Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L99-0023 - SECURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT # 2 LLC - PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTL99 -0023 TUKWILA PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LAND DIVISION 13217 40th Ave. So. City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Prepared July 6, 2000 HEARING DATE: July 17, 2000 NOTIFICATION: • June 30, 1998 Public Notice Board posted on South 146th Street • July 9, 1999 Notice of Application mailed to 36 property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the site • July 22, 1999 Public Meeting held at Foster Library • October 5, 1999 Determination of Nonsignificance mailed to parties of record and SEPA mailing list • October 5, 1999 Determination of Nonsignificance posted on the site • June 30, 2000 City Council Public Hearing Notice mailed to 36 surrounding property owners and parties of record June 30, 2000 City Council Public Hearing Notice published in Seattle Times July 10, 2000 Public Meeting held in Conference Rm. 5, Minolta Building • FILE NUMBERS: L99 -0024 (Subdivision) L99 -0023 (PRD) E99 -0012 (SEPA) APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: SEPA DECISION: Gary Greer, Secure Capital LLC City Council Approval of Preliminary Plat subdividing six parcels totaling 6.78 acres, into 20 single family lots, including streets, sidewalks, utilities and pedestrian path linking the subdivision with 38th Avenue South. West side of 40th Avenue South, south of South 130th Street Determination of Nonsignificance issued October 5, 1999 (File No. E99 -0012, see Attachment E) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential RECEIVED JUL 0 7 2000 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision ZONING DISTRICT: LDR, Low Density Residential RECOMMENDATION: Approval With Conditions STAFF: Carol Lumb ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map B. Proposed Preliminary Plat C. Public Meeting Attendees and Written Comments Received D. Applicable Subdivision Code E. SEPA Determination and SEPA Staff Report F. Squier/HGI Geotechnical Report dated 7/15/98, and Nelson Couvrette & Associates Geotechnical Report dated 3/27/2000 G. Shannon and Wilson Peer Review Report, dated 5/30/2000 H. One -Year and Fifteen -Year Landscape Perspectives I. Illustration of Detention Pond Landscaping (to be provided at public hearing) FINDINGS VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION Project Description: Subdivision of 6.78 acres into 20 lots with associated public improvements for streets, landscaping, water, sewer, storm drainage, fire hydrants and illumination. The new lots will range in size between 6,582 square feet to over 8,500 square feet. (See Attachment B) Existing Development: The site is currently developed with a single family home, which is accessed from 40th Avenue South. The home will be retained on a parcel that was created through the boundary line adjustment process. Surrounding Land Use: The site is located primarily in a low density residential area. The subdivision is bounded on the west by Tukwila International Boulevard, although the topography of the site provides a physical barrier between the subdivision and the Boulevard; on the east by 40th Avenue South and single family residential development; and on both the north and south by single family residential development. Terrain.. The site slopes down from west to east with the steepest slope on the site. approximately 48 percent. The maximum slope within the proposed residential area is less than 30 %. The steepest portions of the site have been placed in an open space tract. Vegetation: The site contains ground cover and deciduous trees. Street trees will be planted along the new access streets serving the subdivision and any trees .cleared that are located in q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 2 z re 11 JU O 0 N 0: LU JF. CO U- w0 g Q: 5.0_d I— III z F— 0. Z I- LL/ ui U 0: O N. O 1-. w w — 0: w z. U 0 z Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision the steep slope sensitive areas will be replaced as required by the Sensitive Areas Overlay (SAO) and Tree Ordinance. Public Facilities: The site is served by Water District #125 and Val Vue Sewer District. Sewers will be extended from 40th Avenue South to serve the site. The access road from 40th Avenue South serving the subdivision has been designed to provide a pedestrian connection through to 38th Avenue South. PUBLIC MEETING COMMENTS A public meeting was held on July 22, 1999 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Foster Library. Seven people, in addition to City staff, the applicant and his engineer attended the meeting conducted by the Department of Community Development. The following issues or concerns were expressed at the meeting: • There should be no through connection from the subdivision to 38th Avenue South. A through street would create an unsafe condition for the children living 011 38th Avenue South and would generate too much traffic. • The detention pond proposed at the entrance to the subdivision should be placed underground, like Foster View Estates, the subdivision up the street. • If the detention pond does remain above ground, it should be well landscaped and maintained. • How high is the fence that would go around the detention pond? • The new street should have regular curbs, not rolled curbs that encourage cars to park on the sidewalk. • What kind of houses will be built and what will the price range of the housing be? Staff responded that a decision had not been made yet on the issue of a through street. Engineering options 011 where the detention pond is located will be reviewed, and whether it is above or below ground will be discussed with the applicant. The applicant stated that house prices probably would range between $200,000 and $250,000. The plans submitted to the City included examples of the types of houses proposed for construction. These will be reviewed by the City Council as part of the subdivision approval process. In addition, a number of written comments were received from area residents. The primary issue addressed in the written comments related to the whether a through street connection between 40th Avenue South and South 130th Street is provided from the subdivision. Concern was expressed about the safety to the current residents and their children if a through street is constructed. Other issues raised related to the aesthetics of the detention pond and street standards. Copies of these letters are included as Attachment C. A second public meeting will be held on Monday, July 10, 2000 from 5 -7:00 p.m. to provide another opportunity for interested citizens to obtain information about the proposed subdivision prior to the public hearing. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff - rpt.doc Page 3 Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision DECISION CRITERIA The standards for approval of a preliminary plat application are contained in the Tukwila Subdivision and Zoning Codes. This is the second subdivision submitted for City review and approval since the adoption of the revised subdivision ordinance March 2, 1998. The Tukwila Zoning Code classifies preliminary plats as a Type 5 decision (TMC 18.104.010(F.)). Under the Type 5 process, the City Council conducts an open record hearing and makes a decision on the preliminary plat that may only be appealed to Superior Court. (TMC 18.100.030) The City Council's decision shall include Findings and Conclusions that demonstrate that the recommendation is: "...consistent with, carries out and helps implement applicable state laws and regulations and the regulations, policies, objectives and goals of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, the City of Tukwila's Development Regulations and other official laws, policies and objectives of the City of Tukwila." (TMC 18.100.030) At the final plat stage, another public hearing will be held at which the Council will review the plat's compliance with any conditions applied through preliminary subdivision approval. At the final plat stage, the Council will also review any Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (C, C and R's) that apply to the plat. REPORT ORGANIZATION There are a number of criteria that apply to the review of a preliminary plat. The report is organized to address these criteria in the following way: I. Preliminary Subdivision Approval Standards II. Planned Residential Development Standards III. Sensitive Areas Ordinance IV. Tree Ordinance V. State Subdivision Code VI. Zoning Code Requirements I. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL STANDARDS: Tukwila's Subdivision Code (17.14.020 C.) provides the following criteria for City Council decisions on preliminary plats: q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 4 z g. JU '0 0: c W I J � w 0: u_ 1 • I— al •z �. �- 0: zl—• D o' 0 N; :0 H` w w. 1-U! • . z: 0 -: 0 ~. Staff Report to the City Council L99 -0024 Tukwila Subdivision 1. The proposed subdivision is in conformance with the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and any other City adopted plans. The following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies apply to this subdivision: Subdivision Design and Street Layout: The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Residential Neighborhoods Chapter provides a number of goals and policies to guide residential development in the City. Goal 7.1, Neighborhood Quality states: Urbanization and development that fosters a sense of community and replaces lost vegetation and open spaces with improvements of at least equal value to the community. Applicable policies to implement this goal are: 7.1.1 Maximize neighborhood quality through City actions that help define the City and neighborhoods as specific "places." Goal 7.4, "Streetscape Development" states: Streetscapes that enhance neighborhood quality and strong sense of community. Applicable policies to implement this goal are: 7.4.1 Provide pedestrian and other non - motorized travel facilities, giving priority to sidewalk improvements that connect public places; such as parks, the river, open spaces and neighborhood gathering spots. 7.4.2 Emphasize a network of residential local access through streets, minimizing cul- de -sacs. 7.4.4 Design residential local access streets to provide the minimum capacity for emergency access and for slow traffic. Goal 7.6, "Private Sector Development" states: Residential neighborhoods with a high - quality, small -town pedestrian character. Applicable policies to implement this goal are: 7.6.4 Support single - family residential in -fill housing that is in harmony with the existing neighborhood as a means of achieving adequate, affordable, and/or diverse housing. At the .public meeting many of the attendees stated they did not want a through street to connect the proposed plat with 38th Avenue South. The residents along 38th Avenue South expressed concerns about the increase of traffic that would occur and the safety hazards that would pose to children who currently play on the dead end street. In response to these concerns, a through street connection from 40th Avenue South to 38th Avenue South is not proposed, although a pedestrian connection will be provided. The lot configuration in the Page 5 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc ., Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision subdivision orients the majority of the lots to face each other to establish a neighborhood "feel" to the development. The private access roads will have a designated pedestrian walk area, identified with a different paving surface than what is used for the road. The cul -de -sac bulb is larger than specified in TMC 17.20.030 General Standards, 6. Public Roads, due to concerns expressed by the Fire Department that the largest Department fire trucks require additional turning radius room. The landscape island in the middle of the cul- de -sac is also sized to prevent conflicts with emergency vehicles. The proposed subdivision is in an area with a mix of larger lots between three - fourths of an acre and one acre in size capable of further subdivision and smaller residential lots. The subdivision will provide housing opportunities in an area with existing facilities and services, such as schools and utility infrastructure. Sanitary sewers will be extended to serve the subdivision. Utilities: The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Utilities Chapter states: Policy 12.1.15 Approve development only if adequate utilities are available when a need is created for those facilities, or within a reasonable period as approved by the City. Policy 12.1.28 Require that new developments locate required storm water management facilities on site unless a regional facility benefiting a drainage basin is constructed, or storage is provided in the river, or it is a single - family short plat or smaller residential development. Adequate utilities are available to serve the proposed subdivision. Val Vue Sewer District provides sewer service; Water District 125 provides water service. Storm water will be retained on -site in a detention pond located at the entrance to the subdivision. The storm water will then be released into the storm water system located in 40th Avenue South. Attachment B, Sheet 3 illustrates the proposed utility plans for the subdivision. Public Use and Service Areas: Policy 13.5.8 Provide additional foot trails as opportunities and development occur. As part of the off -site improvements, the developer will construct a five -foot wide pedestrian path to connect the subdivision with 38th Avenue South providing an easement through adjacent property. The pedestrian connection is being provided in lieu of connecting the road accessing the subdivision with 38th Avenue South. The pedestrian path will permit access through to South 130th Street and then to Tukwila International Boulevard and transit facilities located there. The applicant has proposed the path be concrete on -site and gravel off -site. A condition of approval will be to require the use of concrete for the entire path to ensure visibility and low maintenance. Page 6 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff - rpt.doc - .,,...,»......._,..- Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision 2. Appropriate provisions have been made for water, storm drainage, erosion control and sanitary sewage disposal for the subdivision which are consistent with current standards and plans. As noted above under the discussion of the Comprehensive Plan policies, the site will be served by Water District #125 and Val Vue Sewer District. Adequate water is available to serve the site via a 6 -inch line in 40th Avenue South. The sewer line will connect with an existing sewer line in 40th Avenue South. Storm water will be collected and detained on site in a detention pond to be located at the low spot on the site, which is at the south entrance to the subdivision. The storm water will be released to the existing storm water system in 40th Avenue South just north of the subdivision. 3. Appropriate provisions have been made for road, utilities and other improvements which are consistent with current standards and plans. The proposed roads, utilities and other improvements are consistent with current standards and plans with the exception of the size of the cul -de -sac as discussed above. The main street serving the subdivision will be dedicated to the City upon its completion and approval as meeting Public Works standards. That street will have 50 feet of right -of -way and a 28 foot paved travel surface. Two private access roads serve 8 of the lots; with a third access tract providing access to one home and the pedestrian trail that will link the subdivision with 38th Avenue South. The access tracts will remain private and will be maintained by the residents served by the access tract. The pedestrian access trail will be required to be. constructed of concrete. The applicant will pay approximately $1,539 in traffic impact fees for the project. The cul -de -sac bulb is larger than specified in TMC 17.20.030 C.6. due to concerns expressed by the Fire Department that the largest Department fire trucks required additional turning radius room. Half -street improvements, including curb, gutter and sidewalk, will be installed on the west side of 40th Avenue South from the north edge of Tract B south to the end of lot 18. Utilities such as electricity and gas are adequate to serve the site. 4. Appropriate provisions have been made for dedications, easements and reservations. The main street serving the subdivision will be dedicated to the City upon its completion and approval as meeting Public Works standards. That street will have 50 feet of right -of -way and a 28 foot paved travel surface. As noted above, there are two private access roads that serve 8 of the lots; with a third access tract providing access to one home and the pedestrian trail that will link the subdivision with 38th Avenue South. The access tracts will remain private and will be maintained by the residents served by the access tract. The pedestrian access trail will be required to be constructed of concrete — the applicant has proposed a mix of concrete on the subdivision site and gravel off -site for the trail. The concrete path will ensure its visibility Page 7 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision and durability over time. An easement will be provided through property that intervenes between the subdivision and 38th Avenue South. The storm water detention pond will be dedicated to the City for maintenance after completion and approval as meeting Public Works standards. 5. The design, shape and orientation of the proposed lots are appropriate to the proposed use for which the lots are intended and are compatible with the area in which they are located. The subdivision is designed to orient the lots in a way that is conducive to establishing neighborhood community and quality within the constraints of the site's topography and stream systems. The lack of a through street hinders the connection between the subdivision and the homes that lie along 38th Avenue South, however, the pedestrian path will provide at least a small physical connection. 6. The subdivision complies with the relevant requirements of the Tukwila Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances, and all other relevant local regulations. The preceding sections have discussed the subdivision's consistency with the requirements of TMC Chapter 17, Subdivisions and Plats. The discussion of the zoning code requirements for subdivisions follows below. 7. Appropriate provisions for maintenance of privately owned common facilities have been made. There are two open space tracts proposed as part of the subdivision to set aside steep slope areas and the areas that contain a Class 3 stream and two Class 2 streams and their buffers. Typically, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC & R's) are used to outline maintenance responsibilities. The Council will review and approve the CC & R's as part of the final subdivision. 8. The subdivision complies with RCW 58.17.110. The criteria outlined in RCW 58.17.110 are essentially the same as those set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.100.050. These criteria will be discussed in Section VI below. In addition to the criteria noted above, the Subdivision Code includes the following design and improvement standards for subdividing land: environmental considerations; compatibility with existing land use plans; street standards; blocks; lots; landscaping; street signs; lighting; and monumentation. The items that are not addressed in other sections of this report are addressed below. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\.staff- rpt.doc Page 8 • Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision • BLOCKS TMC 17. 20.030 E. requires that the length of subdivision blocks be not less than 300 feet nor more than 1,000 feet, with the width of blocks wide enough to allow two tiers of lots, except where abutting a major street or prevented by topographical conditions or the size of the property. The main access road providing access to the majority of the subdivision lots is approximately 510 feet in length. The shape of the plat does not permit two tiers of lots to be created. z z� w U O co U W =. w • O • LOTS �? TMC 17.20.030 F. establishes the criteria for lot arrangement and design for both interior and = d z�. O The lots are generally rectangular or square with the shape of the lots determined in part by z the shape of the two open space tracts. The shape of lot 20 was revised to provide a building 2 n envelope that allowed more flexibility for development. The lots meet the requirement of c=.� N 6,500 square foot minimum lot area and average lot widths of 50 feet. All proposed lots are o capable of meeting the standards when they are developed. = w U. O. wz Street lighting will be provided as required. The applicant will follow the standard lighting ,� �! fixtures adopted by the Public Works Department in its Infrastructure Design and z Construction Manual. corner lots. • LIGHTING • TREES TMC 17.20.030 G. requires one street tree per lot be provided, which will add 20 trees throughout the subdivision. The cul -de -sac will have a 20 -foot diameter landscaped island in the center. A proposed conceptual landscape plan has been provided by the applicant. The applicant is proposing to use a mix of Katabura Tree, Birch, Ash and Flowering Pear trees throughout the subdivision. Some of the trees are not drought tolerant or are susceptible to disease. The applicant will be required to revise the landscape plan to substitute trees that are more appropriate for this locale. Attachment H represents the one -year and fifteen -year perspectives of the street trees and tree replacement areas. Landscaping is proposed around the storm water detention pond to ensure that it is screened appropriately given its very visible location at the entrance to the subdivision. A color board (Attachment I) will be provided at the hearing that illustrates the landscaping concept for the detention pond. For safety purposes, the detention pond will be fenced; the applicant will be required to install chain link fencing with a black plastic coating, which helps obscure the fencing. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 9 Staff Report to the City Council II. PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS L99 -0024 Tukwila Subdivision The Sensitive Areas Ordinance requires any new residential subdivision that includes sensitive areas or its buffers on the site to apply as a Planned Residential Development (PRD) In this case the presence of the streams on the site triggers the PRD requirements. TMC 18.46.112 provides that the following criteria must be met to approve a PRD: 1. Requirements of the subdivision code for the proposed development have been met, if appropriate. The requirements for compliance with the subdivision code are set forth under Section I, above. 2. Reasons for density increases, or lot size and setback reductions , meet the criteria as listed in the PRD chapter of this title. The applicant is not requesting a reduction in lot sizes or setbacks for this project. 3. Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated. The relationship of the project to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance is discussed under Section III, below. 4. Compliance of the proposed PRD to the provisions of this chapter (18.46) and the Sensitive Areas Overlay District chapter of this title. The stated purpose of the PRD chapter is: a) to promote the retention of significant features of the natural environment; b) encourage a variety or mixture of housing types; c) encourage maximum efficiency in the layout of streets, utility networks and other public improvements; and d) create and/or preserve usable open space for the enjoyment of the occupants . (TMC 18.46.010) These criteria are addressed below. a) The preliminary plat has set aside the stream areas and their buffers and the steepest portions of the site into two open space tracts totaling 89,658 square feet. The streams are significant features of the site. As a condition of approval, where the open space tract abuts a residential lot, the boundary will be identified through the use of a split wood or other form of fencing that will clearly identify the end of the residential parcel and to prevent encroachment into the open space tract. b) The project will provide single family homes similar to those shown on Attachment B, Sheet 7. However, the current owner is in the process of selling the property to another individual who will develop the homes. To provide more flexibility for the new owner, the plat will be conditioned to allow the Director of Community q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff - rpt.doc Page 10 z .,._ w 6 �' U O' CO CI w= J CO u. wo 2 J LL Q =w z� O' Z I— U O N. ww � Z til U� H I— •O z Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision Development to review and approve the design of the new homes. The proposed homes must be designed to reduce the prominence of the garage. c) The street system and other public improvements are laid out in an efficient manner z that permits the maximum number of lots to be created while still encouraging a z sense of community in the project. �— w d) The open space tracts will be available for use by the residents of the subdivision for open space purposes. A trail system through Open Space Tract A was not required v 0 due to the steep terrain in the area and concern that a trail would damage vegetation to on the slope. The open space tract A serves as a buffer between the development CO and Tukwila International Boulevard. u w O. 5. Time limitations, if any, for the entire development and specified stages have been g -. j u) d There are no time limitations or stages of development that have been identified for this ? 1— O: Z 1— 6. Development in accordance with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan and o Section I above, criteria 1. identifies the relevant Comprehensive Plan policies and w w discusses compliance of the proposed plat with them. 0 W z. 7. Compliance with design review guidelines. N; Sheet 7 of Attachment B provides three examples of the type of houses that would be. built on the proposed lots. Typically the City Council reviews proposed designs of the homes to be built in the subdivision and approves the design concept. In this case, the current owner is in the process of selling the subdivision to another party who will then develop the lots. documented in the application. project. other relevant plans. To permit more flexibility for the future developer, it is proposed that the Director of the Department of Community Development be authorized to review and approve the design of the homes to be built. The design of the homes as proposed by the current owner is illustrated on Attachment B, Sheet 7. As can be seen, two of the three designs feature a garage that dominates the front of the house. The new homes will be required to de- emphasize the garage by setting the garage back further and emphasizing the entrance to the homes more. Many of the homes will be built on slopes, so the designs presented by the future owner will need to respond to that site feature. The proposed building materials are typical of those used in the construction of single family homes: wood or vinyl siding, composite roofing and an exterior lighting feature. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 11 Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision 8. Appropriate retention and preservation of existing trees and vegetation recommended by the Director. A little more than two acres of the 6.78 -acre site is set aside in open space tracts, in which no clearing will occur. The applicant has provided a conceptual tree restoration plan that identifies the trees to be removed and the number of trees to be planted in their place. A final tree restoration plan will be submitted for approval prior to the issuance of a Land Altering permit. III. SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE Water Courses The site contains areas with slopes over 20 percent and lies within the 560 -acre Southgate Creek drainage basin, which drains into the Duwamish River. Southgate Creek branches into the North, Middle and South Forks upstream of a culvert under South 133rd Street. The project site lies between and includes the North and Middle Forks of Southgate Creek. The Middle Fork of Southgate Creek discharges under Highway 99 through a culvert, drains an area upslope of the highway as well as the south end of the project site before it flows under 40th Avenue South. A small tributary also discharges from a culvert under Highway 99, and then flows easterly across the southern portion of the site behind Lots 14 -20. This tributary merges with the Middle Fork of Southgate Creek. The North Fork of Southgate Creek crosses the northeast corner of the project site before it also drains under 40th Avenue South. The Middle Fork and the tributary are both classified as a Type 2 stream. The North Fork is classified as a Type 3 stream under the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. The applicant has requested a reduction in the 35 -foot required buffer between Lot 16 and Lot 20 and placing the stream in an additional 180 feet of piping to provide access to Lots. 18 -20. As mitigation for the additional piping, the applicant will create a small sediment pond to allow stream flows to be reduced before entering the intake pipe. The area around the pond will be enhanced with native plant species and will include additional trees. To permit the reduced buffer, the watercourse mitigation plan will provide plantings of native species to replace the removed vegetation. The conceptual landscaping plan proposes using western red cedar around the proposed sediment pond. Approval of both the additional piping and the buffer reduction are a Type 2 decision made by the Director of the Department of Community Development. Final approval of this request will be made after the City Council has taken action on the Preliminary Plat. Page 12 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc z a• I-- Z ul CC J U • .0 CV cn tu W 0- g ¢. =d. z : I-0� Z l— D o. ;o wuf M _ Z ui U !Q z• Staff Report to the City Council Tukwila Subdivision • L99 -0024 Steep Slopes Given the steep slopes on the site and the amount of clearing and grading that will occur in the course of installing roads, infrastructure and homes, peer review was conducted on the applicant's geotechnical reports. Copies of the applicant's geotechnical reports are attached as Attachment F. A copy of the peer review report is found in Attachment G. The Peer Review Report, prepared by Shannon and Wilson, relies on the Nelson - Couvrette Geotechnical report for its analysis. On the issue of site drainage, the Report states it is not clear the extent to which drainage may be a problem on the site since the areas to be cleared are currently heavily vegetated. The topography, geology and hydrology are complex on the site and will be changed by construction activity. Rather than require extensive drainage measures at the outset, the Peer Review Report recommends that a general contingency plan be prepared for implementation during construction if drainage issues are revealed. The Peer Review Report suggests the elements of the contingency plan could include the definition of acceptable performance, the person responsible for determining the need, the person responsible for the design, and the person responsible for assurance that the requirements have been met. On the issue of structural fill, the Peer Review Report recommends that imported clean sand and gravel be used under all buildings, under and behind all retaining structures and within 18 inches of the surface under all paved areas. For the detention pond, the Peer Review Report notes that not much detail has been provided about it and that based on a review of the information, the pond should be lined to prevent infiltration of perched water into the pond or water from the pond entering the groundwater. Implementation of the Peer Review Report recommendations will be a condition of approval of the preliminary plat. IV. TREE ORDINANCE The Tree Regulations section of the Zoning Code requires that trees removed from sensitive areas be replaced, with the number of replacement trees based on the size of the trees that are removed. The applicant has provided a tree inventory and concept tree replacement plan. The tree inventory identified 93 trees located in sensitive areas that will be removed. Based on a review of the tree inventory, 279 replacement trees will be required for those trees removed from the areas with slopes greater than 20 percent. To meet this 279 tree requirement, the landscape plan shows 34 street trees in addition to those required by the Subdivision Code. Eleven trees will be used as part of the screening of the detention pond. An additional 11 trees will be provided in the restoration areas. The remaining trees will be provided as seedlings, 3 -4 feet in height. It may be that additional trees will be cleared in order to place when the additional stream area is placed in a pipe. Page 13 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Staff Report to the City Council L99 -0024 Tukwila Subdivision If that is the case, then additional replacement trees will be required, based on the size of the trees removed. A final landscaping plan and tree restoration plan will be submitted for approval along with the Land Altering Permit; no clearing will be permitted until these two plans have been approved. The final tree restoration plan will reflect any additional trees that have been identified for removal and the number of additional replacement trees required. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff - rpt.doc Page 14 4 cW J0 U0: to CI 0 W' • • :NIJ W. H 0. ,W W. • • • ��O N tllZ •• Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision V. STATE SUBDIVISION CODE: RCW 58.17.110 The criteria set forth under RCW 58.17.110 mirror those established by Tukwila Municipal Code 18.100.050, which are discussed in Section VI. VI. ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS TMC 18.100.050 of the Zoning Code requires the City Council make the following additional findings when reviewing subdivisions: 1. Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students walking to and from schools; and 2. The public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication. 3. If the City Council finds that the proposed subdivision and dedication make such appropriate provisions and that the public use and interest will be served, then the City Council shall approve the proposed subdivision and dedication. Dedication of land to any public body, provision of public improvements to serve the subdivision, and/or impact fees may be required as a condition of subdivision approval. Dedications shall be clearly shown on the final plat. (TMC 18.100.050) The discussion above under Section I, the criteria established by the Subdivision Code for approval of a subdivision, has demonstrated that appropriate provisions have been made in this plat for the public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision complies with the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and furthers its implementation through the development of single family designated lands and urban infill development. CONCLUSIONS Preliminary Subdivision Standards 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and its policies on subdivision design, street layout, vegetation replacement, utilities and public pathways, per TMC 17.14.020 C. 1. 2. Appropriate provisions have been made for water, storm drainage, erosion control, sanitary sewage disposal, roads and public utilities as well as dedications, easements and reservations, per TMC 17.14.020 C.2 and TMC 17.14.020 C. 4. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 15 z Z JV. 0 0 , W W I J N u_ w O. u. J. sd. z I-- Z I— w o. O— `Ca I—. wW H U' IL r- O Z N' O z Staff Report to the City Council Tukwila Subdivision L99 -0024 3. Appropriate provisions have been made for road, utilities and other improvements. The main street accessing the homes will have 50 feet of right of way with 28 feet of paved area. Full frontal improvements are required along the western side of 40th z Avenue South. _� ,i— z ct w 4. The storm water detention facility will be dedicated to the City upon certification that m it has been constructed to City standards. UO 5. The design, shape and orientation of the proposed lots are appropriate based on the w = shape of the parcels being platted, per TMC 17.14.020 C.5. N LL w0 6. The subdivision will provide one street tree per lot, as required by the subdivision 2 code. The landscaping plan proposes using two trees that are not appropriate for street � co j tree use. = cy t—= 7. The block fronting the main road conforms to the requirements of TMC 17.20.030 E; z the topography and size of the existing parcels being platted do not lend themselves to z O. providing two tiers of lots. ? o O co 8. The lots are generally rectangular or square with the lots on the north side of Road B 0 1 -- the exception due to their location at the cul -de -sac bulb and the shape of the parcels w w being platted established by TMC 17.20.030 C.6. � r II O: 9. The cul -de -sac bulb is larger than prescribed by TMC 17.20.030 C. 6. due to concerns w N` by the Fire Department that its largest equipment cannot navigate a 60 -foot diameter H = bulb. z Planned Residential Development 10. Two open space tracts totaling just under two acres are established to protect the steepest portions of the site and three stream courses. 11. The plat is in the process of being sold. The new owner must submit typical house designs for review and approval that de- emphasize the garage as a feature in the front of the house. Sensitive Areas Ordinance 12. The site contains slopes over 20% and 3 stream courses, one rated as a Class 3 stream and the other two Class 2 streams. The Director has approved as a Type 2 decision, a buffer reduction adjacent to Lot 16 and the additional piping of 180 feet of the Middle Fork of Southgate Creek. The applicant is providing mitigation for the approval of these two administrative decisions: a small pond with native vegetation plantings to catch sediment prior to the stream entering the intake pipe; and additional plantings in the reduced buffer area. Page 16 q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpidoc '.. Staff Report to the City Council L99 -0024 Tukwila Subdivision 13. The applicant provided two geotehnical reports that received peer review by Shannon and Wilson. The peer review report recommended that the applicant: a) prepare a contingency plan to be ready for implementation in the event that site clearing, grading or construction to address any drainage problems that emerge; b) use imported clean sand and gravel for structural fill for all buildings and behind all retaining walls; and c) line the detention pond. Tree Ordinance 14. A tree inventory of the site indicates 93 trees within the identified sensitive areas that are required to be replaced by TMC 18.54. Two hundred and seventy -nine replacement trees will be required. A final landscaping plan will be submitted for approval prior to any land altering or clearing on the site. State Subdivision Code 15. The subdivision complies with RCW 58.17.110. Zoning Code 16. Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety and general welfare, and development of the subdivision furthers implementation of the Comprehensive Plan through the development of single family designated lands and providing urban infill development. RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Findings and Conclusions of the staff report and APPROVE the preliminary plat and planned residential development as proposed with the conditions set forth below and allow the applicant to develop construction plans and specifications and to prepare a final plat. 1. The developer shall submit revised designs of the homes proposed for the subdivision for review and approval by the Director of the Department of Community Development. The house designs shall emphasize the front entrances; garages shall have less prominence in the design. 2. The recommendations of the peer review conducted by Shannon and Wilson Engineers shall be implemented. 3. No clearing may occur until a final Tree Replacement Plan and Landscaping Plan have been reviewed and approved. Where the replacement trees are approved to be seedlings, they must be 3 -4 feet in height. ✓ 4. The entire length of pedestrian path connecting the subdivision with 38th Avenue South must be concrete. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 17 • Staff Report to the L99 -0024 City Council Tukwila Subdivision 5. The pedestrian walkways on the private access tracts shall be concrete to clearly distinguish the pedestrian area from the vehicle travel area. 6. A split rail or other type of fencing must be installed to separate the Open Space Tracts from the residential lots to prevent encroachment of the single family lots into the open space tracts. 7. Final design of the storm water detention pond will be subject to approval of the Public Works Director and Department of Community Development Director. 8. The landscaping plan must be revised to use types of street trees more appropriately suited to their purpose. q: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision\staff- rpt.doc Page 18 • z• _r- • I— Z .u6 D: . J U, UO! • 0o' N wr• .J; .w O, • ~ w;, 1..l • 11- O:. ..z 'W W'> • :0 • uu ,= W'. 1— V • O Zi • d N. City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF DECISION To: Gary Greer, Secure Capital LLC Parties of Record: See attached State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division This notice is to confirm the decision reached by the Tukwila City Council on July 17, 2000.. The City Council voted to approve the preliminary plat for Tukwila Subdivision based on findings and conclusions in the staff report dated July 6, 2000 as supplemented herein. The City Council's Conditions of Approval are attached. This letter is issued pursuant to the Permit Application Types and Procedures, Tukwila Municipal Code Zoning Chapter (18.104.170), on the following project and permit approvals. PROJECT: FILE NUMBERS: ASSOCIATED FILES: APPLICANT: REOUEST: LOCATION: SEPA DETERMINATION: Preliminary Plat of Tukwila Subdivision L99 -0024, L99 -0023 E99 -0012 Gary Greer, Secure Capital LLC Preliminary approval of 20 -lot subdivision 40th Avenue South, South of South 130th Street Determination of Nonsignificance Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday; 8:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. The planner managing the project is Carol Lumb, who may be contacted at 431 -3670 for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 z _- • w 6D. U o' 0. W= J H' N LL. w 0, gm; d. I- w, z� �— 0 wI uj n o. ion'' `w w'. .z 0. o, z. U= o z Notice of Decision Tukwila Subdivision Preliminary Plat L99-0024, L99-0023 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS On July 17, 2000, the Tukwila City. Council adopted the Findings and Conclusions contained in the staff report dated July 6, 2000. The City Council also made the following findings: • That the proposed location and configuration of the open stormwater detention pond creates potential adverse impacts relating to community aesthetics, and if improperly designed and maintained could create a nuisance with regard to noxious organism and insect control. • That the state - mandated five -year allowance for plat construction, with the possibility of extension, could result in excessive exposure of the public to construction - related impacts within the existing 40th Avenue South right -of -way. Of specific concern is the possibility that utility and other work within the existing right - of -way could result in an unacceptable road surface for an extended period of time. DECISION The City Council has approved the preliminary plat and planned residential develop- ment as proposed with the conditions set forth below. The proposed conditions, which the Director of the Department of Community Development is authorized to review and ensure are met, are as follows: 1. The developer shall submit revised designs of the homes proposed for the subdivision for review and approval by the Director of the Department of Community Development. The house designs shall emphasize the front entrances; garages shall have less prominence in the design. 2. The recommendations of the peer review conducted by Shannon and Wilson Engineers shall be implemented. 3. No clearing may occur until a final Tree Replacement Plan and Landscaping Plan have been reviewed and approved. Where the replacement trees are approved to be seedlings, they must be 3 -4 feet in height. 4. The entire length of pedestrian path connecting the subdivision with 38th Avenue South must be concrete. 5. The pedestrian walkways on the private access tracts shall be concrete to clearly distinguish the pedestrian area from the vehicle travel area. 6. A split rail or other type of fencing must be installed to separate the open space tracts from the residential lots to prevent encroachment of the single- family lots into the open space tracts. Notice of Decision Tukwila Subdivision Preliminary Plat L99 -0024, L99 -0023 DECISION (continued) z 7. The final design of the stormwater detention pond will be subject to approval of the _- z ,, Public Works Director and Department of Community Development Director. The W design of the pond must meet the following objectives: 0 - designed to be aesthetically pleasing, preferably with a curvilinear shape; c W' - planted with appropriate plantings, both in the detention pond and around it; and i i - designed for ease of maintenance and nuisance control. w CO 0 � �, w O; 8. The landscaping plan must be revised to use types of street trees more appropriately suited to their purpose. u_ <: 9. Any utility or other construction conducted within existing public rights -of -way 1_,. w; shall be scheduled and conducted in a manner that will minimize the disruption of z 1=-! traffic. In the event temporary patching or other repairs to existing streets is z 0 needed, it will be accomplished in a timely fashion and result in a reasonably smooth and uniform travel surface, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public D o' Works. The Public Works Director is authorized to order the timely repair of o -:. 01-. unacceptable irregularities in the travel surface of 40th Avenue South at any time w uj . after construction of the plat commences and prior to final plat approval. I- vi O:. 111 Z U N' F= _; 01 z • "1111 SHANNON 6WILSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS May 25, 2000 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188-2599 Attn: Mr. Mike Cusick rk rf mAY 2090 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RE: PEER REVIEW SECURE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS #2, LLC 40 TH AVE. S. TUKWILA, WA At your request we have reviewed the geotechnical engineering report and preliminary plan sheets for the above referenced project. In addition we made a short site visit to observe the general conditions. This report presents the results of our findings. SEATTLE RICHLAND FAIRBANKS ANCHORAGE SAINT LOUIS BOSTON In general, we did not find any fatal flaws and believe the project can be built within the general framework presented. Details must be sorted out in the final stages of the project. Specific comments are addressed below. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORTS It is our understanding that Squire/HGI Associates performed a geotechnical evaluation of the site in 1998, which was submitted to the City for consideration. The City wrote review comments based on that report. The owner then retained Nelson-Couvrette & Associates, Inc. to do a new study in 2000 which is the one being considered in this document. We have seen the 1998 report. Although we have not seen the review comments, we have seen a response to those comments by Nelson-Couvrette & Associates, Inc: dated March 8, 2000. The primary difference between the two reports lies in the approach to handling potential water problems. Other than that one issue, the reports are very similar. In general, the Nelson- Couvrette report gives more complete recommendations and, where there are differences, we tend to agree more with the that report. The following discussions assume the Nelson-Couvrette report is being followed. 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 206•632•8020 FAX 206•633•6777 TDD: 1•800•833•6388 21-1-09051-001 ATTACHMENT G City of Tukwila Mr. Mike Cusick May 25, 2000 Page 2 SITE DRAINAGE SHANNON &WILSON, INC. Drainage is difficult to quantify at this site. The explorations indicate water flowing along the surface and through the surficial soils throughout most of the site. In addition, they revealed seepage from sand zones at deeper depths in some areas on the site. In our opinion, the surface water will be a problem during construction and afterward when the homeowners try to keep their yards useable. If the water is not controlled, the surface may become a muddy mess in some areas and there may be shallow slides on steeper areas. The deeper water is more insidious. There are several potential problems. The water may be at, or above, basement levels at some locations requiring waterproof construction. If the water daylights anywhere, it will make that localized area soggy and undesirable, and will contribute to the surface water. If the water table is high under paved surfaces, it will weaken the soils and could shorten pavement life. Under some conditions, the pressures in this layer may cause relatively deep slope stability problems. It appears to us that the first report took the conservative approach to the surface water problems and recommended extensive drainage measures. It appears that the second report made light of the matter because there were minimal visible effects of water during the explorations. Neither report considered the negative impacts of the subsurface water. It appears to us that the issue is much more complex than either report suggests in light of how the construction may change the regime and how those changes may effect the project. The topography, geology and hydrology are complex and they will be changed by the construction. It seems unlikely that any reasonable amount of exploration and study will completely define all aspects of the conditions and.the required remedial measures. Therefore, we recommend that the developer be required to develop a general contingency plan to be implemented during construction when drainage issues are revealed. The details are perhaps not as important as the recognition that there may be a need to expend a considerable amount of money on drainage, which is not part of the initial design. The plan might include: • The definition of acceptable performance. • The individual responsible for determining the need. • The individual responsible for the design. 21-1-09051-001 -L1 /WP/PEC =' . City of Tukwila Mr. Mike Cusick May 25, 2000 Page 3 SHANNON &WILSON. INC. • The individual responsible for assurance that the requirements have been met. The alternate approach is to require extensive drainage measures at the outset that may not actually be necessary. STRUCTURAL FILL In our opinion, it may be possible to dry and compact the on -site silt as the report suggests. We would be the first to let the owner try to save money where appropriate. However, it has been our experience that compacting silt seldom produces a highly stable foundation with any reasonable level of effort, particularly if there is any groundwater or precipitation. We recommend that imported clean sand and gravel be used under all buildings, under and behind all retaining structures, and within 18 inches of the surface under all paved areas. Retaining walls and structures need solid footings and paved areas should not be allowed to frost heave and thaw weaken. It also would not be desirable to place silt fill on wet areas. Wall pressures. In our opinion, backfiIl behind all retaining walls should be clean, free - draining sand and gravel, and drainage layers and drainpipes should be installed. It was probably the intent of the authors to mandate this restriction, but there are areas in the report, which may leave the door open to using on -site silt without drains behind walls. DETENTION POND There seems to be a lack of detail regarding the detention pond. There also seems to be an inconsistency in the treatment of the pond and other drainage considerations at the site. The report suggests that the perched water at the site may infiltrate into the pond. This could only happen if the phreatic surface (groundwater table) at that location was higher than the water surface in the pond. If this is the case, then there must be more water in the soil than the report's treatment of drainage and slope stability would suggest. If the reverse were true, water would leave the pond and enter the groundwater regime resulting in an increase in the water table or an 21 -1- 09051 -001- LI/WP/PEC 21 -1- 09051 -001 Q = f- Z W re 21 6U 00 N0 CO W W =` J F N LL: W O: LL ?. to 1_W' Z �. z °. Um • 01 W w` • Z .w N'. O I. .:z • City of Tukwila Mr. Mike Cusick May 25, 2000 Page 4 SHANNON FIWILSON. INC. increase in the pressure if the.water is in a confined aquifer. Both are very undesirable situations. In our opinion the pond should be lined. Preliminary Plans by ESM Consulting Engineers Preliminary Plat/ PRD (Sheet 1/8) 3/4/00 . • No comment Boundary and Topographic Survey (Sheet 2/8) June 4, 1999 • Information only Preliminary Utility Plan (Sheet 3/8) 3/24/00 • Outside our area of concern Preliminary Grading Plan (Sheet 4/8) 3/24/00 • There is extensive site grading shown with cuts, fills and retaining structures. The problems associated with water and working with water sensitive materials has been discussed but can't be overemphasized. ► There are many retaining walls, some crossing property boundaries and others on property boundaries. There are ownership, easement and timing issues associated with many of the walls. For instance, an 8- foot -high wall will have a footing or internal reinforcement on the order of 5 feet wide. One would assume the vertical face would be on or very near the property line but the landscaping choices could be severely limited by the support structure for the wall. In general, the downhill owner would have most at stake in the aesthetics of the wall but the uphill owner could be most limited by its presence. • We presume someone has thought about the disposition of the creek along the southern boundary as it traverses lots. 18 and 20. Landscape and Recreation Plan (Sheet 5/8) 3/24/00 • Outside our area of interest 21 -1- 09051 - 001 -L1/W P /PEC 21 -1- 09051 -001 z z 6 UO. WI W O: H W, ? Z 1- LU uj U co O CI F-. WW LI w Z U= City of Tukwila Mr. Mike Cusick May 25, 2000 Page 5 • Tree Retention Plan/Slope Analysis (Sheet 6/8) 3/24/00 • No comment CLOSURE SHANNON &WILSON. INC. The plans and reports reviewed are preliminary and general in nature. We have reviewed them as such looking for fatal flaws and large issues that need to be addressed at this juncture. There will be other issues that develop during final design that cannot be addressed at this time. We have relied on the work of others for all information, and hence our analysis is no better than the information provided. We have performed this work using the state of the practice in this area at this time. There is no other warranty, either expressed or implied. We have appreciated this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions, please contact Tom Kinney at (206) 695 -6703. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. TCK/tck 21 -1- 09051- 001- L1/WP/pEC !EXPIRES 9/3/ p/ Thomas C. Kinney, Ph.D. P.E. Vice President. 5 21 -1- 09051 -001 . ' , .z • ■ Z ryw J V' UO unw. w I: JI. 0 • D. �w • H.O, D o: • :0 wW •H V ,- o' • III z; CO! • z• City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director October 18, 1999 Mr. Michael Weinstein Triad and Associates 11814 115th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98034 -6923 RE: Tukwila Subdivision (L99 -0023, L99 -0024, E99 -0012) Dear Mr. Weinstein: City staff has had an opportunity to review in greater detail the proposed Tukwila Subdivision, located at 40th Avenue South and South 130th Street. The following documents were reviewed in preparing our comments: z w JU 00 cno WI J � SQw. w0 Q J. LL Q' co w zF., i- z i—. w U� CI I- I HV. July 15, 1998 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Squier/HGI w Associates; . Z • December 30, 1998 Preliminary Storm Drainage Report prepared by Triad c.) Associates; 0 �: • March 1, 1999 Traffic Study prepared by Transportation Solutions, Inc., • August 13, 1998 Wetland Reconnaissance and Stream Relocation Concepts report prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates • Revised March 24, 1999 project plans (submitted June 7, 1999) prepared by Triad Associates. The comments noted below with an asterisk ( *) must be addressed before the subdivision can proceed to the Council for its review. General Comments *1. The proposed pedestrian trail that traverses the western and southern portion of the development is to be eliminated. These areas are extremely steep and/or sensitive and should not be disturbed. In lieu of a trail, a pedestrian connection to 38th Avenue South will be required. *2 There does not appear to have been any coordination between the different consultants. The proposed plans do not incorporate the recommendations made by the geotechnical engineering study and the storm drainage report does not 7/ I.. D .S llw�7w^�fa+erso./b /.M� T -.dn.dle.- .Weej�lnntnn..Ai%j_-. .,,,h2a . l.- A9.J.-.2. t...aCay.': /- 9/Yi►�d!'i:?/�%i'Ctillt . Mr. Michael Weinstein Triad and Associates October 18, 1999 appear to incorporate the effects of providing curtain drains to control ground water flow. z *3. A significant number of rockeries are being proposed, some as retaining walls in z ,2 steep slope areas. No rockery will be permitted over 4 feet in height. Further, for ur those areas where steep slopes are present, an engineered retaining wall will be 6 n required. i p N0: w= Geotechnical Engineering Study J j— *4. A peer review of the geotechnical study will be required. This peer review will W o occur after any needed revisions are made to the geotechnical report based on the g J comments in this letter and prior to the Council review of the plat. LL co D *5. The Squier/HGI Associates report includes a statement indicating that grade cuts z ? i !— should be limited in steep portions of the site. Squier/HGI Associates must E- p evaluate the stability of the slopes and the suitability of the subgrade for each z I- LIJ w individual lot. As part of the evaluation, an analysis of the proposed retaining walls shall be conducted. The project plans are to show the locations where key 0 y_ and benching is required. o I- al Ill *6. Because construction is proposed in a Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic 1 Instability, the construction of the individual foundations needs to be addressed. . Z Is it feasible to construct each foundation and driveway separately? In other c.) co`. words, can each foundation and driveway be constructed without adversely i impacting the neighbor's side yard stability. Can slope stability be maintained or z should a "series" of foundations be constructed at one time? *7. Given that the geotechnical engineering study was prepared before both the storm drainage report and the project plans were completed, Squier/HGI Associates should review both and provide an evaluation as to whether the plans have incorporated the geotech's recommendations. *8. The geotechnical engineering study stated that control of the ground water was necessary in order to construct footings on firm natural deposits and recommended curtain drains. Further, the study states that careful control of surface water runoff is important to prevent landslides. Therefore the proposed surface and subsurface drainage plan needs to be evaluated by Squier/HGI Associates and an evaluation prepared. In reviewing the tree survey the majority of trees on the steep western slope are bigleaf maple, which indicates dryer conditions in the upper soil layers. Therefore, the recommendation to install a deep curtain drain at the top of slope should be designed not to have a detrimental effect on existing trees growing on the slope. The c: \carol \tukwila subdivision \Weinstein.doc ... Mr. Michael Weinstein Triad and Associates October 18, 1999 curtain drain has the potential to divert water that is necessary for existing vegetation on the slope. 9. A registered professional geotechnical engineer is to be on site at all times during the installation of the utility systems, during land altering activities, and during the construction of the roads and building pads (foundations, foundation drains, driveways, etc.). Daily construction reports are to be prepared, signed, and submitted to the City of Tukwila by the geotechnical engineer certifying that the work has been accomplished in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Tree Regulations 10. A request has been made under TMC 18.54.140 for an exception to use smaller plant material than required by the Tree Ordinance. This request is still under review. The plan's total tree replacement number of 279 trees includes street trees. Street trees and any other tree planting required by the subdivision code cannot be used to meet the Tree Permit requirement. Trees that are planted as part of the detention facility to enhance or screen the pond may be applied to the tree permit. 11. The current landscape plan includes the replacement of trees removed along the lower, western slope for developing Lots #9 through #14. Developing these lots requires tree replacement because of the 20 percent and greater slope conditions. Per TMC Chapter 18.54.140, the slope restoration proposed at the back of these Lots is appropriate and smaller plant material may be used. Where appropriate native tree seedlings can be planted but the recommended size is 3 — 4 feet in height. Depending on height, the 3 year, 2 -1 seedling stock may be acceptable. *12. Reducing the lot size and setbacks, as permitted by the PRD overlay, might reduce the number of trees that need to be cleared and reduce slope disturbance and retaining wall height. Most of the lots in the plat exceed the minimum lot size of 6,500. Under the PRD, the lots can be reduced by 15% to as small as 5,525 square feet and the setbacks can be reduced by 15 %. Gary Schulz, the Urban Environmentalist, estimates that the total number of trees that may be saved is 15. If this is accurate, then that would reduce the number of required replacement trees by a total of 48. We would like to discuss the feasibility of this option with you in order to reduce disturbance in the steep slope areas. Surface Water Management *13. The Storm Drainage Report mentions the existence of an existing stream within the project's boundaries but does not provide any analysis as to its effects upon surface water management. How do the streams fit in with the stormwater plan as well as the siting of individual houses? c: \carol \tukwila subdivision \Weinstein.doc 3 Mr. Michael Weinstein Triad and Associates October 18, 1999 *14. Please verify whether a Hydraulic Project Approval permit will be required for this project. You may confirm this by contacting Phil Schneider, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist. *15. A water management plan must be prepared that incorporates the recommendations made by all the consultants to control both ground water and surface water flows. Each consultant will be required to review and sign the report. The project plans must incorporate the recommendations made in the Water Management Plan. *16. The Geotechnical Engineering Study identifies the need for curtain drains to properly control the groundwater, but the Storm Drainage Report does not include this requirement in the surface water retention and detention calculations. * 17. We would like to discuss the feasibility of moving the storm water detention pond to lot 18 to avoid locating the detention facility at the entrance to the subdivision. In addition, please provide addresses for examples of the landscaping of detention facilities so that we can visit the sites to determine their suitability in Tukwila. Traffic Analysis 18. Potential traffic impact and concurrency mitigation costs will be addressed prior to preliminary plat approval. *19. The diameter of the cul -de -sac must be enlarged to meet Fire Department standards, which are 81 feet of paved area. Phis does not include the area needed for curb and sidewalk. A five -foot wide sidewalk is required. In addition, a pedestrian trail connection to 38th Avenue South must be provided in lieu of the trail through the open space tract. *20. On -street parking is proposed for the main access street. In order to accommodate on -street parking, the road right of way must be 51 feet in width — 41 feet from back of curb to back of curb for travel and parking lanes; 10 additional feet is needed for the sidewalks on both sides of the road. *21. Tract D Access road must be relocated to the other side of Lot 18, in order to prevent conflicts with the main access road. Subdivision Design *22. Please provide a street lighting plan, including illustrations of the type of lighting fixtures to be installed. *23. The PRD Chapter requires certain landscape and site treatment for sites with Class 2, 3 and 4 geologic hazard areas (TMC 18.46.060 F). For downslope and c: \carol \tukwila subdivision \Weinstein.doc 4 Mr. Michael Weinstein Triad and Associates October 18, 1999 side yard buffers, photomontage or computer - generated perspectives, taken at the nearest downslope off -site privately owned property, must show minimum landscape coverage of 25% of the structures at the time of project completion with anticipated 40% coverage within 15 years. You have provided one year and three year perspectives. Are you anticipating that 40% coverage will be achieved by the third year? We would also like to have the perspectives extended to show the homes further up the hill to the northwest and also revised to illustrate the types of homes that are shown on Sheet 7 of the 8 sheets submitted on June 7, 1999. Sensitive Areas Ordinance *24. The current plans propose placing the watercourse channel in the vicinity of Lots 18 and 20 in a culvert. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45) regulates whether this is permitted or not. In general, piping is to be avoided unless absolutely necessary. Piping may be allowed for access purposes if approved by the DCD Director (TMC 18.45.080 D., attached). Some form of mitigation will likely be required. It seems possible to keep this drainage mostly open if a new channel can be provided along the south side of Tract D Access Road. You will need to provide documentation with regard to the current proposal's consistency with TMC 18.45.080 D.6. or revise your proposal to ensure consistency. Moving the access tract D to the south side of the lots it will serve may also impact the plans to pipe this section of the watercourse. For the purposes of TMC 18.104.130 1., the 120 -day clock has been stopped while the information requested in this letter is provided. Please call me if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss any of the comments in this letter. I can be reached at 206 -431- 3661. Sincerely, � C A.t (y (4,2ovV' Carol Lumb Associate Planner cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Jim Morrow, Director, Public Works Department Joanna Spencer, Associate Engineer Gary Greer, Secure Capital Katherine Russell, Triad and Associates c: \carol \tukwila subdivision \Weinstein.doc 5 CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NON'SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: SUBDIVISION TO CREATE 20 LOTS ON 7.1.1 AC. AND BLA AFFECTING 4 LOTS WITH EXISTING HOUSES IN VARIOU'S LOCATIONS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. PROPONENT: LOCATION OF PROPOSAL. INCLUDING ADDRESS: PARCEL NO: SEC /TWN /RNG: LEAD AGENCY: 13217 40 AV S 734060 -0901 NW 15 -23 -4E STREET ADDRESS. IF ANY: CITY OF TUi(WILA FILE NO: E99 -0012 The City has determined that the proposal does not have.a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. • ..l e**• k• k• kA:• k****• k• k• k• k• k• N• k• k: k• k• k• k• k• M• k• k •M•k•k•k•k•k•k•k•k•k•k•k•k*A* *: * k*** *•k•k•k•kk•k**:14•k•k•k•k**k*** **k 4144 This determination is final and signed this day of Oc4132,- 199/. __--- •-- - - -• -- •- Steve Lancaster. Responsible Official City of Tukwila. (206) 431 -3670 6.300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188- Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. • z Z o O, w C3 CO =. J 1. CO LL; w O'. LL Q: — d' �w z �. • moo. z f— ;Ova: Iw • LL O •w � O F z. TUKWILA SUBDIVISION PLAT REQUIREMENTS FROM EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENTS The following items will be required of the applicant for the Tukwila Subdivision, as authorized or required by existing Tukwila Municipal Code. Required /Authorized by Sensitive Areas Ordinance or Land Altering Permit: 1. Peer review of geotechnical report. 2. Erosion Control Plan 3. Additional geotechnical analysis of: a. Grading of steep slopes on -site. b. Retaining walls and rockeries in steep slope areas. c. Affect of individual foundations and driveways on adjacent parcels within steep slope area. 4. On -site professional geotechnical engineer at all times during installation of utility systems, during land altering and during construction of roads and building pads. 5. Daily construction reports signed by on -site geotechnical engineer. 6. Director approval of piping of watercourses if a Type 3 watercourse if certain requirements are met or for purposes of access for all watercourses. Required Through Storm Water Management Ordinance 7. Review by Geotechnical Engineer of storm drainage report and site plans to ensure recommendations are coordinated and the site plan incorporates recommendations of both storm water and geotechnical reports. 8. Preparation of a Water Management Plan to incorporate recommendations of all consultants to control both ground and surface water flows. Required Through Tree Ordinance 9. Replacement of trees 4- inches and larger in caliper removed from a sensitive area. Required Through Traffic Concurrency Ordinance 10. Payment of pro -rata share of traffic impact fee based on Concurrency Ordinance. Required Through Subdivision Ordinance 11. Pedestrian trail connection from subdivision through to South 38th Street. c: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision \plat - req.doc TUKWILA SUBDIVISION LAT REQUIREMENTS FROM EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENTS 'he following items will be required of the applicant for the Tukwila Subdivision, as uthonzed or required by existing Tukwila Municipal Code.:. Required /Authorized by Sensitive Areas Ordinance or Land Altering Permit: 1 Peer review of geotechmcal report. 2 Erosion-Control Plan 3 Additional geotechnical analysis of: a Grading of steep slopes on-site. b Retaining walls and rockeries in steep slope areas. c ;'Affect of individual foundations and driveways on adjacent parcels within steep slope area. { 4 On-site :professional geotechnical engineer at all times during installation of utility systems,; during land altering and during.construction of; roads 'and building pads. 5 Daily construction reports signed by on -site geotechnical 'engineer 6 Director approval of .piping of watercourses if a Type 3 watercourse if certain requirements; are met or for purposes of access for all watercourses. Required Through Storm Water Management Ordinance 7 Review ,;by Geotechnical: Engineer of storm drainage report and site plans to ensure recommendations are coordinated and. the site plan incorporates recommendations of both storm water and geotechnical reports. 8 Preparation of 'a Water Management Plan to incorporate recommendations of all `. consultants to control both ground and surface water flows Required Through Tree Ordinance eplacement,of trees ,4-inches and larger in caliper removed from a sensitive area:' Required Through Traffic Concurrency Ordinance 10 i Payment of pro rata share of traffic impact fee based on Concurrency_ Ordinance. .. Required .Through Subdivision Ordinance edestnan trail connection from subdivision through to South 38t Street. c: \carol \Tukwila Subdivision \plat- req:doc' City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM October 1, 1999 To: Steve Lancaster, Director and SEPA Responsible Official Fm: Carol I. b,.4ociate Planner Re: SEPA: Tukwila Subdivision (File No. E99 -0012) Project Description: Subdivide an approximately 7.11 acre group of parcels into 20 single - family residential lots. The site will be developed as a planned residential development, with portions of the subdivision held as 2 separate open space tracts to contain a Class II stream, a Class III stream, their respective buffer areas and Class III Areas of Potential Geologic Instability. Proponent: Gary Greer, Secure Capital, LLC Location: The site will be accessed from 40th Avenue South Date checklist prepared: March 24, 1999 Lead Agency: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Far (206) 4313665 File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report Challenges to Document: None Other Agencies of Jurisdiction: None Recommendation: Determination of Nonsignificance Documents submitted with SEPA Checklist: 1. Wetland Reconnaissance & Stream Relocation Concepts Study, Jones& Stokes Associates, August 13, 1998 2. Geotechnical Study, Squier/HGI Associates, July 15, 1998 3. Traffic Study, TSI, March 1, 1999 4. Proposed Project Plans, dated 3/25/99, revised 6/7/99 (Preliminary Plat/PRD; Boundary and Topographic Survey; Preliminary Utility Plan; Preliminary Grading Plan; Landscape/Recreation Plan; Tree Retention Plan/Slope Analysis; Building Elevations; Adjacent Land Uses) Summary of Primary, Impacts: Earth The steepest slope on the site is approximately 48 percent, although the maximum slope within the area proposed for residential development is less than 30 percent. The site is generally underlain by native outwash, tills and consolidated fine - grained glaciolacustrine soils and over - consolidated sandy siltstone. The near - surface soils consist of stratified gravelly sand, fine to medium sand, sandy silt, and clayey silt. Most of the western half and southeast end of the site has been classified as a Class 3 area of potential geologic instability, under the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. A Class 3 area is one in which the landslide potential is high. The Geotechnical Report notes that some surficial evidence of slope instability was observed at the site during a site visit. A minor scarp -like feature was located downslope of the Pacific Highway drainage ditches near one of the test pits. No visible signs of recent landslide activity were noted, nor were there visible surface springs on the site. However, the Report notes that heavy vegetation on the site may have concealed seeps and springs and prevented a thorough visual survey. The Report recommends that once the site is cleared of undergrowth, the site be re- examined to check the initial c: \carol \tukwila- subdiv ision\sepa- rpt.doc 2 - .; ^:�� File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report geotechnical observations. Peer review will be required as permitted by the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Prior to issuance of the Land Altering Permit, additional geotechnical analysis will be required, such as more detailed information related to grading and retaining walls. Because construction is proposed in a Class 3 area of Potential Geologic Instability, the construction of the individual foundations must be addressed by the Geotechnical Report, particularly whether the construction of individual foundations and driveways on some of the parcels with steep slopes will adversely affect the side yard stability of the adjacent property. The Land Altering Permit also will be conditioned to require a registered professional geotechnical engineer to be on site at all times during the installation of the utility systems, during land altering activities and during the construction of the roads and building pads (foundations, foundation drains, driveways etc.). Daily construction reports will be required. These reports are to be prepared, signed and submitted to the City by the geotechnical engineer certifying that the work has been accomplished in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Grading of the site will occur in the course of installing roads and utilities to serve the subdivision. Erosion could occur during the clearing and grading activities, particularly in the steep slope areas. An approved erosion control plan will be required prior to the issuance of a Land Altering Permit. The Checklist notes that possible erosion control methods to be used include silt fences, straw bales, temporary storm drainage features, minimizing soil disturbance during the rainy months and hydroseeding exposed soils and cleared areas after construction is complete. Approximately 35 percent of each building site will be covered with impervious surfaces. Air Emissions and dust particulates generated primarily by construction equipment will be produced during the construction phase of the project. Long term impacts to air quality are those typically associated with residential land use, such as vehicle emissions from increased trips by residents, and smoke from any wood burning fireplaces. Emissions during construction can be controlled by watering the site to control dust, although the sloped areas would need to be monitored for erosion. c:\carol\tulcwila-subdivision\sepa-rpidoc 3 File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report Water The site lies within the 560 -acre Southgate Creek drainage basin, which drains into the Duwamish River. Southgate Creek branches into the North, Middle and South Forks upstream of a culvert under South 133rd Street. The project site lies between and includes the North and Middle Forks of Southgate Creek. The Middle Fork of Southgate Creek discharges under Highway 99 through a culvert, drains an area upslope of the highway as well as the south end of the project site before it flows under 40th Avenue South. A small tributary also discharges from a culvert under Highway 99, and then flows easterly across the southern portion of the site behind Lots 14 -20. This tributary merges with the Middle Fork of Southgate Creek. The North Fork of Southgate Creek crosses the northeast corner of the project site before it also drains under 40th Avenue South. The Middle Fork and the tributary are both classified as a Type 2 stream. The North Fork is classified as a Type 3 stream under the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. These watercourses are mapped and inventoried as Watercourses #15-5 and 15 -3 by the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance inventory. The stream on the southern portion of the property is culverted in several areas as the stream flows toward 40th Avenue South. The applicant is proposing to place approximately 100 additional feet of the stream in a culvert where it currently flows on the northern side of Lot 18. The Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45. 