HomeMy WebLinkAboutAuburn Downtown Plan and EIS FinalCity of Auburn
Auburn
Downtown Plan
Final EIS
ORDINANCE NO 5549
ADOPTED MAY 21 2001
May 2001
H
1
Acknowledgments
Auburn Downtown Plan Task Force
Bruce Alverson
Pat Bailey Auburn Regional Medical Center
Jim Blanchard Chair
Heather Campbell Green River Community College
Peter Di Turi
Karen Ekrem Auburn Planning Commission
Wayne Heisserman
Doug Johnson King County Metro
Alan Keimig
Nancy Krause Auburn Downtown Association
Jayne Leet Community Health Centers of King County
Mike Morrisette Chamber of Commerce
Lynn Norman
Janet Saar Senior Center
The Honorable Sue Singer
Gary Stamps
Roger Thordarson
Consultant Team
Arai Jackson Architects and Planners
Bucher Willis and Ratliff Corporation
Property Counselors
Leland Consulting Group
OTAK
Community Planning and Research
Vicki Scuri Siteworks
Citizens of Auburn
involved in Downtown Planning efforts
This material is based upon work supported by the Federal Railroad
Administration under a grant cooperative agreement dated July 21
1997
Any opinions findings and conclusions or recommendations
expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the view of the Federal Railroad Administration
and or U S DOT
Mayor
Charles A Booth
City Council
Jeanne Barber
Trish Borden
Stacy Brothers
Pete Lewis
Fred Poe
Sue Singer
Rich Wagner
City Staff
Paul Krauss AICP Planning Director
Bob Sokol AICP Principal Planner
B Sanders ASLA Associate Planner
Shirley Aird AICP Associate Planner
Jack Locke PE Special Projects Engineer
Steve Mullen PE Traffic Engineer
Joe Welsh Transportation Planner
Dennis Selle PE Senior Engineer
Pam Miller Engineering Aide
Susan Sagawa Cultural Programs Manager
14
Community Planning and Research Visioning
101 Stewart St Suite 200
Seattle WA 98101
206 441 7579
Leland Consulting Group Economics and Implementation
325 Northwest 22nd
Portland OR 97210
503 222 1600
OTAK Commuter Rail Station
117 South Main Street Suite 300
Seattle WA 98104 2540
206 442 1364
Property Counselors Market Analysis
1221 Second Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
206 623 1731
Draft Environmental Impact Statement DEIS Issue Date
December 7 2000
Final Environmental Impact Statement FEIS Issue Date
April 19 2001
Location of Background Data
City of Auburn Planning Department
25 West Main Street
Auburn WA 98001 4998
253 931 3090
Availability Cost of Document
Copies of the Downtown Plan and Final EIS may be purchased during regular
business hours 8 00 a m to 5 00 p m at the City of Auburn Planning Department
City Hall located at 25 West Main Street The cost of the document will be based
on the cost of printing Public review copies are available at City Hall Planning
Department as well as the Auburn Branch of the King County Library System
Public Hearings Held
Planning Commission February 6 2001
Auburn City Council May 7 2001
Date of Adoption May 21 2001
Adopted by Ordinance No 5549
SEPA File Number SEP 0029 98
City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Table of Contents
Part One Downtown Plan
Executive Summary 1
Section 1 1 Introduction 9
1 1 1 Goals and Purpose 9
1 1 2 Planning Process 11
Section 1 2 Urban Design Vision 15
1 2 1 Purpose of the Urban Design Vision 15
1 2 2 How the Vision was Created 15
1 2 3 Auburn Downtown Association and Chamber of Commerce Vision 16
1 2 4 Core Values of the Urban Design Vision 18
1 2 5 Detailed Vision Elements 19
Section 1 3 Downtown Profile 33
1 3 1 Past Planning Activities 33
1 3 2 Existing Assets 36
1 3 3 Challenges to Revitalization 38
1 3 4 Downtown Economic and Business Profile 38
1 3 5 Market Forecast 41
1 3 6 Profile of Stampede Pass Reopening 43
1 3 7 Parking Supply and Demand 48
1 3 8 Profile of Historic Resources 50
Section 1 4 Downtown Plan 57
1 4 1 The Plan Strategy 57
1 4 2 Recommended Policies and Actions 63
Section 1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 131
1 5 1 Main Street Corridor 132
1 5 2 Auburn Way Corridor 140
1 5 3 Transit Center 147
1 5 4 Auburn Regional Medical Center District 151
1 5 5 A Street NW and South Central Districts 154
1 5 6 East and West Main Residential Districts 158
Table of Contents
May 2001
List of Figures
Figure 1 Downtown Plan Area 9
Figure 2 Interim Zoning Map 34
Figure 3 Existing Assets 37
Figure 4 Challenges to Revitalization 39
Figure 5 Downtown Auburn Trade Area Map 41
Figure 6 Downtown Plan Area Historic Resources Map 54
Figure 7 Plan Concepts 59
Figure 8 Key Streets 60
Figure 9 Summary of Recommended Actions 65
Figure 10 Long Range Vision 69
Figure 11 Transportation Improvements 73
Figure 12 Downtown Bicycle Routes 85
Figure 13 Pedestrian Destinations Generators and Barriers 89
Figure 14 Potential Public Private Garage Locations 93
Figure 15 Downtown Area Drainage Basins 101
Figure 16 Proposed Zoning 103
Figure 17 Downtown Districts 131
Figure 18 Main Street Corridor Recommendations 133
Figure 19 Auburn Way Corridor 139
Figure 20 Concepts for Auburn Way South of Main 140
Figure 21 Concepts for Auburn Way North of Main 141
Figure 22 Transit Center Plan 148
Figure 23 Medical Center District 153
Figure 24 Residential and Industrial Districts 159
Figure 25 Priority Projects Map 166
List of Figures
May 2001
f
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Downtown is the physical and cultural heart of the Auburn
community Like many American cities downtown Auburn began
to decline in the 1960 s and 70 s In the 1990 s business owners
property owners and the City of Auburn began to take action to
turn around this decline with a series of physical improvements
This Plan seeks to continue the revitalization of downtown Auburn
through an increasingly comprehensive approach
Why was the new downtown plan needed
The Auburn Downtown Plan was initiated in response to a number
of factors as outlined below
1 The existing plan needed to be updated to con
tinue Downtown revitalization
The City has been using the Downtown Auburn Design Master
Plan also known as the black book to guide its efforts in
Downtown since 1990 This 33 page document was
instrumental in accomplishing many improvements in
Downtown including the reconstructed Main Street with
decorative sidewalks pedestrian street lighting banners and
planters full of flowers This contributed to a much needed
facelift for Main Street Downtown s most highly visible
setting
However many of the projects outlined in this small black
book have now been accomplished And because of its
abbreviated and conceptual nature it simply doesn t have
the level of detail which is now needed to take Downtown to
the next level of development and revitalization
2 The reopening of Stampede Pass raised many
concerns
The reopening of the Stampede Pass rail line and increased
F e freight train traffic along the Burlington Northern Santa
Railroad tracks raised concerns about the impacts such
expansion would have on the success of Downtown Safety
hazards caused by extra slow moving trains was also a
concern
3 Multiple large projects were proposed for Down
town
At the inception of this planning process several large scale
public transportation projects were being proposed in the
11 Executive Summary
May 2001
heart of Downtown These projects include the SR 18 C
Street SW Interchange the 3 Street SW Grade Separation
in response to the reopening of Stampede Pass revisions to
A Street SW and expansion of A Street NW and the
construction of a new Transit Center These projects have
the capacity to create major changes in both the appearance
of Downtown and the way it functions The community
recognized that the layout and design of each needed to be
coordinated into a larger overall concept for Downtown
4 Private investment in Downtown is scarce
The level of private investment in Downtown has been
minimal over the last few decades leading to a decline in
quality of housing and commercial building stock In the
current climate of region wide economic and population
growth now is an ideal time to turn around a stagnant business
climate
Community members and City staff saw the cumulative effect of
these varied issues and chose to study and respond to them with
an integrated approach The result was the decision to undertake
a substantially expanded Downtown Plan
What is the Downtown Plan intended to do
The overall goal of the Auburn Downtown Plan the Plan is to
strengthen the downtown community economy and image by
building on existing assets facilitating catalyst projects in key
locations stimulating infill and redevelopment and influencing
the design and construction of high quality public infrastructure
Other goals of the Plan are to evaluate the impacts of increased
rail traffic on the livelihood of Downtown to establish City policy
that implements and promotes revitalization and to bring
stakeholders together to generate ideas and concepts useful in
developing a common strategy for the Downtown s future
What process was used in development of the Down
town Plan
A Downtown Plan Task Force of local residents and business people
was formed to guide the Downtown Plan through its development
Opportunities for input from the community at large were also
offered during the planning process The environmental review
d process provi es another occasion for public participation
Funding for the study was obtained from several sources The
Federal Railroad Administration FRA supported this project with
a grant and cooperative agreement to determine the impacts of
2 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
the reopening of the Stampede Pass rail line on Downtown
Financing from the City s Arterial Streets fund supported the
extensive traffic analysis completed for the Plan
How is the Plan organized
This Downtown Plan is unique in that it combines the Downtown
Plan document with the required environmental analysis This is
a new approach that is allowed by the rules of the State
Environmental Policy Act SEPA The advantage of this type of
organization is that the environmental analysis is conducted
simultaneously with development of the Plan which allows the
planning process to react to issues as they are brought up rather
than waiting until the process is basically complete
The document is divided into four parts and appendice The four
parts are
Part 1 Downtown Plan
Part 2 Environmental Summary Analysis of Alternatives
Part 3 Environmental Analysis
Part 4 Downtown Plan EIS Addendum
A summary of these four parts follows
Part 1 Downtown Plan
is designed to provide the framework to guide and promote the
redevelopment economic revitalization and a high quality of life
in the Auburn Downtown This part discusses the planning process
used develops an Urban Design Vision profiles the current assets
and challenges to revitalization lays out a strategy for improving
many aspects of Downtown and comes up with a set of
recommended policies and actions Specific recommendations
are then described for 10 districts within Downtown Finally a
detailed implementation strategy is presented with approximately
33 projects or programs to accomplish the goals of the Plan
Part 2 Environmental Summary Analysis of Alternatives
looks briefly at two alternatives for Downtown The Downtown
Plan Part 1 is one alternative a No Action alternative is the
second A summary of each alternative s impact on the built and
natural environments is provided These are described and
analyzed more completely in Part 3
n
Executive Summary 3
May 2001
t
Part 3 Environmental Analysis
evaluates the Plan s environmental constraints and opportunities
identifies appropriate mitigation measures and provides
opportunities for public comment in the decision making process
The City of Auburn Downtown Plan is a non project action
therefore this Environmental Analysis presents qualitative and
quantitative analysis of environmental impacts as appropriate to
the scope of the proposal and the level of planning For the
Downtown Plan the level of detail addressed by the environmental
analysis is broad with many of the impacts described on a
downtown wide level These analyses indicate very general
environmental impacts but in most cases do not provide precise
measurements of those impacts
Part 4 EIS Addendum
provides the comment letters and responses to comment letters
recieved during the DEIS comment period This Addendum
prepared in April 2001 along with the Auburn Downtown Plan
Draft EIS issued December 7 2000 constitutes the Final EIS for
the proposal The Addendum was prepared as a stand alone
document to comply with the requirements of SEPA and has been
orated into this document incor p
How will this Plan be implemented
The Downtown Plan identifies a multitude of methods to
implement the ideas set forth within These include proposed
projects revision of regulations and programs that will each take
a step toward accomplishing the goals for Downtown Some of
these implementation steps will require the coordination and
cooperation between the public and private sectors others will
require considerable effort by City staff to accomplish The capital
projects suggested vary widely in their costs but overall substantial
funding would be needed to complete all the projects Looking at
this list realistically it may take many years to achieve the total
vision depicted here
What are the conclusions of the Downtown Plan
The Downtown Plan forecasts a bright and hopeful future for
downtown Auburn if assets are capitalized upon and challenges
are addressed Some of the major findings of the Plan are
summarized in the paragraphs below
Urban Design Vision
Citizens contributed to a vision of Downtown Auburn that retains
a traditional small town feel but that welcomes development which
4 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
1
combines new uses in creative ways Downtown should be well
maintained and should be comfortable and safe day and night
Residential opportunities should be expanded and high quality
office space should be built
Assets and Challenges
Citizens helped to define downtown s current assets and ongoing
challenges Among the many assets discovered were the sense of
a heart of the city that Main Street provides the recent street
and streetscape improvements along Main Street the presence of
large employers like Auburn Regional Medical Center and the
City of Auburn entertainment venues such as the Performing Arts
Center and Auburn Avenue Theatre and the Transit Center with
bus and commuter rail service
Challenges are many a retail district that is interrupted by heavy
volume streets and an excessive number of taverns underutilized
and visually unappealing buildings and properties insufficient
reinvestments into downtown businesses and properties for many
years and major streets which do not convey the impression of a
downtown There are also many auto oriented uses in an area
that functions best when it is pedestrian oriented
Economic Profile and Market Forecast
Auburn retail businesses generate almost 50 less per square foot
per year in gross sales than industry averages The opportunity to
turn these numbers around will appear however as market area
population and income levels increase in Auburn The Transit
Center will create a demand for additional convenience retail and
residential development Overall demand for additional retail
space is estimated to average from 6 000 to 20 000 square feet a
year Class A office space for professional services is a strong
immediate need lodging with conference space is also identified
as a need
Downtown Plan Strategy
Major strategic steps for accomplishing the goals of the Plan include
building out from the center of the Downtown linking the various
districts of Downtown to each other and improving their own
individual identities making improvements along key streets that
might include landscaping sidewalks signage crosswalks and
gateways implementing catalyst projects on key sites that will
stimulate further development improving the quality of
development by instituting design standards and improving the
image of Downtown Auburn as a great place to do business and
invest
Executive Summary
May 2001
conducted provides sufficient environmental analysis on
Transportation and Stormwater Management for proposed
developments to use in their own proposals thus expediting the
review process This is intended to be an incentive to development
of properties within the Downtown Plan study area
1
1
1
1
1
1
J
7
8 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Part One
Downtown Plan
Pi
0
Section 1 1 Introduction
I Section 1 1 Introduction
o
1 I I I I
1990 Design Master
Plan Study Area
0 Downtown Plan
Study Area
L
0
P
G
I Figure 1 Downtown Plan Area
N
800 Feet
1 1 1 Goals and Purpose
The overall goal of the Auburn Downtown Plan the Plan is to
strengthen the downtown community economy and image by
building on existing assets facilitating catalyst projects in key
locations stimulating infill and redevelopment and constructing
high quality infrastructure Other goals of the Plan are to evaluate
the Downtown Plan s land use impacts on public facilities to
evaluate the impacts of increased rail traffic on the livelihood of
Downtown to establish City policy that implements and promotes
revitalization and to bring stakeholders together to generate ideas
and concepts useful in developing a common strategy for the
Downtown s future
Downtown has been the heart of Auburn both physically and
culturally since the community was founded in 1891 Like most
American communities downtown Auburn declined in the 1960s
and 1970s as the suburbs grew and retail activity went elsewhere
I 1 1 Introduction
9
May 2001
Auburn s residents and business owners recognized the decline
and took significant steps to reclaim downtown A number of
major public investments were made over the last 20 years
including the decision to build City Hall at its Main Street location
the 1994 expansion of Auburn Regional Medical Center the
construction of West Auburn High School in 1992 the construction
of the Performing Arts Center in the late 1970s the 1990 Downtown
Auburn Design Master Plan and the implementation of the Main
Street improvements completed in the 1990s
While public investment was significant during the past decade
and has had a dramatically positive effect other forces continued
to have a detrimental impact on downtown including the
development of strip retail along Auburn Way the decline in quality
of downtown housing stock and minimal private investment in
quality development or building maintenance These are not
uncommon problems as recent retailing trends have put more of
a focus on major national chains In Auburn s case the trend has
been toward automobile oriented big box developments that
have located just outside of downtown Downtown merchants have
had difficulty coping with these nationwide and regional trends
The reopening of Stampede Pass on the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe Railroad line also created concern that Downtown would be
effectively isolated from the rest of the city several times a day
This brought into question the whole issue of whether Downtown
already struggling could remain viable under these conditions
Today Auburn is experiencing another wave of major change In
the current climate of region wide economic and population
growth a number of major transportation investments are
proposed under construction or recently completed These will
have a major impact on the look and feel of downtown Projects
include the SR18 C Street Interchange and 3rd Street SW Grade
Separation which will provide access to Downtown over the BNSF
tracks the Transit Center with commuter rail local and express
bus service and the reconstruction of A Street SW These significant
public investments coupled with the need to plan for downtown
growth and redevelopment in a coordinated manner created the
impetus to prepare this Downtown Plan
Related to these goals is the need to build on the successes of the
1990 plan The current plan will look at a larger area than the
1990 plan see Figure 1 and is designed to incorporate recent and
upcoming developments identify market conditions and
development opportunities identify and remove impediments to
continued revitalization and identify a realistic action oriented
implementation plan I
10 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
For this reason the Auburn Downtown Plan uses an
implementation based approach that is focused on getting things
done The approach is designed to gain the confidence of interested
parties and to secure commitments to the completion and
subsequent implementation of the Plan Plan preparation included
Formulation of the Urban Design Vision for downtown
Evaluation of increased rail traffic on business and
residential viability
Preparation of a detailed market analysis
Identification of essential sites for catalyst projects which
would trigger additional investment
Identification of the infrastructure needed to accommodate
future growth
Collaboration with major property owners
Development of a Plan EIS
Development of Code Amendments
Traffic mitigation program unique to the CBD
Commitment to improving the overall quality of downtown
development and infrastructure
Improving image problems within downtown
These elements have helped to create a sound plan that generates
enthusiasm and translates into market support as various parties
commit to the Plan s vision
1 1 2 Planning Process
This section outlines the process used to develop the Plan
Public Involvement
The Downtown Plan was developed over a number of months
with extensive public involvement at each step of the process
Auburn Downtown Plan Task Force
The Auburn Downtown Plan Task Force guided the development
of the Downtown Plan The Task Force met regularly from
November 1997 through development of the Draft Plan and
worked on plan elements and urban design concepts Comprised
of more than fifteen citizens and community organization members
1 1 Introduction 11
May 2001
I
A i
r
P
Citizens and consultants collaborat
ing at the Downtown Charrette
and ten City of Auburn employees the Task Force also worked
with the Sound Transit design team to oversee design and
construction of the Transit Center
Design Workshop
A 3 day design workshop or charrette was held in early December
1997 to set the direction for the Auburn Downtown Plan The
charrette was hosted by the City of Auburn and the consultant
team and was designed to share existing conditions information
with the community gather information regarding issues and
priorities and begin to develop concepts to be further refined as
the Plan is developed Sixty five people were interviewed and
approximately one hundred people attended the charrette
Priority issues identified at the charrette were 1 identity and
community character 2 economic development 3 transportation 4 human needs and public safety
Downtown Urban Design Vision Workshop
An Urban Design Vision for downtown was created through a
workshop hosted by the Task Force where community members
identified photographs of development they liked and met in small
groups to discuss their selections The Urban Design Vision
presents the community s desired personality and identity for the
continued improvement of downtown The Urban Design Vision
has been used as a means to define improve and bolster the image
of downtown Auburn as the civic and commercial heart of the
community see Section 1 2
Downtown Projects Open House
A downtown projects open house was held in April 1998 to inform
property owners and community members about the proposed
SR 18 C Street overpass and Transit Center The open house also
provided an opportunity for community input on Transit Center
options
Downtown Plan Open House
On January 31 2001 the City of Auburn held an open house on
the Downtown Plan in the City Hall Council Chambers This
open house which was well received and attended provided
interested parties with background information about the
Downtown Plan prior to the public hearing process that began in
February 2001
1
12 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Public Hearing Process
On February 6 2001 the Auburn Planning Commission held a
public hearing on the Auburn Downtown Plan Subsequently on
February 13 2001 the Planning Commission took action to
recommended approval of the Downtown Plan to the City Council
with certain revisions
On May 7 2001 the City Council held its public hearing on the
Downtown Plan and subsequently on May 21 2001 approved
an ordinance adopting the Auburn Downtown Plan
1 1 Introduction 13
May 2001
1
I
t
1
1
1
1
f
IIi L
7
14 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
I Section 1 2 Urban Design Vision
1
1
I Section 1 2 The Vision for Downtown
The Downtown Urban Design Vision the Vision reflects the
community s desired personality and identity for the continued
improvement of downtown The Vision incorporates new major
public infrastructure investments in commuter rail transit facilities
grade separations and downtown streets This public investment
will be complemented by increased private investment in the retail
service office medical and residential sectors Together these
public and private investments will achieve the community Vision
for the heart of Auburn
1 2 1 Purpose of the Urban Design Vision
The Downtown Urban Design Vision guided the development of
the Plan and will be essential to its implementation strategy Most
immediately the Vision will guide the streetscape design and urban
design elements of the Plan During the planning process this Vision
was helpful in determining some of the design details for the Transit
Center After Plan adoption the Vision will be used as the basis
for design standards amendments to the Zoning Code and other
aspects of Plan implementation
1 2 2 How the Vision was Created
The downtown Urban Design Vision is comprised of three com
ponents
A text Vision which is based upon interviews with the
Auburn Downtown Association ADA and the Chamber
of Commerce
The Core Values for downtown identified by the Auburn
community at the December 1997 Downtown Charrette
Main Street improvements
constructed in the 1990s
through sustained community
effort
1 2 Urban Design Vision 15
May 2001
see page 12 and the February 1998 Task Force Vision
Workshop and
The images selected at the Vision Workshop which pro
vide a clear picture of the community s hopes for the
future of downtown
Each of these components can stand alone but combined they
form an integrated vision which is stronger than the individual
components
1 2 3 Auburn Downtown Association
and Chamber of Commerce Vision
As active participants in the revitalization of downtown Auburn
the Auburn Downtown Association ADA and the Auburn Area
Chamber of Commerce have a vision for downtown The following
summary of their visions is reflected in the images from the Vision
Workshop
A Healthy Downtown
Both organizations see the need for a safe and comfortable
downtown that has the following qualities
A downtown where citizens gather celebrate and con
duct their business
High quality development and redevelopment projects
A visitors center possibly in conjunction with the new
Transit Center
Emphasis on public and private art throughout downtown
Design standards and a design review process for down
town development
A plaza that supports gatherings and provides public in
formation
An accessible downtown through adequate roads parking
and pedestrian and transit connections
Future Downtown Development
The Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce and the ADA see
downtown expanded beyond Main Street including both
residential and commercial development and stretching to the west
north south and east
1
t
1
1
1
t
1
16 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
In addition they envision
A central business district with quality destination stores
and businesses specialized clinics and professional offices
Higher density higher quality housing in downtown par
ticularly near the Transit Center
A cohesive downtown that provides incentives for investors
Multiple anchor stores within downtown with one occu
pying the former J C Penney building
Improved pedestrian and urban design linkages between
the medical community and downtown
Retail stores at street level with housing and or offices above
Public private partnerships
Downtown Streets
Streets which disperse traffic to parking areas within walk
ing distance of downtown
Attractive well marked pedestrian walkways directing foot
traffic to Main Street and the Transit Center
Design which enhances access while maintaining down
town character
Design which overcomes barriers such as the railroad tracks
and Auburn Way
This streetscape was the
highest rated image in the
February 1998 workshop
1 2 Urban Design Vision 17
May 2001
Expansion of the Main Street design concepts further east
and west as well as beyond Main Street
Quality gateways to downtown
Adequate signage to direct people into downtown and to
parking facilities
1 2A Core Values of The Urban Design Vision
Below are the critical Core Values expressed by community mem
bers at the Downtown Charrette and the Vision Workshop The
Core Values form the basis of the overall Vision and serve as the
guide or roadmap for the formation of the Auburn Downtown
Plan
Celebrate Auburn s history
Create buildings with a flavor and form that echo the his
toric character of downtown and historic railroad themes
Use building forms similar to the original Main Street
buildings
Use traditional building materials such as wood and brick
and avoid steel and glass
Incorporate architectural elements such as covered side
walks using structural overhangs or cloth awnings side
walk level storefronts and historic light features
Provide symbols such as a clock tower that strengthen
the downtown s identity and provide space for a commu
nity plaza meeting place or park and open space
Despite being a large city Auburn retains a small
town character
Design human scale buildings
Define downtown s urban form with continuous building
facades placed adjacent to the sidewalk
Strip malls are inappropriate for downtown
Vary building type while avoiding very modern buildings
with large window formats
Integrate signage into the building facades
18 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Provide ample landscaping downtown
Integrate public art reflective of our community s values
Comfort Security and Maintenance
Create downtown streets where people feel comfortable
and safe both day and night
Streets buildings and landscaping are clean and well
maintained
Downtown should be well lit and public areas have good
sight lines and eyes on the street
People living downtown
Downtown should be a pleasant place to live
Upper floor residents increase the downtown population
Parking garages should not look like parking
garages
Parking garages should look like buildings integrated into
the urban fabric using traditional building patterns mate
rials and details
1 2 5 Detailed Vision Elements
The vision elements are provided for the categories of retail mixed
use office medical transit housing and streets At the Vision
Workshop 45 participants rated 100 slide images in sets of 4 iden
tifying the most and least appropriate among the sets or none of
the 4 as appropriate for Downtown Auburn After rating the im
ages participants broke into small groups to review the images
and discuss in more detail which elements were appropriate for
downtown and why The slide ratings group responses and writ
ten comments formed the basis of the detailed topic vision ele
ments
The next pages provide a more detailed vision for the following
elements
Retail Mixed Use Development
Office and Medical Development
Transit
Parking Garages
Downtown Streets
Downtown Housing
What is it going
to look like in ten
years
Auburn Citizen
1 2 Urban Design Vision
19
May 2001
Retail Mixed Use Development
Key Features
Brick and other natural
materials
Good shopping windows
Awnings retain human scale
when broken horizontallyto
emphasize individual shops
Two tofour story buildings
Traditional architectural fla
vor some character but not
too modern
Pedestrian friendly with out
door seating
First floor emphasized visu
ally with different materials
New and in good condition
Well organized signage in
tegrated into the building
facades
Mixed use development in downtown Auburn can have a variety
of uses including retail service office medical and residential
What is important to the community about mixed use develop
ment is that the first floor maintains and improves the pedestrian
and retail orientation while devoting upper floors to the mix of
uses perhaps stepping them back from the street to maintain the
human historic downtown scale
What We Like
This building mixes
brick with other
materials and has a
varied roof features
such as the clock
tower are a bonus
20 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
This is a new
building made to
look old This was
accomplished by
using cloth
awnings simple
lines with small
signs and friendly
lights
21
People liked the
ground floor
storefronts
roofline awnings
and trees but felt
the upper windows
were too small
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
Looks like downtown
Seattle Massive box
with many different
architectural elements
Liked the awnings
separating the
store fronts
Auburn Citizen
1 2 Urban Design Vision
May 2001
Office and Medical Development
Key Features
Traditional materials flavor
and elements
First floor retail pedestrian
orientation
Modulated facades and
stepped back upper floors
Awnings
Human scale details and
windows
Buildings placed next tothe
sidewalk
The office characteristics that the community members felt were
appropriate are similar to the core values expressed as appropri
ate for mixed use development
What We Like
Participants liked
the fact that this
was only a two
story building It
has cloth awnings
over individual
window sections
thus resembling
retail space
although it is an
office use
22 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
This is another new
building that looks
older designed to fit
into an established
traditional
neighborhood echoing
residential architectural
elements while provid
ing offices
Participants had mixed
feelings about this
building They like the
variety of materials and
the clean look of the
building but thought
that the wall was too
massive
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
Screams Downtown
Seattle More brick
might be better L L Too big for Auburn
No strip mall look
want modulations
Auburn Citizen
1 2 Urban Design Vision
May 2001
Feel like I d go in
it get lost ff
Don t like flat
place on front
not inviting
Looks like a jail
23
n
Transit
Key Features
Open space lawn and trees
Clock tower
Mural at the bus transfer
station
Well maintained and secure
Historic features contained
in the bus shelter and the
old fashioned lights
Clearly identified pedes
trian walkways
Retail and service uses
Brick materials and classic
details
Weather protections and
awnings
Public art integrated into
the facility
Places to sit
Connections to other fa
cilities
Transit will play an increasingly larger role in Downtown Auburn
in the near future with the recent construction of the Transit
Center
Community members identified a historic railroad flavor as the
cornerstone of the station s identity image and function
What We Like
The brick building and
clock tower give this bus
station a traditional
railroad look and includes
retail services The small
group also liked the
amenities such as
telephone benches and
trash cans
24 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Participants liked the
European feel of
this row of retail
stores in this station
The brick sidewalk
makes it pedestrian
friendly as do the
tables lights and
awnings
The light coming
through the glass
awning the brick
walls and the tile
floors were all
positive features
found in this image
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
Looks cheap and
utilitarian
No protection
from the wind and 4 j rain
Y This transit
center lacks
much of what
Auburn citizens
are looking for
1 2 Urban Design Vision 25
May 2001
Parking Garages
Key Features
Brick facades or combina
tions of brick and other ma
terials
Street level retail
Auto entrance not visually
dominant
Size of openings limited
First floor and upper floors
differentiated by variations
in floor height and materials
Parking garages should look like the traditional downtown build
ings that reinforce and improve the traditional identity and char
acter of Downtown Auburn
Subdued signage clearly identifies parking entrances while the
street side facades are primarily devoted to commercial activity
and pedestrians
What We Like
This building has
many features
reminiscent of
Auburn s history
including the
cupola brick
distinct first floor
with high ceilings
and retail
26 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
This mixed use
parking garage uses
separated awnings
and retail on the
bottom floor both
qualities Auburn
citizens are looking
for
In this building the
first floor is accented
with different materials
and height the awning
is appropriate and it
makes use of first floor
retail Also the large
scale openings are
broken up into
window sized
elements
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
Fine where it is
doesn t fit the decor
of Auburn Don t
want another like it
1 2 Urban Design Vision
May 2001
A parking garage
shouldn t look like a
parking garage
Auburn Citizen
27
Downtown Streets
Key Features
Center planted median
Landscaping designed to
preserve visibility of adja
cent businesses
Special paving such as
bricks and cobbles marks
the way for pedestrians
Underground utilities
Decorative light poles
Ample sidewalks and well
marked crosswalks free of
obstructions
High quality infrastructure
functions as gateways to
downtown
Street trees
The quality of the downtown street infrastructure does more to
create identity and an impression of quality than any other single
urban element
The Auburn community has identified downtown streets as the
structure and glue that link public and private development into a
cohesive urban fabric
Well designed public rights of way provide ample and comfort
able facilities for vehicles transit pedestrians and bicycles Each
element of public streets provides the opportunity for quality in
frastructure which through public art and carefully selected mate
rials serves to create and reinforce the image of downtown iden
tity and quality
What We Like
The mature trees
brick sidewalk and
general pedestrian
friendly nature of
this street were
considered positive
features
28 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Participants liked the
trees down the
center median and
the on street parking
found in this image
They also appreci
ated the tree mainte
nance that had taken
place with these
mature trees
Citizens liked the
banners the land
scaped median
which helps to
provide a safe
crossing and the
decorative lighting
Underground wiring
would help to make
this appropriate for
Downtown Auburn
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
No median almost
no street trees
sagging wires
overhead cobra
lights and ill defined
crosswalks
Citizens are looking
for more than this in
their downtown
A sidewalk is not
just a sidewalk it
should be used for
history art poles
banners lights etc
Auburn Citizen
1 2 Urban Design Vision 29
May 2001
Downtown Housing
Key Features
Ample landscaping
Balconies well modu
lated without flat facades
The relationship of the
building to the street is lay
ered parallel parking
street trees landscaping
building entryway and
building facade
Gabled roof line conveys
these are residences
Vertically framed windows
Provide housing on the
upper floors of mixed use
buildings as well
Open space away from the
street
Recent improvements a strong market demand increased transit
and development activity are making downtown a more attractive
place to live An increased downtown residential population in
town will support increased commercial activity
Residential development that would meet diverse housing needs
would be human scaled with modulated facades pitched roofs
and clearly identified entrances using traditional materials and
architectural elements that echo Auburn s historic downtown form
Residential development could be a component of a mixed use
development or be a stand alone project
What We Like
This building
provides off street
parking is of
appropriate scale
with attention to
details and the
interiors have good
daylight
30 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
A well defined
sequence of walk
way stairs porch
front door and
housing is in
smaller buildings
that look residen
tial
Appropriate ele
ments are land
scaping clapboard
siding and brick
This building is well
maintained
although it needs
well defined entries
for safety and
identity
Not Right for Downtown Auburn
1 2 Urban Design Vision
May 2001
This form takes
up too much
land for Down
town Auburn
with parking in
the front com
bined with front
yards
Design details
should be
appropriate to the
size ofa building
Auburn Citizen
31
Implementation of the Vision
The types of buildings and streets identified in the Vision and their
relationship to one another define the urban form desired in down
town Auburn
The Urban Design Vision outlined in this chapter was the basis of
the recommended street design improvements and architectural
design guidelines described in the following chapters
11
32 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Section 1 3 Downtown Profile
I Section 1 3 Downtown Profile
Today downtown Auburn is many things to many people the
historic and commercial core on Main Street the through corri
dors of Auburn Way and Auburn Avenue A Street a place to catch
the bus or train home of the Auburn Regional Medical Center
and many others
But all of these activities and functions occur within a built envi
ronment characteristic of a struggling downtown Many store
fronts are empty buildings are underutilized and suffer from poor
maintenance individual renovations occur absent an overall com
mon design merchandise is limited and retailing techniques lack
attractions that can effectively compete against alternative retail
ing types including shopping malls and more recently a com
merce
This Downtown Profile summarizes the policy regulatory and
market forces which affect downtown and will set the stage for
future Plan actions
1 3 1 Past Planning Activities
1990 Downtown Design Master Plan
The Downtown Design Master Plan was successful in meeting the
major objective which was to produce a physical setting that will
support commercial and civic improvement activities
The Vision from the 1990 Downtown Design Master Plan was for
the downtown to retain its home town character that it be a
focus for civic activities that it offer a full range of commercial
and public services and that it provide an attractive and conve
nient pedestrian oriented environment
The community has worked hard to implement the Design Mas
ter Plan The streetscape improvements on Main Street including
reconstruction of Main Street sidewalks light standards hanging
baskets public art parking and signage are the most notable form
of the 1990 Downtown Plan s implementation
Comprehensive Plan
The 1995 Comprehensive Plan designated Downtown as a special
planning area and established a vision for Downtown
Existing Zoning
Downtown Auburn is divided into 12 zoning districts with the
majority of the land within the study area contained in the C 2
zone See Figure 2
1 3 Downtown Profile 33
May 2001
Downtown Auburn today
Downtown Plan
Study Area
N
Figure 2 Interim Zoning Adopted
during Downtown Plan preparation 800 Feet
A brief description of these zones is as follows
C 1 The Light Commercial District allows small and
moderate scale retail or professional businesses that are pedestrian
oriented Mixed use buildings are allowable in this zone with no
density restrictions
C 2 The Central Business District designation
sets apart that portion of the City which forms
the center for financial commercial governmental professional
and cultural activities Mixed use buildings are allowable with no
density restrictions Additionally multiple family dwellings are
allowable as a conditional use with no density limitations
34 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
C 3 The Heavy Commercial District allows retail services
with outside production or service features Mixed use buildings
are not allowed but multiple family dwellings are allowable as a
conditional use provided that 1 200 square feet of lot area is pro
vided for each dwelling unit
M 1 The Light Industrial District accommodates a variety of
industrial uses in an industrial park environment While the M 1
zone is primarily intended for light industrial uses some commer
cial uses may be permitted Regional shopping centers and com
mercial recreation may also be permitted The only housing
allowable in this zone is work release pre release or similar facili
ties offering alternatives to imprisonment under certain conditions
and standards
M 2 The Heavy Industrial District allows general manufac
turing and processing and grouping of industrial enterprises Other
uses are disallowed if they will discourage use of adjacent sites for
heavy industry No housing is permissible in this zone
P 1 The Public Use District allows public uses that serve the
cultural educational recreational and public service needs of the
community Housing is not allowed in this zone
I The Institutional Use District is intended to provide an
area for educational governmental theological recreational cul
tural and other public and quasi public uses
R 2 The Single Family Residential District allows relatively
small lot sizes 6 000 square feet and multifamily development as
conditional uses provided that 6 000 square feet of lot area is pro
vided for each dwelling unit and there are no more than four
dwelling units per structure Accessory units such as a guest cot
tage are allowable
R 3 The TWo Family Residential District accommodates a
limited increase in population density by permitting two dwelling
units on a minimum size lot while maintaining a desirable family
living environment by establishing minimum lot areas yards and
open spaces
R 4 The High Density Residential District allows multiple
family residential development It is intended as a residential dis
trict of single duplex and multiple family residences
RO The Residential Office District accommodates business
and professional offices medical and dental clinics banks and simi
lar financial institutions at locations where they are compatible
with residential uses Some retail and personal services may be
permitted if supplemental to the other uses allowed in the zone
1 3 Downtown Profile 35
May 2001
1
This zone is intended for those areas that are in transition from
residential to commercial uses along arterials or near the hospital
RO H The Residential Office Hospital District is intended to
be used for medical and related uses and those uses compatible
with the medical community Restaurants and other retail sales
operations that support the medical community are allowable as a
conditional use Multiple family dwellings are allowable as a con
ditional use provided that 1 200 square feet of lot area is provided
for each dwelling unit
1 3 2 Existing Assets
Historically Main Street was the heart and core of downtown
Auburn Thanks to continuing vision and investment provided by
the combined efforts of the City and the downtown community
over the last 20 years Main Street is still one of downtown s greatest
assets City Hall acts as an anchor on the west end of downtown
The buildings on Main Street have also retained the original scale
and form which combined with the recently completed Main
Street improvements forms the basis of downtown s physical iden
tity This provides the urban form model for future redevelop
ment as downtown continues to grow and revitalize See Figure
3 Existing Assets
Just off Main Street near the core of downtown are a number of
other assets that will play a key role in Auburn s future One is the
Auburn Regional Medical Center downtown s largest employer
largest physical facility and economic generator The Performing
Arts Center and two high schools and an elementary school also
create activity in and near downtown The Transit Center and
A Street SW are recent major assets to the core area of downtown
A Street SW the SR18 C Street Interchange and the 3rd Street
Grade Separation project will improve access to downtown and
alleviate traffic congestion that results from increased rail activity
Finally QQwest has a central office facility where calls are switched
located in downtown Auburn at Second Street SW and Division
Street Certain types of businesses including Class A Office Space
particularly benefit from access to high speed communications in
frastructure frequently associated with these facilities Generally
closer proximity to a central office facility often means higher qual
ity telecommunication services
Finally another Downtown Auburn asset is its traditional site and
location for certain long standing community events and activi
ties This includes for instance the Auburn Good Ol Days cel
ebration and the Veteran s Day Parade As such Downtown Au
burn is seen a focal point for events that enhance and build on
7
36 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Figure 3 Existing Assets
Key City owned sites with potential for joint
City Medical Center parking garage or
municipal facilities expansion
West Auburn
High School
Buildings along Main
Street with historic
character
A Street SW
Improvements
Transit Center has good connections to Main
Street and core retail area
Existing Building Assets
J Transit Center
1 3 Downtown Profile
May 2001
Washington
Elementary
Buildings on Main Street have retained their
original scale and form
proposed SRI B C Street overpass project
N
BN Feet
37
City Hall acts as an anchor on Main
Street
Auburn Regional Medical Center
Recent Main Street
Improvements
1
1
community and civic spirit and pride and serves to bring the com
munity closer together
1 3 3 Challenges to Revitalization
Despite the many assets in Downtown Auburn there are also chal
lenges to meeting overall downtown goals A discontinuous retail
district the lack of connections between downtown districts
underutilized and visually unappealing properties and major streets
which lack visual impression of a downtown identity or culture
contribute to these challenges Much of this is attributable to prop
erty owners who have not sufficiently reinvested back into their
properties
Other challenges to downtown revitalization include vehicular traf
fic patterns that route regional trips through the Downtown A
well designed and defined pedestrian environment is not present
off of Main Street Land use impacts associated with the intrusion
of heavy commercial industrial and or auto oriented uses in the
Downtown and an aggregation of taverns and undesirable sec
ondary impacts also pose challenges to this Plan s revitalization
program See Figure 4 Challenges to Revitalization While Main
Street is particularly well lit the remainder of downtown is dark
and isolated At present Downtown does not provide the well
maintained comfortable environment that is necessary to bring
people here
Further complicating this situation is the change in freight train
traffic through Downtown Auburn which has recently occurred
Additional information about the effect of increasing freight traf
fic on Downtown will be provided in later sections and in the En
vironmental Anal sis y
1 3 4 Downtown Economic and
Business Profile
This section presents a snapshot of downtown from a business
and economic perspective A more detailed analysis of the Down
town Market can be found in the Auburn Downtown Plan Market
Study March 1998
The downtown core consists of 78 acres and 1 8 million
square feet of buildings
There are 304 businesses in downtown of which 84 are
retail 157 are service and 44 are finance insurance and
38 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Economic development interviews
during the Charrette process
Figure 4 Challenges to Revitalization
eparated from retail core
by BNSF railroad tracks
and C Street SW
i Ii Undesirable mix t i
of industrial and
single family uses
10
4j
1 i
O
Neighborhood t
threatened by
industrial and
commercial 14 Intrusion ff
1 I
Noise vibration and
visual impacts
Tavern block forms a barrier
between the retail core and
City Hall
Stampede Pass reopened
increasing freight train traffic
Auburn Ave lacks visual continuity and is
disconnected from the core of downtown
Underutilized areas strip development on
Auburn Way poor entryway to downtown
disconnected from the core
j Barriers
Challenges to
Revitalization
1 3 Downtown Profile
May 2001
routes
Empty J C
Penney Building
Separated from
retail core by
Auburn Way
Large expanse
of blacktop
Strip development
on Auburn Way
Underutilized areas and strip
development on Auburn Way provi
poor entryway to downtown
A Street SE disconnected from
the core of downtown adjacent land
underutilized visually disconnected pool
maintained structures
N
Soo Feet
39
1
real estate Within the service category there is a large
concentration of health care providers
Taxable retail sales in downtown totaled 38 1 million in
1996 and 40 3 million in 1997 representing approximately
4 percent of taxable sales in the City
Auburn retail businesses generate approximately 175 per
square foot per year in gross sales compared to 213 per
square foot per year for industry averages for community
shopping centers
There are 331 residential units in downtown of which 20
percent are single family
Cultural activities are provided by the Performing Arts Cen
ter Auburn Avenue Theater Evergreen Ballet and the Au
POtential Annual burn Symphony Studies show that every dollar spent on
the arts generates five dollars in the community Absorption
Rates Development Influences and Opportunities
From Auburn Downtown Plan Twenty percent increase in primary market area popula
Market Study March 1998 tion is expected between 1996 and 2010
Retail 6 000 to 20 000 Increase in market area population and income levels will
square feet year increase spending in Auburn
Office 15 000 square Growth in downtown employment and residential popu
feet year lation is anticipated
Residential 25 50 units Commuter rail station will create an additional demand
of new housing year for 4 500 6 800 square feet of convenience retail devel
opment
Office development related to health services and a class
A building for other professional services will be the stron
gest immediate opportunity
Residential development will become increasingly popu
lar in the downtown Commuter rail service alone will sup
port the demand for 90 110 new housing units
Incremental development of retail will continue building
upon the success of existing strong retailers and the addi
tion of new employers and residents
40 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
i
1
d
I I
l
fl
0
u
Figure 5 Downtown Auburn Trade Area Map
Additional development of all types will occur as each
development creates demand for others and increases
Downtown s vitality
Green River Community College offers a vital opportu
nity to Downtown in terms of residents linkages with busi
nesses and use of transit facilities
1 3 5 Market Forecast
The following section is a summary of the Auburn Downtown Plan
Market Study Property Counselors February 1998
1 3 Downtown Profile 41
May 2001
Market Area
Trade area population 192 000
Potential growth 227 000 by 2010
258 000 by 2020
Retail Demand
The demand for additional retail space is estimated to vary from
89 000 to 296 000 square feet through the year 2010 equivalent to
average annual absorption of 6 000 to 20 000 square feet The low
end of the range is consistent with steady improvements to down
town market conditions The high end is consistent with aggres
sive actions to attract employers residents businesses and shop
pers to downtown and not likely to occur without public and pri
vate intervention Economic performance in the retail core has
increased steadily over the last number of years however some
of the existing downtown retail still performs less well per square
foot compared to performance in nearby cities indicating oppor
tunities for stronger performance in some existing businesses
Office Demand
Of the approximately 300 000 square feet of office development
in downtown over half is health care related and one quarter
government Only 20 percent are traditional private office space
users There is no Class A office space in downtown Class A
office space refers to new office buildings with modern building
systems and high quality interior and exterior finishes
A Class A office building would attract image conscious office ten
ants already located in downtown or elsewhere in the city A 50 000
to 70 000 square foot four story building such as the Centennial
Building in Kent would meet this need Growth in the Auburn
Regional Medical Center would support 5 000 square feet of ab
sorption per year Overall office absorption should be sustainable
over time at approximately 15 000 square feet per year
Lodging Demand
Auburn has approximately 350 hotel or motel rooms
which meets current demand
There may be additional opportunity to attract a good
quality limited hotel a hotel which provides sleeping ac
commodations but little if any food service or meeting
facilities an independent restaurant and some type of pub
lic meeting facility in a coordinated development project I
42 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
The overall result would be equivalent to a small conven
tion hotel and could attract moderate sized conventions
of 150 to 200 attendees The opportunity for such a devel
opment is dependent upon
Identifying a site with access and visibility to SR
18 and
A strong effort to provide amenities such as meet
ing space in a public private cooperative effort
Residential Demand
Over 50 percent of the new housing built in Auburn has
been multifamily 1990 to present
Apartment vacancy rates are 4 3 percent compared to a
3 3 percent vacancy rate county wide
Rental rates are the lowest among South King County com
munities with average rates of 481 555 and 662 per
month for one bedroom two bedroom one bath and three
bedroom units Demand in the City would support 25
50 units of new housing in downtown each year Down
town is also an attractive place for senior housing The
Auburn Regional Medical Center is a strong factor as are
the goods and services of the business districts
1 3 6 Profile of Stampede Pass
Reopening
Historical Background
Two major rail lines run north south through the Downtown study
area Both lines the Union Pacific UP and the Burlington North
ern Santa Fe BNSF provide service along the west coast of the
United States The Union Pacific line is adjacent to the Interur
ban Trail which forms the westernmost edge of the study area
About 1 4 mile east lie the double tracks of the Burlington North
ern Santa Fe Railway at the edge of the Main Street core At the
south edge of the study area is an east west running rail line owned
by BNSF referred to as the Stampede Pass line This is one of
three east west lines in the state of Washington that provides ser
vice across the Cascade Mountains Ultimately Stampede Pass is
part of a system that traverses the U S from the eastto the west
coast
1 3 Downtown Profile 43
May 2001
1
Historically much of Auburn s commerce and livelihood revolved
around the railroad After the advent of the automobile and the
conversion of much freight traffic to trucking use of the railroads
and Stampede Pass in particular declined The line passes through
a tunnel in the mountains which has snowsheds at each end to
reduce the buildup of snow at the tunnel entrances One of the
snowsheds suffered extensive damage and it was decided at the
time to discontinue use of the line since rail lines at Stevens Pass
and the Columbia River were able to handle the existing demand
In about 1996 BNSF began to explore the repair and reopening J
of the Stampede Pass line to meet expanding needs for freight
train traffic However conditions in Auburn were somewhat dif
ferent than they had been in the early heyday of train service A
formerly bustling downtown built around the railroad was now
substantially less vibrant The station in Downtown Auburn had
been demolished and the area around the tracks now stood va
cant Nearby homes had been built for railroad workers and many
of these modest homes had deteriorated or been altered in insen
sitive and unattractive ways
The freeway and arterial road system had supplanted the rail sys
tem as a means of moving freight and people around the region
As population and vehicular traffic increased in the latter part of
the 20th century so did freight train traffic Increasing traffic of all
kinds has contributed to blocking problems around the railroad
tracks SR 18 and several at grade crossings in Downtown
Changes in railroad technology also resulted in a different kind of
train traffic than had been experienced half a decade or more ago
Freight trains envisioned for the Stampede Pass line were pro
jected to be 5 000 to 9 000 feet long almost 2 miles at the longest
City officials became concerned about the prospect of the reopen
ing of Stampede Pass The junction of this coast to coast line with
BNSF a major west coast line occurs just south of 3rd Street SW
in Downtown Auburn
Trains must slow to 10 mph to make the curve that joins the two
main lines At several thousand feet long it was determined that a
single train had the capacity to block five intersections at one time
three of these in Downtown And streets might be blocked for as
long as eight minutes at a time several times a day
Studying Impacts of Stampede Pass
A study was commissioned by the City and funded by the Wash
ington State Legislative Transportation Committee to analyse the
impacts of the opening of Stampede Pass on the community s traf
fic The study used a time horizon of 2005 and found the follow
44 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
ing in its analysis
Number of trains
BNSF plans to operate between 2 and 22 trains per day The
higher number is not expected to be reached in the foresee
able future Air quality restrictions in the Stampede Pass
tunnel would limit the maximum number of trains to 24 per
day Between 8 and 10 trains per day are expected to be run
ning by 2005
Grade Crossings
Trains would block seven streets with at grade crossings in
Auburn Five grade crossings may be blocked at the same
time
Emergency Access
e of l i it h h C s on a t osp enter e Auburn Regional Medical
only three Level 3 Trauma Centers in the region Access to
the hospital from the west side of the City would be
compromised if all grade crossings are blocked and aid cars
and ambulances would need to be redirected
Access to the commuter rail station and bus transit center
would be impaired making dependable transfer service
difficult
Conclusions of this study found that while grade separating all
affected crossings is technically possible doing so would be very
costly Grade separating some crossings such as West Main Street
would create new problems such as causing impacts on historic
buildings and the shopping district The study used sophisticated
computer based modeling techniques to determine the effects on
traffic patterns and vehicle delays The resulting analysis identi
fied the most cost effective combination of projects to offset the
impacts of Stampede Pass rail operations In Downtown these
include the 3rd Street Grade Separation project and the A Street
NW extension from 3 d Street NW to 14 Street NW Both of
these projects are discussed throughout this Plan the grade sepa
ration project is now under construction and the A Street exten
sion is in the design phase
Grade Crossings
The City participated in a study sponsored by Sound Transit called
the Tacoma to Seattle Grade Crossing Diagnostic Project Railroad ex
perts from WSDOT Rail BNSF and Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission WUTC evaluated railroad grade
1 3 Downtown Profile 45
May 2001
crossings throughout the BNSF rail corridor This study group
worked with the City of Auburn Traffic Engineer and Transporta
tion Planner to identify issues at each individual grade crossing in
Auburn and made recommendations for safety and functional im
provements Under consideration at the time was a proposal to
increase train speeds from 40 mph to 79 mph in this corridor
Agreement to these new speeds was predicated on the improved
safety conditions
BNSF has plans to add a third set of tracks along the mainline
through Auburn Improvements will include the installation of
the tracks signal modifications and installation of power switches
in the rail yard As this will be a substantial undertaking it was
agreed that when these improvements are made the company will
also institute the crossing upgrade recommendations for Down
town Auburn as listed below
3rd Street NW
Raised medians are proposed on the west side of the cross
ing to prevent cars from going around the lowered gate
arms A short section of median may be possible on the
east side of the tracks but is limited by driveway entrances
to businesses
Signal upgrades
Repaint pavement markings
West Main Street
South side of West Main The cantilever is currently
placed so that when a train is approaching the crossing
the gate arm blocks only the car traffic The cantilever
will be moved so that it is positioned to stop pedestrians
on the sidewalk keeping them from crossing the tracks
Signal upgrades
Repaint pavement markings
BNSF Right of Way
Fencing is proposed in the following locations to eliminate
informal crossings and to direct pedestrians to protected
crossing locations
At the Transit Center site between the sets of tracks
Parallel to B Street NW between West Main and Mers Lumber
1
46 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Impact of Stampede Pass on Downtown Business
Vitality and Quality of Life
With a Downtown in need of support and revitalization the com
munity was very concerned about the impact of increased train
traffic on the viability of Downtown businesses It was feared that
long delays at railroad crossings would cause such frustration that
drivers would discontinue using the affected streets thus reducing
their number of trips to or through downtown
It is difficult to determine the effect of the train traffic on busi
nesses directly An examination of the business community over
all found that there has been a small but fairly insignificant de
crease in the number of businesses in Downtown between 1996
and 2000 The chart below is based on the businesses which are
required to pay assessments as part of the City s Downtown Busi
ness Improvement Area BIA The BIA roughly coincides with
the Downtown Plan Study Area although residential areas are
not included or affected within the BIA
Change in Number of Downtown Businesses
I Number o Number of Medical and N
Year Businesse Related busi
Although there has been a small decrease in the total number of
businesses and in medical and medical related businesses the
numbers could be attributable to several factors Circumstances
such as declining condition of buildings increased rental rates
and construction of new office and store spaces outside of Down
town are probably more directly related to business changes than
train impacts It is also not unusual to have a slight cyclical change
in numbers as business turnover occurs regularly throughout each
year
Emergency Access
Emergency vehicles must have ready access to Auburn Regional
Medical Center the hospital to have the greatest chance of sav
ing lives in emergency situations Residents and employees who
live and work on the west side of the railroad tracks need to have
the same accessibility to emergency services as the rest of the City
The Auburn Fire Department has identified a number of alterna
tive routes to reach the hospital in case their normal routes across
3rd Street NW West Main or 3 a Street SW are impassable In the
time since Stampede Pass has opened they have been able to use
47
1 3 Downtown Profile
May 2001
1
other streets successfully and have not found this to be an in
soluble problem
1 3 7 Parking Supply and Demand
Downtown Auburn began its development just prior to the rise of
the automobile as a primary mode of transportation Its develop
ment pattern was if anything influenced more by the presence of
rail and wagon facilities However it ultimately developed a street
grid system capable of supporting automobile traffic and provided
a full range of commercial services in mostly low density low rise
buildings A combination of on street parking and small private
lots appears to have sufficiently served the area adequately for
decades Auburn had what we today term a pedestrian friendly
street and use pattern that made it possible and even pleasurable
to combine visits to many services and shops in a single visit
Change was slow to come to downtown Auburn J C Penney was
probably the most intensive commercial use and it along with other
stores in the area created high demand for parking until the store
closed in 1996 Auburn Regional Medical Center expanded re
cently other medical clinics have also located nearby creating
another area with high parking demand These demands have
