City staff say signage or driveway closure, not roundabout, are practical fixes for T‑intersection crashes

Federal Way public works staff told the City Council on July 15 that engineering options — not a roundabout — are the practical near-term responses to recurring crashes at a T‑intersection where a private driveway intersects the roadway.

The issue matters because the driveway predates current city standards and sits where modern rules would forbid it; staff said the location has been the scene of several collisions involving suspected DUI or excessive speed, and neighbors worry for pedestrian and senior safety.

Public Works Director EJ Walsh briefed the council in response to a resident complaint about the intersection identified in the presentation. Walsh said the site predates incorporation and explained current standards: “the minimum spacing between driveways is a 150 feet,” and “driveways that serve only residential uses may not be located within 25 feet of any street intersection,” meaning the property today would only be permitted one driveway and it could not be in the intersection. Staff reviewed collision reports from Jan. 1, 2021, to the present and found ten reports in the catchment area; four of those shared the same pattern cited in public comments, and three of the reports directly involved the property driveway. Walsh said the three directly related collisions and a fourth similar crash all listed suspected DUI or excessive speeding as contributing factors.

The city presented options that do not require large-scale land acquisition: install a permanent “do not enter” or a distinct yellow-and-black double-arrow warning sign (both permitted by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, MUTCD), erect a vertical barrier and close the driveway if the resident agrees, or pursue a roundabout only if the city condemned adjacent property. Walsh said a roundabout large enough for that intersection would probably require taking part of the southwest corner or the property itself. “We would either have to condemn the southwest corner of the intersection and take out properties there or take out this property to be able to have enough room to make a roundabout,” he said.

Walsh said the city previously offered to remove the driveway apron and replace the primary driveway as part of a street reconstruction project but the resident declined at that time. Staff told the council they have since offered to install a permanent sign or the yellow-and-black double-arrow warning sign if the resident grants permission; Walsh said he had not yet received the resident’s response.

Councilors asked clarifying questions about the number and location of collisions, signal presence and pedestrian concerns. Councilor McDaniel confirmed staff’s collision accounting and asked whether a signal exists for the driveway; Walsh said he would verify whether the driveway has a dedicated signal head. Councilor Honda emphasized nearby senior housing and asked whether speed humps were possible; Walsh said the roadway’s capacity makes humps infeasible and recommended increased enforcement and adjusted signal timing to break speeds along the corridor.

No formal council action was taken; staff said they will proceed to install the yellow-and-black sign if the resident consents and otherwise continue enforcement and signal‑timing options to address speeding concerns.