080 D. 6.) governs when piping of watercourses is permitted. Generally, piping of any watercourse is to be avoided. Piping may be allowed if it is necessary for access purposes and also may be allowed for Type 3 watercourses if certain conditions are met. Before the additional culverting of the southern stream will be allowed, the applicant will be required to provide additional information on the type of watercourse (whether Type 2 or Type 30) in the area where the culverting is proposed, and whether placing the stream in the culvert is necessary for access purposes. Both of the streams will be placed in Open Space tracts along with their respective buffer areas (35 -feet for the Type 2 stream and 15 -feet for the Type 3 stream). The Tukwila PRD Wetland Reconnaissance and Stream Relocation Concepts report prepared by Jones and Stokes Associates looked at whether any wetlands are present on the site and assessed stream channel conditions in anticipation of the applicant submitting a proposal to relocate one of the stream channels. The possibility of relocating the stream channel is not being pursued by the applicant and no stream relocation is proposed. c: \carol \tukwil a- subdivision\sepa- rpt.doc : z z aa� JU O 0 w =, • w wO 2 � -J = a. 1w Z= HO ZI 2• o U to — CI I—: ww Z I- LL:' O. w z. UV 0 z File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report Stormwater from the site will be collected in a series of catch basins and conveyed to a proposed detention/water quality facility. The detention/water quality facility is proposed to be located at the low end of the site, which is at the entrance to the subdivision on 40th Avenue South. The stormwater system must be designed in accordance with the King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City's adopted stormwater regulations. The geotechnical engineering study was prepared prior to both the storm drainage report and prior to completion of the proposed project plans. The geotechnical fine, Squier/HGI Associates, will be required to review both and determine whether the stormwater plans have incorporated the geotechnical recommendations. For example, the geotechnical engineering study states that control of the ground water is necessary in order to construct footings on firm natural deposits and recommends curtain drains, however the project plans do not appear to have incorporated this recommendation. It also does not appear that the curtain drain requirement has been incorporated into the surface water retention and detention calculations. In addition, the City's Storm Water Management Ordinance will require a water management plan that incorporates the recommendations made by all consultants to control both ground water and surface water flows. Each consultant will be required . to review and sign the report. The project plans must be revised to incorporate the recommendations made in the water management report. Concerns have been expressed about the location of the aboveground stormwater detention facility at the entrance to the subdivision on 40th Avenue South. The location of the detention facility on the project site and whether it is an above- or belowground detention facility, will be reviewed and determined prior to the plat's review by the Tukwila City Council. Plants The SEPA Checklist notes that alder, maple, willow, hawthorn, fir and cedar trees are found on the site. With the exception of the steep slope areas, most of the vegetation in the proposed development area will be graded and removed to accommodate residential site preparation, roadway and utility installation. Street trees will be planted along the new public access street serving the subdivision as well as along 40th Avenue South. The City's Tree Ordinance requires replacement of trees 4 inches and larger in caliper if they are removed from a sensitive area. The applicant has submitted a Tree Retention Plan, with an inventory of trees to be removed, their sizes and the number of trees to be replaced. Ninety -three trees are c: \carol \tukwila- subdiv ision\sepa- rpt.doc 5 File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report proposed for removal that is subject to the City's tree ordinance. The Tree Retention Plan/Slope Analysis plan states two hundred and seventy -nine trees would need to be planted to replace the trees removed in the sensitive areas, per Tukwila's Tree Ordinance (TMC 18.54). The applicant has requested that an exception be granted to permit the planting of 175 seedlings in slope restoration areas in lieu of providing the full number of trees at the code required size. This request will be reviewed and a determination made prior to the subdivision's review by the City Council. The Planned Residential Development process (PRD) allows lot sizes and setbacks to be reduced up to 15% in order to minimize the impact of development on sensitive areas. The applicant has not proposed a reduction in lot sizes or setbacks. This may be an option to pursue to reduce the number of trees needing to be cleared. Two open space tracts will be created, .21 and 1.95 acres in size, which will preserve existing native vegetation and provide protection to the stream channels and steep slope areas. Animals The checklist notes that songbirds, raccoons and rodents have been observed on or near the site. There is no threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site nor is the site part of an identified migration route. Energy/Natural Resources Electricity will be the primary source of power serving the project; natural gas will be made available for heating and other needs associated with the future homes. The new home construction will conform to the most recent Uniform Building Code and Washington State energy code. Environmental Health The SEPA Checklist notes it is unlikely that any environmental health hazards will be encountered under the expected normal working conditions on the project site. State regulations regarding safety and the handling of hazardous materials would be enforced during the construction process. Equipment refueling areas would be located in areas where a spill could be quickly contained and where the risks of the hazardous material entering surface water is minimized. The predominant source of noise in the area is from vehicles travelling on Pacific Highway South, located on the property's westerly boundary. Short- c:\ carol\ tukwila- subdivisionlsepa- rpt.doc 6 File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report term impacts from noise would result from the use of construction equipment during site development. Construction will occur during daylight hours and construction equipment will not be allowed to idle for continuous periods of time to help mitigate the potential impacts of construction noise. Land/Shoreline Uses The proposed subdivision is located on a 7.11 -acre site on the west side of 40th Avenue South, just south of South 130th Street. Pacific Highway South (Tukwila International Boulevard) lies to the west; to the south is Southgate Park. Fortieth Avenue South borders on the east. The site slopes downward from west to east, with the west quarter of the site sloping downward steeply from Pacific Highway then sloping more gradually until the site is nearly level at 40th Avenue South. The site is currently occupied by several structures. A mobile home is located at the south end of the site, where Lot 20 is proposed. The mobile home will be relocated to a parcel just south of the proposed subdivision. A single - family residence on proposed Lot 1 will remain on that lot. Adjacent land uses consist of low- density single family homes. Tukwila International Boulevard lies to the west; with commercial and higher density multifamily uses. The slopes on the site buffer the project from Tukwila International Boulevard. The site is zoned Low Density Residential, LDR, with a minimum lot size of 6,500 square feet. Only two of the twenty proposed parcels in the subdivision are less than 7,000 square feet, with the majority of the lots ranging from 7000 square feet to 7,900 square feet. The average lot size is 7,560 square feet. Due to the sensitive areas on the site, steep slopes and the two forks of Southgate Creek, the project has been submitted as a Planned Residential Development (PRD). The PRD process permits flexibility in the application of certain zoning code requirements, such as minimum lot size, in order to encourage the retention of significant environmental features and create open space in residential developments. A 15% reduction of the required lot size (to 5,525 square feet) and 15% reduction in setbacks may be approved through the PRD process if certain conditions are met. The applicant has set aside the steep slope area and stream channels and their buffers in Open Space tracts as part of the PRD process. While the project has been submitted as a PRD, the applicant has not proposed any reductions in lot sizes or setbacks at this point. As noted under the section on "Plants," in order to reduce the number of trees proposed for clearing from the site, a reduction in lot sizes may be recommended. c:\carol\tulcwila-subdivision\sepa-rpt.doc 7 File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Low Density Residential. The SEPA Checklist estimates that approximately 50 to 64 people may live in the proposed subdivision. z mow• . Housing =' JV O 0 A total of 19 new single family homes will be constructed on the twenty lots N°; in the proposed subdivision. One existing home will remain and one home will be relocated. Existing housing is being preserved through the boundary u line adjustment process by separating out parcels with existing homes on 2 them from the proposed subdivision. a. a: • a I- Imo. Aesthetics z 1-O. The new homes will be compatible with the surrounding residential w F-, u j 2 neighborhood. Development of the site will change the visual character of the immediate area for adjacent existing residents. The applicant has o N'. submitted three sample designs of the homes that will be constructed. These 01— designs will be reviewed by the City Council in the course of reviewing the = W proposed subdivision/PRD. Landscaping, street trees and house design will o: reduce aesthetic impacts. . z U =, 01— z Light/Glare Street lights will be installed along the public road serving the proposed subdivision. Other light and glare that will be produced by this project is typical for single - family residential development — outside porch lights, etc. Recreation A walking trail proposed to run throughout Open Space Tract A can be accessed either at the end of the cul -de -sac of the public street serving the proposed subdivision or from 40th Avenue South. Given the sensitive nature of the slopes, the proposed trail will be eliminated. A pedestrian connection will be provided instead to 38th Avenue South, which in turn will provide pedestrian access to Tukwila International Boulevard to the west. Southgate Park is located in close proximity to the proposed subdivision. c:\caroAtulcwila-subdivision\sepa-rpt.doc 8 - . • File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report Historic /Cultural Preservation There are no known landmarks or evidence of any significant historic, archaeological, scientific or cultural resources on or next to this site. If any historic or cultural evidence is encountered during construction, work would be halted and a State - approved archaeologist would be engaged to investigate and evaluate the found object. Transportation The site will be accessed from 40th Avenue South with a full street extending to the west and north, culminating in a cul -de -sac. There are also two private access tracts proposed that will provide access to 8 of the homes. The City is reviewing whether to require a through connection from the subdivision to 38th Avenue South. Metro Bus Route 174 provides transit service off Pacific Highway at the intersection of South 144th, South 139th, South 133rd and South 130th Streets. Route 184 stops at the intersection of South 144th Street and Pacific Highway. To the east, bus service is available on East Marginal Way South with Routes 34, 108 and 129 making stops at the intersections of South 133r1 and 128th Streets. Approximately 220 vehicle trips per day are anticipated from the proposed project. The applicant may be required to pay a pro -rata share of a traffic impact fee based on the Concurrency Ordinance if the project impacts the streets identified in the Concurrency Ordinance. Any required fees will be paid prior to final plat approval. Public Services The new development will generate an increased need for public services, such as police and fire services, however, current service levels can accommodate this increase. Utilities Utilities currently available at the site include electric, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and storm water. The site is served by Val Vue Sewer District and Water District #125. No additional utilities are anticipated to be needed as a result of the subdivision. c:\caroRtulcwila-subdivision\sepa-rpt.doc File E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision SEPA Staff Report Conclusion The environmental impacts of the proposed project will be appropriately mitigated through the application of standard review procedures and requirements under the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance, Surface Water Management Ordinance and other similar regulations. The proposal will therefore not have a significant adverse impact on the quality of the environment. Recommendation Determination of Nonsignificance c:\ carol\ tukwila- subdivision\sepa- rpt.doc 10 z i.- Z; W J0 0 0; cn W! = a W. z�.. E-0 Z I~. 2 U 0 co", ". 'W = Wi 0, U . 0.: City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Carol Lumb, Associate Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: September 24, 1999 RE: Tukwila Subdivision: Permit #'s L99 -0023, L99 -0024, L99 -0025, E99 -0012. The following comments are my technical review of the proposed subdivision. L Wetland Reconnaissance 1. The wetland reconnaissance was conducted in August 1998 (Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.) and includes some analysis of the watercourses on the site. During my site review I did not observe wetland areas and believe the report by Jones & Jones adequately describes and evaluates the areas that would have potential wetland. II. Proposed Tree Retention/Replacement Plan 1. The current landscape plan includes the replacement of trees removed along the, lower, western slope for developing Lots #9 thru #14. Developing these lots requires tree replacement because of the 20 percent and greater slope conditions. Per TMC Chapter 18.54.140, the slope restoration proposed at the back of these Lots is appropriate and smaller plant material may be used. Where appropriate native tree seedlings can be planted but the recommended size is 3 — 4 feet in height. Depending on height, the 3 year 2 -1 seedling stock may be acceptable. 2. However, because this project is a PRD these Lots can be reduced in size to as small as 5,525 square feet. Lot reduction in this slope area could provide more tree retention and reduce slope disturbance and retaining wall height. My initial estimate is that the total number of trees that could be saved is 15. If this is accurate then that would reduce replacement trees by a total of 48. The applicant will need to evaluate the potential lot reduction in order to reduce disturbance in this area. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax. (206) 431-3665 • Tukwila Subdivision Memo September 24, 1999 Page 2 3. The plan's total, tree replacement number of 279 trees includes street trees. Street trees and any other required tree planting related to the subdivision cannot be used to meet the tree permit requirement. Trees that are planted as part of the detention facility to enhance or screen the pond may be used for the tree permit. III. Geotechnical Investigation 1. The geotechnical report (Squier/HGI Associates, 1998) includes a statement indicating grade cuts should be limited in steep portions of the site. 2. Groundwater seepage was observed as minimal to none. Also, in reviewing the tree survey the majority of trees on the steep western slope are bigleaf maple which indicates dryer conditions in the upper soil layers. Therefore, the recommendation to install a deep curtain drain at the top of slope should be designed to not have a detrimental effect on existing trees growing on the slope. The curtain drain has the potential to divert water that is necessary for existing vegetation on the slope. 3. The need for a slope setback along proposed Lots #9 thru #14 appears less critical if retaining structures are used. 4. In order to reduce the amount of disturbance to the steep, western slope, I recommend the pedestrian trail be relocated of the slope and considered as a connection to the north onto 38th Avenue S. This may be a safer route and could be used by more people and include bikes. cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jim Morrow, PW Director FILE: APPLICANT.: ADDRESS: . DATE: PLAN REVIEWER: SEPA REVIEW COMMENTS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision 40th Ave. S. and S. 130th St. August 24, 1999 Jim Morrow; telephone (206) 433 -0179 The Public Works Department has completed its review of the SEPA Checklist. Included in the review were: •. July 15, 1998 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Squier/HGI Associates; • December 30, 1998 Preliminary Storm Drainage Report prepared by Triad Associates; • • March 1, 1999 Traffic Study prepared by Transportation-Solutions, Inc., August 13, 1999 Wetland Reconnaissance and Stream Relocation Concepts report prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates • Revised March 24, 1999 project plans (submitted June7, 1999) prepared by Triad Associates. Based upon this review, the following comments and recommended SEPA conditions are provided. General Comments 1. The proposed pedestrian trail that traverses the western and southern portion of the development is to be eliminated. These areas-are extremely steep and/or sensitive and should not be disturbed. 2. There does not appear to have been any coordination between the different consultants.. The proposed plans do not incorporate the recommendations made by the geotechnical engineering study and the storm drainage report does appear to incorporate the effects of providing curtain drains to control ground water flow. 3. A significant number of rockeries are being proposed, some as retaining walls in steep slope areas. No rockery will be permitted over 4 feet in height. Further, for those areas where steep slopes are present, an engineered retaining wall will be required. z z UO J CO Lc-' w O' 2 g Q. _d �_ z �. o. zI- ww ca = U. IL I- z U- O z Geotechnical Engineering Study 1. A peer review of the geotechnical study will be required. 2. Squier/HGI Associates is to evaluate the stability of the slopes and the suitability of the subgrade for each individual lot. 3. Because construction is proposed in a Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic Instability, the construction of the individual foundations needs to be addressed. Is it feasible to construct each foundation and driveway separately? In other words, can each foundation and driveway be constructed without adversely impacting the neighbor's yard (Side yard stability). Can slope stability be maintained or should a "series" of foundations be constructed at one time? z • w cog U O co w z' (ou wO 4. Given that the geotechnical engineering study was prepared before both the storm drainage report and the project plans were completed, Squier/HGI Associates = c� should review both and provide an evaluation as to whether the plans have _ incorporated the geotech's recommendations. z '' I- O z►— w U• � O D- o H. w w • U_ 11 Z _ w U - z 5. The geotechnical engineering study stated that control of the ground water was necessary in order to construct footings on firm natural deposits and recommended curtain drains. Further, the study states that careful control of surface water runoff is important to prevent landslides. Therefore the proposed surface and subsurface drainage plan need s to be evaluated by Squier/HGI Associates and an evaluation prepared. 6. A registered professional geotechnical engineer is to be on site at all times during the installation of the utility systems, during land altering activities, and during the construction of the roads and building pads (foundations, foundation drains, driveways, etc.). Daily construction reports are to be prepared, signed, and submitted to the City Of Tukwila by the geotechnical engineer certifying that the work has been accomplished in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Surface Water Management 1. The Storm Drainage Report mentions the existence of an existing stream within the project's boundaries but does not provide any analysis as to its effects upon surface water management. 2. The Storm Drainage Report also mentions the possible need for a Hydraulic. Permit because of the aforementioned stream but does not provide any analysis as to the actual requirement for the permit. ,. ,-.: 3. The Geotechnical Engineering Study identifies the need for curtain drains to properly control the groundwater, but the Storm Drainage Report does not include this requirement in the surface water retention and detention calculations. 4. The project plans do not appear to have incorporated the comments and recommendations made by the different consultants — plans do not show any curtain drains, as an example. Traffic Analysis 1. Potential traffic impact and concurrency mitigation costs can be addressed prior to final plat approval. 2. There appears to have been considerable discussion about whether the development's access from 40th Ave South should be a through street and connect to 38th Ave South. The Applicant, in response to public comment, has proposed a cul -de -sac. Even though some residents may object to the proposed access being a through street, the City has a policy of promoting through streets where possible. Additionally, the Applicant is proposing that on street parking be allowed. In order to accommodate on- street parking, the road must be 51 feet in width — 41 feet from back of curb to back of curb; 10 feet is needed for the sidewalks on both sides of the road. 3. Tract D Access should be relocated to the other side of Lot 18. RECOMMENDED SEPA CONDITIONS 1. A peer review of the geotechnical study will be required, at the Applicant's expense. 2. Squier/HGI Associates shall be required to evaluate the stability of the slopes and the suitability of the subgrade for each individual lot. As part of the evaluation, an analysis of the proposed retaining walls shall be conducted. The project plans are to show the locations where key and benching is required. 3. Squier/HGI Associates shall be required to evaluate the feasibility of constructing the foundations and driveway access for each building site. Can slope and side yard stability be maintained if each building pad is built individually or should there be a proposed construction sequencing? 4. Squier/HGI Associates shall be required to review the Storm Drainage Report and the project plans to ensure that 'adequate provisions have been made to maximize slope stability. . z Z re LI _JO O' N0: co w w z; J H; N LL' w O; g cn Q� r.w z 1 —• t— O. z I-- U 0. 'O N. '0 F- w W!. O Z t11u O~ z A Water Management Plan shall be required that incorporates the recommendations made by all consultants to control both ground water and surface water flows. Each consultant will be required to review and sign the report. The project plans are to incorporate the recommendations made in the Water Management Plan. A registered professional geotechnical engineer is to be on site at all times during the installation of the utility systems, during land altering activities, and during the construction of the roads and building pads. Daily construction reports are to be prepared, signed, and submitted to the City by the geotechnical engineer certifying that the work has been accomplished in accordance with the approved plans and 'specifications. . _ +: CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING TUKWILA SUBDIVISION (L99 -23, L99 -0024, E99 -0012) NAME Kcttlt,H S�e-tson • 117sdh SIGN IN vtl ADDRESS TELEPHONE 1329 -E Ar4 Zs L 3 asg 1-fo' t Ati4 . Sv /392ZZ 2672:AvQ_��a, / 5 ' o ?. S' A43 -73-09 2y,3 -0777 07 3 —�1. ?7 <c • c A NA • C- it -_ `J e r, b o k 2 Cri- c S 2 S z *- 3 lF (- V° L 3 ,kg /( i f /`fefco /f%= 31M -{eW t'pZ7 `/o?s -- csr6 - `/33- HeVi ? I( )1��`�- �� Nt ��v�l� {��o I2s !4l/ C/G D '©C 2&(%'7f7 /3v /3' 3 (1 /./t, J, . 9/— Z..S2 P' / 3015 - ,32" Ace so 2y/ - 75-2? • City of Tukwila /Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: v ED JUL 2 9 1999 rcjiglilmuNr-ry J LOPMENT I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. VI • • - • • 11 118,i ••111 1 •11- I• :1 - 1 • •1 :• 1 1- new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion. Some of my reasons are: Thank you for relaying in Ge to the City Council. fr4°-/-eLr r--4/1/1/0 Date F1r?A �la7 Address /City /State' PJ_iic, c,)A 7e-e' z <z rLw 0 00 N0: W =, f- NLL w0 La i' I-. F=O. Ww 0 H. w w. U O. lil Z U N 1--H_ 0 z City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECEIVED JUL 2 91999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting_38th Ave. S. through with the new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion. Some of my reasons are: Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City Council. 4.74-7'4,7•41.-- 7-24 %' Signed Date #4,64-A/ 7,7erh pso., Name / ?oiV 3g 4 3 Address /City /State •.,..:... .��• -.... City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECEIVED JUL 2 9 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. `f I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting 38th Ave. S. through with the new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion Some of my reasons are: Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City Council. Signed 1 l Date N)303(' s ✓ Address /City/State ■ z w. lx 2 6 JU 00 W = U) LL 0. u. J.' Na w z� I-0 Z �- uj 0 I- w w; LI , z. LLI 0 , 0 H; z City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECEIVED JUL291999 COMMUNITY z : DEVELOPMENT re W 'U O. CO 0: CO W W=. N L. WO g �d Z �. I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting 38th Ave. S. through with the new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion Some of my reasons are: Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City Council. 7 J 7 -97 ' Date lot- h. in awl Name )7' Address/City/State JUL 29 1999 15:41 FR M I CROFI.IFT RECEP #B July 29, 1999 Carol Lumb City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Re: Tukwila Subdivision 13217 40t Ave S 425 936 7329 TO 92054313665 01944 1U 2 91999. P.01/02 I just saw the big street sign that identifies this new project. I am very concerned about the removal of trees and other greenery. Jamming so many houses•into such small lots can mean major removal of trees and greenery. '. At a time when air and noise pollution from nearby freeways and from two airports are increasing daily, I would think that the city would be doing everything possible to mitigate — not increase — these health hazards. Removing so much greenery and replacing it with impenetrable surfaces seems a huge step in the wrong direction. All the greenery also provides much - needed water absorption while it decreases runoff. I'm fully aware that private property owners have the right to sell their property to developers, who then can develop it according to the city's building and zoning laws. I also saw on the big street sign that there is a walking greenbelt on part of the project perimeter. I know that mature trees, bushes, and other landscaping adds value (both monetary and in terms of a feeling of safety and serenity) to homes, whether they're old or new. Again, my concern is the removal of so much greenery from a location that needs it the most! I'd be willing to bet that buyers would appreciate having a beautiful tree in their front or back yard. I know, I know: not all buyers, but then some buyers are smarter than others and will know the value of these trees. They may also appreciate having something that differentiates their house from those around them. I'm proud of this community and only want the best for it! Please don't turn this wonderful green haven into another copycat trashy development of one tacky bi- or tri- level jammed next to the exact same tacky house sitting on clearcut land with front -yard twigs that will, in another 50 years, become decent -sized trees. This is an ugliness that should be outlawed! And a brand -new one - year -old tree has none of the value of a mature 50- year -old tree. That's lie asking a newborn to be the CEO at Boeing! The air is so sweet and clean in this area: if you spoil it, if you treat it shabbily, you spoil your own future, and your children's future assurances of a healthy and happy �' JUL 29 1999 15:42 FR MICROSOFT RECEP #B 425 936 7329 TO 92064313665 P.02/02 Fj. environment. Trees aren't something mechanical that you can replace: once that tree is gone, its life- giving qualities are immediately erased forever. I don't think that anyone has ever gone so far as to say that removing a tree is like removing healthy days, months, or years from the end of your life — so I'll just go there and say it now. That's how strong my beliefs are in the environmental benefits of the trees and related greenery. These benefits translate into dollars and cents in terms of increased property values for homes that have mature landscaping. I'd like the developer and/or builder to identify which trees will be removed and why. I don't think this is an unrealistic request. I believe that a conscientious effort to retain as many trees as possible — even if it means moving a house over a few feet — would be a most welcome and extremely refreshing and gratifying thing to see in these days of cheap - looking bare -land housing developments. I also believe that the developer/builder .would definitely be able to command a higher price for these homes because-of the landscaping. These days, people are looking for value, not just low cost. They want something they, can be proud of. I'd welcome your comments. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. .1 Georgina Kerr / 3834 S 116 St Tukwila WA 98168 206.444.9695 S ** TOTAL PAGE.02 z H Z' 6 U O' Ww W =: J F. CO w w 0. u. 0 a, 1- w. X• z� 0. Z F— UJ D I- w W:. — O • 111 Z Na F= U It. 0 Dwight McLean, 04:15 I 7/30/99 , RE: 40th Ave S PRD Applicati From: ."Dwight McLean" <D- L.McLean @worldnet.att.net> To: <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: RE: 40th Ave S. PRD Application Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 16:15 :53 -0700 X- MSMail- Priority: Normal X- MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Content - Length: 5597 = H July 30, 1999 6 ATTN: Carol Lumb coo w= Dear City of Tukwila: co WO We were at the open house for this project on Thursday, July 22. I felt g much better about the developers plans as opposed to■the previous project LL , for this development. N O =w H= Z �. 1-0 z� uj w 2:3 0 0— C3 w w`. U aim O 1- z My major concerns are: 1. The cul de sac remain so, and that the project not open up onto 38th Ave South. I live on 38th Avenue. It is a narrow street with open ditches and parking on both sides, leaving about 1.5 lanes open for traffic flow. If 38th were to be opened, culverts would need to be put in, and the street widened to allow through traffic to flow safetly unimpeded. I purchased my home on a dead end street with the expectation that we would not have certain problems that are experienced on a regular arterial street. Our street is quiet, the children can safetly cross the street etc and we don't have to worry. Burglaries are almost non existent in our neighborhood. A through street would change this, and our quality of life. 2. The detention pond should be well landscaped and maintained by the homes of this project. ,If it is left untouched for a few years, it will revert to a large ugly blackberry patch. Some of the beautiful trees, will need to be removed which are on this site, so we need some type of bondable assurance that this pond-and landscaping will be perpetually well maintained. Any fencing should be well hidden by landscaping material. 3. I would like.to see regular curbs put up. Roll over curbs encourage cars to park on the sidewalks leaving little or no room for people to walk by. Tukwila is a very unfriendly pedestian area (look at all the painted lines on the road that are suppose to represent sidewalks). We should not promote this general attitude by allowing rollover curbs Thankyou Dwight McLean ;Nancy McLean 13015 38th Ave South Tukwila, WA 98168 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "- / /W3C / /DTD W3 HTML / /EN "> Printed for Tukwila Department of Community Development <tuk... 1 Carol Lumb - Internet From: Gina Smith To: Carol Lumb Date: 7/30/99 3:24PM Subject: intemet From: "Scanlon, Donald A" <Donald.Scanlon @PSS.Boeing.com> To: "'clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us "' <clumb @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Subject: 40th Ave S PRD Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 15:08:12 -0700 Content - Length: 739 Hi, Here are my comments on the 40th Ave S PRD. 1) I would prefer that the new street created by this project not be connected to 38th Ave S. My concern is that this connection would put too much traffic on 40th Ave S. 2) I like the project as it was presented to us on July 22nd in the Foster Library. Single family homes are the best use of this land. The plan for twenty homes looks to be appropriate for the site considering the terrain. 3) I do have a concern about the detention pond. I'm not sure how it will look ten or twenty years from now. Would it be possible to see a cost comparison between an open and closed system? Thanks, Don Scanlon 13410 40th Ave S Tukwila, WA 98168 home (206) 244 -7107 : work (253) 657 -3042 . Page 11 City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECEIVED AUG 0 2 1999 GOM MUN TY I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting 38th Ave. S. through with the new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion Some of my reasons are: -WQ)<T7 6<-17-7 (10.1-41-Pc 4 \e/ 'PrieNVIC1/Ni s --r<gb TVV,T4PA Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City ccil c,E't l j� yl 7. -C f Date , Name Address /City/State z w —i U U O': W =` U) w: w 0. LL j. cna I— Ili _. Z �. I- 0 z►- tu 0 co ww LI Z;. w .±6 z City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th•Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. I - • . n 111.1 � i, 1 1111- I' : 11 : ' , • • I I- new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion. Some of my reasons are: J .514t. 5t1' A * ezt* st&t& NN,c ciktL, . ()cwt.' - pkLL 0+'c‘-(. - CLEO, rt.k . E z 2 - O t QCs 417 o for relaying my opinion to the City Council. Signed A-,?W 4C—tilzast.ir Address /City /State --ILA 414 LA w A 01.5 Date UtJ0r' z • :1- w ix 2 6 D, oo W = w0 u. Q .u2 cf, w z�. 1- o ZI U0 ,o 0 H w W. 0. w Z; U= z City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECE VED -1.i G 0 2 1999 CC^ +:lMUNfl Y CEU:_L ORIENT I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. • - • • 11 1 1 i 1 !Ii 1 • • •' . • 1 i 1 • ` • : 1 1 - new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion. Some of my reasons are: 1,e crt- Thank you for relaying my opinion Ctj the City Council. e".144 i,1; 6•/-7 celd409,160_Y--/Ara-yvt-d>14-620-,. 7- 94' —V ' gn.. Date rQ.yName _ 0 3 - 3 'r•A -V& S, Address /City/State 24,7 da z w UO. co o.. w= J �. N LL u.l 0. ag LLa D i a' w Z �.. 1- O Z1-: I" IIJ ° c ww :z O. z. w co Z City of Tukwila /Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: 'RECEIVED ;' : 0 2 1999 .V. :NIUNi TY OPMENT I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th.Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting 38th Ave. S. through with the new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion Some of my reasons are: Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City Council. Signed l/ / Date Name A.7t/Zg Address /City/State z a F- w 00 • 0 W I W0 2 ga id t-11.1: • 0. z� U CO : 0 i0 _. W W 1- r- w Z'. -7z 0 F-i z City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206 -431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 -431 -3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: RECEIVED AUG 0 2 1999 CC'J1MUNiTY vELOPMENT z • �W 00: • CO w. =. J �. ill a -` u_•<, • Sil d` I-O ww . Some of my reasons are Do U •.ON F-:. w Wi =- V •IJ.IZ =', .o~ .z I would like to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. Therefore, I wish to record my opposition to connecting 38th Ave. S. through with the A - • . - . 1 . . • 1 - r - 1 11 • 1 111. BOLA OF `tif-. Ri-FK:?..- G! 18E7 P�OiL� //JY Soars D'2►`.J @^ ipir.l-r2 td.f fP.`e„ 44i 4S Thank you for relaying my opinion to the City Council. ?ci&.2 740ll Signed Date L.A.Z �:� Q�CI,. ivj ✓ Name /5o0 fits, wY. # %O Address /City/State ThiC ; L*, cam- q S r G G . City of 'rukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Carol Lumb, 206-431-3661 206-431-3670 206-431-3665 fax Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: I woulA lie to comment on the proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. RECEIVED AUG 05 1999 commuNirt DEVELOPMENT I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. new city street to be created that would serve the subdivsion. Some of my reasons are: 1 aya VI £td1 4:ZeJ /44, -10-4 diA6 e City Council. re;Date/ N1761)10 03711.19k1 S d/4 ddress/1Tity/State __ 'ONI 'DL OA MISS 960T tL6 SZt WA 90:TT 66/50/90 z < • 1- i Z C4 2, 6 = -J C.) 0 0. , co o- w • U-. n- u. a cs z c.) z tu O u), O — :0 }- 11.1 0, 9-- a Lu, 0 AUG 11 '99 16:04 FR PAC SER; ES City of Tukwila/Dept. of Comm.Dev. 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 206 881 0409 TO 206431.=4;65 c Attn: Carol Lumb, 206431 -3661 206 -431 -3670 206 - 431 -3665 fax R EC E V`D AUG 1 1 1999 co.\iimuNITY CEVELCPNiENT P.01 Re: Secure Capital/ 40th Ave. S. PRD Application: Dear City of Tukwila: I would like to comment on the. proposed 20 lot subdivision submitted by_Secure Capital known as the 40th Ave. S. PRD. I understand that the City of Tukwila has a policy of connecting; city streets through whenever possible, but that the continuation of 38th through the, new subdivsion and connecting into 40th Ave. S. would be a matter to be considered by the City Council. • it • r• 1 1 1 1 J 1 , 1 i, I I I , • , , ".•! • 1 • . 1 ■ 1 • • 1 , - 1 1- . • •.' 4• 1. . • 1 r - 1 1 •,• k. •1 cL1 e‹...-1 cLI \7y r t-m- A&A 1-1:—\--7, .4\ s..L.Li . Some of my . reasons are: Thank you ying my opinion to the City Council. Signed Da I. `� Name l,O(k 3 %41' e... Address /City /State City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION DATED June 16, 1999 Michael Weinstein Triad Associates 11814 115 Av. NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Subject: L99 -0024 Tukwila Subdivision L99 -0023 Tukwila Subdivision PRD E99 -0012 Tukwila Subdivision Environmental Review Dear Michael: have reviewed your June 7, 1999 resubmittal and appreciate your comprehensive response to our comments. We have determined that your application is complete. The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, you may obtain them at the Department of Community Development (DCD). After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. I will be out of the office until June 28, 1999. If you have any questions please call my supervisor Jack Pace at 431 -370 or wait and call me when I return. Sincerely, Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner Cc: Fire Public Works Urban Environmentalist 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 41 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 z • 6 -J U: V O e) wi W=: • J H w, wO• w a • (1) a` w: _, • :Z O: •z�-. w w: ._. "101 W z Z. .. • Date: L2169 1619 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100, Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 icra Response to Incomplete Letter ❑ Response to Correction Letter ❑ Revision after Permit Issued Project Name: Project Address: Contact Person: RECEIVED JUN 0 7 1999 COMMUNITY Plan Check/Permit Number: Lc(et - c b Z3 -�- Lctot Phone Number: 't/o 2.. 