recently been compounded by increased City of Auburn staff and
court activity directly related to the City s rapid growth
Auburn s place in the region has changed dramatically Until the
1960 s Auburn was a freestanding city with its own employment
base and a full set of commercial services located primarily down
town After that time the regional highway system connected
Auburn with the rest of Central Puget Sound Commute trip lengths
increased and people sought expanded shopping opportunities at 1 regional shopping malls Downtowns like Auburn s could not
compete well with the product variety and price offered in malls
nor with the convenience of seas of free parking they offered In
the 1960 s the City sought to improve the situation downtown by
constructing a series of surface parking lots financed through spe
cial assessments These were successful in improving the parking
situation and continue to provide the nucleus of downtown s cur
rent parking supply
I n recent years as the variety and vibrancy of downtown com
mercial uses diminished the overall supply of parking was not a
problem although there were a number of issues
There were localized parking shortages in the vicinity of
the hospital and post office I
48 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Parking was difficult for downtown employees and resi
dents due to a requirement that limited parking in public
lots to a maximum of 3 hours
It became difficult for developers to meet downtown park
ing requirements due to land cost and ownership patterns
that divides blocks into many small tracts
City parking standards were developed largely for mod
ern shopping center type development The standards did
not recognize the ability of a pedestrian oriented down
town to support multiple trips and therefore unfairly pe
nalized downtown property owners with excessive and
costly parking requirements
There was a concern that available downtown parking was
not sufficiently convenient and did not encourage new in
vestment downtown
Issues of public safety and parking code enforcement were
also raised
In 1996 the City undertook the Auburn Parking Study to re
spond to these concerns However it must be understood that the
Study was responding to anticipated growth under the 1990 Down
town Design Master Plan and at that time Sound Transit still had
not received voter approval The rapid growth in parking de
mand to support City Hall and Police and Court services was not
yet apparent Additionally the City had yet to experience a dra
matic increase in parking demand that could result from a single
successful new business like the Sun Break Cafe The conclusions
of the study follow
With a few exceptions total parking supply was not con
sidered to be a major issue Exceptions included the medi
cal center and post office Improved utilization of existing
lots and reduction of demand through improved transit
access were advocated
A complete overhaul of the Zoning Code s parking require
ments specifically to support downtown development was
advocated The code revisions were later adopted by the
City and generally served to reduce parking requirements
in Downtown
1 3 Downtown Profile 49
May 2001
t
1
It was recognized that the public sector had a role to play
in meeting new parking demand The advantages of coor
dinated well designed and located public lots serving
multiple businesses with a high turnover rate were under
stood to be more advantageous than multiple small pri
vate lots that were inconsistent with the desired downtown
development pattern The Plan also recognized that the
provision of public parking could serve as an economic
development tool
The Plan identified two potential locations for public park
ing facilities one at the site of the recently constructed
transit center and the second in the vicinity of the post
office
Section 1 4 of this plan identifies some potential approaches to
improve parking conditions in Downtown This section also in
cludes extensive policies and possible financing mechanisms for
creating an overall parking strategy
1 3 8 Profile of Historic Resources
Historic buildings both commercial and residential are a primary
asset within the Downtown Plan study area Distinctive architec
ture significant events and important persons and historic move
ments are tangibly embodied in buildings and places throughout
the Downtown Plan area Sometimes the significance and irre
placeable unique value of these places and their design isn t rec
ognized until they are lost The value of historic resources is often
economic as well since authentic history and character are an at
traction and business asset themselves
Historic Character
It is not surprising that the values identified in the Urban Design
Vision are demonstrated in or originate in the traditional building
patterns and forms present in Auburn s historic buildings and
streetscapes The historic patterns of Auburn s core are human
scaled and pedestrian oriented in both commercial and residen
tial areas Historic Main Street is intensely commercial and well
suited for pedestrians Like commercial buildings everywhere
Auburn s historic Main Street buildings have had periodic facelifts
new windows and doors a change of first floor exterior materials
new signs etc but the traditional arrangement of most of the fa
cades persists and much of the original exterior material is still
50 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
F present
Auburnis older residential neighborhoods particularly those within
and adjacent to the Downtown Plan area contain primarily wood
frame and wood clad one and one half to two story single family
residences Gable roofed vernacular bungalow style buildings
predominate throughout the planning area Mature street trees
are common The different quadrants of the planning area differ
somewhat in age and character The most distinctive is the south
west residential area which has several large residences on mul
tiple lots built by prominent people of the community The north
and southeast residential areas are more consistent with smaller
houses and lots larger blocks and fewer street trees Most of the
surviving historic housing stock dates from the period between
1910 and 1925 a prosperous and expansive period for the city
Overview History
Auburn s history can be condensed into four major periods each
tied to developments in land use and transportation and reflected
to some degree in the physical components of the city
During the first period including Native American and early Eu
ropean American settlement prior to 1883 settlements were pri
marily focused on the river and sustained by farming Nothing
within the planning area remains from this period
The second developmental phase 1883 1912 includes the found
ing and early development of the town The town first called
Slaughter was platted in anticipation of the arrival of the North
ern Pacific Railroad service from Tacoma Development intensi
fied after the platting of the townsite
The third phase 1913 1945 followed the development of a major
Northern Pacific Railroad yard in Auburn from 1910 1913 which
brought more population to Auburn and intensified industrial de
velopment The 1910s and 1920s saw continued growth and ex
tensive redevelopment on Main Street Early wooden buildings
were gradually replaced by more substantial masonry structures
The fourth phase 1946 present covers the city s post war
regionalization and industrial development Following the war
Auburn experienced a substantial building boom Businesses be
came increasingly automobile oriented and many such as car sales
moved outside the historic core into areas that had only recently
been farmland
By the early 1970s Auburn s current form and character were evi
dent though within smaller boundaries A compact historic core
with auto related and dependent commercial development along
51
1 3 Downtown Profile
May 2001
11
I
radiating arterials was surrounded by older and newer residential
and light industrial areas The traces of most of its significant pe riods of history were evident in the center of the city although
t t f h d b mos s ore ronts a een recently remodeled
Remodeling and new construction since the 1970s have removed
additional traces construction to accommodate renewed use of
the Stampede Pass rail line development of commuter rail ser
vices and other major transportation and economic changes will
continue to affect the city s historic resources
Preserving Historic Resources
Historic resources are best preserved when they continue to have
an active useful life in the community The challenge in preserv ing significant architecture and reminders from the past is to sus
tain changing uses while retaining the significant historic features
and character of older buildings Changing uses and new con
struction need not destroy irreplaceable treasures from earlier eras
Historic buildings can continue to house businesses and residents
contribute character to the downtown and inspire the present
Preservation requires a process of identifying evaluating and pro tecting historic resources through a variety of means The City has a vital role to play in identifying its historic resources and then
acting to encourage their protection and continuing use Some
steps have already been taken including those listed below
Inventory An inventory of historic resources on Main
Street has been completed
Landmark Designation Auburn s most significant historic
properties can be recognized and preserved through his
toric landmark designation Buildings or properties desig
nated as Auburn Landmarks will undergo a special his
toric design review process to insure that changes do not
destroy the significant historic features of a building There
are three properties designated as Auburn Landmarks in
the city two of which are in downtown Auburn
Benefits to Landmark Property Owners Owners of his
toric buildings may qualify for many incentives for preser
vation or restoration of their buildings Incentives include
property tax reductions grants and low interest loans for
restoration and technical assistance for care and mainte
nance of older buildings
52 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Historic Resources in Downtown Auburn
This Plan groups historic buildings into three categories
1 Historic Landmarks These are buildings that are officially
recognized and protected as Auburn Landmarks These are build
ings that are officially recognized and protected as Auburn Land
marks Buildings that receive Landmark status are eligible for
several financial benefit programs They also must undergo de
sign review for approval of any proposed changes to the exterior
of the building to ensure that significant historical features are
retained There are two designated landmarks in the Downtown
Plan study area
The Auburn Public Library 1914 now Auburn Music
and Dance and
The Auburn Post Office 1937 now the Seattle King
County Public Health Department
2 Potential Landmarks These homes and commercial build
ings are significant historic buildings that contribute greatly to a
unique and distinctive sense of Downtown These are buildings
that are worthy of protection and or restoration Work conducted
during the course of the Downtown Plan has identified 19 poten
tial landmarks that appear to be eligible for landmark designation
due to clearly significant historical associations architectural char
acter and relative lack of change over time The following are
some of the outstanding potential landmarks A complete list of
potential landmarks is provided in Table A
The Tourist Lotus Hotel 1905 and the adjacent Knights
of Pythias Hall 1923 deserve serious consideration for
landmark designation
The J C Penney building 1921
The Auburn Masonic Hall 1924 and other buildings in
the block
The Williams Auto Livery 1926 now the Auburn Av
enue Theater
The Farmers Warehouse and elevator circa 1920 now
Del s Farm Supply
The Knickerbocker Residence 1906 at la and E Streets
SW
The Otto Bertsch Residence 1922 at 3rd Street SE and
S Division
53
1 3 Downtown Profile
May 2001
1
3 Historically Significant Buildings Buildings in this category
contribute to the character of districts within the Downtown Plan
area This Plan identified 147 historically significant buildings that
are or should be included in the City s historic resource inven
tory Some may be eligible for landmark designation Many of
these are houses in the East Main and West Main Residential dis
tricts While not individually significant these houses create dis
tinctive historic neighborhoods whose character should be pro tected A preliminary list of historically significant properties is
identified in the Appendix
A more complete inventory should be conducted of properties in
this category This process should identify potential landmarks
and eventually lead to designating the most significant as land
marks Those that are not suitable for landmarking may still be
11
Figure 6 Downtown Plan Area Historic Resources Map I
Potential Landmarks
Designated Auburn Landmarks
O Historically Significant Buildings
N
800 Net
r
54 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
t
1
1
t
i
1
55
Table A Potential Landmarks
Address Historic Name Current Name or Use Year Built
K
10AUBURNAVE Williams Auto Uvery Aubum Ave Theater Auburn Avenue DinnerTheater 1926
224 E ST ugh arrs s McH s
201 E MAIN ST J C Penney Auburn Investment Co J C Penney Building Vacant 1921
Meade Arthur esid 25 EST 9
5061 ST ST SW Kn ickerbocker I B Residence Residence 1906
O it t Y a 27I OAII STY Fi FS v
102 E ST SW Bungalow
304 DIVISION ST S Bertsch Otto Residence Residence 1922
MR 116 H ST NW Queen Anne Resident
232 C ST NW Farmers Warehouse Elevator Offices Del s Farm Supply and Storage 1920
L 07 E MAIN BPOE 3
124 144 E MAIN ST Brooks Hotel Johnson Block Auburn Antique Craft Mall 1921
Drive In Restaurant Building Cafe
KIng Sol
Knights of Pythias Hall Apartments Vacant Commercial 1923
2
Hoye Dr Bartholomew Residence Residence 1914
304 f ST SE Tru Irner 31ex 111IF 00 n 1
318 E MAIN ST 1950
ST 3Q2 31
116 120 W MAIN ST
and architectural interest Information has been compiled from a
important for the character they give to the neighborhood In
these cases permit review that looks at the larger issues of historic
preservation or in the case of proposed demolition advertising
the building free to anyone willing to relocate it are options for
maintaining some of the historic resources
The historic resource map Figure 6 shows properties of historic
number of sources including a windshield survey of the planning
area conducted in April 2000 partial inventories previously con
1 3 Downtown Profile
219
U W
DIVISION ST S
5T
May 2001
I I
7
ducted by the City and an extensive inventory of Main Street
conducted over the past three years Further research and consid
eration of properties not yet inventoried will modify the list of
properties somewhat
Section 1 4 contains policies and recommended actions for ad
dressing the needs of retaining or preserving the community s most
valued historic resources
1
1
r
1
I
1
56 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
xga v p a ap gp 7arwr h xs z r r pguo m
Section 1 4 Downtown Plan
Section 1 4 Downtown Plan
1 4 1 The Plan Strategy
The overall goal of the Auburn Downtown Plan is to strengthen
the downtown image community and economy by building on
existing assets facilitating catalyst projects in key locations
stimulating infill and redevelopment and constructing high quality
infrastructure
Downtown Auburn will change dramatically in the near future as
several major transportation projects have recently been
completed or are under construction These include the Transit
Center with commuter rail local and express bus service A Street
NW and SW the SR18 C Street interchange and the 3rd Street
Grade Separation The Plan sets a framework for action to make
the most of the public investment and to leverage funds already
allocated to stimulate the larger revitalization of the overall
downtown area
The Plan identifies a series of actions projects programs and
policies which should occur in phases capturing growth in a
manner that will implement the Downtown Vision and that will
strengthen downtown s role as the heart of the community
Implementation of the Plan will be brought to fruition by the
coordinated efforts of the City of Auburn other governments the
downtown community the Auburn Downtown Association the
Chamber of Commerce and the development community at large
Months of planning efforts citizen participation and the Downtown
Vision have determined priorities in downtown Auburn along
with methods for accomplishing these priorities The following
elements represent this work and outline the overall Plan strategy
The following section identifies policies the key recommendations
and actions for downtown as a whole The next chapter 1 5 breaks
the downtown into districts and describes the future of each district
in greater detail
A Build Out from the Center
The Plan strategy is based on the concept of solidifying investment
in the core and building outward from the center for investment
and action area see Figure 7 Plan Concept This will allow
investments to build upon each other so that key assets and activities
reap the maximum possible benefit from one another
Infrastructure investments such as the Transit Center can lead to
investments in residential and commercial development
Residential and commercial development in turn are mutually
beneficial and will also spur further investment into Downtown
f r
The Plan p
Strategy T
Build out from the center a
x Link downtown distil
and improve identity y s
Improve key streets
lf 11 L Implement catalyst 1projects oney sites T
Improve the c lualiYy pf
development
improve bUstness anc t7 development image
1 4 Downtown Plan
May 2001
57
1
U
Auburn in the form of growing commerce 5
The construction of the new Sun Break Cafe between City Hall
and the new Transit Center demonstrates how investments create
needed links that solidify the downtown core This approach of
concentrating development to profit from multiple benefits is what
defines a downtown and is the antithesis of strip development
The Plan includes policies and implementation measures that are
necessary to ensure that new development is consistent with this
approach see Section 1 4 Table B Summary of Recommended
Actions Section 1 5 Downtown Plan Districts and Section 1 6
Implementation Strategy f
B Link Downtown Districts and Improve Identity
After revitalizing downtown outward from the center the next
step is to link the different downtown districts to the core creating
a more cohesive and readily identifiable downtown Downtown
today can be loosely defined by districts which have common land
uses or other unifying characteristics Main Street Auburn Way
and the Medical Center district can be easily identified as areas
that are distinct from one another While these areas are all within
the downtown study area one could travel along Auburn Way
and not get a sense of being in a downtown or city center The
same is true for parts of the Medical Center area There are
however places along Auburn Avenue that one would identify as
part of a downtown
Other parts of downtown such as the area around A Street SE do
not have a distinctive character or similar land uses Rather they
are a collection of residential uses auto oriented uses and
underutilized or vacant properties In contrast the residential and
industrial districts on the periphery of downtown are easily
identified as such
Linking these disparate districts through the continued
development of buildings and streets to create a dense cohesive
urban form is a major precept of the Plan These actions will expand
the urban form currently found on Main Street and link the outlying
areas to the core
C Improve Key Streets 1
The plan aims to improve downtown s image identity and
cohesiveness through the improvement of street form Key streets
are those that are an integral part of the identity of downtown In
downtown key streets include East and West Main Street A Street
NW SW Division Street A Street SE Auburn Avenue Auburn I
58 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Figure 7 Plan Concept
Link City Hall
and retail core
with iced use
lopment
n
I
1
i
f u
i
t
i
ASt
i Iml
iJ 00
E6 o oc
r
odq
Con investment
and action area
Second tier
investment and
action area
59
Link Transit Center
to City Hall Main
Stmet and adjacent
neighborhoods
zzz Potential Catalyst
Projects
Activities Anchors
housing mixed
use catalyst
projects
Core Investment and
Action Area
i Second Tier Investment
1 1 and Action Area
l J
Strengthen medical
center activity and
link to Main Street
Streetscape
improvements
to Auburn Way
and Auburn
Ave A Street SE
Performing
Arts Center
1
f Link east and west
Main Street
Potential hotel
and office sites
N
600 feet
1 4 Downtown Plan
May 2001
Way and sections of 1st Street SW 2nd Street SW 3rd Street SW
and Cross Street SE See Figure 8 Key Streets
There are two main elements that compose street form
1 street design the size configuration and amenities on the
street itself and
2 building form the location size and form of buildings
adjacent to the street
Throughout downtown Auburn building form can be improved
by ensuring that
buildings are located adjacent to the sidewalk
retail and service uses occupy street level floors
doors and windows face the street and
office or residential uses occupy upper floors
t
rJ
Figure 8 Key Streets
aoo FW
N
60 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Ll
While good building form is particularly important on key streets
it should be ensured throughout downtown Buildings frame the
street by providing the most prominent visual elements along it
When new development is located adjacent to the sidewalk a
human scale space is created This is however dependent upon
the width of the street Retail and service uses on ground floor
with windows and doors facing the street increase the level of
activity on the street helping to create a more vibrant downtown
For good overall street form new development should be
complemented by high quality public streets that are safe
comfortable and attractive Key streets must be improved to create
continuity throughout downtown and to distinguish downtown
from other commercial areas in Auburn Street improvements that
would significantly support connections and promote a downtown
identity include landscaping street trees sidewalks a coordinated
signage plan clearly marked and specially paved crosswalks where
warranted undergrounding of overhead wires clearly identified
entry points or gateways to downtown public art built into the
infrastructure and the minimum number of lanes necessary to
accommodate traffic flows
At least one route is needed to provide access between the east
and west sides of Downtown without interruptions by train traffic
Previous studies identified 3 d Street SW as the best location to
provide a grade separated street that will serve the greatest number
of vehicles This project is under construction and scheduled for
completion in 2002 Main Street and 3rd Street NW will remain
affected by commuter and freight trains and will require special
attention to pedestrian and safety features Finally there are also
key streets related to transit The development of the commuter
rail station and the rail station s transit center will necessitate shifting
some transit service onto different streets through downtown Key
transit streets identified by Metro relating to bus service to the
commuter rail station include 2nd Street SW lst Street NW and
A Streets NW SW
D Implement Catalyst Projects on Key Sites
The Plan recommends building quality development on key sites
This supports the concept of building out from the center and
making the most of every action and dollar spent This will stimulate
additional investment and development and demonstrate the
viability and wisdom of investing in downtown Catalyst projects
will take several forms and will build on different types of
opportunity Some projects will be identified on key sites that have
a strategic location Others will capitalize on a historic building
capture a market opportunity meet a specific goal or solve a specific
problem while still others will take advantage of a planned
1 4 Downtown Plan 61
May 2001
1
1
investment of capital improvement and leverage that action to
create additional development opportunities Specific catalyst
projects are described in detail later in this section
E Improve the Quality of Development
As revitalization occurs it will be important to ensure that the
quality of new development fulfills the Downtown Urban Design
Vision and that it continues to improve the overall image of
downtown as a good investment The Plan recommends adoption
and implementation of design standards which will play an
important role in the successful implementation of the Plan and
the Vision as will improved City standards to guide public
investment including new downtown street standards sign
regulations and landscaping programs
F Improve Business and Development Image I
The last element of the strategy is public relations To achieve the
Plan s goals it will be important to improve the image of downtown
Auburn as a place to do business and as a great place to invest A
downtown public relations program media campaign and ongoing
service improvement training for all City staff are examples of
how the downtown image can be improved The program will
need to be created and successfully marketed by a coalition of the
City Auburn Downtown Association and Chamber of Commerce
to achieve the desired quality of implementation
Circulation Plan
Major transportation changes in Downtown Auburn will result in
substantially revised circulation patterns The construction of the
grade separation on 3rd Street SW will result in increased traffic on
this route and adjoining streets as some drivers adopt this route
for east west travel replacing Main Street and 3 d Street NW The
Transit Center with Sound Transit commuter rail service and
express bus service and Metro local bus service will prompt
considerable new bus and vehicular traffic on all the surrounding
streets A and C Streets SW and 11 and 2 d Streets SW will be
particularly affected as activity at the Transit Center increases When
A Street NW is extended northward to Wh Street this will create a
much needed north south alternative to C Street NW SW and Auburn
Way Changes in traffic patterns can be expected as drivers change
habits to include getting to and driving on A Street NW
Pedestrian and bicycle circulation patterns will be revised to a lesser
extent by some of these changes Main Street will remain a primary
corridor for these users The introduction of a pedestrian bridge
62 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
1 4 2 Recommended Policies and Actions
This section presents major actions and supporting policies to carry
out the overall goal of Downtown revitalization Many of these
actions are related to physical improvements that the City can
make or initiate Others suggest new programs or approaches
that might stimulate additional investment by the private sector
While the list is long and will require many years to accomplish
these are the steps deemed necessary by the Downtown Plan Task
Force to meet the community s long term ambitions
Illustrations of some of these concepts are shown on the following
pages Figure 9 Summary of Recommended Actions illustrates
physical improvements that are suggested for both public and
private sector action Figure 10 presents a Long Range Vision for
downtown Auburn Figure 10 depicts what Auburn might look
like in 20 years if many of the recommended actions are
accomplished It is important to note that this graphic doesn t
imply specific development plans for any particular property but
is conceptual in nature only
A Strengthen Main Street Retail District
Most retail shopping in Downtown occurs along Main Street
unfortunately recent losses of strong businesses along Main Street
and a decline in customers have weakened the retail environment
Main Street can reach its full potential as the heart of downtown
by filling existing gaps in the retail core and linking Main Street
on the east and west sides of Auburn Way Gaps currently exist in
the Penney s building the Tavern Block west of Auburn Avenue
on the north side of Main Street across from City Hall south
side of Main Street and at the west end of Main Street between
the BNSF railroad tracks and A Street SW see Figure 4 Challenges
to Revitalization A tenant or development of some significance
is needed to attract additional activity to Main Street east of Auburn
Way East Main could also be improved by extending some of the
concepts of the Main Street improvements to that area and trying
to tie Main Street more strongly into the Performing Arts Center
GOAL 1 To take positive action that creates a successful
retail environment in Downtown particularly along Main
Street
Specific actions the City might take to influence the retail
environment are expressed in the policies below
Policy 1 1 Facilitate private investment
The City should seek opportunities to facilitate private sector
investment in developing new retail opportunities downtown
1 4 Downtown Plan 63
May 2001
1
Policy 1 2 Ground floor retail
The City should seek to incorporate ground floor retail space in
parking garages and other public structures Downtown
Policy 1 3 Coordinate marketing of Downtown
The City Auburn Downtown Association and Chamber of
Commerce should cooperate to improve the marketing of
Downtown This might include the creation of a coordinated
website educating business owners in e commerce options and
encouraging property owners to upgrade and or restore buildings
B Diminish Blighting Influences
Blight can occur in the form of poorly maintained buildings and
or land uses that are incompatible with a high quality pedestrian
oriented downtown Blighted properties and influences adversely
impact the ability to attract private sector investment They also
create an atmosphere in which many residents elect to conduct
business elsewhere in surroundings that are perceived to be safer
and more comfortable
Blighting influences in downtown Auburn include
Excessive number of taverns related issues of building
maintenance and impact of tavern customers on public
safety real and perceived
Underutilized or vacant parcels often with trash and
maintenance issues
Poorly maintained buildings
Potential Redevelopments A Street SW Transit Center and Housing
Mixed Use Project
f
1
1
I
Ll
7
1
0
64 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Figure 9 Summary of Recommended Actions
65
111
Transit Center with commuter Potential hotel and
rail and expanded bus services office development
SR 18 C Street Potential housing mixed use with Continue Main Street
overpass commercial uses facing A Street SE streetscape improvements
Major Catalyst V 1
Projects
A
8
Medical Center
Master Plan Area
N
800 Feet
v Civic Center i Gateway
Protect and Preserve Facade Street Improvements Vehicular
Existing Residential Improvement and or Streetscape
Neighborhoods
Improve Intensify O Intersection t Pedestrian Bike
Existing Use Buildings Improvement Links
1 4 Downtown Plan
May 2001
0
Table B Summary of Recommended Actions
B Diminish Blighting Influences
E Stens
D Integrate Major Public Facilities
E Transportation Poes andStreet Improvements
1 Downtown Circulation
2 Street Design Deveioprxient tanda r
3 Sidewalk Corridor
w Curbs 1 K t I l i a i L
5 Driveways
r s l a m ry s ps e T s R R r
6 Street CornersAntersections
7 Bike Routes
8 Pedestrian Circulation t j
F Parking Strategy
G Major Plan P
1 Catalyst Projects
2 Publk oPio
3 Private Sector Projects
K Increase Cuhu i
Increase Downtown Residential Population
F de 1 roveii r tsy
K Protect Adjacent Neighborhoods
L Provide Storrr v iater Managemee t 7
M Regulatory Revisions
a Expand Downtown P C rt rant x
3 ta Sa r v am LB da v k a c a
1 The Ramp
MT M l edestrian L n1t es Y i F
3 Parking Lots and Parking Garages
S nac l qr r r aw T r l 9 edical i nter r LP 4 t
5 Transit Center
Preserve Histork Res
R Adopt Downtown Design Guidelines or Standards
66 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
A
Commercial strip development along Auburn Way that
is inconsistent with pedestrian oriented densely developed
downtown
Industrial and auto oriented uses within the downtown
and or adjacent to residential uses These impact upon
traffic visual quality neighborhood atmosphere noise and
other issues
GOAL 2 To remove or diminish the impact of blighting
influences throughout Downtown
the City should seek to remove or diminish Wherever possible
the impact of blighting influences
Policy 2 1 Encouraging removal
Removal of blighting influences is encouraged
Policy 2 2 Public sector investment
When private sector investment is not feasible or timely public
sector investments in catalyst projects should be considered The
City shall have the ability to acquire properties to aggregate into
larger projects
Policy 2 3 Code and liquor license policies
The City should consider zoning code amendments and liquor
license review policies to limit the adverse impacts of taverns and
drinking establishments
Policy 2 4 Remove non conforming land uses
Zoning Code amendments should be sought to remove non
conforming and inconsistent land uses over time
Policy 2 5 Enhance code enforcement
The City should undertake enhanced code enforcement to insure
III that buildings and properties are appropriately
maintained
II
II
1 Policy 2 6 Evaluate historic
buildings Older buildings should be evaluated for their historic
significance and ability to be successfully rehabilitated as an alternative
to
demolition 1 4 Downtown Plan
67 May
2001
1
A
C ore C Intensify Land Use in the
With the exception of the Auburn Regional Medical Center most
of the buildings in downtown Auburn are one or two stories in
height which presents a low ratio of building area to ground area
for downtown as a whole In addition a significant amount of
land in downtown Auburn is occupied by surface parking This
low intensity means a lower economic return for downtown
development in general than is possible Also the low building
h density means that the appearance of downtown streetscapes wit
the exception of Main Street is that of suburban strip development
more than of a downtown or city center
i f es our stor The urban design vision for downtown identified two to
as appropriate for downtown with stepped back upper floors above
three stories These heights would allow a much greater building
volume than currently exists in downtown Further discussion with
the Downtown Plan Task Force revealed a desire to allow greater
building heights to respond to the economic needs of potential
developers The design guidelines presented in this section detail the
approach to building heights that was proposed by the Task Force
With intensifying land uses the City of Auburn should consider
having downtown designated an Urban Center in accordance with
King County s County Wide Planning Policies To designate
f h ousing or downtown an Urban Center estimated growth targets
and employment must be established and downtown would need
to comply with King County Growth Management Planning
Council criteria for Urban Center designation
GOAL 3 To increase the number of people living and
working downtown by increasing the density height and
volume of buildings
Policy 3 1 Building height and density
To provide more options to support downtown development there
shall be no maximum building height requirement in the C 2 zone
Rather the maximum building height shall be determined based
on the applicant s ability to satisfy performance and design
standards that provide for an appropriate sense of street level
enclosure and sunlight penetration
Policy 3 2 Multi use parking
The City should continue to facilitate multi use public parking lots
and garages to permit increased development density
68 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
l L
O N q
c f x f y d
c E c
A S cE as
24
J i
t
t r t i l f
1 W 4 W W 12 1 X
1 i i 1
Y
Z
1
sS 1 I i t U C4 1
i
1
14 lm
1 A AL l
MN 7aanS O
r
t t
ii
r
4
C C d C r a y v C E
Li y a o
e m O v
d N E E W
lo y1 N y
i7
S
d i
C y
t
Q N
I
y t 4 I r t i
t Y
3S awls a N
11
T
co
va
C
U
l y CJ
I
n
y
C
a E r
W CL y N o
N A
a
V
E p
0 0
o a v
y 1 I
d
3
y d V
N 3 y l 10
y
1 L c10i y a Tii A 1 i
O Y
a
v Z
tr K SLl e
i t 1 W ti
i
1
VI
C y V
O a uy a
i 1
r
k
C i E
O
O
Q y
47 O i
1
Z O O
y V 0 0 Dm N
Vf T Y y C N
C yp1 d 7 Cr x v T7 s d u
I J C r r i1Y r
C
V
T
cv
A w
NVf p i
d
Q
LJI
T
Q A G I
U a
N
A Y 1 0 t j
c aaa aw
L
d
j r
O g
C
R
I
C c
C
1
t
i
I r tt t
t
fir
i
v
3S laaJlS v i
a r
3004 V t
J CO
H 1
1111 JSN9
i 1 r o y of t
n
23I r o E
r ct
a f T Iio 7 d
CL
i na t a Z t A p Ip 1
o c
O G N
d T N
fi 1 F r 1
G C L G1 G7
0N o
rl y N o c 5
e N jy y m N d A O C t
mar d 3 a w U
tt a C N CD
v mcavid y 0
d
a
O
N Ra i d CD r t
v as
O vl c
y t a
te at A v o a a yc c m ccu O 1 ry Oi C 3t I H N a p 3 o m o
1 0
i J t
1 i rtr
Policy 3 3 Urban Center
The City shall seek an amendment to King County and Puget
Sound Regional Council plans and policies to have Auburn s
Downtown designated as an Urban Center
D Integrate Major Public Facilities
Three major transportation improvements are recently completed
or under construction in Downtown Auburn These include
The SR 18 C Street Interchange and 3 d Street SW Grade
Separation
The Transit Center and
A Street SW improvements
The Downtown Plan Task Force and subcommittees were
instrumental in reviewing these projects and ensuring their
coordination in this south central part of Downtown Each is far
reaching in impact and represents the investment of many millions
of public dollars
The scale of the three projects is such that they need to be delicately
integrated into the downtown fabric to ensure that they have a
positive aesthetic impact Input from the Task Force helped to
define how this integration might occur There will still be
opportunities after construction for continued efforts to fit these
large structures and facilities into the community through aesthetic
approaches such as street tree plantings plantings along large walls
and provision of public art and street furnishings
Other public facilities such as below ground utilities and power
lines also need to be integrated overall and within each individual
project Development in Downtown began in the late 1800s some
of the older systems such as water pipes are still in place The
increased density encouraged by this Plan may have an impact on
these systems and their ability to service the number of people
and businesses envisioned While some improvements have been
installed in the last couple of years close coordination will need to
occur between the Public Works and Planning Departments to
guarantee that current systems are not overtaxed by new
development and that system upgrades are planned to meet
upcoming needs
As density and traffic increases there is also a need to create a
clearer identity for Downtown and to provide better tools to help
visitors and residents find their way around
70 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
GOAL 4 To plan for public facilities to serve the increased
density in Downtown
Policy 4 1 Coordinate utilities with development
Coordinate water service sanitary sewer and storm water utilities
electrical and fiber optic facilities with the increasing development
Downtown Pursue opportunities to develop technologically
advanced high speed communication infrastructure that supports
or could attract desired businesses to Downtown Auburn
Policy 4 2 Underground utilities
All new development shall provide underground utilities
Policy 4 3 Gateways and landmarks
Opportunities to develop gateways landmarks and a wayfinding
system in Downtown shall be explored
Policy 4 4 Enhance transportation facilities
Visual and environmental enhancements shall be provided for large
scale transportation facilities in Downtown
E Street Improvements Transportation Policies
All streets in downtown Auburn are envisioned to function as
carriers of vehicular traffic and as urban pedestrian oriented
environments Visual and functional improvements to key streets
will provide facilities for all modes of travel for business and
recreation Key recommended transportation improvements are
illustrated in Figure 11 Streets to be improved include Auburn
Way Auburn Avenue A Street SE A Street NW and SW Cross
Street East Main Street and 3 d Street NW Key improvements
include the addition of gateways sidewalk improvements public
art improved signage landscaping and undergrounding of utilities
Major intersections that need aesthetic or functional improvement
include Main and Auburn Way Main and A Street SW Main and
C Street SW Auburn Way and Cross Street A Street NW and 3 d
Street NW and A Street SW and Cross Street
A number of policy actions are needed to implement the
Downtown Urban Design Vision As population and activity
increase over time in Downtown Auburn additional congestion
should be expected and will be a sign that downtown is becoming
more economically competitive and attractive To foster economic
development and revitalization a lower level of service standard
will be acceptable in Downtown Auburn than in the rest of the
City The reduction in the LOS for Downtown will be
1 4 Downtown Plan 71
May 2001
n
ff complemented by other e orts to promote street improvements
that enhance pedestrian safety and access This will minimize
vehicular non motorized conflicts
Policies to accomplish the intent and vision for street improvements
and transportation presented in this Plan are detailed below
GOAL S To acknowledge that Downtown automobile and
pedestrian traffic are unique within the City and that
standards need to be more flexible in Downtown
Policy 5 1 Level of service in Downtown
A lower Level of Service LOS is acceptable in Downtown than
elsewhere in the City
Policy S 1 Level of service in Downtown
A lower Level of Service LOS is acceptable in Downtown than
elsewhere in the City
Auburn s downtown is a unique area within the City In order to
promote the density of development needed to support a vibrant
downtown while improving pedestrian accessibility the City
accepts that a successful downtown will have a lower level of service
then is applied elsewhere in the community
The overall Level of Service in Downtown Auburn can be reduced
to an average LOS of E except along the corridors of Auburn
Way Auburn Avenue A Street SE and C Street NW which must
be maintained at the current City of Auburn LOS standard When
determining if the average LOS of E is being maintained no
three consecutive intersections on a corridor can be Level of Service
F While any single intersection in Downtown Auburn excluding
intersections along those corridors mentioned above may fall to
LOS F an average LOS of E or better must be maintained
when averaging the compromised intersection with the four
intersections immediately adjacent to it on the north south east
and west Finally no intersection may be allowed to fall below
LOS F for a time the eriod exceedin eak hour p g p
Policy S 2 Through traffic
The City will maintain through traffic movements on arterial routes
that pass through the Downtown Background traffic will continue
to grow as the community and its surroundings develop
The City s standard Traffic Mitigation Program is satisfied by the
analysis provided in this Plan The analysis demonstrates that
development anticipated in the Plan can be safely accommodated
72 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Figure 11 Transportation Improvements
Transit Hub with commuter
rail and expanded bus services
SR 18 C Street
overpass
Arterial Collector Improvements
vehicular pedestrian and
streetscape
Streetscape Improvements
provided by Adjacent
Redevelopment
Transit Center
City Streetscape
Improvements
O Intersection Improvements
vehicular and pedestrian
N
800 Feet
1 4 Downtown Plan
May 2001
73
Continue Main Street
streetscape improvements
asreel Imp owmmoaa
1
between 3rd Street SW and 31d St NW with an extension north
of downtown from 3rd Street NW up to 151 Street NW
The Transit Center which will provide express bus local
bus and commuter rail service
The SR 18 C Street Overpass
Cross Street improvements widening and sidewalks
Auburn Way improvements widening and sidewalks
between 2n and 41 Streets NE
Improvements between 2nd and 41b Streets NE and on
Auburn Way North and between A Street SE and Auburn
Way South on Cross Street
Other transportation improvements that this plan recommends
adding to the City s Transportation Plan are
Improvements to the West Main Street C Street NW
intersection
Auburn Way improvements sidewalk streetscape signal
improvements and access management
Auburn Avenue A St SE sidewalk and streetscape
improvements
Planned and recommended improvements are described
in detail below and in Section 1 5 Downtown Plan Districts
Circulation Plan
Major transportation changes in Downtown Auburn will result in
substantially revised circulation patterns The construction of the
grade separation on 3 d Street SW will result in increased traffic on
this route and adjoining streets as some drivers adopt this route
for east west travel replacing Main Street and 3rd Street NW The
Transit Center with Sound Transit commuter rail service and
express bus service and Metro local bus service will prompt
considerable new bus and vehicular traffic on all the surrounding
streets A and C Streets SW and 13 and 2nd Streets SW will be
particularly affected as activity at the Transit Center increases When
A Street NW is extended northward to 141 Street this will create a
much needed north south alternative to C Street NW SW and Auburn
Way Changes in traffic patterns can be expected as drivers change
habits to include getting to and driving on A Street NW
1
I
L
t
0
76 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Pedestrian and bicycle circulation patterns will be revised to a
lesser extent by some of these changes Main Street will remain a
primary corridor for these users The introduction of a pedestrian
bridge over the BNSF tracks at the commuter rail station platform
will offer an alternative to the pedestrian or cyclist waiting at a
grade crossing blocked by a slow moving train A Street SW will
also be heavily used by pedestrians
Street Design Guidelines and Policies
This section identifies guidelines and policies that are
recommended throughout the Downtown The improvements
should be incorporated into Downtown streets with all public and
private development and improvements
Within the scope of this planning effort it was possible to develop
design guidelines for street and streetscape improvements
appropriate for consideration within the downtown However it
was not possible to develop and implement ordinance and design
revisions to codify these improvements Consequently two policies
are required to implement this section of the Plan
It is essential to recognize that downtown streets and blocks are
uniquely different from the balance of the community and that
standards applicable elsewhere cannot be uniformly applied here
without resulting in unwarranted expense and damage to the goals
contained in this Plan Therefore a mechanism is required to
recognize this difference and give the City the flexibility to apply
different standards
In the longer term the City needs to develop design standards
uniquely suited to downtown This effort will require dedicated
staff time and funding
GOAL 8 To develop and implement design standards for
downtown streets and streetscape
Policy 8 1 Pedestrian access
Pedestrian access shall be a high priority in the development of
street and streetscape design standards in Downtown High
pedestrian activity locations in and around downtown should be
identified and evaluated Engineering studies should be conducted
to determine appropriate measures for pedestrian improvements
Policy 8 2 Street design standards
The City shall prepare street and streetscape standards appropriate
for use within the downtown
1 4 Downtown Plan 77
May 2001
1
Policy 8 3 Street and streetscape standards
Street and streetscape standards for the Downtown shall take
into consideration public transit routes and infrastructure needs
of public transit providers
E 2 Overall Downtown Streetscape Improvements
Streetscape improvements are recommended throughout
downtown Auburn to complement Main Street Variations of a
decorative hooded light a paving strip adjacent to the curb and
sidewalk street tree standards and a Chinook style tree grate will
be used throughout downtown to enhance its character while
providing common visual elements
Variations of a hooded light by Architectural Area Lighting
Universe Collection see illustration will be used along streets
throughout downtown This style is similar to those on Main Street
but dissimilar enough to maintain Main Street as a distinctive place
in downtown
A one foot wide gray concrete paving strip with a textured band
will separate sidewalks from the curb in downtown Auburn This
strip will help provide uniqueness and character to all of downtown
Adopted street tree standards from Auburn s Design and
Construction Standards will improve the streetscape by softening
0
1
1
1
1
J
1
a
1
78 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Potential Hotel Development near SR 18
the hard urban environment while providing shade and pedestrian
comfort among other benefits The standards should be revised
and adopted for downtown Using the revised standards will ensure
a consistent look throughout downtown
A Chinook style tree grate by Urban Accessories Inc see
illustration will be used for sidewalk trees throughout downtown
This style subtly reflects the Northwest while further improving
the character and uniqueness of downtown Auburn
E 3 Sidewalk Corridors
Downtown streets have been constructed and it is unlikely that
they will be rebuilt in large measure throughout the downtown
The following section addresses the need to improve pedestrian
conditions within downtown Auburn while working in most cases
within the existing right of way and with the existing curbs
remaining in their current locations Resolutions of conflicts in
every given case must be based upon a balance of conflicting needs
and uses and adjusting the solution to fit the magnitude of both
need and conflict
The following approach is recommended when considering the
layout of sidewalks and their accessories
Downtown sidewalks can be divided into zones to separate
Table C Sidewalk Corridor Recomendations
SIDEWALK FURNISHINGS THROUGH FRONTAGE
CORRIDOR APPLICATION ZONE PED ZONE ZONE
15 feet Recommended for arterials 4 5 feet 8 feet 2 to 6 feet
where ROW width is 80 feet
and collectors and pedes
trian districts
ecamtr endedfofatt s Q
colieCto s and pedestrian 6inches
rvhe6t f
10 feet Recommended for arterials 4 5 feet 5 feet 0 feet to
collectors and pedestrian 6 inches
districts
9 fee Not reommended ford 3 ee to 0
Q lo nor
ifon street trees must Jie
T Stae d IIna ArMJn m0 a7
Less than NOT RECOMMENDED 2 feet to 6 6 feet to 6 0 feet
9 feet Accepted in existing con inches trees inches
strained corridors when not possible
increasing sidewalk width is
not practicable
1 4 Downtown Plan 79
May 2001
1
uses and functions of different parts of the sidewalk
Furnishings Zone Through Pedestrian Zone No
Obstruction Zone and Frontage Zone The purpose
function and design of each zone is discussed below
Proposed hooded light
fixture
Detail of Chinook style Tree Grate
Table C provides guidance for recommended widths of
these zones under various street conditions When a major
new development is proposed the entire street cross section
should be evaluated considering the role and needs of
motorized and nonmotorized traffic in the particular
location This will help determine the dimensions for the
entire sidewalk corridor and the individual zones where
appropriate
Streets in downtown Auburn have already been built and
in many cases the existing sidewalk corridors are too
narrow to accommodate the recommended zone widths
Competing needs for space in constrained sidewalk
corridor spaces can be resolved in either of two ways by
compromising on the minimum width required for some
or all of the sidewalk zones or by increasing the dimensions
of the Sidewalk Corridor
In some cases it is possible to widen the Sidewalk Corridor either
through acquisition of additional right of way or through public
walkway easements or by reallocation of existing right of way
Such measures should be considered on A Street NW Auburn
Avenue A Street SE and on Cross Street
T F Z HE URNISHINGS ONE
The portion of the sidewalk directly next to the curb is identified
in this plan as the Furnishings Zone
The Furnishings Zone buffers pedestrians from the adjacent
roadway and provides the area where elements such as utility
poles signal poles street lights controller boxes hydrants signs
driveway aprons grates hatch covers street trees and street
furniture are properly located This is also the area where people
alight from parked cars Vending carts might occupy a portion of
the Furnishings Zone
Where it is wide enough the Furnishing Zone should provide street
trees In downtown this area could be paved with tree wells and
planting pockets for trees flowers and shrubs
80 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Separating pedestrians from auto travel lanes greatly increases their
comfort as they use the Sidewalk Corridor This buffer function of
the Furnishing Zone is especially important on streets where there
are high volumes of automobile traffic
All grates and hatches within the sidewalk should be located in
the Furnishings Zone and should be flush with the surrounding
sidewalk surface and outside the Through Pedestrian Zone
Ventilation and tree grates should have openings no greater than
1 2 in width Pavers are acceptable as tree grates Hatch covers
should have a rough surface texture with a slightly raised pattern
and be slip resistant
THE THROUGH PEDESTRIAN ZONE
The Through Pedestrian Zone defines the area of the sidewalk
that is intended for pedestrian travel This area should be free of
permanent and temporary objects As a general rule the zone
should be a minimum of 5 8 wide on downtown streets see table
C Driveway aprons should not intrude into the Through
Pedestrian Zone see detail for Typical Alignment of the Sidewalk
Zone
Walking surfaces should be firm and stable resistant to slipping
and allow for ease of passage by people using canes wheelchairs
or other devices to assist mobility Sidewalks should generally be
constructed of Portland cement concrete Unit pavers could also
be used particularly in the Furnishings Zone or around mature
trees where lifting occurs Concrete sidewalks should be scored to
achieve patterning as is appropriate
Walking surfaces should be relatively level with a preferred cross
slope of the entire Through Pedestrian Zone of 2
THE FRONTAGE ZONE
The Frontage Zone is the area between the Through Pedestrian
Zone and the property line This zone allows pedestrians a
comfortable shy distance from building fronts in areas where
buildings are at the lot line and from elements such as fences and
hedges which may also abut the property line Where no
Furnishings Zone exists elements that would normally be located
in that zone might be located in the Frontage Zone but should be
reviewed for appropriateness on a case by case basis Temporary
uses such as sidewalk cafes and vending carts may occupy the
i Frontage Zone so long as the Through Pedestrian Zone is
maintained
Frontage Furnishings
Zone Zone
Through
Pedestrian
T
1 s curb
Moveable
Objects
Fixed
objects
Building
Front
r
Typical Alignment of the
Sidewalk Zone
1 4 Downtown Plan 81
May 2001
1
EA Curbs I
Curbs should be maintained on all downtown streets to prevent
stormwater from entering the sidewalks discourage vehicles from
driving on sidewalks and to make street cleaning easy In addition
curbs help to define the pedestrian environment within the
streetscape as separate from the vehicular environment And at
comers the curb is an important tactile element for pedestrians
who are finding their way with a cane
E 5 Driveways
Driveways curb cuts interrupt the pedestrian realm with cars and
changes of grade Frequent driveways also add multiple turning
movements on streets and pose potential safety hazards to both
pedestrians and vehicles
The following guidelines are recommended
Encourage access from alleys where present
Driveway aprons should be designed to not intrude into
the Through Pedestrian Zone
Sidewalk DRIVEWAY APRON DESIGN Sidewalk
The preferred condition for driveway design is where the Through
Pedestrian Zone is maintained at 1 50 slope across the entire
driveway and is scored with a sidewalk pattern The sloped portion M of the driveway is located entirely within the Furnishings Zone
and should be sloped to a maximum of 1 10 to minimize the width
S1 p of the sloped apron Where necessary to keep the driveway apron
slop slope from exceeding 1 10 the sidewalk may be partially dropped t sc
1 10 max to meet the grade at the top of the apron This is preferred to
Max T extending the sloped apron into the Through Pedestrian Zone
Slope Where sidewalk widths are too constrained to accommodate the
Y preferred condition a dropped driveway may be used This
i N driveway meets ADA requirements and is appropriate where the
sidewalk width is less than eight feet wide The sidewalk scoring
grid should continue across the driveway through the Through
Preferred Driveway Dropped Driveway Pedestrian Zone
Condition in Constrained Situation
EA Guidelines for Street Corners Intersections
Pedestrian activities are concentrated at street corners where
sidewalks converge and where pedestrians wait to cross They are
also the primary location for street signs traffic control signs and
traffic signal bases The design of the corner affects the speed with
which turning traffic can maneuver through an intersection
Visibility at street corners is an issue for all street users
82 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
The following street corner guidelines are recommended
Clear space Comers should be kept clear of obstructions
and have enough space for the typical number of
pedestrians waiting to cross and should have enough room
for curb ramps transit stops where appropriate and for
street conversations If possible utility poles newspaper
boxes and other physical elements should be located
outside of the clear space area There should also be an
identified no private use area to ensure that there is
adequate waiting area and visibility at intersections
Visibility It is critical that pedestrians at street comers
have a good view of the travel lanes and that motorists in
the travel lanes can easily see pedestrians
Legibility Symbols marks and signs used at corners
should clearly indicate what actions the pedestrians should
take
Accessibility All corner features such as ramps landings
call buttons signs symbols marks texture etc must meet
accessibility standards
Separation from Traffic Corner design and construction
must be effective in discouraging turning vehicles from
driving over the pedestrian area
Special paving at key intersections and gateways Special
paving such as cobble bricks or other unit pavers should
be used at the intersection of Main Street and Auburn Way
and also at the north and south gateway intersections of
Auburn Way and 4t Street NW and Auburn Way and Cross
Street Design standards should be developed that identify
appropriate and accessible locations for use of special
paving
Minimizing Crossing Distances at Intersections
Many factors govern the choice of a curb radius in any given
location including desired pedestrian area at that corner traffic
turning movements the turning radius of the design vehicle the
geometry of the intersection the street classification and whether there
is parking or a bike lane between the travel lane and the curb
Given all of these factors the following guidelines are
No Private
Use Aro
r
Corner No Obstructions
1 4 Downtown Plan 83
May 2001
1
recommended
The chosen radius should be as small as possible for the
circumstances
Refuge islands islands that allow pedestrians to cross one
segment of the street to a relatively safe location out of the
travel lanes and which shorten the length of the crosswalk
should be provided at intersections with large turning radii
however smaller turning radii are preferable This
guideline may apply to the Auburn Way Cross Street
intersection
E 7 Bicycle Routes
Downtown Auburn currently has two routes that are commonly
used by bicyclists These are the Interurban Trail and Main Street
The Interurban Trail is a paved 12 foot wide trail on the west edge
of the Downtown Plan study area that provides a vital north south
route traversing the entire length of the City The 4 mile segment
in Auburn is part of a regional trail that extends from Pacific to
Tukwila and is 17 miles in total length This is an important
connector to other valley communities for both commuting and
recreational cyclists
Many cyclists use Main Street as a connector to and from the trail
Although there are no marked bike lanes on Main Street traffic in
the core area moves slowly enough that sharing the lane with
vehiclular traffic is not an uncomfortable experience With the
arrival of the Transit Center it is desirable to provide improved
access for bicyclists from all directions and to provide directional
signage for cyclists and signage to let motorists know to expect
cyclists in the roadway
Main Street is also the primary east west connection from the
Interurban Trail and Downtown to the east part of the City It is
frequently used by bicyclists traveling toward SE Green Valley
Road and Flaming Geyser State Park to the southeast and toward
the Green River Road to the northeast
Access from other parts of the City into Downtown is more difficult
Arterial streets that pass through Downtown are heavily traveled
and provide no bike lanes or wide right lanes suitable for bike
travel Local residential streets have low traffic volumes suitable
for bicycing but few streets extend for more than a few blocks due
to dead ends such as at railroad tracks This makes using these
streets a circuitous and unlikely prospect Bicyclists who need to
travel across the city through Downtown are also without good
84 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Figure 12 Downtown Bicycle Routes
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
l
to the 1
Interurban Trail
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
M 1998 Downtown Plan
Study Area
Mapped Bike Routes
Marked Bike Lanes on street
Proposed Trail
Existing Trail
a
a
0
o
N
800 rwt T
1 4 Downtown Plan 85
May 2001
Trail connection
to 1 Sth St NW to Fred Meyer
1
J
options other than Main Street
The Nonmotorized Transportation Plan adopted in December
1998 identified the need for access into Downtown and the Transit
Center from A Street SE and the southeast part of the City The
City has purchased property to construct a separated trail along
this route as part of the A Street SW extension project The planned
extension of A Street NW to 15 Street NW should also be designed
with bike facilities creating a longer north south route that will
access both the Downtown and North Auburn Central Business
District Figure 12 shows existing and proposed bicycle routes in
downtown
Goals and policies to enhance the bicycling environment in
Downtown are listed below
GOAL 9 To improve opportunities for bicycling in
and through Downtown
Policy 9 1 Trail to Transit Center
The City shall seek funding to construct a paved separated trail
connecting the Transit Center and A Street SE
Policy 9 2 A Street NW bike facility
Planning design and construction of the A Street NW extension
shall include bicycle facilities
Policy 9 3 Seek opportunities for bike facilities
Other opportunities to improve bicycle facilities in Downtown
should be sought particularly in association with planned traffic
improvements A bicycle service center that provides safe long
term parking and other facilities should be developed at the Transit
Center
GOAL 10 To provide lane marking and a signage
system oriented to bicyclists
Policy 10 1 Mark bike lanes on Main Street
Bicycle lanes should be planned and marked on West Main Street
from the Interurban Trail to the Transit Center and should be
explored on East Main Street from approximately D Street NE
SE to R Street NE SE
Policy 10 2 Directional si9na9e
Directional signage shall be developed to guide bicyclists to the
major sites in and around Downtown An information kiosk shall
86 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
7
I
1
be provided at the Main Street trailhead of the Interurban Trail
directing cyclists to points of interest in Downtown and beyond
E 8 Pedestrian Circulation
Most visitors to Downtown are pedestrians at some point during
their visit It is a goal of this plan that the pedestrian experience
be improved and expanded and that more visitors will see this as
a great place to walk To accomplish this it is necessary to examine
the existing pedestrian circulation system to identify needed
improvements
A street tree sidewalk inventory conducted in 1999 found that most
i streets in Downtown Auburn have sidewalks in place The
condition of these varies substantially however Many of the oldest
sidewalks are from the early part of the century These are often
M narrower than are required today Some have surface damage or
have been uplifted or broken up by tree roots or other natural or
manmade forces While the sidewalk dimensions and conditions
probably do not unduly influence walking they do reduce the
aesthetic quality and safety of the experience
N Pedestrian Destinations and Barriers
Bigger factors in whether people walk downtown can be framed
by two questions
1 Is there someplace for people to go a destination and
2 Is there anything in the way of getting there a barrier
An examination of the pedestrian destinations or generators places
with a large number of employees such as the hospital found about
a dozen major locations in Downtown These include the Main
Street Core shopping district transit center banks grocery store
hospital schools and City Hall
Numerous barriers to walking were also identified these are
primarily related to transportation features such as wide busy
streets or railroad tracks These barriers contribute to the feeling
that although close in distance adjacent areas are actually very
dissimilar and unrelated These barriers may be more
psychological than physical but they are effective in discouraging
people from walking from the Main Street core for example and
crossing Auburn Way to the Performing Arts Center on East Main
Street Figure 13 identifies the most obvious pedestrian
destinations generators and barriers to walking
This Plan refers repeatedly to the desire to become more
pedestrian oriented Other sections identify means such as the
design of streets or buildings as ways to contribute to this effort
1 4 Downtown Plan 87
May 2001
1
But the pedestrian system itself must also be conducive and
attractive to Downtown visitors to make a true difference in the
numbers of walkers and the distance that people are willing to
walk
All Downtown streets should be accessible by sidewalks
Opportunities to replace damaged walks or install new sidewalks
where none exist should be sought This is supported by Goal 8
Pedestrian Bridges
High Priority Pedestrian Corridors
A pedestrian system that identifies certain high priority pedestrian
corridors for future development would be helpful The Long
Range Vision Figure 10 and the Pedestrian Destinations
Generators and Barriers Map Figure 13 should be used to help
determine the best locations for such pedestrian corridors These
high priority corridors will receive the most emphasis when
applying for grants preparing plans for new developments or as
other opportunities for improving the pedestrian network appear
Initial review indicates that at a minimum Main Street A Street
SW Division Street and the alleyway behind the south side of
Main Street would qualify as high priority pedestrian corridors
Pedestrian Safety
The presence of two railroad mainlines and several arterial streets
raises concerns about keeping pedestrians as safe as possible As
a result of the construction of the Transit Center and the reopening
of the Stampede Pass line the need to address pedestrian safety at
railroad tracks has become a timely and pressing issue
1
t
1
1
u
1
88 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Pedestrian Destination Generator
Barrier to Pedestrian Travel
Figure 13 Pedestrian Destinations Generators and Barriers
While plans for the Transit Center were being developed the City
participated in a study with Sound Transit called the Tacoma to Seattle
Grade Crossing Diagnostic Project This study identified issues at each
individual grade crossing in Auburn and made recommendations
for safety and functional improvements In Downtown these
recommendations that apply to pedestrians include installing
fencing between the tracks to discourage unprotected crossings
relocation of gate arms so that the pedestrian walkway is blocked
when a train is present and the repainting of striping that helps
define the pedestrian walkway at the grade crossing Construction