1 • S'I'lLk Summary of Revision: Z.AS\5L Q l.03 > 40 z) Sheet Number(s) C6 "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revisions and date revisions. Submitted to City of Tukwila Permit Center ❑ Entered in Sierra on 3/4/99 z ':mow re 2 JU UO WI J 1- CO LLI �Q' = d' I- O Z I; O N = U: U.0: U to H F' z. June 4, 1999 Mr. Steve Lancaster, Director City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 TRIAD ASSOCIATES Project Management Civil Engineering Land Surveying Land Use Planning Landscape Architecture Site Design RE: Tukwila Subdivision PRD No. L99 -0023, Tukwila Subdivision No. L99 -0024 Triad Job No. 97 -223 Dear Steve: Pursuant to the regulations stipulated in Tukwila Code Section 18.54.140, I am writing to request an exception from the tree replacement requirements stipulated in Section 18.54.130.3. I believe that this request for exception does meet the criteria cited in 18.54.140.2. I came to this conclusion after carefully reviewing the number of trees that would be removed during the mass grading operation. According to City Code Section 18.54.130.3, the number of required replacement trees had increased to the astounding number of 279. Given the density of trees on those portions of the site that will remain undisturbed, planting that number of trees cannot be accomplished on this site. Instead, we propose, as indicated on the revised submittal plan, planting 104 trees and 175 native evergreen seedlings within "slope restoration areas ". I believe that this approach satisfies the intent of the Tree Regulations Chapter, as well as creating a more aesthetically pleasing, more viable project for the applicant. I appreciate your consideration in this matter. Should you have any question regarding this request, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES atherine E. Russell Planner 11814 115th Avenue NE, Kirkland. Washington 98034 -6923 Phone 206.821.8448 Toll Free 800.488.0756 Fax 206.821.3481 z • 6 .= F" -I C.) U0 CO 0 u)w. LULU: ' . g�i, _;. Z �. o' LLI U� rZ .0 I- ll/ ui — 0; W z; N' I. z June 4, 1999 Moira Bradshaw City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 RECEIVED MEM NNW 11•1111h JUN 0 7 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TRIAD ASSOCIATES Project Management Civil Engineering Land Surveying' Land Use Planning Landscape Architecture Site Design RE: Tukwila Subdivision PRD No. L99 -0023, Tukwila Subdivision No. L99 -0024 Triad Job No. 97 -223 Dear Moira: Pursuant to your letter dated April 21, 1999, Triad Associates has revised the above referenced submittal package to reflect your comments. The following is a list of changes and /or comments, in order as they appear in your letter, necessary for the above referenced application to be considered complete: 1. Pursuant to your May 4th telephone conversation with Ron Guest of Triad Associates, The Design Review requirement has been waived for this project; 2. A listing of architectural materials has been provided on sheet seven of this submittal; and 3. The location and type of exterior building lighting has been indicated on sheet seven of this submittal. Additionally, your April 21st letter raised a number of issues that you indicated should be addressed. In regard to the street system you stated that the internal street system should be extended to 38th Street, as the proposed PRD boundary abutted 38th Street. During the past several months, the applicant has had the opportunity to speak with some of the neighbors and inform them of the proposed subdivision. Consistently, their primary concern was that a connection to 38th Street not be a part of this development. This would avoid increasing traffic on 40th and associated disturbances. In response to this request and to be sensitive to the neighbors' concerns, the applicant has elected to remove that portion of the property abutting 38th Street from this proposal. Your letter also stipulated that cul -de -sac length should not exceed 600 feet. Triad has measured the cul -de -sac length and confirmed that it does not exceed 600 feet. Lastly, your letter stated that sidewalks would be required on both sides of the street. The revised plans now include this requirement. Not referenced in your letter, but discussed during our May 4th meeting, is the proposed hammerhead turn- around depicted on the original submittal. As it is unlikely that this would be acceptable to the City, Triad has revised the plans to indicate a cul -de -sac turn- around built to City standards. 11814 115th Avenue NE, Kirkland, Washington 98034.6923 Phone 425.821.8448 Toll Free 800.488.0756 Fax 425.821.3481 Internet www.triadassoc.com Page 2 Moira Bradshaw City of Tukwila June 4, 1999 Regarding the proposed trail, we have, pursuant to your request, extended it to the edge of property for connection with Pacific Highway. Your letter also indicated a number of problems with our initial submittal regarding the on -site utility system. The sewer line connections have been checked and modified pursuant to your letter. The distance between fire hydrants has been modified such that the distance between hydrants does not exceed 300 feet. Likewise, a hydrant has been added in the vicinity of lots 4, 5, and 6 so that the 150 foot distance from the hydrant to the outside of the house is not exceeded. As you and I have discussed, both during the May 4th meeting and over the telephone, the location of the detention pond is based on the topography of the site. In order to maintain the aesthetic value of the site, Triad has provided significant landscaping to adequately screen the detention pond. The last item referenced in your letter is that the City does not allow subdivision entry monument signs in single- family neighborhoods. I would like to clarify that the note "landscape /entry monument easement" depicted on sheet five of this submittal is specifically called out for landscape treatment/natural "monumentation" such as tastefully placed rock formations and is not indicative of signage. The last issue that I would like to point out is the revised tree retention count. After carefully reviewing the number of trees that would be removed during the mass grading operation, the number of required replacement trees, pursuant to Tukwila Code Section 18.54.130.3, has increased to the astounding number of 279. Given the density of trees on those portions of the site that will remain undisturbed, planting that number of trees cannot be accomplished on this site. Instead, we propose, as indicated on the revised submittal plan, planting 104 trees and 175 native evergreen seedlings within "slope restoration areas ". I believe that this approach satisfies the intent of the Tree Regulations Chapter, as well as creating a more aesthetically pleasing, more viable project for the applicant. Pursuant to Section 18.54.140, a letter to the Director is enclosed requesting an exception to the specific requirements of Section 18.54.130.3. I trust that this submittal addresses all of the issues you have raised, both in the May 4`" letter and in conversation. Should you have any questions or need additional information regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, ASSOCIATES /////F Katherine E. Russell Planner City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director April 21, 1999 Ronald Guest Triad Associates 11814 115 Av. NE Kirkland, WA 98034 Subject: Notice of Incompleteness L99 -0024 TukwilaSubdivisiori L99 -0023 Tukwila Subdivision PRD Dear Mr. Guest I have received and reviewed your documentation for the above referenced applications. The following items are needed in order to consider the above two applications complete: 1. A Design Review application (see application checklist for potential additional materials) and fee ($900) 2. Architectural Materials to be used 3. Location and type of exterior building lighting Upon receipt of these items, the City will continue processing your applications. Please provide these materials together as a package. These applications will expire if we do not receive the package within 90 days of the date of this letter; unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.104.070(E) of the Tukwila Municipal Code. Substantively there are a number of issues that will need to be addressed. These comments are preliminary in nature, not comprehensive but significant. Several Tukwila Design Standards are not met in your proposal. The most significant issue from the planning perspective is the overall layout of the subdivision and its relationship with surrounding subdividable land and streets. Specific standards are listed below. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 ,„ ,.,----- z re 6 2: -I C.): UO CO 'A U.) LL w O. •LLQ Z d ,._ •z I-0 • z ill w moo' • :o(12; 0 w w. • I V, 0 ui z U N: 0 z Streets 17.20.030© Extension. Proposed street systems shall extend existing streets. Where appropriate existing streets shall extend to the boundaries of the plat to ensure access to neighboring properties. 38th Street is a natural extension into . z this subdivision and is ignored. There may also be opportunities to the north = and south of your site where access through your plat would be appropriate. w 6. (b) 1) Cul -de -sacs standard length should not exceed 600 feet. 6. © 5) Sidewalks are required along all street frontages. d o' u) 17.20.030 E. Blocks. Residential block lengths should be-within 300 and 1,000 feet. Width should allow a two -tier layer of lots. o The Subdivision Code has an exception section, TMC 17.32, that you may use for g the above elements. There are specific criteria that must be applied to requests , n a for exceptions from the standards. w ?1._ Trails. We would like to see the proposed trail extended to Pacific Highway, Z °; where pedestrians are likely to travel to access transit and commercial services. D, U �. 0 f- W W. o: w Z,. U -. L- c �. z Utilities. Sewer. It appears that you are making sewer connections to the storm drain system. See lots 4 & 3 and 21 & 22. Water. Maximum spacing between fire hydrants is 300 feet and the distance between lots 7 and 11 exceeds that standard. The Fire Department has also indicated that the minimum distance of 150 feet from hydrant to any outside portion of a building will not be met for lots 4, 5 & 6; therefore an additional hydrant that is looped into the system will be required at this location. Storm Water Detention. The location, contouring and landscape treatment of the detention system at the entrance to the subdivision does not seem appropriate or inviting. Can it be given a different treatment and designed to fit more naturally with the terrain and layout? Signs. Subdivision monument signs are not allowed in single family neighborhoods. Public Works and our Environmental Planner have your project under review. When they have their comments together we can meet to discuss these issues and any other issues comprehensively. Please call me at 431 -3651 with any questions. Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner Enclosure Cc: Fire Public Works Urban Environmentalist March 25, 1999 Permit Technician City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Tukwila PRD Triad Job No. 97 -223 Dear Sir or Madam: ARM I • Z' TRIAD ASSOCIATES Project Management Civil Engineering Land Surveying Land Use Planning Landscape Architecture Site Design RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On behalf of our client, Secure Capital Securities, we are formally requesting Planned Residential Development (PRD) review. Enclosed is the application materials for a PRD. The proposed project is for the development of 22 single- family residences on approximately 7.11 + acres. We have also enclosed an application for a Subdivision, SEPA Review, and a Boundary Line Adjustment to the underlying parcels. This is necessitated in order to modify lots which have existing residences consist with the plat requirements. The proposed project located between Pacific Highway 99 South and 40th Avenue South in Tukwila, within Section 15, Township 23, Range 4E., W.M., (tax parcel numbers 734060 -0901, 0929, 0930, 0941, 0942, 0943, 0945). Attached are the following required documents and a check for the review fee, to be distributed and reviewed by city staff: • Secure Capital check for the review fee in the amount of $1,500 (initial fee $800 plus $100 /acre). • original signed application • 12 plans sets — plan set includes: vicinity map (located on cover sheet) PRD plan (sheet 1 of 8) boundary and topography survey (sheet 2 of 8) preliminary utility plans (sheet 3 of 8) preliminary grading plans (sheet 4 of 8) preliminary landscape plan (sheet 5 of 8) building elevation exhibit (sheet 7 of 8) 11814 115th Avenue NE, Kirkland, Washington 98034 -6923 Phone 425.821.8448 Toll Free 800.488.0756 Fax 425.821.3481 Internet www.triadassoc.com •Z 1— W • :00:. :fo w; .Lux: Ji . wo w = a• • � w; • z �� Z.H; W W` - ,Do i0 `,w w: . ' f- z City of Tukwila PRD Review March 25, 1999 Page 2 tree retention and slope drawing (sheet 6 of 8) surrounding area map (sheet 8 of 8) Drawings prepared by Triad Associates, dated 3/23/99. 1 set of photo montage of site • 1 set of high quality xerox reductions of the above plans, reduced 8.5 x 11 inches • 1 copy - Certificate of Sewer Availability, dated 9/2/98 • 1 copy - Certificate of Water Availability, dated 9/15/98 • 1 copy — legal lot status • 5 copies — geotechnical study prepared by Squier/HGI Associates, dated 7/15/98 • 5 copies — traffic study prepared by TSI, dated 2/19/99 • 5 copies — sensitive areas report prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates, dated 8/13/98. • 5 copies — wetland reconnaissance and stream relocation concepts prepared Jones & Stokes Associates, dated 8/13/98. • 2 sets of mailing labels • 1 King County assessor's maps (quarter section — NW 1/4 15 -23 -4) • 5 copies — preliminary storm drainage report prepared by Triad Associates, dated 12/30/98. Triad Associates will handle the project management for the project. The Triad contacts are Ron Guest, the Project Manager, and Doug Stapleton, the Project Planner, at 800- 488 -0756 (8 :00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m.). If you should have any questions or require additional information, please call Ron Guest or me in our office. Thank you for your help on this project. Sincerely, TRIAD ASSOCIATES Lee Ann Fraser Project Administrator z 1.1";. uji -z JU: U .N J ■ 1- Wo'. • 2 a w .¢; _: z1-7; :Z i•-; • o F; w: O‘ Z • U ■ City of Tukwila PRD Review March 25, 1999 Page 3 LAF /wp Enclosures cc: Mr. Gary Greer Secure Capital Securities (w /enc. 1 submittal PRD pckg.) CITY C. TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION Planned Residential Development approval (PRD) is required for any multi - family development or subdivision which is proposed on property with Sensitive Areas: a wetland, stream, geologically unstable areas (e.g., over 20 %), abandoned coal mine areas, and important geological or archaeological sites; or their buffers (TMC 18.45.060(2) & 18.06.720). The PRD process, permits flexibility in Zoning Code requirements to encourage imaginative site and building design, protects environmentally sensitive areas and creates open space in residential developments. The number of dwelling units is determined by the underlying zoning district. Minimum lot sizes, and building setback standards can be reduced; and a maximum density bonus of 20% may be allowed in the MDR and HDR zones subject to satisfying the bonus criteria. At least 20% of the PRD site, or the area encompassing the sensitive area and buffers, must be devoted to open space that is concentrated in large usable areas capable of providing passive or active recreation and owned and maintained under one ownership, by a homeowners association or dedicated to the City (if acceptable. Perimeter setbacks must be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. CRITERIA PRD proposals must comply with various specific development standards, as well as the following criteria: 1. Requirements of the subdivision code for the proposed development have been met, if appropriate; 2. Reasons for density bonuses meet the bonus criteria; 3. Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated; 4. Compliance of the proposal to PRD and sensitive area requirements; 5. Time limitations, if any, for the entire development and specified stages have been documented in the application; 6. Development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant plans; 7.' Compliance with the BAR review guidelines (TMC 18.60.050); and 8 Appropriate retention and preservation of existing trees and vegetation as recommended by the Director of Community Development. PROCEDURE A pre - application conference is required prior to PRD application. A brochure with guidelines for these conferences is available at the Permit Center. Within 28 days of receiving your application, City staff determines if it is complete. If not, you will be mailed a letter outlining what additional information is needed. The project will be scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council once the application is determined to be complete. The hearing date be will no sooner than 60 days from the determination of a complete application. During this time, staff will review the application, meet with you as needed, and formulate a recommendation for the Council. The City Council's decision is final unless appealed would be to Superior Court. PRDCKLT.DOC 7/8/96 11 CITY CTUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Department. Please contact the Department if you feel certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However, they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670. APPLICATION FORMS: ❑ Application Checklist (1 copy), indicating items submitted with application ❑ PRD Application (6 copies) and fee - $800 + $100 /acre ❑ SEPA Environmental Checklist (6 copies) and fee - $325 ❑ Design Review application and fee ($900) ❑ Other required land use approvals RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS (Six (6) copies of the following, unless the number is coordinated with other applications): in Vicinity map showing location of the site. ❑ Surrounding area map showing existing land uses within a 1000 -foot radius from the site's property lines. ❑ Site plan at 1 "= 30' or 1" = 20', with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; and the license stamp of the architect. The following information must be contained on the plan (details may be included on additional drawing sheets): O Property lines and dimensions, lot size(s), and names of adjacent roads O Location and setbacks of existing and proposed structure(s) with gross floor area O Location of driveways, parking, loading, and service areas, with parking calculations O Location and design of dumpster /recycling area screening and other exterior improvements O Location and type of exterior lighting, including parking and pedestrian areas O Location and type of site furniture, such as benches, bike racks; location and type of any proposed public outdoor art O Location of any trails, parks, plazas or other outdoor open space provided for employees or the public; existing and proposed open space easements and dedications (if any) PRDCKLT.DOC 12/18/96 , , O Location and cla:7-^' ation of any watercourses or wetlanr'— nd 200' limit of Shoreline Overlay District O Existing and proposed grades at 2' contours, extending at least 5 feet beyond the site's boundaries with slopes. in excess of 20% clearly identified O Location of closest existing fire hydrant; location and size of utility lines; location and size of utilities O Letter of water and sewer availability from provider of utility if other than the City of Tukwila. O Other relevant structures or features such as rockeries and fences. O Location, dimensions and nature of all existing and proposed easements z ❑ Landscape/planting plan at the same scale as site plan, with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; o o and the license stamp of the landscape architect. The following information must be contained on the N w plan: –I 1--: O Property lines and names of adjacent roads o w O Location of the following: proposed structure(s), vehicle and pedestrian circulation areas, 2 dumpster /recycling area, site fumiture, any proposed public outdoor art g O Existing trees over 4" in diameter by size and species, and any trees to be saved O Proposed landscaping, including size, species, location and spacing. z�. ❑ Building elevations of all building facades at a scale of 1/8" = 1' or 1/4" = 1', with graphic scale and z 0' date. Include on the elevations: 2 O Dimensions of all building facades and major architectural elements N 0 O Materials to be used o 1--. O Location and type of exterior building lighting = w0 O Location of mechanical units and proposed screening where necessary. u- o: wz ❑ If site has slopes greater than 20 %, a photo montage showing the proposed development at o completion and 3 years after project completion. z ❑ One (1) high quality 8 1/2" x 11" reduction of each sheet in the plan. ❑ OTHER MATERIALS: O Site percolation data approved by the Seattle -King County Department of Environmental Health pursuant to TMC 14.36.020 if the site is proposed for development using a septic system, or a Certificate of Sewer Availability from the sewer utility purveyor serving the site if the sewer utility serving the site is an entity other than the City. O Proof that the lot or Tots are recognized as separate lots pursuant to the provisions of TMC Title 17 and RCW Ch. 58.17. O Any sensitive areas studies required by TMC 18.45. O A list of any existing environmental documents known to the applicant or the City that evaluate any aspect of the proposed project. O A list of any permits or decisions applicable to the development proposal that have been obtained prior to filing the application or that are pending before the City or any other govemmental entity. O A storm water design which meets the requirements set forth in the Surface Water Design Manual adopted pursuant to TMC 16.54060(D). O Legal description of the site. O A soils engineering report for the site. O Traffic studies or studies, if required pursuant to TMC 9148.070. PRDCKLT.DOC 12/18/96 :1 O A tree - clearing plar-quired by TMC 18.54. O A parking plan, if required by TMC 18.56. O Other documentation and graphics in support of the proposal may be included as appropriate, such as color renderings, perspective drawings, photographs or models. If other materials are to be considered, eight (8) copies of each must be submitted (except models). Color drawings or photos may be submitted as 8.5 x 11 -inch color photocopies. PUBLIC NOTICE: 0 King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property 'within 500 feet of the subject property. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. (Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks —must be included.) See Attachment A. ce. 6 '0 0' CO Ur w' w O,' ❑ A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on -site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. See Attachment B. PRDCKLT.DOC 12/18/96 CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMF—`T OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEe* 6300 SouthcL.,iter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 9818b Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (P -PRD) APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLYi: File Number. Project File #' . p (t. O;:Appilcatlon:Complete: (Date :,.,...::.; j ❑; A • • Iication lncom . late. a ate. SEPA File #: BAR File #: gl I. PROJECT BACKGROUND A. NAME OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT:,... Tukwila PRD B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: STREET ADDRESS: 1 3223 - 40th Avenue South ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: Please see attached sheet LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Please see attached sheet Quarter: NW Section: 15 Township: 23 Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent) NAME: Ron Guest / Triad Associates ADDRESS: 11814 - 115th Avenue N.E. Kirkland, WA 98034 PHONE: 425 8448 Sm!ITURE: PRDCKLT.DOC 7/5/96 DATE: 1/13/99 RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1999 OMMTY DE OPM VE E T 1 z w IX 2 00 Nom. wz J I- N LL W o. g- u- j. - d. I- =_ Zf.. I- O Z uj 2 0 - 0 I- W uj r` —o ui z: — Z': O~ z I D. PROPERTY O1',ER DECLARATION The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit approval), will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the property prior to 1. -- • . -.;. nstruction permits. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on l /5 ,199 9. (Signature) 2("-- • 7 2 - (Print name) Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures. PRDCKLT.DOC 7/5/96 RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E. DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SATISIFIES ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA. 1. Requirements of the subdivision code for the proposed development have been met, if appropriate. The proposed PRD development has been designed in conformance with Chapter 17.20 — Design Standards for the Subdivision of Land. In addition, no variances or special exceptions have been applied for to meet the requirements set forth in Section 18.46 — Planned Residential Development of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). 2. Reasons for density bonuses meet the bonus criteria. No density bonuses are being requested with this application. 3. Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated. Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated through the use of PRD process. Appropriate setbacks have been designed and incorporated into the site design around the sensitive areas. The slope areas approaching 20 to 40 percent have been mitigated per the Geotechnical Study prepared by Squier/HGI Associates. Furthermore, appropriate buffers from the Class 2 and Class 3 Streams have been provided. No construction activity will take place within the required 35 -foot, Type 2 stream buffer, and the 15- foot, Type 3 stream buffer. 4. Compliance of the proposal to PRD and sensitive area requirements. By utilizing the City of Tukwila's PRD process, the proposed project preserves a majority of the designated sensitive areas on site. The project site has slope areas approaching 20 to 40 percent and two stream corridors. No building or construction activity will take place within the required buffers of the two open drainages, or within the designated open space tracts. 5. Time limitations, if any, for the entire development and specified stages have been documented in the application. The proposed project will be built as one phase upon the approval of the grading, building permits, and all other subsequent approvals. 6. Development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant plans. The Comprehensive Plan Designation for the site is Single - Family Residential. The proposed PRD is in accordance with the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Designation, and the Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning Designation. Maximum Allowed Density: 6.7 du /acre Proposed PRD Total Site Area: 309,846 square feet/7.11 acres Proposed Lots: 22 Density: 22/7.11 = 3.09 lots per acre Open Space: 94,123 square feet R.O.W: 44,904 square feet Detention: 9,196 square feet Net buildable area: 161,123 square feet Average lot area: 161,123/22 = 7,347 square feet Net Density: 22/3.71 = 5.9 lots per acre 7. Compliance with the BAR review guidelines (TMC 18.60.050). According to Section 18.60.030 of the TMC, LDR zoned districts are exempt from the Board of Architectural Review (BAR). However, this submittal does include building elevations for each proposed lot within the PRD, but no specific architectural floor plans are being submitted with this PRD submittal. It can be anticipated that houses built on the site would conform to the TMC and the Uniform Building Code. 8. Appropriate retention and preservation of existing trees and vegetation as recommended by the Director of Community Development. The Director of Community Development has not established specific tree retention requirements for this project/site. However, the proposed development meets the PRD requirements for the preservation of the natural vegetation. According to TMC Section 18.46.060, at least 15% of the natural vegetation must be retained. The proposed PRD provides approximately 30% of open space. The project provides a total of 94,123 square feet of open space, with the open space tract along the westerly boundary, which protects the majority of the natural vegetation on the site. The majority of the significant trees and vegetation found on -site lie within this area. z +••• W> Ce 6 J U; O 0 CO ° w z' J I; CO u uJ O.. 0. 1- w zF. G. WILL THE PROJECT BE COMPLETED IN PHASES? z o Development and construction of the site will proceed as one phase. p! O CD I. HOW WILL THE COMMON OPEN AREAS AND RECREATION AREAS BE MAINTAINED: i e:. At this time it is anticipated that all open space areas will be maintained through an z` agreement set forth in the proposed homeowner's association. v O ' : E. PLEASE USE SEPARATE SHEETS OF PAPER TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING: DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PROOSED DEVELOPMENT SATISFIES ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1. Requirements of the subdivision code for the proposed development have been met, if appropriate; 2. Reasons for density bonuses meet the bonus criteria; 3. Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated; 4. Compliance of the proposal to PRD and sensitive area requirements; 5. Time limitations, if any, for the entire development and specified stages have been documented in the application; 6. Development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant plans; 7. Compliance with the BAR review guidelines (TMC 18.60.050); and 8. Appropriate retention and preservation of existing trees and vegetation as recommended by the Director of Community Development. F. IF APPLYING FOR A MULTIPLE FAMILY DENSITY BONUS PER TMC 18.46.070, DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FOLLOWING ARE SUBSTANTIALLY PROVIDED: 1. A variety of housing types is offered. 2. At least 15% of any significant stands of natural vegetation is retained. 3. Advantage is taken or enhancement is achieved or unusual or significant site features such as views, watercourses, wetlands, or other natural characteristics. 4. Separation of auto and pedestrian movement is provided, expecially in or near areas of recreation. 5. Development aspects of the PRD complement the land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan. G. WILL THE PROJECT BE COMPLETED IN PHASES? ❑ YES ❑ NO H. ANY RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS OF LAND OR CHARACTER OF BUILDINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY COUNCIL (This must be incorporated into your proposal and may only be recorded after review and approval by the.City Attomey and City Council.) 1. HOW WILL THE COMMON OPEN AREAS AND RECREATION AREAS BE MAINTAINED? J. PLANS SHALL REFLECT ALL OTHER PRD AND ZONING CODE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. PRDCKLT.DOC 7/5/96 I! z = I-. -I C.), • UO CY W =. J W O. u_ ?; co 3 = w' Z I--. F- O Z I- 11J ut p: 0 i0 N o I•- w w. H V`. _ p. itiz' U N`. z • . galoweepm -- . - •:- • • • : • • • Current Parcel Tax Acct..t Vesting i A . • 734060-0921-09 Secure Capital Inves B • 734060-0920-06 Secure Capital Inves C 734060-091)1=01 Secure Capital Inves D . 734060-0902 Secure Capital Inves El . 734060-0941-00 Secure Capital Inves Fj 73060-094o-09 . - Secure Capital Investments.- - • ,734060-0941-01 Secure Capital: Investments • ;.• • • • • . . LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 8 (PROPOSED BLA) THOSE PORTIONS OF TRACT 59 AND TRACT 61, RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 61, THENCE NORTH 8978'48" WEST ALONG 114E SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 10.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NEST RIGHT -OF -WAY MARLIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5674852, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 0040'43" EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 72.95 FEET THENCE NORTH 89707" NEST 105.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89707* EAST 105.00 FEET TO SAID WEST MARGIN OF 40114 AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE NORTH 0040'43" EAST ALONG SAID WEST MARGIN, ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUMENTS FILED UNDER RECORDINGS NO. 5674852, 5706313 AND KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 614098 A DISTANCE OF 166.24 FEET THENCE CON1NUING ALONG SAID MARGIN NORTH 0017620" EAST 274.11 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 00.06'20" WEST 90.41 FEET FROM THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID TRACT 59; THENCE DEPARTING SAID MARGIN, NORTH 67J1'46" WEST 40.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 887338" WEST 24.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'30'25" WEST 24.07 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47177'19" NEST 38.72 FE£1;' THENCE NORTH 6732'53" WEST 36.36 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00'42'23" EAST 26.46 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF TRACT 59, INTERURBAN TRACTS; THENCE NORTH 897737" NEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY, 220.15 FEET TO THE EAST BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60; THENCE SOUTH 00'37'49" WEST ALONG SAID WEST BOUNDARY 48.76 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTH 60 FEET OF THE EAST 120 FEET OF SAID TRACT 60; THENCE NORTH 897751" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY. 120.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 120 FEET OF TRACT 60; THENCE SOUTH 00J7'49" NEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60; THENCE SOUTH 897751" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60 AND TRACT 59 A DISTANCE OF 120.02 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 380 FEET OF TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE SOUTH 00'41'28" WEST 144.86 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF 714£ SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF SAID TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, SOUTH 8978'48" EAST 79.80 FEET TO 714E WEST LINE OF THE EAST 300.20 FEET OF TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, SOUTH 00'4128" NEST 290.20 FEET TO 774E SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 61; THENCE SOUTH 8978'48" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 184.84 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 00'40'43" WEST FROM 774E TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00'40'43" EAST 72.93 FEET TO 774E TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF TRACT 61, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 61; THENCE NORTH 891751" WEST ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 12.42 FEET TO A POINT ON 114E WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO 771E DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5706313, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING ;; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 897751" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 94.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00176'20" WEST 100.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8953'40" EAST 69.83 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO 1746 LEFT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9017000" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.27 FEET TO A POINT ON THE MASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY MARGIN OF 40174 AVENUE SOUTH ACCCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5706313; THENCE NORTH 00176'20" EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 74.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT 61, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 61, THENCE NORTH 8978'48" NEST ALONG 114E SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 10.36 FEET TO A POINT CW THE WEST RIGHT -OF- WAY MARGIN OF 40114 AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5674852, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 00'40'43" EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 175.91 FEET TO POINT "A"; THENCE DEPARTING SAID MARGIN NORTH 895340" WEST 84.57 FEET TO 114£ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 8953'40" WEST 7Z35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00176'20" EAST 109.74 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8933'40" EAST 7Z35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00176'20" WEST 109.74 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUB,ECT TO AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: BEGINNING AT THE HEREINABOVE DESCRIBED POINT 'A,• THENCE NORTH 8953'40" WEST 161.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00176'20" WEST 30.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8953'40" EAST 161.62 FEET TO A POINT ON 114E WEST MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE NORTH 0040'43" EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 30.00 FEET TO 7746 POINT OF BEGNNNNG. TAX LOT/09J0: 174E WEST 68.65 FEET OF THE EAST 188.65 FEET OF 774E SOUTH 217.65 FEET OF TRACT 60, RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT 174E WEST 8 FEET OF THE NORTH 40 FEET THEREOF. TAX LOT/0942: THAT PORTION OF TRACT 61, RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACT$, ACCORDING TO 714E PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PACE 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 380 FEET OF THAT PORTION THEREOF" LYING NORTH OF 714£ NORTH LINE OF 171E SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF SAID TRACT; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEROF LYING 111711/N THE SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF THE EAST 300.20 FEET OF SAID TRACT 61. ».....