of the Transit Center will also include a pedestrian bridge that
crosses the BNSF tracks
The following goal and policies are provided to address additional
pedestrian issues as discussed above
U
E3
N
800 Feet
1 4 Downtown Plan 89
May 2001
1
1
GOAL 11 To provide well developed pedestrian
corridors that provide connections to the major
destinations in Downtown
Policy 11 1 High priority pedestrian corridors
Pedestrian corridors that serve major destination points should be
identified as high priority for repair or development
Policy 11 2 Directional signage
Directional signage should be provided to direct pedestrians and
bicyclists to safe travel and railroad crossing locations r F Parking Strategy
A parking strategy is recommended for downtown Auburn to assist
in redeveloping a more efficient and active downtown A 1996
Parking Study for downtown Auburn found that two strategies
would improve parking in downtown Auburn
1 Providing shared parking opportunities and
2 Reducing parking requirements
Many individual surface parking lots serve individual uses and
establishments within downtown Auburn Costly and inefficient
because of their expansive use of land surface parking lots should
be studied to determine where shared parking could take place
particularly near the retail core and the Transit Center
d l h A ditionally pub ic private partners ips could be formed to
develop parking structures Structured parking could be initiated
by the City and the private sector could buy into the use of a
parking structure as development occurs in downtown
While only a few years have passed since the Auburn Parking Study
was completed the nature of the issues has undergone significant
changes
Sound Transit was approved by the voters and Auburn s station
opened in Fall 2000 The station includes surface level parking for
approximately 120 cars An additional 500 to 600 will be in a
multi story garage with ground floor retail uses I
t
90 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
At the time the Parking Study was undertaken the conceptual site
plan showed the garage on the west side of the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe tracks During the Downtown Plan process the garage
location has been shifted to the east side The current location
offers the distinct advantage of being able to provide additional
parking resources for redevelopment since it is physically closer
to the center of downtown The garage is designed with sufficient
parking to support the on site retail and still have stalls additional
to those needed for transit that could be made available to support
redevelopment in the area The garage parking will be available
for City use during non transit hours which could easily support
complimentary uses such as housing or entertainment that need the
stalls in the evening or weekend
The Sound Transit contract gives the City the option of
utilizing much more of the east side garage stalls in the
future if Sound Transit constructs another garage for
commuters along C Street to replace the lost spaces Thus
significant flexibility has been built into the plan
Sound Transit will provide 23 kiss and ride parking stalls
between A and B Streets SW just north of the garage
These surface stalls will only be needed for transit during
morning and evening commute times and will be made
available for the public at all other times
This Downtown Plan envisions increases in development
densities over previous plans due to the coming of mass
transit and development trends which are favoring a return
to traditional downtown development
The Sun Break Cafe relocated into the heart of downtown
directly across the street from the station The restaurant s
business has grown significantly in its new location Plans
called for the construction of some on site surface parking
supplemented by improvements to a heretofore
underutilized public lot located on Division Street As a
result these parking lots are now heavily utilized
throughout the day and on weekends
1 4 Downtown Plan 91
May 2001
L
In the decade of the 1990s the City added nearly 10 000
people and an equal number of jobs through growth and
annexations As a consequence staffing at City Hall and the
nearby Police Headquarters and Municipal Court has
increased as has business activity As a result public surface
parking lots located on Main Street at Division and 151 Streets
NW between Division and A Streets NW and in two lots
located west of A Street NW are now often full to capacity
The coming decade could easily see the City add another
20 000 to 30 000 people as the balance of Lea Hill and the
West Hill are annexed and Lakeland Hills builds out
Auburn Regional Medical Center continues to grow At the
time of writing the Hospital is planning to construct a second
multi story tower on the site of a former funeral home
As a consequence of these factors it is important for the City to
identify a coordinated yet flexible approach to meeting potential
parking demands The period we are entering is likely to be one
of rapid change where opportunities must be seized or lost The
policies outlined below introduce the approaches that will provide
for future parking capacity and flexibility
GOAL 12 To coordinate the planning construc
tion and financing of public parking garages
Policy 12 1 Public private parking garages
The primary source of new parking in downtown Auburn should
be in the form of public or public private lots and garages Large
numbers of individually owned private surface lots are
incompatible with a pedestrian oriented densely developed
downtown
Policy 12 2 Financing mechanisms
The City should develop public and public private financing
mechanisms to support the construction and maintenance of
parking facilities The use of LIDs special taxing districts and
sale of existing public lots to raise capital for structured parking
are among the mechanisms that should be considered At some
point it will be necessary to consider charging for parking although
this should be avoided as long as possible to maintain a competitive
advantage for downtown
f
L
92 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Figure 14 Potential Public Private Parking Garage Locations
d
Potential Public Private Garage Locations
N
800 Feet
1 4 Downtown Plan 93
May 2001
1
r
Policy 12 3 Private development public parking
The City should develop mechanisms that allow developers to
contribute to local improvement districts LID for the purpose of
constructing parking Contributions will be credited to the developer s
requirement for parking spaces
GOAL 13 To locate public parking where it will
meet the greatest need
Policy 13 1 Activity centers
Public parking facilities should be located near centers of activity
Direct vehicle access to and from Main Street should be avoided
Policy 13 2 Potential parking garage sites
Potential parking garage sites have been identified and are t
illustrated on Figure 14 The designation does not infer the support
of the property owner nor the cost effectiveness of the particular
site It simply indicates that these sites offer unique opportunities
that should be explored in more detail as opportunities arise
Downtown Auburn at full development will not need to utilize all
of the illustrated parking opportunities In fact no more than two
or three sites will be required to meet ultimate demand Individual
sites should be selected for further study based upon development
opportunities that present themselves in the future The potential
sites include
1 Wells Fargo surface lot and drive up facility r
2 Tavern Key Bank Block
3 Block north of City Hall
4 Safeway lot
5 B Street SE East Main Street public lot
GOAL 14 To provide parking lots and garages that
are aesthetically beneficial to downtown and that
meet the needs of many users
Policy 14 1 Long and short term parking
The City should provide a variety of parking opportunities This
should include longer duration parking for employees and
residents and short term spaces that turn over several times a day
to support a vibrant downtown community on weekdays weekends
and in the evenings it
94 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Policy 142 Architectural requirements
Public parking structures should include architectural detailing
consistent with the downtown location The inclusion of first floor
retail and or office space should be required and the use of air
rights for office or other development can be considered
GOAL 15 To provide safe and effective use of
public parking facilities
Policy 15 1 Parking enforcement
The City should develop a parking enforcement strategy that
maximizes effective utilization of an expensive resource
Policy 15 2 Parking safety
The City Police Department should incorporate parking lots and
garages into its normal patrol patterns
Policy 15 3 Leased space in commuter rail station park
ing garage
Leasing of tenant space in the commuter rail station parking garage
shall give preference to commercial establishments that
a Demonstrate economic stability by virtue of having a successful
regional and or national presence
b Are transit oriented by supporting the convenience needs of
transit riders with goods or services such as drop and go
convenience services or merchandise that can easily be carried
c Can also successfully support downtown revitalization by being
open during weekends and or during other non peak commute
hours to serve non commuters and
d Provide goods and services and or a quality of goods and services
not otherwise readily available in the downtown
1 4 Downtown Plan 95
May 2001
G Major Plan Projects
Special projects that could contribute significantly to downtown
revitalization are listed here and discussed in more detail in Section
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts Accomplishing large projects like
these often require the coordination and cooperation of both public
and private players The policy statements below address the need
for such involvement
GOAL 16 To stimulate development of major
projects that will contribute to downtown revital
ization and to further development of smaller
projects
Policy 16 1 Encourage private sector development
The City should use its resources in a manner that encourages the
private sector to undertake catalyst projects Collaboration among
property owners to consolidate parcels to create larger projects is
encouraged
Policy 16 2 Civic center master plan
The City should prepare a Civic Center Master Plan that seeks to
concentrate municipal functions in a Downtown campus
G 1 Catalyst Projects
Catalyst projects are located in strategic locations and will when
developed have a spillover or catalyst effect of stimulating
additional redevelopment in their immediate area These projects
should be implemented through coordinated public and private
actions
MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON THE TAVERN BLOCK
The community has expressed that the highest priority is the
redevelopment of the Tavern Block to create a needed link
between the retail core and City Hall on Main Street Potential
uses include first floor retail and offices on upper floors
HOUSING MIXED USE PROJECT NEAR TRANSIT CENTER
The market study identified a market for multifamily housing near
the Transit Center
r
l
J
u
1
1
I
96 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
TRUITT BUILDING PASTIME TAVERN REDEVELOPMENT
For almost ten years only the facade of the Truitt Building which
was destroyed by fire in 1991 remained standing Next door the
building housing the longtime Pastime Tavern also suffered from
many structural problems Despite their historic importance they
were deemed to be unable to be restored at a reasonable cost and
were demolished in September 2000 Redevelopment of these
two building sites is needed to fill in the gap in the western most
block of the Main Street core These structures were located on
the most historically significant block in Downtown Auburn
redevelopment should be sensitive to and take advantage of the
block s unique historic character
Across A Street SW the City owned parking lot is a prime space
for redevelopment possibly in conjunction with a Truitt Pastime
project These two corners constitute a major entrance to the
Transit Center and thus will have high visibility A project here
might add retail office or entertainment uses and may be eligible
for Transit Oriented Development funding
JC PENNEY BUILDING
The JC Penney Building was historically a downtown retail anchor
The store has been vacant for a number of years since JC Penney
closed the store creating a major gap in the retail district Public
and private actions which could stimulate the redevelopment of
the building include City or another party s guarantee of a 2nd
floor lease which would enable the current owner to secure
financing use of Community Development Block Grant CDBG
funds for renovation and the City or other parties such as local
business owners purchasing a partial share in the building
G 2 Public Sector Projects
CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN
A long term plan for City facilities expansion in close proximity
to City Hall is needed Civic functions could be included as
elements of mixed use projects
TRANSIT CENTER
The commuter rail and local and express bus hub will include a
public plaza and a parking structure with retail on the first floor
CITY HOSPITAL PARKING STRUCTURE
A joint City Hospital Parking Structure could provide needed
parking and free up other sites for new development
1 4 Downtown Plan 97
May 2001
1
G 3 Private Sector Projects
The following actions will also strengthen Downtown and should
be implemented through private sector investment
HOTEL SMALL CONFERENCE FACILITIES
The market analysis identified the potential for a hotel and small
conference facility near the Auburn Way SR 18 intersection This
project would improve the image of the southern gateway to
Downtown at Auburn Way and provide needed meeting facilities
DESTINATION LAND USE ON EAST MAIN STREET
A new tenant or development on Main Street east of Auburn Way
will assist in revitalization by bringing more activity to the area
CLASS A OFFICE DEVELOPMENT
The market analysis also identified the potential for a Class A office
development near the Auburn Way SR 18 interchange
REVITALIZE BLOCK ACROSS MAIN STREET FROM CITY HALL
This block with the exception of Green River Music and the Sun
Break Cafe is a weak retail block and should be revitalized to
complete the link between the Transit Center and the retail core
Revitalization could take the form of new tenants and facade
improvements or redevelopment If parking resources are available
in the Sound Transit parking garage the City should consider selling
the parking lot at the corner of West Main and A Street SW and
making it available for redevelopment
H Increase Cultural and Entertainment Activities
Downtown can be further revitalized by increasing the amount of
cultural and entertainment activities restaurants events better links
with the Performing Arts Center that will bring more people
Downtown during the daytime and evening hours
GOAL 17 To increase cultural and entertainment
activities in Downtown during both daytime and
evening hours
Policy 17 1 Support events at Performing Arts Center
Continued City support for events at the Performing Arts Center
is encouraged
J
t
r
1
1
98 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
i Policy 17 2 Improve linkage to Performing Arts Center
The City should seek to undertake projects and signage that
improves linkages between the Downtown core and the Performing
Arts Center
Policy 17 3 Encourage quality restaurants
Quality restaurants should be encouraged to locate in Downtown
Increase Downtown Residential Population
The Auburn Downtown Plan Market Analysis identified a market
for the development of 25 50 dwelling units per year in downtown
which could greatly increase the downtown population An increase
in the student population of Green River Community College could
also fuel the demand for downtown housing Downtown residents
should represent a mix of incomes
Increasing the downtown residential population including all
income groups will increase the amount of evening activity and
support additional commercial development
GOAL 18 To increase the number of residents
living Downtown
Policy 18 1 Support residential development
The City should undertake Code and Plan amendments that
support Downtown residential development
J Facade Improvements
False facades have been added to many of the core Main Street
buildings Removal of false facades and restoration would
strengthen the appearance of Downtown buildings and create a
stronger link to the past Careful historic restoration would make
some properties eligible for landmark designation and related
financial incentives
GOAL 19 To improve the appearance of building
facades in Downtown
Policy 19 1 Encourage restoration of historic facades
City design standards should be implemented that encourage
removal of false facades and restoration of historic architectural
features
1 4 Downtown Plan 99
May 2001
Policy 19 2 Implement facade improvement program
The City and Auburn Downtown Association should explore ways
to implement a facade improvement program Fagade
improvement on Main Street should follow design standards that
insure compatibility of materials signage and storefront
configuration with the predominant materials patterns and
character of historic buildings with special attention to adjacent
historic buildings
K Protect Residential Neighborhoods
In keeping with the strategy of building out from the core
redevelopment should be encouraged in the more central locations
of downtown creating a critical mass in downtown Residential
neighborhoods should be protected from impacts from adjacent
commercial and industrial activity commercial expansion into
residential neighborhoods and from cut through traffic
Design standards or guidelines can be employed to ease the
transition from commercial to residential neighborhoods
Techniques such as stepping back building heights on the back of
commercial properties abutting residential ones shielded lighting
altering locations of dumpsters and delivery areas and landscaping
and fencing buffers can alleviate negative impacts on residential
neighborhoods
L Stormwater Management
The Downtown Plan envisions development unlike that in the rest
of the City It specifically pursues high density development to
create a vibrant aesthetically pleasing urban core with high levels
of employment and housing served by a regional multi modal
transportation network As much of Downtown Auburn already
consists of impervious surfaces the level of development envisioned
in this plan may result in a small increase in impervious surface
over existing conditions Both stormwater quantity and runoff
quality will also be affected as downtown development and
redevelopment occurs In some instances this effect can actually
be beneficial as certain redeveloped sites upgrade stormwater
management facilities to meet the City s existing standards
Downtown development does pose a challenge to traditional
stormwater management techniques For example a preferred
technique for storm drainage treatment is biofiltration such as grass
lined swales Biofiltration techniques typically require more land
area than is practically available in the downtown with its
100 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Figure 15 Downtown Plan Area Drainage Areas
Approximate Drainage Area Boundary
N
boo F et
relatively small blocks and parcels These techniques also are not
always visually compatible with traditional high density
development Also the City prefers retention systems when soil
conditions are suitable for such application however soil and
groundwater conditions in the Downtown Plan area are generally
not conducive for retention systems except in some eastern
portions of the study area
1 4 Downtown Plan 101
May 2001
Subbasin E Subbasin B Subbasin C
If a detention system is used for runoff control the City s preferred
method of storage has been parking lot ponding or an open pond
Neither of these is consistent with the goals of the Downtown Plan
dd ress Therefore flexibility and creativity are necessary to a
stormwater management in the Downtown Plan area As an
example an underground closed detention system can be used
with pre approval from the City This detention system type would
not be visible from the surface nor would it consume developable
surface land and would therefore be more consistent with
development as proposed by the Downtown Plan
A Comprehensive Drainage Plan was prepared concurrently with
the Downtown Plan The Drainage Plan identifies three drainage
subbasins within the Downtown Plan study area These drainage
areas are illustrated in Figure 15 In the westernmost downtown
drainage subbasin Subbasin E such flexible and innovative
techniques may be used until planned regional stormwater
detention system and water quality treatment facilities are built
In the two other downtown drainage subbasins Subbasins B and
C that cannot drain to an available regional facility the use of
innovative techniques and approaches should be encouraged and
allowed
The following goals and policies support this flexible approach to
stormwater management in the downtown
GOAL 20 To provide a stormwater system and
standards for the Downtown Plan area that pro
vide sufficient capacity and treatment for a
densely developed commercial and residential
fl ibili ll ty ex ows core and a review process that a
in implementation
Policy 20 1 Prior to regional storm basin
Until regional facilities are available to serve Subbasin E in the
western portion of the Downtown Plan Study Area on site
detention and water quality treatment facilities shall be required
and to the extent possible be placed underground in this area
Policy 20 2 Non traditional stormwater standards
City stormwater quantity and quality design standards shall be
administered to allow underground and or other practical non
traditional stormwater facilities and methods in the Downtown
Plan study area
102 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Figure 16 Proposed Zoning
permanent
Soo Feet
NOTE This figure reflects possible zoning changes to implement
certain Downtown Plan concepts The zoning boundaries that
may be adopted are still subject to the public hearing process and
may differ from the boundaries proposed and depicted in this
Figure
Aubum Way N
from C1 to C2
N
T
1 4 Downtown Plan 103
May 2001
Policy 20 3 Waiving stormwater standards
The City engineer may waive existing stormwater design standards
in the Downtown Plan Study Area when a functional alternative is
proposed that is consistent with the intent vision goals and policies
of the Downtown Plan and provides comparable water quality
and quantity control
GOAL 21 To provide fair and equitable financing
of stormwater facilities to serve Downtown
Policy 21 1 Fair share contribution
When sufficient capacity in a regional stormwater system is
available developers of properties in the Downtown Plan Study
Area shall be required to contribute their fair share toward the
financing of such regional water quality and quantity improvements
or construct an on site facility specifically for the development at
the City s option
Policy 21 2 Localized improvements
Developers of properties in the Downtown Plan Study Area may
be required to provide localized off site improvements to the
stormwater system to provide conveyance to the regional facility
Policy 21 3 Improvements necessitating stormwater
upgrades
Improvements to properties within the Downtown Plan Study Area
which exceed 50 of the assessed value whether wholly exterior
or a combination of interior and exterior will not necessitate
upgrading of the storm drainage facilities to current City standards
f ace when there is no change in the amount of impervious sur
The City will enact changes to its regulations to implement this
requirement with the intent that such changes sunset after a five
year period unless the City Council elects to extend it
M Regulatory Revisions
The City of Auburn uses several methods to control or influence
development These regulatory methods include the zoning code
and design standards for new construction The City adopted
interim C 2 zoning to insure that development occurring prior to
the completion of this Plan maintained consistency with the intent
expressed in the draft Plan The City implemented the permanent
C 2 zoning with the adoption of this Plan The sign code should
also be revised to better meet the Downtown Urban Design Vision
and to protect the Downtown core from inappropriate
development
1 04 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
The following policy statements indicate regulatory revisions
that should occur to implement the Downtown Plan
GOAL 22 To revise existing regulatory mecha
nisms to implement the concepts of the Auburn
Downtown Plan and Urban Design Vision
Policy 22 1 Design standards and review
Design standards and design review reflecting concepts voiced in
the Downtown Urban Design Vision shall be adopted
Policy 22 2 Sign code revisions
The sign code should be revised to require smaller signage of
appropriate materials and mounting style that reflect the
Downtown Urban Design Vision
Policy 22 3 Respond to Business Trends
Regulatory revisions shall creatively respond to business industry
trends that enable desirable downtown businesses to be competitive
and or encourage new businesses to locate downtown This
includes for example allowing automobile fuel facilities as an
accessory use to large grocery stores Where appropriate
development regulations shall incorporate design and or
performance standards to ensure consistency of such uses with the
principles of this Plan The City shall not approve code
amendments that are inconsistent with the policies and principles
of this Plan
N Expand Downtown Public Art Program
The Plan defines public art broadly and recognizes opportunities
to integrate public art into buildings streets landscapes and large
scale infrastructure projects Auburn s identity history and culture
will be reflected and reinforced through public art which will create
additional reasons to invest in downtown Public art can enhance
public space and create opportunities for social interaction and
cultural enrichment Public art creates a legacy for future
generations
Auburn has a vibrant regional industry and a rich history in railroad
commerce Indian culture agriculture and pioneer history Its role
as a hub between Tacoma and Seattle is reinvented with the
implementation of the Transit Center Definition of the downtown
core by marking the gateways to the city will shape Auburn s future
It is the intention of this plan to envision the most notable gestures
and places for future investment
1 4 Downtown Plan 105
May 2001
L
NA Benefits of Public Art
Public art provides the opportunity to reveal enhance interpret
and aesthetically intensify the large scale cultural physical and
other systems at work in a city For example the former course
of the White River and the present storm drainage system could
be marked and revealed in some way subtly educating people
about environmental change the omnipresence of water and its
movement and the past history of the community When
thoughtfully integrated into a community s revitalization efforts
public art has a multitude of benefits including
Identity Art nurtures and establishes neighborhood and
city wide ownership
Cultural context Art integrates history culture and
social dynamics into a project
Orientation and experience of space Art contributes
in a fundamental way unifying movement and orienta
tion in and throughout downtown
Gateways Mark entries create a sense of welcome and
define boundaries
Surprises and discoveries Art reveals itself through
surprise encounters
Phenomena Art interacts with the environment to create
awareness of the natural world and emphasizes temporal
and seasonal change
Lighting Art as illumination provides beauty and safety
identity and civic pride
Infrastructure Art integrated into urban infrastructure
improves city image and identity It leaves a lasting
impression of quality
Landscaping and plant materials The use of plant
materials as public art is directly related to quality of life
and quality of experience
Noise mitigation drainage Art as an environmental
water feature can address noise and drainage issues
ecologically
106 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Public art environmental design urban planning and development
must use an integrated design approach The goal of this integrated
approach is to improve the quality of life in Auburn now and for
generations to come All project teams should include
interdisciplinary professionals including artists who can creatively
and skillfully accomplish the scope of work for each project
Implementing of this plan will take place over many years As
times and needs change this plan should be re examined and
updated to fit the current circumstances and demands of the time
This plan is best viewed as a guide for prioritizing projects within
the City while providing an interdisciplinary method of engaging
public art on a City scale Certainly stand alone public art
commissions objects and site specific art should also be considered
and utilized Interdisciplinary design teams that include artists
and a variety of design professionals offer the most comprehensive
creative and successful approach to revitalizing the city
General recommendations and policy statements integrating public
art into downtown Auburn follow Area specific and site specific
recommendations are included in Section 1 5 Downtown Plan
Districts
GOAL 23 To integrate art into public spaces in
Downtown Auburn
Policy 23 1 Public projects
All public projects shall consider the inclusion of public art
Development of artwork should be an integral part of the complete
design process
7
Streets Parking
1 4 Downtown Plan 107
May 2001
GOAL 24 To use art to create a distinctive iden
tity for Downtown
Policy 24 1 Local flavor
Selection or commissioning of public art shall consider the history
cultures and future of Auburn and the surrounding region
Policy 24 2 Signage and markers
Directional signage or historical markers shall be designed to be
both functional and distinctive
N 2 Art and the SR18 C Street Grade Separation
This new entrance to Auburn s Downtown Core forms a significant
gateway feature that merits full consideration Defined by highway
infrastructure retaining walls stormwater ponds and landscaping
this new entrance will be unlike the present one The scale of the
project is quite large in comparison to existing structures in the
vicinity
Concern about this disparity in scale and impacts of the structure
led to creation of a subcommittee of the Downtown Plan Task
Force that participated in evaluating and planning for the visual
impacts of the grade separation project The subcommittee was
presented with a number of options by the consultant and staff
team working on the project The committee selected the following
techniques to reduce the scale and impact of the structure
Concrete retaining wall and bridge surfaces will be finished
with a texture that resembles ashlar stone
Public Infrastructure as
Public Art
7
I l
a
L
Li
0
0
108 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
x 4 K
Landscaping will be used in front of most tall vertical
surfaces
Native plants will be installed along the highway
interchange area owned by the State of Washington at the
request of WSDOT This will reduce need for irrigation
and maintenance
Unique lighting will be placed on the underside of the
bridge structure
The bridge structure will resemble an old railroad trestle
Financial constraints did not allow the incorporation of the
following ideas during the construction phase but these could be
added at a later date
Installation of decorative railing and pedestrian scale
lighting on the bridge
Gateway artwork landscaping and or signage
N 3 Art and Pedestrian Linkages
Pedestrian linkages throughout the downtown will enhance
movement and provide a more enjoyable pedestrian experience
These linkages are extremely important as they promote walking
in the downtown core while providing safer and more people
scaled walkways These linkages may be viewed as episodic
experiences marked by special paving attractive landscape urban
Gateways Entryways
1 4 Downtown Plan 109
May 2001
C
GOAL 28 To develop a Historic Preservation Plan
for Downtown Auburn
Policy 28 1 Preservation Plan
The City should undertake a comprehensive Historic Preservation
l icies Plan for Downtown Auburn to accomplish the goals and po
listed in this section
P Downtown Design Guidelines
Design guidelines are presented here to guide future Downtown
development in a manner that implements the Downtown Urban
Design Vision The following concepts are intended to be fairly
general but comprehensive These guidelines which should be
evaluated after some time in practice should be used to prepare
Design Standards that are more definitive in nature
What Design Guidelines and Design Standards are In
tended to Do
Design guidelines and standards create attractive communities and
ensure that new development contributes positively to
neighborhoods These should be a tool with some flexibility that
allows new development to respond to the distinctive character of
its surroundings Guidelines are advisory only and are intended
to assist development applicants understand and prepare proposals
that meet the desired form of urban design Standards are
mandatory The following design guidelines intentionally
emphasize qualitative rather than quantitative measures and could
generate numerous solutions
It is recognized that building design and construction materials
and methods will continue to evolve over time No single style of
design is proposed by this set of criteria Instead the goal is to ensure
a high level of design quality liveliness and convenience for people
who work shop and live in the downtown Varied and imaginative
designs consistent with the Urban Design Vision are encouraged
GOAL 29 To develop Design Standards for Down
town Auburn
Policy 29 1 Design Standards
The City shall develop Design Standards to guide future
d s development in Downtown Auburn These Design Standar
should be based on the Design Guidelines in this Downtown Plan
114 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
The Challenge of Infill or Retrofitting Development in an
Existing Downtown
Because the Downtown area is largely developed new
development will generally add to replace or fill in infill
between existing buildings This poses a particular challenge that
new construction in an undeveloped area doesn t typically face
The challenge is for the new and old buildings to relate to each
other in a pleasing way Experience in numerous other cities shows
that new and old buildings can be designed to coexist harmoniously
together side by side creating a more consistent and attractive
whole
Downtown Districts
This Plan has divided Downtown into ten districts based on land
use patterns and other defining characteristics These districts are
illustrated in Figure 17 Section 1 5 For the purpose of design
guidelines these ten districts are combined into three areas
AREA 1 Main Street
includes the entire block both north and south
of Main Street therefore some properties will
face onto 1 Streets NW SW and NE SE
AREA 2 Other Commercial and Industrial Districts
comprised of Industrial C Street NW A Street
NW Medical Center Auburn Way and South
Central Downtown Districts
AREA 3 Residential Areas
comprised of West Main and East Main
Residential Districts
Each of these areas is described briefly below In some cases such
as Main Street the overall form and character is one that is
distinctive and desirable Guidelines are intended to echo these
desirable qualities Other settings though fairly consistent within
an area are not as desirable and guidelines are presented that
move away from the existing form
Main Street Area Areal
Main Street originally developed in the 1890s and early 1900s in a
classic western storefront style with wooden boardwalks Simple
wood frame buildings on what is now West Main Street were
115
1 4 Downtown Plan
May 2001
replaced in the 1910s and 20s with more substantial brick and
masonry buildings many of which served the growing railroad
industry Another active period occurred during the 1930s and 40s
Defining Characteristics Main Street Area
Main Street is one of the most distinctive and memorable streets
in the entire city and for many Main Street is Downtown What
makes it so special By breaking Main Street down into individual
components this distinctive character can begin to be understood The following are defining characteristics for the Main Street District
1 Site Planning and Layout
The site planning and layout along Main Street reflects a classic downtown style Buildings are placed at the edge of the sidewalk and there is typically no side setback between buildings In other
words the buildings touch each other and may even share
common side walls Primary entrances are directly from the sidewalk along Main Street rear entrances are mostly utilitarian Parking is confined to the street in front of the buildings or in
public or private parking lots behind or to the sides of buildings W ith a few notable exceptions there are limited midblock curb
cuts for vehicular access Most first floors contain retail or service
oriented commercial uses upper floors of several buildings include
ll sma residential rental units
2 Building Design
The architectural style of buildings on Main Street can best be described as commercial vernacular Although a few such as the Masonic Temple or Tourist Lotus Hotel can be described according to a particular architectural style most are simple buildings that were typical for traditional downtowns in the 1910s 20s and 30s
Th l e sca e of the buildings along Main Street is fairly small Most buildings are only one or two stories tall and cover the entire lot The building facades are based on a historic platting pattern that is
approximately 25 feet wide This results in narrow storefronts that
are very appealing to a person strolling along on foot because the scenery is always changing The storefront itself is divided into a classic three part organization that consists of a recessed entryway with display windows on either side The upper floors reflect a similar three part organization but with smaller windows that are vertical in alignment The first and upper floors are sometimes divided by a decorative cornice or canopy or awning The buildings are consistently flat roofed and often have a cornice along the top edge Renovations
116
City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
carried out in the mid part of the 20th century often removed or
simplified these cornices Corner buildings were sometimes
designed with an angled entrance across the comer which
increased the visibility of the entrance from the opposite corners
3 Streetscape Features and Site Elements
Paved sidewalk is present throughout the length of Main Street
Between Auburn Way and B Street NW SW a length of about six
blocks textured colored sidewalk was installed during the 1990s
At the same time the following street furnishings were also installed
teal colored benches and pedestrian light fixtures exposed
aggregate planters and trash receptacles a brick paver plaza with
artist designed bollards tree grates and tree guards for six Redspire
Pear trees informational kiosk and totem
A few parking lots are located next to Main Street the screening
of these varies from none at all to attractive landscaping that
includes berms and trees and shrubs such as alongside the Mural
parking lot next to B Street SE Signage consists of many examples
of panel signs affixed flat against the face of a building The
materials used for these are somewhat evenly divided between
plastic and wood Other sign forms seen along Main Street are
lettering painted or applied directly to awnings blade signs that
project out from the building surface and a few pole mounted
signs toward the edge of the district
Design Guidelines for the Main Street Area
For the most part the design characteristics described above give
good guidance for how design along Main Street should proceed
in the future The demands of current economics and building
practices may necessitate some departure from a strict
interpretation of this historic pattern The guidelines below should
be followed when designing and developing new buildings or
renovating existing buildings in the Main Street District
1 Site Planning and Land Use Guidelines Main Street
Area
SP 1 1 SETBACKS LOT COVERAGE
Buildings shall be developed next to the public right of way For
buildings that face Main Street the entire frontage should be
occupied by a building The building shall be oriented parallel to
its lot lines
1 4 Downtown Plan 117
May 2001
1
SP1 2 Street orientation
Buildings on Main Street should have primary facades and building
entrances on Main Street Angled entrances are acceptable on
corners
SP1 3 VEHICULAR ACCESS
No new driveways or parking lot entrances shall be allowed on
Main Street
SP1 A PARKING
Parking shall be located behind buildings and surface parking
should be screened No new parking lots or garages shall be
developed along Main Street Buildings that include parking above
the ground floor will be allowed
SP1 5 LAND USE
Retail or service uses oriented to the public should occupy all
storefronts on the ground floor level of Main Street Residential
and office uses are encouraged on upper floors along Main Street
2 Building Design Guidelines Main Street Area
Main Street has several significant historic buildings along its length
Literal imitation of older historic styles is not necessary however
contemporary interpretations of traditional buildings which are
similar in scale and overall character to those seen historically are
encouraged
BD1 1 BUILDING HEIGHT
Buildings in the C 2 District may be constructed to a height
equivalent to the width of the abutting street right of way at the
property line Additional building height may be allowed provided
that the building steps back to maintain a minimum 1 1 street width
to building height ratio For the purposes of this policy an alley
shall not be considered a street
BD1 2 FACADE MODULATION
Facade modulation shall be provided on buildings with significant
mass to decrease the scale and to create visual interest
BD1 3 STOREFRONT MODULES
For large buildings the repetition of a traditional storefront
organization with approximately 25 foot wide modules is
encouraged These modules should be expressed three
dimensionally across the entire facade
118 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
BD1 4 BUILDING STEPBACKS
Buildings taller than the width of the adjacent street shall be
stepped back on the street side to reduce the apparent mass of
the building A cross section analysis should be conducted to
determine the best height for the stepback to coordinate with
adjacent buildings
BD1 5 BLANK WALLS
Large blank walls at ground level should be avoided by using a
change in materials color windows artwork trellises or wall
articulation
BD1 6 COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING BUILDINGS
Where new buildings will infill next to buildings of historic
significance design review will be mandatory Sketches or visual
simulations should be provided that illustrate how the proposed
structure will relate to the existing one s A comparison of floor to
floor heights the traditional building width and materials should
be made to evaluate the compatibility of the adjacent structures
BD1 7 CORNER BUILDINGS
Corner buildings should have special architectural treatment such
as an angled entry turrets bay windows or an accentuated cornice
BD 1 8 BUILDING MATERIALS
1 Traditional materials such as masonry units brick or stucco
are encouraged
2 Concrete block or masonry units visible from a public street
or place should have a colored and or textured surface
Tilt up concrete wall construction should be avoided
3 Plywood or wood siding shall be used for trim only in new
construction
4 Existing brick stone or cast stone masonry facades may
not be covered with metal siding metal screening plastic
fiberglass plywood or wood siding materials
5 Mirrored glass chain link fencing and corrugated metal or
fiberglass shall not be used
BD1 9 WINDOWS AND DOORS
1 Upper story windows with vertical alignment are encouraged
2 Building entrances should be recessed and clearly defined
1 0
Proper Width Height Ratio
1 4 Downtown Plan 119
May 2001
BD1 10 ROOFS a
Roof forms should be similar to those used historically Flat roofs
or parapets screening a slightly sloped roof are appropriate Roof
forms such as gables hips or mansards are inappropriate
BD1 1 1 ALIGNMENT OF FACADE ELEMENTS
Maintain the alignment of horizontal elements along the block
including building cornices window sills moldings and awnings
BD1 12 COLORS
Bright or brilliant colors should be used only for accent such as
for doors or window or sign trim
BD1 13 UTILITY AREAS AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
Utility areas and rooftop mechanical equipment should be designed
to be integral with the building architecture or screened from view
BD1 14 WEATHER PROTECTION
1 Canopies or awnings which provide weather protection for
pedestrians are encouraged along street fronts Coverings should
extend at least five feet over the sidewalk The width may vary as
necessary to accommodate street trees lighting and other features
2 Traditional awning shapes and materials such as canvas are
encouraged Translucent vinyl or plastic materials and backlighting
should not be used
BD1 15 CORPORATE ARCHITECTURE I
Avoid standard corporate architectural styles as associated with
national chain businesses I
3 Streetscape Feature Guidelines Main Street Area
SS 1 1 SIGNAGE
Signs should be designed as an integral part of the building design
and should be primarily oriented to the pedestrian view The
number of signs should not contribute to visual clutter
SS 1 2 SIGN MOUNTING
Flat panel signs affixed directly to the building or blade signs that
project from the building are encouraged Blade signs hanging
under canopies and hand painted lettering directly applied to
windows are well suited to pedestrians and are desirable
0
1 20 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
SS 1 3 EXTERNALLY LIT SIGNS
Externally lit signs shall have the light source shielded from view
SS 1 4 PROHIBITED SIGNS
Monument and pole mounted signs shall not be allowed in the
Main Street Area Internally lit plastic signage shall not be used
SS 1 5 SIGN QUALITY
Professional quality materials should be employed
SS 1 6 SIGN SHAPES
Creative sign shapes that reflect the nature of the business are
encouraged For example a pair of scissors might advertise a
beauty salon
SS 1 7 NEON
Neon should be used minimally and only as signage
SS 1 8 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING
Pedestrian level lighting is encouraged The same light fixture used
in the Main Street core should be continued east and west along
Main Street
SS 1 9 LIGHTING LEVELS
Lighting levels should be relatively consistent from one area to
another Avoid extreme contrasts between brightly lit and shadowy
areas
SS 2 SHIELD FROM GLARE
Exterior light fixtures should be designed to cast light in a
downward direction and to shield adjacent land uses from light
or glare
Other Commercial and Industrial Districts Area 2
The remaining commercial and industrial properties in Downtown
that are located outside of the Main Street District are comprised
of the Industrial C Street NW A Street NW Medical Center
Auburn Way and South Central Downtown Districts These areas
have developed individually and sporadically over the past 50
years or so
1 4 Downtown Plan 121
May 2001
t
Defining Characteristics Other Commercial and Indus
trial Districts Area 2
Area 2 does not exhibit the well defined character that is easily
identified in the Main Street Area While there are differences
among the six districts in Area 2 none of the districts has an
overwhelmingly strong character The districts are neither cohesive
or visually appealing for the most part The following are defining
characteristics for Area 2
1 Site Planning and Layout 1
Although some of the districts within Area 2 display a classic
downtown layout with buildings and entrances at the edge of the
sidewalk these are primarily found on the streets closest to Main
Street More commonly commercial buildings are set back far
enough from the sidewalk and street to provide parking in front of
the businesses Many buildings stand alone with 30 or more feet
between buildings a common occurrence Numerous driveways
are found along streets such as Auburn Way All of these situations
combined create a challenging environment for pedestrians
In the residential settings small grassed front yards are typical
Houses are set back from the street 10 to 25 feet
2 Building Design
With the exception of the Auburn Regional Medical Center most
buildings are one or two story A few single and multi family
residences are found scattered throughout these districts The
homes built mostly between 1900 and 1930 tend to be older than
the commercial structures In the case of the commercial buildings
three or four businesses may occupy a single building t
The commercial buildings are simple structures with little
decorative trim or features constructed of plain and inexpensive
materials such as concrete block The storefront extends across
the entire width of the building and has lost the narrow storefront
modules common to buildings of the first half of the 201h century
Most have flat roofs and entry doors flush with the face of the
building Retail oriented buildings tend to have large horizontal
display windows Professional offices often have vertically aligned
windows that cover less of the building surface than retail stores
Residences in this district are typical of their age They are wood
frame construction and most have horizontal wood cladding of
some type Roofs are almost always gabled or hipped with
occasional dormer windows Porches are a prominent feature
122 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
3 Streetscape Features
Paved sidewalk is found along almost all street frontages in this
area Sidewalk width varies from about four to five feet wide on
residential streets to seven or more feet on commercial streets A
landscape strip is found on many streets although it is often quite
narrow Some of these contain street trees Little to no street
furnishings are found in these districts
Design Guidelines for the Other Commercial and
Industrial Districts Area 2
The districts above feature a variety of design approaches and
materials that do not meet our expectations for Downtown today
Area 2 has no cohesive character and is characterized by
automobile friendly inexpensive construction For that reason
the guidelines below seek to create some of the positive character
exhibited on Main Street but generally with more flexibility
Development of design standards should expand on the following
concepts
1 Site Planning and Land Use Guidelines Other Com
mercial and Industrial Districts Area 2
SP2 1 SETBACKS AND LAYOUT
The majority of a building s frontage should be next to the public
right of way Building layout should primarily be parallel to lot
lines and or the right of way
SP2 2 STREET ORIENTATION
The primary facade and building entrance should be located on
the street side of the buildings
SP2 3 PARKING
Parking shall be located next to or behind buildings Adjacent
property owners are encouraged to share parking and vehicle
access points
SP 2 4 LAND USES
Commercial and residential uses should predominate in this area
Industrial uses shall be confined to appropriately zoned locations
Residential buildings are encouraged to include some retail or office
space on the first floor Purely commercial buildings should keep
most retail uses on the first floor with service oriented businesses
or office spaces on upper floors
r
1 4 Downtown Plan 123
May 2001
1
1
2 Building Design Guidelines Other Commercial and
Industrial Districts Area 2
BD2 1 BUILDING HEIGHT
Buildings in the C 2 District may be constructed to a height
equivalent to the width of the abutting street right of way at the
property line Additional building height may be allowed provided
that the building steps back to maintain a minimum 1 1 street width
to building height ratio For the purposes of this policy an alley
shall not be considered a street
BD2 2 FA4ADE MODULATION
Facade modulation shall be provided on buildings with significant
mass to decrease the scale and to create visual interest
BD23 BUILDING STEPBACKS
Buildings taller than the width of the adjacent street shall be
stepped back on the street side to reduce the apparent mass of
the building It may be desirable to begin the stepback at a lower
than maximum level to coordinate with adjacent buildings
BD2 4 BLANK WALLS
Large blank walls at ground level should be avoided by using a
change in materials color windows artwork trellises or wall
articulation
BD 2 5 BUILDING MATERIALS
1 Traditional materials such as masonry units brick or stucco
are encouraged
2 Concrete block or masonry units visible from a public street
or place should have a colored and or textured surface
Tilt up concrete wall construction should be avoided
l y in new 3 Plywood or wood siding shall be used for trim on
construction
4 Mirrored glass chain link fencing and corrugated metal or
fiberglass shall not be used
BD 2 6 WINDOWS AND DOORS
1 Extensive use of clear glass windows is encouraged
particularly for first floors of commercial buildings
fi d l l d ld b h l e ne e c ear y ou ding entrances s 2 Bui
BD 2 7 ROOFS
A variety of roof forms are acceptable
124 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
BD 2 8 UTILITY AREAS AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
Utility areas and rooftop mechanical equipment should be
integrated with the building architecture or screened or placed so
that views are minimized
BD 2 9 WEATHER PROTECTION
1 Canopies or awnings which provide weather protection for
pedestrians is encouraged along street fronts Coverings should
extend at least five feet over the sidewalk The width may vary as
necessary to accommodate street trees lighting and other features
2 Traditional awning shapes and materials such as canvas are
encouraged Translucent vinyl or plastic materials and backlighting
should not be used
BD 2 10 CORPORATE ARCHITECTURE
Avoid standard corporate architectural styles as associated with
national chain businesses
3 Streetscape Feature Guidelines Other Commercial
and Industrial Districts Area 2
SS 2 1 SIGN DESIGN
Signs should be designed as an integral part of the building and
or site design
SS 2 2 EXTERNALLY LIT SIGNS
Externally lit signs shall have the light source shielded from view
SS 2 3 PROHIBITED SIGNS
Pole mounted signs shall not be allowed Internally lit plastic
signage is discouraged
i SS 2 4 SIGN QUALITY
Professional quality materials should be employed
SS 2 5 SIGN SHAPES
Creative sign shapes that reflect the nature of the business are
encouraged For example a pair of scissors might advertise a
beauty salon
SS 2 6 NEON
Neon should be used minimally and only as signage
1 4 Downtown Plan 125
May 2001
SS 2 7 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING
Pedestrian level lighting is encouraged Light fixtures should not
be identical to those on Main Street but may be similar Falsely
historic fixtures should not be used
SS 2 8 LIGHTING LEVELS
Lighting levels should be relatively consistent from one area to
another Avoid extreme contrasts between brightly lit and shadowy
areas
SS 2 9 AVOID GLARE
Exterior light fixtures should be designed to cast light in a
downward direction and to shield adjacent land uses from light
or glare
SS 2 1 OSTREET TREES AND LANDSCAPING
7
1
Planting strips with street trees and landscaping should be provided
with new construction Sensitive placement to avoid competition
with signage is acceptable
SS2 11 SITE FURNISHINGS
Site furnishings such as benches trash receptacles and bike racks
are desirable These should be coordinated with others selected
for Downtown and approval should be sought before selection
Residential Area Area 3
Residential districts described in this Plan as the East Main
Residential District and West Main Residential District are
combined into one area for design guidelines Most of the houses
in this area were built between 1900 and 1930 and many remain
relatively unchanged They vary significantly from the substantial
Knickerbocker home built in 1906 for Auburn s long time City
attorney I B Knickerbocker to small cottages built for rail workers
Defining Characteristics Residential Area 3
Although there are slight differences between the districts and
even from street to street within a district the following are common
features of the Residential Area Area 3
1 Site Planning and Layout
Single family homes are usually placed toward the front of long
narrow lots Setbacks typically range from about 10 to 25 feet
Garages or accessory buildings are placed at the rear of the lot
Many streets feature alleys and garages are accessed via the
alleyways Few homes have driveways or garages accessed directly
from the street
126 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
2 Building Design
Homes were typically designed for a single family although a few
apartment buildings remain Most homes were small to moderate
in size and were built for the workers on the nearby railroads and
farms They were one one and a half and two story homes often
using inexpensive construction materials and methods A few very
large homes were built for Auburn s prominent families some of
which have been divided into apartments
Architectural styles include a variety of approaches to cottage and
bungalow design including the craftsman influenced bungalow
common to the 1920s and early 30s Gable and hip roofs are the
most commonly seen forms with relatively steeply pitched roofs
Houses are constructed with wood frames and covered with
horizontal wood cladding of some type Long narrow individual
windows are the norm in these neighborhoods Most have front
porches wide fascia boards and deep eave overhangs
Home renovations have brought about a variety of improvements
and oddities Many renovations have obviously been carried out
to improve the weather protective ability of the houses
Replacement of windows and siding are the most common
renovations While understandable many of the treatments chosen
have reduced the historical value of the homes and some are clearly
inappropriate
3 Streetscape Features
The residential streets of Downtown tend to be quite narrow and
have limited space for on street parking The presence and size of
sidewalks and planting strips varies without any apparent pattern
Several streets have huge old trees that contribute substantially to
the bucolic character of the neighborhoods
Design Guidelines for the Residential Area Area 3
Some of the residential areas will probably remain much as they
are today with only occasional renovations proposed by the
homeowner Guidelines for these situations should focus on
retaining the character and form of the original house while
allowing needed updating to be performed
Neighborhoods close to the Transit Center and in the midst of
commercial development will come under more pressure for
removal and replacement of existing houses or the division of the
larger houses into multiple units These situations should be
approached with great care to ensure that valuable resources are
not lost forever
1 4 Downtown Plan 127
May 2001
1 Site Planning and Land Use Guidelines Residential
Area
SP 3 1 SETBACKS
To preserve and maintain their historical development pattern and
character the City shall consider reducing minimum setback
requirements or adopting setback averaging provisions for
residentially zoned districts within the downtown planning area
SP 3 2 STREET ORIENTATION
Buildings should be oriented to their primary street
SP 3 3 VEHICULAR ACCESS
Where present alleys should be used for vehicular access and
parking New driveways and curb cuts from the street should be
avoided
SP 3 4 LAND USE
Single family and appropriately scaled multi family residences
should be the primary land uses
R id ti l A B ildi D i G id li es en a rea 2 u ng es gn u e nes
The scale materials and forms of the homes found in Downtown
residential districts are distinctive and give these neighborhoods
their desirable qualities These should be imitated and improved
upon with any renovations or new construction
BD 3 1 BUILDING HEIGHT
Maximum building height should be consistent with the underlying
zonin desi nation g g
BD 3 2 BUILDING FORM
Renovations and new construction should seek to retain or imitate
existing building forms in the following ways
1 Gable and hip roofs should be the predominant roof forms
Roof pitches should be a minimum 5 12 vertical to horizontal
ratio and a maximum 12 12 ratio
2 Entry features such as porches and overhangs should be
provided
3 Windows should have vertical proportions
4 Wide eave overhangs and fascia boards are encouraged
128 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
5 New multi family buildings shall be articulated to resemble
the size and proportions of existing homes on the block
BD 3 3 ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS
Accessory dwelling units or other new structures visible from the
street should be compatible with the architectural character of the
existing home and neighborhood Similar building forms and
materials should be used to ensure compatibility
BD 3 4 BUILDING ENTRIES
Each building should have one primary entrance Secondary
entries such as for an accessory unit should be subordinate in
appearance to the main entrance to the home Modern doors
especially those that are primarily glass or without decorative
panels are discouraged
BD 3 5 CONVERSION OF EXISTING HOME TO MULTIFAMILY UNITS
Conversion of an existing home to multiple dwelling units should
be done with sensitivity to the historic character of the home
Entries to individual units should be from inside the home to avoid
multiple exterior doors Where additional fire stairs or entry is
necessary these should be in a location not visible from the street
BD 3 6 BUILDING MATERIALS
Materials for new construction or renovation of existing buildings
should reflect the historic patterns of the neighborhood
1 The use of metal window frames is discouraged Vinyl
covered windows which require lower maintenance than
wood are acceptable These should be designed with
dimensions to reproduce the appearance of wood
2 Horizontal wood siding of various types 4 to 6 wide is
predominant Some stucco type materials are also used
Vinyl siding is acceptable in addition to these traditional
materials
3 Streetscape Elements Residential Area
SS 3 1 STREET TREES
Planting strips and street trees are encouraged on streets where
sufficient right of way width exists Trees should only be located
in planting strips 5 feet or greater in width
1
1 4 Downtown Plan 129
May 2001
1
I
t
1
I
1
1
J
1
130 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
1
1
r
1
1
r
i
Section 1 5 Downtown Plan
Districts
t
1
1
1
1
I Section 1 5 Downtown Plan Districts
Figure 17 Downtown Districts
N
800 Feet T
The Downtown Plan study area is broken up into ten districts based
upon land use patterns and defining characteristics Four residential
districts one of which is planned for Residential Office use two
industrial districts and a medical district are located within the
study area The Main Street corridor forms a district within
downtown Auburn as does the automobile oriented Auburn Way
Corridor The Transit Center lies adjacent to the Burlington
Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and began operation in the year
2000 The areas between Auburn Way and the Transit Center
and along A Street Northwest north of Main Street are
characterized by a mixture of land uses
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 131
May 2001
Table D Recommended Land Uses by District
Wks I
CSTO R rmica
war
ww CENTM
f J WINTPQf
DISTRICT
Main Street
Transit Center
Auburn Way Corridor
A Street NW
Medical District 3
C Street NW
East and West Main Resident
Residential Residential Office
1 5 1 Main Street Corridor
WAY
1 1 J lr
91 A 7
Main Street Corridor
132
General Description Existing Conditions
Main Street is the historic and current center of downtown Auburn
which retains a historic feeling while functioning as a retail
destination Although Main Street changes in character over its
entire length there are several characteristics that contribute
substantially to its overall atmosphere Many of the buildings along
Main Street were built in the 1910s and 20s using a traditional
downtown pattern with buildings set at the back of the sidewalk
directly next to each other Building surfaces are primarily masonry
or stucco and the storefronts have large display windows and
recessed entries There are few curb cuts along the street making
this one of the best shopping streets in the city for pedestrians
Interruptions in the continuity of the street wall do occur in several
locations where public parking lots have been constructed adjacent
to Main Street and at the City Hall plaza Some of Downtown s
best historic buildings are located on the corners of key street
intersections increasing their visibility and significance
This Plan divides Main Street into three geographic areas based
on the change in character from east to west These are 1 along
West Main Street from the Union Pacific railroad tracks to the
BNSF railroad tracks 2 the Main Street Core from the BNSF
railroad tracks to Auburn Way South and 3 from Auburn Way
South to F Street on the east side of downtown
City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Unk downtown to Inter
urban Trail with bike lane
Clock tower at Transit
Center
WEST MAIN STREET
o
0000 pro
o
qC f
a
P O
Oa CP CIO
8 P C
iI co ocy 0 0
cm 0
0 En CD Ll
0
O
Pic
O o o P Be o
PU
9
CD o C
p O
1
C
C
0 Gb
Main Street C Street
NW Improvements
Truitt Building Pastime Tavern
transit oriented development
project
catalyst project
Restore historic character and
quality of historic block
Unk Main Street with Redevelopment of Tavern Block catalyst
Medical Center project will link retail core with City Hall and
west end of Main Street Core Potential uses are
civic or medical office above retail
Redevelop Penny s building
catalyst project
MAIN STREET CORE EAST MAIN STREET East Main Street
Improvements ot la 0
o Rl 00 R Unk Main Street
opOc ppODo to Performing
Arts Center
ao t S
I l T1 nn
i
Alley improvements extend
west to Transit Center
Revitalize block face south Intersection
of City Hall facade improvements at
improvements new Auburn Way and
tenants or redevelopment Main Street
g O
o Op
o Oc0
661
Encourage destination uses on
East Main Street
Figure 18 Main Street Corridor Recommendations
Main Street Core
The Main Street Core is the heart and center of downtown Auburn
containing retail shops and City Hall Main Street is also the
ceremonial center of the City hosting a number of festivals and
parades such as the Sidewalk Sale Good Ol Days and others
throughout the year
The Main Street Core benefits from recent street improvements
and is pedestrian oriented in scale including a wide boardwalk
style sidewalk decorative pedestrian oriented street lamps banners
artwork curb bulbs to slow traffic benches receptacles and
landscaping These elements combined with the buildings in the
area reinforce the Main Street Core s unique identity which is
distinguished from any other area of Auburn
N
800 Feet e
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 133
May 2001
rI L
I
The flowers landscaping and street furniture on Main Street are
well maintained adding to the strength of the district
Unfortunately maintenance of the new sidewalks has been a
difficult problem to resolve and they often look dirty
The B Street SE Plaza improvements provide an excellent linkage
between Safeway a major pedestrian destination and the Main
Street commercial district Public art helps define the space and
create its particular identity Despite the extensive improvements
the B Street Plaza remains underutilized is often occupied by
undesirable people who intimidate others from using the area
businesses have low traffic and the plaza is frequently occupied
by service or delivery vehicles
The buildings in this district are located directly adjacent to the
sidewalk are typically one to two stories tall and are occupied by
retail businesses on the ground floor The original building
character of the district has been altered by the addition of false
facades on many of the buildings and by the addition of some
awnings which are out of character with the original building styles
The narrow street on street parking and slow moving vehicular
traffic supports the pedestrian orientation of the Main Street Core
Most off street parking is not adjacent to the street in this area
SE is the healthiest part of the commercial core There are some