� .; .. .. �. SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Secure Capital Investments #2, LLC P.O. Box 25127 Seattle, Washington 98125 Attn: Mr. Gary Greer Re: Subsurface Investigation for Proposed Tukwila R.R.D. King County, Washington Dear Mr. Greer: 7981 168th Avenue N.E., Suite 109 Redmond, Washington 98052 RECEIVED MAR 2 5 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 425.702.0185 FAX 425.881.6616 98349 July 15, 1998 We have completed a geotechnical engineering study, including a geologic hazards evaluation, for the 7.5 -acre proposed residential subdivision site located between Pacific Highway 99 South and 40th Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. The location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map (refer, Figure 1). The conceptual plan for the site, as developed by Triad Associates on May 1, 1998, is to build seventeen single - family housing units on lots ranging from about 5,500 to 6,500 square feet in size. The. remaining areas are set aside for open space, stream buffers, a roadway, and a stormwater detention pond. In June 1998, two acres of the total 7.5 acres of land at the southeast portion of our study area were added to the original 5.5 acres due to proposed property acquisitions. A conceptual plan for this additional area was not provided to us prior to implementing this study. The overall purpose of our study was to conduct a geotechnical engineering study and report on the subsurface conditions observed at the site, and on the geotechnical requirements for development of the proposed subdivision, and evaluate stability and drainage characteristics for the site in general. Our study did not include recommendations for design and construction of individual properties. Review of "sensitive area" maps at the City of Tukwila revealed that the site is classified as a Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic Instability for most of the western half and southeastern portions of the site, and that the eastern portion of the site near 40th Avenue South is largely outside Areas of Potential Geologic Instability. A Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic Instability is identified as an area where landslide potential is high. These include areas sloping between 20% and 40 %, which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock and also include all Attachment F 000 ..•. % SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES areas sloping more steeply than 40 %. Title 18 of Tukwila's Municipal Code recognizes that Areas of Potential Geologic Instability can be modified or the project can be designed so that potential impact to the project and surrounding properties is eliminated and slope stability is not negatively affected. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Description The proposed residential subdivision site is roughly rectangular in shape. The main portion of the area of investigation measures approximately 540 by 600 feet. The site is bounded by Highway 99 on the west and 40th Avenue on the east, as shown on Vicinity Map (refer, Figure 1) and Site Survey (refer, Figure 2) prepared and provided by Triad Associates. The site is approximately 7.5 acres in size and consists of a combination of seven City of Tukwila tax parcels of land. Currently, the subject site is occupied by an old wood and concrete water tank structure at the northwest comer, an old abandoned log cabin on the northeast parcel, and three single family houses along 40th Avenue South. One of these houses is a mobile home and another has been recently abandoned. Vegetation covers the majority of the site. It consists mostly of deciduous trees (e.g., maple, alder, willow, fruit), vine plants, grasses, and a few remnants of cultivated agricultural plants. Ground cover consists largely of vine plants and grasses. Vine plants are primarily blackberry bushes and have grown to a height of 15 feet at some locations within the site boundaries. The site descends to the east from Pacific Highway South with a maximum slope of approximately 30 percent along the western side of the property and grades to approximately 12 percent in the eastern portion of the site. The southem limits of the site have the steepest grade change. The western limit of the site begins at elevation 194 feet at its highest point and slopes east to a low elevation of 74 feet near 40th Avenue South. The topography of the western and southern portions of the site is moderately steep (approximately 30 percent grade) and grade to a much more gentle slope (approximately 10 to 15 percent grade) near the central and eastern portions of the site. Approximately one -half of the land within the site boundaries is below 15 percent grade. Surface water runoff in the vicinity of the site likely flows northeasterly from the upland till plain towards the Duwamish River Valley as sheet flow or shallow subsurface flow. Due to controlling topography, surface water drainage at the site likely flows to the east - northeast into the 40th Avenue South ditch line. The small drainage ditches located on the southwestern portion of 2 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES the property are directly fed by two 18 -inch drainage culverts emerging beneath the Pacific Highway 99 embankment fill at the western portion of the site. Sensitive area protection easements surround a small stream channel on the south side of the site and a steam channel at the northeast parcel of the site. The stream at the northeast parcel has created a ravine approximately 15 feet in depth and 20 feet wide. Some surficial evidence of slope instability was observed at the site on June 18, 1998. A minor scarp -like feature was located downslope of the Pacific Highway 99 drainage ditches near Test Pit #8. However, there were no visible signs of any recent landslide activity on the site that could be observed at the time of the investigation, nor were there visible surface springs on the site on this date. Heavy vegetation may have concealed seeps and springs and prevented a thorough visual survey. As a consequence, we recommend that we revisit the site to check our initial observations once the site has been cleared of undergrowth during site development. The narrow rectangular portion of the site which extends north to 38th Avenue in the most northwestern section of the site was investigated to determine suitability for a building site. The surface conditions indicated surface water ponding in the southeast corner of the above narrow section, approximately 60 feet southwest of a house located on an adjacent property. Approximately one -third of this narrow section is located on a steep slope with buildings located upslope. It is unclear if this slope is an embankment fill slope or a cut slope due to abundant vegetation which covers the embankment. Lower portions of the slope revealed garbage debris mixed in with soil indicating some fill material may be present. If housing is proposed in this area, some additional field investigation might be required to better evaluate the slope's possible fill and subgrade condition. Geologic Setting Existing reconnaissance -level geologic mapping of the Des Moines Quadrangle (Waldron, 1962) indicates that the site is underlain by Pre - Vashon drift deposits along the eastern edge of glacial till in the upland area. Our field investigation revealed that a veneer of Vashon glacial till extends over much of the site and is, in turn, underlain by advance outwash and glaciolacustrine deposits. Pleistocene glacial deposits in the site area were largely directly or indirectly derived from the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran ice sheet about 14,000 years ago during the Vashon Stade. These glacial deposits have been glacially overridden by several thousand feet of glacial ice. The till generally consists of a poorly sorted to nonsorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders in variable amounts, with a concrete -like appearance. Though generally quite sandy, it locally contains much clay and its poor sorting reflects mixing of materials overridden and 3 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES incorporated by the ice. The Advance Outwash typically consists of stratified clean pebbly sand with fine- grained sand and some silt in the lower part of the unit. Where large areas of advance outwash have been exposed to subaerial weathering, much of it has been oxidized to brown and reddish -brown in contrast to its usual gray color. It is generally well drained and provides stable foundation material. Moisture sensitivity is low to medium. Glaciolacustrine deposits consist of silt and clay deposited in ice - marginal lakes or ice - walled depressions. These deposits consist mostly of massive to laminated clay, silt, and fine sand, and are generally poorly drained. The glaciolacustrine deposits may grade up into the base of the overlying advance outwash. Moisture sensitivity of fine- grained glaciolacustrine soils is normally high. FIELD EXPLORATIONS General The subsurface conditions underlying the site were explored with eight test pits on June 18, 1998. The locations of the test pits, designated Test Pit #1 through Test Pit #8, are shown on the Site Survey, Figure 2. In addition to the eight test pits, six hand auger explorations were conducted to a maximum depth of 4.8 feet. The locations of the hand holes, designated HA -1 through HA -6, are shown on the Site Survey, Figure 2. The procedures and techniques used to accomplish the explorations, collect samples, and other field techniques are described in detail in the following paragraphs. Unless otherwise noted, all soil sampling and classification procedures followed applicable ASTM standards. Test Pits Eight test pits were made to observe subsurface conditions and materials within the proposed subdivision. The test pits were excavated to about depth 9 to 14 feet using a Komatsu trackhoe. A representative from our firm located the general areas for the excavations and maintained detailed descriptive soil Togs of the explorations. Representative disturbed samples were taken at selected depths in the test pits for classification and for physical testing. The samples were sealed in glass jars or placed in plastic bags. The unconfined compressive strengths of the fine - grained soils exposed in the sidewalls of the test pits were evaluated using a pocket penetrometer and a Torvane shear device. 4 z • z. w o:�. JU U O- cn W i. w • 0 J •< (J)a ~ z� 0. Z I- • .0 0. :0 N. w w. H U� 'LL_H z ui U 0E-: z SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES Logs of Test Pits The logs of all explorations are presented on Figures 4 through 17. The logs show the various types of materials that were encountered and the depths where the materials and /or charac- teristics of these materials changed, although the changes may be gradual. The types of samples taken during excavation, along with their identification numbers, are shown to the right of the classification of materials. Further to the right are plotted the natural water (moisture) contents, and undrained shear strength values. To the left on each log, where applicable, observed water seepage is noted. A natural ground water table was not observed during our excavations; however, slight seepage was observed in some of the test pits at a depth of 9 feet below the existing ground surface (refer, Logs of Test Pits, Figures 4 through 11). The logs of all hand augers are presented on Figures 12 through 17. LABORATORY TESTS All the soil samples were returned to our laboratory for further examination and check classifi- cation. During classification, certain physical characteristics of each sample were noted; for example, color, distinguishing odors, degree of plasticity and whether the sample was dry, moist, wet or saturated. The terminology used in the soil classifications and other modifiers are defined in Table 1. The natural moisture (water) content of selected samples were measured. The moisture content is the ratio of the weight of water to dry weight of soil, expressed as a percentage. The moisture contents are plotted on the test pit logs. DISCUSSION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil Conditions The site is generally underlain by native outwash, tills, and consolidated, fine- grained glaciolacustrine soils and over - consolidated sandy siltstone. The near - surface soils consist of stratified gravelly sand, fine to medium sand, sandy silt, and clayey silt. Numerous cobbles were observed in a majority of the test pits and occasionally boulders (up to two feet in diameter) were observed in a few of the test pits. Deeper penetration was prevented by existence of cobbles or boulders in the hand auger holes. The generalized stratigraphic sequence of soil and rock units on site are as follows: 5 z �~ w 6 00 cn w z' J F. WO u. a z� o z�-. LU np — 0 H. wW I- - o .z w O I' z SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES Soil /Rock Units A. A veneer of loose organic silty sand .topsoil, on average one to two feet in thickness, mantles the heavily vegetated site. B. Glacial till which consists of clayey, sandy silt with gravel ranging from stiff to hard, and generally well -sorted and highly consolidated and moist. Its extent ranges from below the organic topsoil unit to a poorly sorted, highly laminated hard silt unit beneath it. Its thickness ranges between approximately three to four feet in all test pit locations. C. Native outwash sand underlies the till in the eastern portion of the site and ranges from loose to dense and contains occasional cobbles to a maximum size of about eight inches in diameter. D. Silt strata are typically laminated. brown and tan, with fine- grained sand and clay lenses. Mottling was present in this unit in a majority of the test pits. The silt unit is hard, moist to dry and easily stands vertical when cut with the trackhoe bucket. E. A gray, hard, fine sandy silt unit immediately underlies the hard, tan laminar silt. The overconsolidated silt grades to siltstone approximately one foot beneath its contact with the overlying silt strata. The gray silt and siltstone is laminated with fine sand in most samples. The gray siltstone unit was encountered in Test Pits #2, #3, #4, #5, #7, and #8. No evidence of disturbed native material or artificially- placed, non - native fill was present in any of the test pits. One of the hand auger holes, HA -6 (located in a narrow strip in the northern portion of the site), however, revealed man made debris at approximately 1.5 feet indicating some fill at that location. Hand auger borings HA -3 and HA-4 revealed angular 3/4-inch minus angular driveway gravel. The soil in the vicinity of HA -5 was observed to be a wet, highly organic, fine sandy silt. Ground Water Conditions Ground water seepage was not observed in the upslope Test Pits #2, #3, #4, and #5. In fact, soils in these test pits were only slightly moist to dry. No naturally occurring springs were observed during the investigation although the dense vegetation may have prevented their visual discovery. Ground water seepage was encountered in all of the lower elevation test pits ( #1, #6, #7, and #8). The ground water inflow rates on June 18, 1998 ranged from approximately 0.5 to 2 gallons per minute from the side walls of these test pits. The zone of inflow was apparently an outwash sand 6 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES layer which was present at 9 to 9.5 feet below the existing ground surface in the te;it_pjis immediately above an impermeable silt layer. The ground water is likely to be higher during the wet winter months and after significant storm events, and migration patterns are likely to occur laterally along the outwash sand layer due to the highly impermeable consolidated and over - consolidated siltstone encountered beneath the sand. Perched ground water in significant quantities possibly could be trapped on the glaciolacustrine aquitard (low permeability layer) during periods of heavy precipitation or if water is artificially introduced into the subsurface. Water will infiltrate into the outwash deposit and migrate down- ward along the contact with the glaciolacustrine_ deposits, until it emerges in springs at the lower elevations of the site. Relatively loose soils near the ground water table observed in lower elevation test pits may be caused by rapid seepage of ground water downhill on the west slope that undermines the outwash sand deposits. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General. Based on the soil conditions encountered in our subsurface explorations, our opinion is that the proposed development is feasible in most areas of the site from a geotechnical engineering viewpoint. Footing foundations placed in the firm, undisturbed, natural deposits underlying fill and weathered soft or loose topsoil may be used for supporting single - family residences. Over - excavation and backfilling of footing trenches may be required in areas where excessive thickness of fill or loose soils is encountered. Control of ground water seepage will likely be necessary in order to construct footings on firm natural deposits. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Landslide Hazard. The site has been classified as a Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic Instability for most of the western half and southeast end of the site with the steep slopes. A Class 3 Area of Potential Geologic Instability is identified as an area where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping between 20% and 40 %, and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock. Landslides are most likely to occur at the site after clear cutting in the form of debris flows where a few feet of relatively loose, surficial soil over the denser and less permeable underlying consoli- dated soil becomes saturated. Based on the combination of slope, geology, soil types, and ground water conditions at the site, our opinion is that the potential for shallow debris flow -type landslides at the site is moderate in the southwestern and western portions of the site and low in 7 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES the eastern half of the site. Careful control of surface water runoff is important to prevent debris flows. Surficial soil movement may occur if significant cuts are made during construction. The steeper portions of the site may become unstable if excessive amounts of water are applied to the slope or if ground water levels increase. Due to the steepness of the slope at portions of the site, cuts should be limited, and the drainage system and shoring in those areas should be incorporated into foundation and road designs. Occasionally, glaciolacustrine soils and bedrock fail on steep slopes. Our current opinion, however, is that a deep- seated landslide at the site is unlikely to occur due to the degree of consolidation of underlying soils and rock, slope inclination, and general geologic characteristics of the slope. Based on current information, our opinion is that the potential for this type of slope failure is very low. Erosion Hazard and Control. The potential erosion hazard is high for a Class 3 Landslide Hazards Area when it is devegetated. Soil erosion, primarily by uncontrolled surface water runoff, can cause significant problems in areas of the site undergoing development on the slopes between 20 and 40 percent, unless measures are taken to control surface water flow. Ground water discharge of springs along the slopes on the site (if any) may cause erosion of downslope soils, particularly where flow velocities become high. In unpaved areas, if ground vegetation cover is maintained and concentrated discharge of storm water onto slopes is diverted to appropriate collection pipes and ditches, the erosion hazard at the site should be low. Several additional measures are available to minimize the effects of erosion. Typical are the following: • The building pads and any other exposed areas, such as lay down yards and haul roads, should be protected by crushed rock base as soon after exposure as practical to protect the exposed subgrade from softening and erosion. • Sediment control barriers, such as hay bales, or a pre- manufactured barrier, such as Envirofence by Mirafi, may be constructed to intercept silt -laden runoff, and to prevent sedimentation offsite. Such barriers are used to shorten runoff paths. Sediment basins may be constructed at the head of runoff ravines, also, to minimize sedimentation offsite. • Any natural vegetation removed outside of the development area should be replanted or reseeded as soon as possible. A silt fence should be erected along the downhill sides of the construction area to contain sediments. 8 90(19 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES We are available to work with you to identify appropriate erosion and sedimentation control measures, as the rainy season progresses, and as the needs for the project become apparent. Site Preparation and Earthwork The site should be stripped and grubbed within the limits of any new construction so as to remove all grass, roots, organic soil; and, locally, tree roots larger than 1 inch. Based upon our explora- tions, stripping over most of the site should remove about the to • 12 inches. Locally, organic zones or large roots may require; deeper stripping and grubbing. The exposed subgrade should be probed (during the rainy season) or proof - rolled (during the dry season) with a rubber -tire vehicle, such as a partially loaded dump truck, to reveal soft/weak unsuitable areas that may exist in the subgrade. Any soft/weak areas disclosed should be overexcavated to firm ground and the grade restored with suitable backfill material placed in thin lifts and compacted. Because of the fine- grained soils encountered, we recommend that earthwork be accomplished during the summer construction season, generally considered to extend between mid -June and late October of any given year. At other times, earthwork and vehicular traffic may cause excessive soil "pumping ", rutting and /or other soil disturbances, resulting in additional site prep- aration treatment and greater than expected site development costs. Further, as discussed below, the fine- grained native soils are highly moisture sensitive and difficult to place and compact when the natural moisture is above optimum for compaction. Excavation and Slopes The maximum slope within the area of proposed residential development is less than 30 %. The setback requirement in the City of Tukwila Municipal Code fora residential area is 10 feet. Normally in the Seattle area, setbacks are based on a 40% or more slope. We do not anticipate that additional setback will be required by the City of Tukwila based on slope within the proposed developmental plan area. Some of the proposed residences may have daylight basements cut into the slope which may require the design of embedded retaining walls. An engineered retaining wall would likely be necessary for a residential structure built in the north narrow section within the most northwest portion of the site, if the slope was to be altered for building foundations. Where excavation is required, the cut slopes should not be greater than the limits specified by local, state and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts greater than 4 feet in height should be sloped no steeper than 1 H:1 V in the natural deposits of the gravelly sand of the Advance Outwash or in the 9 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES clay and silt of the glaciolacustrine deposits. Footing trenches excavated into the loose fill or topsoil may be as steep as the bank stays stable, if no workers are to be sent into the trenches; otherwise, the trench banks should not be steeper than 1 %H:1 V. The above recomrrzeaded, excavation slopes assume ground water will not be encountered _during construction, Should ground water be encountered, the excavation should be immediately halted and the slope stability re- evaluated. The excavation slopes may have to be flattened and other measures taken to stabilize the slopes. Permanent fill embankments, if required, should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations in the Structural Fill section of this report, andlshould be no steeper than_2 %zH:1 V1 Surface runoff should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of cut slopes into excavated areas. Exposed temporary cut slopes should be covered with plastic sheets during construction to minimize erosion and sloughing from rainwater. Permanent cut slopes or fill embankments should be vegetated or covered with erosion protection matting for long -term stability. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Structural FiII Restoration of grade in overexcavated areas, and the raising of site grades within the access roads, buildings, and behind basement walls might require compacted structural fill. The material for the structural fill may consist of onsite silt or an imported granular material, such as sand and gravel or crushed rock, or reject crushed rock. With the silt or reject crushed rock material, the water content at the time of compaction becomes important. If too wet for optimum compaction, the material will be difficult to place and to compact to a suitable density. Because of the need for moisture control, the silts and similar fine- grained materials, as well as reject crushed rock, generally are not suitable for use during the wet rainy season. However, if construction of the structural fill proceeds during the summer, such silt and reject crushed rock materials can be considered for use in the structural fill. With respect to the onsite soils, the average natural moisture content is about 20 to 30 percent. Our experience suggests that this moisture content is about 5 to 10 percent wet of optimum moisture for suitable compaction. Hence, some drying by aeration most likely will be required. Based upon our experience, the placement of the silt in thin lifts over a wide area combined with aeration by tilling during the summer construction season can dry the silt to optimum moisture for compaction. If imported material is used for structural fill, it should consist of sand, or sand and gravel, or crushed rock, with not more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve (wet sieve analysis, ASTM 10 . SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES D1140). During periods of no precipitation, reject crushed rock may be selectively hauled onsite for use in structural fills. The substitution could be a field decision at the time of fill placement. Placing fill against a slope steeper than 4H:1V requires some site preparation to prevent slippage of the fill- natural slope contact. The site preparation should include benching into the existing slope with a bulldozer. A relatively level work area wide enough for a bulldozer and compactor should be prepared. Each lift should be relatively horizontal and further benched into the slope in a "stair -step" fashion as the fill is constructed. Granular fill material should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches (loose); whereas silt or other fine - grained fill materials should be placed in lifts not exceeding 9 inches (loose). Each lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent in the upper 12 inches and lower layers should be minimum 90 percent of the modified- maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D1557 or AASHTO -180. A medium weight (48 -inch diameter drum) smooth steel - wheeled vibratory roller probably would prove to be effective in compaction of granular material. Compactors with pad foot drums would probably be effective on silt and fine - grained fill material. Wet Weather Construction If wet weather construction is necessary in order to meet project schedules, we recommend that additional steps in construction be considered in order to minimize subgrade disturbance. Prolonged rains tend to weaken any exposed subgrade, and cause pumping and softening of the subgrade under wheel loads of construction equipment, along with foot traffic. In order to control subgrade pumping and softening, we recommend that all haul roads consist of a minimum 18 inches of crushed rock aggregate. A separation geotextile, such as a Mirafi 140N, will strengthen some soft subgrades and minimize rutting and other forms of subgrade failure, such as excessive pumping. A geotextile will also prevent contamination of the base aggregate by subgrade silt, allowing the aggregate to be used elsewhere, at a later time. Use of a separation geotextile can be a field decision made at the time of the construction. At other locations, care should be taken to cover all exposed surfaces with crushed aggregate as soon as possible after exposure. Particularly important would be the covering of the subgrade for the road with the recommended base rock course, shortly^after exposure. 11 cro Ooo SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES Utility Trench Backfill All utility trenches should be backfilled with material that is suitable for compaction. The accept- ability of trench backfill material should be in accordance with the same criteria described for structural fill, whether it is native silt or imported sand or crushed rock. The backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D1557) below one foot from the surface, and compacted to at least 95 percent in the upper 12 inches. Utility trench backfill in landscaped areas may be compacted to 85 percent (ASTM D1557) maximum dry density. Base Course Prior to paving the silt subgrade should be proof - rolled or probed as described in the section entitled, Site Preparation and Earthwork. Any soft/weak areas disclosed should be improved by overexcavating to firm ground and backfilling with compacted structural fill. The base course for pavement should be 1%-inch minus crushed rock, which passes Washington State Highway Department specifications. A leveling course of % -inch minus crushed oc ma be used to cap the top,2 inches of the base rock section. The base course should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum modified dry. density (ASTM D1557). Compaction, in our opinion, would be best accomplished using a medium weight (48 -inch diameter) smooth - wheeled vibratory roller. Foundations Spread footings may be used for supporting columns and continuous footings for residential buildings. Footings should be founded on compacted structural fill or firm native, undisturbed, glacial till, outwash sand, or the glaciolacustrine silt or siltstone underlying the fill and surficial topsoil. Over - excavated footing trenches, where excessively thick fill or unsuitable material is encountered, may be backfilled with Control Density Fill (CDF) or structural fill. CDF is a flowable, low- strength mixture of cement, fly ash, and aggregate that is commercially available in ready -mix form. If structural fill is used for supporting footings, the structural fill should extend laterally for a horizontal distance beyond the edges of footings at least one -half the depth of the structural fill. The structural fill should be constructed in accordance with recommendations in structural fill section. When ,ground water is encountered, the footing trenches should. be. badkf Iled with.4 -inch 12 z ~w 0 0: co w =' J H, NLL w0 a. a cn _. z �. �o z� U� '0 CI OF w w: U` _z. 0 z SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES minus crushed rock to at least 6 inches above water level. In lieu of structural fill, over - excavated footing trenches may be backfilled with CDF to support footings. Moisture should not be allowed to accumulate in excavated footing trenches. Disturbed. soil should be completely removed or thoroughly re- compacted prior to pouring concrete for the footings. If ground water levels potentially could rise at the lower elevations of the site, it would be prudent to increase the elevation of this area of the site by using structural fill. For footings constructed as recommended above, our recommended design criteria for footings are as follows: • • Allowable soil bearing pressure for footing, including dead and live loads, should be no greater than 2,000 psf. • Minimum depth to bottom of perimeter footing below adjacent final exterior grade should be no less than 18 inches. • Minimum depth to bottom of the interior footing below lowest adjacent grade or top of floor slab should be no less than 12 inches. • Minimum width of wall footings should be no Tess than 18 inches. Minimum lateral dimension of individual footings should be no Tess than 24 inches. A one -third increase in the above allowable soil bearing pressures may be used when considering short-term transitory wind or seismic Toads. Based on our experience of single - family residential structures supported on similar soil conditions and for the above allowable soil bearing pressures, we estimate that the maximum total post- construction settlement should be' inch or less and the differential settlement across the building width should be % inch or less. Lateral Earth Pressure on Retaining Walls Retaining walls will most likely be required in the major cut or fill areas or in the daylight basement areas. Lateral earth pressure on retaining walls depends on the type of wall (i.e., yielding or non - yielding wall), the type and method of placement of backfill against the wall, the magnitude of surcharge weight on the ground adjacent to the wall, and the slope of the backfill. A summary_ of design earth pressures for level backfill or a backfill slope of 4Hly or, flatter, and for different types of backfill materials is presented in the following table. 13 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES Type of Wall Embedded Wall Backfill: Earth Pressures Backfill Equivalent Fluid (PCF) Yielding Clean crushed rock 35 Onsite silt without gravel 45 Non - Yielding Clean crushed rock 50 Onsite silt without gravel 60 Note: Assumes_backsLope of 41�- :1 V slope or flatter Loading adjacent to the top of the wall which acts as surcharge on the retaining wall, can be taken into account by dividing the vertical surcharge Toad, expressed in psf by 100. The resulting quotient, expressed in feet, is an equivalent height of backfill which is added to the retaining height, H, of the wall. The passive earth pressure on an embedded wall, which would provide a component of resistance against sliding can be computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid density of 200D, where "D" is the thickness of the permanent backfill against the embedded footing (feet). The magnitude of passive earth pressure is significantly influenced by the amount of lateral displacement of the wall and footing into the soil. Therefore, to minimize the displacement the recommended value of passive pressure includes a factor of safety of 1.5. All footings should be poured neat against undisturbed soil, or backfilled with compacted structural fill. Further lateral resistance for the retaining walls can be provided by friction along the base of the footing. This frictional resistance can be expressed as the vertical multiplied by a coefficient of friction of 0.35 (native silty soils). A factor of safety of 1.5 should be used in calculation of overall sliding resistance. BaskfilLabpye any_r taining_walJs should be graded to drain surface runoff away from the wall and to drains to preyentpon_diag and infiltration of rainfall, and to minimize entrance of water through embedded walls and into building. Backfill placed against the retaining walls should only be moderately compacted, i.e., between 85 and 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density, ASTM D1557. Heavy compac- tion equipment should not be allowed closer than 5 feet to embedded walls to prevent inducing higher lateral earth pressures. 14 CIO Qa v z a• =z CC 2 �~ w 6� 0, 0 0; CO 0; W z. J 1 N LL wO LL < 1, z� zo Li" uj V 0. O -' C) W — O: iii z O z 1 SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES Note: The above recommendation regarding the retaining walls are site specific general (geotechnical parameters) recommendations; however; we should review the design parameters for the actual designed retaining walls higher than 4 feet. Site Drainage Surface Drainage. The finished ground around buildings should be graded such that surface water is directed away from the residence. Water should not be allowed to stand within building limits or in areas where footings or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grades should allow surface runoff to be collected by catch basins and drain lines, and tightlined to drain into a permanent storm drain system. We suggest that the ground be sloped at a radient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the buildings, except in areas that are to be paved. Ground Water Drainage. Should ground water seepage be encountered during construction, we recommend that the bottom of excavation be sloped to collect water into small sump pits or ditches from which the water can be pumped and discharged into a storm drain. A subdrain system should be installed behind all embedded walls. If a basement option is adopted for the buildings, the lower floor may require subdrains underneath the slab and behind the building walls. The footing drain should consist of a 4 -inch minimum diameter, perforated, rigid, drain pipe laid below the footing level with a sufficient gradient to generate flow by gravity. The drain line should be bedded on, surrounded by, and covered with a free - draining washed rock, pea gravel, or other free - draining granular material, wrapped with a layer of non -woven filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent. Once the drains are installed, the excavation within an 18 -inch horizontal distance behind the footing or foundation walls should be backfilled with a granular structural fill, except the top twelve inches should be a layer of compacted, impermeable, native soil. This impermeable soil cap should be separated from the underlying granular soil by a layer of non -woven filter fabric. The ground surface should be sloped to drain away from the buildings. Alternatively, the ground can be sealed with asphalt or concrete pavement. Water collected by the footing drains should be tightlined to drain into a permanent storm drain system or to be dispersed over a large, well- vegetated area at a sufficient distance away from the proposed residence. Under no circumstance should roof downspouts drain lines be.connected to the footing drain system. All roof downspout drains must be separately tightlined to discharge to 15 Qo v SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES the permanent storm sewer system. The footing drain system should have a minimum of 12 inches of veltioaLfaILbefore _it..isconnected to the storm water sy_stem.. We recommend that sufficient cleanouts be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the Z footing and downspout drain systems. , 1 z re w 2 Curtain Drains. To control surface water and shallow subsurface ground water flow on to the site 6 J n from Pacific Highway 99, and to minimize slope instability of the hillside due to seepage, a curtain N o drain should be designed and installed near the top of the west slope parallel to the highway at i potential flowpath locations. This curtain drain should penetrate into the highly consolidated co w 0 glaciolacustrine silt or siltstone, beneath permeable outwash deposits, and tightlined down the 2 slope into a stormwater sewer line. In addition, a curtain drain should be designed and installed in g Q a similar_ manneLatapprnximately the 1 1n- th 120-foot centQur.Jine to capture any water from w a seepage and springs discharging from the slope to decrease ground water levels at lower Z I elevations of the site. z 0 w The curtain drains or interceptor trench drains should be at least 18 inches wide and minimum �ra 5 feet deep (24 inches into the glaciolacustrine silt or siltstone). A 4 -inch perforated, rigid PVC o 1' pipe should be embedded near the bottom of the trench. The trench should be backfilled with the w w' H U drain pipe completely surrounded by pea gravel or drain rock. The bottom of the trench and the u_ 0 drain pipe should have sufficient gradient (minimum 0.5 percent) to generate gravity flow. The w N_ drain pipe should be tightlined at low points to discharge collected water into a permanent storm - I` sewer system. Otherwise, the water should be discharged within the property at minimum 50 feet z away from the slope and proposed buildings. The discharge points should be well- vegetated areas and discharge over a large area to minimize erosion potential from discharged water. Additional Services We should be retained to review the project plans and specifications of each building, retaining wall, fill, and roadway to evaluate if they are in substantial conformance with the conclusions and recommendations contained in our report, and to evaluate compatibility with site conditions. We further recommend that we observe all footing subgrade conditions and cut/fill slopes for each residence to assure compliance with our recommendations. Also, we should observe the excavated curtain drain trenches to confirm the presence of low permeability soils. Unless we have the opportunity during construction to confirm our assumptions, interpretations and analyses, we cannot be held responsible for applicability of our conclusions and recommendations to conditions that are different from those anticipated. 