successful retail establishments on the north side of Main Street
between Auburn Way and Auburn Avenue but the continuity of
the pedestrian experience is interrupted by the vacant Penney s
building and the four taverns on the block between Auburn Avenue
and City Hall and the drive through banking facilities near Auburn
Avenue
The civic center lies near the west end of the Main Street Core
and consists of City Hall the Police Municipal Court Building
and adjacent city parking lots This area has many pedestrian
amenities including landscaping benches trash receptacles wide
sidewalks and the plaza in front of City Hall City Hall has public
art both inside and outside of the building There are more street
trees here than in any other area of downtown City Hall functions
as both a major pedestrian destination and generator
The south side of Main Street between Auburn Way and B Street
The BNSF tracks form a natural division between the Main Street
core and the west end of Main Street The tracks create both a
perceptual and at times a physical barrier between the two sections
of downtown With the number of freight and commuter trains
projected to increase substantially a real concern about how to
improve connections through Downtown and decrease impacts of
rail traffic has arisen
134 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Main Street Today
East Main Street Main Slhvet
While once an integral part of the Main Street Core Main Street ImPlementa l n
east of Auburn Way lacks the vital character evident in Main Street
to the west There are fewer destinations an absence of pedestrian A dons
oriented street improvements and a barrier posed by Auburn Way
which is a wide fast moving high volume street 1 Redevelop the Tavern
Block
Some one and two story retail buildings are adjacent to the sidewalk
2 Adopt Civic Center Master
in this area There are also some strip commercial buildings with plan
surface parking lots adjacent to the street which breaks down the
continuous street wall Fewer storefronts are used for retail and 3 Redevelop the Truitt
services east of Auburn Way and this section of Main Street does Building Pastime Tavern
not benefit from the Main Street improvements which terminate 4 Redevelop the JC Penney
at Auburn Way The street is wider than the other portions of Main building
Street and there is on street parking on the south side of the street 5 Create destination uses on
only East Main
The Performing Arts Center part of the Auburn High School 6 Revitalizethe block across
facility lies at the east end of the Downtown Plan study area but from City Wall between Di
is functionally and visually separated from the downtown due to vision and A facade im
its location the distance it is set back from the street its visual provements new tenants
or redevelopment
appearance and the landscaping and concrete barriers on its
perimeter 7 Facade Improvement Pro
gram
Main Street West of the BNSF Rail Line 8 East Main Street improve
Main Street west of the BNSF Rail Line has always had a different ments
character than the Main Street core The street in this location is 9 Extend alley improvement
wider than along the Main Street core and there are sidewalks and Improve intersection of 10Imp v
on street parking on both sides of the street Originally from a dAubumWy ro
block west of the BNSF tracks West Main was lined by houses
k East Main with Per Li 11 and a few commercial buildings Many of the buildings remain n
forming Arts Center
today although some of the houses are occupied by commercial
uses A fire in 1999 affected two historically significant buildings 12 Bicycle facilities on West
along this section of the street The Natsuhara and Sons store was Main from the Interurban
destroyed and the former American Legion Hall suffered extensive Trail to the Transit Center
interior damage 13 Create and improve links
to Auburn Regional Medi
West Main Street is home to West Auburn High School in addition cal Center
to a mix of older homes and businesses Concern for this area
Design standards for de 14 revolves around a mix of possibly incompatible commercial and velopment residential land uses as well as impacts from traffic on SR 18 the
BNSF rail line and Main Street itself The street curb and gutter 15 Code amendments to C 2
sidewalks and street trees are also in poor condition along this district
street 16 Improve ped crossing at
BSNF tracks and West
Main
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 135
May 2001
1
t
Future Land Use and Character
Main Street Core
The Main Street Core will remain the commercial center of
downtown Auburn and will be strengthened by the addition of
more office retail and restaurant space Mixed use development
in any combination of retail housing and office will be encouraged
along the Main Street corridor Facade and awning renovations
will strengthen the visual character of Main Street linking past to
present through the use of older buildings that house present day
uses Future development may include taller buildings that do not
maintain the small town flavor identified in the Downtown Urban
Design Vision Redevelopment of the Penney building will bolster
the retail core between Auburn Way and Auburn Avenue
A mixed use development should be sited on the tavern block
to link City Hall with the retail east of Division Street The block
across the street from City Hall should be upgraded either by
facade improvements and stronger tenants or through
redevelopment The retail uses between A Street SW and the BNSF
tracks will be strengthened by the presence of the Transit Center
which will create demand for more retail and service uses at that
end of the Main Street Core
Improved pedestrian linkages will attract more users from the
Auburn Regional Medical Center to the Main Street Core
Pedestrian safety and aesthetic improvements are also needed
where the BNSF railroad tracks intesect with West Main Street to
encourage walking between the Main Street core and the remainder
of Downtown west of the tracks
Increased Downtown residential population is envisioned spurred
by the development of the Transit Center As the community
grows City facilities may also require additional space Main Street
is a location that the City of Auburn should explore as it evaluates
the need for additional municipal office and activity space in
Downtown Additional government presence would provide
stability to the area and draw more people into Downtown
The alley improvements between Safeway and A Street SE will
extend west to provide another link between the Main Street Core
and the Transit Center The improvements will increase the use of
and access to Main Street buildings
East Main Street I East Main Street should be linked to the Core by expanding the
pedestrian oriented facilities on the west side of Auburn Way to
the east Main Street improvements may be similar to those of the
136 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Main Street core while not being a literal replication Economically
and aesthetically stronger tenants in the existing buildings when
combined with the streetscape improvements will attract additional
users to East Main Street Intersection improvements at Auburn Way
and Main Street will make vehicular and pedestrian crossings easier
and will visually link the two parts of Main together
The Performing Arts Center can be better linked with Main Street
in several ways An intensive landscaping and signage program
the removal of the existing physical barriers to the facility and a
carefully thought out painting scheme perhaps using brighter
colors could emphasize the various elements of the facility making
it easily identifiable from a distance
Potential Tavern Block Redevelopment
West Main Street
West Main Street will continue to function as it is and will be
better linked to the Main Street Core with the intersection and
street improvements in the vicinity of C and B Streets NW SW
Bicycle facilities will be added to link the Interurban Trail at the
Union Pacific railroad to downtown Auburn
Existing Tavern Block
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 137
May 2001
1
i on Projects Implementat
Tavern Block
Public comment indicates that redevelopment of the block
immediately to the east of City Hall the tavern block is a top
priority for Auburn citizens The four taverns break up the retail
district Many Auburn residents also perceive this block as unsafe
particularly at night The removal of the taverns and subsequent
redevelopment of this block is a critical step in revitalizing
downtown Auburn A mixed use development on half or all of
this block will establish the retail link that is currently missing
provide space for offices and improve the appearance and function
of Main Street and Auburn Avenue Medical uses or future City
facilities are possibilities Implementation of this project may
require public sector assistance such as purchasing properties and
or businesses or providing incentives for a third party to purchase
the tavern block to facilitate its redevelopment Business relocation
assistance may also be a project component Construction of a
parking structure on the north half of this block would serve many
nearby users and should be evaluated
City Hall Civic Center Area
City Hall is a vital element of Main Street and Downtown Auburn
The building s presence functions and employment base are
significant assets for downtown These assets will be strengthened
in the future as civic functions grow to support the size of the
community Future expansions of City Hall police and court
facilities should be located in the general vicinity of the existing
buildings
This Plan recommends development of a Civic Center Master Plan
that will identify and assess future needs for City facilities such as
expanded office space courtrooms and a public safety building
All City facilities should be designed as a cohesive civic center in
a manner that improves the function and appearance of Main
Street This will help link east and west ends of the Main Street
Core Building design should be compatible with historic Main
Street flavor During the development of the Civic Center Master
Plan the City should consider the best use of all downtown
properties and examine the potential for trading selling or sharing
properties with the medical community or other appropriate
development
Truitt Building Pastime Tavern
Redevelopment of the site formerly occupied by the Truitt Building
and the Pastime Tatvern will fill a gap in Main Street and bring
138 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
a FJ oo Gateway Project
North Entrance
Improvements to Auburn
Way Main Street Intersection
o
Remove Recycling Bins
Infill Project on the Comer
of the Safeway Site
Potential Hotel Office
Catalyst Project Sites
Cross Street Intersection
Improvements
Gateway Project South
Entrance
N
Figure 19 Auburn Way Corridor
Recommendations soo Feet
activity to the west end of the Main Street core The proximity of
this corner site to the Transit Center will further bolster its position
as a key location in Downtown and will also increase the benefit
as these projects being to act in concert Frontage on A Street SW
Main Street and the Transit Center plaza will increase the site s
visibility and viability
The significant historic character of this block should be respected
in the design of new buildings for this site Any replacement
building s should utilize masonry exteriors a higher first floor
extensive display windows and recessed entries compatible with
the former Pythias Hall next door
J C Penney Building
The vacant J C Penney Building presents a major gap in the retail
district both physically and psychologically as vacancies in the
retail district can create the impression of decline even when the
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 139
May 2001
Concepts for
Auburn Way
South of Main Street
Selectively extend curb to gain
planting area
Center planted median with
larger trees in center
Selected access management
primarily Cross to 2nd Street
Smaller double row of trees
border sidewalk
accommodates power lines
trees limbed up to allow
visibility to businesses
Signage consolidated above
and below trees
Add pedestrian scale
decorative lighting and paint
light poles
Textured pavement at Cross
Main Street intersection
functions as gateway and alert
to drivers
Main Street intersection with
split phase signal on Main to
allow left turns
Crosswalks at all intersections
Future Hotel Future Hotel or o ice1 r or office v 1 a l
cn
rest of the district is healthy Public and private actions which could
stimulate the redevelopment of the building include Development
of additional public parking in the immediate vicinity City or
another party s guarantee of a 2nd floor lease which would enable
the current owner to secure financing use of CDBG funds for
renovation and the City or other parties such as local business
owners purchasing a partial share in the building Facade
renovations should include removing the 1970s metal facade to
reveal the original surface Restoring the storefronts to their 1920s
configuration should be considered This was originally a very
simple building it is not necessary to prettify it If the building
is designated as an Auburn Historic Landmark it would qualify
for restoration under the more flexible Washington Historic
Building Code if adopted by the City
1 5 2 Auburn Way Corridor
General Description Existing Conditions
Auburn Way is a major travel route through the City of Auburn
and experiences the highest volume of traffic within downtown It
is characterized by strip development over its entire length
including the portion which runs through downtown between 41
Street NE and SR18 The street is characterized by parking lots
W
N
y l Create
Pedestrian
Paths and
N Rotentia Intensify
New
t uildingi
l
Concentrate Limited Street Trees Unify Corridor
Public Redevelopment and Create Pedestrian Travel
Improvements Potential
Figure 20 Concepts for Auburn Way South of Main Street
10
Concentrate Public
Improvements to
Link East and West
Main Alert Drivers
Safeway
1
1
1
l
1
1
0
140 City of Auburn Downtown Plan E15 I
separating buildings from the roadway It is rare to find a building Concepts for
with an entrance that is adjacent to the street in this district Many
ll Auburn Way of the buildings are single story and advertise themselves with ta
pole signs designed to catch a passing automobile driver s eye North of Main Street Landscaping is minimal along the corridor with the exception of
two small center planted medians and small trees and shrubs at Selectively extend curb to gain
intermittent intervals Since repeating vertical elements tend to planting area
dominate the view in any street s case pole signs and utility poles Center planted median with
are the dominating physical characteristics along this corridor The larger trees in center
pavement buildings and the landscaping become a minor element Selected access management
Smaller trees border sidewalk
Auburn Way functions as a barrier to east west pedestrian travel accommodates power lines
and to the cohesion of the retail district The width of this heavily trees limbed up
traveled arterial varies from four to six lanes and many of the Signage consolidated above
and below trees
crosswalks on Auburn Way are in need of re striping There are Add pedestrian scale
sidewalks along most of Auburn Way within the study area except decorative lighting and paint
around 2nd and 3rd NE and near Cross Street at the southern end light poles
The sidewalk is integral with the curb leaving no separation Textured pavement at Main
between the pedestrian and vehicular traffic The sidewalk and Street intersection
y properties street edge are characterized by curb cuts with some
Narrowed Main Street
intersection with split phase
having their entire frontage as a curb cut Frequent curb cuts signal to accommodate left
discourage pedestrian use because of frequent auto usage and the turns
change in sidewalk elevation These conditions create an
uncomfortable pedestrian environment and decrease traffic safety
U
H
C
t 9
W
Y
Y
L I N
N
Wells 0 i3
Fargo
3 d
Figure 21 Concepts for Auburn Way North of Main Street
Concentrate 1 uonc
Improvements as
Gateway and Entry
Point
13
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 141
May 2001
t
1
Although the corridor is characterized by strip development the
Ailbl 1 n way areas north and south of Main Street are different The right
of Implementation way is at its greatest near Safeway at 100 and at its narrowest in
AWons
The street the northern area between 2 d and 4 Streets NE at 60
l anes varies in width as well from 4 lanes north of Main Street to 5
Street redesign land 1
in the southern area where the curbside lane is wider than 20 and
undergrounding scaping underutilized The corridor appears especially wide around
of utilities access man Safeway where the pavement is widest and where the buildings
agement and street are set back the farthest from the street
reconfiguration Given all of the conditions identified here Auburn Way as the
2 Improvements to Auburn main travel route into and through downtown presents a poor
Way Main Street intersec impression and relates very little in form and function to the Main
tion Street Core Auburn Way is a key corridor and entry to downtown
3 Gateway project north Improving the aesthetics of Auburn Way is essential to improving
entrance downtown Auburn
4 Gateway project south
t Future Land Use and Character rance en
5 Cross Street intersection While there is a lack of visual continuity on Auburn Way and it
does not have the desired character of a downtown most of the
6 Hotel buildings along the street are in good to fair condition and most
y Office are occupied The majority of parcels are relatively small ranging
8 lnfill project on the from 4 000 10 000 square feet The Safeway parcel is 270 000 square
corner of the Safeway site feet and other minimal numbers of larger parcels do exist These
9 Signage Improvement land use conditions lead to the conclusion that most of the existing
Program code changes buildings will remain in the foreseeable future although the tenants
and financial assistance
a
may change
progr m Improvements to private property that will make a significant
10 Design standards difference include signage that complies with a new City sign
ordinance and design standards for new development and
redevelopment As demonstrated in many Puget Sound cities it is
possible to successfully lower the heights and sizes of signs without
destroying the viability of existing businesses This helps to create
the more pedestrian friendly atmosphere which is a key element
of the vision for downtown Implementation actions may include
both sign code changes and a City finance program to help
businesses remove nonconforming signs A specific amount could
be dedicated per year to accomplish this task
It is difficult to alter a land use pattern that is as established as
Auburn Way However great potential exists to improve the public
right of way especially south of Main Street where the right of
way is widest and the existing street width is not fully used
The addition of landscaping decorative lighting and the
undergrounding of utilities will complement the decreases over
142 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
time in the height and size of pole signs After these improvements
are made the unifying element will become the landscaping
decorative lighting and signage both public and private Improved
building design will be accomplished over time as the design
standards are implemented
Another key area of the corridor is the intersection of Auburn
Way and Main Street as discussed in the Main Street District
section above With the implementation of design standards and a
public signage program the buildings and urban form will look
more like downtown than like strip development thus alerting
the Auburn Way user that they are in the downtown area of the
City Intersection improvements will help to unify Main Street on
the east and west sides of Auburn Way
Redesigning the entries to downtown from Auburn Way will create
a better impression of downtown than currently exists Careful
design of public art and the redevelopment of public infrastructure
will speak for themselves in terms of the quality of the community
and the downtown The northern gateway will also link downtown
to the emerging regional retail area to the north around 15th Street
NE
Intensifying land uses will also improve the appearance and
function of Auburn Way Potential projects include the addition of
a building to the corner of the Safeway parking lot and the addition
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 143
May 2001
Potential Infill on Safeway Site
of a hotel and Class A office development at the southern area of
the corridor
Street and Intersection Improvements
Of all of the identified catalyst projects improvement of the Auburn
Way street and intersections will have the greatest impact and unify
the corridor visually while improving its physical function
Specific improvements to be made include
Center planted medians in the approximate locations
shown in Figures 20 21
At the intersection of Main Street and Auburn Way split
phase signal improvements on Main Street should be
explored to allow left turns from Main Street to Auburn
Way
Add a travel lane and sidewalk improvements between
2nd and 4th NE on Auburn Way
144 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Potential Auburn Way Street Improvements with Existing Power Poles and Wires
Realign Fourth Street NE between Auburn Way and
Auburn Avenue to improve the 2 intersections
The alley behind Main Street south side will be closed
and street entrances to Safeway consolidated
Access management would be instituted on Auburn Way
to minimize curb cuts and multiple accesses per block
Southern Gateway
The southern gateway to downtown on Auburn Way South occurs
at the crossing of SR 18 and railroad bridges There are many
opportunities for public art to be integrated with existing
infrastructure In addition to the SR 18 bridge and the railroad
bridge the Cross Street intersection also provides opportunities
Intensive landscaping and signage can begin at this gateway point
to alert the user that they have entered downtown These elements
should be used throughout the Auburn Way corridor to establish
continuity and identity
Hotel and Small Conference Facilities
The Downtown Market Analysis identified the potential for a hotel
with small conference facilities to be developed in downtown
Auburn near SR 18 Visibility and convenient freeway access are
key to the success of a hotel facility Also a sizable site is required
to meet the needs of the hotel and accompanying parking Sites
on the west side of Auburn Way near the Cross Street intersection
would be appropriate for the hotel catalyst project and combined
with public street and gateway improvements would greatly
improve the appearance of the southern entrance to downtown
Northern Gateway
The land uses at the northern end of downtown do not change
dramatically when one enters the downtown core There is no
easily identifiable point at which one knows that now I am in
downtown Therefore a gateway should be created Given the
land use pattern of strip development the greatest potential exists
to use the public infrastructure of the reconstructed street as a
gateway The change in the type and quality of the infrastructure
in the vicinity of 41 Street NE will speak for itself A cluster of
trees signage and other art elements will function as the gateway
and establish the identity of the downtown portion of the Auburn
Way corridor
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 145
May 2001
Class A Office Development
The Downtown Market Analysis identified the demand for Class
A office space in downtown Like the hotel sites on the west side
of Auburn Way near the intersection with Cross Street are
appropriate and easy to access Many other sites within the
downtown core would also be viable Class A Office development
sites Class A office development typically has technological
communication needs The presence of the Qwest central office
in this area could be used to help market and attract Class A
Office development
Public Art Opportunities
The inclusion of an art program along Auburn Way would help to
mitigate and organize the drivers experience along this route
Crosswalks and lighting would add to pedestrian safety while
providing needed visual enhancements to the existing streetscape
A greening and tree planting program will greatly improve the
visual quality of the street Finally the gateway bridges at Auburn
Way and SR 18 should be viewed and addressed as important
entryways The proposed and the partially completed design
i 4
9l t
l 410 t
p t t
44 Il lal
Conceptual illustration of parking garage at Transit Center with retail on 1 st floor along the
street
146 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
artwork on the BNSF railroad overcrossing should be prioritized
and completed Also the SR 18 overcrossing should be renovated
through an environmental design approach This could be done
in many ways including graphics color and trellis work with
greening Lighting at this entry point would make a significant
difference especially if the two gateway bridges could be unified
as an entry statement
The following elements could improve the Auburn Way
experience
Crosswalks Special paving
Tree planting program
Lighting
Signage
Medians Greening and landscaping as art form
Gateway opportunity at SR 18 overcrossing include
completion of existing gateway bridge
1 5 3 Transit Center
General Description Existing Conditions
A Transit Center has recently been constructed adjacent to the
BNSF rail line just south of Main Street It is part of the Sound
Transit s Regional Transit Plan It is a multi modal facility with
commuter rail initially during the AM and PM peak hours and
regional and express bus service
Located in the City s C 2 or Central Business District zone the
area around the Transit Center site has commercial uses ranging
from auto service to offices
Future Land Use and Character
The Transit Center will focus around a public plaza that will link
the platforms and parking on both sides of the tracks via a
pedestrian overpass Parking on the west side of the tracks will be
approximately 120 surface stalls with the long term potential for a
parking structure to replace the surface stalls On the east side a
parking structure will accommodate approximately 500 to 600
stalls The parking structure should be designed as part of the urban
form rather than the more standard concrete structure with open
decks The first floor of the structure facing A Street SW and the
plaza will have shops and services oriented to the transit user
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts
May 2001
u
fTIQi
appom
SOLI JL 11 co WDOWWra
Auburn Way Corridor
147
Auburn Way today at Cross Street
C
11
i
J
j
li t EJ a
1 1
x
a
Kiss and Ride
Public Area
Commuter Rail Platform
Future Pedestrian Bridge
BusTransfer Area
Parking Garage
Surface Parking
SR I SIC Street Grade
Separation
N
Figure 22 Transit Center Plan T aoo Feet
The Transit Center facilities are designed to meet the Downtown
Vision Key features include a plaza with trees seating and public
art Canopies along the rail platform have been designed using the
classic red brick that is a feature of many of the nearby historical
buildings The canopies are stacked at the end of the plaza to create
a significant focal point with a custom designed clock at the apex It
is anticipated that a public artist will be involved throughout the
Transit Center design process
Public Art Opportunities
The Transit Center will create a new center of activity in downtown
Auburn and presents an opportunity for revitalizing the downtown
core It has the potential to create an outdoor living room for
the community flanked by retail parking plaza park and
pedestrian linkages It will become a most important activity center
and it should be enhanced to create an uplifting and inspiring transit
experience which reinforces a positive image of Auburn as a city
designed for living and commuting
I I
I I
148 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
The station architecture reflects the surrounding context and
Auburn s railroad history Reflecting historical context does not
mean old time vernacular architecture rather it is a reinvention
of historic forms to announce Auburn s forward looking dreams
for the present and the future
The following elements offer future opportunities for public art
Platform paving pattern color movement canvas
Platform furniture community living room public
private partnership
Windscreens myth history and poetry potential
Advertising panels signage kiosks could be
illuminated
Identity lighting enhance light levels seasonal change
and celebrations
Noise abatement features such as fountains or water walls
Kiss and Ride plaza
Drainage mitigate through greening and softscape
Phenomena sound sculptures wind elements
Passive play structure for children possibly musical
Pedestrian Bridge at Transit Center
The pedestrian bridge provides a gateway opportunity to the Transit
Center The bridge will provide access between the platforms on
each side of the Transit Center It can also be used by pedestrians
whose travel along Main Street or other locations is interrupted
by train traffic Although it might require walking out of one s
way hopefully it will reduce the inclination by some walkers to
try to beat the train or to crawl between stopped train cars
Design of the pedestrian bridge will be coordinated with the design
of the parking garage and will include elevator access from the
platform and from the garage itself The elevator will be sized to
accommodate wheelchair users and riders with bicycles and so
can also meet the needs of these segments of nonmotorized traffic
to cross the tracks safely and efficiently
Historically bridges have been built and designed by engineers
craftspeople and artists Its role as a connector should be viewed
as more than simply function Bridges present an opportunity for
Residential neighborhood west of
the Transit Center
Transit Center
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 149
May 2001
S a
sculptural form and structure to come together in a powerful and
functional urban form This bridge should be designed to create
an identity statement and to improve the experience of pedestrians
in the Downtown core The following options should be
considered
Lighting Lighting enhancements are featured on some
of the most notable bridges and should be considered here
Lighting effects can be changed to mark the seasons and
mitigate effects of dark dreary weather
Bridge Design Design should relate well to the existing
canopies along the the platform the parking garage and
the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation to the south
Identity Statement A distinctive appearance will
contribute to a unique identity for the Transit Center and
this end of Main Street A strong identity will also
contribute to a higher level of use
150 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
1 5 4 Auburn Regional Medical Center
District
General Description Existing Conditions
The Medical Center and its surrounding medical uses make up a
large district within downtown It lies in the north central section
of the study area and its most significant feature is the Auburn
Regional Medical Center located between Auburn Avenue and
North Division Street The Medical Center is a major facility that
one sees when entering downtown from the north on Auburn
Avenue
The five story building is the largest in downtown and houses the
largest employer with over 500 employees and more than 200
affiliated doctors Medical office buildings from 1 3 stories and
their associated parking lots surround the Medical Center
The facility the clinics and the physicians offices have grown
over time It has grown outward from its original building and the
Center s orientation faces away from the rest of downtown
Sidewalks facilitate pedestrian travel to and from the other
downtown districts but there are no other visual clues to guide
pedestrians between the medical district and Main Street
Consequently the Medical Center is perceptually isolated from
enter visuaisl expected
identity
d Ftoacilities have
to
grow adding approximately six physicians per year and the
surrounding medical facilities are expected to grow as well
There are three primary goals for this downtown district 1
improve the physical and visual connection between the Medical
Center and Main Street 2 increase Medical Center employees
the rest
Future
of dLandowntown The scale and the style
Uses
of thande Medical CCharacterenter district buildings are
been developed at different times by different entities
continue
This is
reflected in the eclectic mix of buildings
diverse
The Auburn
and
urn
do
Regional
not have
Me
a specific
use of downtown and 3 improve the physical appearance and
cohesiveness of the Medical Center district
ments
Plan required orvoiun
The most simple way to accomplish these goals is to prepare a M master plan for the Medical Center This could be accomplished
through the voluntary collaboration between the Medical Center
and the City on a master plan Alternately a master plan could be
a regulatory requirement for future Medical Center expansion
1Viedic9 Center
Implementation
Actions
1 Auburn Way Improve
2 31d Street NW Improve
ments
3 Medical Center Masser
tart
4 Potential Use of City
properties for Medical
Center use eg parking
5 Design standards
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 151
May 2001
1
1
Medical Center District
A Medical Center master plan should identify both Auburn
Regional Medical Center facilities and other medical facilities in
the District as well A master plan would facilitate the growth of
the area in a visually cohesive manner would create the potential
for shared parking and other facilities and would help to meet the
goal of greater integration of the Medical Center with Main Street
and downtown Auburn Another benefit would be the ability to
plan for future impacts generated by Medical Center growth
particularly traffic and alleviate some or all of the need for
individual environmental review of future improvements
The City could be a partner with the medical community in the
development of joint facilities such as parking Simple
improvements such as a cohesive landscaping plan will unify the
disparate parts of the Medical Center district Plantings should be
distinctive to this area to unify it and begin to create a unique and
separate identity At the same time the Medical Center district
should be integrated in the larger sense with downtown This can
be accomplished through greater emphasis on pedestrian
orientation and linking facilities with other districts
Street improvements to solidify and create an identity for the district
include improvements along 3rd Street NW NE and Auburn
Avenue Although there are medical and professional office uses
north of 3 d Street NW and NE the scale and building form should
remain residential with 3rd Street NW NE as the boundary
Design and development guidelines for the Medical Center would
focus on building location on the parcels locations of doors and
pedestrian walkways in relation to the street signage building
materials screening of parking and parking garage design
Public Art Opportunities
Like A Street SW A Street SE Auburn Avenue Corridor
redevelopment would greatly benefit from pedestrian
enhancements which provide safety comfort and a journey that
is specific to this street There is an opportunity for a welcoming
gateway gesture at the intersection of Auburn Avenue and Auburn
Way North marking the entrance to the downtown core This is a
significant intersection which should be marked by a major work
of public art to be viewed by both drivers and pedestrians It should
address different scales and speeds as part of its design program
152 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Auburn Regional Medical Center
today
Figure 23 Medical Center District
Parking garage creates boundary between
Medical Center and residential
neighborhoods to the north
Gateway to Medical
Center District
Tree planting to unify area and
create identity Columnar trees
are tall and create unity above
building tops
Redevelop with entrance to
the hospital to create
connection toward Main
Street
Potential Medical Center or Civic Center
expansion with redevelopment of City owned
parcels for use as joint City Medical Center
parking or other use
Medical Center
District
Potential
Medical Center
Expansion
Potential Joint
Parking
pportunity O
Potential expansion of Medical
Center Civic Center district with
redevelopment of Tavern Block
potentially with civic or medical uses
on upper floors
400 Feet
N
T
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 153
May 2001
Gatawav to downtown
Opportunities to integrate public art into this corridor include
Crosswalks Special paving or graphics
th l i li k bi P d e pa s estr an n ages cyc e
Sidewalk paving with game inserts
Tree grates tree guards
Drainage
Greening Tree planting program
Gateway opportunity at Auburn Way
i P l m entat on rojects Imp e
Potential Use of City Properties for Medical Center Use
One strategy to bring the Medical Center further into downtown
is to use City owned properties for either future medical facilities
A St NW South or for jointly developed City Medical Center parking
Central D15tI1CtS Consolidation of City parking facilities into a joint parking facility
with the Medical Center could free up land for medical and or
Implementation City facility use Parcels currently owned by the City are within
Actions one block north of Main Street which could help to bring the
Medical Center within closer proximity to the downtown core
1 A Street SE improvements
2 AStreet SW improvements 1 5 5 A Street NW South Central Dis
3 A Street NW improvements tri ts
4 Design Standards
General Description Existing Conditions
Two areas of downtown Auburn are identified as mixed use districts
The first is south of Main Street between Auburn Way and the
Transit Center A Street SW and the second is along A Street
NW north of Main Street Both areas are currently occupied by a k 7 mixture of residential commercial and retail land
The first area south of Main Street is split by A Street SE which
is characterized by underutilized parcels houses and other strip
retail and office uses A Street SW was upgraded during
construction of the Transit Center
Mixed Use Districts The second area north of Main is primarily residential and office
uses with a few industrial land uses along the railroad This area is
zoned M 1 C 3 C 2 and RO H A Street NW runs through this
area and is slated for improvement and reconstruction
The C 3 zone is a heavy commercial zone which allows light
154 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
industrial uses auto related uses and strip development C 2 is
the Central Business District The M 1 zone is light industrial
and RO H is the Residential Office Hospital District
Future Land Uses Character
The zoning in the mixed use district south of Main Street has
been changed from C 3 to C 2 Central Business District
concurrent with this Plan s adoption This shifts the land use focus
for this area from heavy commercial and auto oriented uses to
retail service office and housing Land use in this area will become
pedestrian oriented mixed use and auto oriented and heavy
commercial uses will be phased out over time Housing is a priority
use for both of the Mixed Use Districts with their physical
proximity to transit and the Main Street core thus offering the
ability to increase the downtown residential population
The first area south of Main has great potential as the district that
links the Transit Center Auburn Way and the Main Street core
through the creation of a more cohesive urban form This area
contains a number of underutilized parcels which due to the
proximity to the Transit Center offer the opportunity to locate
housing and offices near transit and the downtown core
Redevelopment of this mixed use district will bring higher land
use intensity than currently exists in the downtown and a more
cohesive urban form Emphasis in this district will be on buildings
located adjacent to the street parking located at the rear of parcels
and first floor retail on parcels along A Street SE
A Street SE one of the major corridors through downtown should
be revitalized not only by private investment but also by public
investment in the street corridor to improve vehicular and
pedestrian facilities and landscaping
Due to planned street improvements and the future extension of
A Street NW north to 15 Street NW there will be a potential
market for strip commercial development in the second area The
potential also exists to expand medical uses The intersection of
3rd Street NW and A Street NW should be improved as a
downtown gateway Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map
amendments for this area should be considered especially given
the planned extension of A Street NW and the identification of A
Street NW and 3rd Street NW as a gateway Design standards for
this area will need to be carefully considered to ensure that
redevelopment along the A Street corridor is in accord with the
Downtown Urban Design Vision See Section 1 2 Urban Design
Vision
A Street SW NW will be one of the most significant streets in
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts 155
May 2001
downtown Auburn with gateways at the northern and southern
ends It is planned to be improved as a minor arterial In addition
A Street SW will be the front door to the Transit Center and the
street that links the Transit Center to the rest of downtown
The reconstructed A Street SW was envisioned as a pedestrian
oriented urban street that would carry significant amounts of
vehicular traffic A Street SW was constructed with 2 travel lanes
a center turn lane and on street parking on one side to serve the
short term needs of adjacent retail and service businesses
Pedestrian and streetscape improvements include the
reconstruction of the sidewalks and future inclusion of street trees
plantings and decorative lighting Utilities were placed
underground
Although planned construction of the improvements north of Main
Street and the link to 15th NW are not yet funded This segment is
also envisioned as a pedestrian oriented urban street that will carry
significant volumes of traffic linking the Medical Center area with
Main Street and providing a gateway to downtown at 3rd NW
This segment of A Street should also be constructed to have 2
travel lanes with on street parking on both sides As with the street
south of Main Street pedestrian and streetscape improvements
will include the reconstruction of the sidewalks inclusion of street
trees plantings and decorative lighting Utilities should be placed
underground
A Street SE is currently a 4 lane facility with integral curb and
gutter fully using the 60 foot right of way Although at present
the appearance and function of A Street SE does not meet the
urban design vision for downtown there are no planned capacity
or safety improvements for this street Properties along A Street
SE are currently underused and therefore will likely see significant
redevelopment in both the near term and long term As A Street
SE redevelops a 10 foot building setback or easement should be
required of private property owners which would increase the area
available for streetscape improvements Streetscape improvements
would include creation of a planting strip between the curb and
sidewalk thus buffering the pedestrian from moving traffic and
the reconstruction of the sidewalk in the setback area Buildings
should be required to be located at the property line which in
time with the streetscape improvements will transform this auto
oriented strip into a more urban downtown street Until an
opportunity to underground the power lines occurs street trees
for A Street SE should be selected to fit under the power lines
while still providing a visually prominent tree canopy
Cross Street should also be improved for functional and aesthetic I
156 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
South Central District today
reasons Beginning with the gateway at Auburn Way Cross Street
links to 3rd Street SW and will experience increased traffic with
the construction of the overpass at that link
Today the properties along Cross Street are underused
economically and the street itself lacks sidewalks in places and
has no landscaping Properties on the north and south sides of the
street are identified as the best locations for both the hotel
conference center project and for the development of a Class A
office project It will be important to design the improvements to
include ample streetscape improvements including sidewalks
landscaping and gateway treatments at both ends
Public Art Opportunities
A Street SW would benefit from public art and environmental
design applications which enhance the movement safety and visual
experiences of the pedestrian and bicyclists Public art should be
used to create discoveries which heighten mark and orient
pedestrian movement
There is opportunity to provide civic identity and greening by
including an extensive tree planting program and by marking
gateways Another opportunity for a gateway exists at the
intersection of A Street SW and Third Street SW This gateway
will become more significant with the redevelopment of the
downtown core especially since this entry to the City aligns with
the new Transit Center As such this gateway merits a significant
wayfinding and welcoming gesture
The following elements could integrate public art into A Street
SW and downtown
Crosswalks Special paving or graphics
Pedestrian linkages bicycle paths
Sidewalk paving with game inserts
Tree grates tree guards
Drainage
Greening Tree planting program
Gateway opportunity at Third Street SW
Catalyst Projects
Housing Near Transit Center
Parcels on the east side of A Street SW have been identified as key
locations for downtown residential development in close proximity
to the Transit Center The City Chamber and ADA will each
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts
May 2001
157
1
Residential
Implementation
Actions
1 West Side pedestrian con
nection to theTransit Cen
ter
2 Design Standards
I Home ownership pro
grams
4 Down payment assistance
5 Home repair
6 Active code enforcement
play a role in attracting developers and assisting with land assembly
Housing developments are expected to be one half block or one
full block in size with the potential for a number of individual
projects to be developed in this district in the next number of years
1 5 6 East and West Main Residential
Districts
General Description Existing Conditions
There are four residential neighborhoods that exist on the periphery
of downtown in the northwest southwest southeast and northeast
quadrants of the Downtown Plan Study Area All four quadrants
can be described as single family residential neighborhoods with
multiple family dwellings scattered throughout Many of the streets
in these areas have planting strips with mature trees separating the
sidewalk from the street The Grade Separation will be located
adjacent to the West Main Neighborhood
These neighborhoods contain some of the City s oldest homes
remnants of Auburn s railroad heritage Several of them are
potentially of historic significance However many of these homes
are in poor condition and neighborhood stability is threatened by
the intrusion of a mix of incompatible commercial and industrial
land uses as well as impacts from traffic on SR 18 the BNSF rail
line and Main Street itself
Future Land Uses Character
The residential neighborhoods are planned to remain in residential
use although the West Main Residential District north of West
Main Street is planned for residential office use Design standards
will help to protect the existing residences from the potential
impacts of adjacent commercial development such as light glare
cut through traffic and noise Standards will also protect historic
houses from inappropriate remodeling activities
Maintaining the ability to walk safely and easily to the Transit
Center and the Main Street Core from the West Main Residential
District was a concern during the planning and design phases of
the Transit Center and 3r Street Grade Separation projects As a
result a pedestrian connection will be provided from the
neighborhood west of C Street to the Transit Center
It will be important to protect the West Main neighborhood from
impacts of the operation of the Grade Separation by designing
and maintaining a landscaped buffer on the west side of C Street
1
1
1
Ll
1
158 City of Auburn Downtown Plan E15 I
Residential Districts
SW between the Grade Separation and the neighborhood Special
care will also need to be taken regarding the impact of the Grade
Separation on the Wayland Arms
1 5 7 Industrial Districts
General Description Existing Conditions
There are two industrial areas within the Downtown Plan study
area both west of the BNSF rail line These areas are characterized
by large buildings including warehouses and lie on large parcels
The industrial areas are distinct in character and different from
downtown due to the nature of their use
O District Boundaries
Sensitive Edges
159
800 Feet
u
oLs
N
Figure 24 Residential and Industrial Districts
1 5 Downtown Plan Districts
May 2001
1
Future Land Uses Character 1
1lSIpMIW ItN MIWM
MK
lOYIM
vI1Ml00AMIO M
Industrial Districts
Business Park Light Industrial District
The industrial areas are intended to stay in industrial use and to
remain distinct in character from downtown It is important to
maintain the existing development standards that require buffers
between industrial and adjacent residential uses Truck routes
should be designated to minimize impacts on adjacent residential
uses
1 5 8 C Street NW District
General Description Existing Conditions
This district is currently used for a variety of residential
commercial and industrial uses and is adjacent to the rail line
and industrial districts as well as the West Auburn High School
Housing stock in the district is older and in dilapidated condition
Existing houses have been converted to industrial commercial
purposes and new industrial facilities have been built
Future Uses Character
The trend of conversion from single family residential to small
commercial and industrial uses would likely continue without
intervention The district will become increasingly less attractive
as a residential neighborhood under the current conditions
However due to its proximity to the Transit Center City Hall
and West Auburn High School C Street NW may be an appropriate
place for additional commercial and multi family residential uses
This could serve as a transition between the commercial and mixed
use character of the Downtown core and the industrial areas to
the west and north Comprehensive Plan and or zoning map
amendments to implement these objectives might be appropriate
for this area
L
1
Ll
1
1
160 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Section 1 6 Implementation
Strategy
Section 1 6 Implementation
Strategy
The projects programs and policies identified in the two preced
ing chapters offer the potential for downtown revitalization that
will strengthen downtown and allow it to reach its potential as the
commercial cultural and civic heart of the community This sec
tion outlines ways in which these preceding ideas can be turned
into action
1 6 1 Marketing and Implementation
Philosophy
When taken in combination the multitude of implementation steps
in this section will create a marketing strategy for Downtown Au
burn
This marketing strategy examines the means that is the tools
programs incentives policies and other levers that can be used
to achieve development of a particular desired type size and char
acter It is a long term proactive process that does not just re
spond to unmet demand but rather involves the shaping of con
ditions to create and respond to opportunities Such efforts are
the responsibility of both the public and private sectors
What follows is a marketing strategy that has been used to imple
ment other downtown revitalization plans The strategy provides
a framework for broad participation and encourages and supports
actions that are consistent with the vision and objectives of the
community
The next sections present the key components that should be in
place for an implementation program to succeed along with a list
of projects recommended in downtown Auburn Implementation
inevitably faces barriers and an analysis of what these might be
and how to overcome them is also included
It is clear that the projects identified in the downtown plan will be
implemented over time and that funding is not identified at this
point for the majority of the projects listed here The City of Au
burn would find it difficult to finance the implementation of this
plan alone even over a 20 year period Nor can the plan be imple
mented solely by regulations with the assistance of the occasional
capital project
Given the circumstances implementation of the Auburn Down
town Plan is not solely the responsibility of the City but of a part
1 6 Implementation Strategy 161
May 2001
r
n
nership between the City and a broad cross section of the commu
nity The proposed implementation strategy is based upon the fol
lowing philosophy
Make a Great Plan
This plan is designed to be bold and far reaching in its vision This
clear vision is required to unite the many players who will need to
be involved over a long period of time to bring the plan to frui
tion for it is difficult to unite people around a plan that is average
or lacks excitement and vision
A great plan is a vision powerful enough to carry the community
into a future in which its specific elements are achieved It boldly
goes beyond patching current problems It is also realistic firmly
grounded in both the market conditions and social mores of the
community It creates a coherent sense of place generating a cli
mate of community support and the commitment from stakehold
ers to see it through
d i l l t e project an tip This means there are many stakeholders and mu
relies on development standards
Select the Right Leaders
The plan will have many advocates those who want to see at
least their component projects implemented Those who work to
ward implementation are the leaders Both are necessary but com
mitted individuals determined to see the entire plan through are
critical They may be drawn from government business or the
community at large However there are limits to what elected of
ficials can do Leadership must come from a balance of the many
facets found in the community
The plan as a whole must also have advocates and leaders work
A small group must coordinate ing for overall implementation
the many component projects and the communication program
This is a matter not just of individual effort but institutional struc
ture organization as well
Many Many Projects
There are several reasons for having multiple projects Each plan
project brings with it a constituency In becoming a part of the plan a
project can broaden its initial constituency by adapting to the needs
and concerns of others This is a mutually advantageous situation
Section 1 6 Implementation Strategy identifies many projects pro
grams and policies that will implement the Plan No one project
will revitalize downtown Auburn Downtown can be likened to an
162 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
ecosystem the diversity of life that exists in downtown is what
guarantees its health If one or a few projects are unsuccessful the
overall revitalization of downtown will not suffer
Success breeds success Investors developers and lenders seek
out environments with market opportunity and areas with pros
pects for success When there are many projects moving forward
simultaneously there is enough action to ensure that there will be
a stream of success stories even if a few projects slow or fail The
actual number is not as important as the fact that there is a range
of projects that will always keep the area moving forward
Many Many Stakeholders
just as multiple projects are required to implement the Plan the
same holds true for stakeholders Having a broad base of stake
holders is critical A stakeholder is anyone with an interest in the
plan s outcome This includes as wide as possible a group of indi
viduals companies and public and private organizations as well
as government bodies at all levels
In addition to committed leadership and multiple projects many
stakeholders representing a wide range of interests will be required
to keep the Plan alive as it is implemented Stakeholders who will
be active in the process include public officials public employees
business leaders citizens representatives of funding agencies and
other jurisdictions special interest organizations the media and
others Key partners in the Downtown Plan implementation are
the ADA the Downtown Plan Task Force the Chamber major
downtown property owners and the Auburn Regional Medical
Center
Communications
With multiple projects moving forward simultaneously there is a
steady stream of news to report to stakeholders residents the de
velopment community lenders and other sources of help with
implementation as well as the media This includes advertising
success as it happens The wider the audience the more possible
stakeholders
Supportive Government
Government commitment to the success of downtown revitaliza
tion is another key implementation component The City of
Auburn s commitment to the success of downtown revitalization
is exemplified in good measure by the City s commitment to or
ganizing and preparing this Downtown Plan
Local government staff can be instrumental in implementing Down
1 6 Implementation Strategy 163
May 2001
town redevelopment Presently City planning staff participate
and are involved in Downtown revitalization efforts and organiza
tions More specifically the City s Planning and Community De
velopment Department has an economic development coordina
tor Although committed to citywide economic development ef
forts a significant amount of that position s time is spent on down
town revitalization and redevelopment efforts In many ways the
economic development coordinator serves as a development moni
tor providing businesses with information and assistance regard
ing the city s development opportunities and coordinating actions
so that a potential investor can be placed in quick contact with key
individuals at City Hall to obtain needed information
Perhaps one of the most important things local government staff
can do is to actively listen to individuals expressing concerns about
local codes regulations and policies and then using this informa
tion to determine whether the concerns are legitimate and rec
ommend changes In general many codes are often oriented
toward situations involving new development and not so much
redevelopment What works for new development may not work
well for redevelopment Listening to concerns and developing or
amending codes that provide flexibility in redevelopment efforts
are key functions city government can play
Ongoing Review
Because conditions change the plan and its implementation strat
egy will benefit from establishment of a formal ongoing review
process This will evaluate policies and perceptions of them It is
not intended to give people a chance to change the basic plan but
to adapt the means and specifics so that they remain consistent
with the purposes In the extreme if purposes change that too
can be addressed Such a review is best carried out under the
umbrella organization indeed it is a task inherent in its coordi
nating role To ensure that the Plan stays current and relevant
City staff will on an annual basis report to the Planning Commis
sion on progress made toward implementing the Downtown Plan
Appropriate stakeholders should be invited to the meeting when
the annual report is given for their input and to determine if amend
ments to the Downtown Plan might be warranted
Building the Right Image
This last principle may be as important as all of the others com
bined The perception that downtown Auburn is a good place to
invest without getting lost in a bureaucratic maze is crucial The
City must offer a friendly efficient and professional development
review process that will greatly enhance and expedite the imple
mentation process This image must be built through a concerted
1
1
r
n
i
1
1 64 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
public relations program that is instituted upon Plan adoption and
is maintained for a period of years This will engage the develop
ment community and expedite the potential for new partnerships
Efficient Use of Limited Resources
One advantage of multiple projects and breaking larger ones down
into smaller pieces is that the pace of implementation can be set to
the availability of resources the key is to have to undo as little as
possible of each previous step Financial resources can be lever
aged In general public investment should increase tax base and
promote employment These incremental revenues can be plowed
back as investment in public projects and these projects can le
verage private ones
1 6 2 Implementation Actions
The following section identifies all of the Plan implementation ac
tions as a whole by priority and with a detailed description of
each action Actions are described by category Policies Regula
tions Programs Transportation Street Improvements Public Fa
cilities and Public and Private Catalyst Projects This represents a
range of possibilities for implementation The City of Auburn has
not endorsed or committed to implementation of all of these items
Table E Actions by Task Force Priority
Priorities
Actions by Task Force 1 2 3
Priority 0 3 ears 3 6 ears 6 9 ears
Policies Regulations Land Use Code Revisions Facade Improvement Downtown Tree Planting
Programs Sign Code Revisions Program Program
Downtown Image Program Local Lender Program Downtown Art Program
Signage Improvement and Lending Pool
Assistance Program
Downtown Street Design
Standards
Downtown Street Lighting
Program
Design Guidelines
Standards
Transportation Street Auburn Way Street Bicycle Facility on W Main
Improvements Improvements Auburn Ave A St SE
C St Main St Intersection improvements
Improvements
Main St Auburn Way
Intersection improvements
Cross St Improvements
AStNWand SW
Public Facilities Downtown Gateways
Project
E Main St Improvements
Link E Main St with
Performing Arts Center
Public and Private Catalyst Tavern Block Hotel Conference Center
Projects Redevelopment Class A Office
Truitt Building Transit Development Infill Project at corner of
oriented Development Revitalize Block across Safeway site
JC Penney Building from City Hall
Housing near Transit
Center
1 6 Implementation Strategy 165
May 2001
a
d
0 P
P
C
Physical Improvements
Q Auburn Way Street Improvements 0 Tavern Block Redevelopment Q Downtown Plan
Study Area
Q C St Main Street Intersection Truitt Building Pastime Tavern Transit Oriented Development
0 Main St Auburn Way Improvements O JC Penney Building Redevelopment
Qi Cross St Improvements O Civic Center Master Plan
A St NW and SW Improvements Medical Center Master Plan
Transit Center and Parking Garage
N
Figure 25 Priority Projects Map
166 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Land Use Code Revisions
The Downtown Study Area consists of several zoning districts
The predominant zoning district in the Downtown Study area is
C 2 Central Business District C 2 is the most compatible and
consistent zoning district with the vision for Downtown Auburn
It allows land uses envisioned in this Plan for the Downtown and
perhaps more importantly prohibits those that are not The C 2
district also incorporates many development standards that fit the
urban design vision For this reason much of the Downtown was
rezoned from C 3 to C 2 with the adoption of this Plan
Other parts of the Downtown study area are not zoned C 2 These
and other areas not zoned C 2 should be reviewed and monitored
following the Plan s adoption to determine whether part or all of
their inclusion into the C 2 District would also be appropriate to
prohibit undesired development in key areas
Zoning amendments are the responsibility of the City of Auburn
and and necessary amendments should be implemented soon af
ter they are identified to enable development consistent with the
Downtown Urban Design Vision and lessen the likelihood of that
which is not
Benefits
Enable the development of mixed use buildings and mul
tiple family dwellings in a broader area of downtown
Phase out industrial and heavy commercial uses that are
incompatible with the downtown Plan and Vision
Implement uses and standards that are compatible with
the Urban Design Vision
Problems Solved
Limits new development of strip and auto oriented uses in
downtown that are incompatible with the Urban Design
Vision
Steps Required
1 Prepare zoning code amendments
2 Planning Commission review and recommendations
3 City Council review and adoption
Category
Policies Regulations and
Programs
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Duration
On going
Estimated Cost
Staff time Planning
Department
1 6 Implementation Strategy 167
May 2001
Category Sign Code Revisions Downtown
Policies Regulations and Information Signage Program
Programs The sign code should be revised to require signage that is consis
Responsibility tent with the Downtown Urban Design Vision Additionally the
D f own or City should develop a coordinated signage program
City of Auburn town for directional and informational signage
Duration Benefits Problems Solved
Revised signage requirements will improve key streetscapes On going Coordinated signage will decrease clutter and improve City
Estimated Cost identity and image
Code Revisions Staff time Parking and destination locations will be more easily located
Planning and Public Steps Required Works Departments
Signage Program 1 Prepare zoning code amendments
50 000 2 Planning Commission review and recommendations
3 City Council review and adoption
1 68 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Facade Improvement Program
A facade improvement program will help to improve the pedes
trian friendly environment downtown and overall quality of de
velopment This program would provide assistance to building
and business owners with facade maintenance and improvement
This program should be coordinated with the Landmark Revolv
ing Loan Fund and Special Valuation program that are available
for restoration of historic properties and designated landmarks
Other cities have used the following or similar programs
The City business organizations and financial institutions work
together to establish a facade improvement program The finan
cial institutions provide low interest loans for qualifying facade
and maintenance improvements The maximum loan amount is
10 000 at 6 interest for 5 years The interest rate may be re
duced in proportion to the level of private investment A commit
tee composition to be determined evaluates the loan application
and advises staff and design assistance may be provided to the
developer Thirty loans would be anticipated with these estimated
costs
Benefits
Category
Policies Regulations and
Programs
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Auburn Downtown
Association
Chamber of Commerce
Duration
Planning Program
Design 9 months
Implementation 3 years
for facade improvements
and 5 8 years for loan
repayment
Estimated Cost
Improves the pedestrian friendly environment downtown 1 st year 100 000
and overall quality of development 2nd year 84 000 which
Makes Main Street retail district and other portions of combined would sup
downtown more cohesive and attractive port 20 loans
Provides financial incentives to business or property own 3rd year 70 000 which
ers who might otherwise be unable to fund these improve would add another 10
loans
ments
Problem Solved
Many buildings in the Main Street core have false facades
plastic awning and are in poor condition which does not
convey an image of community
pride investment prosperity
Steps Required
1 Determine funding sources
2 Determine roles of City of Auburn
Auburn Downtown Association
Chamber of Commerce and lend
ing institutions and form partnerships
3 Publicize solicit participants and edu
cate property and business owners
4 Implement
1 6 Implementation Strategy 169
May 2001
Category Downtown Image Program
Policies Regulations and This element will propose a multi pronged Public Relations pro
Programs gram which will be used to recruit investment and improve the
image of downtown as a place to visit shop live and work A
Responsibility consultant would prepare the program for the City Chamber and
ADA to implement An image program should use a variety of
City of Auburn media to convey information on downtown to interested parties
Auburn Downtown This might include brochures websites press releases presenta
Association tion materials for speaking engagements and city and downtown
Chamber of Commerce gateways Incentives to developers or property owners to make
building improvements or create new high quality developments
Duration should be clearly described
Prepare plans 6 months Benefits
Implementation ongo Creates positive investment climate
ing with specified Actively shapes image of downtown as a place to do
available each year business
Estimated Cost Creates positive downtown image
Adds directional and welcome signs that announce you
35 000 year for 3 years are here
Specific advertising on Problems Solved
media campaigns would Lack of knowledge of Downtown Auburn
be above these costs Wayfinding
Coordination
Work with ADA and Chamber of Commerce to ensure consis
tency of effort and non overlap
Steps Required
1 Determine roles of City of Auburn Auburn Downtown
Association Chamber of Commerce and form partner
ships
2 Determine funding sources
3 Hire consultant to design program
4 Identify development incentives created or encouraged by
the Downtown Plan Select media to relay this informa
tion to potential developers and property owners
5 Implement
170 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
1
11
Signage Improvement and Assistance
Program
This type of program could be set up in a similar fashion to the
facade improvement program It may be possible to combine the
programs
Assistance would be provided to business owners wanting to im
prove the appearance of their signage New signage would be con
sistent with revised sign code
A financial support program to encourage new signage consistent
with the Code could be implemented Could provide a maximum
of 2 000 per property on a one time basis to assist business own
ers with sign code compliance Other incentives would include a
waiver of signage permit fees purchase or lease financing pro
grams with a designated lender no loan or processing fees and a
five year amortization of payments and other incentives
Benefits
Improved sign quality increases overall downtown attrac
tiveness and quality of development
Improved streetscapes and impression of downtown
Problems Solved
Coordinated signage will decrease clutter and improve City
identity and image on key corridors
Coordination
Would help ensure consistency with revised sign code
Could be coordinated with the facade improvement program
Steps Required
1 Revise Sign Code
2 Determine funding sources
3 Inventory existing signs
4 Identify a lender for the program
5 Publicize solicit participants and educate property
owners
Category
Policies Regulations and
Programs
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Auburn Downtown
Association
Chamber of Commerce
Duration
Planning 9 months
Implementation 5 years
Estimated Cost
200 000 Staff time to
administer
1 6 Implementation Strategy 171
May 2001
Category Downtown Street Design Standards
Policies Regulations and Downtown street design standards should be developed to ensure
Programs that future street improvements both publicly and privately funded
will implement the Downtown Plan and Urban Design Vision
Responsibility Elements of street design standards include
City of Auburn Sidewalk corridors including furnishings
Duration Curbs curb ramps
9 Months Driveways
Estimated Cost
Crosswalks
Pedestrian lighting
Staff time Public Works Driveway apron design and Planning Depart
ments Street corner specifications
Public transit infrastructure needs
Other street development standards
Benefits
Ensures balanced function of streets for both pedestrians
and autos consistent with the Downtown Urban Design
Vision
Improved aesthetics and comfort for the pedestrian
Improved downtown visual quality
Pedestrian safety
Problems Solved
Downtown Auburn less automobile dependent
Bring streetscape quality and scale into accord with Down
town Urban Design Vision Plan and function
Steps Required
1 Develop detailed downtown street standards based on the
guidance provided in this Plan in Section 1 4 Street
Improvements Transportation Policies
2 Review with Public Works committee and Planning Com
mission
3 City Council adoption
172 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Local Lender Program Lending Pool
The City of Auburn should take a leadership role in establishing
and implementing a local lending pool program targeted toward
Downtown revitalization The City must aggressively recruit and
convene representatives from lending institutions particularly those
in a position to make lending decisions and educate them about
the Downtown its redevelopment potential and the City s com
mitment to implementing successful revitalization All of this
should be done with the goal of establishing a local lending pool
program
Under this program the City would obtain commitment from a
number of local banks to provide loans for local priority projects
and to hold the loans in the bank s portfolio Such loans would be
subject to the same performance as any other loan
Then the City could recruit a developer who could obtain the
loans if they met the specific loan criteria
A local lender program lending pool could have additional ben
efits It could help increase lenders exposure and access to stake
holders For example lenders could be brought into develop
ment processes earlier in the project formulation stage and posi
tively influence a proposal s fiscal characteristics at an early stage
Problems Solved
Streamline project development and financing phases
Steps Required
1 Research potential lending programs
2 Identify banks willing to participate
3 Prioritize downtown projects
4 Distribute information on desired projects and financing
options to the development community
Category
Policies Regulations and
Programs
Responsibility
Chamber of Commerce
ADA
City of Auburn
Local banks
Duration
Prepare program 6
months up to 10 years to
implement
Estimated Cost
Staff time Economic
Development Coordina
tor and Planning Staff to
prepare and implement
program
1 6 Implementation Strategy 173
May 2001
Category Downtown Street Lighting Program
Policies Regulations and A downtown street lighting program should analyze street light
Programs ing needs for downtown for both safety and as an amenity Based
upon the analysis street lighting needs should be prioritized and
Responsibility coordinated
City of Auburn Pedestrian scaled lighting plays an important role in the streetscape
by providing a softer light and better ambiance than that typically
Duration used for automobiles The placement style details and character
of pedestrian scale lighting in concert with trees awnings and
Prepare program 9 building facades defines the streetscape As a vertical repeating months element pedestrian scale lighting narrows the streetscape for the
Implementation coordi automobile driver and with other streetscape elements creates a
nated with streetscape pedestrian zone that is separate from moving traffic
improvements over Pedestrian scale lighting is typically used in conjunction with over
phases 10 years head roadway lighting and is 12 to 14 feet in height Maintenance
requirements of lighting should be evaluated before selection
Estimated Cost Benefits Problems Solved
2000 4000 light Improves aesthetics of streetscape
Improves functional use of street by providing light spe Construction costs
depend upon street cifically intended for pedestrians
conditions and other Makes the street safer
factors Lightens dark areas for pedestrians
Adds a cohesive element to the streetscape
Coordination
This program would take place in coordination with street design
standards and streetscape improvements throughout downtown
Auburn including Auburn Way Auburn Avenue A Street SE A
Street SW NW and East and West Main Streets and in all public
parking lots Maintenance needs and staff support should be coor
dinated with the Public Works Maintenance and Operations staff
during program design and installation
Steps Required
1 Define needs survey of downtown street lighting standards
and appropriate locations
2 Prepare draft street lighting standards improvement plan
3 Construction in phases coordinated with other efforts
174 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Downtown Tree Planting Program Category
Street trees are another key element which will improve the over Policies Regulations and
all character of downtown Auburn A repeating vertical element Programs
that helps to define the street trees also increase property values
while adding to the attractiveness of businesses and adding to the Responsibility
overall cohesiveness of the downtown streetscapes A comprehen City of Auburn sive tree planting program should include extensive planning and
preparation to minimize long term costs and maintenance and to Duration maximize benefit to the downtown Specific attention should be
given to selecting low maintenance species identifying situations Prepare program
where ground covers vines or shrubs are more appropriate than g months trees and using design and construction techniques that provide a
healthy environment for root growth thus reducing the chance Implementation
for damage to surrounding hard surfaces coordinated with
Benefits Problems Solved streetscape improve
Aesthetically pleasing trees provide variety while enhanc meets
ing and unifying downtown character Estimated Cost
Shade in summer cools the air
Trees have educational value to younger people Parks Planning and
Public Works Depart
Trees help clean the air and soak up stormwater ments Staff time to
Trees soften the urban environment implement and maintain
Coordination
A street tree program should be implemented in coordination with
the street lighting program street design standards and streetscape
improvements A street tree program would be implemented over
time in coordination with public and private development
1 Research issues of cost and maintenance associated with a
street tree program
2 Identify potential locations for trees and or other vegeta
tion
3 Prepare street tree plan
4 Planning Commission review and recommendations
5 City Council review and adoption
6 Implement in phases over time
1 6 Implementation Strategy 175
May 2001
CategorY Downtown Art Program
Policies Regulations and The 1990 Downtown Design Master Plan explained the role of
Programs public art
Responsibility Public art can do much more than merely provide urban decora
civic revitalization l i l i e n ro ntegra tion It can play a larger more
City of Auburn Public art can make us more aware of our surroundings reinforce
the design character of our streets parks and buildings commemo
Duration rate special events provide useful information and helps us to
understand who we are and what is special about our commu
Prepare program nity
9 months This project would be an expansion of the existing City Art Pro
Implementation gram which has placed art downtown and throughout the City
Up to 10 years coordi The expanded program will identify opportunities to integrate pub
nated with streetscape lic art into buildings streets landscapes and large scale infrastruc
improvements Tra n sit ture projects
Center and other Benefits Problems Solved
projects Enhances public space and create opportunities for social
Estimated Cost interaction and cultural enrichment
1 of individual capital Helps address downtown identity problem
projects budgets plus Coordination
additional funding for This program will be coordinated with downtown streetscape
special projects improvements the Transit Center the Grade Separation and the
Medical Center as well as parking garages and other new devel
opments
Steps Required
1 Arts Commission develops Downtown Work Program
including an implementation process
i h me ases over t 2 Implement in p
F
1P
1
176 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Enforcement of Policies and Codes Category
Improved enforcement of proposed policies and codes in down Policies Regulations and
town Auburn can help to ensure that needed improvements take Programs
place and correct existing enforcement needs Responsibility Benefits Problems Solved
City of Auburn
More code enforcement staff would help to ensure that
implementation of the downtown plan is taking place Duration
Develop and implement a continuum of response from Ongoing
advice or warning up to legal action
Estimated Cost Coordination
The role of code enforcement staff is to ensure correct Staff salary cost
implementation of the downtown plan
Steps Required
1 City Council ongoing approval and budget allocation
2 Hire additional code enforcement staff
177
1 6 Implementation Strategy
May 2001
t
Category Designate Downtown as an Urban
Policies Regulations and Center
Programs The City of Auburn may wish to have downtown designated an
Responsibility Urban Center in King County s County Wide Planning Policies
To designate downtown an Urban Center estimated growth tar
City of Auburn gets for housing and employment must be established and down
town would need to comply with King County criteria for Urban
Duration Center designation
Ongoing Benefits Problems Solved
Estimated Cost Having downtown Auburn designated as an Urban Cen
ter makes it eligible for funding for downtown projects and
Staff salary cost implementation
Can strengthen downtown by requiring it to meet growth
targets for population and employment
Coordination
Could be coordinated through economic development staff
Steps Required
1 Establish housing and employment growth targets
2 Identify how to comply with King County criteria
3 Make formal request to PSRC for Urban Center designa
tion
1
L
7 IJ
1 78 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
F
I Downtown Parking Strategy
A parking strategy is recommended for downtown Auburn to as
sist in redeveloping a more efficient and active downtown A 1996
Parking Study for downtown Auburn found that two strategies
would improve parking in downtown Auburn providing shared
parking opportunities and reducing parking requirements
Many individual surface parking lots serve individual uses and
establishments within downtown Auburn Costly and inefficient
because of their expansive use of land surface parking lots should
be studied to determine where shared parking could take place
particularly near the retail core and the Transit Center
Additionally public private partnerships could be formed to de
velop parking structures Potential locations for shared parking
structures have been identified in this plan Acquiring property
designing and constructing parking garages could be initiated by
the City Developers could obtain required parking spaces in down
town by participating in a Local Improvement District LID to
contribute toward the costs of a nearby parking structure
Benefits Problems Solved
Shared parking and parking structures are a more efficient
use of land and resources
Shared parking and parking structures help make an ac
tive downtown
Surface parking lots are costly and inefficient because of
their expansive use of land
Coordination
Could be coordinated through economic development staff
Steps Required
1 Explore shared parking concept with potential private partners
2 Determine major costs including land acquisition
demolition and construction
3 Investigate funding sources such as Local Improvement
Districts LIDs and management approaches such as a
parking authority
4 Prepare a parking strategy
5 Planning Commission review and recommendation
Category
Policies Regulations and
Programs
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Duration
Ongoing
Estimated Cost
Staff time for develop
ment of parking strategy
Construction costs to be
determined
6 City Council review and adoption
7 Implement in phases over time
1 6 Implementation Strategy 179
May 2001
1
Category Historic Preservation
Policies Regulations and Preservation of historic buildings in downtown will help to main
Programs tain its unique scale and character To accomplish this historic
preservation planning should include completion of a downtown
Responsibility building inventory and prioritization for landmarking or restora
City of Auburn tion inclusion of historic data in the permit tracking database
providing information to property owners about financial incen
Duration tives and technical assistance for restoring their properties and
developing design standards that encourage restoration of origi
Plan 2 years neigh nal facades and that protect historic buildings and residential neigh
Implementation On borhoods from inappropriate renovations or construction Coor
programs will dinating these efforts with economic development programs will
going going going improve their efficacy Preparation of a historic preservation plan
Estimated Cost would pull all the many efforts together
Benefits
Staff time
Plan 50 000
Preserves history of Auburn
Maintains unique character of downtown
Improves condition of existing buildings and housing stock
Problems Solved
Careful evaluation saves valuable historic buildings that
might otherwise be destroyed
Poor maintenance or inappropriate building changes are
corrected
Coordination
Coordination with economic development efforts is vital The in
ventory and evaluation design standards facade improvement
program and permit tracking steps should be coordinated with
the new wave of downtown development
Steps Required
1 Complete inventory of historic buildings 4 Adopt state historic building code and or
Identify priority properties to become amend existing code to allow increased
Auburn Historic Landmarks flexibility for restoration of historic build
2 Provide inventory and technical assis
tance information to property owners
3 Prepare design standards
ings
5 Input historic information into permit track
ing system and SEPA process
6 Prepare comprehensive Historic Preserva
tion Plan
1
11
1
1
180 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Main Street and Auburn Way Category
Intersection Improvements Transportation Street
Improvements
Intersection improvements planned for Auburn Way and Main
Street are part of the larger Auburn Way street improvements Responsibility project Proposed improvements include adding textured pave
ment and narrowing the Main Street intersection by using corner City of Auburn
bulbs A split phase signal to accommodate left turns from Main
onto Auburn Way should be explored Duration
Benefits Problems Solved
One construction season
Helps unify Main Street to east and west of Auburn Way
Left turns from Main onto Auburn Way accommodated Estimated Cost
by split phase signal 200 000
Alerts drivers to the fact that they are in downtown
Coordination
This project will be coordinated with the Auburn Way improve
ments project
Steps Required
1 Prepare downtown street standards
2 Include and prioritize project in the Capital Facilities Plan
CFP and 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program
TIP
3 Secure funding
4 Design project
5 Prepare final cost estimate
6 Construct project
1
n
1
1 6 Implementation Strategy 181
May 2001
1
I
Category Cross Street Improvements
Transportation Street
rovements Im
Cross Street should be improved for both functional and aesthetic
Cross Street is currently an auto oriented street which reasons p
lacks pedestrian facilities including sidewalks in certain locations
Responsibility Beginning with the gateway at Auburn Way Cross Street links to
3rd Street SW and will experience increased traffic with the con
struction of the ramp and Transit Center at that link Another fac
Duration tor contributing to a need for improvements are the adjacent prop
erties which have been identified as the best locations for a hotel
conference center project and a Class A office project
One construction season The City recently received Transportation Improvement Board
Estimated Cost funding for improvements to Cross Street The 3rd Street Cross
Street project will extend from Division Street to Auburn Way
Funded at 1 6 million South It adds capacity by widening the link from the 3rd Street
Grade Separation project to Auburn Way to five lanes and includes
signal modifications Design consideration should be given to ac
cess management and improving the pedestrian environment
through pedestrian friendly features such as pedestrian lighting
and intersection pavement treatment
Benefits Problems Solved
Improved image and access to key redevelopment site
Improved safety and enhanced traffic flow through access
management
Improved pedestrian environment through placement of
lighting landscape sidewalks and textured pavers
Coordination
f h t e This project would be completed through the coordination o
Auburn Way improvements downtown street lighting program
and street tree program
Steps Required
1 Include and prioritize project in the Capital Facilities Plan
CFP and 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program
TIP
2 Secure funding
3 Design project
4 Prepare final cost estimate
5 Construct project
182 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
u
A Street NW and SW Category
A Street SW NW is planned to be improved as a minor arterial in Transportation Street
the City of Auburn Transportation Plan with a new extension be Improvements
tween 3rd NW and 15th NW thus linking downtown with the
northern retail area of the City Extension of A Street NW will Responsibility
provide a much needed continous north south route through City of Auburn
downtown and relieve some traffic pressures on C Street NW
Auburn Avenue and Auburn Way North From Main Street to 3 d
Street NW the existing A street NW will be upgraded The street Duration
is narrow in this older neighborhood location and design and re Two construction
construction work should be sensitive to the adjacent properties
A Street SW will be the front door to the Transit Center and the
seasons
street that links the Transit Center to the rest of downtown A Street Estimated Cost
SW is designed to create a loop that will connect with S Division
Street where the two streets approach the Stampede Pass line One of A St SW construction
the catalyst housing projects has also been identified on A Street SW complete Main to 3rd
A Street SW from Main south to 3rd SW was reconstructed dur Street SW except for A St
SW traffic SW and 2nd St
ing construction of the Transit Center and the 3rd Street SW Grade
000 signal 150 Separation The street is envisioned as a pedestrian oriented ur
ban street that also carries significant amounts of vehicular traffic
Pedestrian and streetscape improvements will include the recon
struction of the sidewalks inclusion of street trees plantings and
decorative lighting with utilities placed underground Gateways j should be enhanced at the intersection of A and 3rd Streets NW
and at the intersection of A and 3rd Streets SW
Improvements north of Main Street the loop portion south of 3rd
Street SW and pedestrian amenities have not yet been funded
The portion of A Street from Main Street to 141 Street NE is
1 included on the 2001 2006 Transportation Improvement Program
TIP Funding and construction of this street will be key to pro
viding access to redeveloping parts of downtown
Steps Required
Benefits Problems Solved 1 Include and prioritize
Improved investment climate project in the Capital Fa
Improved pedestrian environment and urban form cilities Plan CFP and 6
Balanced needs of vehicular traffic pedestrian safety and Year Transportation Im
ram TIP rovement Pro access and appearance and appeal of downtown g p
This project will need to be coordinated with Transit Cen 2 Secure funding
ter design and construction 3 Design project
Coordination 4 Prepare final cost estimate
3rd Street SW Grade Separation downtown gateway projects 5 Construct project
1 6 Implementation Strategy 183
May 2001
1
Category Transportation
Transportation Street Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility on West Main
Improvements
Bike and pedestrian improvements on West Main would link the
Responsibility Main Street core to West Auburn High School and the Interurban
Trail Decisions will need to be made regarding the exact location
City of Auburn and configuration of bike lanes Adding a bike lane may require
removal of one side of on street parking Existing street trees are
Duration in poor condition and have raised and buckled the sidewalk Both
1 construction season sidewalks and trees need to be replaced using a planting method
such as root barriers or structural soil that will eliminate such dam
Estimated Cost age in the future
400 000 Benefits Problems Solved
Improved safety for bicyclists and pedestrians
Improve links between downtown and other public facilities
Improve the overall non motorized transportation system
Coordination with other Projects
This project will be coordinated with Main Street C Street NW
improvements and Transit Center construction
Steps Required
1 Include and prioritize project in the Capital Facilities Plan
CFP and 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program
TIP
2 Secure funding
3 Design project
4 Prepare final cost estimate
5 Construct project
t
1
1
H
F
1
11
1
I I
1
184 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Transportation
Auburn Avenue A Street SE Streetscape Improve
ments
This project includes the design and construction of streetscape im
provements which will be implemented over time through private
development Auburn Avenue improvements will be coordinated with
the Medical Center Master Plan
A Street SE is an area that is currently underused and therefore will
likely see significant redevelopment in both the near term and long
term A Street SE currently does not meet the urban design vision for
downtown and there are no planned public capacity or safety im
provements for this street Streetscape improvements would include
creation of a planting strip and the reconstruction of the sidewalk in
the setback area Street trees for A Street SE should be selected to fit
under the power lines while still providing a prominent tree canopy
The City needs to prepare a specific streetscape design plan to ensure
that these improvements are implemented as private properties along
A Street SE redevelop In general buildings should be built to the
property line however a 10 building setback or easement may be
required along private property to gain additional space for streetscape
improvements
Benefits
Brings this key street into accord with
the Downtown Urban Design Vision
Street more pedestrian friendly
Problems Solved
Improves downtown image and helps
revitalize this currently under used area
in the core of downtown
Balances needs of vehicular traffic pe
destrian safety and access and appear
ance and appeal of downtown
Coordination
Auburn Avenue streetscape improvements will
be coordinated with the Medical Center Mas
ter Plan All streetscape improvements will be
coordinated with downtown street design stan
dards
Category
Transportation Street
Improvements
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Duration
Streetscape Design 9
months
Implementation Ongo
ing with redevelopment
Estimated Cost
400 000
1 City Council prioritizes and allocates
budget
2 Funding sources identified
3 Project included in Capital Facilities
Plan CFP
4 Finite cost estimates provided
5 Identify project manager
6 Project design
7 Construction
Steps Required
1 6 Implementation Strategy 185
May 2001
1
Category 3rd Street SW Improvements
Transportation Street In conjunction with construction of the SR 18 C Street SW Inter
Improvements change 3rd Street SW will be improved to solidify and create an
identity for the South Central District Improvements include the
Responsibility Grade Separation public art landscaping and street lighting
City of Auburn Benefit Problems Solved
Improved traffic flow as a result of the SR 18 C Street SW
Duration Interchange and access to the Transit Center
Two construction sea Creates a natural gateway into Downtown
sons
Coordination
Estimated Cost 3rd Street SW improvements will be constructed as part of the
Funded through the Grade Separation project Amenities such as landscaping and pub
Ramp project lic art were not funded and sources for these should be sought
Design of these elements should be coordinated between the plan
ning and engineering staffs the Arts Commission and the adja
cent neighborhood
Steps Required
1 Completion of the SR 18 C Street SW Grade Separation
2 Pursue additional funding for other elements
I I
186 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
East Main Street Streetscape Category
Improvements Transportation Street
Improvements
By continuing existing Main Street improvements east of Auburn
Way East Main Street would be better linked to the downtown Responsibility
core Full Main Street treatment may not be necessary extended
facilities such as signage lighting landscaping or banners may be City of Auburn
sufficient to help make Main Street more cohesive with the im
proved section This will help increase foot traffic to businesses on Duration
the east side of Auburn Way Planning 9 months
Benefits Design and Construction
Better linkage to core from east side of downtown 1 Year
Improved retail vitality east of Main Street with increased Estimated Cost business visibility
Connection to Performing Art Center 400 000
Problems Solved
Low viability of East Main Street businesses
Coordination
This project would be coordinated with Auburn Way improve
ments
Steps Required
1 Include and prioritize project in the Capital Facilities Plan
CFP and 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program
TIP
2 Secure funding
3 Design project
4 Prepare final cost estimate
5 Construct project
1 6 Implementation Strategy 187
May 2001
F
Category
Transportation Street
Improvements
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Duration
2 years
Estimated Cost
3 000 000
Benefits Problems Solved
Auburn Way Street Improvements
Auburn Way is a key corridor and entry to downtown As a main
travel route into and through downtown Auburn Way presents a
poor impression and relates very little in form and function to the
Main Street Core Improving the aesthetics of Auburn Way is es
sential to improving downtown Auburn and to differentiating it
from the other strip development on Auburn Way outside down
town
The addition of landscaping decorative lighting widened side
walks selective center planted medians and access management
will complement the decreases over time in the height and size of
pole signs and the redevelopment of key gateway sites After these
improvements are made the unifying element will become the
landscaping decorative lighting and signage both public and pri
vate Improved building design will be accomplished over time as
the design guidelines are implemented
The project may be accomplished in 2 phases north of Main
and south of Main Street The northern half would include the
programmed improvements between 2nd and 4th Streets NE
and the Auburn Way South 4th Street NE intersection im
provements
Gateways and improvements provide
greater downtown identity
Improved aesthetics
Improved functionality and comfort for
the pedestrian
Improved investment image and cli
mate
Auburn Way will be less of a barrier to
pedestrian travel both along Auburn
Way and in crossing at East Main 2nd
Street SE and Cross Street
Some negative aspects of strip devel
opment will be alleviated
Will contribute to making Auburn Way
feel like part of downtown
Coordination
This project will incorporate elements of the
signage improvement program downtown
street design standards a downtown street light
ing program a downtown street tree program
and a downtown art program
Required Steps
1 Include and prioritize project in the
Capital Facilities Plan CFP and 6 Year
Transportation Improvement Program
TIP
2 Secure funding
3 Design project
4 Prepare final cost estimate
5 Construct project
n
n
fl
1
1
I
r
1
188 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Link East Main with Performing Arts Category
Center Public Facilities
The Performing Arts Center has the potential of being a signifi Responsibility cant pedestrian generator and destination in downtown It can be
better linked with Main Street in several ways An intensive land City of Auburn
scaping and signage program the removal of physical barriers to
the facility and a painting scheme perhaps using brighter colors Duration
could emphasize the various elements of the facility making it Planning 9 months
easily identifiable from a distance
Construction 1 season
Benefits
Improved access to Main Street businesses to and from Estimated Cost
the Performing Arts Center 500 000
Problems Solved
Corrects missing link between Main Street businesses and
the Performing Arts Center
Coordination
This project will be coordinated with the East Main Street
Streetscape Improvements and with Auburn School District
Steps Required
1 Include project in the Capital Facilities Plan CFP
2 City Council prioritizes and allocates budget
3 Secure funding
4 Prepare final cost estimate
1 6 Implementation Strategy 189
May 2001
1
1
Category Downtown Gateways Project
Public Facilities Gateways will create easily identifiable points at which people will
know they have entered downtown A cluster of trees signage or
Responsibility public art elements will function as gateways Gateway treatment
City of Auburn is needed at the following locations
East Main Street and the Performing Arts Center Auburn Way at
Duration 4th Street NE Auburn Way at 4th Street SE and railroad bridge
A Street SE and railroad bridge Auburn Avenue and 3rd Street
1 year planning and NE A Street NW and 3rd Street NW West Main Street at the
design construction over Interurban Trail and the SR 18 C Street Interchange
5 years Benefits Problems Solved
Estimated Cost Creates a sense of welcome to downtown
Planning Design Helps solve downtown identity problem
100 000 Distinguishes downtown from other neighborhoods
Construction 1 million Establishes the tone for quality downtown development over 5 years
Coordination
Downtown gateway concepts should be more fully developed
during preparation of a citywide gateways program The down
town gateways project would be implemented through the City
h d owntown e Art Program downtown streetscape improvements t
street tree program the SR 18 C Street Overpass and the Transit
Center Gateways would be coordinated with A Street NW im
provements A Street SE improvements Auburn Avenue improve
ments Auburn Way improvements and East Main Street improve
ments
oject P d f E h G t i S R eway r re or ac a equ teps
1 City Council prioritizes and allocates budget
2 Prepare citywide gateway program
3 Prioritize downtown gateways and develop concepts for
each
4 Design individual gateway projects
5 Pursue funding opportunities
n
0
190 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Housing Near Transit Center
Parcels on the east side of A Street SW have been identified as key
locations for downtown residential development in close proxim
ity to the Transit Center The City Chamber and ADA will each
play a role in attracting developers and assisting with land assem
bly Housing developments are expected to be one half block or
one full block in size with the potential for a number of individual
projects to be developed in this district in the next number of years
Benefits Problems Solved
Increased residential population in downtown Auburn con
tributes to overall revitalization
Meets market demand for downtown housing
Coordination
Local lending pool
Steps Required
1 Determine appropriate and viable uses
2 Assess purchasing acquisition options
3 Identify funding options
4 Prepare Request for Proposals RFP
5 Form public private partnership
6 Partnering attract developers
7 Design project
8 Construction
Category
Public Private Catalyst
Projects
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Private Sector
Duration
Planning 1 year
Design 1 year
Construction 1 season
Estimated Cost
Will vary with project
1 6 Implementation Strategy 191
May 2001
1
Category Truitt Building Pastime
Public Private Catalyst Redevelopment of the site formerly occupied by the Truitt Build
Projects ing and the Pastime Tavern will fill a gap in Main Street and bring
activity to the west end of the Main Street core The proximity of
Responsibility this corner site to the Transit Center will further bolster its posi
tion as a key location in Downtown and will also increase the ben
efit as these projects begin to act in concert
Private Sector This building site is found on the most significant historic block in
ration D Downtown Rehabilitating and reusing the existing building and
ld u storefront was not possible therefore construction of a new bui
Planning 1 year ing should be harmonious with the adjacent historic structures
Private development should concentrate retail uses on the first
Design 1 year floor with office residential or other compatible uses on upper
floors
Construction 1 year
Benefits Problems Solved
Estimated Cost Contributes to overall revitalization of downtown
Will vary depending on Brings activity to west end of Main Street retail area
scale of project Fills gap in Main Street retail
Provides more intense land use near Transit Center and
Main Street
Coordination
Local lending pool
Steps Required
1 Work with developer of Truitt Pastime Tavern site to as
sure new building design will fit with historic character of
Downtown
2 Coordinate design with Sound Transit s adjacent Kiss and
Ride facility
192 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Hotel Conference Center
The Downtown Market Analysis identified the potential for a ho
tel with small conference facilities to be developed in downtown
Auburn near SR 18 Visibility and convenient freeway access are
key to the success of a hotel facility Also a sizable site is required
to meet the needs of the hotel and accompanying parking Sites
on the west side of Auburn Way near the Cross Street intersection
would be appropriate for the hotel project and when combined
with public street and gateway improvements would greatly im
prove the appearance of the southern entrance to downtown
Benefits Problem Solved
Creates gateway project
Presents quality development
Provides conference center
Provides secondary positive economic impact to downtown
Coordination
Local lending pool Auburn Downtown Association Chamber of
Commerce
Steps Required
1 Identify potential users and developers and their needs
2 Explore ways to involve existing property owners and
aggregate parcels
3 Prepare project package which illustrates site potentials
identifies constraints and local incentives
4 Circulate project package among potential investors
1
1
1
r
Category
Public Private Catalyst
Projects
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Chamber of Commerce
Auburn Downtown
Association
Private Sector
Duration
2 year planning design
1 year construction
Estimated Cost
Staff time Economic
Development Coordina
tor and Planning staff
10 000 to prepare
project package
Private development
costs unknown at this
point
1 6 Implementation Strategy 193
May 2001
t
Category Class A Office Development
Public Private Catalyst The Downtown Market Analysis identified the demand for Class
Projects A office space in Downtown Like the hotel sites on the west side
of Auburn Way near the intersection with Cross Street are appro
Responsibility priate and easy to access Many other sites within the downtown
core would also be viable Class A Office development sites
City of Auburn
Chamber of Commerce The ownership patterns in downtown Auburn frequently result in
contiguous small parcels under multiple ownership This can pose
Auburn Downtown an obstacle to site assembly that would allow for a larger develop
Association ment that is financially feasible The City may have a role to play
Private Sector in site assembly to help aggregate contiguous parcels into a suffi
cient land area to facilitate its development whether for Class A
Duration office space or for other development
Planning Design 1 Benefits Problems Solved
year Assists in overall revitalization of downtown
Construction 1 year Meets projected demand for Class A office space
Improves downtown image possibly on a key gateway site
Estimated Cost Coordination
Staff time plus 10 000 Could potentially be catalyst project
to prepare project pack
age
Steps Required
1 Identify potential users and developers and their needs
2 Identify potential locations for projects
3 Analyze site assembly needs Determine if City should
undertake a role in site assembly
4 Prepare project package which illustrates site potentials
identifies constraints and local incentives
5 Circulate project package among potential census and
investors
6 Coordination with local lending pool
1
194 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Infill Project on the Corner of Safeway Category
Site Public Private Catalyst
This project would entail the development of a portion of the Projects Proj
Safeway parking lot on the corner of 2nd Street SE and Auburn Responsibility Way City of Auburn Auburn
Benefit Downtown Association
Adds land use intensity and building presence in strip Chamber of Commerce
area Private Sector
Problems Solved Duration
Makes Safeway more pedestrian oriented Planning Recruitment
Improve visual quality of Safeway area 1 yea r
Coordination Design and Construction
Coordination would take place with Auburn Way improvements 1 year
and the local lending pool Estimated Cost
Steps Required Economic Development
1 Prepare concepts and incentives for site and Planning Depart
2 Contact Safeway ment Staff time
3 Recruit developer
1 6 Implementation Strategy 195
May 2001
1
Category
Public Private Catalyst
Projects
Responsibility
City of Auburn Auburn
Downtown Association
Chamber of Commerce
Private Sector
Duration
Planning Recruit Ten
ant 1 year
Design 1 year
Construction 1 season
Estimated Cost
Will vary depending on
scale of project
JC Penney Building Redevelopment
The vacantJC Penney Building presents a major gap in the retail
district both physically and psychologically as vacancies in the
retail district can create the impression of decline even when the
rest of the district is healthy Public and private actions which could
stimulate the redevelopment of the building include City or an
other party s guarantee of a 2nd floor lease which would enable
the current owner to secure financing use of CDBG funds for
renovation and the City or other parties such as local business
owners purchasing the building or a partial share in the building
Facade renovations are also needed to make the building appear
ance more palatable Additional parking will be necessary to meet
the needs of this and other businesses in the vicinity A shared
public private parking structure should be considered to meet these
needs
Benefits Problems Solved
Occupancy of Penney s building contributes to overall re
vitalization of downtown
Potentially brings retail anchor to downtown Auburn
Steps Required
1 Determine purchase redevelopment approach
2 Identify future uses
3 Identify public incentives
4 Identify future tenants
1
E
1
n
r
1
1
r
196 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
1
Destination Uses on East Main
East Main Street between Auburn Way and the Performing Arts
Center has a scarcity of businesses or activities that draw the pe
destrian or even many visitors This is intensified by the psycho
logical barrier created by the heavy traffic and width of Auburn
Way Streetscape improvements have been recommended to im
prove the aesthetic experience when travelling this area by foot
bicycle or car New businesses that create new life on this stretch
of Main Street and serve the needs of visitors to the very active
Performing Arts Center and Auburn Family Sports Center are criti
cally needed These might include restaurants ice cream parlors
and other businesses complementary to the existing uses
Benefit
Increases overall vitality of downtown Auburn
Problems Solved
Creates opportunity for an entire evening out experi
ence on this end of Main Street
Improves weak retail on east Main Street
Coordination
Economic development staff should coordinate potential projects
with the Performing Arts Center
Steps Required
1 Identify potential users and developers and their needs
2 Prepare project package which illustrates site potentials
identifies constraints and local incentives
3 Circulate project package among potential census and in
vestors
Category
Public Private Catalyst
Projects
Responsibility
City of Auburn
Private Sector
Auburn Downtown
Association
Chamber of Commerce
Duration
1 year
Estimated Cost
Economic Development
and Planning staff time
1 6 Implementation Strategy 197
May 2001
1
Category Revitalize Block Across from City Hall
Public Private Catalyst The block across Main Street from City Hall should be upgraded
Projects either by facade improvements and stronger tenants or through
redevelopment The proximity of this block to the Transit Center
Responsibility will make it a highly desirable location for transit oriented devel
Cit of Auburn y opment Such an upgrade will help create a stronger downtown
core
Private Sector Benefits
Duration Help in overall revitalization of downtown
1 year Fills in missing piece in Main Street
Estimated Cost Problems Solved
Improves weak retail district west of Auburn Ave A Street
Planning Economic
Development staff time Coordination
This project would be coordinated by new economic development
staff and with the Civic Center Master Plan
Steps Required
1 Identify potential users and developers and their needs
2 Prepare project package which illustrates site potentials
identifies constraints and local incentives
3 Circulate project package among potential investors
1
r
1
1
198 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Tavern Block Redevelopment
Public comment indicates that redevelopment of the block imme
diately to the east of City Hall the tavern block is a top priority
for Auburn citizens The four taverns break up the retail district
Many Auburn residents also perceive this block as unsafe par
ticularly at night The removal of the taverns and subsequent re
development of this block is a critical step in revitalizing down
town Auburn A mixed use development on half or all of this block
would establish the retail link that is currently missing provide
space for offices and improve the appearance and function of Main
Street and Auburn Avenue Medical uses or future City facilities
are both possibilities Implementation of this project may require
public sector assistance such as purchasing properties and or busi
nesses or providing incentives for a third party to purchase the
tavern block to facilitate its redevelopment or assistance with the
provision of parking Business relocation assistance may also be a
project component
Benefits
Critical step in revitalizing downtown Auburn
Problems Solved
Safety issues and negative perception about downtown
Coordination
Medical Center master plan link Main Street to Medical Center
joint parking facility local lending pool
Steps Required
1 City Council prioritizes and allocates budget
2 Determination of appropriate and viable uses
3 Assess purchasing acquisition options
4 Identify funding options
5 Prepare Request for Proposals RFP
6 Form public private partnership
7 Design project
8 Construction
Category
Public Private Catalyst
Projects
Responsibility
City of Auburn Private
Sector
Duration
1 year planning design
1 year construction
Estimated Cost
9 000 000
2 floors medical office
over retail
1 6 Implementation Strategy 199
May 2001
1
r
1
1
1
1
r
L
C
1
200 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
r v Rr 4i S Eav Fj r r a v cwas Y u crpw j fi
Part Two
3P f ase
Environmental Summary Analysis
of Alternatives
I
Section 2 1 Introduction and
Background
Section 2 1 Introduction and
Background
The City of Auburn proposes to adopt a Downtown Plan to serve
as a subarea plan to the City s adopted Growth Management Act
GMA Comprehensive Plan The Downtown Plan provides
analysis goals and policies to manage change in Auburn s
downtown over the next 20 years and provides the framework to
guide and promote the redevelopment economic revitalization
and a high quality of life in the Auburn Downtown and the balance
of the community
The City of Auburn is considering two 2 alternatives in the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement DEIS 1 the No Action
alternative and 2 the Downtown Plan alternative Both
alternatives are similar in that they are consistent with the GMA
and have strategies to address downtown redevelopment and
revitalization The Downtown Plan alternative however outlines
and details a much more comprehensive and coordinated
redevelopment strategy It identifies historical constraints and
impediments to economic revitalization and from there identifies
and articulates solutions and strategies This DEIS analyzes the
probable impacts upon the environment resulting from the
adoption of the City s Downtown Plan and uses the No Action
alternative as a basis for comparison
The Downtown Plan is presented as an integrated State
Environmental Policy Act Growth Management Act SEPA GMA
document It integrates environmental protection measures under
SEPA with the broader planning requirements under the GMA
Part 3 represents the primary DEIS portion of the integrated
document although in certain areas it relies heavily on information
contained in Part 1 the Downtown Plan and does not repeat that
information To this extent the DEIS and Downtown Plan are
truly integrated as the description of existing conditions and
analysis in the Downtown Plan is referenced and integrated into
the EIS section Further the planning process was integrated with
the environmental analysis process
In using this integrated format this document should serve as an
excellent economic development and marketing tool The
Downtown Plan and accompanying environmental review is
sufficiently detailed to expedite certain project review elements
for those projects consistent with the Downtown Plan and
environmental analysis Furthermore this document provides
2 1 Introduction and Backround 201
May 2001
1
the general public with a better understanding of development
and environmental impacts in the subarea and how these impacts
will be mitigated If public awareness is enhanced and
development applications are expedited on the basis of this
environmental review approach then elements of uncertainty time
delay and risk have been reduced from the development review
process
The DEIS is intended to address critical questions such as
How can the Downtown Plan be implemented over the
planning period
Does the proposal recognize environmental constraints and
opportunities
How much growth can the downtown accommodate
What are appropriate ways to preserve community
character
How does the opening of Stampede Pass affect the
Downtown
Therefore the Downtown Plan alternative sets forth goals and
policies that address the issues listed above as well as others that
have emerged The DEIS s purpose is to evaluate the draft plan s
environmental constraints and opportunities identify appropriate
mitigation measures and provide opportunities for public comment
in the decision making process
It has been determined that the proposal may have a significant
adverse environmental impact upon the environment and that the
EIS process will address these issues in accordance with SEPA
In August 1998 the City of Auburn issued a Determination of
Significance DS and request for comments on the scope of the
EIS The scoping process included public notification of affected
agencies and request for public input on the particular issues that
should be addressed in the EIS
J
1
1
1
f
1
1
202 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
What does this Draft Environmental Im
pact Statement DEIS contain
The City of Auburn Downtown Plan is a non project action WAC
197 11 442 Therefore this DEIS presents qualitative and
quantitative analysis of environmental impacts as appropriate to
the scope of the proposal and the level of planning For the draft
Downtown Plan the level of detail addressed by the
environmental analysis is broad with many of the impacts
described on a downtown wide level indicating very general
environmental impacts but in most cases not providing precise
measurements of those impacts
The following is a description of each major EIS section of this
document
Part 2 Environmental Summary Analysis of
Alternatives
Besides this introduction and background Part 2 also includes a
summary that provides an overview of the Downtown Plan This
includes a description of the alternatives and summary discussion
of impacts and mitigation
Part 3 Environmental Analysis
Part 3 evaluates the two alternatives 1 The No Action
alternative which represents the existing policies and development
regulations and 2 The Downtown Plan alternative Per SEPA
the discussion is organized by Built and Natural elements of
the environment The Built environment section assesses
development and infrastructure such as land use and
transportation The Natural environment section identifies and
describes elements of the natural environment likely to be affected
by the plan
The DEIS generally evaluates policies and proposals in the
Downtown Plan that could have probable significant adverse
impacts upon the environment and then analyzes these probable
impacts Mitigation measures to reduce or alleviate probable
impacts are identified If an adverse environmental impact cannot
be mitigated to a level of non significance it is identified as an
unavoidable adverse impact
2 1 Introduction and Backround 203
May 2001
I
I
1
fl
l
1
E
1
1
7
204 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Section 2 2 Scope of the DEIS
Section 2 3 Significant Areas of
1 Controversy
Section 2 4 Issues to be Resolved
Section 2 5 Concise Analysis
Description of Alternatives
Section 2 2 Scope of the DEIS
The integrated Downtown Plan DEIS Scope was determined in
accordance with the scoping process identified in WAC 197 11
408 Specifically in August 1998 the City of Auburn issued a
scoping notice for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DEIS Based upon the existing conditions in the study area and
on the availability of existing environmental documents the City
of Auburn determined that a limited scope EIS would be prepared
Elements of the environment scoped in the notice included air
quality environmental health noise land and shoreline use
specifically land use and aesthetics and transportation
movement circulation of people or goods As part of the scoping
process the DEIS scope was revised to include water water runoff
including stormwater management and historical and cultural
preservation
Several existing environmental documents provide information
on the affected environment and analysis of environmental impacts
associated with potential or actual development within the city
and in some cases the Downtown in particular These existing
documents include
City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan DEIS and FEIS
March 1986 and May 1996
SuperMall of the Great Northwest Draft Supplemental EIS
June 1992
Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack DEIS March 1993
DEIS for the Auburn North CBD Analysis November
1991
Environmental Classification Summary SR 18 C Street
Interchange April 1996
Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment EA for the
South Corridor Commuter Rail Project November 1997
and
Tacoma to Seattle Commuter Rail Environmental
Assessment EA June 1998
2 2 Scope of the DEIS 205
May 2001
E
t
7
1
I J
0
1
206 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Section 23 Significant Areas of
Controversy and Uncertainty
I There are no significant areas of controversy and uncertainty
1
L
1
II
v
2 3 Significant Areas of Controversy 207
May 2001
1
t
F
1
n
n
1
i
1
t
1
1
208 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
I Section 2 4 Issues to be Resolved
I There are no major issues to be resolved
n
1
1
u
1
2 4 Issues to be Resolved 209 I May 2001
u
1
F
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
210 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS 1
Section 2 5 Concise Analysis
Description of Alternatives
This DEIS evaluates two alternatives 1 The No Action
alternative and 2 the Downtown Plan alternative The following
generally analyzes and describes each alternative
No Action Alternative
The No Action alternative is the current comprehensive plan
zoning regulation other development regulations and downtown
revitalization efforts Under this alternative the existing
comprehensive plan designations and zoning will be maintained
The Auburn downtown is primarily though not exclusively zoned
for commercial use Residential uses are present and allowed in
the study area A few industrial areas exist as well
Main Street continues to be the focal point of Downtown Auburn s
retail activity Single family residential neighborhoods are
predominant to the west of the BNSF railroad tracks as well as
east of Auburn Way Medical uses and the hospital are prominent
along Auburn Avenue A new commuter rail station with a transit
center is located just south of West Main Street along the BNSF
Railroad mainline
The No Action alternative is a viable option The existing
comprehensive plan and development regulations population and
employment projections are consistent and compliant with the
Growth Management Act GMA King County Countywide
Planning Policies and Vision 2020 The City of Auburn
Comprehensive Plan includes downtown plan policies that provide
general policy direction for downtown redevelopment The zoning
code provides for uses and development standards in the downtown
area many of which are aimed toward achieving pedestrian friendly
building design and orientation However under the No Action
alternative only a portion of the downtown would maintain C 2
Central Business District zoning much of the downtown planning
area would remain zoned C 3 Heavy Commercial Efforts at
encouraging downtown redevelopment are on going This includes
the work of organizations such as the Auburn Downtown
Association the City of Auburn and the Chamber of Commerce
however a comprehensive and detailed strategy is not laid out in
existing plan documents
Those development proposals not exempt under SEPA would
2 5 Concise Analysis Description of Alternatives 211
May 2001
continue to be reviewed for environmental impacts on a case by
case basis Applicable transportation and stormwater standards
would be required of development
Downtown Plan Alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative is reflected in this document It
provides a much stronger level of analysis and focus on Auburn s
downtown with the goal of stimulating development and
redevelopment more actively than the No Action alternative
Through the planning process ideas have been generated that
identify impediments and allows for strategic redevelopment
efforts Many ideas that have been verbally discussed over time
to improve downtown are now outlined into a cohesive document
with estimates of costs and time Specific redevelopment barriers
are identified along with solutions to remove the barriers Catalyst
projects to spur redevelopment are identified In addition the
Downtown Plan has a much stronger emphasis on business
financing assistance public private partnerships and downtown s
visual appearance than the No Action alternative
Because of the Downtown Plan s emphasis on revitalization a
higher level of intensity development will likely occur than under
the No Action alternative Intensification of land use is a goal
of the plan Buildings are allowed to be taller than in the No
Action alternative However much of the downtown planning
area is downzoned from Heavy Commercial C 3 to Central
Business District C 2 to assure appropriate land uses namely
those pedestrian oriented retail service and office uses rather than
auto oriented are located downtown
Specific strategies are outlined in the Downtown Plan alternative
to accomplish redevelopment More flexibility in addressing
certain development requirements namely in transportation and
storm water are provided The Downtown Plan alternative also
places additional emphasis on aesthetics and appearance of the
downtown area as both a redevelopment strategy and to mitigate
impacts Stronger code enforcement is promoted to remove
nuisances and blighting influences Sensitivity of new development
to historic resources is emphasized as is the role of public art in
promoting a more desirable environment for people to work and
shop More pedestrian connections and pedestrian oriented
development are foreseen This will encourage additional
pedestrian activity within and outside of the downtown area and
will reduce the reliance on vehicular transportation Bicycle routes
and use are also encouraged
f
212 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
1
1
i
Section 2 6 Summary of Impacts
I Section 2 6 Summary of Impacts
The following summarizes impacts of the two alternatives based
on elements of the environment scoped for this DEIS
2 6 1 No Action Alternative
Land Use
Under this alternative the existing plan designations and zoning
will be maintained This includes the existing downtown land use
policies in the Comprehensive Plan as well as other policies related
to downtown throughout the plan document Existing zoning
designations include
Single Family Residential R 2
Two Family Residential R 3
High Density Residential R 4
Residential Office R O
Residential Office Hospital RO H
Light Commercial C 1
Central Business C 2
Heavy Commercial C 3
Light Industrial M 1
Heavy Industrial M 2
Public Use P
Institutional I
Downtown Auburn is primarily though not exclusively zoned
for commercial use Residential uses are allowed throughout the
study area with the exception of certain industrial areas Main
Street continues to be the focal point of retail trade in Downtown
Auburn Single family residential neighborhoods exist west of the
BNSF railroad tracks as well as east of Auburn Way Medical
uses and the hospital are predominant land uses along Auburn
Avenue
Under the No Action alternative development and
2 6 Summary of Impacts 213
May 2001
redevelopment will likely continue as it has in the past Generally
this will mean a slow progression toward redevelopment of the
downtown without a comprehensive needs analysis and
implementation strategy Under this scenario much new business
in downtown will result from the turnover of businesses within
existing buildings rather than from new construction Many
strategies that have traditionally been discussed to improve
downtown will likely not be implemented due to a lack of overall
prioritization of efforts amongst stakeholders
Scale and Character of Development
Under the No Action alternative the scale and character of
development is anticipated to change incrementally over the next
twenty years While existing zoning in the downtown generally
allows four story buildings and provides incentives to limit on site
parking the predominant downtown development pattern within
the commercial areas is one and two story buildings NOTE The
Residential Office Hospital District RO H allows a maximum
building height of 65 feet New development that has occurred
has provided on site parking resulting in large paved areas and an
inefficient use of land in the downtown From a practical
standpoint the development pattern results in lower intensity of
development than could be achieved under current zoning
Impediments to new development related to parking and
stormwater management would mean that tenant turnover within
existing buildings would be more prevalent than new development
buildings
Also much of the planning area would retain C 3 Heavy
Commercial zoning under this alternative It is possible that
these areas might be developed by certain automobile related uses
incompatible with the downtown vision
Transportation Circulation
The No Action alternative while concentrating growth in the
urban growth area consistent with the GMA does tend to disperse
housing employment and other land uses throughout the City in
a pattern that can be served most efficiently by the automobile
As a result maintaining the current land use plans policies and
practices is expected to support the continued growth in automobile
traffic and deterioration of travel conditions on Auburn roadways
The traffic model results prepared for the Downtown Plan indicate
that traffic congestion will become more severe and widespread
than it currently is even with completion of the proposed roadway
214 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS 1
improvements Residents and employees throughout the City will
experience more delays and less reliable travel times as area
roadways reach their physical capacity Level of service LOS for
transportation facilities would be subject to the requirements of
the existing comprehensive plan In downtown this is generally
LOS D
Bicycle use and pedestrian use would be encouraged in accordance
with the city s adopted 1998 Nonmotorized Transportation Plan
which is city wide in scope Efforts to better link the Interurban
Trail with downtown along Main Street would continue Still the
Nonmotorized Transportation Plan deferred to the Downtown Plan
which was being prepared soon after to address specific details
about nonmotorized transportation in the downtown area
Off street parking in the downtown would be required on a case
by case development basis In this respect off street parking
requirements would continue to be an impediment to economic
development and revitalization in downtown Many parcels in
downtown Auburn are small making it difficult for developers to
efficiently satisfy parking requirements due to land costs and
ownership patterns that divides blocks into many small parcels
Code provisions to reduce parking requirements in the CBD do
exist but these code requirements have not in themselves
significantly resulted in the removal of this impediment
Rail traffic in the downtown consists of the Union Pacific and
Burlington Northern Santa Fe BNSF railways The Union Pacific
railway is at the western edge of the Downtown area while the
BNSF railway is within the downtown core Sound Transit uses
the BNSF tracks for its commuter rail service BNSF s recent
opening of Stampede Pass has resulted in increased train traffic
Downtown and more traffic delays at crossing locations due to the
length of the railroad cars and the slow speed at which they will be
required to travel
Historic Preservation
The City of Auburn contracts with King County for historic
preservation services This would continue under the No Action
alternative While there is recognition of the historic nature of
the community and Downtown Auburn the small contract would
not allow an aggressive effort to inventory historic resources nor
to promote compatibility between new development and historic
structures With the No Action alternative design standards
would not be in place to protect historic resources or the historic
character of buildings
1
12 6 Summary of Impacts 215
May 2001
u
City historic preservation policies would generally be guided by
Chapter 10 of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan entitled Historic
Preservation Chapter 10 includes eight historic preservation
policies only one of which HP 5 specifically references the
Downtown HP 5 states that future development in the downtown
area should be sensitive to the character of surrounding buildings
and the historical context of the area It adds that modifications to
existing buildings shall consider the incorporation or restoration
of historic architectural features
Storm Water Management
Traditional methods of stormwater management would be required
For example a preferred technique for storm drainage treatment
is biofiltration using methods such as grass lined swales This
would be an impediment to downtown redevelopment since
biofiltration techniques typically require more land area than is
practically available in the downtown area given its relatively small
blocks and parcels It would also be visually inappropriate
Also current City practice is to prefer retention systems when soil
conditions are suitable for such application however soil and
groundwater conditions in the Downtown Plan Study Area are
generally not conducive for retention systems except in some
eastern portions If a detention system is used for runoff control
the City s preferred method of storage is parking lot ponding or
an open pond This too is not conducive to downtown
revitalization
These limitations tend to discourage downtown redevelopment
Air Quality
Air quality in the downtown would likely gradually worsen due to
the overall increase in air pollutants on a regional level New
development in the downtown core would generate additional
traffic in the downtown and presumably more air quality impacts
Downtown would likely not be developed as a pedestrian friendly
area so reliance on the automobile would be the likely form of
travel to and within downtown There would be more airborne
dust from construction projects
Noise
The primary sources of noise would likely be traffic vehicular
and passenger freight trains and construction activity Street work
projects commercial heating and cooling systems and emergency
vehicle activity also contribute to noise downtown
C
t
216 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
These noises especially train traffic noise can create annoyance
and speech interference during the day and to a lesser extent during
the evening Noise will particularly affect residential and office
uses as well as schools
2 6 2 Downtown Plan Alternative
Land Use
The Downtown Plan alternative results in an increased focus on