16 ; • SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES RISK EVALUATION STATEMENTS There is an inherent risk of soil movement in developing steep - sloped sites. The conditions of the site, however, are not unique to the local area of the site, and developments of sites with similar conditions have been successfully completed. The risk of soil movement on the steep slope can be reduced by careful planning, proper design, suitable foundation supports, and prudent construction practices. In our judgment, if the recommendations of this report are satisfied during construction and after the completion of the development, the areas disturbed by construction will be stabilized and remain stable and should not increase the potential for soil movement. In our opinion, the risk of damage to the proposed development and from the development to adjacent properties from soil instability should be acceptable. Detailed plans and specifications of the proposed development were not available at the time of this study, and should be reviewed by us when available. LIMITATIONS The stability of the slopes and the suitability of the subgrade for each individual lot should be evaluated and checked by us prior to construction and after footing excavations are completed. This report is prepared for the specific application to this project and the exclusive use of Security Capital, Inc., and their associates and representatives. We recommend that this report, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information of the prospective contractors for their estimating and bidding purposes. The conclusions and interpretations in this report, however, should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The scope of this study does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in this report for design considerations. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on soil conditions encountered in our test pits, hand augers, our engineering analyses, and our experience and engineering judgement. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty, express of implied, is made. The recommendations in this report are based on the site surface conditions observed and subsurface conditions encountered in our site exploration. Soil and ground water conditions may 17 J SQUIER /HGI ASSOCIATES vary from those actually encountered during exploration. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until construction. If variations appear then, we should be retained to re- evaluate the recommendations of this report, and to verify or modify them in writing prior to proceeding with the construction. The scope of our services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, ground water, or air, on or below or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the test pit/hand auger logs regarding odors noted or unusual or suspicious items or conditions observed, are solely for the information of our client. We are pleased to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report or need further consultation, please feel free to call us. Yours very truly, Squier /HGI Associates by Glen C. Strachan, R.G., C.E.G. Principal Geologist by /TlZ 2 2 Arlan H. Rippe, P.E. / Senior Vice President GCS /SB /AHR/ph Encl: Table 1 Figures 1 through 17 98349.wpd I EXPIRES: 7-6-00 z w; REFERENCES City of Tukwila, "Sensitive Area Overlay" Title 18 of Tukwila Municipal Code, 10/10/98. GeoEngineers, "Geologic Hazards Evaluation Report," Prepared for City of Tukwila, Washington, undated. Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. et al., South King County Ground Water Management Plan, Volume II, April 1991. Triad Associates, "Proposed Tukwila R.R.D. Layout Plan," Kirkland, Washington, 5/1/98. Triad Associates, "Tukwila P.R.D. Boundary and Topographic Survey Drawing," Kirkland, Washington, 6/8/98. U.S. Geological Survey, "Des Moines, Washington," 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map, 1962, Photorevised 1973. TABLE 1 TERMINOLOGY USED TO DESCRIBE SOIL SAMPLES AND CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK SAMPLES Soils exist in mixtures with varying proportions of components. The predominant soil, i.e. greater than 50 percent based upon total by weight, is the primary soil type, i.e., sand, gravel, silt or clay. Lesser percentages of other soils in the mixture are indicated by use of modifier words in general accordance with standard practice (ASTM D2488 -93). For sand and gravel, the following modifiers are used: Term trace /clean with silt/clay silty /clayey with sand sandy with gravel gravelly Portion of Total Sample < 5% minus No. 200 5% - 15% minus No. 200 15% - 50% minus No. 200 z 15% sand z 30% plus No. 200, predominantly sand z 15% gravel 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel Soil sample identification based upon visual examination is in general accordance with Visual - Manual Procedure (ASTM D2488 -93). If the field sample contains any cobbles or boulders, use "with cobbles" or "with cobble and boulders" and list maximum size. Group symbols and descriptions are based on the portion passing the 3 -inch (75mm) sieve, and are limited to naturally occurring soils. Plasticity characteristics are based upon the minus No. 40 sieve fraction. Description of Relative Density for Granular Soils Relative Density very loose loose medium dense dense very dense Standard Penetration Resistance (N- values) blows /ft. 0 - 4 4 - 10 10 - 30 30 - 50 over 50 Description of Consistency for Fine - Grained (Cohesive) Soils Consistency very soft soft medium stiff stiff very stiff hard Standard Penetration Resistance (N- values) blows /ft. less than 2 2 -4 5 -8 9 -15 16 -30 over 30 Unconfined Compressive Strength tons /sq.ft. less than 0.25 0.25 - 0.5 0.5 - 1.0 1.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 4.0 over 4.0 Sandy silt materials which exhibit general properties of granular soils are given relative density descriptions. 1 z , sz w 6 .J • 00� u w, w= J H' W w. w o: u -< a. z 1-0. z,-;. U• 0 Mr w • W' ILO o iii U N. 0I . O z TABLE 1 (Cont'd.) TERMINOLOGY USED TO DESCRIBE SOIL SAMPLES AND CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK SAMPLES Scale of Rock Strength Approximate Range of Unconfined Compressive • Description Designation Strength. lbs. /sq.in. Very low strength R1 Low strength Moderate strength R2 R3 Medium high strength R4 High strength Very high strength R5 R6 100 -1,000 1,000 -4,000 4,000 -8,000 8,000- 16,000 16,000- 32,000 32,000 Field Identification Crumbles under firm blows with point of geology pick; can be peeled by a pocket knife. Can be peeled by a pocket knife with difficulty; shallow indentation made by firm blows of geology pick. Cannot by scraped or peeled with a pocket knife; specimen can be fractured with a single firm blow of geology hammer. Specimen requires more than one blow with a geology hammer to fracture it. Specimen requires many blows of geology hammer to fracture it. Specimen can only be chipped with geology pick. Correlation of RQD and Rock Quality Description of RQD. Percent Rock Quality 0 25 50 75 90 - 25 - 50 - 75 - 90 - 100 very poor poor fair good excellent Descriptive Terminology for Joint Spacing or Bedding Spacing of Joints Less than 2 inches 2 inches - 1 foot 1 foot - 3 feet 3 feet - 10 feet Greater than 10 feet 2 Descriptive Term very close close moderately close wide very wide (massive) File: L 99 -0023 r Sit�. Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevation jet: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Depth In Feet Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. • Natural Water Con ent % 0 50 100 •: %'•.: t: x' .x • A x . • •x .: }: ' ,� •: x . x• •} • • . • • x • .*••• x : x .x • • { • • x .t x ,x' :: •z : x•,t: x• x: 1•x x••t. • x• x. :.: *H x• x • • • x x' at x, x• '.t • ..•x' x• x',•.%• Ground water seepage at 9.0 feet (1 gpm) 0.0 1.0 5.5 9.3 9.5 TOPSOIL: Soft dark brown sandy SILT with trace clay and occasional gravel, numerous organic fibers; moist '` —'' -` i'.',_I; • ' • 0 3 4 6 7 8 TILL: Medium stiff brown silty fine to coarse SAND with gravel; trace clay; subrounded to rounded; occasional organics; moist Grades to sandy clayey SILT; medium plasticity; micaceous Alliti • t ' 1• • x•' ;t}•�••'`k II s2 OUTWASH: Loose to medium dense gray brown silty fine to coarse SAND with gravel and cobbles; rounded to subrounded; moist to wet Grades to SAND with silt, gravel and cobbles . �. } . 6 S -3 ' 1 • itil.i; t•;} I. } ' 411 "' r S-4 /1 : f4 t � 4:- 1:1{.. I and boulders k. a ,Cobbles End Test Pit (6/18/98) LEGEND Do 33 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) • Torvane '■ Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample ]I = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as • = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown ® " Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT #1 O - Bag Sample B - CBR Test Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision H-- ��-Liqutd Limit Tukwila, Washington = Seepage �— Natural Water Content NOTE: �� Plastic Limit SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of ditTering description are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition t 626/98 98349 Reviewed pole.fi Page 1of1 FIGURE 4 .te .... Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevait at: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Dep In Fee ' Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. • Natural Water Content, % 0 50 ix) • '.. . x• .**- A. *• .*... * .**.. * • .. . * A': * • . '.• * .*... *• • .*•.• *. . '.• *• . ... * • . '.. *• .*'.• *• .'.. *• • '. *• .‘... * • A ..* *. x. •.%. '.. * . . No ground water seepage observed 0.0 2.5 6.0 8.5 9.1 TOPSOIL: Soft brown silty fine to coarse SAND with gravel; trace clay; subangular; numerous organics; moist .L-..., il.0i; " . % t • s% i . • i ; 4• _1, ....., .sA 'I; .,L I . . ...% .1 • ... • . ..%% I, • .st : • ' ,,• 'si i; 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 S-I M TILL: Very stiff gray brown SILT with fine sand; trace clay and gravel; mottled; low plasticity; moist — •. . • • . . • • . . . • . . . . • . • . ' • • . • . ' • • . • • • • . '• . • • . . ' • S-2 a MI WI , \—. GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Hard tan brown SILT with clay; trace fine sariklaminated with fine sand and clay lenses; low plasticity; overconsolidated; dry ..... . • .••. .. . • .. ..•.. ... •. ... ... •. ... ..- •. • . • •. •.. ..• •. • . , • • . S-3 4) Very low strength (RI) gray Eme sandy SILTSTONE; d massive; severely weathered; dense ,.._ -2" _ 7. -. _=] f End Test Pit (6/18/98) LEGEND # 1 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) • Torvane % Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample 11 = 3.0" O.D. Thin-Walled Sample Ground Water Level as = Sample Not Recovered --Y.- Measured on Date Shown • (May Vary with Time of Year) El - Ju Sample TEST PIT #2 0 - Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision 3 9 - CBR Test Sample F I-4-Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington Content ' '41 1----.s.—. ••/•t. - Seepage Natural Water • NOTE: Plastic Limit SQUIEFt/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are a ..rmumate on! and ma indicate .. • ual transition 6/26/98 98349 .n..7'0,1 Ir TT% TI1 e Reviewed / Page 1 ot 1 Reviewed X1/1 pg Page 1 of 1 FIGURE 6 Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevation ,.. xt: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Depth In Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. Natural We er Content, % o so 100 x• .t• • • %'•; x: x x. • •� •., x . •.% : } x x• • •% ••• }• • •x •.: *. .�'•: }: x• .x • .x. }•; x t. x •t. '.%••• x • x': x x• •x• '.x'::. x• •x: x. • .x: x- x x: ': x• x• x: '•x'. }• x••x. x x. : '•x• x. x t: •,1': %• x• %• x :'x x• x. '.x': x; x•t x x. x: x• .x x x. x t. x'•: x: •%•• :x: x' t • %' x• • s' x• 'x. x• t: x ,x: :• x. No ground water seepage observed 0.0 1.0 3.5 10.0 12.0 TOPSOIL: Loose dark brown silty SAND with cobbles; trace rounded gravel; numerous organics; moist '` .. •� /7'.',_t; • • . •• 0 I 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 TILL: Medium dense tan silty fine SAND with cobbles; trace fine to coarse gravel; subangular; micaceous; occasional organics; moist .�, •f ;1.' :••k , f Fi .,.i. [ �••: S -I ,t F GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Hard tan fine sandy SILT with clay; laminated; overconsolidated; mottled; moist to dry I I . I•'. I•• • .. I 1. :I''1', 1 I. I • I• I I . 1' I • I. i • I.•i . • I• 1'. 1 1 .. .I 1'. I. S-2 X • Very low strength (R1) gray SILTSTONE; remolds to silt with trace fine to coarse sand; silt lenses; massive; dense - — — —: — — —; - -- S -3 - End Test Pit (6/18/98) -23 LEGEND a 0 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) ■ Torvane •N Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample II = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as • =Sample Not Recovered 4- Measured on Date Shown ® = Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT #3 Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision B = CBR Test Sample 1-- t]-- 1E- Liqutd.Limit = Seepage f � Natural Water Content Tukwila, Washington NOTE: Plastic Limit Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description SQUIEIit/ HGI ASSOCIATES are approwmate only and may indicate gradual transition 6/26/98 98349 Reviewed X1/1 pg Page 1 of 1 FIGURE 6 se _ V = co ii, Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevotio, : CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Dept,. In Feet ' Samples A Dry Density. P.C.F. • Natural Water Con ent, % 0 50 I . ' . • .A *.; •* • A.... % . • • . •: % • '.*'... A. x• % • • .%••• %.• .% .• % • • A ...•* x• • •%.• *.%'.: *• %. .%•• • •. • .% .: % • • .% •.: *. . . . .% .: • • • •• • A •.: *.. x• .% • .%.: *• • '-: *• A • ' • A..: * x• .%• • .*•.: *• *.%•.: % • '.'... * x• .%• • A ... * • • • • .1k '.; • No ground water seepage observed 0.0 1.0 3.0 7.5 8.5 11.0 TOPSOIL: Loose dark brown silty SAND with numerous organics; moist . • . . i, • ,t I, - .- .. . • .111 j.• . • • . . 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 TILL: 24 inch weathered granite boulder .. . •• • GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Dense brown SILT with fine sand and clay; overconsolidated; close laminations of fine sand; mottled; low to medium plasticity; micaceous; moist . . _ .. . . ... .. . . . " .* •• . • . '. ... .• ... ... .... . . . .. . • . . •.. .. • • • ••• •. .. %. . . • . •.. . • . • . •.. • .. •.. • S-1 a II % Very dense gray SILT with fine sand; close laminations of silt; moist ....._L_L Grades to very low strength (RI) gray SELTSTONE; remolds to silt with trace fine sand; micaceous; close laminations; numerous lenses of clayey silt; dense ..... . • . • . • . ..• . . •. • . • ::-L—_.: — -...7=_ - — —, S-2 5...0 End Test Pit (6/18/98) LEGEN D 00 25 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane 'I. Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample 11 = 3.0" O.D. Thin-Walled Sample Ground Water Level as - Sample Not Recovered -V- Measured on Date Shown • (May Vary with Time of Year) Jar Sample TEST PIT #4 i El P Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision i E = CBR Test Sample 1-111-1-0-Liquid.Limit Tukwila, Washington Water Content "L--..,.._- seepage _—. Natural NOTE: Plastic Limit SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description 98349 are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition 6/26/98 . — . ...iv." y Tali r,‘ Pr acvic.ci -07 age 1 o . ;•, - • Y ^ Yew al Remarks Depth Feet Surface Etewtio. et: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log pepq, In Fat 0 1 2 Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. • Natural Water Content 0 50 I�0 x' s' 'x • x '.x X. x• x . x' •x x x x' •x ' x x• x• x . %•: % • ,x •,.': h• x'. .%. X. ** . X. x a': i• • x'•: x x. {. x' • • X. .x , ': x • x x• '.x x % x: i x .x . ;:.; is };;z x r. x.. x .x. }. x• ,x • x x x x x' x' No ground water seepage observed 0.0 1.0 6.0 11.0 13.0 TOPSOIL: Loose dark brown silty SAND; numerous tY organics; moist '•• •w-` �• . • *. ; ;., r,,. w1 TILL: Dense gray brown silty fine to coarse SAND with clay, gravel, and cobbles; rounded to subangular; weathered cobbles; moist Petrified wood k l� ;1 'I• f1 t E. ; '. •'`� 3 S -I " Ill. '■ 1w 44 •E. 5 8 10 11 12 13 s -2 GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Hard tan silty fine SAND with close laminations of silt and clay; dry I I '. 1 1 • . I'• I. •I ! • I . '• I • • • 'I.'.; I I•. 1 I' I I . • I I. I Very low strength (RI) gray SILTSTONE; occasional fine sand lenses; remolds to silt with clay and trace fine sand; dense _ - -_ _ _ _ --- _—='-----_:, S -3 1 R End Test Pit (6/18/98) --, 'i LEGEND 0 0 2 5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane ■ Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample 11 = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown • ® = Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT #5 a - Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision e = CBR Test Sample FID—��- Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington .� = Seepage f� Natural Water Content NOTE: Plastic Limit 4 SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description 'l� 626/98 98349 are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition • �r!`1T T71T 0 Reviewed A/710 Page 1 of 1 I Eevieveed AIM Page 1 of 1 FIGURE P F. Y ^ li, Remarks Depth Fect Surface Elevation : ed: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Depth In t Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. • Natural Water Con ant, o se top 4 x ,x • • ..% •• x•; . %'.: x; • x x' .}... . .• • z' x• .x • x' •x' x�. x' x x.•x. x x. x •• x' x' x .x x• :.x . •••••' •.'. :'x; x.: x x • x. X* x ; x; x •: •x x x • .x.' x• x. x• x' x x• x x. Ground water seepage at 9.5 feet 1 m 0.0 0.5 9.0 10.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 TOPSOIL: Loose brown SAND with silt; moist L- •`- 1 1 2 4 TILL: Dense tan fine to coarse SAND with silt and cobbles; trace clay and gravel; subangular to subrounded; weathered cobbles; occasional organics; moist • I... • j• - ° I. _C.�, '' ft• jr a 1 7 �� OUTWASH: Medium dense tan silty SAND with gravel; wet • Loose tan orange sandy GRAVEL with cobbles; trace silt; wet . 4.4'. * ..f '' j 10 041 IV i itj . ii �� •.1.. .1: I '. 11 12 13 14 GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Hard tan SILT with clay; trace fine sand; close laminations of silt and lenses of fine sand; mottled; wet Very low strength (R1) gray SILTSTONE; occasional lenses of fine sand dense — = S -2 /t • End Test Pit (6/18/98) LEGEND 0 0 2 5 5 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) • Torvane % Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample I[ = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as • = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown ® - Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT #7 ❑ =Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision El = CBR Test Sample i• ---1-- Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington '� = Seepage f� Natural Water Content NOTE: Plastic Limit SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description 6/26/98 98349 are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition • Reviewed t41,Q Page 1 of 1 � .. -- se D Remarks F Depth S Surface Elevatio eet: D Log I Dept A Samples A D Dry D Density, P P.C.F. Content, % % 100 77ETI-7 1 Ground water TILL: Stiff brown silty fine to coarse SAND with clay I. Iv 4-I 1 2 — 4 S-2 I I • • OUTWASH: Medium dense brown silty SAND with S . . GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSITS: Very stiff tan % %I% i. • S-3 Li Vety low strength (RI) gray SILTSTONE; remolds to — — 5.0 End Test Pit (6/18/98) LEGEND 00 25 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample • Reviewed Page 1 of 1 I es u ^ en iy� Remarks De th p Feet Surface Elevation . .,et: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Depth In Fat Samples L Dry Density. P.C.F. Natural Water Content, 0 50 100 0.0 1.0 5.0 TOPSOIL: Dark brown silty SAND with gravel; moist !Lit: • =` L•. ere. 0 TILL: Brown sandy SILT with gravel; moist . Increasing cobbles and gravel "li' .ti11 •_11L. illi 4't 1't AI i't II i! 2 3 4 End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) 5 LEGEND 0 0 2 5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) • Torvane ". Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample 11 = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as • = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown ® = Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) HAND AUGER HA -1 ❑ = Bag Sample 8 = CBR Test Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision 1-0-1-0-Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington "."-t• = Seepage f-- Natural Water Content NOTE: Plastic Limit SQUIEFt/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only and may indicate •. • uai transition i' 6/26/98 98349 1 Reviewed Mfg Page 1 of 1 FIGURE 12 Y r. D Remarks F Depth S Surface Elevatioi. eet: D Log I Depth A Samples • A Dry Density, P.C.F. 0.0 T TOPSOIL: Dark brown organic sandy SILT with ` ` '' •= t t TILL: Brown sandy SILT with gravel; trace clay; moist .• 2 End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) LEGEND 0 0.0 2-5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample • = • Reviewed r " 7 Page 1 of Iu ^ 00 w Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevation et CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log AV: • .•.O•. •;•�• • t Depth In 1 Samples Q Dry Density F.C.F. • Natura Wa er Con ent 0 se lip 0.0 1.0 5.0 FILL: 3/4 -inch minus crushed rock TILL: Brown sandy SILT with gravel; trace clay; moist Increasing cobbles and gravel 1 41 -11 ill i1, ' � r 11q • -j1[ III 1 2 3 End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) 5 LEGEND o 0 2 5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane ". Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample 11 = 3.0" O.D. Thin- Walled Sample Ground Water Level as s = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown El _ Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) HAND AUGER HA -3 ❑ -Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision a = CBR Test Sample 1-1111--1-41-Liquid Limit =Seepage �� Natural Water Content Tukwila, Washington NOTE: Plastic Limit Lines representing the interface between gradual transition units of differing description SQUIEIW HGI ASSOCIATES are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition 6/26/98 98349 1 Reviewed Meg Page 1 of 1 FIGURE 14 Z Q' 2W 6 JU U OQ` W O) W. W =• J � CO Li- WO g Q. co = W Z F=-. Z O Lu • W C3 ;O N O I--; UU W' 1- U:. O. w Z, H =. Z Y ... mw Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevuioi, eet: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log • • • • • •••••• •••. Depth l In t 0 Samples Q Dry Density, P.C.F. • Natural Water Con ent 0 50 100 0.0 0.5 4.2 FILL: 3/4 -inch minus crushed rock TILL: Brown sandy SILT with gravel; trace clay; moist Increasing cobbles and gravel ' • ''1 Iu Ili .•11 • ill '11 y ■/« 2 3 4 End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) 5 , LEGEND 0 0 2 5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane '■ Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample II = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown • ® = Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT HA -4 ❑ =Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS P Pro osed Tukwila Subdivision B = CBRTest Sample 1—I-4- Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington •vim _ page f— Natural Water Content NOTE: Plastic Limit 4 SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description 6/26/98 98349 are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition r Reviewed M Page lo ; . • at co u, Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevation eel: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Lag Depth In o Samples A Dry Density, P.C.F. •Natural Wa er Content o 50 130 0.0 1.0 4.2 4.2 TOPSOIL: Dark brown organic sandy SILT with gravel; medium plasticity; wet ' —' =. i, .,%•r; r•,' .`fir t 5 TILL: Brown sandy SILT with gravel; trace clay; moist Increasing cobbles and gravel i1 1't« .• -'t« Il�1 « 1-14 . yy 1!« 1 End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) LEGEND 0.0 2 5 5.0 Shear Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane '■ Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split Spoon Sample ]I = 3.0" O.D. Thin - Walled Sample Ground Water Level as • = Sample Not Recovered Q Measured on Date Shown ® = Jar Sample (May Vary with Time of Year) TEST PIT HA -5 o =Bag Sample ATTERBERG LIMITS Proposed Tukwila Subdivision EI = CBR Test Sample 1-1111--1_ -4-Liquid Limit Tukwila, Washington '� = Seepage �\ Natural Water Content NOTE: Plastic Limit 4 SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description ■ 6/26/98 98349 are approximate only and may indicate gradual transition 6/2 8 Reviewed M/6 Page 1 of 1 ~ W et 2 00 N W' J 1.- U) WO 1L Q. a W . Z Z 1—O Z Lu U O N` O t- W W. 1--• U Z 111 U = H O - z P en P Y _ 0 w Remarks Depth Feet Surface Elevstio Beet: CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIAL Log Dept'. In Feet . t 'l. I 2 3 Samples Q 0 Dry Natural Density Wa F.C.F. er Con 50 ent, % 130 0.0 3.0 TILL: Brown fine sandy SILT with gravel; artificial debris at 1 foot; moist (possible fill slope) ' . iii ''l. 11 i't. �1 1t. End Hand Auger Boring (6/18/98) LEGEND Spoon Sample Walled Sample interface and may Ground Water Level as Q Measured on Date Shown (May Vary with Time of Year) ATTERBERG LIMITS NaturalLWater 4% 0.0 Shear • 2 5 5.0 Strength, T.S.F. (approx.) Torvane Pocket Penetrometer 1 = 2.0" O.D. Split II = 3.0" O.D. Thin - • = Sample Not Recovered lE = Jar Sample ❑ = Bag Sample B = CBR Test Sample = Seepage NOTE: Lines representing the are approximate only '■ TEST PIT HA -6 Proposed Tukwila Subdivision Tukwila, Washington SQUIER/ HGI ASSOCIATES ■ 6/26/98 98349 Content Plastic Limit between soil/rock units of differing description indicate gradual transition 1 Reviewed /41/7/3 Page 1 of 1 FIGU GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION SECURE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS #2, LLC 40TH AVENUE SOUTH TUKWILA PROJECT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FOR SECURE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS #2, LLC ATTACHMENT F • NELSON- COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 17311 -135th Avenue NE, A -500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486 -1669 • Fax 481 -2510 March 8, 2000 Mr. Gary Greer Secure Capital Investments #2, LCC PO Box 25127 Seattle, Washington 98125 Snohomish County (425) 337 -1669 Wenatchee /Chelan (509) 784 -2756 Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation - Summary and Response to City Review Comments Secure Capital Investments #2, LCC 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project Tukwila, Washington NCA File No. 278400 Dear Mr. Greer: This letter transmits five final copies of our report that summarizes the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation for the 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project. We submitted draft copies of this report, dated March 3, 2000, for your review. This final version incorporates your comments. This letter also includes a brief summary of the report and our response to comments by the City of Tukwila that were presented in their review letter, dated October 18, 1999. SUMMARY It is our opinion from a geotechnical standpoint, that the site is compatible with the planned development. Based on our visual observation and test pit explorations on the site, it is our opinion that the site is in a stable condition and that there is not a significant potential for deep- seated slope instability. Slight to moderate perched ground -water seepage was observed in the test pits. Our test pits were excavated at a relatively wet time of the year and likely indicated the upper range of perched water volumes that can be expected during wet winter conditions. We expect that footing drains and wall drains will provide adequate drainage and that additional site drainage provisions, such as cutoff drains, will not be necessary. . . Geotechnical Engineering Evr ;lion - Summary and Response to City Re' v Comments Secure Capital Investments #2, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 7, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 2 The site soils are considered highly moisture - sensitive, and will disturb easily and become difficult to work with when wet. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months. Construction is feasible outside of the drier months, but would incur additional expenses due to wet weather construction. z it w The near surface bearing soils should provide suitable support for conventional shallow spread footings. 6 0 Lateral earth pressures are provided for design of retaining walls, both for subsurface structure walls and U O: for general site grading. w w= J H N LL RESPONSE TO CITY REVIEW COMMENTS • w O You requested that we respond to review comments by the City of Tukwila that were presented in their g Q review letter, dated October 18, 1999. Our response is limited to the geotechnical comments, which were presented as comments 4 through 9. Numbers in brackets indicate page numbers in the report where these = �w items are addressed. Z = comment 4: No response was required for comment 4. z LL! Lu comment 5: It is our opinion that the site is stable [page 5]. This is based on our observations and explorations, which we feel are adequate to evaluate site slope stability. In our opinion, it is not necessary O N`; to evaluate the stability of slopes for each individual lot. The report provides geotechnical input w parameters for retaining wall design [page 11 -13]. 0 LL H' comment 6: It is also our opinion that it will be feasible to construct foundations and driveways z: individually and/or in combination while maintaining slope stability and without having an adverse effect V an adjacent properties. comment 7: In our review of the preliminary plans that were available at the time of our report, we did not find items that were inconsistent with our recommendations. At the end of our report, we recommended that we be retained to review final plans prior to the start of construction to check for conformance with the recommendations in the report [page 14]. comment 8: In our opinion, cutoff drains ( "curtain drains ") will not be necessary. Accordingly, review of cutoff drain plans would not be necessary. Review of plans for wall drains would be completed during review of final plans (see comment 7). If cutoff drains are not constructed, then their potential effect on trees will not need to be considered. comment 9: We do not see unusual circumstances associated with the site and the proposed development that would require that a registered professional geotechnical engineer be on site full -time during earthwork activities. It appears that it should be adequate to provide geotechnical construction observations consistent with the local standard of practice. This would involve part-time observation of geotechnical aspects of construction by a soil technician who worked under the supervision of a registered professional geotechnical engineer. The engineer would be available for consultation or construction observations if unusual circumstances were to develop. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. z Geotechnical Engineeringluation - Summary and Response to City 'Thiew Comments Secure Capital Investments nl, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 7, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 3 CLOSURE Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our services, we have strived to take care that our work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time this letter was prepared. No other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. We trust this letter provides the information you requested. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project, and look forward to continued involvement. If you have any questions or comments, or require additional services, please contact us. Sincerely, NELSON- COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. William M. Kuck, PE Senior Engineer WMK:nit NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIA TES, INC. z Zr ce JU N CI,. •W =. N LL; • to 0. • gQ =w .z ►-; . i- •0; . zI- :W w • ..z; w .z, • NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 17311 -135th Avenue NE, A -500 Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 486 -1669 • Fax 481 -2510 March 8, 2000 Mr. Gary Greer Secure Capital Investments #2, LCC PO Box 25127 Seattle, Washington 98125 Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Secure Capital Investments #2, LCC 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project Tukwila, Washington NCA File No. 278400 Dear Mr. Greer: Snohomish County (425) 337 -1669 Wenatchee /Chelan (509) 784 -2756 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering evaluation at the planned residential development project in Tukwila, Washington. The site is located at 40th Avenue South and South 133rd Street in Tukwila, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. For our use in preparing this report, the current project civil engineer, ESM Consulting Engineers, provided us with Sheets 1 of 8, 2 of 8, and 4 of 8 of preliminary plans by TRIAD Associates, dated June 3 to 7, 1999; a previous geotechnical report for the project, dated July 15, 1998; and a review letter from the City of Tukwila, dated October 18, 1999. The property is approximately 7 acres in size. The ground surface generally slopes moderately to gently down to the east. The site is bordered on the north and south by residential property, on the west by Pacific Highway South, and on the east by 40th Avenue South. There are currently two residences on the east side of the site. Preliminary plans indicate that the existing residences will remain, and the rest of the property will be developed into 20 additional residential lots, access roads from 40th Avenue S, and a detention pond. Grading plans indicate retaining walls will support cuts and fills up to about 10 feet high. Z • Z� Z W 6 J U` .0 0. to co w: WZ J CO I.: uj LL?: f.12 a � W.. 1—O. Z Dp p.N� I—; .W Z W 0) O' z. Geotechnical Engineering F'1,uation Secure Capital Investments trz., LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 2 SCOPE The purpose of this study is to explore and characterize the subsurface conditions and. develop z geotechnical design recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services includes X z. these tasks. c u6= U: UO. 1. Review soils and geologic maps of the area, existing geotechnical information, and w = preliminary plans. N w 0. 2. Evaluate the subsurface soil and ground water conditions with about eight test pits 2 excavated with a subcontracted track hoe. g w 3. Complete a field reconnaissance of the site slopes. = d; w 1 4. Evaluate slope stability. ? F- 5. Provide recommendations for site preparation and grading, including placement of w w, structural fill and temporary and permanent cut and fill slopes. U 0 0 -' 6. Provide recommendations for drainage, for the site in general, and for proposed ` "" 0 H. w 0 7. Estimate potential quantity of contribution of ground water to the detention pond. Oz. U -: 8. Evaluate appropriate retaining structures for site grading and discuss general design OH structures. guidelines. 9. Provide recommendations for foundation and slab -on -grade support. 10. Provide recommendations for subsurface (structure) retaining walls. 11. Prepare a report to summarize our findings and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The site is located on a hillside southwest of the Duwamish River. The ground surface slopes down to the east at inclinations of up to about 30 percent. The site is vegetated with mature evergreen and deciduous trees, underbrush, and Lawn areas. A drainage swale crosses the southern portion of the site. Water was running in the swale during our site visit. Two residences are located along the east side of the site. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Evr" --ion Secure Capital Investments #2, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 3 Geology The geologic units for this area are mapped on the Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle. Washington, by Howard H. Waldron, (USGS, 1962). The site is mapped as being underlain by Pre - Vashon drift, undifferentiated, with ground moraine, and Kame - terrace deposits mapped near by. Our explorations at the site encountered soils consisting of silt deposits, silty sand with gravel, and sand with silt. Explorations Subsurface conditions were explored at the site on February 17, 2000, by excavating eight test pits to depths ranging from 7.0 to 16.5 feet below existing ground surface. The test pits were excavated with a track hoe. The explorations were located in the field by an engineer from this office who also examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered and maintained logs of the test pits. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Figure 3. The logs of the explorations are presented in Figures 4 through 6. We present a brief summary of the subsurface conditions in the following paragraphs. For a more detailed description of the site soils, the test pit logs should be reviewed. Subsurface Conditions We encountered a surficial layer of organic topsoil 0.5 to 1.8 feet thick in all test pits. Beneath the topsoil, Test Pits 3, 4, and 5 encountered very stiff to hard silt deposits extending to the bottom of the explorations. Test Pits 1, 2, 6, and 7 encountered a silty sand layer that typically was medium dense to dense beneath the topsoil. Test Pits 1 and 6 were terminated in a layer of hard silt underlying the silty sand. Test Pit 2 was excavated through the silty sand and a layer of hard silt, and exposed dense to very dense sand with gravel and trace silt extending to the bottom of the excavation. Test Pit 7 was terminated when the excavation encountered a large boulder within a layer of very dense silty sand with gravel, cobbles and boulders. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. .....,....,.,..,,........ . z �z re O - 0 co w= J I_ .co u- w o gQ .BCD' H 1.. z� I-0 Z F- .w Lu O ▪ —_ 0 F- U •u_0' • .. Z: H_ 0 H:. z Geotechnical Engineering 1' ivation Secure Capital Investments „�, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 4 Test Pit 8 exposed a layer of very stiff sandy silt beneath the topsoil. Beneath the sandy silt was a layer of dense sand with silt that extended from depth 5 feet to depth 10 feet. Beneath the sand with silt, Test Pit 8 was terminated in a layer of hard silt. Hydrologic Conditions Slight to moderate ground water seepage was observed in all of the test pits. The seepage observed in our explorations is interpreted as a perched water condition. Perched water occurs when surface water infiltrates through less dense, more permeable soils and accumulates on top of the underlying less permeable soils. The more permeable soils consist of the weathered soil horizons and the sand seams. Perched water does not represent a regional ground water "table" within the upper soil horizons. It should be noted that the local volumes of perched ground water could vary depending upon the time of year and the upslope recharge conditions. Our test pits were excavated at a relatively wet time of the year and likely indicated the upper range of perched water volumes that can be expected during wet winter conditions. Seismic Hazard The site is located within Zone 3 of the Seismic Zone Map shown as Figure 16 -2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). This corresponds to a Seismic Zone Factor, Z, of 0.30. This, in turn, corresponds to an effective peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.3 g. Site conditions best fit the UBC description for Soil Profile Type Sc ( "Very Dense Soil and Soft Rock "). Hazards associated with seismic activity include liquefaction potential, slope instability, and amplification of ground motion due to soft soil. The dense and hard soils that are interpreted to underlie this site do not have a significant potential for liquefaction, slope instability or amplification of ground motion. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General It is our opinion from a geotechnical standpoint that the site is compatible with the planned development. The underlying medium dense to very dense and very stiff to hard soils exhibit high strength and should provide suitable support for foundations and pavement. The planned structures may be founded on shallow spread footings. We recommend that the foundations for the structures extend through any loose soils and bear on the underlying medium dense /very stiff or better native soils, or on structural fill NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. :.. , ... ... : Geotechnical Engineering Ev(""`tion Secure Capital Investments #2, L,LC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 5 extending to these soils. At our test pit locations medium dense /very stiff or better bearing soils typically were encountered at depths of about 1 to 2 feet below existing grade. The underlying soils are considered highly moisture - sensitive and will disturb easily and become difficult to work with when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult to compact to structural fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months. Construction is feasible outside of the drier months, but it would incur the additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction, which would include extra excavation, export of excavated on site soil, and use of imported fill or rock materials. In the planned detention pond area our exploration exposed a layer of sand with silt that extended from depth 5 feet to depth 10 feet. This material is expected to have a relatively high permeability in comparison to the overlying sandy silt and the underlying silt. The detention pond may need to be constructed with a liner to limit infiltration into or out of the sand layer. Slope Stability Based on our visual observation and test pit explorations on the site, it is our opinion that the site is in a stable condition. We did not observe surficial evidence of past or current movement associated with an unstable slope condition. The core of the slope is inferred to be composed of dense sand, hard silt, and possibly bedrock, all of which have high strength. Accordingly, it is our opinion that there is not a significant potential for deep- seated slope instability. Erosion Control The soils anticipated to be exposed during grading on -site have a moderate erosion potential when disturbed, depending on how the site is graded and water is allowed to concentrate. Areas disturbed during construction should be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include diverting surface water away from the stripped areas. Cut slopes may be protected from erosion by diverting surface water away from the top of slope and covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting. Silt fences or straw bales should be erected to prevent muddy water from leaving the site. Disturbed areas should be revegetated at the end of construction. The vegetation should be maintained until established. The erosion potential of areas not stripped of vegetation should be minimal. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. z Z Ce W u`1 _. 00 CO 0 J N LL w 0 2 u- ?. z� 0: zt- w w 0 . 0— O -. W W I I— ~'.. — 0, ui z` ClY F— 1. 0.~. z Geotechnical Engineeringluation Secure Capital Investments ,,z, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Projeec March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 6 Site Preparations and Grading The areas that will support footings, slabs -on- grade, pavements or structural fill, should be stripped of vegetation, fill and loose soils. Stripped soil that contains organics or debris should be removed from the site, or stockpiled for later use as landscaping fill. The subgrade should be compacted to a dense, non - yielding condition. Areas observed to pump or weave should be reworked to structural fill specifications or be excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill. The on -site soils likely to be exposed during construction are considered highly moisture sensitive and will disturb easily when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult to compact to structural fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months. Construction is feasible outside of the drier months, but it would incur the additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction, which would include extra excavation, export of excavated on site soil, and use of imported fill or rock materials. If significant surface water flow is encountered during construction, this flow should be routed around areas to be developed using a system of drainage ditches. During wet weather, alternative site preparation methods may be necessary, such as diverting construction traffic around prepared subgrades. The prepared subgrade may be protected from disturbance by placing a blanket of rock spalls or imported sand and gravel in construction traffic areas. This can be evaluated at the time of construction. Structural Fill General: All fills placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. For the purpose of this report, structural fill is defined as material that is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality free - draining granular soil, free of organics and other "deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported, all- weather structural fill should meet these requirements and also should contain no more than NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. .... . ,, Geotechnical Engineering Evr'"°`tion Secure Capital Investments #2, ,.. LC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 7 5 percent fines (soil passing a Standard U.S. No. 200 Sieve) based on that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4- inch sieve. The use of on -site soil that is free of organics and debris as structural fill would be dependent on moisture content control. Some drying of the native soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. During warm sunny days, drying could be accomplished by spreading the material in thin lifts. Some aeration may also be necessary. We expect that compaction of the native soils to structural fill specifications would be difficult during the winter or in wet weather. Alternative construction methods such as the addition of kiln dust or other agents to reduce the moisture content of the site soils might be feasible to allow fill placement using on -site soils that are above optimum moisture content for compaction. Such methods should be attempted only by a contractor experienced with the proposed treatment method. The contractor should evaluate if the proposed treatment is appropriate for the soil and moisture conditions and if there are environmental considerations associated with the treatment. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, the placement of the structural fill may proceed. Fill should be placed in 8- to 10 -inch -thick uniform lifts. Each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. All structural fill underlying building areas, and within 2 feet of pavement and sidewalk subgrade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 compaction test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The moisture content of the soil to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Temporary and Permanent Slopes Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, such as the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and the presence of surface or ground water. It is difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a stable, temporary, cut slope angle. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Fmluation Secure Capital Investments ,.—, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila ProjeL, March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 8 condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and ground water conditions encountered. For planning purposes we recommend that temporary cuts in the near surface weathered soils be no steeper than 1 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (1H:1V). Cuts in the dense /hard soils may stand at steeper inclinations. If ground water is encountered, we expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut slopes be protected from erosion. Measures taken may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet if worker access is necessary. We recommend that cut slope heights and inclinations conform to WISHA /OSHA standards. Final slope inclinations for structural fill and cuts in the native soils should be no steeper than 2H:IV. Lightly compacted fills or common fills should be no steeper than 3H:1 V. Common fills are defined as fill materials, potentially with some organics, that are "trackrolled" into place. They would not meet the compaction specification of structural fill. Final slopes should be vegetated and covered with straw or jute netting. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Foundations Foundations should extend to undisturbed medium dense or better native granular soils (i.e., sand or silty sand) or very stiff to hard cohesive soils (i.e., silt or sandy silt) or be founded on structural fill that extends to these soils. At the exploration locations, the medium dense /very stiff or better native soils typically were encountered about 1 to 2 feet below existing grade. Deeper areas of loose soils be may be encountered during construction in the unexplored areas of the site. If the soil at the planned bottom of footing elevation is not medium dense /very stiff or better, the soil should be overexcavated to expose suitable bearing soil. The excavation should be filled with structural fill, or the footing may be extended to native bearing soil with extra concrete. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. • Geotechnical Engineering Eva'" -`tion '1 Secure Capital Investments 142, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 9 Footings should extend a minimum of 18 inches below the adjacent ground surface for frost protection and bearing capacity considerations. Minimum footing widths of 18 and 24 inches should be used for continuous and isolated spread footings, respectively. For foundations constructed and founded a§ outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of not more than 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design. Higher allowable bearing pressures would be appropriate for footings placed on dense /hard native soils. We are available to provide recommendations for higher bearing pressures, if needed. Current Uniform Building Code (UBC) guidelines should be used when considering increased allowable bearing pressure for short-term transitory wind or seismic loads. Potential foundation settlement, using the above allowable bearing pressure, should be less than 1 inch total and 1/2 inch differential between adjacent footings or across a distance of about 20 feet. Resistance to lateral loads may be provided by friction at the base of the footing and passive resistance against the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used to calculate the base friction, and should be applied to the vertical dead Load only. Passive resistance may be calculated as a triangular equivalent fluid pressure distribution, using an equivalent fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). These recommended values incorporate safety factors of 1.5 and 2.0 applied to the estimated ultimate values for frictional and passive resistance, respectively. To achieve this value of passive resistance, the foundations should be poured "neat" against the native medium dense /very stiff or better soils. Alternatively, compacted fill should be used as backfill against the front of the footing. The soil in front of the footing should extend horizontally a distance equal to at least three times the foundation depth. We recommend that the upper 1 foot of soil be neglected when calculating the passive resistance. Slabs -On -Grade Slab -on -grade areas should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report. After removal of loose soil, the subgrade should be compacted to a dense, non - yielding condition. Prior to structural fill placement the subgrade should be proofrolled with a heavy rubber -tired piece of equipment to identify soft or yielding areas that require repair. Areas observed to pump or weave should be reworked to structural fill specifications or be excavated and replaced with properly compacted structural fill. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering P- -quation Secure Capital Investments ,,L, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila ProjeL L March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 - Page 10 We recommend that all floor slabs be underlain by at least 6 inches of free - draining sand or gravel for use as a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the sand or gravel. A 2- inch -thick sand blanket may be used to cover the vapor barrier to aid in curing the concrete. The capillary break should be designed to drain into the foundation drain system. Construction Dewatering We do not anticipate significant ground water will be encountered in trenches or excavations that are not deeper than our test pits over most of the site during the summer months. However, local areas of perched ground water may be encountered. If excavations for utilities or the detention pond are done in the wetter months, there is a greater potential that perched water may be encountered. At this time, we do not expect a significant amount of water will be encountered and we anticipate that the water can be handled with sumps within the trenches. Drainage Surface: We recommend that runoff from impervious surfaces such as roofs, parking areas, and access roadways, be collected and routed to an appropriate storm water discharge system. Final site grades should promote drainage away from any buildings. We suggest that the finished ground be sloped at a minimum gradient of 3 percent for a distance of at least 10 feet from the buildings. Surface water should be collected by permanent catch basins and drain lines, and be discharged into a storm drain system. Subsurface: Should ground water seepage be encountered, or if excessive rainfall occurs during construction, we recommend that the contractor slope the bottom of excavations and collect the water to ditches and sump pits from which the water can be pumped and discharged into a permanent storm drain. We recommend the use of footing drain systems around the perimeter of the planned buildings. The drains should consist of 4- inch - minimum- diameter, perforated or slotted, rigid, PVC pipe laid at the bottom of footings. The drain line should be embedded in, surrounded by, and covered with a free - draining washed rock, pea gravel, or other free - draining granular material wrapped in a Layer of filter fabric. The excavation within an 18 -inch horizontal distance behind the footing should be backfilled with a free- draining, granular structural fill, except for the top 12 inches, which should be a layer of compacted, native, low permeability soil to limit surface water infiltration. This impermeable cap NELSON- COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Eve' -'tion ; '- Secure Capital Investments #2, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 11 material should be separated from the granular soil by a layer of building paper or plastic sheeting. The footing drain should be tightlined to discharge into a permanent storm drain. Capillary breaks and vapor barriers should be provided for slabs -on- grade, as discussed in the subsection "Slabs -on- Grade ". Roof downspout drainpipes should not be connected to the perimeter footing drain system. The footing drain system discharge pipe should have a minimum of 12 inches of vertical fall before it is connected to r the roof drain system discharge pipe. We recommend that sufficient cleanouts be installed at strategic locations to allow for periodic maintenance of the footing drain and downspout drainpipe system. Pavements Pavement areas should be prepared as outlined in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection. We recommend that prepared subgrades be proofrolled prior to paving with a heavy, rubber -tired piece of equipment, such as a loaded 10 -yard dump truck, to identify soft areas. Areas observed to pump or weave should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill. We should be retained to observe the proofrolling and recommend repairs, prior to placement of the asphalt or hard surfaces. The on -site soils are moisture sensitive, but should be able to be compacted to a dense, non - yielding condition if at the proper moisture content. If this cannot be achieved, or if construction will extend into the wet winter months, the use of asphalt treated base (ATB) in the design pavement section may be warranted. The ATB is not the final pavement surface. • It is typically used to protect the road subgrade and to act as a working surface during construction. Repairs are made to the ATB and subgrade, prior to the final paving. Lateral Pressures on Subsurface Walls The lateral pressure acting on subsurface retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement which can occur as backfill is placed, wall drainage conditions, and the inclination of the backfill. For walls that are free to yield at the top at least one thousandth of the height of the wall (active condition) soil pressures will be less than if movement is limited by such factors as wall stiffness or bracing (at -rest condition). We recommend that walls supporting horizontal backfill and not subjected to hydrostatic forces be designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to that exerted by a fluid with a density of 35 pcf for yielding (active NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering F--luation 1 Secure Capital Investments _, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Proje... March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 12 condition) walls, and 55 pcf for non - yielding (at -rest condition) walls. If the walls are not drained, the equivalent fluid densities should be increased to 80 pcf and 90 pcf for active and at -rest earth pressure z conditions, respectively. _ ` '- w These recommended lateral earth pressures are based on the assumption of a horizontal ground surface 6 J V adjacent to the wall for a distance of at least the subsurface height of the wall, and do not account for N p. surcharges. Additional lateral earth pressures should be considered for surcharge loads acting adjacent to w subsurface walls and within a distance equal to the subsurface height of the wall. This would include the w p w effects of surcharges, such as hydrostatic pressure, traffic loads, floor slab loads, or other surface loads. g Surcharge effects should be considered, if appropriate. Increased lateral earth pressure due to adjacent j Ia areal vertical surcharge pressures can be taken as a uniform pressure equal to 0.3 times the vertical w surcharge pressure for active conditions, and 0.45 times the vertical surcharge pressure for at -rest Z F. conditions. w w We recommend that walls supporting a 2H:1 V backslope and not subjected to hydrostatic forces be p P,. C1 (- designed using a triangular earth pressure distribution equivalent to that exerted by a fluid with a density w = U' of 55 pcf for yielding (active condition) walls, and 85 pcf for non - yielding (at -rest condition) walls. u ui - Z The lateral pressures on walls may be resisted by friction between the foundation and subgrade soil, and U O- ~ by passive resistance acting on the below -grade portion of the foundation. Recommendations for z frictional and passive resistance to lateral loads are presented in the Foundations subsection of this report. All wall backfill should be well compacted as outlined in the Structural Fill subsection of this report. Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to overcompaction of the wall backfill. Excess lateral pressures can be avoided by placing wall backfill in 8 -inch loose lifts and compacting it with small, hand- operated compactors. Permanent drainage systems should be installed for retaining walls. We recommend that these drainage systems consist of an 18- inch -wide zone of clean (less than 3 percent fines), free - draining granular material placed along the back of the wall. Pea gravel is an acceptable drain material, or drainage composite may be used instead. We recommend that we be retained to evaluate the proposed wall drain backfill material for its suitability. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. '�� . Geotechnical Engineering Evr Secure Capital Investments #2, ..LC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 13 The granular material should be placed up the back of the wall to within 1 foot of the ground surface. A slotted drainpipe, having a minimum diameter of 4 inches, should be embedded in pea gravel or some other free - draining material at the base of the wall, along its entire length. This drainpipe should discharge into tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point. Surface water drains and roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. Reinforced Soil Walls: Grading plans indicate that retaining walls will be used for site grading. We understand that the City of Tukwila does not allow rockeries more than 4 feet tall. We discussed retaining wall types with ESM, and they indicated a preference for reinforced soil walls. In our opinion, these walls would be appropriate for the project. Reinforced soil walls are constructed with synthetic geogrid reinforcement in a structural fill, and usually incorporate modular block facing. The amount of the geogrid reinforcing material will vary with the wall design, but the width of the reinforced zone is usually about 3/4 to 1 times the height of the wall. Detention Pond Detention pond plans were not available at the time this report was written but we understand that the pond is to be located in the southeast portion of the site, in the vicinity of Test Pit 8. We do not know the pond's footprint dimensions or depth. We expect that medium dense to dense granular soils and very stiff to hard cohesive soils will be exposed in the detention pond excavation. Test Pit 8 exposed a layer of fine to medium sand with silt that extended from depth 5 feet to depth 10 feet below the ground surface in the general area of the pond. Moderate ground water seepage from the sand layer was noted from 7 to 10 feet below the ground surface. This sand layer is expected to have a relatively high permeability in comparison to the overlying sandy silt and the underlying silt. The detention pond may need to be constructed with a liner to limit infiltration into or out of the sand layer. Seepage Analysis: If the pond extends down into the sand layer and no liner is provided, perched ground water seepage from the sand may contribute to the volume of water in the pond, especially during wet seasons. We estimated the potential flow rate of ground water seepage from the pond sidewalls into the pond using Darcy's equation of Q =KIA. We assumed a permeability (K) of 1 x 10"3 feet per minute (ft/min) for the fine to medium sand with silt, and a gradient (I) of 0.13. The gradient is based on the average surface topography extending about 240 feet west from the approximate pond location. Since the location and NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering F"--.luation ^' "^`, Secure Capital Investments . _, LLC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Proje... March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 14 dimensions of the pond are not known we have presented the flow (Q) in terms of a 1- square foot area (A) of the exposed sand layer. Based on the above assumptions, the magnitude of flow calculated is approximately 1.3 x 10'4 cubic feet per minute per square foot. We consider this to be a conservative estimate. To estimate potential infiltration into the pond, this value should be multiplied by the area of the permeable sand with silt layer that is exposed on the west wall of the pond. For example, if the exposed layer were 5 feet thick by 100 feet long, the estimated potential flow would be 0.07 cubic feet per minute, or about 90 cubic feet per day. USE OF THIS REPORT We have prepared this report for Secure Capital Investments #2, LCC and their agents, for use in planning and design of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding and estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions, and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions. At the time of this report, final plans were not available. We recommend that we be retained to review final plans prior to the start of construction to check for conformance with the recommendations in this report. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions. We recommend that project planning include contingencies in budget and schedule, should areas be found with conditions that vary from those described in this report. We should be retained to provide monitoring and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, and to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated. As part of our services, we would also evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our services, we have strived to take care that our work has been completed in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical Engineering Eva'' -';ion Secure Capital Investments #2, —LC - 40th Avenue South Tukwila Project March 8, 2000 NCA File No. 278400 Page 15 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If there are any questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2erioggio Michael D. Rundquist Senior Staff Engineer William M. Kuck, PE Senior Engineer MDR:WMK:n1t One Copy Submitted Six Figures cc: Mr. Ron Guest — ESM Consulting Engineers (Four Copies) NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Z ∎:F-W. 00 ,co CO w` W =; uj uj O H =: Z� I•• O 'Z 'ILI Ili UO col 'tu W HV;.. --0 0 • Z. File: L 99 -0023 35mm Drawing #2 W. • ;J U; N D' .cow W•_ ;: W 0. lL < a... • 1-w. • (=�i • Z . W •,_ 1JJ r' • SON'. • w Wt, F-? UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE - GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON NO. 200 SIEVE GRAVEL MORE THAN 50% OF FRACTION CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL - GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GP POORLY-GRADED GRAVEL COARSE RETAINED ON O. 4 SIEVE GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSES NO. 4 SIEVE CLEAN SAND SW WELL- GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY-GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND SC CLAYEY SAND FINE - GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% PASSES NO, 200 SIEVE SILT AND CLAY LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50% INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY LIQUID LIMIT 50% OR MORE INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOL MOISTURE MODIFIERS 1) Field classification is based on - Dry- Absence of moisture, dusty, dry visual examination of soil in general to the touch accordance with ASTM D 2488 -83. Moist- Damp, but no visible water 2) Soll classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D 2487 -83. Wet- Visible free water or saturated, 3). Descriptions of soil density or usually soil is obtained from consistency are based on below water table interpretation of blowcount data, visual appearance of soils, and /or test data. NELSON- COUVRE'TE &ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. GEOLOGISTS SCIENTISTS UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FIGURE 3 AND ENVIRONMENTAL Com pa ny1drafting2000 \coreldraw\samples\soilclas.cdr .. DEPTH LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT ONE 0.0 - 0.5 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL, ABUNDANT ORGANICS ( LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 0.5 - 3.0 SM GRAY -BROWN RUST MOTTLED SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL AND SAND SEAMS (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, WET) 3.0 - 7.0 SM GRAY -BROWN RUST MOTTLED SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL, SAND LENSES, AND SILT LENSES (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST) 7.0 -9.0 ML GRAY SANDY SILT WITH TRACE GRAVEL AND COBBLES (HARD, MOIST) TEST PIT TWO 0.0 - 0.5 SM 0.5 - 2.0 SM 2.0 - 8.5 ML 8.5 - 16.5 SW TEST PIT THREE SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 0.3, 2.0, 4.0, 7.5 AND 8.5 FEET MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 1.5 TO 3.0 FEET TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 1.0 TO 7.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 9.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) RUST BROWN SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) GRAY -BROWN SILT WITH TRACE GRAVEL AND SAND SEAMS (HARD, MOIST) GRAY -BROWN FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL AND TRACE SILT AND SILTY SAND SEAMS (DENSE TO VERY DENSE, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 6.5 AND 10.5 FEET SLIGHT TO MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 3.0 TO 4.0, AND 14.5 TO 15.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 3.0 TO 4.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 16.5 FEET ON 02/17/00 0.0 -1.0 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.0 - 6.5 ML GRAY RUST MOTTLED SILT WITH TRACE SAND (HARD, MOIST) 6.5 - 9.5 ML LIGHT BROWN SILT WITH RUST STAINING (HARD, MOIST) 9.5 -15.0 ML GRAY SILT WITH RUST STAINING (HARD, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 2.0, 5.0, 7.0, 10.0, 12.5 AND 14.5 FEET SLIGHT GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 1.0 TO 1.5 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 1.0 TO 2.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 15.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 MDR:sls NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 278400. FIGURE 4 ..;: ^••,• DEPTH LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FOUR 0.0 - 1.0 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.0 - 4.0 ML GRAY RUST MOTTLED SILT (VERY STIFF, MOIST) 4.0 - 7.0 ML LIGHT BROWN SILT (HARD, MOIST) SAMPLE COLLECTED AT 6.5 FEET SLIGHT GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 4.0 FEET TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 7.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 TEST PIT FIVE 0.0 - 1.2 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.2 - 5.0 ML GRAY RUST MOTTLED SILT (HARD, MOIST TO WET) 5.0 - 10.5 ML LIGHT BROWN RUST STAINED SILT (HARD, MOIST) 10.5 - 11.0 ML GRAY SILT (HARD, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 6.0, 7.5 AND 10.8 FEET SLIGHT GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 1.2 TO 3.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 0.0 TO 3.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 TEST PIT SIX 0.0 - 1.0 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.0 - 5.5 5.5 - 9.0 9.0 - 10.0 TEST PIT SEVEN SM GRAY-BROWN RUST MOTTLED SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL, COBBLES, BOULDERS AND SAND SEAMS (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) SM GRAY-BROWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH TRACE FINE GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) ML GRAY-BROWN SILT WITH TRACE FINE GRAVEL (HARD, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.5, 6.5 AND 9.5 FEET SLIGHT TO MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 2.0 TO 3.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 0.0 TO 3.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 10.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 0.0 - 1.0 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.0 - 6.0 SM GRAY-BROWN RUST MOTTLED SILTY FINE SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST TO WET) / 6.0 -8.0 SM GRAY-BROWN RUST MOTTLED SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL, COBBLES AND BOULDERS (VERY DENSE, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 5.5 AND 7.0 FEET SLIGHT GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 1.0 TO 2.0 FEET SLIGHT TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 1.0 TO 2.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 8.0 FEET ON 02/17/00 MDR:sls NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 278400. FIGURE 5 DEPTH LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT EIGHT 0.0 -1.8 SM DARK BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH ABUNDANT ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 1.8 - 5.0 ML GRAY RUST MOTTLED SANDY SILT (VERY STIFF, MOIST) 5.0 - 10.0 SP-SM GRAY BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH SILT (DENSE, MOIST TO WET) 10.0 - 13.5 ML GRAY SILT (HARD, MOIST) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.0, 6.0, 7.5, 10.0, 10.5, 12.0 AND 13.0 FEET MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE ENCOUNTERED AT 7.0 TO 10.0 FEET TEST PIT CAVING ENCOUNTERED AT 7.0 TO 11.0 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 13.5 FEET ON 02/17/00 MDR:sls NELSON-COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FILE NO 278400. FIGURE 6 • • •• • •-•,• • • - ••• • ' . S 137 ST S 139 ST S 140 ST S 141 ST Vicinity Map Attachment A z z ce 6 JU U0 U �. co w LU N L W 0: LL? �d = W z H0 z W W 0 O W W,. O lllz U -, O z Not To Scale 410 SQUIERIHGI ASSOCIATES NOTE: Features shown are for illustrative pu oses onl and are approximate Proposed Subdivision Tukwila, Washington VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 LUMINAIRE DETAIL (SEE STREET LIGHT DESIGN GUIDELINES STANDARD PUN) PRESTRESSED CONCRETE LIGHTING MO Ardor lane Petit Nunber L.n U / 114•lOht 100-6 197 / 610 N110 -7 23'r / 740 100 -73 247 / 790 K104 267 / 900 100-43 27'A• / 940 100.4 29•• / 1000 M110 -10 3010' / 1300 Ml0 -10.4 347 / 1300 1110 -11.7 317• / 1600 NOTE! 3/4' CHAMFER 2:1 Appearance Code #213 Hand Hole 1..6' Curb Linn Aluminum Dont Arm - Skievalk —H TYPICAL LUMINAIRE POLE DETAIL (4) 1' -ONC STEEL ANCHOR BOLTS ASTL A576. A151 GRADE 1021-1041 50.000 PSI- INN MD MEIN ON OF ROD STOCK 0.006* 011'. OUT OF ROUND TOLERANCE ±0.012'. ROLLED OR CUT THREADS PER A307. CLASS 2A. TOP 10' CALK Sn. LOCK HASHERS t (4) 1' GLV. STL FLATMASIERS. GLV. Sit C 0NO*AT (PER PLAN) 2 3 /4'(TNREADED) 4' 1 CTR'SS • .} . ♦-a B -p BARS MILT SPACED ANCHOR BOLT LAYOUT REINFORCING FRAME 1/2' -13IC TAPPED GROUNDING HOLE SECTION THRU HANDHOLE NOTE: ANCHOR BOLTS SIMIL BE ACCURATELY LOCATED AND SECURED N PLACED PRIOR TO POURING CONCRETE GROUND R00 SHALL BE INSTALLED PER STD. SPECIFICATIONS. C1AS5 CONCRETE 3' OYL FOUNDATION DETAIL `2ECE VED MAY 2 2 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NOTES; 1. BRACKETS SUPPLED WITH 2' N.P.S. SLPFTI'TER SPECIFY N00. 140 FOR 1.25' N.PS. SLIPRTTER. 2. TM BRACKETS ARE LOCATED 180 0.C. 3. 10' BASE DU. POLES REQUIRE 1' -OHC • 4r LONG ANCHOR BOLTS M1H A 3 1/4' PROJECTION. 4. STREET UGH15 MOO SDEIIALK 5. JUNCTION BOX O' INTO SDEIOALJC. 6. SEE STANDARD PLAN. City of Tukwila ALTERNATE RESEDENT1AL STREIT LIGUT POLE 30' & 40' YOUN IING HEIGHT DATE: 11/26/96 $ot to anL. RS -21 . • EX • ICI -1 Lei' OF -SLC3 � l'�Ll7Gfj. iY 1 �•'•1• J t Tukwila PRD Perspective Exhibit Project Entry- 1 Year -r#lS PERG7-1 VE cFT�F� PRoPo�J =l�� '`4- 1 [5 PI'l 1 T7 - ( p J 4T T loci ENO 15 NT Ha-AP-171- `l- �Pccrf�el�}}Y o2' /=, 1 L.-5 crG cor!•S i" ucL+ 1 c>-4 40th Avenue South RECEIVED MAY 22 2000 J DEVELOPMENT Prepared by: ESM Consulting Engineers ATTACHMENT H Sty rx1•sTINec E' . I� Tukwila PRD Perspective Exhibit Project Entry- 15 Year N��• THIS vEtz'SPF 7-1∎. pRv(�og�^ -SuFSDIVISi (•• aN PcR- 71 a--1 ■%*ID lS r-4 T 'To S4toW E�C4GT' Td'��t -R PIiY oR- .. ._ 40th Avenue South RECEIVED MAY 22 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Prepared by: ESM Consulting Engineers Z re 6 Jo o 0. co 0 CO w. J = CO LL wO Nv = w Z� I- 0 Z I-- j= O o. 0 = U: u-0 U u; 0• E'4 •1 / ti 1111 ;\4.1'1! :t�l�i' ,.,,. ., , ,1 �1 ,f,,... _lyitile Me 1 .11 \\I '\t 1. i I1 14I 199'1il e ill ,'` ''I:t�l`' „ >.. t1 l i 'l'i; ' ` ' ._...,r 1 1• y�� ill ;•.:' \ ,.••,111411 11tl � • it. \1 1141 In • i 1 1 \ POR. OF NW 1/4, SEC. 15, TWA. 23N, RCE. 5E, W.M. 1 P. 1 I I \ 1 1 1 I I \ 1 �a j 3.3 R -'.0El \9 ED ..1111. 0 7 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ` .A S ,. , ,.....,.'f:. \1 iil' :�•,I; 1 4 4L smote rc.,z 1 \ \ L, \\ \� 17(000',.' `,\ \ `. t .. 1\ \A run*•\ ,•\ \\ •�� i 1 • •L�` ti�E•_, 1 I 11 \ \ \ 1 \ I\ I • \ \ •t \\ \\ 1 1 \ 1 1 I L i 1 1 \11 -7 ` 11\ t 1i A •Ir \ \ \1.J \• on LEGEND 10.00 *33.1 4m•■■•■•■••••SC.(M /01Ct UAM •N 3[33333[ AWI u4M em•••• LOVp41. Of I• UM I-K -R.. Cu19.1 ROM W.. UK C[M .lM[ •.*3303133 SEW. UK (335331) MAO 04.003 ROC • 3009.9 OR. IO' COMAS Y COMIC4MS SI0.0 O33.M -3 R0A MO 700Iw0 91•0 •••�•••�SR.IC 00 CIC1 7003E _1_1 -1_ 0.nICU *Mt mum gORM rROrtClW1 GSEOENI lfl t) 3314330033 34,1 C MOM., - 33.3333,3303 • 10.CR uIMM0.[ • 4000.11 08012 3u033o *31n33 M/ 0/•• 10333331 000111 1.•33 „E10 0/ I. 10033:t /wC 00033+331 AM/VAC *UM 04.4 A0+ on. M CM M.IK "4 RI • ,•-1 3333* InDUCIR COIC001t KW*, 10'3 • CAI. ASMI. Irot • • Ut0, B 33.9,3, 1,11 • ,� \ \\�`1 \ \ c'• • .330 0RAM 0▪ .[33110* 113303113*0 =It CI'f R.OM * 3300.33 33.33330. ▪ aw NI A0•(1 21191 ADMf I©.•,:I A500µ1 7AK10M1 90[0A01 • yR d.Kl OCOMC33CIC O KRue 0409 330'1 1••991 ly \ '\ \'\ •\ t 11 \ \` \ ''\\ )l [1 \ 1 t 1 4 I i i A, )1' is \1\, \ \,\ \ \'1►'I \ \ TRAC7 `E • \OE )TN 17 N \TRA) )�I I. 1 1 (�tit \ilk ` t\\ \� \11 \\\ \4 l \ \ \1♦ }91.91 \1\t \\ \1�1 \11 \I\. \t 1 \, \.i I� \11,\ \1 L . L \. \ I 1 1i:. \ \\\\\\ 11: o \ \ \\\1\ \l� 'i1•t '�i /,�,.:,. t/ I ! 1 ! 1 ! I ".; �: \ \ `\\ . \.y\\ t •'�,��/i / //� ./j %' /.mow 1_ ;l=' \ .1 / � � \,1 \tits \1\1 1'•"11\ \\1 \\ \1\ \\'• ti r �� \; .,' _ \\\ .�•`;,'::....s.`� :." `��ii��'� �• �\ '1; • • y \ y 1\ III +trlY )�. ,�r. . `,II 1' :..:� l\ \ \\ \ \t�II ( ft 4.. • \1\ \l 4.r i` 11.00• 111.33 :0•:00.0 ,9:149 SCALE: I' ..30. CS TRIAD AISOCIAT1• a uo taaa rows. M PRELIMINARY' UTILITY PLAN i u A C1M TAO •naa•33l PIMP M to NUM 00.11••I• 87 -223 „ 3.8 a File: L 99 -0023 5mm Drawing. #3 -11 Z;: • U,O (01;:y W; W =` pci W O, LL Q; H W. I- O Z 1- WW > Ni 1 Wt O File: L 99-0023 35mm Drawing #1 __ • ....._.__.. • . -.1 iiij.ilitlir111111111111.1111111111.,111111.1!1.11.1.011.1i 11.1.1.1.111 „ . 1.11;i:(1,11 !III 1111 11111,0 '111111.111 01:(11.1.0 . 200 Ito . 