mixed use development downtown Areas where mixed use
development would be encouraged would be expanded outward
from Main Street particularly to the south toward SR 18 and west
toward Sound Transit s Transit Center
A significant part of the planning area would be rezoned from C
3 Heavy Commercial to C 2 Central Business District This
would eliminate the possibility of automobile intensive uses to
locate in the downtown area that tend to conflict with pedestrian
movement It would also subject a larger area to pedestrian oriented
guidelines and development standards commonly associated with
a central business district
Cultural and entertainment activities and uses are encouraged Uses
and activities that provide more liveliness to the downtown after
typical business hours are also strongly encouraged in the
downtown
New residential development in downtown is desired in the
Downtown Plan alternative again by encouraging mixed use
Increasing the downtown residential population is a goal expressed
in the Downtown Plan Existing residential neighborhoods within
the downtown would be maintained and protected from higher
intensity development Efforts to promote and enhance the
residential character of certain residential neighborhoods are
pursued through design guidelines and policies seeking to protect
less intensive residential uses from incompatible uses
The Downtown Plan alternative also identifies and acknowledges
the presence of other specific districts including the Medical Center
a Business Park Light Industrial district Auburn Way district and
a Transit Center district
Scale and Character of Development
The permitted density and intensity of downtown development
would be greater than that of the No Action alternative The
key difference between the No Action and the DowAtown Plan
2 6 Summary of Impacts 217
May 2001
1
alternatives is that the Downtown Plan alternative provides for
a number of development incentives As it relates to scale and
character of development specifically this includes a performance
based building height requirement In other words there is no
specific maximum height requirement in the downtown area
however certain performance techniques are required to ensure
quality building design and building height to street width ratios
This assists developers by making projects more economically
viable through the provision of additional floor space while still
ensuring that the development satisfies quality building design
principles
As noted the Downtown Plan also features design guidelines and
recommends that design and streetscape standards be be developed
and adopted to mitigate impacts associated with greater
development intensity and density Public art and other pedestrian
amenities are also key components of the Downtown Plan These
components will affect the appearance and character of downtown
Auburn see discussion of aesthetics below
In addition the Downtown Plan alternative promotes greater
participation from the City of Auburn as a partner in catalyst
projects The Downtown Plan alternative proposes
redevelopment of the Tavern Block the Truitt Pastime sites a
mixed use project adjacent to the Transit Center gateway
treatments at the north and south points of entry to the downtown
and the development of joint city private sector parking structures
With these catalyst efforts there is greater potential for new
commercial and mixed use development in the downtown than
with the No Action alternative
Off street parking requirements would be addressed by parking
garages This would eliminate the need for smaller individual
parking lots provided on a case by case basis Land area that
might typically be devoted to parking lots could be used for
buildings or amenities
Aesthetics
The Downtown Plan alternative places a strong and maintained
emphasis on physical design and aesthetics through the inclusion
of design guidelines that address issues such as site planning and
layout building design streetscape features and other site elements
More specifically these guidelines address issues such as but not
limited to building height facade modulation parking building
orientation signage utility equipment screening roof forms site
furnishings and street trees and landscaping
218 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Building and streetscape design standards are recommended for
adoption and are intended to improve the appearance and
character of downtown Further as mentioned earlier public art
and gateway treatments are concepts advanced in the Downtown
Plan to improve the quality and appearance of the Downtown
Means of implementing a facade improvement program will be
investigated
Code enforcement to remove blighting influences and nuisances
would also be aggressively pursued to improve both the appearance
and the development climate of downtown
Transportation Circulation
Under the Downtown Plan alternative the policies would allow
for a change to the level of service standard in the downtown area
The Downtown Plan alternative accepts a lower level of service
in the downtown than elsewhere in the city This is intended to
promote a vibrant downtown that focuses on improved pedestrian
accessibility It also acknowledges that downtowns do tend to have
greater congestion than other parts of the city Generally the
overall average level of service in downtown is proposed to be
E except along certain corridors that must maintain the current
City LOS standard LOS D When determining if the average
LOS of E can be maintained no three consecutive intersections
on a corridor can be level of service F
A traffic accounting system is proposed to ensure that the
development is consistent with the development densities proposed
in the plan Development densities will be monitored and
accounted for during the project review process to ensure that
development will not exceed allotted densities
In terms of other transportation modes the Downtown Plan
alternative places a strong and concerted emphasis on developing
bicycle and pedestrian opportunities and pathways This is in
part intended to minimize congestion by reducing the reliance on
motorized vehicles within the downtown However this is also
intended to enhance the appeal and attractiveness of the downtown
by promoting design and development that caters to the pedestrian
Amenities and street standards are to be pursued to encourage
these nonmotorized transportation modes
A parking strategy is outlined in the Downtown Plan alternative
This strategy primarily pursues public private partnerships to
develop coordinated planning construction and financing of public
parking spaces Potential parking garage sites are identified
Parking garages would concentrate parking at certain locations
and mechanisms will be explored that would allow developers to
2 6 Summary of Impacts 219
May 2001
F
n
purchase capacity in public lots and garages to satisfy their parking
requirements This should help promote density and encourage
development within the downtown as well as make it easier for
shoppers to park in the downtown area
Transit activity in downtown Auburn could increase over the No
Action alternative Greater commercial and residential density
could result in increased transit use and demand and the need for
more bus service downtown Sound Transit commuter rail service
would generally be determined on a system wide basis
Development activity in Auburn alone would not tend to influence
Sound Transit s system wide scheduling
Railroad impacts would generally be similar to the No Action
alternative although the increased development activity and
increased rail traffic in downtown could increase the potential for
rail conflicts with automobiles pedestrians and bicyclists at crossing
locations
Water Runoff Stormwater Management
Development envisioned in the Downtown Plan alternative may
result in a marginal increase in impervious surface over the No
Action alternative Stormwater quantity and runoff quality will
be affected as downtown development and redevelopment occurs
In some instances this effect can actually be beneficial to water
quality as certain redeveloped sites upgrade stormwater
management facilities to meet the City s existing standards This
would result in a beneficial impact by improving water quality
discharge to waters that may support salmon habitat and other
wildlife
The Downtown Plan alternative provides more flexibility and
creativity to address stormwater management in the Downtown
Plan area As one example the Downtown Plan supports the use
of underground closed detention system with pre approval from
the City This detention system type would not be visible from
the surface nor would it be consumptive of developable surface
land This flexibility should promote development that
traditionally has been discouraged due to stormwater management
requirements
220 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
J
l J
Air Quality
The Downtown Plan alternative could result in worse air quality
in the downtown than in the No Action alternative This would
be attributable to the higher intensity of development that is allowed
under the Downtown Plan alternative Additional traffic may
be generated in the downtown and more congestion at least in
terms of LOS is allowed than under the No Action alternative
In addition development incentives provided for in the
Downtown Plan may result in development occurring sooner
than it would under the No Action alternative In this respect
air quality may be impacted sooner than it would under the No
Action alternative
Noise
Traffic vehicles and train traffic and construction noise are the
likely noise generators resulting from the Downtown Plan The
sources of noise are similar to the No Action alternative
Construction noise may be more prevalent given that more
development activity is expected to occur Noise associated with
vehicular traffic may be higher than in the No Action alternative
given higher traffic volumes than the No Action alternative
In some respects though the land uses in the Downtown Plan
tend to be less intensive in some areas than in the No Action
alternative As indicated much of the study area is downzoned
from Heavy Commercial to Central Business District under
the Downtown Plan alternative As a result certain more
intensive commercial land uses would not be allowed in the
planning area under the Downtown Plan alternative
12 6 Summary of Impacts 221
May 2001
r
1
II
1
J
C
Ir LJ
C
J
222 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
m
Section 2 7 Key Differences Between
the Two Alternatives
Section 2 7 Key Differences
Between the Two Alternatives
The following two tables summarize the key differences between
the two alternatives relative to permitted land uses and forecasted
growth potential
Table F Approximate Acreage in Generalized Land Use Categories
Public
Facility Mixed Use Commercial
Medical
Office Residential Industrial
No Action 12 47 80 16 48 19
Downtown Plan 21 80 28 16 66 12
As Table F illustrates the Downtown Plan alternative would
provide more land area designated for public facility mixed use
and residential uses while the No Action alternative would
emphasize commercial land use and provide slightly more acreage
for industrial land uses
Table G Estimated Growth Potential Under Each Alternative
Forecast to Year 2020
Land Use Type No Action Downtown Plan
Residential 126 additional units 811 additional units
Commercial 627 employees 766 employees
Office 381 employees 828 employees
Industrial 97 additional employees 97 additional employees
Hotel 0 additional rooms 150 additional rooms
As shown in Table G implementation of the Downtown Plan
alternative is estimated to result in a greater number of housing
units and office employment and a slightly greater retail
commercial employment In addition implementation of the
Downtown Plan is expected to attract an approximately 150 room
2 7 Key Differences Between the Two Alternatives 223
May 2001
hotel to the downtown Estimated growth potential for the
Downtown Plan alternative is based upon a market analysis that
was undertaken as part of the Downtown Plan update The market
analysis considered the implementation actions that are proposed
for the Downtown Plan
Implementation of the No Action alternative is expected to result
in modest residential and office employment growth over time
The estimated growth potential for the No Action alternative is
based upon the existing Comprehensive Plan Some modifications
were made to these estimates to take into consideration the
influence of the Transit Center
It is important to recognize that the estimated growth potential is
different from development capacity Growth potential is the
estimated growth that will result from implementation of the
alternative Development capacity is the level of growth that could
be achieved based on zoning and development regulations The
overall development capacity is greater under the No Action
alternative from a regulatory standpoint However although the
Downtown Plan allows for additional building height there are
considerations e g soil conditions that will influence what can be
built from an economical and practical standpoint Therefore
the incremental development capacity between the two alternatives
is not expected to constitute a significant difference
A f d owntown Another key difference relates to the appearance o
much higher standard for design and aesthetics including the visual
appearance of buildings and the streetscape and pedestrian oriented
amenities is placed in the Downtown Plan alternative than in
the No Action alternative The removal of blighting influences
and nuisances implementation of building and streetscape design
standards introduction of street furniture and amenities and facade
improvement are examples of strong emphasis on appearance in
the Downtown Plan alternative
224 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
TIM 91
Section 2 8 Summary of
Environmental Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Section 2 8 Summary of Environmental
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table H Summarv of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Built Environment
Land Use
Im
No Action Alternative
Continued physical deterioration of downtown
buildings as there would be less potential for
redevelopment and or reinvestment in existing
underdeveloped and underinvested properties
Less emphasis on pedestrian oriented design and
land uses New automobile oriented uses could
locate in certain locations within the planning area
Downtown Plan Alternative
Development intensity would increase
Redevelopment of existing sites and buildings and
more reinvestment in existing uses would occur
Greater pedestrian oriented development with more
non motorized linkages Fewer automobile
oriented land uses
Mitigation
Design guidelines and standards are to ensure that new higher intensity building design is visually
pleasing particularly to the pedestrian and is compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses
Rezone a substantial portion of the planning area from C 3 Heavy Commercial to C 2 Central
Business District to eliminate uses inconsistent with the concept of a pedestrian oriented downtown
Encourage parking garages to avoid excessive number of small surface parking lots
Zoning and design standards requiring significant buffers to protect residential areas from incompatible
uses
Aesthetics
Impacts
No Action Alternative
Development would largely retain existing
character aesthetics Low rise buildings surface
parking areas uncoordinated signage facades
and or building design would remain
Downtown Plan Alternative
Greater positive change in character aesthetics
through redevelopment Taller buildings could be
developed but would be well designed and oriented
to the pedestrian Structured parking would be
preferred to surface parking Public art
streetscape improvements coordinated signage
and facade improvements would be implemented
Mitigation
Street right of way to building height ratios
Create gateways landmarks and wayfinding system to encourage pedestrian use define boundaries
Underground utilities
Design standards to improve the aesthetic quality of new buildings
Code enforcement efforts to remove blighting influences and nuisances that detract from the physical
appearance of downtown
Including public art in all public projects
Streetscape and landscaping programs that provide more plant materials
2 8 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitagation Measures 225
May 2001
F Trans ortatton s Y
y r
Y
cam
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Alternative
Traffic Volumes LOS
The existing citywide land use pattern is conducive
to transportation trips by automobile As with the
rest of the city downtown traffic congestion would
worsen due to local and regional growth Traffic
congestion would worsen and certain intersections
would exceed the City s current LOS standard of D
over a twenty year period without improvements
Traffic Volumes LOS
Focusing land uses in the downtown that can more
easily be served by transit or avoid multiple vehicle
trips would benefit traffic citywide In the downtown
traffic congestion would become worse due
increased development A lower LOS would be
acceptable Additional traffic could pose more
conflicts with non motorized transportation
Transit
Demand for transit ridership would be expected to
increase over time as Sound Transit adds more
commuter service and as more development occurs
downtown that may require additional transit
service
Parking
Increased demand for parking Parking would
primarily be provided on surface parking lots
resulting in an inefficient use of land downtown
Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities
Transportation projects within the 1998 Non
Motorized Plan would be pursued however the
1998 Non Motorized Plan deferred to the Downtown
Plan as the basis for detailed study of non
motorized transportation in the Downtown
Railroad
No additional freight or passenger service would
occur as a direct result of the No Action
alternative
Transit
Generally the same although increased density
downtown may require local transit agencies to
respond to the need for increased bus service at a
more rapid pace than under the No Action
alternative
Parking
Increase demand for parking in the downtown area
more so than the No Action alternative
Development of parking structures rather than
reliance on surface parking
Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities
More bicycle and pedestrian travel that under the
No Action alternative due to emphasis on
pedestrian connections within the downtown and to
surrounding neighborhoods
Railroad
Same as No Action alternative
J
i
1
I
C
226 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Mitigation
TrafficVolumes LOS primarily automobiles d Street SW grade Continued implementation of programmed street improvements including the 3
separation project to improve safety and access to and from downtown
Establish a traffic accounting system to evaluate and monitor the progress of development and its
consistency with the development densities identified in the Downtown Plan
Pursue and implement nonmotorized transportation strategies to encourage alternatives to automobile
use
Coordinate with transit agencies and request additional transit service or modifications to service levels
as needs are identified
Nonmotorized
To avoid conflicts with vehicular traffic assess opportunities to improve bicycle facilities through lane
marking and signage systems especially in conjunction with planned traffic improvements
Continued implementation of planned pedestrian improvements
Parkin
Pursue public private opportunities to develop parking structures to provide an orderly and adequate
parking situation in the downtown for visitors and shoppers
Transit
None although transit mainly busses will also benefit from planned street improvements in the area
of downtown that will promote access and facilitate transit circulation needs
Railroads
Planned improvements including the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation project to allow for increased
regional freight mobility by separating train traffic from vehicular traffic
Pedestrian safety improvements at the West Main Street at grade crossing will be included as part of
the third main line track installation
Noise
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Alternative
Overall increase in noise could occur associated Greater construction related noise anticipated than
with new development construction and traffic under the No Action alternative Traffic volumes
associated with new development and commercial
deliveries are expected to be greater than under the
No Action alternative More evening related noise
might occur under this alternative due to its
emphasis on encouraging nighttime uses and
activities
Mitigation Measures
Design new structures to orient away from noise oriented facilities and uses and also apply appropriate
sound mitigating construction standards Require land use buffers between incompatible uses
Enforce restrictions on hours of construction activity
Code enforcement activities in the downtown to address nuisance related noise impacts
2 8 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitagation Measures 227
May 2001
1
Historic and Cultural Preservation
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Alternative
No concerted pro active historic preservation Through design review redevelopment of existing
strategy could lead to premature demolition or buildings and new development would respect and
inappropriate alteration of historic buildings New be compatible with existing Downtown historic
development could be inconsistent with existing resources and character New development would
development s historical character Improvements build on rather than detract from the historic
to existing buildings or facades would continue character of the downtown
without a review process that ensures consistency
with historical character of a building or buildings
Historical quality of buildings would likely deteriorate
due to lack of reinvestment in properties
Mitigation measures
Develop a historic preservation plan for downtown
Education and the provision of incentives and removal of disincentives for the preservation of
downtown historic resources
Design standards intended to protect existing historical structures from incompatible adjacent
development ensure that the historical character of existing historical structures is not compromised by
tenant improvements and that encourage the removal of false facades and the restoration of historical
architectural features
1
0
1
C
228 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Natural Environment
STORMWATER xr
No Action Alternative
Existing stormwater requirements would discourage
downtown development and redevelopment
Conventional requirements such as bio swales and
open ponding would consume surface land and limit
efficient use of land Existing buildings would be
non conforming with respect to stormwater quality
and quantity standards
Mitigation Measures
None
Downtown Plan Alternative
Improved stormwater quality since redevelopment of
non conforming development would be encouraged
and new development would be made compliant
with existing stormwater standards Chinook
salmon recently listed as threatened would benefit
from improved water quality
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Alternative
Overall decrease in air quality associated with
construction and traffic under this alternative
Greater construction activity and increased traffic
would result in a decrease in air quality as well
probably more so than the No Action alternative
Mitigation Measures
Implementation and enforcement of existing air quality regulations including
All point sources of air pollution shall require permits from PSCAA
PSCAA requires that reasonable measures be taken to avoid dust emissions during
construction Such precautions may include spraying water or chemical suppressants on bare
soils during dry windy weather The City also uses SEPA to implement mitigation techniques
watering associated with construction and cleaning of vehicles and street cleaning
EPA and PSCAA requirements address the safe removal and disposal of asbestos containing
materials
Emphasis on landscaping and street trees to filter suspended particulates
Improve pedestrian and bicycle usage opportunities as an alternative to the automobile
Street and circulation improvements to reduce congestion
Strategy to reduce the need for continual circulation b traffic within the downtown to find parking
2 8 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitagation Measures 229
May 2001
Section 3 1 Introduction
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
n
H
232 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Section 3 2 Land Use
Section 3 2 Land Use
3 2 1 Existing Land Use Plans and Policies
The Downtown Auburn planning area is approximately 220 acres
in size It is located on the valley floor just north of SR 18 and east
of the Interurban Trail It is the site of the historic city center and
is comprised of the Main Street commercial district the
Auburn Medical Center City Hall and surrounding residential
neighborhoods The following paragraphs give a general
description of the existing land use pattern in Downtown Auburn
A Generalized Land Use
Main Street Commercial
This is the historic retail and service center for Auburn Businesses
lining Main Street are primarily small independent retail shops
These shops are interspersed with professional office service and
restaurant uses
Auto Oriented Commercial
Auto oriented commercial uses are primarily located fronting on
Auburn Way and Auburn Avenue which run north south through
the planning area
Medical Center District
The Auburn Regional Medical Center and numerous smaller
private medical offices and related services are located just north
of the Main Street commercial center and west of Auburn Avenue
Residential Land Use
Downtown Auburn has four established residential areas located
at the perimeters of the planning area These districts are comprised
of primarily single family residential development There are some
duplexes and larger single family homes that have been converted
into multiple units Apartments are scattered throughout the
Downtown and are primarily smaller affordable housing units
and senior housing units
Industrial
The edges of larger industrial areas permeate the western
boundaries of the Auburn Downtown planning area
1
3 2 Land Use
233
May 2001
1
be encouraged to maintain a vibrant active and competitive
center for the City of Auburn
LU 80 The City should continue to support the development and
rehabilitation of multiple family housing in the Downtown
including housing targeted toward special needs e g
elderly and handicapped housing populations
LU 81 The City shall maintain an ongoing downtown planning
and action program involving the downtown business
community and other interested groups This activity
should be guided by this document the Auburn Downtown
Plan and the Downtown Auburn Design Master Plan
LU 82 The City shall continue to give priority consideration to
the maintenance and improvement of public facilities and
services in the downtown area
Objective 102 To recognize areas within the downtown that have
identifiable characters and land uses
LU 83 The area north of 1st Street N west of Auburn Avenue
south of 5th Street N and east of the Burlington Northern
tracks should be designated and managed as a medical
and professional services area New heavy commercial and
industrial uses should be prohibited and existing ones
amortized Commercial uses supporting medical and
professional uses should receive priority
LU 84 The area lying generally east of D Street SE and south
of Main Street not including the Main Street frontage shall
be designated for mixed residential and commercial uses
LU 85 The area lying generally between Auburn Way North and
Auburn High School should be designated for multiple
family residential uses
LU 86 Automobile oriented uses within the Central Business
District should be directed to Auburn Way North and the
area lying south of the Safeway Superstore
Objective 10 3 To ensure that all new development and
redevelopment in the downtown reflect the unique character of
the area
LU 87 The City shall develop programs and ordinances to preserve
and protect downtown s historic character Development
codes should be revised as needed to recognize the
uniqueness of downtown through appropriate performance
standards and design guidelines A high level of visual
amenity should be pursued and no heavy outdoor uses or
outdoor storage should be allowed
236 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
I
LU 88 The downtown area shall be comprised of a mixture of
uses consistent with the area s role as the focal point of the
community These uses shall be primarily people oriented
as opposed to automobile oriented and shall include
commercial medical governmental professional services
cultural and residential uses
LU 89 Regulations for the retail core of downtown should
encourage retail uses but should discourage uses that result
in a high proportion of single use vehicle trips such as fast
food restaurants and drive through windows
Objective 10 4 To emphasize pedestrian traffic and transit usage
in the downtown
LU 90 Emphasis should be given to enhancing pedestrian linkages
between the Hospital area the Main Street retail core the
Performing Arts Center the southwestern portion of
Downtown and the parking area adjacent to the Safeway
Superstore An important element of this emphasis will be
to reduce the pedestrian barrier effect of Auburn Way
LU 91 The City should build upon past efforts to improve
pedestrian amenities through public improvements sign
regulations and development standards The maintenance
of public and private improvements should be given
priority commensurate with downtown s role as the focal
point of the community
LU 92 The City shall work with transit providers to increase the
availability and effectiveness of transit in downtown and
between downtown other commercial and employment
areas residential areas and the region at large
LU 93 As regional transportation programs such as commuter rail
are implemented the City will strive to ensure that the
downtown is a beneficiary Siting of a commuter rail station
shall take into account the conclusions and findings of the
Auburn Commuter Rail Station Siting Study
Objective 10 5 To develop a parking program for the downtown
that recognizes the area s historic pedestrian character while
providing sufficient parking for customers of all businesses
LU 94 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved
parking circulation and the grouping of business outlets
and governmental services Parking standards should be
developed which recognize the unique nature of downtown
parking demand The City should work with the business
3 2 Land Use 237
May 2001
1
1
community in public private partnerships to develop a
coordinated and effective approach to providing adequate
parking and circulation
LU 95 A strong Downtown shall be encouraged through improved
parking circulation and the grouping of business outlets
and governmental services The development of public
parking lots to serve the downtown should guided by a
Downtown Parking Plan
LU 96 The City views adequate parking in the downtown area as
a crucial step in implementing the downtown policies and
the rehabilitation policies of this Plan All business in the
downtown area will be hindered if adequate parking in
the downtown area is not available However parking
needs coupled with rehabilitation needs in the downtown
area require special policies
a Some flexibility in the general parking requirements of
the City may be necessary to accommodate reuse of
existing buildings and to accommodate new development
Such flexibility should be directed at seeking to pool
parking resources through the formation of a Downtown
parking LID when such parking cannot be provided by
the business or through shared parking agreements
b Since rigid parking requirements will interfere with
redevelopment of downtown and the pattern of existing
development restricts the amount of parking available
public development of parking in the downtown area is
appropriate
c A comprehensive study of the parking needs of
downtown should be made to determine the most efficient
method of meeting the unique parking demands of the area
d Parking policy for the downtown needs to balance the
impact of parking on downtown s pedestrian character
economic development and transit usage s
Objective 10 6 To work with all interested groups on revitalizing
the Downtown area
LU 97 The City of Auburn should strive to maintain active
working relationships with the Auburn Downtown
Association the Chamber of Commerce and other groups
whose goal is the revitalization of downtown The City
will seek to become a partner with these and other
groups where feasible in public private partnerships that
further the goal of downtown revitalization
238 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
LU 98 The City shall continue to support legislation to improve
fiscal leverage in urban rehabilitation programs
LU 99 The City shall continue to support the redevelopment
efforts of the private sector in the downtown area
Housing Policies and Objectives
Objective 7 8 To respond to the housing needs of individuals and
families that cannot afford or do not choose to live in traditional
detached single family housing
HO 24 Encourage residential development in Downtown
particularly housing that is integrated with commercial
development
Capital Facilities Policies and Objectives
Objective 14 1 To site buildings in accord with their service
function and the needs of the members of the public served by the
facility
CF 51 Downtown shall continue to be the business center of City
government and the City shall seek to site all of its business
functions in the downtown area
CF 52 All people oriented City facilities should be located in
high amenity sites Les Gove Park and Downtown are
particularly appropriate sites for services such as senior
services community center library museums etc
Transportation Policies and Objectives
Objective 16 10 To recognize the linkages between land use and
transportation and to encourage urban design that eases the use of
non motorized travel modes
TR 38 Development in Downtown Auburn should encourage non
motorized access and should include characteristics such
as limited setbacks awnings pedestrian oriented
streetscape and display windows
Economic Development Policies and Objectives
Objective 9 1 Promote a diversified economic base capable of
withstanding changes in interest rates inflation and market
conditions
ED 3 The importance of Downtown Auburn as a unique retail
environment and sub regional center of commerce should
be considered in the City s economic plan
3 2 Land Use
239
May 2001
Historic Preservation Policies and Objectives
Objective 20 1 To enhance and maintain the quality of historical
resources in the region
HP 5 Future development in the Downtown area should be
sensitive to the character of surrounding buildings and the
historical context of the area Modifications of existing
buildings shall consider the incorporation or restoration of
historic architectural features Comprehensive Plan Land
Use and Zoning Designations
Urban Design Policies and Objectives
Objective 22 5 To promote the incorporation of artwork into
new and existing public facilities to enhance the visual quality of
the City
UD 24 The City shall when appropriate encourage and facilitate
the placement of artwork in new and existing
neighborhoods and the downtown business area
Objective 22 5 To promote development that eases access by
both pedestrians and transit users
UD 25 Downtown is considered a pedestrian and transit oriented
area Codes in the downtown should encourage
development which is more oriented toward these modes
of transportation than towards the automobile
Downtown Special Planning Area
Auburn s downtown was designated a Special Planning Area in
the Comprehensive Plan This designation applies to specific areas
identified as being appropriate for mixed urban level development
on a planned basis The Comprehensive Plan states that uses and
intensities within Special Planning Areas are to be determined for
each area through individual planning processes The
Comprehensive Plan also calls for the development of the
Downtown Area Plan to consider and integrate
1 The 1987 Auburn Downtown Plan
2 The 1990 Downtown Auburn Design Master Plan and
3 The Commuter Rail Station Siting Study
The recommended Auburn Downtown Plan contained in this
document is intended to update and replace the first two documents
listed above once adopted
1
240 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Downtown Land Use Designations
The 1995 City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan land use element
identifies the character and uses of the various areas of the
Downtown Plan study area
Existing Zoning Designations
The study area is currently covered by the following zoning
classifications Please refer to Section 1 3 Figure 2 Existing
Downtown Zoning Map for the boundaries of each zone These
include Light Commercial District C 1 Central Business District
C 2 Heavy Commercial District C 3 Light Industrial District
M 1 Heavy Industrial District M 2 Single Family Residential
District R 2 Two Family Residential District R 3 High Density
Residential R 4 Residential Office District RO Residential
Office Hospital District RO H Public Use District P 1 and the
Institutional I
A summary of the intent of these zones is as follows
C 1 The Light Commercial District is generally located west of
D Street NE NW along West Main Street as well as in the north
eastern portion of the study area to the east of Auburn Avenue
This classification provides for the location of a grouping of
compatible uses that represent retail or professional enterprises
These small and moderate scale businesses should be oriented
towards the leisure shopper and pedestrian oriented activities
Mixed use buildings are allowable with no density restrictions
Additionally apartments are allowable as a conditional use
provided that 1 200 square feet of lot area is provided for each
dwelling unit The maximum building height is 45 feet which may
be exceeded if one additional foot of setback is provided from
each property line for each foot the building exceeds 45 feet
C 2 The Central Business District is generally located around
the retail core of the downtown This designation sets apart that
portion of the City which forms the center for financial commercial
governmental professional and cultural activities Mixed use
buildings are allowable with no density restrictions Additionally
multiple family dwellings are allowable as a conditional use with
no density limitations This district allows for a maximum height
of four stories not to exceed forty five feet Setback requirements
are five feet from the front and street side of the building There
are no requirements regarding lot coverage Five feet of visual buffer
landscaping is required along the street frontage
C 3 The Heavy Commercial District covers much of the south
central part of the study area as well as extending north on C
Street NW This district provides for enterprises which involve retail
3 2 Land Use 241
May 2001
1
services but with outside production or service features This zone
is intended to accommodate uses which are oriented to automobiles
either as the mode of transportation or as the type of commercial
service Mixed use buildings are not allowed but multiple family
dwellings are allowable as a conditional use provided that 1 200
square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit The
maximum building height is 45 feet which may be exceeded if
one additional foot of setback is provided from each property line
for each foot the building exceeds 45 feet
M 1 The Light Industrial District is primarily located in the
northern part of the study area along the Burlington Northern
Railroad tracks between 5th Street NE and south of 3rd Street
NE This district is intended to accommodate a variety of industrial
uses in an industrial park environment While the M 1 zone is
primarily intended for light industrial uses some commercial uses
may be permitted Regional shopping centers and commercial
recreation may also be permitted The only housing allowable in
this zone is work release pre release or similar facilities offering
alternatives to imprisonment under certain conditions and
standards The maximum building height is 45 feet Structures may
exceed 45 feet if one additional foot of setback is provided for
each foot the structure exceeds 45 feet
M 2 The Heavy Industrial District is located in the vicinity
of the northern portions of D Street NW and between F Street
NW and H Street NW north of West Main Street This designation
is intended to provide for general manufacturing and processing
and grouping of industrial enterprises Other uses are disallowed
if they will discourage use of adjacent sites for heavy industry No
housing is permissible in this zone
idential District is located in the il R F Si l 2 Th R y es am ng e e
south eastern portion of the study area between 4th Street SE and
just south of East Main Street This district provides for relatively
small lot sizes 6 000 square feet and allows for multi family
development as conditional uses provided that 6 000 square feet
of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit and there are no
more than four dwelling units per structure Accessory units such
as a guest cottage are allowable
R 3 The Duplex Residential District is located in the south
eastern portion of the study area between 4th Street SE and State
Route 18 This zone is intended to permit a limited increase in
population density by permitting two dwelling units on a minimum
size lot while at the same time maintaining a desirable family living
environment by establishing minimum lot areas yards and
openspaces The minimum lot area for duplexes is 7 200 square feet
242 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
with the exception of existing platted lots between 7 000 and 7 200
square feet in area which may be allowed to construct a duplex
The minimum lot area per dwelling unit is 3 600 square feet The
maximum building height is two and one half stories not to exceed
thirty feet
R 4 The Multiple Family Residential District is generally
located in the vicinity of the City Park and Washington Elementary
School in the north eastern portion of the study area and in the
southwest portion south of West Main Street between G Street SW
and C Street SW This district is intended to provide for multiple
family residential development and is further intended as a
residential district of single duplex and multiple family residences
The minimum lot area is 7 200 square feet with a maximum
building height of two and one half stories not to exceed thirty
feet Additionally multiple family dwellings that are adjacent to
any property line of an RR RS RI or R2 zone shall either set
back 50 feet from the adjoining property line or limit the number
of units per structure to three or four in which case the minimum
setback may be 30 feet
RO The Residential Office District is located north of the
hospital between 3rd and 5th Streets NE This zone is intended
primarily to accommodate business and professional offices
medical and dental clinics banks and similar financial institutions
at locations where they are compatible with residential uses Some
retail and personal services may by permitted if supplemental to
the other uses allowed in the zone This zone is intended for those
areas that are in transition from residential to commercial uses
along arterials or near the hospital The minimum lot area for this
zone is 7 200 feet and the maximum building height is two and
one half stories or thirty feet
RO H The Residential Office Hospital District is located in
the vicinity of the hospital north of 1st Street NE and south of 3rd
Street NE This designation is intended explicitly for the hospital
area and is intended to be used for medical and related uses and
those uses compatible with the medical community As a
conditional use restaurants and other retail sales operations that
support the medical community are allowable Multiple family
dwellings are allowable as a conditional use provided that 1 200
square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit The
maximum building height is 65 feet
P 1 The Public Use District is located between West Main Street
and 2nd Street NW and F and D Streets NW in the north western
portion of the study area This designation provides for the location
and development of public uses that serve the cultural educational
3 2 Land Use 243
May 2001
1
recreational and public service needs of the community Housing
is not allowed in this zone The maximum building height is four
stories not to exceed 45 feet
I The Institutional Use District is located at the Performing Arts
Center Auburn High School This zone is intended to provide an
area for educational governmental theological recreational
cultural and other public and quasi public uses
Downtown Parking Requirements Chapter 18 52 of the Zoning
Code discusses parking requirements which are generally based
upon the proposed use There are also specific provisions for
development within the CBD as follows
18 52 030 B The joint use of off street parking facilities is
not allowed for residential uses with the exception of those
residential uses within the Central Business District CBD
as defined in the Comprehensive Plan
18 52 080 Within the CBD the parking spaces required in
this chapter for commercial uses may be satisfied through
the signing of a binding non remonstrance agreement with
the City The agreement will ultimately be utilized by the
City to support the construction of new public parking
facilities that are required to meet the parking demand
within the Central Business District
In addition the zoning code also includes parking standards for
the Downtown area that recognize its urban pedestrian oriented
characteristics These standards include the following
Overall Parking Reduction For new development within
the Downtown area an overall 25 reduction in the
number of required parking spaces is permitted
Re Use Re Construction of Existing Building The
provision of additional parking is not required for a change
of use in existing buildings in the C 2 district Whenever a
new building replaces an existing one or there is an
expansion of an existing building within the C 2 zoning
district the City s parking requirements shall apply only if
there is an increase in floor area of twenty five 25 or
more
it
1
C
L I
r
1
1
1
1
244 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
3 2 2 Environmental Impacts
Land Use Adopted Plans and Policies
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative land use development in
the downtown would continue under current codes policies
and regulations These existing plans and regulations do provide
standards and direction for Downtown revitalization and
redevelopment The existing Comprehensive Plan states
thatdowntown Auburn should remain the commercial cultural and
governmental focal point for the community Development and
rehabilitation of multi family development downtown is
encouraged Pedestrian oriented development and transit use is
also addressed and encouraged
With the No Action alternative a significant part of the Auburn
downtown planning area would remain zoned C 3 Heavy
Commercial Certain auto oriented uses that typically are not
conducive to a pedestrian friendly downtown atmosphere could
locate in the downtown under the C 3 zone The Main Street
commercial core and other parts of downtown are zoned C 2
Central Business District Non commercial zoning is also present
in the study area including residential and industrial
Building height is limited to 45 feet in the C 2 zone The C 3 zone
maximum building height is 45 feet with additional height allowed
subject to performance standards The Residential Office Hospital
RO H zone allows a maximum height of 65 feet
Design oriented development standards exist for buildings in the
C 2 Central Business District zone New development in the C
2 zone implementing these requirements will need to address
standards such as pedestrian amenities and building and entryway
placement Still these standards are limited and are not
comprehensive in terms of addressing building design often
associated with pedestrian orientation and architectural detail
Under the No Action alternative individual proposals not
exempt under SEPA would be reviewed under SEPA on a case
by case basis In the absence of an overall comprehensive strategy
for downtown redevelopment case by case review of individual
projects could result in less consistent implementation of adopted
policies than that afforded by the Downtown Plan with its approach
of adopting specific implementing development regulations
In addition the existing codes and regulations do not strongly
affirm the City s commitment to downtown redevelopment with
an overall detailed strategy In this respect new development in
3 2 Land Use 245
May 2001
1
downtown has not been very active and the physical and economic
conditions of downtown have deteriorated It is quite likely this
will continue over time under the No Action alternative
Downtown Plan Alternative
Under the Downtown Plan alternative amendments to existing
codes including new sections will be necessary to ensure
consistency with and to implement the Downtown Plan policies
These code amendments would also be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan policies and direction The Downtown Plan
alternative calls for subsequent implementing code amendments
that will be subject to review by State agencies prior to subarea
plan adoption RCW 36 70A 106 All amendments would be
subject to the public notice and public participation requirements
of the GMA to ensure a broad public involvement is attained
Early and continuous public participation has been pursued
throughout this process
Code amendments necessary to implement the Downtown Plan
alternative are identified in the Downtown Plan These code
amendments are part of a comprehensive and coordinated strategy
for downtown redevelopment This includes eliminating a
specified height requirement in the C 2 zone to allow property
owners to better actualize the economic potential from their
properties Part of this is an effort to intensify land use in the
downtown core and as a result the land use intensity should over
time be greater under the Downtown Plan alternative than the
No Action alternative This intensity could result in bigger
buildings that are not in character with the area if not mitigated
To this extent future regulations would be more effective in eliciting
positive impacts as the regulations would be prepared and guided
by a cohesive strategy for the revitalization of the downtown area
The application of policies and regulations to proposals in the
downtown area would be prepared reviewed and implemented
with clear objectives in mind Regulations can be applied
consistently to all development proposals rather than relying on
case by case review through SEPA The code requirements will
also communicate to the public and development community
expectations the community has set for development in the
downtown area and should remove elements of development
uncertainty and risk
In some areas future development proposals would be subject
to more flexible requirements See following Transportation and
Stormwater sections that are addressed and discussed in this
Downtown Plan This should encourage development and the
revitalization of Downtown Auburn
246 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
In addition the Downtown Plan alternative envisions a stronger
code enforcement presence in the Downtown This includes
addressing poorly maintained or hazardous buildings illegal uses
trash and other maintenance issues and illegal structures and
signage This will help ensure a visually pleasing downtown and
announce to individuals pursuing downtown redevelopment that
their investments will be protected from nuisance related concerns
In terms of land use the Downtown Plan alternative would
promote more mixed use development in the downtown consistent
with transit oriented development themes Increasing downtown s
residential population is a downtown plan strategy intended to
promote and foster more activity particularly nighttime activities
Redevelopment of key opportunity sites would result in more
intensive development in terms of scale
Finally the Downtown Plan alternative is consistent with the
multi county regional vision set forth in Vision 2020 Vision 2020
calls for high density centers served by a multi modal high capacity
transportation system Promoting development including more
residential development and other transit oriented development
around the Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station in downtown
Auburn is consistent with this regional plan and vision and will
have beneficial impacts for the regional planning vision
3 2 3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures provided for by goals and policies in the
Downtown Plan alternative include
Zoning and design guidelines and standards are to be
prepared and adopted to ensure that new higher intensity
building design is visually pleasing particularly to the
pedestrian and is compatible with adjacent and
surrounding land uses
Rezone a substantial portion of the planning area from C
3 Heavy Commercial to C 2 Central Business District
to eliminate uses inconsistent with the concept of a
pedestrian oriented downtown
Zoning code amendments to remove non conforming and
inconsistent land use over time
Encourage parking garages to avoid excessive number of
small parking lots
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
I None
3 2 Land Use 247
May 2001
1
1
r
r
r
1
r
1
248 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
I Section 3 3 Aesthetics
1
1
1
J
Section 3 3 Aesthetics
3 3 1 Existing Aesthetic Conditions
As discussed in Part 1 Section 1 4 the Downtown Plan Study Area
is divided into three broad yet distinct subareas for the purpose
of discussing aesthetics These include
1 Main Street comprised of the entire block north and south
of Main Street
2 Other Commercial and Industrial Areas comprised of
Industrial C Street NW A Street NW Medical Center
Auburn Way and South Central Downtown Districts and
3 Residential areas comprised of West and East Main
residential districts
Existing conditions for these three subareas including detailed
discussion of defining characteristics site planning and layout
building design and streetscape features and site elements are
described in Part 1 Section 1 4 and will not be repeated here
3 3 2 Impacts
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative there is no formally adopted
set of comprehensive architectural design guidelines or design
standards nor are there downtown streetscape standards In this
respect the No Action alternative does not strongly emphasize
the physical appearance of development nor does it place emphasis
on pedestrian oriented design or on providing pedestrian amenities
that would encourage non vehicular use At the very least there
would not be an overall strategy or concerted effort to improve
the visual appearance of downtown buildings and streetscapes The
No Action alternative would perpetuate an existing development
pattern generally lacking both distinctive and or coordinated
architectural features and high quality site development standards
Development could continue under existing plan and regulations
New development if it did occur would generally be allowed up
to a maximum of four stories 45 feet However given the market
trends and historical development activity in downtown from a
practical standpoint this means that the downtown would retain
its existing character and aesthetics including low rise
development
3 3 Aesthetics 249
May 2001
11
Most development would likely consist of remodeling of existing
buildings more so than the introduction and development of new
buildings New development has been rare in the recent past due
to impediments to development that have historically existed
discussed in Part I the Downtown Plan Building remodels
would be done without specific guidance on how to retain the
character of the downtown area or respect the historical and
architectural character of buildings False facades have been added
to many of the core Main Street buildings and would likely
continue This has resulted in revisions to the building facades
that may be inappropriate with the character of the area and or
insensitive to historic features of the building New or replacement
signage inappropriate for a pedestrian oriented downtown and that
lacks quality worksmanship would also become increasingly
prevalent
Under this scenario the quality of downtown development would be
more predisposed to decline and the economic climate worsen The
absence of strong and continuous code enforcement would likely result
in the continued presence of poorly maintained buildings illegal uses
illegal structures or signs and nuisances in the downtown And
because of the high commercial vacancy rate in downtown the lack
of reinvestment into buildings would continue and the aesthetic
qualities of downtown buildings would simply deteriorate This
deterioration leads to unsafe and or unhealthy conditions
Downtown Plan Alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative would over time change the
appearance of downtown Auburn in a positive manner Perhaps
the most significant aesthetic impact that could result from the
Downtown Plan relates to building height The Downtown Plan
alternative proposes removing the maximum building height
requirement in the Downtown planning area in lieu of a more
prescriptive based approach The Downtown Plan alternative
proposes a maximum building height based on satisfying building
design criteria This includes maintaining a minimum 1 1 street
width to building height ratio to avoid a canyon affect and to
provide a sense of comfort for the pedestrian by providing sunlight
and views of the sky Therefore taller buildings could result than
under the No Action alternative These taller buildings have
the potential for adverse visual impacts if not mitigated
Under the Downtown Plan alternative catalyst projects will be
romoted and initiated Areas of downtown typified by low scale p
buildings that have historically become rundown and or vacant
would redevelop likely at a higher density and foster a positive
250 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
image with quality design Building envelopes for these sites
would likely be greater than existing building envelopes Land
use would intensify in the downtown more so than under the No
Action alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative would have additional beneficial
impacts on downtown appearance The Downtown Plan
alternative contains building design guidelines and recommends
that these be formally implemented through the adoption of design
standards Design standards will help ensure that downtown
development is performed in a manner consistent with the overall
vision expressed in the Downtown Plan Development will be
sensitive to and compatible with human pedestrian scale adjacent
development and overall downtown development Buildings will
be designed and developed to retain the character and quality of a
traditional downtown with efforts to address building and site
features such as blank walls facade modulation building stepbacks
parking location vehicular access storefront modules building
materials building orientation windows and doors roofs and
colors
In addition to design standards for buildings standards for other
elements of the built environment including streetscape street
furniture pedestrian lighting and paths and signs are
recommended to improve the function and visual appearance of
Downtown
Public art built into the fabric of downtown wayfinding signs and
gateways will also create a distinct aesthetic identity for downtown
Landscaping and tree plantings in the street and on private property
are proposed to add plant materials and improve the sense of
experience in the downtown All of these improvements along
with efforts to promote pedestrian linkages will serve to actively
enhance and build on the aesthetic quality of downtown
In addition the Downtown Plan alternative seeks to encourage
the restoration of historic architectural features including facades
A facade improvement program would be explored and if feasible
implemented on Main Street to ensure compatibility of materials
signage and storefront configuration with the predominant
materials patterns and character of historic buildings with special
attention to adjacent historic buildings
Overall the aesthetic form and quality of the downtown is intended
to change over time Increased development intensity such as
building height and lot coverage is allowed This must be
accomplished and will be mitigated by the imposition of standards
addressing quality building and site design Building design is
oriented toward preservation of the historical character of the
3 3 Aesthetics 251
May 2001
community protecting less intensive land uses and maintaining
an interesting appearance Site design features are particularly
oriented to the needs of the pedestrian so that walking or even
bicycling opportunities are encouraged and made enjoyable
3 3 3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures provided for by the goals or policies in the
Downtown Plan include the following I
Increased building height impact is reduced by maintaining
a maximum street right of way to building height ratio
Gateways landmarks and wayfinding system to encourage
pedestrian use define boundaries and create a sense of
welcome to the Downtown
Undergrounding of utilities
Improving signage quality including discouraging sign
types inappropriate to a downtown
Design standards to improve the aesthetic quality of new
buildings
Facade improvements including design standards and or
a facade replacement program that encourages removal
of false facades and restoration of historic architectural
features
Zoning and design standards requiring significant buffers
to protect residential areas from incompatible uses
Code enforcement efforts to remove blighting influences
and nuisances that detract from the physical appearance
of downtown
Removal of inconsistent and non conforming land uses
Including public art in all public projects
Expansion of a Downtown Public Art Program
Streetscape and landscaping programs to provide more
plant materials directly affecting quality of life and quality
of experience
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
None
1
1
252 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
r
1
1
Section 3 4 Transportation
Section 3 4 Transportation
This section describes the existing conditions and compares and
analyzes transportation impacts between the No Action and the
Downtown Plan alternatives Transportation is addressed very
broadly in this section and includes not only roadways traffic
level of service but also transit pedestrian bicycle circulation non
motorized parking and railroads
Certain items contained in this section are technical and result
from traffic analysis completed for the City of Auburn Downtown
Plan An existing City of Auburn 1996 Transportation Model
TMode12 was used as a starting point and updated with revised
downtown land use data and assumptions Land use outside of
the downtown area remained constant for this analysis Traffic
counts within the downtown core were updated and included in
the re calibration process Multiple scenarios were run to aid in
the development of the Downtown Plan traffic analysis Results
from these scenarios are included in the Appendix
To relate the Downtown Plan to areas outside the downtown core
modifications were also made to the existing City wide model 1996
calibration and analyzed for determination of impacts for areas
outside the downtown core Background information and raw
data results are contained in the Transportation Appendix
3 4 1 Existing Conditions
This section documents and describes existing transportation
improvements conditions and or services in and around the City
of Auburn Downtown Plan study area that may be impacted by
implementation of the Downtown Plan alternative The
discussion focuses on the roadway network traffic level of service
transit services bicycles and pedestrians non motorized
transportation parking and railroad facilities
Roadways
A roadway network consisting of several different types of facilities
including freeways surface arterials and local streets serves the
City of Auburn There are two state routes traversing near or in
the City of Auburn s downtown area SR 18 east west and SR 167
north south SR 18 is a four lane freeway that passes along the
southern portion of the downtown area and links to Interstate 5 to
the west Downtown Auburn s access to SR 18 is provided at the
C Street SW and Auburn Way interchanges
3 4 Transportation 253
May 2001
SR 167 is a four lane freeway that passes through the City of Auburn
west of downtown Auburn and connects to Interstate 405 to the
north and Highway 410 and SR 512 to the south Access to SR
167 is provided at 151i Street NW and south at an interchange near
the SuperMall The distance to the downtown area from the SR
167 interchange is farther than those provided by SR 18
Several principal arterial streets serve both regional and local traffic
in Downtown Auburn and the balance of the City The principal
arterial roadways in Downtown include Auburn Way and segments
of C Street SW and A Street SE The roadway network also
includes a number of minor arterial streets North south minor
arterials within the downtown area are Auburn Avenue A Street
SE north of 3 1 Street SE A Street NW SW has been identified
as a future minor arterial when it is extended to 141i Street NW
East west minor arterials within the downtown area include 31
Street NW NE Main Street and 3i1 Street SW Cross Street 41
Street SE Downtown also includes several residential and non
residential collector arterials
In addition to the existing roadway network described above there
are several downtown study area roadway improvements identified
s Transportation Improvement Program within the City of Auburn
TIP as well as in the 20 Year Long Range Plan These are currently
at various stages of development
f A b u urn Truck routes are another important element of the City o
roadway network The transportation of freight to from and within
the City and downtown generates a significant volume of truck
traffic The existing system of truck routes focuses on the freeways
and principal roadways in the area A map of freight routes
including truck routes and rail lines is included in the 1997 Auburn
Transportation Plan
Traffic Volumes and Level of Service
The City of Auburn uses a traffic simulation model TModel2
calibrated to 1996 traffic conditions These traffic conditions take
into account land use in 203 zones within the City as well as traffic
counts on city streets When examining the calibration for
downtown Auburn alone it was determined that this area should
be re calibrated using updated land use projections and traffic
counts This allows for a more accurate reflection of travel patterns
and for a more detailed analysis of the downtown area For more
information concerning the changes made to the city wide model
to construct the re calibrated downtown model see the
Transportation component in the Appendix
254 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
As expected the highest traffic volumes in the Downtown Auburn
area using 1996 1998 average pm peak hour traffic volumes are
found on the regional freeways SR 18 carried between 1 858 and
3 263 vehicles during the average pm peak hour through the
downtown Auburn area
Traffic congestion is perceived as a significant problem on the
roadway network serving downtown Auburn Congestion occurs
when the volume on the roadway approaches its capacity The
ratio of volume to capacity is used as a measure of traffic congestion
When the volume demand exceeds the capacity of a roadway
the result is congestion This capacity deficiency is most common
during the pm peak traffic hours but may also occur when the
capacity is reduced by accidents or construction activity
Using the re calibrated downtown Auburn model no roadway
segments and intersections are currently experiencing congestion over
acceptable levels LOS D being acceptable during the PM peak hour
Transit Facilities and Services
The King County Department of Metropolitan Services Metro is
the primary provider of public transit services to residents and
employees in the City of Auburn Metro Transit is part of the
Department of Transportation in King County Washington Metro
operates a fleet of about 1 300 vehicles including standard and
articulated coaches electric trolleys dual powered buses and
streetcars that serves an annual ridership of more than 75 million
within a 2 128 square mile area Additional bus service is provided
in Auburn by Sound Transit s Regional Express
Approximately 10 Metro transit bus routes operate in the
downtown Auburn area Most of these bus routes run north south
along Auburn Way with the main transit stop in Auburn located
on V and B Streets NE Other routes within Auburn utilize Main
Street throughout the downtown area one route travels along Main
Street to M street the other two routes using portions of Main
Street during their routes one between B Street and Auburn
Avenue and another between B Street and Auburn Way
The Sound Transit Station has been designed to accommodate
both commuter rail and bus service Once the station is complete
the Metro bus transfer hub will move from 15 and B Street NE to
the Sound Transit Station All routes traveling through or within
Auburn will pass through this regional hub to facilitate transfer
between bus and train Bus service will be coordinated with
commuter rail departures and arrivals
3 4 Transportation 255
May 2001
r
Sound Transit operates commuter rail service from Tacoma to
Seattle Auburn is one of several transit stations along the
commuter rail corridor Service began in September 2000 with
two daily weekday round trips A service level of nine round trips
is programmed over time Over the next few years Sound Transit s
commuter rail service will extend north to Everett and as far south
as Lakewood
Parking
The Downtown Plan Part includes detailed discussion of parking
issues as part of the background on parking strategy policies That
discussion should be referenced for a more thorough discussion
d f owntown ecting on existing parking conditions and issues af
Auburn and will not be repeated in detail here
In summary in 1996 the City of Auburn undertook a parking study
to respond to concerns raised about downtown area parking
Concerns included localized parking shortages difficulties
developers faced in meeting parking requirements due to land
costsand small lots the lack of convenience for downtown shoppers
and the concept that parking requirements for downtown should
be different than that of suburban mall type development
With a few exceptions parking supply was not identified as a
significant issue The study did however find a need to reevaluate
city parking requirements and found that the public sector had a
role to play in addressing new parking demand
Existing parking conditions consist of a myriad of small parking
lots and on street parking most of which is subject to time
limitations The hospital has a large parking garage Safeway has
a large surface parking lot area The City of Auburn owns several
smaller surface parking lots around City Hall some of which are
available to the public for limited time periods
Certain Downtown areas have localized parking shortages This
includes areas in the vicinity of the hospital and the post office
Additionally the commuter rail component of the Transit Center
opened in September 2000 with only 120 surface parking stalls
This is expected to contribute to parking scarcity in Downtown
particularly should ridership be higher than expected
A Transit Center parking garage is being developed at the time of
this plan s adoption The garage with approximately 500 to 600
spaces is being built as a partnership between the City of Auburn
King County and Sound Transit Approximately 110 stalls in the
parking garage will be dedicated to the City for its use It is possible
that the City may create a Local Improvement District LID to
arkin hts to these t rchase ri l ll d g p g ow eve opers o pu a
256 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
stalls to satisfy their parking requirements A pedestrian bridge
will be developed that allows for safe access between the parking
garage and station platforms
Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian
Sidewalks exist in almost all areas of downtown Auburn The
Main Street core benefits from recent street improvements and is
generally pedestrian oriented in scale This includes a wide
boardwalk style sidewalk and amenities such as pedestrian oriented
lighting landscaping and in some locations art and street furniture
Additionally Main Street has mid block pedestrian crossings The
B Street SE Plaza improvements offer a linkage between Safeway
and the Main Street commercial district Street furniture and public
art are prominent in this plaza Further improvements behind
the shops on East Main as well as revisions to Main Street between
Auburn Way and the B Street SE Plaza have contributed to the
easy flow of pedestrian traffic in this area
Given the traffic volumes and the width of the street Auburn Way
functions as a barrier to east west pedestrian travel and many
crosswalks need restriping Sidewalks are present along most of
Auburn Way within the study area except around 2nd and 31d Streets
NW and near Cross Street Frequent curb cuts discourage
pedestrian use because of conflicts with automobile use and the
frequent change in sidewalk elevation These conditions create
an uncomfortable pedestrian environment
The rest of downtown is variable in terms of the quality of sidewalks
and their condition Certain areas are experiencing lift in sidewalks
due to the confined root systems and root structure of certain street
trees Pedestrian plazas are uncommon only two exist in the
Downtown area The plaza in front of Auburn City Hall is the
most prominent plaza for pedestrians to sit and rest in Downtown
The B Street Plaza on East Main is the other smaller plaza in
Downtown
Bicycles
Downtown Auburn currently has two routes that are commonly
used by bicyclists These are 1 the Interurban Trail and 2 Main
Street The Interurban Trail is a paved 12 foot wide trail on the
west edge of the Downtown Plan study area that provides a vital
north south route traversing the entire length of the City It is
adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks The segment of the
Interurban Trail in Auburn is slightly more than four miles long
and is part of a 17 mile long regional trail that extends from the
3 4 Transportation 252
May 2001
F1
City of Pacific to the City of Tukwila This is an important
connector to other valley communities for both commuting and
recreational cyclists
Many cyclists use Main Street as a connector to and from the
Interurban Trail Although there are no marked bike lanes on
Main Street traffic in the core area moves slowly enough that
sharing the lane with vehicular traffic is not an uncomfortable
experience for either the bicyclist or the automobile driver
Main Street is also the primary east west connection from the
Interurban Trail and Downtown to the east part of the City It is
frequently used by bicyclists traveling toward SE Green Valley
Road and Flaming Geyser State Park to the southeast and toward
the Green River Road to the northeast
Access from other parts of the City into Downtown is more difficult
Arterial streets that pass through Downtown are heavily traveled
and provide no bike lanes or wide right lanes suitable for bike
travel Local residential streets have low traffic volumes suitable
for bicycling but few streets extend for more than a few blocks
due to dead ends such as at railroad tracks Bicyclists who need
to travel across the City through Downtown are without good
options other than Main Street
Railroad
There are two main railroad track rights of way that run north
south near or through the City of Auburn downtown One railway
track is owned and operated by Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railway BNSF and the other is owned by Union Pacific Railroad
UP The BNSF rail line traverses through the downtown core
In addition to serving a high volume of freight trains traveling
though the City the BNSF tracks are used in conjunction with
Sound Transit s commuter rail program Sounder
Along the southerly boundary of the Downtown Plan study area is
a BNSF rail line that generally runs east west This line is
commonly referred to as the Stampede Pass line With the
reopening of Stampede Pass a few years ago additional trains are
now traveling through the City of Auburn including through the
Downtown connecting with the BNSF mainline
il 0 m e s Stampede Pass line joins the BNSF mainline via a 1 BNSF
per hour curve at the southwest corner of Auburn s Downtown
Long trains in the 5 000 to 9 000 foot range combined with slow
speeds result in blocking of several at grade crossings
simultaneously causing large backups for vehicles with few or no
alternative routes available
258 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
BNSF indicates that the Stampede Pass opening results in a
maximum of eight to ten daily trains in the foreseeable future It
appears that the trains operate at or below this level unless one of
the other east west routes across the Cascade Mountains is blocked
which occurs occasionally during the winter This increase in trains
through the Auburn area along with the location of the intersecting
mainline curve in Downtown Auburn results in up to five at grade
crossings simultaneously being utilized With few alternative routes
available major delays and queuing on the arterial system in the
Downtown area is expected without additional improvements
The 1997 Auburn Stampede Rail Traffic Study found that grade
separated intersections in all affected areas would be cost
prohibitive Thus the Auburn Stampede Rail Traffic Study
concluded that the most cost effective combination of projects to
offset the impacts of the Stampede Pass rail operation in the
downtown included the construction of two grade separated
intersections at 3rd Street SW and M Street SE extending A Street
NW from 3rd Street NW to 141hStreet NW and constructing a by
pass route linking Auburn Black Diamond Road to M Street SE
Aviation
There are currently no commercial airports within the City of
Auburn Nearly all the regional passenger air travel is
accommodated by Seattle Tacoma International Airport Sea Tac
which is located northwest of Auburn Other local facilities for
general aviation use include Auburn Municipal Airport Renton
Municipal Airport and Boeing Field
3 4 2 Environmental Impacts
The following section compares and evaluates transportation
impacts of the Downtown Plan alternative with the No Action
alternative However prior to the specific discussion of impacts
the following discussion is intended to provide additional
background information concerning the modeling analysis of
roadway traffic and LOS
Analysis Assumptions
The City of Auburn Traffic Demand Model served as the basis for
evaluating the Downtown Plan alternative s traffic impacts
Travel demand models are used to estimate future traffic volumes
associated with specified land use scenarios This model has been
applied to both 6 year and 20 year land use forecasts developed
3 4 Transportation 259
May 2001
l
L
for the Downtown Plan land use alternative and provides an
indication of future traffic conditions in each scenario This analysis
is assumed sufficient through the year 2005 The preponderance
of the future analysis was completed using this time frame
The complete modeling methodology assumptions and results
are documented in the Model Development Paper prepared for
the City of Auburn by the Bucher Willis Ratliff BWR
Corporation The model was calibrated on the existing roadway
system using updated 1998 downtown land use information This
resulted in a baseline condition 1998 pm peak hour traffic
Then the model was revised to include the infrastructure
improvements TIP and Long Range Plan projects and land use
changes for both the six 6 year and twenty 20 year projections
The travel demand model was then utilized to generate forecasts
of future travel demand
For each of the alternative analysis scenarios the Sound Transit
regional commuter rail component was included
A Street NW SW Analysis
To aid in the overall analysis of downtown traffic additional
modeling and analysis was performed on a programmed city street
project that will aid in alleviating congestion in Downtown
Specifically the City of Auburn will extend A Street NW from 3r
Street NW to 15th Street NW to address congestion along C Street
NW SW Auburn Avenue A Street SE and Auburn Way This
project s anticipated role in improving downtown traffic circulation
was deemed significant enough to merit additional analysis prior
to including it in the Downtown Plan alternative s modeling
effort
i d h t r e To take into account possible alternative roadway designs an
impacts as well as to determine the most appropriate design width
to use in the city s modeling for the Downtown Plan alternative
four scenarios were considered for the A Street NW SW roadway
section between 3 d Street SW and 151h Street NW The four designs
took into consideration different combinations of travel lanes and
on street parking within different segments of the roadway The
intent of the scenarios was to identify the most appropriate design
alternative to include in the downtown traffic model
Each scenario was run on the 2020 re calibrated downtown model
to produce the worst case event of the area The modeling results
showed minimal discrepancies between the four scenarios
Therefore the A Street design selected for model projections
involves two lanes one lane in each direction north of 3r Street
h d es si NW with no on street parking two lanes and parking on bot
260 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
of the street between Main and 3rd Street NW and three lanes
one lane in each direction and a continuous left turn lane with
on street parking on the west side of the street south of Main Street
see Appendix for more information concerning the analysis and
determination of the A Street configuration
Future Year Assumptions
Four main infrastructure projects were included in the traffic
analysis for both alternatives These include 1 The extension of
A Street NW from its existing terminus at 3rd Street NW to 15d
Street NW see discussion above 2 a loop connecting the
southern terminus of A Street SW traveling under the fly ramp
being constructed as part of the SR18 C Street Interchange and
connecting to Division Street at 3rd Street SW This allows quick
access to SR 18 while also allowing movements to and from A
Street and the transit center 3 realignment of the intersection of
41 Street NE NW and Auburn Way and 4 Auburn Way
improvements
The intersection of 4d Street NE NW and Auburn Avenue will be
realigned from an offset intersection to a true intersection The
Auburn Way improvements will include access control and signal
modifications
Overall then the key difference in the traffic model between the
No Action alternative and the Downtown Plan alternative is
the land use assumptions within the downtown core area
Table I shows the intersections and their node capacity for the
1998 baseline as well as the No Action and Downtown Plan
alternatives analysis for both the 6 year and 20 year time frames
Node capacities are slightly different than intersection Level of
Service LOS Node capacities are based on the total number of
vehicles entering and exiting an intersection whereas intersection
LOS takes into account how many of these vehicles are turning
left turning right or going through that intersection A node
capacity of 81 90 would approximately correspond to an
intersection LOS of D
Table j summarizes the Auburn Travel Model results for the 1998
calibrated Downtown Model as well as the six year and 20 year
analysis including pm peak hour vehicle miles traveled VMT
pm peak hour vehicle hours traveled VHT and average pm peak
hour speed The table also shows how those figures differ from
the 1998 baseline traffic conditions
3 4 Transportation 261
May 2001
Table I City of Auburn Node Capacities at Downtown Intersections
1996
Calibrated 2005 Downtown Model 2020 Downtown Model
Downtown Existing Downtown Existing Downtown
Intersections Model Trends Plan Trends Plan
CStreetSW@SR 18EBromps 40 64
C Street SW @ Main Street 34 60 61 74 79
Division Street @ 3rd Street SIN 33 a
A Street SE @ Cross Street 44 79 81 90 91
Auburn Avenue @ Main Sheet 40 62 n 64 i s 70
NOTE The City of Auburn s acceptable Level of Service in Downtown LOS D corresponds
to node capacities at or below 90
Table J City of Auburn pm Peak Hour VMT VHT and Average Speed
VMT VHT Average Speed
1998 Calibrated Downtown Model baseline 884 881 55 944 28 56
6 year Existing Trends 1 200 925 74 534 16 11
Change from 1998 baseline 35 73 t 33 23
6 year Downtown Plan 1 201 536 74 365 16 16
Change from 1998 Baseline X35 809fx T 32 9396 43 42
Change from 6 ear Existing Trends
r
0 05 i 0 23 0 31
20 year existing trends 1 317 546 105 096 1 2 54
e from 1998 Baseline Pan 87 8696
h i 56 E z
20 year Downtown Plan 1 318 487 105 359 12 51
from 1998 Baseline Change 901 8833 56I
i Changefrom 20 ear Existing Trends 0 07
r
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VHT Vehicle Hours Traveled
No Action Alternative
Roadway Traffic Level of Service
The principal feature of the No Action alternative is the dispersed
housing employment and other land uses throughout the city that
lends itself to being efficiently served by the automobile more so
than other modes of transportation As a result maintaining the
262 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
current land use plans policies and practices is expected to support
the continued city wide use and growth in automobile traffic and
the deterioration of travel conditions on Auburn roadways
As indicated in Table I if the current land use trends continue
peak hour VMT and VHT are projected to significantly increase
with average speeds slowing to half the 1988 baselines
The model results indicate that traffic congestion will become more
severe and widespread than it currently is even with completion
of the proposed roadway improvements and expansions Residents
and employees throughout the City will experience more delays
and less reliable travel times as area roadways reach their physical
capacity
Downtown will also be increasingly congested The City s LOS
standard of D for the Downtown area would be applied with
mitigation imposed under SEPA Downtown intersections that
will exceed the LOS standard in the 20 year time frame include
C Street SW at SR 18 eastbound ramps Division Street at 3rd Street
SW and A Street SE at Cross Street see Appendix for more
information concerning the 6 year and 20 year model projections
Parking
Under the No Action alternative parking would likely continue
to be provided by development on a case by case basis although
Sound Transit is constructing a parking garage with spaces owned
by the City that could possibly be allocated to developers through
a Local Improvement District LID Existing codes do provide
for the reduction of off street parking requirements in the
downtown but generally developers would continue to face
difficulties meeting parking requirements due to land costs and
ownership patterns that divides blocks into many small parcels
New developments that can provide surface parking would be using
valuable land area that could more appropriately be used for
buildings floor area The difficulty in satisfying off street parking
requirements discourages downtown redevelopment and tends to
encourage continued tenant turnover in existing buildings
In addition multiple surface parking lots detract from the
appearance of downtown Large numbers of individually owned
surface parking lots requiring curb cuts have resulted from this
development pattern and are incompatible with a pedestrian
oriented densely developed downtown
3 4 Transportation 263
May 2001
1
Transit
The No Action alternative should not have a direct effect on the
number of bus routes in the Downtown area A recent factor
affecting transit routes has been the development of the Sound
Transit commuter rail station This has led to the rerouting of
existing routes to service the commuter rail station Although local
jurisdictions are allowed input into the transit routing and
scheduling process routes and schedules are primarily set by
individual transit agencies e g Metro Pierce Transit and Sound
Transit
Commuter rail transit is included in the No Action alternative
with the initiation of Sound Transit s Sounder Service from Seattle
to Tacoma Auburn is one of several stations along the Tacoma to
Seattle route that will eventually be expanded to include service
to Everett and Lakewood The parking garage will serve as a park
and ride facility
Existing Comprehensive Plan transportation element policies
encourage the continued development of public transit systems
including working with Metro to explore opportunities for
improved bus service in Auburn as well as exploring linkages to
the south with Pierce Transit
Pedestrian Bicycle
Pedestrian
Under the No Action alternative the existing pedestrian network
would likely remain Sidewalk infrastructure to support pedestrian
movement is essentially in place with a few exceptions Absent
however are strong pedestrian linkages within the downtown and
from surrounding areas into downtown Further pedestrian
oriented amenities that typically complement and encourage
pedestrian use are not present in a significant way outside of the
Main Street corridor
Under the No Action alternative the primary guide for pedestrian
improvements is contained in the City of Auburn s 1998
Nonmotorized Transportation Plan Downtown is designated in
the Nonmotorized Transportation Plan as one of Auburn s primary
pedestrian oriented areas The Nonmotorized Transportation Plan
notes that parts of downtown vary greatly in their ability to serve
pedestrians and defers to the Downtown Plan process for potential
improvements such as shelter and shade seating sidewalks
pedestrian corridors and traffic revisions
1
264 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
Bicycle
Under the No Action alternative bicycle improvements would
also be guided by the adopted Nonmotorized Transportation Plan
The Plan identified the need for access into Downtown and the
Transit Center from A Street SE and the southeast part of the City
The City has purchased property to construct a separated trail
along this route as part of the A Street SW extension project In
addition the planned extension of A Street NW to 151 Street NW
is to be designed with bicycle facilities creating a longer north
south route that will access both the Downtown and North Auburn
Central Business District
Overall for pedestrian and bicycles the No Action alternative
continues to have the potential for pedestrian bicycle conflicts with
motorized vehicles and trains Transportation improvement
projects such as the 3 Street SW grade separation the pedestrian
bridge crossing at the commuter rail station garage grade crossing
improvements at Main Street the inclusion of bike lanes into road
projects and other pedestrian improvements are identified to
address some of the existing and anticipated motorized
nonmotorized conflicts
Railroad
Under the No Action alternative freight and commuter rail traffic
would continue on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe BNSF and
freight traffic would continue on the Union Pacific UP mainlines
In some respects the additional traffic downtown attributable to
growth in general will likely increase the possibility for train
vehicular conflicts and accidents However anticipated projects
that would occur under either the No Action and Downtown
Plan alternatives such as the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation
should provide railroad safety improvements and safeguards
Pedestrian safety improvements at the West Main Street grade crossing
will be included when the third mainline track is installed The work
is covered under an existing agreement between Sound Transit and
BNSF Also at the Sound Transit station there will be a mid station
pedestrian bridge between the platform on the west side and the
platform and parking garage on the east side
The Stampede Pass rail traffic should not have adverse impacts on
Auburn downtown due to noise or vibration Under the No
Action alternative zoning along the railroad mainline is either
commercial or industrial These designations are generally
compatible with railroad uses The closest residential area is located
to the west of the BNSF tracks where the commuter rail station has
r
3 4 Transportation 265
May 2001
I
been constructed Sound Transit s parking garage however is
being constructed along the east side of the commuter rail station
It will serve to deflect some noise between the railroad line and
new residential areas located east of the station
However the Stampede Pass opening could affect downtown by
making it less desirable to visit and shop especially until grade
improvements are made Potential downtown visitors may perceive
downtown as being less safe and or less desirable due to delays
caused by the additional Stampede Pass train traffic Additionally
mixed use development may be more difficult to achieve as
increased train traffic may discourage pursuit of residential
development in the proposed area
Downtown Plan Alternative
Roadways Traffic Level of Service
Roadway improvements in the Downtown Plan alternative are
similar to those identified in the No Action alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative envisions and promotes higher
intensity development in comparison to the No Action
l alternative With the projected increase in retail other commercia
space and residential units within the downtown core area trips
that might normally be attributed to other areas of the city e g
shopping dry cleaners office uses such as lawyers accountants
can be moved to the downtown area This allows for trip chaining
multiple stops along the same trip On a citywide basis the result
is only a slight increase in the overall VMT and VHT over the
No Action alternative as seen in Table I while providing retail
and commercial core usage
Under the Downtown Plan alternative a lower level of service
LOS will be acceptable in the Downtown than elsewhere in the
City LOS within the Downtown will be calculated on an average
of corridor segments and not individual segments Essentially the
Downtown Plan alternative provides for an overall LOS in the
Downtown area that can operate at an average LOS of E and
are Auburn Way E still be acceptable Exceptions to the LOS of
Auburn Avenue A Street SE and C Street NW which must be
maintained at the current LOS of D In part allowing a LOS of
recognizes that density is desirable and related congestion is E
an acceptable impact to achieve a vibrant downtown In addition
it is in recognition that the city has already expended and
programmed a considerable amount of funds into road
improvements to serve the downtown area Traffic impact fees if
adopted will give consideration to waiving this requirement in
the downtown area
266 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
The Downtown Plan Model calculations show that the average
LOS will be retained over the six year analysis period through 2005
To ensure that new development is consistent with the development
densities envisioned in this plan and to monitor how development
affects the downtown average LOS standard a traffic accounting
system will be established and will be applied during project review
This accounting system will be used to closely monitor how
development densities decrease the LOS standard set for the
downtown Should a development proposal reduce the LOS
standard below the minimum established by the Downtown Plan
then mitigation will be required
Given the lower LOS standard the Downtown Plan alternative
could result in more traffic congestion than under the No Action
alternative in the Downtown area in particular
Transit
The Downtown Plan alternative envisions higher density
development over time Should this be accomplished it is possible
that Metro Pierce Transit and or Sound Transit s Regional Express
may identify the need for additional transit service to Auburn s
downtown Also the lower LOS standard set for the Downtown
area under the Downtown Plan alternative might encourage more
transit use as individuals look for acceptable alternatives to personal
vehicles and increased congestion when visiting and or shopping
in downtown Auburn
Increased traffic congestion in the downtown area could affect
transit service by causing delays but it is unclear as to what degree
The frequency of commuter rail service Sounder by Sound Transit
would not be affected by the Downtown Plan alternative Those
decisions are made on a broader system wide basis by participating
agencies
Parking
Under the Downtown Plan alternative more density is expected
to result in more parking demand by customers residents and
employees New development will be required to provide parking
The Downtown Plan alternative assumes a more coordinated
and flexible approach to meeting parking requirements than the
No Action alternative Specifically the Downtown Plan
alternative seeks to promote public and or private garages as a
source of parking in Downtown relieving individual owners the
burden of supporting and maintaining parking lots
Encouraging the development of parking structures is intended to
reduce the impact of large areas devoted to parking Garages
3 4 Transportation 267
May 2001
1
encourage better overall design of development within downtown
and also encourage customers to only park once rather than make
multiple vehicular trips Garages also allow for better control over
the total supply of parking Too much parking in downtown
discourages transit oriented development by consuming land and
in some instances disrupting pedestrian linkages and walkways
across properties
The Downtown Plan alternative calls for the consideration of
specific mechanisms to enable the City of Auburn to raise capital
for parking structures Once built developers would be able to
buy parking capacity in garages to satisfy their parking demand
Potential sites are identified in the Downtown Plan alternative
to facilitate this effort
One impact associated with parking garages could be their
appearance although the plan policies do emphasize that such
structures should include architectural detailing consistent with the
Downtown location Additional traffic near and around parking
garages could also cause an impact both in terms of congestion on
the streets and conflicts with pedestrians or bicyclists
Overall the parking strategy set forth in the Downtown Plan
alternative addresses the parking needs associated with growth and
also is a component to the overall Downtown Plan strategy to
identify and remove impediments to redevelopment
Bicycle Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian
Pedestrian use and activity is expected to increase and will be better
accommodated in the Downtown Plan alternative than in the
No Action alternative At the core of the Downtown Plan
alternative is an emphasis on creating a pedestrian oriented
downtown through the provision of pedestrian connections within
Downtown Auburn and to and from outlying neighborhoods
Building design and the provision of amenities consistent with
pedestrian orientation are encouraged This emphasis is much
stronger in the Downtown Plan alternative than in the No
Action alternative Encouraging walking around the downtown
and avoiding multiple vehicle trips within downtown is a prominent
Downtown Plan theme As a result more people are expected to
be walking within the downtown area under the Downtown Plan
alternative than in the No Action alternative
To accommodate this the Downtown Plan specifically discusses
the preparation of street design standards intended to establish
standards for sidewalk corridors These include furnishings to
1
71
i
1
1
1
268 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
improve pedestrian comfort and curb cuts to minimize conflicts
between pedestrians and vehicles Street design standards will
ensure a balanced function of streets for both pedestrians and
automobiles The focus on pedestrian enhancements and safety
will also make downtown Auburn less automobile dependent
Downtown art street lighting and tree planting programs are all
discussed in the Downtown Plan to promote amenities that will
encourage pedestrian travel
Bicycle
Bicycle use is also expected to increase in the Downtown Plan
alternative relative to the No Action alternative The Downtown
Plan includes policies specifically aimed at improving
opportunities for bicycling in and through Downtown This
includes strategies and policies aimed at developing a bicycle link
from the Main Street Core to West Auburn High School and the
Interurban Trail
To facilitate both bicycle and pedestrian use in the downtown
area gateways signage improvements and wayfinding techniques
will be implemented in the Downtown Plan alternative to better
direct pedestrians and bicyclists to and within the downtown area
These land marking and signage systems will promote safe and
convenient bicycle use and pedestrian travel
As with transit use with the increase in pedestrian and bicycling
activity there is a possibility for more pedestrian bicycle conflicts
with automobiles and trains unless pedestrian and bicycling routes
are clearly identified To the extent that more traffic and pedestrian
bicycle activity is expected the possibility of such conflicts is
greater
Railroad Facilities
The Downtown Plan alternative will not result in additional
freight or passenger service over the No Action alternative To
this extent there are no anticipated differences in impacts between
the No Action alternative and the Downtown Plan alternative
Freight and passenger service should not be affected by the
Downtown Plan alternative
In some respects the additional traffic downtown resulting from
the Downtown Plan alternative could pose the possibility for
greater train vehicular conflicts and accidents than under the No
Action alternative
From the standpoint of impact upon downtown additional train
traffic and traffic delays associated with the opening of Stampede
3 4 Transportation 269
May 2001
1
Pass could be an impediment to Downtown redevelopment if the
perception or reality exists that increased train traffic makes
downtown a less desirable place to invest or if customers perceive
travel to downtown as too dangerous or cumbersome due to train
traffic
However programmed improvements should provide railroad
safety improvements and safeguards while enhancing access that
mitigates these concerns Again these projects include the 3rd Street
SW Grade Separation project to allow for unimpeded access into
downtown Pedestrian safety improvements at the West Main Street
at grade crossing will be included when the third main line track
is installed The work is covered under an existing agreement
between Sound Transit and BNSF Also a mid station pedestrian
bridge is being constructed between the platform on the west side
of the Sound Transit Commuter Rail station and the parking garage
3 4 3 Mitigation Measures
Traffic primarily automobiles
Continued implementation of programmed street
improvements including the 3rd Street SW grade separation
project to improve safety and access to and from downtown
Establish a traffic accounting system to evaluate and
monitor the progress of development and its consistency
with the development densities identified in the Downtown
Plan
Pursue and implement nonmotorized transportation
strategies to encourage alternatives to automobile use
Examples include creating pedestrian linkages within
downtown and to and from the periphery of the downtown
implementing gateways signage improvements and
wayfinding techniques to better direct pedestrians and
bicyclists to and within Downtown and providing
appropriate streetscape amenities such as benches that
foster pedestrian use
Coordinate with transit agencies and request additional
transit service or modifications to service levels as needs
are identified
Nonmotorized
To avoid conflicts with vehicular traffic assess opportunities
to improve bicycle facilities through lane marking and
signage systems especially in conjunction with planned
1
Fli
1
1
C
11
1
1
270 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
traffic improvements These lane marking and signage
systems will promote safe and convenient bicycle use and
pedestrian travel
Continued implementation of planned improvements
including pedestrian safety improvements at the West
Main Street at grade crossing that will be included as part
of the third main line installation and construction of a
mid station pedestrian bridge between the east and west
platforms of the Sound Transit Commuter Rail station
Parking
Pursue public private opportunities to develop parking
structures to provide an orderly and adequate parking
situation in the downtown for visitors and shoppers
Transit
None An exception is that transit mainly busses will also
benefit from planned street improvements in the area of
downtown that will promote access and facilitate transit
circulation needs
Railroads
Planned improvements including the 3rd Street SW Grade
Separation project to allow for increased regional freight
mobility by separating train traffic from vehicular traffic
Pedestrian safety improvements at the West Main Street
at grade crossing will be included as part of the third main
line track installation The work is covered under an
existing agreement between Sound Transit and The
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
None
13 4 Transportation 271
May 2001
F
1
272 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS 1
Section 3 5 Noise
Section 3 5 Noise
3 5 1 Existing Conditions
The human ear responds to a wide range of sound intensities
Human response to noise is also subjective and can vary greatly
from person to person Factors that influence individual responses
include the intensity frequency time and pattern of the noise the
amount of background noise present before the intruding noise
and the nature of the work or activity that the noise affects
The decibel scale used to describe sound is a logarithmic rating
system that accounts for the large differences in audible sound
intensities This scale accounts for the human perception of a
doubling of loudness for each 10 decibel increase Therefore a
70decibel sound level is twice as loud as a 60 decibel sound level
In the outside environment such as near roads a change of two or
three decibels would not be noticeable to most people while a
five 5 decibel change would be perceived under most listening
conditions
Normal conversation ranges between 55 and 65 dBA when the
speakers are 3 6 feet apart Quiet urban nighttime noise levels
range in the low 40 s dBA noise levels during the day in a noisy
urban area are frequently as high as 80 dBA Noise levels above
110 dBA become intolerable and can result in hearing loss Table
K indicates the magnitude of typical noise levels
Table K Sound Pressure Levels of Representative Sounds and Noises
Source Decibels Description
LarQe rocket engine nearby r 180 J j t
Jet takeoff nearby 150
130
Jet takeoff 60 meters 120 Pain threshold
Subinrayram 1
Heavy truck 15 meters and Niagara Falls 90 Constant exposure endangers hearing
Avera efactory i
80
Busy traffic 70
Normal conversation 1 meter 60
Quiet office 50 Quiet
Library 40 w x2
Soft whisper 5 meters 30 VeryQuiet
Rustling leaves 20
Normal breathing 10 Barely audible
Hearin threshold 0
3 5 Noise
273
May 2001
In general several factors can create changes in noise levels and
patterns in a downtown area These include
Extent of urban development and construction activity
Design of transportation facilities
Increases in traffic volumes and
Nature of employment activities
Downtown Auburn is an urbanized area The main sources of
noise in the Auburn Downtown are vehicular traffic including
delivery traffic public transportation and railroad activity
commercial operations such as heating and cooling systems and
entertainment uses and activities Noise within residential
downtown areas is typified by normal residential activities such as
yard equipment and traffic Many of these areas abut higher
intensity zones and uses so they are also subject to commercial
and industrial related noise
In terms of existing regulations Auburn City Code ACC 8 28 010
states that any person who sets in motion or operates any machine
or device motorcycle automobile or any other vehicle in such a
manner that the same makes any noise which disturbs any
neighborhood or which is an annoyance to the public is guilty of a
misdemeanor
3 5 2 Impacts
No Action Alternative
Development activity that occurs under the No Action alternative
will increase employment and residential growth in the downtown
subarea and consequently ambient noise levels
h as Temporary noise from construction related activities suc
demolition excavation building construction paving landscaping
and the operation of miscellaneous heavy equipment will occur
Construction noise can create annoyance and speech interference
during the day Residential uses and schools West Auburn High
School are particularly affected
Increase in development will cause the ambient noise level to
increase Again surrounding residential areas and schools would
be particularly sensitive to increases in general traffic noise Other
typical noises from new development include moving and idling
vehicles delivery tricks voices from increased pedestrian activity
and truck maneuvering for loading and unloading
274 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
There will be greater potential for noise impacts around the transit
center and the new interchange to impact surrounding
development since new development is likely to occur proximate
to these facilities
However as indicated earlier historical development trends in
the Auburn downtown have not been extensive Therefore the
amount of new construction activity is not expected to be significant
under the No Action alternative
Downtown Plan Alternative
In some instances the Downtown Plan is not expected to increase
noise above what would occur under the No Action Alternative
Noise impacts associated with certain activities such as programmed
street construction projects train activity commuter rail and
freight and vehicle traffic associated with the commuter rail station
will likely be the same under either alternative
However it is likely that there will be an overall increase in noise
under the Downtown Plan alternative Since the development
activity and intensity envisioned in the Downtown Plan
alternative is greater than that expected in the No Action
alternative then the noise impacts would be greater More
temporary construction related noise activity is particularly likely
For example the Downtown Plan alternative envisions more
development of properties within the Downtown with specific
catalyst projects identified Construction related activities such as
demolition excavation building construction utilities installation
paving landscaping and the operation of miscellaneous heavy
equipment will occur Construction noise can create annoyance
and speech interference during the day
Because of the expected increase in development and development
intensity traffic volumes will likely be greater as will pedestrian
activity and commercial deliveries These can contribute to greater
noise impacts than might be expected in the No Action
alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative places an increased emphasis
on evening activity Noise associated with expected increase in
nighttime activity will be more obvious because the ambient noise
level during nighttime hours is lower than it is during the day
Finally since the Downtown Plan promotes greater residential use
in the downtown and more development and street activity in
general there is more of an opportunity for conflicts between noise
and residential uses than under the No Action alternative
3 5 Noise 275
May 2001
3 5 3 Mitigation
Design new structures to orient away from noise oriented
facilities and uses and also apply appropriate sound
mitigating construction standards
Require land use buffers between incompatible uses
Enforce restrictions on hours of construction activity
Code enforcement activities in the downtown to address
nuisance related noise impacts
Development of parking garages in downtown to ensure
that adequate parking is available and to avoid traffic
circulation associated with individuals looking for parking
spaces
Emphasis on pedestrian oriented design and paths as well
as bicycle circulation to reduce reliance on motorized
vehicles
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
None
276 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I I
Section 3 6 Historic and Cultural
Preservation
Section 3 6 Historic and Cultural Preservation
3 6 1 Existing Conditions
The City of Auburn contracts with King County Office of Cultural
Resources for historic preservation services City historic
preservation policies would generally be guided by Chapter 10 of
the Auburn Comprehensive Plan Historic Preservation
Chapter 10 includes eight historic preservation policies only one
of which HP 5 specifically references the Downtown
Historic buildings both commercial and residential are a primary
asset within the Downtown Plan study area Distinctive
architecture significant events and important persons and historic
movements are embodied in buildings and places throughout the
Downtown Plan Study Area
Existing conditions related to historical character of the Downtown
Plan Study Area are described in detail in Part 1 and will not be
repeated again in this section In summary historic resources in
Auburn are grouped into three categories
1 Historic Landmarks
2 Potential Landmarks and
3 Historically Significant Buildings
Detailed information about these three types of historic resources
including a map identifying their location is included in Part 1 of
this document
In summary there are two Designated Landmarks in the
Downtown Plan study area These are buildings that are officially
recognized and protected as Auburn Landmarks
Potential Landmarks are significant historic homes and
commercial buildings that contribute greatly to a unique and
distinctive sense of Downtown These are buildings that are worthy
of protection and or restoration Work conducted during the course
of the Downtown Plan has identified 19 potential landmarks that
appear to be eligible for landmark designation due to clearly
significant historical associations architectural character and
relative lack of change over time
3 6 Historic and Cultural Preservation 277
May 2001
11
Historically Significant Buildings contribute to the character of
districts within the Downtown Plan area The Downtown Plan
identifies 147 historically significant buildings that are or should
be included in the City s historic resource inventory Some may
be eligible for landmark designation
Overall the Downtown has lost some of its historical character
due to inappropriate remodeling of buildings inappropriate land
uses new development not sensitive to historical buildings and
the destruction or damage of certain buildings due to fire or other
causes
NOTE The historic resource map Figure 6 in Part 1 Section
1 3 shows properties of historic and architectural interest Further
research and consideration of properties not yet inventoried will
likely result in a modification to this listing of properties
3 6 2 Environmental Impacts
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative the City of Auburn contracts
with King County Office of Cultural Resources for historic
preservation and cultural resource services This relationship would
continue under the No Action alternative
Downtown development would occur as it has in the past without
a concerted strategy to protect historical structures through
landmarks preservation or through a design review process to
ensure compatible development There would not be an aggressive
nor focused effort to inventory historic resources nor would there
be an effort to promote compatibility between new development
and historic structures No design standards to reinforce historical
character would be in place
There would likely not be a comprehensive historic resources
inventory to determine the historical significance of properties or
to determine what could be placed on a register for incentives
There would be no strong pursuit of developing incentives for
historic preservation Improvements to existing buildings or
facades would continue to occur without a review process for
consistency with the historical character of the building or
surrounding buildings
Specifically most development activity to accommodate new
businesses would likely consist of remodeling to existing buildings
Remodeling of buildings would be done without overall guidance
r
1
11
11
1
278 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
on how to retain or enhance the downtown area s historical
character False facades typically inconsistent with the area s
historical character have been added to many of the core Main
Street buildings and would likely continue Inappropriate new or
replacement signage would continue
Because of the high vacancy rate in downtown the lack of
attentiveness and reinvestment into buildings would continue and
the historical quality of downtown buildings would continue to
deteriorate
Downtown Plan Alternative
The City s contract with King County for historic preservation
and cultural resources services would continue
In the Downtown Plan alternative there would be a concerted
effort and program to identify and protect cultural resources in
the Downtown area The Downtown Plan alternative offers a
policy framework that recognizes and supports the identification
evaluation and active protection of its heritage This policy
directive is much stronger and specific than the No Action
alternative and it is expected that sensitivity to historic resources
is much greater in the Downtown Plan alternative
Redevelopment of existing buildings that builds on the historical
character of the community would be actively pursued and new
development would be designed to ensure its compatibility with
existing historic resources in the Downtown Signage building
color materials and facade elements would be reviewed for
individual projects to ensure consistency with the building s original
design and with the historical character of downtown
Education and incentives for the restoration of historic buildings
and properties are promoted and a comprehensive historic
preservation plan for downtown Auburn is sought
Residential neighborhoods are recognized in the Downtown Plan
as having historical character Neighborhoods close to the Transit
Center and in the midst of commercial development will come
under more pressure for removal and replacement of existing
houses or the division of the larger houses into multiple units
Downtown Plan policies address these situations and recommend
that they be approached with great care to ensure that valuable
resources are not lost forever Code amendments to provide for
new development consistent with the existing development pattern
are also promoted
3 6 Historic and Cultural Preservation 229
May 2001
Overall the Downtown Plan alternative would result in the
appropriate upgrading of buildings that would strengthen their
appearance and create a stronger link to the past Careful historic
restoration would make some properties eligible for landmark
designation and related financial incentives A facade improvement
program would provide an incentive for property owners and
businesses to upgrade their buildings to promote downtown s
historical character
3 6 3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures provided by goals and policies in the
Downtown Plan Alternative include
Identify evaluate and actively protect historic structures
in the downtown area Develop a historic preservation plan
for downtown
Education and the provision of incentives and removal of
disincentives for the preservation of downtown historic
resources
Develop a facade improvement program
Implementation of design standards intended to protect
existing historical structures from incompatible adjacent
development and also to ensure that the historical character
of existing historical structures is not compromised by
tenant improvements
Implementation of design standards to encourage the
removal of false facades and the restoration of historical
architectural features
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Conse
quences
None
280 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS
Section 3 7 Stormwater
Section 3 7 Stormwater
3 7 1 Existing Conditions
Auburn Way North and A Street SE divide the Downtown Plan
area into two distinct drainage areas see Part 1 for a map of these
stormwater areas The western portion west half comprises
approximately 57 percent of the Downtown Plan area and is located
in Subbasin E of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Drainage
Plan The eastern portion or east half comprises approximately
43 percent of the Downtown Plan area and is partly in Subbasin B
32 percent of the total Downtown Plan area and partly in Subbasin
C 11 percent of the total Downtown Plan area
Based on estimates developed in 1990 the percent impervious
value for the Downtown Plan drainage area is approximately 65
percent percent impervious is the percentage of surface area
occupied by buildings structures pavement walkways and other
impervious surfaces which generate high volumes of stormwater
runoff during rainfall events A percent impervious value of 65
percent is moderately high which is common for high density
development like that currently in the downtown area By
comparison a typical percent impervious value for a suburban
residential area is approximately 40 percent
From data collected in 1996 1997 and 1998 groundwater depth
typically ranges from five 5 feet in the west portion of the
Downtown Plan area to 25 feet in the far east portion Groundwater
elevations vary seasonally with elevations as much as eight 8
feet higher in the spring than in the fall Pacific Groundwater
Group 1997
In the west half of the Downtown Plan Study Area the general
direction of surface water flow is to the north and to the west
through the Subbasin E drainage system Lateral storm drain
pipelines collect runoff and convey it northward to a storm trunk
pipeline which discharges to an open channel immediately east
of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks This open channel conveys
the runoff in a northward direction parallel to the railroad tracks
and ultimately into Mill Creek at Outfall MC7 Currently there
are no regional stormwater facilities for storage or water quality
treatment of runoff from the west half of the Downtown Plan area
3 7 Stormwater 281
May 2001
r
Assessment of Stormwater Needs
The City s code requires stormwater storage and treatment for all
new development In addition redevelopment that involves
additions alterations or repairs of greater than 50 percent of the
assessed valuation of the structure is required to bring the structure
and property into conformance with current City storm drainage
standards The only exemption from the standards is for
redevelopment of properties that includes wholly interior
improvements within an existing structure
City stormwater quantity and quality requirements for new
development and redevelopment are contained in Chapter 6 of
the City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards The
requirements include criteria for pumping drainage conveyance
detention retention and water quality treatment
The standards require a retention or detention system so that the
peak rate of runoff from a site is not increased by a proposed
development A retention system stores runoff and percolates it
into the soil which can remove pollution and recharge
groundwater A detention system stores runoff and then releases
it to the downstream conveyance system at a rate that matches the
pre development conditions The City prefers retention systems
when soil conditions are suitable for such application Soil and
groundwater conditions in the Downtown Plan Study Area are
generally not conducive for retention systems except in some
eastern portions of the area If a detention system is used for runoff
control the City s preferred method of storage has been parking
lot ponding or an open pond
The City also requires water quality treatment of runoff to remove
oil and other contaminants that come from paved surfaces of a
site The City s preferred techniques for storm drainage treatment
are biofiltration methods such as grass lined swales Biofiltration
techniques typically require more space than is available in the
downtown area with its relatively small blocks and parcels
The City will consider alternative water quality treatment options for
small and or developed sites Alternative water quality options for
sites with space constraints and less than 20 000 square feet of
impervious area will be evaluated where biofiltration techniques are
not feasible A below grade manhole structure that provides oil water
separation and sediment removal from stormwater runoff may be an
option This alternative is allowed only with prior approval from the
city engineer and is judged on a case by case basis by the City
C
D
IE
r
w
r
284 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
3 7 2 Environmental Impacts
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative additional development and
redevelopment will occur consistent with the existing code
requirements In some respects the existing code serves as an
impediment to redevelopment As indicated earlier alterations
or repairs greater than 50 percent of the assessed valuation of the
structure are required to bring the structure and property into
conformance with current City storm drainage standards The only
exemption from the standards is for redevelopment of properties
that includes wholly interior improvements within an existing
structure Because of construction costs even relatively small
exterior renovations or remodels may trigger the requirement to
bring the property up to the City s stormwater management
standards This is one reason more building renovations are not
carried out Rather incremental remodels take place
In addition requirements for bioswales or open ponding also tend
to work against redevelopment of the downtown since they tend
to be consumptive of surface land that is necessary for buildings
This is particularly true in the downtown area since there is limited
land for surface storm drain facilities
The impact to stormwater quantity and quality would still be
addressed through the City s existing standards As indicated the
impact is more likely to inhibit development than to have a direct
impact on stormwater quality or quantity
Downtown Plan Alternative
The Downtown Plan proposes relatively high density development
As development occurs at the level envisioned in the Downtown
Plan buildings parking lots and garages sidewalks and streets
will increasingly cover most of each developed parcel This will
result in a slight increase in impervious surface over existing
conditions and a resulting increase in the volume of runoff during
rainfall events Stormwater runoff quality could also be affected as
transportation commercial and residential activities intensify
unless appropriate treatment methods are employed
The City s Comprehensive Land Use Map March 1998 was used
as the primary resource for calculating the percent impervious
value for the future land use condition in the Downtown Plan area
The projected future land use percent impervious value for the
Downtown Plan area is 71 percent up from 65 percent in 1990
13 7 Stormwater 285
May 2001
The Downtown Plan consciously promotes administrative
flexibility in the application of stormwater standards to
development projects It thus removes a barrier to certain
renovation and redevelopment projects and should result in
redevelopment of sites that might otherwise not redevelop
Underground large diameter pipes can be used with pre approval
from the City This type of detention system would not be visible
from the surface and would therefore be more consistent with
promoting the development envisioned in the Downtown Plan
provided a site has sufficient area for a below grade detention
system Other non traditional standards are also encouraged
Further the Downtown Plan provides the City Engineer with the
flexibility to waive stormwater standards when an alternative is
proposed that is consistent with the vision of the Downtown Plan and
provides a comparable level of water quality and quantity control
Impacts to stormwater quality could be beneficial under this
alternative By allowing for flexibility and encouraging
redevelopment more development in the Downtown area
compliant with the city s existing stormwater management
requirements will result Buildings not currently in conformance
with the City s standards could redevelop into ones that are
Stormwater systems will be improved Water quality will be
improved To this extent certain wildlife habitat including
endangered species such as the Chinook salmon will benefit over
existing conditions as downtown makes progress toward satisfying
water quality standards
3 7 3 Mitigation Measures
None Under the Downtown Plan alternative development will
need to satisfy the City s stormwater quality and quantity standards
and requirements
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
None
1
1
1
1
286 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
IF
Section 3 8 Air Quality
Section 3 8 Air Quality
3 8 1 Existing Conditions
Air quality is generally assessed in terms of whether concentrations
of air pollutants are higher or lower than ambient air quality
standards set to protect human health and welfare
Ambient air quality is a function of many factors including climate
topography meteorological conditions and the production of
airborne pollutants by natural or artificial sources The major
airborne pollutants of interest in the Puget Sound region include
carbon monoxide particulate matter ozone and the ozone
precursors hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen The regulated
pollutants are commonly referred to as criteria pollutants
A summary of these major airborne pollutants follows
Carbon monoxide Carbon monoxide CO is a colorless
odorless toxic gas formed by the burning of fuels containing
carbon Motor vehicles are the principal source of CO
emissions in urban areas Maximum concentrations usually
occur near roadway intersections and other areas of traffic
congestion as they decrease rapidly with distance from the
source
Particulate matter Particulate matter PM enters the air
from industrial operations vehicular traffic and other
sources such as burning woods and other materials Most
of the particulate matter generated by motor vehicles
consists of re suspended road dust Two common
classifications for particulate matter are total suspended
particulates TSP and inhalable particulate matter PM 10
which only includes particles with a diameter less than or
r equal to 10 micrometers
Ozone Ozone 03 in the lower atmosphere is a harmful
air pollutant and contributes to the formation of smog It
is a secondary pollutant formed by the reaction of
hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the presence of
strong sunlight Thus minimizing emissions of these
precursor pollutants reduces ozone levels The Puget
Sound area currently complies with ozone standard though
by a slim margin
3 8 Air Quality 287
May 2001
1
Hydrocarbons Hydrocarbons HC are a key component
in the formation of ozone These compounds are emitted
or evaporate into the atmosphere from a variety of sources
particularly the storage and combustion of fuels in motor
vehicles
Oxides of Nitrogen Oxides of nitrogen NOX are another
precursor to the formation of ozone They are produced
as a result of high temperature fuel combustion and
subsequent atmospheric reactions Common sources of
NOX are diesel fueled motor vehicles power plants
refineries and other industrial operations
Air quality standards are established at the national level by the
US Environmental Protection Agency EPA at the State level by
the Washington State Department of Ecology DOE and at the
regional level by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency PSCAA
These agencies establish regulations that govern both the
concentrations of pollutants in the outdoor air and contaminant
emissions from air pollution sources Although their regulations
are similar in stringency each agency has established its own
National ambient air quality standards NAAQS identify criteria
pollutant concentrations that are not to be exceeded over specified
time periods Primary air pollutants are defined for the protection
of public health and safety and secondary standards are intended
to protect the natural environment Table L below shows the
primary and secondary NAAQS for the major airborne pollutants
of interest
Table L National State and Local Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Washington Puget Sound Pollutant State Region Primary Secondary
Carbon Monoxmle
8 Hour Average 9 ppm nst 9 ppm 9 ppm
1 Hour Average 35 ppm nsl 35 ppm 35 ppm
4t
w
71
1 Hour Average 0 12 ppm 0 12 ppm 0 12 ppm 0 12 ppm
Par late Mstter PM 10I
Annual Arithmetic Average 50 g m3 50 g m3 50 g m3 50 9 m3
24 Hour Average 150 g m3 150 g m3 150 g m3 150 g m3
Par late Matter TSP
Annual Arithmetic Average nsl nsl 60 g m3 60 9 m3
24 Hour Average nsl nst 150 g m3 150 g m3
Source Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency 1993
NSl No Standard Established
t1
1
Weather directly affects air quality A few times each year poor
dispersion persists in the Puget Sound region for a day or longer
and these conditions are often associated with higher pollutant
288 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
I
1
concentrations During temperature inversions of late fall and
winter emissions from motor vehicles which operate less
efficiently in cold weather and wood stoves tends to increase
These factors combine to cause the highest CO and particulate
concentrations
Non attainment areas are geographical areas where air pollutant
concentrations exceed NAAQS for a pollutant The central Puget
Sound region is designated as being in attainment or unclassifiable
for all criteria pollutants On going monitoring throughout the
central Puget Sound region indicates that the overall ambient air
pollution concentrations particularly for CO have been decreasing
during the past decade The decline is due primarily to improved
emission controls on motor vehicles that account for a significant
portion of CO emissions in the region However there are other
factors that have the potential to counteract this downward trend
Each year there are more automobiles on the regions roadways
and people in the area are making more trips and traveling greater
distances
The major impacts to regional air quality are attributable to regional
growth and development Certain land uses in particular have
more of an impact on air quality than others
Regulatory control of air quality in the Auburn downtown area
and broader Puget Sound region is largely the responsibility of the
Department of Ecology and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
PSCAA Any new point source of pollution would require
PSCAA review and approval Identified regional air quality
problems such as automobile emissions are typically addressed
on a regional level and are not expected to impose any specific
requirements on the downtown Auburn area
3 8 2 Impacts
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative development would occur
While much of this development may be more oriented toward
renovation of existing buildings new development is still likely
Development would generate dust from excavation and grading
that would contribute to ambient concentrations of suspended
particulate matter If demolition is involved additional impacts
are possible including the release of asbestos
Construction activity would require the use of heavy trucks and
smaller equipment such as compressors and generatofs These
3 8 Air Quality 289
May 2001
I
n
engines would emit air pollutants that would temporarily degrade
local air quality although these emissions and resulting
concentrations would be far outweighed by emissions normally
found within and around the project area
Construction activity and construction equipment associated with
any development activity could delay traffic in the downtown and
decrease air quality due to more traffic congestion Also some
odor bearing air contaminants such as those related to asphalt
paving could also occur This impact would be short term
Growth in the downtown under the No Action alternative would
result in additional traffic related pollutants due to increased traffic
However there are traffic improvements programmed for
downtown under both alternatives These improvements will
improve traffic flow in the downtown area As opposed to current
congestion levels this could result in an improvement to air quality
even if traffic overall increased
Downtown Plan Alternative
Many of the same impacts associated with the No Action
alternative would be applicable to the Downtown Plan
alternative This includes construction related air quality impacts