140 _ ` =20'v ,yo NA 100 .. A GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A to A' : PROPOSED SUBDIVISION SITE , TUKWILA WASHINGTON e TOPSOIL: organic, sandy SILT and Silty.SAND ROADWAY FILL: angular roadway embankment fill TILL and OUTWASH: stiff, brown, sandy SILT with silty clay, gravel and cobbles; some sand lenses g LAMINATED SILT: highly consolidated tan and brown glaciolacustrine SILT with sand and clay lenses • SILTSTONE: over consolidated gray fine sandy SILTSTONE, lenses of fine sand and silt; grades to fine grain Sandstone in some locales Unit boundaries are inferred between test pit locations. Actual unit boundaries and characteristics may vary throughout the site. TP #1 (el. 100') • (el. 140) •TP #5 �,wn o y 1.1 11 :%f • A' 1 i•1 -L" r f P t (el. 186' )TP #3 .. R.O.W. A' Highway 99 I1 jt. f • k t l r i 1 1 • 0 - , 0 1.e:0 ••.;, e� 9 SQUIER 1 HGI ASSOCIATES Dawn by: u• �I'• t t � st I �. 1 ,t 120 16o Z40 ' ,Z$1 1324 1 " =40'H NOTE: Features shown are for Illustrative purposes only and are approximate '3Go 4es '4,10 ' q %b TSlb Proposed Subdivision Tukwila, Washington GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION Checked by: Graphics Check: Orkpinsl Date: R•�9B Revision: Revision: Latest Revision: File PROJECTS.98 S l i„ _ L t, t •,.. 0 ',if; i11llll{ ii► Ifilil{ Ill)llin{ Illlllilltlli�illlU .11llllll�lllllllll {11111` 1111 {IIILIIIII {III111111 {IIIIIIIII {hill lilt {1111 llll{lilll1f,111)111..1 ��. • :ir r !(t'rti's; FIGURE 3 Date: June. 1998 Job. No. File: L 99 -0023 35rnrn Drawing #2 �'��ajyl.Trr4s r.'�i,•it jj� .� �� 111111i11 i11i1i1ii 1A .•0 \ \ \, ' \ \ \, \ '\` \ \ ;TP -5 'r ‘- `.`\' Vi'4`) N N A \ \k, ■■ \\71,i_: • i \ ' ` \\t\ \ \ 11 \\ \�\\\ \\ �i \Ill (\ \t \ \\ \'r 1 .111 \ 0� graze 11 OD 4111. AP,1 \Ili'\ 1RACT 8 OPEN SAGE TRACT ,. �\ \ \ \ \ Z %\ r ► �`` t t '' , rw `_ \` :. s. ` t"•1�Ii1�/1�/�MtiT�► • r — II \� \�'.� \\\\\4\\\\\\ \\N. 1\ \\�`�i1\� TP -3 ' `. ` \ ' \• t 1. I \I �t,`,� \ �� \� 1 \ , \, ` \ � \ \1 \ � �\ ,,\ \\ �,� �`' . � � \ � \�'�111�1it1�.t► \ -� ` •i \ � . � � � TP -8 � ,.,,,, \\ , \ \\ ` \\ \ \ `, �\ ,�\�, �,r :. �.,,�� I TP -1 1 fi \ '14,\\\ ) \\\\\\\ \` lull\\' \\I \ \ k.-- �. , \ ` \`, \ \\\‘\\\\\.\\\\\,\\,,,..\\\\\\„\\:\\,,,,;, \ \ \ \ ` r t f `ti \ iii. i41-,,t;:.1. � ■ r-a. .�kaQ.. "7-1- > 171 ''' ma I 1411' \� \�� ���\� rx +r� Ar, \\\1\ \ '..- 7 "' � \ l \ t J) "%' Pte' = �``� - � 1 �\ i 1;i,.: :tr.:, \ �: M �\\ \11\11[/, , , l /�� ('�,1(( I i/1:4--..;:',.. • \ ,,,-, _`` _ .��, , #2. _ 4 � I 1r F \ i � 1,• .� \ ',1\1\,\1,,% : a .- \\\- ,\`\ -r)fi ter`` =�ti \ `` `.--._::\''-N-\ `�\� \`�. " `` �i�`` \ .1 \\ - :...,.. 5 ; I11 ii,. J i r -- _•.. \ ~` Site plan based on preliminary grading plan titled "40th Ave. South Tukwila Project" by Triad Associates, dated 5/21/99. �\ \ \\ ,\llt� ' ' OA i■F.11 I.aGUNQ sict Site Plan LEGEND TP -1 NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST PIT 0 80 1 I 1 160 Scale 1" = 80' NELSON - COUVRETTE & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS SCI 40th Ave S Tukwila FILE NO. 278400 FIGURE 2 0' -Inch 1/16 e.4Trfwrr: "-- gi bl Gl l� ill 4{ I !JIIII IIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111111lllll. l II1111111111 II1IIIIIIIII1lllllllll1lllllllll1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1IIIIIII1I1JII .I,i11II1IIIIILI111111111111_ Company \ncad rafting2000 \co reldraw\sitep la n12784sp. cd rjgl,2 /22/00 File: L 99 -0023 35mm Drawing #3 -11 GN -CL 'pus STOP" "A 12A, "A N891751 •W 8.00' — PTL Scale: 1"=40' 366.6 TCH LIN NED 3' •x • • C. •N SS TA N PUN H NO0'53'2 1 "A 'CHAIN LI K FNC 75.70 • 2"LL 12 LL '401 12M0 12"DEC 14c --'4.11111111"-- I 11 11 T S1\121 BUILDING HSE# 13243 FE.B8.40 6"FR 6"HO TEST PIT LOCATION • HAND AUGER BORING LOCATION Proposed Subdivision Tukwila, Washington SITE SURVEYIEcEivED SQUIER/HGI ASSOCIATES Drawn By: FIGURE 2 Checked By: Reviewed By: File: -7-'77-77.77•771', 0 inch „: 2 6 L1----El, '1.1i L '0 1 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111110111AIIIIIIIINIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII'LlINIIIIIII11111111,111111111111)1111,1011161, '1 CAD \SITESURV Date: MAR 2 5 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELORMEN- 7/9/98 IJob No. 98349 AutoCA. rile: E\ PROJECTS \97223 \Owgfiles \7223pp1.dwg Plotted at: Fri Jun 04 16:16:51 1999 (� \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ L E ALDESCRIPTION PARCEL 7 OSE HOS IDTRACS 59. 60 AND 61,\ HERS IE INTERURBAN TRACTS \ TO TIE FLAT THEREOF RECORDED�N%UAE 10 O4' PLATA PAGE 74,\111 TY, WASHINGTON, MORE PARnnhARL DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS POR. OF NW ,1/4 OF SEC.15,TWP. 23N,RGE. 4E,W.M. 30' WABIDIAMIo AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAII)6 TRACT 61. THENCE NORTH 8978''44' NEST ANON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 10. FEET TO A POINT ON THE NEST RIGHT -qpfe WNY MARCH OF 407H AVENUE SOUTH A G 7V THE DEED RLED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5674852 KING COUNTY, WASHING THENCE NORM 00!0'43• EAST ALONG MARGIN 7295 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 7r NEST IOS00 FEET TO THE TRUE r OF EEG/ MWM THENCE SOUTH 6979'1 r EAST 105.00 FEET TO SAID NEST MARGIN OF 407H AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE NAVH 0040F4J• EAST ALONG SAID NEST AIARGIN4 ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUMENTS FILED UNDER 570635 AND KONG COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. FEET, WOW CON77NUING ALONG SAID MARGN NORTH 00 PONT NUM BEARS SOUTH 008'20' NEST 90.41 FEET SOUTH ALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SAID TRACT 69;; THEN NORTH 73146• NEST 40.68 FEET, DENDE NORM 887338 NORTH $77�332�025• NEST 24.07 FEET, MORE NORTH 474799• NORTH BOUNDARY OF IE38.36 E N HA THRICE THE H� TRAC THENCE NORTH 897737 NEST ALONG SAID NORTH THE EAT BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60: BOUND 77 NN{CEp � SOUTH 007749• Mc Oitini 120 SAD C60. THENCE NQ4IN I' IIE3T ,72Z BOUND ` SOUTH 007r49• NEST ALONG SAID NEST LIVE J$ THE SOUTH BOUNDARY c4 TRACT 81 THEN SOUTH 891751• EAST ALONG THE :OU BOUNDARY OF iRAC 60 AND TRACT 59 A DISTANCE OF 120.02 FEET 7V THE NEST E OF THE EAST 380 OF TRACT 61; THEN ALONG SAID NEST LINE SOUTH 004 78• NEST 144.86 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SOUTH 29020 FEET OF SAID MAC 61; 1 N LM' SAID FEET (N' TRACT 8978' EAST 79.60 FEET TO THE NEST OF 7F EAST THEN SAW ._Nor LRIE; SOUTH 00. 178 NEST 290.20 FEET TO TiHE‘SOUTH . BOUNDARY O • TRACT 61; T7Iala -50071 78' -EASTALONG- THESOUh..I0UHDARY 7HEREG , 184.84 FEET 70 A POINT NF9CH 5011111 OOYOIJ• HEST THE TRUE POINT EEGNNING THENCE NORTH 00401I • MAST 729J FEET TO THE TRU PONT OF EXCEP THAT PORTION OF TRACT 61, MOREI PAR I LARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COM 0 AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER 0 TRACT 61; THENCE NORTH 697 '31' NEST ONG 171E NORTH BOUNDARY TIERS ICU FEET TO A POINT OW THE NESSr RICHT�NWY- MARGIN- OF- 407H•A1E AK ' ACCORDING .TV_ 7TE' ^9T^ �ED1/BOER RECOROWG NO 5706311 KING COUNTY WASHINGTON AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGIMVINA THENCE CONTINUING NORM 897751• NEST ALONG SID NORTH BOUNDARY 94.84 FEET THENCE SOUTH 000670' NEST 100.32 FEET THENCE 5011111 8953'4• EAST 69.83 FEET TO TIE LEMMING OF A CURVE TO 711E LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET: THENCE NORTHNESIERLY ALONG SAID CARIB TO THE LEFT VNOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 900000• AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.27 FEET 10 A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT- OF-WAY MARGIN OF 40711 AVENUE SOUTH ACCOOROING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING N0. 5706373; THENCE NORTH 000620' EAST ALONG SMD�•M MARGIN 74.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGNNNG ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION-5F SND TRi, CT 6{, L7ORMR1WCARCY"DESQOBED'1LS FOI.W 'PVC AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER! OF T1?ACT 61, THENCE NORTH mew NEST D THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF 0.36 FEf 70 A POINT ON THE NEST RIGHT- OP-..4 . MARGIN OF 40111 AVENUE SOUTH ACT. ?DING 110 THE DEED BLED UNDER `,� r' 'C NO 567485E TONG MINTY, IVASHNNGTCW,• THENCE NORTH 004043• EAST 9111 AL O /C SAID MARGIN 1789E FEET TO POhyT 'AT. THENCE DEPARTING SAID MARGIN .• B3J'40• NEST 84.57 FEET TO 111E '- rc�- ,,eQR{r CI' BEGINNBFC: THENCE n ' I/ING�AW77H"893J'i0' "NIrST77,3! FEET1 THENCE NORTH GOO670•'Ei1SF1 74 THENCE SOUTH 693.'40• EAST 77.35 Fan THENCE SOUTH 001870• NEST 09.74 Al TO THE PINT OF BECANNG 1 1 ; --- - AND UTILITIES OVER THE FrLL019 G IE DESOWEED PONT 'A; THEN r TH 001870• NEST 30.00 PEEP, THENCE T ON THE NEST MARCH OF 40711 AVENUE 414 t JaailiEEZ.D2.111E.E0INT OF Cd0INOS NO. 567485$ 14093 A DISTANCE OF 16124 70' EAST 214.11 FEET 10 A THE NORM LINE OF THE DEPARTING SAID MARGIN, r 24.61 FEET; THENCE T 3872 FEET, THENCE ST 26.48 FEET TO ME TRACT 59, INTERURBAN ARV, 220.15 FEET 7O ALONG SAID NEST `FEET OF THE EAST Y 12000 FEET TO THE NEST LINE pF sfID EAST 120 FEET y�• TR� 6Q' THENCE I 1 I( \\ I I 120.00' .118977'31 •W ) ? \llll� 20.15' N897 :77t \. CT B QPIE 4 SPACE TRACT 9205 SF '-0016.46' \ f467‘1 J i ;\ 11 7511 SF J'I4 ( 7472 57'1 X1_1 I�°o \\� 1\ , 111. ' \ \ I .62'83' N89'S3'4o- '� aLa+an Ia+LhMeNearera+ -trsi maM»f•.�.a>e..t ���wM-rMn4, 1 i '``.\\.�\ \ �''.;' 1, 1 I \.\•� \ \ \\ \\1.0 , \ \1t n l \ 1 \ \ \ n\ \\ I\ / \\ 1 � 1 y \ �, \lit \�'�� \ ��\ k �\, \ \ekeF \ \\ ,. -a \ \ \\ \\ \\ \-i \\ \ i \ \ \ y.!�, " \ \\ \\019k \\ \I �il 4C1 \�s� I� (I //\/\\d \ 1 \-�r 1\11 �V�I �\\\�\ \v/),. 11/ //fill iii i i�' ii. �` +...._ •, 6 \\''' ‘r\ !\ \ \ ‘\ 1 \+. ` % , \�` • \ ;>.,. %` •- ._,70 \ / , • \ I\\ \,.� ..�. ~\ \\ \: \`+\'�T .::, ,.ii / -7:4 _tl Lao._,.,.. ,_,`• :: -.7 �\ \` \.,•, . \ 4. \, /ESN' Q ,,,\\\ \ .......„ ........_ !ADJACENT LOT CREATED ITNROUGN BLA PROCESS SUB/ ECT TO AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS PARCEL: BECNNNO AT 111E N TH 895710•. NEST 161.92 FEET; n S01. R(.QY..'J..340• EAST 161.62 FEET TO SOCHI; TENerfiaRTH-D04D4rEAS mamma TAXI LOT10942 THAT POTION OF TRAC 6/ IfIIVERYOE INTERURBAN TRANS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT 7 RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 CF PLATS, PA 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, L EASTERLY OF THE EASTERLY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO WI WEPT 7Hl£ EASTERLY 380 FEET OF TH AT PORTION THEREOF LNWG NORTH ON THE WORM LINE OF THE SOUTH 290.20 r- '•- AID'}RAC I--m0-E`XCE.1 -THA POgILON_JNEB4I_471NG 1.NI7�'N_ G-- TH 29020 FEET OF THE EAST 300. FEET OF SAID TRACT 61. 1 1 - - - - -- - -' __ f rt ROUTE OF PEWS T�41lT� ADVERSE *IPA Or SIGNIFICANT TRW \ 11 1 11 11 SW, CORNET C.S. tP.MS CaIAN)H .ANO CI.MM \' EXISTING BUILDING 70 REMAIN EXISTING BUILDING 70 BE REMOVED rruN SMORI MONUMENT v/�+d'I 'C 0 U. M NE. 37th AVE.. VII 9n 1 11 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 11 11 1 1 NOTES - EABE/ENTS • V 1 \ THE SOUTHERLY 4.35' OF PARCEL V (PROPOSED BLA) IS SUBJECT TO A STANDARD KING COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT EASEMENT FOR NECESSARY Y7S & FILLS AOLICENT TO 40TH AVE SOUTH PER RECORD NO 5674852 5706211 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 �p (pLU. /hC4 ,1 z 1, 1'foL I _ .11 C.•G 1 SI, 241 .. G 20 i ^rS "Ii,-;6 3 /I .2.177'7: t Cor- Si ^d, • 0 Inch . • Inn I" . STN w.IC ?ep \1RARRT `, ` c - � 196tSF 1 I■, EMIT 30' ISSOY.A7ED LOT CREATED TT /ROUGH BLA PROCESS EXIS77NG BUILDING 70 REMAIN - ACCESS 1 FROM TRACT D EXISTING BUILDING 1 TO BE MIMED 'AVERAGE LOT WIDTH !Lor 1 f2' LOT 11 60' !LOT 2 (LOT J ,LOT 4 LOT 5 LOT 6 LOT 7 LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 b 194, 6. 12' 79' 60' LOT 12 60' LOT 13 61' LOT 14 61' LOT 15 62' LOT 16 58' LOT 17 64' LOT le 76' LOT 19 99' LOT 20 74' si�.. -0.1 -Ci Et. ..I' 01 0... L.... i S ",1',_..L L T o, ' �JIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIILIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�lllllllllllllllllll�lllllllll�lllllllll�lllllllu� �� 3 30' EXIS77NG BUILDING 17O BE RELOCATED TO ADJACENT LOT ADJACENT LOT CREATED 17HROUGH BLA PROCESS I 1 • . to RIVERTON .• r. T � S 1. 't SITE a ' y S ' rl ; y 130 11P STS � CIA SOU lf GATE v INTERNAIION AIRPORT t^ y Ly FOSTER 7 11 BITE DATA OWNER: DEVELOPER: TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY.• VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE ENGWEERINC/ LANCFCAPE ARCIIIECIURE/ PLANTING GARY GREER SECURE CAPITOL INVESTMENTS 1Z LLC PO BOX 25727 SEATTLE: WA 98125 (206) 361 -8023 LOUVERN L. L.AUTENSCHLAGER 13243 4071 AVE. SOUTH SEATTLE WA 98768 GARY GREER SECURE CAPITOL INIESTMENTS /Z PO BOX 25127 SEATTLE., WA 98125 (206) 361 -8023 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11874 115111 ME NE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 (425)827 -8448 TRIAD ASSOCIATES 11814 115TH AVE NE KIRKLAND, WA 98034 (425)821 -8448 EXISTNC ZORNG LOR ADDRESS 13223 40TH AVE 5 J=DLL"CS SANITARY SEINER: VAL WE SEVER DISTRICT WATER: WATER DISTRICT 1125 ELEC:,8af11 PUGET SOND•ENERCY NATURAL GAS PUGET SOUND ENERGY TELE1'IILWE• US NEST CABLE rN MI CABLE REFUSE SERVICE SEA -TAC INDEX OF SHEETS 1 PRELMMNARY PLAT 2 BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 3 PRELM /NARY UTNJTY PLAN 4 PRELIMINARY GRADMIG PLAN 5 LANDSCAPE PLAN 8 TREE RETENTION AND SLOPE ANALYSIS EXfMBIT 7 ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS 8 ADJACENT LAND USE EXHIBIT X99 -oclZ FicEGDPY RECEIVED JUN 0 7 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SCALE: 1" = 50' 25 50 1 01999 1RIA0 ASSOCIATES AIMMIM v TRIAD ASSOCIATES ProJct Wtryet at EIau hi4oterin8 W4 BurnTly Lad Ust PNnnly IAWcepe 6rellleclon BIU Dalp 11111 1II7 Aa. U DEWS. U Npl-1 7111N,WA* 7.11N.N13111 MI /tee NE/MIHN mirlaircesa PRELIMINARY PLAT /PRD WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA, s GUESETwrii JOHN !NAM FIERTEWIER- P r ENGINEE VEIN THOMAS DAM 3/24/99 SCALE: 50111.1 /1=30' VUT: 11 STAMP NOT win DNI85S SIGNED AND DOT® JOB NUMBER sHEgr NUMBER $ 97 -223 551 . 1or8 it (qty OF TUNWIA CONmQL POwT 94°0) PORTION OF NW 1/4 SEC. 15, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., �.M. CI' HMI ZIAISTIZ ADVANCE Subject To Revls a 13cm BT. FOUND MONUMENT IN CASE 2/12/90 9DMH 89.120.55 IE.123.06 24' CUP E. E.122.72 24' CW W. Ay SOWN 89.119.07 10.114.60 24' CLIP W. 5.110.00 14' CUP E. 94▪ ) r4 15. 4{ Z . ��Y\r'.�QU 10 sluP" •905 MP" 10.52.0 I 12' 51 NOO'63'2 76.70 9:.127.19 24' CUP (9 TIIACT 55 RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS TRACT 00 RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS Y(11..1U, i'0. 74 ELEV..IOY 0'l REFERENCES 111 >\ 1 1 II \ 9891 388.641/ 10.70.46 12• CONC. 12' cptc. ?% , 111•IIT0930 I � tci itij�4 1.4.4,1 - - 1rY(•� 0'111 \ WG 1 \ \1 1 �11: `•' / 1r y� a I a \ I ,,.A II IL ^ \ �6 24' �A �d {i \\ ` \ !' 14 PARCEL A% 12'0 \ 11 \ r. `` \ J6' M ULA. ItL -1L- 14• 6� \ G�08a'\ 9 1 1{'A '0) X14$ J \ \\ \ J . 1,EAR ' e,p/ M 5 i Lyle' 10'0 1 q .;4,A� e•p (,(y(�t 1' 1 I /�a' �14�A T,t f y091�t .A 4 AP `1 \1'• q;� �.1 I:: ..:" ty\ u E`O \O*IT^Gi E �j,, I k A� I I / ! 1 1 2 i') ^ \i.,., °' �� \. 7.a' *012' �( A\ T,ty bW2 If le 17'6 1 I \ 1 1 14'Af \ ° , 1A '4, I\il y� 10'0 qd \ \ � ���111 I � � ♦'.`- r' WAE 1NC \ \ \ 1 ; \'�'A �Y 0' ~' \ \,[I T ��A2� al I \ I I �AP \ I - •Ki ���� SHCO 11,, '�' L r. :,:cia '�" ((.L'A�A,��N•• A{ \E2A \ ,i.e... 11p• . A 1.A�1 'A \ \ A�UI M,e.. `0 •c:. • 2 9 7\ �.�TA4 NK ON N \ ici. I`• \I \ �'7' I I \ ¶ TN 5REP ? '1i11Aw K fNC 12•P T, ('91M6tt N DI 0 \ \\ \ \\0\ \ \ II \ A 6A II \ \ 'i 1 1 \ 0.01.4 1Ee:P, 0 12 i'124, �' \ \ \ \ `(1\�t' \ �A C$I- I 2' CON e e u 1 1 Q / \ I \l 11 \\\\\I \ NO? \�c't r 2'A CI dF kKALA "� I \ 16 API `�4'y p�(zt to �I 111.11\ \ I g,.i \ I v \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ I g •��0, 1 \ Ck `.P \ 31. .4,'110. 1�\ � \t t\ \ \ \ \ �e� 1 a.1A 1 1 ®1 \ r 1' �� 2y 'k \ \\\\1:<\9\ EW .� \ \ \ \ t,• I \ \ \ \L. (1941 \ . b26 FP Ty t: \\‘\\ j \ \ 1 TES PIT \ ` r' 1 I'• (A,"/ \� ` ,► e \ \ ; \ \ \ \ 1E.� \� ° \ \ is'DEO ,:d �1..'. ,e• 1 a 1 � 2t° 1 \ \ \\ \ 1 1 (' J,° ` \ F1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ e � r9re11'� i \ •• \ \` / \ \ \ \ \\\ \ I T`-' • 1 1 \, \ \ rP I / P `\� \ \Ia�Pt�II,1 1a•a \ \ \ \ I 2 \9 \ i � \ \ \ \ 2D�o 1 1) •, o \\ ` •�\`\ \ 4• 1 I I 6 # \ \\ 1 \ ITRCT dti \ \ I 1 ,, \V,. �- ri \\ \ \ 1 I 1,2� .11 \ \ \ \ I I \ I{I�EEf1.. U1.14.1UR AI4 TRACTS \ ,1 / \\\ CY� �l Y ,\ \(�,{� .1 \ aL.•��y. I 1 I I 1�.� \ 0\\\?,c\■„. \ VU1I. 111 i'U // \ 10 P 110'.4 \ I f I 1 / \ \ \\\ `\M 6 ' , 914.1 i 1 1619 ^'1 I 1 {Y \ \ \ \ \ \ \ °•, OI \ \ t, �1\\ 111'9 III \\\ I II t\ \ 1\40 e EPa t \ \ \ \\ ° 17• 1 1 \ \ \ r 1'1.0 \ 6 0 A 9. \ ..� \ \ \+. \ I l „/.._:0 \� \ ��1 j • Al.‘, ► I I I 1 111 � I I � f���I9�'� \ =0`11 \ \ °'� � \ ,� 36 \l .( y 1 ( F. ) WN Uo v ®\ '� \ \ 1p 741°9.10 rx , . ki \ \ \ \ \ \ \4,11..1 I I I I I 1 'Y\ \ \ \ . . \ \ I,E PI\ 61 \ T.t.. „D9, S 3...._____ 6`CNP \ `0 ,:►off\ \ \� \ \1 \ \ \\ \11 \I,Et,161I 1 1 \ \\ 1 \\1 \ \ \ \\:;1/211. \ 1 \ I \� I \� \ ' . \ \\ 11 p `I 10'0 t�'� 8'F V \7. n 143' W \ \ N \ \ \o4 \ \ I 1 1 \ \ \ ` \ 1 \ \ • !E!!{ . N . \ l`. \ 1 r ' \9 \ \ , L Nb9W2 \ 1 n n•R BNlD910 3/ CHIC `6'x0 it�Q \ \ \i ce ` \? : \ ‘.\ I \ / l I \ I I I \ 21\\44:1:\080;01, . \ \ \ \ I I I 't 140E 132, IE To.90 .. \ \ \' \ \ ., \ \ 779•.. f -) \ \\' � \ \ 11 A, \ \\ \ �;`A \ \ \ \ T�. �D9 3 \ ° . 1>o'YN `I 11,'q \ \\ � \ \\ \ \ \ I 11,' '1A IEA� \ � 1 \ 11'• � 6 CON k \\ r d1\ \ \\� IL)2\ \ \\ \\\.\,_\ .4' \ \ A •�J10� \ I\ I ) I I I A tf:EFl� 1 wAlx� 3 \\ • \\ \ !\ \\ \F J� \\ \11\ \ \ 1 \ I B1.A. IU. E.7ASY0, \\ � \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ 1\�}L�/ 1 A` '1 \ I E.I1I ttl' F �..T.I•dir K.7. .20 .• E 6 ' eTO NIF X1'^4\ ,` \ I \\ \\ �rt�ii \ \. \ \ \ \ I 1\4\cs'\\Q\"1".":1‘7\011 yM. le, P 1. l 1°'caN ..I FF:t 1R,•1,72Ak0.: \\ 121 \\ \\k 0 1711 I\ \ 1 1 \ \ \ \ 1 5 A� .I :�F, 16' ,�4' r ^,, ',,11 IC°! "I \\ �� \ \ \� \ \ \p,l 1"1111 \N\ \ \ 1 \ 11 III �;," ►..,. y ,161\ \;� 4•Y� \ \ \ \ \ \ \1 113\'17 I 2 Y \2\ 1 I `.�('� �\ .r•, I / %��4 ` • \ �0," \1 ICgC+ 101 \ \ I \ y ) 17 f J \ \ � \ \ \ � T; � f l 7' /f/ i /) �4jD1,1 d, ,1 , ,! 4,--;;\),) N _ J y-\ \ \\\444°` ' '\ \ \l'. 1 1 } \\ \` \ \ \ \� \\�= // // ��yy�J�/ 1I\-J P'j" . \,al; � :::::*5....• 42 -.�Q \��\ \ \ \lQ *\ ;\ west- \ �` \ \ \\\ \ \ \ \.. ////,4< 1iy �; \,, i...,1 \\ 1, )..L 4 ��� ,` \� \ �� \\ •,�t.a.T 4. �T +�,�� \\\\1/4 d Jo \ °' 'e'>\ I'G2.,..0.......E....,...„ � 111 � \\ \ \• \�lo � ' :dc . \ \\ \ \ .E. . '\ \ \ , •y -1YM\ \ \\ \ `� \ 79.1• \ 'I:. :..r ,y \ \5'1 �• . >/ / , D 12 ' {fir y " E'1\'\� L �a \\ \ •r,��g \ t7�rr'i tk \\` \\ � � 11� �� ..A'\ ',OIL- \� y101 \ \\ �0 \ N [::, \J,. \ \ \`A m6S _ T E.2o Let \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ ) �0 I \2 {l; :/ �% Jo \ \ \\ ` RACE 1 20, \ ' • \ \ \ \� I t 1 r ° \ \ \` \ \\\t \�) I \ 1 / ill' � •,-. \ \\ � \ .. u rQ i70o4/CAP l k l o8 Ii - °•� \ \ \ \1 I 1 I III/J/ .r▪ i ��yy,YY�Ir)7 �. 0.7 Na,tx Herr AROUfND 1� TRACT DIG OIOR14 T. � • _ RIVERSIDE 1.10, 11.74 TRACTS VOL.10, Pa. 74 RW.7°.18 10• PVC NAS C1R CI°a..90.l5 �I 1 I (CITY OF NKWLA COHIOOl PoINT 1450> AI AW CORNER C.C. IEW0 DONAWIw LAND CLAIM FOUND STONE MONUMENT ! /CUT 'X' • CE TE4UNE 3718 M . S 2/12/99 CITY 0� NKWIA EUV� 190.91 1) RECORD OF SURVEY, BOOK 28 AT PAGE 81, JOHN R. ENING & ASSOCIATES, JUNE 30, 1981. 2) A.LT.A. /A.C.S.M LAND TITLE SURVEY BY TRIAD ASSOCIATES, JOB N0. 94 -325, JANUARY 30, 1195. Q P.C. STA. 600171.3 (R CAC, P05000 FR CIA 11E5 BASIS OF BEARINGS: WASHINGTON NORTH ZONE NAD 83/91 HELD BEARING OF N00'53'21 "E ON THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THE C.C. LEWIS DONATION LAND CLAIM BETWEEN THE FOUND STONE MONUMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE C.C. LEWIS D.L.C. & THE CASE MONUMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF S. 130TH 5T. it 37th AVE. 50. VERTICAL DATUM:NAVD e8 „RI uM 51 TBM .1152 ORIGINATING BENCHMARK: CITY OF TUKWILA IBM / 40009. PK NAIL w/ TAO SET ON APPROXIMATE CENTERLINE OF HWY, 99. 55' S.E. OF P.C, STA, 600 +78.3. POINT 15 MARKED PATH PAINTED AERIAL PANEL POINT. ELEVATION - 190.84 NM MI - 91'1 NN. "PINT' 1111'. ':IUr p.p. 11:1' 0111114' UIIUII1111. POLE IS ON E. SIOE OF 37th AVE. SO. 9 60' SOUTH (APPROXIMATELY) OF WESTERLY - N.W. CORNER OF PROPERTY. • ELEVATION - 199.02 TBM 62 - SET R.R. SPIKE IN W. SIDE OF P.P. 1.5' ABOVE GROUND. P.P. 15 ON E. SIDE OF 401h AVE, S0. OPPOSITE APPROXIMATE MID -POINT OF E. PROPERTY LINE. ELEVATION - 70.00 10.81.83 0/F 24' cam. 811.74.43 ID' PVC HAS C2R 09101.09.64 161/ I2 ELEV..70.06 SDCB 54. OVERFLOW C0 19.71.72 10.57.22 2C CIIP N. 5:.50.25 15' CMP 5. 0.50.59 12• CCNC. SE DC0 811.72.49 I1E.7504 12' CONC. NW 1 5TA 40400 (CALF) 0100 CO. P.W.O. 1 1:.73.50 0' 10.86.03 12• CON[. 10.07.61 12' CON[. 11 0i"_Gi- Ci_'.LP. 1.1. UI , `D1 S'- 5- •,, /.';E_L 1 1Di °. � pdDII�IIIIIIIII�IIIIIUII�llllllllllgllhulhllllllll�llllllllllllllllll�lllllllll�lllllllll111111UH�lllllllll�ulllllll�plllnp�ulilpli� 10.97.95 EAST END . 5594 RI1/.77.09 5.00.09 10• PVC N. 5.5849 0' PVC S 10.09.39 e' PVC W. SCALE: 1" 50' 25 50 1 0 GRAPHIC SCALE CONTOUR INTERVAL . 2' LEGEND SOL CB FH . OA OM OV 410 PP Tn MAN 510N •, SSMH - TMH - TP W WM . WMH - WV - NOTES: BOLLARD CATCH BASIN FIRE HYDRANT GUY ANCHOR OAS METER GATE VALVE MONUMENT IN CASE POWER POLE POWER POLE w/ TELEPHONE UNE STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SIGN SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE TELEPHONE MANHOLE TELEPHONE POLE WATER MAIN WATER METER WATER MANHOLE WATER VALVE AP - APPLE D ,. DECIDUIOUS C CONIFER CY - CHERRY DA "• GUY ANCHOR HO ,. HAWIHORN LO . LAUREL M MAPLE MN . MONEY 0 . PINE PA . PLANTER AREA 1. INSTRUMENTATION FOR THIS SURVEY WAS A ONE MINUTE THEODOLITE AND ELECTRONIC DISTANCE MEASURING UNIT. PROCEDURES USED IN THIS SURVEY WERE FIELD TRAVERSE, MEETING OR EXCEEDING STANDARDS SET BY WAC 332 -130 -090. 2. THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP REPRESENTS THE RESULTS OF A SURVEY MADE ON DATE INDICATED AND CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED AS INDICATING THE GENERAL CONDITION EXISTING AT THAT TIME. 3. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL FOR THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON PUBLISHED VALUES FOR CITY OF TUKWILA CONTROL MONUMENTS AS PROVIDED BY THE PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT. 4. SANITARY SEWER AND STORM DRAINAGE FACIUTIES HAVE BEEN ASBUILT THROUGH FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF THE LOCATION OF THE ACCESS STRUCTURES, THE TOP ELEVATION OF THE STRUCTURES, AND THE INVERT ELEVATIONS OF ANY PIPES ENTERINO OR LEAVING THE STRUCTURES. IT IS STANDARD PRACTICE TO SHOW THE PIPES CONNECTING THESE STRUCTURES AS STRAIGHT UNES. THIS 15 ONLY AN ASSUMPTION AND 111E ACTUAL LOCATION OF THE PIPING MUST BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 5. UTIUTY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON ASBUILT FIELD LOCATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES. FIELD L004,1109 OF UTIUTIES BASED ON LOCATOR PAINT MARKINGS AND LOCATIONS BASED ON UTIUTY MAPS FROM CITY AND UTIUTY DRAWINGS. 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATION, ELEVATION AND SZE, OF EXISTING UTIUIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 7. SITE TOTAL AREA • 295,220 SO. FT. 8.78 ACRES LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 8 (PROPOSED BLA) THOSE POR)IONS OF TRACT 59 AND TRACT 61, RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS PAGE 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 61, THENCE NORTH 89'18'48' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 10.36 FEET TO .4 POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT -OF -WAY MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORO'NC N0. 5674852, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 00'40'47' EAST ALONG SAI0 MARGIN 72.95 FEET,' THENCE NORTH 8979'17' WEST 105.00 FEET TO INC TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 8979'17• EAST 105.00 FEET TO SAID WEST MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE NORTH 00'40'43' EAST ALONG SAID HEST MARGIN. ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUMENTS FILED UNDER RECORDINGS NO 5674852, 5706313 AND KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO 674098 A DISTANCE OF 166.24 FEET,; VHENC£ CONTINUING ALONG SAID MARLIN NORTH 0006'0• EAST 214.11 FEET 70 A POINT:06CH BEARS SOUTH 0006'20• WEST 9041 FEET FROM NNE NORTH LINE OF THE SOU7H`HALF OF INC SOUTH HALF OF SAID TRACT 59; THENCE DEPARTING SAID MARGIN, NORTH 67;71'46' WE57 40.68 FEET,; THENCE NORTH 887JJ8' WEST 24.81 FEET,' THENCE NOR7HI67J0''25• WEST 24.07 FEET,• THENCE NORTH 47127'19" IYES7 20172 FEET,• THENCE NORTH 67'32'53' REST 38.26 FEET' THENCE NORTH 004212- £AST 26.46 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF THE SCUM HALF OF INC SOUTH HALF OF TRACT 59, INTERURBAN TRACTS' )HENCE NORTH 8917'27' WEST ALONG SA10 NORM BOUNDARY, 220.15 FEET TO THE EAST BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60,• THENCE SOUTH OOJ7'49' WEST ALONG SAID WEST BOUNDARY 48.76 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF INC SOLIDI 60 FEET OF THE E457 120 FEET Cr SAID TRACT 60; THENCE NORTH 8977'51' NEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 120.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 120 FEET OF TRACT 60; THENCE SOUTH 00'77'49" WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60; THENCE SOUTH 89'1751' EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 60 AND TRACT 59 A DISTANCE OF 720.02 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE £AST 380 FEET OF TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAND WEST UNE SOUTH 00 '41'28' WEST 144.86 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE 'OF THE SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF 5410 TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAD NORTH LINE, SOUTH 8978'45' EAST 79.80 FEET TO 791E WEST LINE OF INC EAST .300.20 FEET OF TRACT 61; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, SOUTH 008'28' WEST 290.20 FEET TO THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 61; THENCE SOLIDI 8978'48' EAST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 184.84 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 00 '40'43' WEST FROM INC TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORM 00'40'47' EAST 72.93 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF TRACT 61, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 61: THENCE NORTH 897757" REST ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 12.42 fur TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT- Of -IYAY MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING N0. 5706J7J, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 89'17'51' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 94.84 FEET ;; THENCE SOUTH 0006'20" WEST 100.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8953'40' EAST 69.83 FEET TO INC BEGINNING OF A CURVE 70 THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO INC LEFT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90120'00' AN ARC DISTANCE OF J9,27 FEET TO A POINT ON INE HES7ERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY MARGIN OF 4011 AVENUE SOUTH ACCCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5706313; THENCE NORTH 0006'0' EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 74.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. .4050 EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF 5.410 TRACT 61, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 61, THENCE NORTH 8978'48' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY THEREOF, 70.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT -Of- WAY MARGIN OF 4070 AVENUE SOUTH ACCORDING TO THE DEED FILED UNDER RECORDING N0. 5674852, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON;; THENCE NORTH 00•40'4J' EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 175.91 FEET 70 POINT "A"; THENCE DEPARRNC SAID MARGIN NORM 89'53'40" WEST 84.57 FEET TO INC TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 895J'40' WEST 77.35 FEED. THENCE NORTH 0006'20' EAST 109.74 FEET,' THENCE SOUTH 89'53'40' EAST 77.35 FEET ;; THENCE SOUTH 0006'20' WEST 109.74 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT 70 AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRI8£D PARCEL: BEGINNING AT THE HEREINABOVE DESCRIBED POINT A't THENCE NORTH 89'53'40' KEST 161.92 FEE4 7IENCE SOUTH 0006'20' WEST 30.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 8953'40' EAST 161.62 FEET TO .4 POINT ON THE WEST MARGIN OF 40TH AVENUE SOUTH,' THENCE NORM 00'40'43• EAST ALONG SAID MARGIN 30.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEOININNC. TAX 005/0942: THAT PORTION OF TRACT 61, RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN T74,AINC N KING COUNTY, LYING THEREOF PAGE Y,ASTERLY Cr THE EASTERLY LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 1; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY J80 FEET OF :NAT PORTION THEREOF LYING NORM OF 7145 NORTH UNE OF THE SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF SAID TRACT; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEROF L77NG 14TH/N INC SOUTH 290.20 FEET OF INC EAST 20620 FEET OF SAID TRA05 67. MOVED I/rif oo a7llwLeN _, ca9 axm EMI 'MUM mI NEM TRIAD ASSOCIATES PrsJ.el 899.6.mml 0h j lead UN Pl.mlel L4244494 Mchltect9:, 8114 Nip 11611 1168 9n. 50 12:91221, 6/ 95011 -9982 TM 455.04 ANI 195 186.621,1411 105 1006 600 .406.0751 mll19dW00.9091 i. 1 k V 0 LU v 4 gI cc cc O 0 O ` CC ri >. O rg v. cc Q z 000 CITY OF TUKWILA, x d4♦//-1/////// RCN WEST PROJECT MANAGER DESIGNED: GADD: S. PHILLIPS J4. CRICKED: DATE: 3/24/99 ,SCALE: • RORIZ.:50' VERT.: 1' STAMP NOT VALID MUSS SIIINRU AND UNTO JOB NUMBER SHEET 9119800 97 -223 20P8 1 I: \ESM -JOBS \85501990 Secure Capital 12 \O1- Tukwila PFD \Design \2 -4 A PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SEC. 15, TWP. 23 N., ME. 4 E., W.M. MATCHUNE, SEE cur .4 ■ C. ----------- -■ \ si TRACT SO RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS , • o , 0 , ,i,. \ - 1 2,,,..,,,,,..-..- ... • s \ \ „ ,,.... .,..., , ._.. ------- , (11; ,-.. , ''..',., ss'ssc- .. , •;„ i , MATCHUNE, SEE RIGHT TRACT GO RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS VOL.10, P0. ,W,•///,',/////:///&,,a L 1 • \' TRACT Fs- .ACCESS,,TNACT --- TRACT'll OPEN SPACE MAqr, SUNG .............................. • s „ ......... ...... = ........ ........ 3 I ..... I r .... ....... . ...... .... r ........ ' 1-7 ....... -- I .............................. woe DOSING STORM 0510M MEMO 15 ss, , \;\\'‘\`\'\ \, 10 SENO 001E4 0 ROUEN •" • • . .. ..... ............. •-r" ROAM DOS1110 STORM SYSTEU • ' • \ \ \ \ \ . • \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - .... 1.11U:L/241.4.'16" ,r7.) \ I \ -- -- \ \ \ \ , , ---- 7 - 2.1. ---- ..\t„.4,_4___IT1 1-I'', , , • ACc MAO, 1,\ 'n\ (1: --- ---- , ' \‘„ \,„ \\„ ; \'‘, \i• '1 I 1 11 ■ , , , Ifi/I111-)---1,\41)1/111111's /.1./ I 4. I fr? I / 1 1' 1 1, 1 / / ")11/ ' 1 I 1 ■ \ ............ '+‘ N \ \ ..... • (,‘ c \ ... ‘„, \ .. `‘, .... ... •o■ TR 'IlfACT-D-JACCESS 1RACT 4K—r - REPLACE d0S7010 CULVERT • '‘`.,..‘•.s2.''.:\s-‘,`-2i' ''''4.--..""%.;:-..:"..:7,1,--::::,----7-7":"----t:::::-.-2.: ‘‘, \--_,-,---,','•• '''• \s, _:::'-'-•---....4-:::.s.':::::::::.::::":::::- . ::2-11----.J-61-•:-....:::--7-2-.-:.; //=- ...... :.:.--..,..'---:,"_-_------ ................ . ......'-::::::::-;::::::";;;:::, e:::.,...:...: ....... ■-.-.7,----,: --------- ....., -- -- -- ----- --- --------- - ' ---- '-'„ • ,_ •• _. , .... ...__ , \ ... ., , -."- --------- ...-- - '''. ‘‘-'• ''' ''..-- ...."- --"----_ s. -, \ \ --- ---- "...- - ----- '',... .<5`,A11ACT.. p •-...,:', .•-• ------- ....s..\ .\ ::::::::::::::---------------'-„ luvoismEinuctuti4H TRACTS:'------- ' \ \ -- - /60—___ ----.. ''..: `..., `0,........--: ...,..... .., ‘stw' PP 74 30 15 0 1• = 30' 30 50 Q , 10 1 , / \ 1 11 \ 11// \\.\\ -------------------- t. 0 REVISIONS No. CIESCIEFRON/DATE rtf — 0 z us NSULTING PROJECT JOB NO. 855-01-900 DWG. NAME: PU0-01 DESIGNED BY: 11JC DRAWN BY: DLS/JIN CHECKED BY: REG DATE: 5/22/00 DATE OF PRINT: 0/22/00 3 OF 8 SHEETS 1: \ESN-JOBS \ B5501990 A PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SEC. 115, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., W.M. NO. REVISIONS DESCRIPTION/D.47E TRACT 59 RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS to ' 2 c 'FF 9245 Ors 92.15 luvlutRinE■ Taunt) Am. TRArrs. • • • ,;":'.";.,7-‘.,11' • • • • )JI gi . 0 . )1111111I11111111111111111110111111111111.110111141111111111111i1111111111111111111111111111111111111111011111111I1111101111.11111111iIIIIIRW Esm CONSULTING ENGINEERS L L C 11822 North Creek Parkway Suite 106 Bothell, WA 980N-8203 BaniEu. (425) 415-6144 www.esmcivil.com Qeo, kg n. 5 1— _1 0 ‹ cc 3 • a. 0 L. 0 0 CC _I Z Lc o- w cc a. JOB NO. 855-01-990 DWG. NAME: PFG-01 DESIGNED BYDLS/RJC/J DRAWN BY DOA, CHECKED BY REG DATE: 5/22/00 DATE OF PRINT: 5/22/00 OF 8 SHEETS I: \ESM- JOBS \85501990 50 25 1" = 50' 0 50 100 A PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SEC. 16, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., W.M. ■eo:os.Esnx NHEIEI.E!IEI 'UH1117�smoi 11MEl �ItIfIL /in �:-1NOE1' wiurantl DAUB ""s 0 Aptly, ML \X IrURO►'. mom. CWI /121PI at 0Ma4 Del oca a1"" 'N1l tlwatio IR■IN16r11r loriem S uemai ry n I 0 O TJIUIEIYUa3091W ,L 310,111110101 •L 0 OINUnNk calm Umc•,Ra %NED 10 10111C.`(a �7a %MK KCL ::51 `U i601Y. Val: NV WOO SREDIE CONCEPTUAL PLANT LIST SYMBOL . PLANT NAME 0 0 0 1!1!1•1 110111 DECIDUOUS STREET TREE CEI4LIDIFMYLLU1 JAPLNIQ!`I/ KAT&URA TREE 1512112.A DIRCH F11A>(NJ6 OXYCARrA 'RAYUIOOD'/ RAYW000 ASH PYRID CALLERYANA'ARSTOCRAT' FLOWERN6 PCAR CONIFEROUS TREES C11PREee00TTA336 LOYLArDII VEIN= IeLI'MC 4 MIU 0TeU6A MCNZII5II/ DCLL3LAe FIR 714UJA PLICATA UEeTIR4 RED CEDAR TALL SHRUBS (S -1' HT) I5CN.LONIA LAN6LDT1N616 'APPLE 151.Oe50P4 CSCAI.LONIA MYRIcA CALIFo5NICM NOM WAX MYRTLE 16101141A PRAWN P4WTINIA MEDIUM SHRUBS (3 -8' HT)' AZALEA (DECIDUOUS)/ AZALEA ILEX C1I104ATA/ JAPA14Eee HOLLY 1114000DENORON'M'1Y NM 16400001542RON VACCNIIM OVATUM/ EVER711E1N M40KLIDIw G OUNDCOVER A160106TAPHYLLOe WA MX/ KSNICKRNIQC VNCA. MINOR/ PeRIWRKLE SIZE 2 -IA' CAL 2 -I/2• CAL 2.1/2° CAL 2.10. CAL 10' HT IV' HT IC' HT 6 0.41 5 GA1. 6 GA. 21.24• 50.41. 21.24' 6 GAL 4• 1.016 4" POTS CONDITION COMMENTS D 4 a DID D4D 15 4 5 545 545 545 5 4 D /CGNT D 4 D /COT 5 4 D /CENT cONT CENT CENT CCNT OTHER RESTORATION AREA. RESTORE WITH NATIVE PLANT MAMBA. 61MIL4R TO EXI5TN0 VEGETATION . I GAL CONTAINER& AND /OR 40EPLING6 ELOPE RESTORATION AREA AREA TO BE RESTORED W/ 3 TEAR OLD 2.1 SEEDLINGS (15% DOUGLAS FIR 25% WESTERN RED CEDAR), PLANTED AT 41.0' OC, WITH HYDROBEED MIX. MINA.' 21 SEEDLING 612EAT PLANTING. 3' 5EE'141EET 6, TREE RETENTION PLAN FOR EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN AND EXISTING TREES TO OE REMOVED ( TREE REPLACEMENT CALCULATION M6q106E2/ TM! IRPLAceMENT6 AT 11 PO ce TREE REPLACEMENTS TRFI PLANTIN66 POR LOTS (MIN I PER LOT) IO MN. D STREET 11rEI woman TR`ES PROVIDED 10 MN AMPLY Toustane POOR TRCE REPLACEMENTS MINR4M )/WINDER OF 6IEDLN66 241 REWIRED N SLEET 111E6TORATION AREAS EV5R611EIN6 N RESTORATION AIQA 11 TOTAL PROPOSED TREE REPLACEMENTS 216 25' TYP 25' TT 25' T1T 25' ITT Ia. oz. MOM _ c1,L '1 11( 00 IS�i�i+Tl ?a:.Pisl ;i �trn72��; n:, <.'I •'. '0 IncA'. ILI • s1° Fi • • EI Et .t. • yUt • 1 1 _4' —'S-P :E 6 .1 0' ! IAI! III�IIII�IIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIII�IIII�llllf IIII�IIII�IIII�IIIIiIIII�IIII�IIII�IIII�IIII�IIII�IIII�UII�llp�llillllll�lll .11iUl�illllllll�lplllUJ�, REVISIONS NO DESCMPTION /DATE tsv CERTIFICATE a 774 U 1 -1 (O EC W W 7L a 2 W CONSULTING CJ O LANDSCAPE PLAN JOB NO. 555 -01 -990 DWG. NAME: PIA -01 DESIGNED BY) Mad /JMV ORAWN BY: OLS /J CHECKED BY: RE0 /JMV DATE: 5/22/00 DATE OF PRIT: 5/22/00 5 OF 8 SHEETS SM-JOBS\85501990 Secure Capita] 12 \O1- Tukwila PBO \Design \2- 4- 00\PLOTS \PTS- 01.dwg Non Nay 22 11:32:31 2000 NUMBER a- 7REES REQUIRED CALIPER WHIN SENSYME AREA REPLACEMENT INCHES 70 BE REMOVED RA770 4 -8" 25 1:1 8 -12" 29 2:1 12 -18" 26 4:1 18 -24" 6 6:1 >24" , 7 81 ��' -T .i J,, ,. I TTt •�•I.'t;' mil; t:tl .l ml-frnTlr�:-:,.�1; • 0 IN: . r t9v^TrnTf J si"771-7" i E1 UI t:. S-S- Q ,.L t t ,G J 1 10111111111111111111111111111111111llu111111lllllll111111llllll1llllllll1111 11 1111llllll111111lUU11111 llll1lllll 1111111111. 41i0 IPl REVISIONS NO. DESCRIPOON /DATE ny O 2 = m kl 43 TREE RETENTION PLAN / 0 6 yO JOB NO. 555 -01 -990 DWG. NAME: PTS -01 DESIGNED BY: D1.0 DRAWN BY: DIG CHECKED BY: REO DATE: 5/22/00 DATE OF PRINT: 5/22/00 6 OF 8 SHEETS Section 15, Townshi 23, Range 4E, WM ,TYPICAL FRONT ELEVATION BUILDING TYPE "A " - TWO STORY FLAT LOTS 2, 3, 11 *CALF, 1/4'.9'•4" ` ; O Inca ..• �r me "I; 7 i ri'i'1 li lT': "tT.S C flLJ DODO TYPICAL FRONT ELEVATION BUILDING TYPE "G" - "STEPPED GARAGE" LOTS 6,8,9,11,18,15,20,22 BUILDING TYPE "D" • "BASEMENT GARAGE" LOTS 1, 12, 13, 14, IS, 16, 23 OCALEI 1/4"4- 0, COMP05ITE ROOFING WOOD CR VINYL TRIM TYPICAL FRONT ELEVATION BUILDING TYPE "B" - TWO STORY DAYLIGHT BASEMENT. LOTS 4, B, 10, 21 •CALR'I 1/4 "4•0" 1,1 1. 1( IIIIndIUIIIGIInIiI��IIINNIRnhI�IhIIIIJUdluili�iiiNNINNIINIIIIUIuNhnIINNINiIIRN6nIINNIIJnINNI1ndllltlnidlflll �1 _W0p .OR_YIN J 5JP..IN� (.EXTERIOR LIGFiT�1y.G__FI.XTLIRE 0 I /V\ • • Wall luminaires with partial uplIphl. Ole cast aluminum arm, canopy and spun aluminum shade, Three•ply opal glass with screw Pock. Color, Black or while. NOTE: . EXTERIQR LIGFITING�DCTURE •SHQWN.ON..THIB DWG 19. . REPRESENTATIVE ONLY.. . Submitted to the city on 3/26/99. •;P ARID le ej L6!lv1c:t -11 N° 01999 TRIAD ASSOCIATES fJ .WO. NMI WW1 losv TR!AD. ASSOCIATES Project Ruysmnl CIrV benterfai 401 lame* In Vu Pin 40lugs Arcllaolun Ila Data 11111 11111 In. NE Ntgal, IA N034d99 fit 116N1.1111 Yu 1111.1114411 Tel ?no MUM m tdNunaeos BUILDING ELEVATIONS 1J 1 g <KKKK KI<KKK44 It QJBC�f N/NIGER . ROJRGT BURY YOR ��{R�OOJNNRGTQRvR�GIME PROISCT JANDSCAPS ARCRJTICT D1TEI 3/3/99 SCALE; HOER: 1/4'-1= 9127, MOP NOT YILID UNLESS SIGNED AND DITRD JOR N"BKR 97 -223 SUIT RIDER Tor 8 I: \ESH-JOBS \85501990 Secure Capital 12 \O1- Tukwila PHO \Oesign \2 -4 -00 \PLOTS \PLU- 01.dwg Han May 22 11:33:14 2000 A PORTION OF NW 1/4 OF SEC. 15, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 4 E., W.M. _I - �I -- - --� L �n -1�-1 I I-1� I I I __� r__.� -I 1 1 1 1 1 1 III IT-� i 1 1 1 Hill' - -i 1- --1 �-- --I 11 i i i i i 1 1 tr] I i --i 1 L ^� -I L -i l l ," 1 1 1 1 I �1�..LEET 1___L ---- J - LDR s �3otn 1C-1 Ef---711 J I I M '-T- T- T-1`1r 1 r`f-f I I \ L J_J �� NC��� � 11. I I it —�yL1� I � I \rri-ii r - -� �-- t^ u_��J1 - --1 . L1J �� L_ 1 '�_ �A r `II- _- ILL__ -1 _ 1-1�� L -- k] I . __� \--\:::\-\;,\\\\\\ r -- I_ —J - --I EE -I �- 1 1 r-+ NCC I.\ \_1 I _LLLi._ .I r � � \ �c \\I 1h' M l L LIr7i-1 .J— I \ \ 1 1 1 I--I I- .41--- \ %,\ --,� ,,I �-- I-- \\ LL1J 1 \ �_-7 rr- ��\ \ \\,, ., , ' I __� i - �'- - -L- -� r - -A\ \ :L _ I \ 1 I 1 ) ,i { _ J -‘ .o 1- - -- W \ \\ 1 _ _ , \ I I 11-' ..-_-' I 1-----iLl----11 DR\mt ) i le- -- - 1-----1, - -1 r H ‘a.x. 1:::::::•:::::1:;::. ,:::::::.*:A" 1., \\ ___, I________, fI LDR \ / jk /I/ L r- / T -1 —1 h-1 -1 ) ,//_J I - - --I 1 - --I r --- L\ \ \ I - -- 1, .�- `Ir- --1 r --Ir - a -1 F-- — -I r- — -I . k —41- — -1 -� \ :. L__ : 1 i--- I1- --1 I- --I L_.� L_ � I L_ H _ L =JL_J rr C ,— 1� - 1r��rir --rr-1 [\\ _\ - - -1 r --1 r --1 . - --1 I- -1 1 • 1 - 1 f--7.11--71-17-711-771 ■ r ----1 --- 11- --r 11- --r 1 1 1 L_-1 L_JL_J \ - --I r -.7i r --I .. r -� r--1 .1--1,_\ muo . • 1 I- --11 - -1 1-- .-11 - --1 \ \ 1 __J L_J L_J .. L_J L_J \ \ \_______ ..r- r- .1.(-r- - i i---- ,- - --1 - -1 --1. __� 1\ :!\ I-.- r -- H- 'T_-1. • h.7-.-1 -7-71---I -11 \ 1 \\ 1- -_J '1�__. r -� _ -L -- t MDR \ \i 1" = 200' 200 100 0 200 LAND USE LEGEND 400 LDR MDR HDR MUO NCC C /Ll LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I MIXED USE OFf7CE 4 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTER COMMERCIAL uGHT IN7USTRIAL PUBLIC RECREATION NERLAY J AMMO n•NA. 1/111°. si Di"-Ii LI :I:.(. UI 0: r L,_ S ....5 `i F. L I . •o ' .I ndlili6n111inlnnh111111lllRIIIUIII g1111111111111111111111111111111111111OII1111111111110111111111dIIIIIfith IIpI111I11111gIRBl. ?I REVISIONS NO. DescRiFT ON /DATE BY cn t. 14. 7:n3 W U ua PROJECT J 1— 0 U JOB NO. 855 -01 -090 DWG. NAME: PLU -01 DESIGNED BY OIS DRAWN BY: DLS CHECKED BY REO DATE: 5/22/00 DATE OF PRINT: 5/22/00 8 OF 8 SHEETS