as well as air quality impacts associated with traffic congestion
Given that the potential for redevelopment activity and increased
development is greater in the Downtown Plan alternative than
is the case with the No Action alternative then so too is the
potential impact to air quality greater
While it is expected that the Downtown Plan alternative will
increase the pace of redevelopment downtown existing regulations
should adequately address air quality issues In addition other
features of the Downtown Plan alternative address air quality
issues as well For example the Downtown Plan alternative
offers a land use development pattern that is more conducive to
demand management and non motorized travel Specifically the
Downtown Plan alternative emphasizes pedestrian pathways and
bicycle paths including those that provide linkages with perimeter
residential areas into the downtown to encourage non motorized
travel Transit use is encouraged and supported
3 8 3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation should include implementation and enforcement of
existing air quality regulations including
290 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
All point sources of air pollution shall require permits from
PSCAA
PSCAA requires that reasonable measures be taken to
avoid dust emissions during construction Such precautions
may include spraying water or chemical suppressants on
bare soils during dry windy weather The City also uses
SEPA to implement mitigation techniques watering
associated with construction and cleaning of vehicles and
street cleaning
EPA and PSCAA requirements address the safe removal
and disposal of asbestos containing materials
Mitigation measures provided for by goals or policies in the
Downtown Plan include
The Downtown Plan emphasizes landscaping and street
trees This can improve air quality by providing filtering
of suspended particulates
The Downtown Plan emphasizes non motorized vehicle
use including improving the pedestrian orientation within
and into downtown as well as pursuing opportunities for
bicycle usage as an alternative to the automobile
The Downtown Plan identifies street and circulation
improvements programmed in the downtown to reduce
congestion
The Downtown Plan includes a parking strategy to address
parking needs This will reduce the need for continual
circulation by traffic within the downtown to find parking
as it becomes scarcer with more development
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
Since projects will be in compliance with PSCAA requirement
and other applicable standards no unavoidable adverse impacts
are anticipated
3 8 Air Quality 291
May 2001
1
H
fl
1
Ll
1
1
C
292 City of Auburn Downtown Plan EIS I
II Distribution List
Copies Sent
The list below indicates those agencies organizations and individuals who have received copies of
the Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS
Federal Agencies
Federal Railroad Administration
Environmental Protection Agency Region 10
National Marine Fisheries Service
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
State Agencies
Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section 2 copies
Department of Ecology Growth Management
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Community Development 3 copies
Washington State Department of Transportation
Department of Corrections
Inter agency Committee for Outdoor Recreation
Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Department of Social and Health Services
Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team
Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation
Regional Agencies
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Puget Sound Regional Council
Sound Transit
Indian Tribes
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Planning and Public Works
Fisheries
Cultural Resources Division
t
Tribal Council
Media
Auburn Reporter
South County Journal
Libraries
King County Library System Auburn Branch
King County
Honorable Chris Vance
King County Office of Regional Policy and Planning
King County Office of Cultural Resources
Metro Transit
City Agencies
Mayor City of Auburn
Chuck Booth
Auburn City Council
Jeanne Barber
Trish Borden
Stacey Brothers
Pete Lewis
Fred Poe
Sue Singer
Rich Wagner
Auburn Planning Commission 7 members
Auburn Downtown Task Force
City of Auburn Planning Director
City of Auburn Public Works Director
City of Auburn Finance Director
City of Auburn Parks Director
City of Auburn Fire Chief
City of Auburn Police Chief
City of Auburn City Attorney
Schools
1
Auburn School District
Utilities Transportation
Puget Sound Energy r AT T Broadband cable
Qwest Phone
RST
Businesses Community Organizations and Interest Groups
Auburn Chamber of Commerce
Auburn Downtown Association
Auburn Regional Medical Center
Safeway Corporation
Notice of Availability
1
1
A notice that the Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS is available has been sent to the following
organizations and agencies
Federal Agencies
Housing and Urban Development
State Agencies
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
Regional Agencies
Pierce Transit
Media
Daily Journal of Commerce
The News Tribune
Puget Sound Business Journal
Seattle Post Intelligencer
Seattle Times
King County
King County Executive s Office
King County Housing Authority
City Agencies
City of Algona
City of Bonney Lake
City of Federal Way
City of Kent
City of Pacific
City of Sumner
Schools
Kent School District
Green River Community College
Businesses Community Organizations and Interest Groups
1000 Friends of Washington
Washington Environmental Council
Members of Auburn Downtown Association Business Improvement Area
Interested Party List
Individuals who have expressed interest in the City of Auburn Downtown Plan Process are on file
with the City of Auburn Planning and Community Development Department This list is available
for public inspection during regular city business hours All individuals on the interested party list
have been sent notices of availability
Part Four
Auburn Downtown Plan Final EIS
Addendum to DEIS April 2001
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
AUBURN DOWNTOWN PLAN
Auburn Washington
This Final Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of Chapter 43 21 Revised Code of Washington RCW Chapter 197 11
Washington Administrative Code WAC and Auburn City Code ACC Chapter 16 06
Environmental Review Procedures
City of Auburn
Planning and Community Development Department
25 West Main
Auburn Washington 98001
April 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
L
TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
FACT SHEET 3
SUMMARY
Summary of Proposed Action 6
Summary of Alternatives Considered
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 10
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT EIS 16
Auburn Downtown Association Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce
Washington State Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation
King County Department of Transportation Metro Transit Division
Mr Patrick Mullaney from Foster Pepper Shefelman PLLC
Attorneys at Law
DISTRIBUTION LIST 27
NOTE Changes to the integrated Downtown Plan DEIS that have been
made in response to comments are minor and are largely confined to the
responses described in WAC 197 11 560 1 d and e Therefore in
accordance with WAC 197 11 560 5 the FEIS consists of the integrated
Plan DEIS and an addendum this document that includes responses to
comments
The FEIS therefore consists of the integrated Auburn Downtown Plan Draft
EIS issued December 7 2000 except as modified by the revisions identified
in this addendum document
1
r
1
2 1
Fact Sheet
Description of Proposal
The proposal is to adopt a Subarea Plan for Downtown Auburn The Auburn Downtown
Plan primarily addresses land use economic vitality urban design stormwater
management historic resources and transportation This is a non project action and will
result in a subarea plan amendment to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan
Location of Proposal
The proposal encompasses the Downtown Auburn area The Auburn Downtown Plan
study area is generally defined by the boundary of the Union Pack Railroad and
Interurban Trail on the west State Route 18 on the south and F Street SE NE on the
east The northern boundary is defined as 2 d Street NW from the Interurban Trail to D
Street NW 3 d Street SW SE from D Street NW to Auburn Avenue and 0 Street from
Auburn Avenue to F Street NE
Proponent and Lead Agency
City of Auburn
25 West Main Street
Auburn WA 98001 4998
253 931 3090
Responsible Official
Mr Paul Krauss AICP Director Planning and Community Development Department
City of Auburn
253 931 3090
Contact Person
David Osaki AICP
City of Auburn
Planning and Community Development Department
25 West Main Street
Auburn WA 98001 4998
253 804 5034
Permits Licenses Agreements Required
The Auburn Downtown Subarea Plan requires adoption by the City Council
Authors and Principal Contributors
The FEIS has been prepared under the direction of the City of Auburn Planning and
Community Development Department Research analysis and document preparation
on the Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS that has also been incorporated into this
document were provided by the following firms
3
1
SUMMARY I
The Final Environmental Impact Statement Final EIS includes letters received during
the SEPA public comment period December 7 2000 to February 5 2001 on the
integrated Downtown Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement DEIS and responds
to the comment letters received during that time frame The DEIS analyzed the
probable significant adverse impacts of the Auburn Downtown Plan and identified
mitigation measures as warranted
This document serves as an addendum to the integrated Auburn Downtown Plan Draft
EIS To the extent that the comments received on the Draft EIS resulted in minor
changes and technical corrections then this addendum identifying modifications along
with the Draft EIS constitute the Final EIS WAC197 11 560 5
A Summary of Proposed Action
The proposal is the adoption of a Downtown Auburn Subarea Plan The Auburn
Downtown Plan primarily though not exclusively addresses issues such as land use
economic vitality urban design stormwater management historic resources and
transportation in the context of promoting Downtown Auburn revitalization and
redevelopment This is a non project action and will result in a subarea plan
amendment to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan
Downtown Auburn has been the heart of Auburn both physically and culturally since
the community was founded in 1891 Like many American communities downtown
areas Auburn s downtown declined in the 1960 s and 1970 s as the suburbs grew and
retail activity went elsewhere Forces have continued to have a detrimental impact on
Auburn including the development of the retail strip along Auburn Way a decline in the
quality of the downtown housing stock and minimal private investment in quality
development or building maintenance Downtown Auburn merchants have difficulty
competing with nationwide and regional trends including automobile oriented big box
retail developments that have located just outside of the downtown and more recently
the growth in e commerce
While this has been going on there are has been significant recent public investment in
the downtown This includes the SR 18 C Street interchange and 3 d Street Grade
Separation project which will provide access to downtown over the BSNF tracks the
transit center with commuter rail and local and regional express bus service and the
reconstruction of A Street SW In the past streetscape improvements have been made
downtown Given these public investments which often provide a stimulant for private
investment there is a need to plan for downtown growth and redevelopment This has
created the impetus to prepare this Downtown Auburn Plan
The proposal encompasses the Downtown Auburn area The Auburn Downtown Plan
study area is generally defined by the boundary of the Union Pacific Railroad and I
6 1
Interurban Trail on the west State Route 18 on the south and F Street SE NE on the
east The northern boundary is defined as 2 d Street NW from the Interurban Trail to D
Street NW 3 d Street NW NE from D Street NW to Auburn Avenue and 4th Street from
Auburn Avenue to F Street NE
The Auburn Downtown Plan was initiated in response to several factors including but
not limited to
The existing Downtown Auburn Design Master Plan adopted in 1990
needed to be updated to continue Downtown Revitalization
The opening of Stampede Pass Rail line raised many concerns over
the impacts that such opening would have on the success of
Downtown
Multiple large projects were proposed for Downtown including
transportation projects and the construction of the new multi modal
transit center
7 Private investment in the Downtown has traditionally been scarce
Through the planning process the assets and challenges characteristic of Downtown
Auburn were identified Identified amongst the many assets was the sense of the
Heart of the City that Main Street engenders the recent street and streetscape
improvements along Main Street the presence of large employers like the Auburn
Regional Medical Center and the City of Auburn entertainment venues such as the
Performing Arts Center and Auburn Avenue Theater and the Transit Center with
commuter rail service
Challenges for Downtown Auburn include a retail district interrupted by heavy volume
streets and an excessive number of taverns underutilized and visually unappealing
buildings and properties insufficient reinvestment into downtown businesses and
properties for many years and major streets that do not convey the impression of a
downtown There are also many auto oriented uses in an area that functions best when
it is pedestrian oriented
The Auburn Downtown Plan identifies a multitude of implementation methods These
include proposed projects revising implementing development regulations and pursuing
other programs and strategies that will take steps toward accomplishing the goals for
Downtown Some implementation steps will require coordination and cooperation
between the public and private sectors others will require considerable effort by City
staff to accomplish The capital projects vary widely in their costs but overall
substantial funding will be needed to complete all of the projects The Auburn
Downtown Plan does not attempt to resolve funding issues but rather sets the tone
and approach for subsequent implementing capital facility financing decisions
11
Major strategic steps for accomplishing the goals of the Downtown Plan are identified in
the Plan These include Building out from the center of the downtown linking the
various districts within downtown to one another and improving their own individual
identities making improvements on key streets that might include landscaping
sidewalks signage crosswalks and gateways implementing catalyst projects on key
sites that will stimulate further development improving the quality of development by I instituting design standards and improving the image of downtown as a great place to
do business and invest
An extensive list of policies and actions are suggested in the Downtown Plan Many are
related to physical improvements others suggest new programs or approaches that
might include the actions of the private sector Policies address ways to strengthen the
Main Street retail district diminish blighting influences intensify land use and integrate
major proposed public facilities into the fabric of downtown Street and transportation
improvements form a vital component of the policy section as does a new strategy for
combining public and private properties and funding to develop parking facilities in
Downtown A new approach to managing stormwater is also proposed
Other policies propose to expand public art in Downtown protect residential
neighborhoods from commercial uses and other intrusions preserve and maintain
historic properties and develop architectural design standards based on a set of
guidelines presented in the plan
Overall then the goal of the Downtown Plan is to strengthen the downtown community
economy and image by building on existing assets facilitating catalyst projects in key
locations and stimulating infill and redevelopment and constructing high quality
infrastructure
B Summary of Alternatives Considered
Two alternatives were considered as part of the environmental review process These
include 1 The No Action alternative and 2 the Downtown Plan alternative The
following generally summarizes and describes each alternative
No Action Alternative
The No Action alternative is the current comprehensive plan zoning regulation other
development regulations and downtown revitalization efforts Under this alternative the
existing comprehensive plan designations and zoning will be maintained The Auburn
downtown is primarily though not exclusively zoned for commercial use Certain
residential uses are however present and allowed in the study area A few industrial
areas exist as well
Main Street continues to be the focal point of Downtown Auburn s retail activity Single
family residential neighborhoods are predominant to the west of the BNSF railroad
tracks as well as east of Auburn Way Medical uses and the hospital are prominent
8 1
along Auburn Avenue A new commuter rail station with a transit center is located just
south of West Main Street along the BNSF Railroad mainline
The No Action alternative is a viable option The existing comprehensive plan and
development regulations population and employment projections are consistent and
compliant with the Growth Management Act GMA King County Countywide Planning
Policies and Vision 2020 The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan includes downtown
plan policies that provide general policy direction for downtown redevelopment The
zoning code provides for uses and development standards in the downtown area many
of which are aimed toward achieving pedestrian friendly building design and orientation
However under the No Action alternative only a portion of the downtown would
maintain C 2 Central Business District zoning much of the downtown planning area
would remain zoned C 3 Heavy Commercial Efforts at encouraging downtown
redevelopment are on going This includes the work of organizations such as the
Auburn Downtown Association the City of Auburn and the Chamber of Commerce
however a comprehensive and detailed strategy is not laid out in adopted planning
documents
Those development proposals not exempt under SEPA would continue to be reviewed
for environmental impacts on a case by case basis Applicable transportation and storm
water standards would be required of development
Downtown Plan Alternative
The Downtown Plan alternative is reflected in this document It provides a much
stronger level of analysis and focus on Auburn s downtown with the goal of stimulating
development and redevelopment more actively than the No Action alternative
Through the planning process ideas have been generated that identify impediments and
allows for strategic redevelopment efforts Many ideas that have been verbally
discussed over time to improve downtown are now outlined into a cohesive document
with estimates of costs and time Specific redevelopment barriers are identified along
with solutions to remove the barriers Catalyst projects to spur redevelopment are
identified In addition the Downtown Plan has a much stronger emphasis on business
financing assistance public private partnerships and downtown s visual appearance
than the No Action alternative
Because of the Downtown Plan s emphasis on revitalization a higher level of intensity
development will likely occur than under the No Action alternative Intensification of
land use is a goal of the plan Buildings are allowed to be taller than in the No Action
alternative However much of the downtown planning area is downzoned from Heavy
Commercial C 3 to Central Business District C 2 to assure appropriate land uses
namely those pedestrian oriented retail service and office uses rather than auto
oriented are located downtown
Specific strategies are outlined in the Downtown Plan alternative to accomplish
redevelopment More flexibility in addressing certain development requirements
namely in transportation and storm water are provided The Downtown Plan
9
1
alternative also places additional emphasis on aesthetics and appearance of the
downtown area as both a redevelopment strategy and to mitigate impacts Stronger
code enforcement is promoted to remove nuisances and blighting influences
Sensitivity of new development to historic resources is emphasized as is the role of
public art in promoting a more desirable environment for people to work and shop
More pedestrian connections and pedestrian oriented development are foreseen This
will encourage additional pedestrian activity within and outside of the downtown area
and will reduce the reliance on vehicular transportation Bicycle routes and use are also
encouraged
Therefore the Downtown Plan alternative sets forth goals and policies that address
the issues listed above as well as others that have emerged
C Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation
Measures
In August 1998 the City of Auburn issued a Determination of Significance DS and
request for comments on the scope of the EIS The scoping process included public
notification of affected agencies and request for public input on the particular issues that
should be addressed in the EIS
The following summarizes impacts mitigation measures of the two alternatives based on
elements of the environment scoped for this proposal
1
1
1
10 1
Built Environment
77
7
7 iazv
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Alternative
Continued physical deterioration of downtown Development intensity would increase Redevelopment
buildings as there would be less potential for of existing sites and buildings and more reinvestment in
redevelopment and or reinvestment in existing existing uses would occur Greater pedestrian oriented
underdeveloped and underinvested properties development with more non motorized linkages
Less emphasis on pedestrian oriented design and Fewer automobile oriented land uses
land uses New automobile oriented uses could
locate in certain locations within the planning area
Mitigation
Design guidelines and standards are to ensure that new higher intensity building design is visually
pleasing particularly to the pedestrian and is compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses
Rezone a substantial portion of the planning area from C 3 Heavy Commercial to C 2 Central Business
District to eliminate uses inconsistent with the concept of a pedestrian oriented downtown
Encourage parking garages to avoid excessive number of small surface parking lots
Zoning and design standards requiring significant buffers to protect residential areas from incompatible
uses
Aesthetics
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Altemative
Development would largely retain existing Greater positive change in character aesthetics through
character aesthetics Low rise buildings surface redevelopment Taller buildings could be developed
parking areas uncoordinated signage facades but would be well designed and oriented to the
and or building design would remain pedestrian Structured parking would be preferred to
surface parking Public art streetscape improvements
coordinated signage and facade improvements would
be implemented
Mitigation
Street right of way to building height ratios
Create gateways landmarks and wayfinding system to encourage pedestrian use define boundaries
Underground utilities
Design standards to improve the aesthetic quality of new buildings
Code enforcement efforts to remove blighting influences and nuisances that detract from the physical
appearance of downtown
Including public art in all public projects
Streetscape and landscaping programs that provide more plant materials
11
Traffic Volumes LOS
The existing citywide land use pattern is conducive
to transportation trips by automobile As with the
rest of the city downtown traffic congestion would
worsen due to local and regional growth Traffic
congestion would worsen and certain intersections
would exceed the City s current LOS standard of D
over a twenty year period without improvements
Transit
Demand for transit ridership would be expected to
increase over time as Sound Transit adds more
commuter rail service and as more development
occurs downtown that may require additional transit
service
Parking
Increased demand for parking Parking would
primarily be provided on surface parking lots
resulting in an inefficient use of land downtown
Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities
Transportation projects within the 1998 Non
Motorized Plan would be pursued however the
1998 Non Motorized Plan deferred to the Downtown
Plan as the basis for detailed study of non
motorized transportation in the Downtown
Railroad
No additional freight or passenger service would
occur as a direct result of the No Action
alternative
Traffic Volumes LOS
Focusing land uses in the downtown that can more
easily be served by transit or avoid multiple vehicle
trips would benefit traffic citywide In the downtown
traffic congestion would become worse due increased
development A lower LOS would be acceptable
Additional traffic could pose more conflicts with non
motorized transportation
Transit
Generally the same although increased density
downtown may require local transit agencies to
respond to the need for increased bus service at a
more rapid pace than under the No Action alternative
Parking
Increase demand for parking in the downtown area
more so than the No Action alternative Development
of parking structures rather than reliance on surface
parking
PedestrianBicycle Facilities
More bicycle and pedestrian travel that under the No
Action alternative due to emphasis on pedestrian
connections within the downtown and to surrounding
neighborhoods
Railroad
Same as No Action alternative
1
1
L
r
L
1
1
1
I
12
Mitigation
Traffic Volumes LOS primarily automobiles
rd Street SW grade Continued implementation of programmed street improvements including the 3
separation project to improve safety and access to and from downtown
Establish a traffic accounting system to evaluate and monitor the progress of development and its
consistency with the development densities identified in the Downtown Plan
lement non motorized transportation strategies to encourage alternatives to automobile nd im P p ursue a
use
Coordinate with transit agencies and request additional transit service or modifications to service levels as
needs are identified
Non motorized
To avoid conflicts with vehicular traffic assess opportunities to improve bicycle facilities through lane
marking and signage systems especially in conjunction with planned traffic improvements
Continued implementation of planned pedestrian improvements
Parkin
Pursue public private opportunities to develop parking structures to provide an orderly and adequate
parking situation in the downtown for visitors and shoppers
Transit
None although transit mainly busses will also benefit from planned street improvements in the area of
downtown that will promote access and facilitate transit circulation needs
Railroads
Planned improvements including the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation project to allow for increased
regional freight mobility by separating train traffic from vehicular traffic
Pedestrian safety improvements at the West Main Street at grade crossing will be included as part of the
third main line track installation
Noise
Impacts
No Action Alternative Downtown Plan Altemative
Overall increase in noise could occur associated Greater construction related noise anticipated than
with new development construction and traffic under the No Action alternative Traffic volumes
associated with new development and commercial
deliveries are expected to be greater than under the
No Action alternative More evening related noise
might occur under this alternative due to its emphasis
on encouraging nighttime uses and activities
13
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
TO THE AUBURN DOWNTOWN PLAN
DRAFT EIS
This section responds to comments received during the 60 day SEPA comment period
December 7 2000 through February 5 2001 on the Draft Auburn Downtown
Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement DEIS Written comments were received
from the following
Loftier Received From Date of lLetter
Co signed by Robert E West Jr President Auburn Downtown
Association Landon Gibson III Chairman of the Board and CEO February 5 2001
Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce Dennis Garre Chair
Economic Restructuring Committee Auburn Downtown Association
Mr Gregory Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer February 5 2001
Washington State Office of Community Development
Mr Gary Kreidt Senior Environmental Planner King County January 10 2001
Department of Transportation Metro Transit Division
Mr Patrick Mullaney Foster Pepper Shefelman PLLC Attorneys February 5 2001
at Law representing the Safeway Corporation
The Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS was prepared as an integrated GMA SEPA
document The comments in the above referenced letters focused almost exclusively
on policy or descriptive issues within the integrated GMA SEPA document rather than
on the proposal s environmental impacts Nonetheless all comments are being
responded to in this document
February 5 2001
B Sanders Associate Planner
City of Auburn Planning Department
25 W Main
Auburn WA 98001
RE Auburn Downtown Association and Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce response to a request
for comments regarding the Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS
As you know the Auburn Downtown Association and Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce have been involved in
reviewing the Auburn Downtown Draft Plan Draft EIS Plan throughout the last several months This joint
document from the two organizations represents our initial response to the request for comments as the Plan begins
its movement through the adoption process
Our consensus is that the Auburn Downtown Phm Draft EIS is comprehensive well thought out and documented
The scope of projects addressed is broad with few omissions and a good deal of study has obviously been directed
towards potential mitigation of the more troublesome issues We understand that a great challenge lies ahead in
terms of prioritization and finding of the many projects under consideration and accept our responsibility in helping
to guide this prioritization process in a way that takes into consideration the needs and concerns of a disparate group
of downtown Auburn stakeholders
We have used Table E Actions by Task Force Priority on page 163 as a guide to help keep our comments focused
and in a framework familiar to all respondents
Policies Regulations and Programs
It is critical to move aggressively forward in the category of Policies Regulations and Programs Clear cut
Guidelines Codes Standards and processes must be established documented and disseminated to the public
ahead of the new development wave It is critical that an equal degree of effort be put forward in the creation
of incentives and removal of disincentives for both new development and redevelopment in our downtown
Through its building department the City should explore development of a rehabilitation code for buildings
constructed prior to 1970 The rehabilitation code should strive to maintain the viability of a building within
the constraints of its original construction while protecting the safety and well being of the inhabitants The
City should use the rehabilitation codes and capital improvement incentives to promote the improved quality
of downtown structures through an active program of owner education
Brochures and other appropriate documentation should be created that will make it known to potential
investors that the City has taken substantial steps to make a number of the costly and complex issues
surrounding downtown development manageable particularly in terms of the overall permitting process
street improvements and storm water management Additionally the City should continue to explore an
implement administrative processes that expedite and facilitate approvals and permits for desired
redevelopment projects
Page 1 of 4 ADA Chamber Initial Response
Draft Downtown PlanW
C
Numbers 1 2 and 3 on our most critical needs list are the JC Penny building parking structures and
Class A office space These 3 projects belong in column 1 with a 0 3 year projected completion date as
rojects that spark intense economic growth in downtown Auburn will serve as major catalyst the p y
The question came up as to whether or not an opportunity for public private funding of a parking structure
might present itself around the needs of the Truitt Building Past Time Tavern redevelopment project
already underway the Auburn Regional Medical Center s new 4 5 story building planned for the old Pric
Hilton site and the current and future needs of City Hall and a new Public Safety Building for additional
parking Interestingly enough although it appears to loom large on the current City and Council agenda
the proposed new Public Safety Building is barely alluded to in the Draft Plan It has been rumored that
the project will come with a 520 30 million price tag so its lack of prominent inchision in the Plan has the
potential to create some credibility problems early on
Additional locations and partnerships that might be investigated in terms of a combination Class A office
build ng parking structure might be Wells Fargo Bank at their current drive through 1 and Auburn Way
And the John Brekka property at 10 and D Street currently a surface paddng lot
In terms of the JC Penny building it is now and has been for a number of years the number one blight on
our downtown landscape There is no lack of interest in the building on the part of legitimate buyers with
legitimate redevelopment plans for its use The problem appears to be that there are no codes in place to
prevent a speculator with enough money from buying a prominent building in downtown Auburn only to
abandon it for an undefined number of years while he or she waits for the market to inflate its value to
some astronomical level The JC Penny building is not the only building within the Plan s geographic
boundary that has sat empty for a number of years Potential resolutions to this problem including zoning
codes and expanded public private partnerships with the City require in depth exploration and prominent
inclusion in the final adopted Plan
Under the Policies Regulations Programs category Fagade Improvement and Local Lender Program s
should be moved forward to column 1 in order to drive and not follow Auburn s redevelopment efforts
As you know the Auburn Downtown Association s Economic Restructuring Committee initiated this
process in mid to late 2000 setting up two luncheon meetings with Community Development Officers and
decision makers for all but 2 of the largest banks around both local and regional Although US Bank was
not able to attend either meeting they were contacted and expressed interest in being part of the process In
our follow up conversations with these institutions it was made clear that what is required in order to
garner their support for such a program are well defined plans and clear in depth definition of the scope o V
all projects under consideration However of equal importance to their evaluation of the merits of creating
such a funding program is the identification of all the partners involved in the projects including what
each brings to the table what role they would play i e money project management management of
paperwork and a willingness to streamline the permitting process and create flexibility of redevelopment
codes where appropriate The ADA and Chamberare ready to continue spearheading efro tsto createa
facade improvement and low interest loan and or revolving fund program In terms of moving forward
our questions and concerns parallel those of the lending institutions most specifically how can we work
with the City in facilitating establishment of such a fund in a timely fashion
An infill project at the corner of the Safeway site shows up in the 6 9 year column but in reality probably
more appropriately belongs in column 1 0 3 years In addition the Plan s drawing of what that infill e
7 might look like resembles a small retail shopping area it is our understanding that the Auburn Way
Safeway is proposes developing a gas station at that site Unless resolution of this issue is reached by final
adoption of the Plan it would be best not to include any drawings
Based on their priority placement in the 3 6 year column we have concerns about the S400K allocated to
bilce paths and or facilities This particular project would be more appropriate in the 6 9 year column To
priority should go to those projects that help make downtown Auburn a great place to live work play an
critically important succeed in business When those projects are completed and downtown Auburn is
Page 2 of 4 ADA Chamber Initial Response
haft Downtown PIWE1 S
vital and prosperous the addition of bike paths and amenities will be seen as a reflection of that
prosperitY
Although expansion of A Street NW and SW is placed in the appropriate column 0 3 years the
Plan s description of the project focuses on Phase I 3 d Street SW to Main Street We believe that
Phase II of the project continued expansion of A Street north from Main Street to 15t is a critical 1
component in the revitalization of downtown Based on the much broader scope of Phase II it
warrants expanded coverage in the document in terms of priority and funding
The placement of the Performing Arts Center linkage project in the later stages of the 6 9 year cohrmn is
appropriate Again our preference is to see those improvements closest to the center of the Plan s
geographical area completed first Unquestionably the PAC brings positive recognition to our area The
question remains however as to how directly that recognition relates to the revitalization of the downtown
core Many of the elements discussed earlier in this response i e low interest and or revolving loan fund
flexibility of building codes addition of incentives and removal of disincentives to redevelopment of our
older buildings would create a more direct impetus to increasing after hours activities in downtown The
Auburn Avenue Dines Theater is an example of entrepreneurial excellence that brings jobs people
recognition and revenue downtown without additional costs to taxpayers
The projected S500K price tag for PAC linkage appears excessive when compared to the S150K
projected for Cross Street improvements A portion of the 500K might better be applied towards the
creation a pedestrian link from Cross Street to Main particularly if the Cross Street location is developed
into a hotel convention center complex
There are two areas we have red flagged as requiring more study the Plan s proposed heavy use of trees throughout
the downtown area and the omission of any consideration of technological needs and amenities
Trees
Although focus groups are attracted to pictures and drawings of trees it is unlikely that adequate
consideration is given to trees as gifts that deeps on giving The cost of maintenance pruning removal
of leaves ongoing cleanup of clogged drains repair of root damage to surrounding brick and concrete
never stops It is critical that the cost of various types of greenery be fully researched with q
comparisons made between initial costs and long term maintenance costs projected out over a 10 to 20 W
year period A Street Tree Plan should be compatible with the Signage Improvement and Assistance
Program in so far as trees can grow and not block signs We would like to see a more conservative mix
of shrubs and trees that would serve the same beatification purpose and be more financially viable ov
a long period of time
Technological Amenities
Completely omitted from the Draft Downtown Plan is any consideration of technological needs i e fiber
optics capabilities or cyber centers both critically important in terms of a creating desirable Class A offrc
space and high tech investment We think this issue is important enough to warrant additional study and
significant inclusion in final Plan
A realistic approach must be found that ensures both approval and implementation of the Plan once it is adopted
One possible reality based approach is to compare the level of commitment and expectation projected by the Plan as
finally adopted in terms of adherence to and enforcement of all Codes Guidelines and Standards for example
those involving building health and safety code enforcement street sidewalk and alley maintenance and cleaning
and parking enforcement to the level of commitment now exercised in enforcing current codes in those areas If
there is a reality gap then consideration must be given to lowering expectations raising performance levels or
scaling back the scope of the plan
We appreciate the document s basic premise that the Auburn Downtown Plan uses an implementation based
approach that is focused on getting things done and especially the 32 Action Steps contained in the
Implementation Strategies pages 163 to 196 Clearly the execution of these steps will require extensive city sta
time and resources We encourage the use of any and all resources necessary to accomplish these tasks in the
shortest time possible
Page 3 of 4 ADA Chamber Initial Response
Draft Downtown MWEIS
The emphasis given in the Plan to the importance of building a solid working partnership between the City the
Auburn Downtown Association and the Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce will prove to be a critical element in it geeing t un ne Each of our organizations takes seriously its role in this process and we look forward to a
partnership thq encourages free flowing communication in terms of seeking recommendations and input into the
decision g process and the setting of priorities
Qinc ly a
r
o
Robert E West Jr President Landon Gibson III Chairman of the Board and CEO
Auburn pownto Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce
Dennis Garre Chair Economic Restructuring Committee
Auburn Downtown Association
11
1
r
11
1
1
1
1
1
Pale 4 of 4 ADA Charnber Initial Itapowe
Draft Downtown PINUM
Letter dated February 5 2001 from Mr Robert E West Jr President
Auburn Downtown Association Mr Landon Gibson III Chairman of
the Board and CEO Auburn Area Chamber of Commerce Mr Dennis
Garre Chair Economic Restructuring Committee Auburn Downtown
Association
1 Thank you for your comment
2 The draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS addresses building code issues for
historic older buildings Proposed Policy 27 2 page 110 entitled Develop New
Incentives calls for the development of incentives and for the elimination of
disincentives to encourage the preservation of historic character and significant
historic resources and the renovation and occupancy of such buildings Permit
fee reductions adoption of the State Historic Building Code and increased
zoning code flexibility for historic properties are identified as worthy of
consideration
3 Comment noted The draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS Downtown Image
Program discussion within Section 1 6 Implementation Strategy on page 168 is
revised as follows new language deleted laRgtiage
DOWNTOWN IMAGE PROGRAM
This element will propose a multi pronged Public Relations program
which will be used to recruit investment and improve the image of
downtown as a place to visit shop live and work A consultant
would prepare the program for the city Chamber and ADA to
implement
An image program should use a variety of media to convey
information on downtown to interested parties This might
include brochures web sites press releases presentation
materials for speaking engagements and city and downtown
gateways Incentives to developers or property owners to
make building improvements or create new high guality
developments should be clearly described
Benefits
Creates positive investment climate
Steps Required
1 Determine roles
2 Determine funding sources
3 Hire consultant to design program
17
4 Identify development incentives created or encouraged by
the Downtown Plan Select media to relay this information to
potential developers and property owners
S Implement
With reference to City codes the draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS y
Implementation Strategy discussion on Marketing and Implementation
Philosophy Section 1 6 1 already identifies the need to amend codes as
warranted to promote flexibility in redevelopment efforts
4 Priorities identified in Table E Section 1 6 2 Implementation Actions on page
163 were developed by the Auburn Downtown Task Force and are meant as a
recommendation The prioritized listing does not nor is it intended to preclude
an earlier implementation of projects identified in later time frames should earlier
implementation opportunities present themselves
5 Parking garages are identified as one element of an overall strategy to address
parking needs and encourage downtown redevelopment Figure 14 page 191
identifies potential public private parking garage location sites but as that text
states the designation does not infer the support of the property owner or the
cost effectiveness of a particular site To this extent the draft Auburn Downtown
Plan DEIS does not detail nor would it given its level of discussion whether
current site specific projects such as the Auburn Regional Medical Center
expansion or the proposed mixed use development project at the former
Pastime Truitt site present opportunities for private public funding for parking
garage structures
6 Page 192 of the Draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS discusses Class A Office
Space While this section mentions sites such as the west side of Auburn Way
South near the intersection with Cross Street as possibly appropriate and easy to
access for Class A office space purposes it also notes that many other sites
within the downtown core would also be viable Class A Office Development sites
7 The draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS recognizes that the JC Penney
building is a challenge to downtown revitalization The draft Auburn Downtown
Plan Draft EIS devotes considerable attention to the site s redevelopment Part
1 5 1 Main Street Corridor notes the JC Penney building is a major physical and
psychological gap in the retail district and Figure 18 page 131 identifies the JC
Penney site as a catalyst project Further the JC Penney property
redevelopment is discussed in detail as an implementation measure within Part
1 6 and identified possible techniques to stimulate redevelopment of the building
8 The priorities identified in Table E section 1 6 2 page 163 were developed by
the Auburn Downtown Task Force Table E is not intended to preclude the
18 1
implementation of projects identified in later time frames to an earlier date should
the opportunity present itself
9 The Auburn Downtown Plan concept expressed by the Safeway infill project is
that intensification of land uses will improve the appearance and function of
Auburn Way The draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS page 141 states
Potential projects include the addition of a building to the comer of the
Safeway parking lot emphasis added The graphic language is not intended
to preclude other development options at this location that are consistent with
this concept
10 Encouraging bicycle pedestrian orientation and movement is a key strategy in the
draft Auburn Downtown Plan DEIS This strategy complements the plan s
emphasis on encouraging pedestrian oriented architectural design development
The West Main Street non motorized improvements in particular will encourage
greater non motorized access and customers into downtown from the Interurban
Trail The project s inclusion in the draft Auburn Downtown Plan DEIS
acknowledges its non motorized project improvement s role in encouraging
non motorized transportation alternatives to and from downtown Increasing and
enhancing non motorized opportunities to and from areas surrounding downtown
is a specified mitigation measure in the DEIS to address motor vehicle related
traffic impacts
Further the draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS proposes to extend the
downtown pedestrian oriented concept and design principles along West Main
Street toward the Interurban Trail recognizing in part that this is a major
gateway into Downtown Auburn Non motorized improvements along this street
segment are consistent with implementing this Downtown Plan vision
Finally the funding amount and time frame identified in the draft Auburn
Downtown Plan DEIS for the West Main Street bicycle and pedestrian
improvements are consistent with the City s adopted Six Year Transportation
Improvement Program
11 A Street NW SW is given prominent discussion in the Auburn Downtown
Plan Draft EIS It is specifically identified as an implementation strategy in
Section 1 6 To provide greater emphasis on that portion of the project north of
Main Street additional text has been added to the project s descriptive
implementation strategy narrative page 181 as follows
A Street NW and SW
A Street SW NW is planned to be improved as a minor arterial in the
City of Auburn Transportation Plan with a new extension between 3 d
NW and 14th NE thus linking downtown with the northern retail area of
the City Extension of A Street NW will provide a much needed
continuous north south route through downtown and relieve some
1 19
1
will be upgraded The street is narrow in this older neighborhood
location and design and reconstruction work should be sensitive
to the adjacent properties
I additieR A Street SW will be the front door to the Transit Center
Improvements north of Main Street the loop portion south of 3rd Street SW
and pedestrian amenities have not yet been funded The portion of A Street
from Main Street to 10 Street NE is included on the 2001 2006
Transportation Improvement Program TIPL
Also revise the estimated cost text to state
Estimated Cost
FURded exSept fey
A St SW construction complete Main to 3rd Street SW
except for landscape and pedestrian amenities 150 000
A St NW West Main to 10th Street NW 4 2 million
12 Decisions about future project funding and timing that are not currently
programmed in the City s Capital Improvement Program will be subject to
evaluation during the City s capital budgeting process
13 The draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS currently includes policy language
relative to trees and compatibility with signage Proposed Policy SS2 9 page
123 relating to design guidelines in other commercial industrial areas notes that
there should be the sensitive placement of trees and landscaping to reasonably
avoid competition with signage i
With respect to the tree maintenance related comments additional language has
been added to the Downtown Tree Planting Program discussion in Section 1 6
Page 173
DOWNTOWN TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
Street trees are another key element which will improve the overall character
of downtown Auburn A repeating vertical element that helps to define the
street trees also increase property values while adding to the attractiveness
of businesses and adding to the overall cohesiveness of the downtown
streetscapes
20 1
A comprehensive tree planting program should include extensive
planning and preparation to minimize long term costs and
maintenance and to maximize benefit to the downtown Specific
attention should be Given to selecting low maintenance species
identifying situations where ground covers vines or shrubs are more
appropriate than trees and using design and construction
techniques that provide a healthy environment for root Growth thus
reducing the chance for damage to surrounding hard surfaces
Benefits Problems Solved
Coordination
A street tree program should be implemented in coordination with the
street lighting program street design standards and streetscape
improvements A street tree program would be implemented over time in
coordination with public and private development
Steps Required
1 Research issues of cost and maintenance associated with a street
tree program
2 Identify potential locations for trees and or other vegetation
4 3 Prepare street tree plan
2 4 Planning Commission review and recommendations
3 6 City Council review and adoption
4 6 Implement in phases over time
14 The document has been revised in several locations to take note of the Qwest
central office facility as a downtown technological asset for the purposes of
attracting Class A office space Page 34 Section 1 3 2 existing assets has been
revised to state
Just off Main Street near the core of Downtown are a number of other
assets that will play a key role in Auburn s future The Transit Center
and A Street SW are recent major assets to the core area of downtown
A Street SW the SR18 C Street Interchange and the V Street Grade
Separation project will improve access to downtown and alleviate traffic
congestion that results from increased rail activity Finally Qwest has a
central office facility where calls are switched located in
downtown Auburn at Second Street SW and Division Street
Certain types of businesses including Class A Office Space
particularly benefit from access to high speed communications
infrastructure frequently associated with these facilities Generally
closer proximity to a central office facility often means higher
quality telecommunication services
21
1
11
In addition Proposed Policy 4 1 on page 68 has been expanded to include language
that the City of Auburn will pursue opportunities to develop high speed technological
communication infrastructure that could support or attract desired businesses to
Downtown as follows
Policy 4 1 Coordinate utilities with development
Coordinate water service sanitary sewer and storm water facilities
electrical and fiber optic facilities with increasing development Downtown
Pursue opportunities to develop technologically advanced high
speed communication infrastructure that supports or could attract
desired businesses to Downtown Auburn
The discussion on Class A office development also makes reference to use of the
Qwest central office as a possible recruitment asset Page 34 Section 1 3 2 Existing
Assets has been revised to add the following language
Class A Office Development
The Downtown Market Analysis identified demand for Class A office space
in downtown Like the hotel sites on the west side of Auburn Way near
the intersection with Cross Street are appropriate and easy to access
Many other sites within the downtown core would also be viable Class A
Office development sites Class A office development typically has
technological communication needs As indicated earlier the
presence of the Qwest central office in this area could be used to
help market and attract Class A Office development
15 Comment noted
16 Comment noted
17 Comment noted
I
1
22
sure o
o L J
Vp Oi rya ieM y
STATE OF WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION
420 Golf Club Road SE Suite 201 Lacey PO Box 48343 Olympia Washington 98504 8343 360 407 0752
Fax Number 360 407 6217
February 5 2001
Ms B Sanders
City of Auburn Planning Department
25 West Main Street
Auburn Washington 98001
In future correspondence pleas6 Aier to
Log 020501 22 KI
Re Review Comments on Auburn owntown
Plan
Dear Ms Sanders
The Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation OAHP is in receipt of the Auburn
Downtown Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement DEIS On behalf of the State Historic
Preservation Officer SHPO I have taken the opportunity to review the Plan and DEIS to assess effects of
the document on cultural resources including archaeological historic and traditional cultural places in the
planning area
As a result of my review I am writing to express support for the Downtown Plan Alternative and
implementation of the Plan as it pertains to historic properties As made clear in the Plan Downtown
represents the heart of the community The goal of revitalization is commendable since a healthy and
attractive downtown signals a vibrant and dynamic community The Downtown Plan for Auburn is also
commendable for its attention to preservation of historic resources The downtown area of any community
represents an important concentration of historically and architecturally significant properties Therefore a
historic preservation component is indispensable in any planning document My review of the Downtown
Plan for Auburn clearly indicates historic preservation as a key element in the City s revitalization strategy
From this point I recommend the City s adoption and implementation of the Plan Implementation should
include identified historic preservation tasks Please feel free to contact OAHP for assistance toward
attaining Auburn s historic preservation goals and policies
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Plan and DEIS Should you have any
questions I may be reached at 360 407 0766 or eggna cted wa aov
GAG
Cc Holly Gadbaw
Julie Koler
State Historic Preservation Officer
0
Letter dated February 5 2001 from Mr Gregory Griffith Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer Office of Community Development
1 Thank you for your comment As you indicated historic preservation is a key
element of the city s overall downtown revitalization strategy
2 Your comment recommending adoption and implementation of the plan is noted
as well as your agency s offer to provide technical assistance in the future
23
0
King Cottaty
Department of Transportation
Metro Transit Division Design Construction Section
Enviroamenud Planning and Real Estate
201 South Jackson Street MS KSC TR 0431
Seattle WA 98104 3856
206 6841418
206 684 1900 FAX
January 10 2001
Ms B Sanders Associate Planner
City of auburn
25 West Main St
Auburn WA 98001 4998
Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS
Dear Ms Sanders
King County Memo Transit Division and Transportation Planning Division staff have reviewed the Auburn
Downtown Plan Draft EIS and have the following comments
From a transit service and facilities standpoim the draft should include more information regarding transits
operations particularly in terms of the downtown streets dw would support transit service Some specific
comments are as follows
Page 58 Improve Key Streets This section should be expanded to include an identificarion or discussion of the
key transit streets m downtown Auburn When the new Commuter Rail transit center is ready for use within the
next several years it will be necessary to shift some transit service onto difference streets through downtown in
order to access this facility Key transit streets in downtown Aubum would aichide 2id St SW 1 St NW and
A St NW SW
Pages 69 73 Street Impmvement Transpottation Policies This section on transportation policies goals does
not include public transit On page T there is mention of the new Commuter Rail Transit Center but no
discussion of the transit routings through downtown to access this facility Perhaps a new policy regarding transit
improvements on key scree would be appropriate KC Metro staff could provide input to assist in the
development of that policy
Pages 76 79 Sidewalk Corridors This description of optimal functions for different sidewalk zones should
also mention modifications necessary to accommodate bus zones which would include adequate width and
clearance for accessibility landing pads and passenger waiting shelters KC Metro staff could provide input to
assist in the development of those recommendations related to bus zones
Should Auburn staff seek further information regarding these comments please contact either Doug Johnson
206 684 1597 or Paul Alexander 206 684 1599 Thank you for the oppormairy to review and comment on
this proposal
Sincerely
Gary Kriedt Senior Environmental Prater
IN
MOBILITY FOR THE REGION
J L
January 10 2001 Mr Gary Kreidt Senior Environmental Planner
King County Department of Transportation
1 The Draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS has incorporated additional language
identifying 2 d St SW 1 st St NW and A St NW SW as key transit streets within part 1 4
Section C Improve Key Streets page 58 59 The following will be added as a final
paragraph to this section on page 59
Finally there are also key streets related to transit The
development of the commuter rail station and the rail station s transit
center will necessitate shifting some transit service onto different
relating to bus service to the commuter rail station include 2 Street
SW 1s Street NW and A streets NW SW
Also the Existing Conditions Transit Facilities and Services discussion in Section 3 4 I page 251 Transportation will be revised as follows to reflect these key streets
The Sound Transit Station has been designed to accommodate both
commuter rail and bus service Once the station is complete the bus
transfer hub will move from 1st and B Street NE to the Sound Transit
Station All routes traveling through or within Auburn will pass through this
regional hub to facilitate travel between bus and train Certain key transit
transfer hub include 2 Street SW 1st Street NW and A Streets
NW SW Bus service will be coordinated with commuter rail departures
and arrivals
2 The Draft Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS has been modified to include a new
proposed policy proposed Policy 8 3 page 75 addressing the need for street and
streetscape standards to consider public transit routes and infrastructure needs of
public transit providers New Policy 8 3 will read as follows
Policy 8 3 Public Transit Routes and Infrastructure Needs
Street and streetscape standards for the Downtown shall take into
consideration public transit routes and infrastructure needs of public
transit providers
3 To ensure public transit infrastructure needs are considered when downtown street
design standards are developed the street design standards elements itemized in
Section 1 6 Implementation Standards Downtown Street Design Standards page
170 has been revised to include reference to Public transit infrastructure as follows
r
24
Downtown street design standards should be revised to ensure that
future street improvements both publicly and privately funded will
implement the Downtown Plan and Urban Design Vision
Element of street design standards include
Sidewalk corridors including furnishings
Curbs curb ramps
Driveways
Driveway apron design
Street corner specifications
Public transit infrastructure needs
Other street development standards
25
V V r A W 1riM JLLY
FOSTER PEPPER SHEFELMAN PLLC
AT T 0 L X I V wT Aw
m
1
D ttt 64 6 i I 284 twT Illi
Dlast 1 tttolll
February 5 2001 a T os
VIA FACSIl1i1II E MvtLr lr a r t a
253 931 3053
Mr David Osaki
Department of Planning CommunityDevelopment City of Auburn
25 West Main
Auburn Washington 98001 4998
Re Auburn Downtown Man Draft EIS comments I r r Tu ao
Dear David AvtNVt
Jolt 4ee
Iwrite on behalf of our client Safeway Safeway would like to thank the City
S ATTLI
vtlitirtttt of Auburn for the opportunity to comment on the Auburn Downtown Plan and Draft i l r r J i
EIS the Safeway commends the effort that has gone into the Plan and the r vision that Auburn has ser for itself rtrt abe t
Given Safeway s longstanding relationship with the community and presence
t tl1M I
0044 f 7
at its Auburn W Y J t orrLSafewa was pleased t leamthatthe City had e tbtirf designated its store as a Key Anchor is the Plan The Safeway store was the only a TIti COH
Key Anchor designated in the southern downtown area and it will serve as an
amenity for the mixed usefresidential neighborhood that is proposed immediately west of the store Also as pointed out in Draft EIS Appendix Tables III 2 and III 4 while retail food stores com rise 7 f A 0 b d p on u o urn s owntown business mix these stores provide a significant percentage of Auburn s retail sales tax collection
Safeway is working with the City to add a fueling facility to its Auburn Way AMCNO location Fueling facilities are a national trend in the grocery industry and are
Aw
Ait t
necessary to serve the needs of Safeway s customers and to remain competitive with other grocery retail ers P en 0O etew
Pages 141 and 193 of the Plan suggest possible infll development of the SWT
Safeway site Such development would present a potential conflict with Safeway s 3 t r
desire to add a fueling facility and could impact the Safeway s ability to serve as an rO twMt economic anchor for the downtown area
i l t nr
I Paul Krauss
February 5 2001
Page 2
Safeway looks forward to woridng with the City to create an a att tiye downtowu I
that promotes the goals of the State s Growth Management Act and provides Safeway customers a F with the services that they require
Again thank you for the opportunity to commenr on the Plan and Draft EIS
Sincerely
Patrick J ey
Cc Barb Richardson Safeway
1
February 5 2001 letter from Mr Patrick Mullaney from Foster Pepper
Shefelman PLLC Attorneys at Law
1 Comment noted
2 Comment noted
3 The Auburn Downtown Plan Draft EIS graphic on page 141 and implementation
discussion on page 193 reflect a general plan concept that intensification of land
uses along Auburn Way will improve its Auburn Way s appearance and function
The text on page 141 that accompanies the graphic states Intensifying land uses
will also improve the appearance and function of Auburn Way Potential projects
include the addition of a building to the comer of the Safeway parking lot
emphasis added Thus a building at this location is identified as a potential
project The graphic language on page 141 and the implementation discussion on
page 193 are not intended to preclude the possibility of other land use options at this
location consistent with the plan s concept
K 1
A
I I
n
1
I I
I I
I I
1
LI
DISTRIBUTION LIST
FEIS ADDENDUM COPIES SENT TO
The following list identifies those agencies organization and individuals that have been
sent copies of this addendum
Federal Agencies
Federal Railroad Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Environmental Protection Agency Region 10
State Agencies
Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section 2 copies
Department of Ecology Growth Management
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Department of Natural Resources
Office of Community Development
Washington State Department of Transportation
Department of Corrections
Inter agency Committee for Outdoor Recreation
Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission
Department of Social and Health Services
Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team
State Archeology and Historic Preservation Office Mr Gregory Griffith
Regional Agencies
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Puget Sound Regional Council
r Sound Transit
County Agencies
King County Department of Transportation
Honorable Les Thomas
King County Office of Regional Policy and
King County Office of Cultural Resources
Metro Transit Division Mr Gary Kreidt
Planning
City Agencies
Mayor City of Auburn
Chuck Booth
27
0
Auburn Ci Council
Jeanne Barber
Trish Borden
Stacey Brothers
Pete Lewis
Fred Poe
Sue Singer
Rich Wagner
Auburn Planning Commission 7 members
Auburn Downtown Task Force
City of Auburn Planning Director
City of Auburn Public Works Director
City of Auburn Finance Director
City of Auburn Parks Director
City of Auburn Fire Chief
City of Auburn Police Chief
City of Auburn City Attorney
City of Sumner Community Development Department
Business Community Organizations and Interest Groups
Auburn Downtown Association
Auburn Chamber of Commerce
Safeway Corporation
Mr Patrick Mullaney Foster Pepper Shefelman Representing Safeway Corporation
Private Citizens
Jeff Revegno
Michelle Chang
Amanda E Vedrich
Indian Tribes
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Planning and Public Works
Fisheries
Cultural Resources Division
Tribal Council
Media
Auburn Reporter
South County Journal
Schools
Auburn School District
Libraries
King County Library System Auburn Branch
28 1
h L J
NOTICE OF FEIS AVAILABILITY
A notice of issuance and availability of the Auburn Downtown Plan Final EIS has been
sent to the following
Federal Agencies
Housing and Urban Development
State Agencies
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
Regional Agencies
Pierce Transit
Media
Daily Journal of Commerce
The News Tribune
Puget Sound Business Journal
Seattle Post Intelligencer
Seattle Times
King County
King County Executive s Office
King County Housing Authority
City Agencies
City of Algona
City of Bonney Lake
City of Federal Way
City of Kent
City of Pacific
Schools
Kent School District
Green River Community College
Businesses Community Organizations and Interest Groups
1000 Friends of Washington
Washington Environmental Council
Members of Auburn Downtown Association Business Improvement Area
Auburn Regional Medical Center
J
29
Utilities Transportation Utt
Puget Sound Energy
AT T Broadband cable
Qwest Phone
RST
1
30 1