HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-15-87 - BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS - MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTELMARRIOTT
COURTYARD HOTEL
THREE -STORY HOTEL WITH
RESTAURANT & LOUNGE
ANDOVER PARK WEST &
STRANDER BLVD.
EPIC -15 -87
WAC 197 -11 -970
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of Proposal Construct a three -story hotel with 82,070 s.f., 149 guestrooms
two meeting rooms, restaurant and lounge. Project site is approximately 4.4 acres.
Cooperative Parking Agreement approved (87- 4 -SPE).
Proponent
Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Location of Proposal, including street address, if any On the east side of Andover Pk. West;
650 feet south of Strander Blvd. in S.E. of Section 26, Township 23N, Range 4E.
Tukwila, WA.
Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -15 -87
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it 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.
[i There is no comment period for this DNS
L[ This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by
. The lead agency will not act on this
proposal for 15 days from the date below.
Responsible Official Rick Beeler
Position /Title Plannirig Director
Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tuk il-a
Date
7727 Signature
Phone 433 -1845
„i110011::
Aff',WP"
You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter.
Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written
appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be
required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal.
Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and
Planning Department.
FM.DNS
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
C,
EPIC EPIC -15 -87
FILE
TO: 1 BLDG j] PLNG n P.W. n FIRE [j POLICE , P & R
PROJECT MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
LOCATION Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. Tukwila FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 7 -15 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 7 -22 -87
Vernon Umetsu RESPONSE RECEIVED
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
DATE � �1j COMMENTS PREPARED BY ,--_--
C.P.S. Form 11
CITY OF TUKWILA
• •
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC EPIC -15 -87
FILE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: n BLDG ri PLNG (i P.W. n FIRE gi POLICE n P & R
PROJECT MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
LOCATION Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. Tukwila
DATE TRANSMITTED 7 -15 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR Vernon Umetsu
FILE NO.
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 7 -22 -87
RESPONSE RECEIVED 7 -�Lo -yy
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
DATE � p r �' 7 COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
III CN
EPIC EPIC -15 -87
FILE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: 0 BLDG ri PLNG n P.W. 02 FIRE n POLICE Q P & R
PROJECT MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
LOCATION Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. Tukwila FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 7 -15 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR Vernon Umetsu
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 7 -22 -87
RESPONSE RECEIVED
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
J WITHOUT COMMENTS.
L.] AS NOTED IN P: =7
' U r'tK- IHE ATTACHED LETTER
s� G T i lAaa hereto have been
^dewed and accepted by the City of
Fires Il., .�
�r ('visions toijA „'•`"'`funs, deletions •
fat J se drawings after this
will void this a��,.,} -._
a resubmittal of revised ,. drawings,
Fi:l I arran +.n,.
inspection by field -
y a representative of tills
deb;.,: rtrr,ent
9
DATE: — .. ....
.............. ...............................
CITY OF TUK -VILA
DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
•
CN•
EPIC EPIC -15 -87
FILE
Vuvt... i ( .
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: ED BLDG PLNG 0 P.W. ri FIRE n POLICE n P & R
PROJECT MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
LOCATION Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. Tukwila FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 7 -15 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR Vernon Umetsu
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY
RESPONSE RECEIVED
7 -22 -87
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING CQMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMMENT
/V0 coke'V7
DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
CITY OF TUKWILA
CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM
CN•
EPIC EPIC -15 -87
FILE
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM:
TO: I4 BLDG ji PLNG { P.W. El FIRE 0 POLICE n P & R
PROJECT MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
LOCATION Andover Park West and Strander Blvd. Tukwila FILE NO.
DATE TRANSMITTED 7 -15 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 7 -22 -87
STAFF COORDINATOR Vernon Umetsu RESPONSE RECEIVED
THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE
REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD
DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART-
MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH
CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE
MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM.
ITEM COMM NT
DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY
C.P.S. Form 11
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC..
TO
"Land Planning, Survey, and Design Specialists"
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Mr. Vernon Umetsu
Associate Planner
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
Date 7/15/87
JUL 1.5 1987
PLANNING DEPT.
Job No ?310.
Attention
RE: 8 1/2" x 11" PMT of Site Plan,
Grading, and Elevations '
WE ARE SENDING YOU
❑ Original Drawings J Prints ❑Sepias ❑ Samples
❑ Specifications DCopy of Letter DOther
Copies
Date
Description
1
7/15/87
8 1/2" x 11" PMT of the Site Plan
1
7/15/87
8 1/2" x 11" Xerox/copy of Exterior Elevations
1
7/15/87
8 1/2" x 11" PMT of Grading and Drainage
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
❑For approval ❑Approved as submitted
n For your use ❑Approved as noted
® As requested ❑Return for. correction
❑ For your review and comment ❑Other
REMARKS Vernon:
❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ Return corrected prints
Here are the PMT copies you requested for the SEPA review.
COPY TO: Ms. Marianne Ramey. P.E.
GOF.67
Marriott Corporation
SIGNED:
As
/
.W�A110/ii. ap/,/,
%
aePot
Barghausej onsulting Engineers
6625 South 190th, #102 • Kent, Washington 98032 • (206) 872 -5522
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
"Land Planning, Survey, and Design Specialists"
July 13, 1987
Mr. Vernon Umetsu
Associate Planner
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
LUL 1 8 1987
CITY OF 1'LiK
PLANNING DEPT.
RE: Environmental Checklist for Marriott Courtyard Hotel Located at Andover Park
West and Strander Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington
Our Job No. 2310
Dear Vernon:
I am enclosing for the City's review an Environmental Determination, the
following information:
1. One original and five copies of the Environmental Checklist per City of
Tukwila specifications and standards.
2. One check in the amount of $100 made payable to the City of Tukwila.
Please note that I have included for reference the traffic impact analysis by
David Hamlin & Associates and soil report by Rittenhouse /Zeman & Associates for the
above mentioned project. Please review this information and contact our office as soon
as you have made a determination. The checklist provides expanded information for a
SEPA determination, and therefore, our office will assume an expedient review. If you
have any further questions or need additional copies, please contact our office. Thank
you.
G. Way' 'otter
Project t ner
GWP /bb
C256.40
enc: As Noted
cc: Ms. Marianne Ramey, The Marriott Corporation (w /enc)
Mr. Dana B. Mower, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Mr. Will Wolfert, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
6625 South 190th, #102 • Kent, Washington 98032 • (206) 872 -5522
MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Environmental Checklist
(City of Tukwila Format)
2. Vicinity Map
3. Area Map
4. Technical Information
A. Traffic Study
B. Soil Report
2310.07
V-) [E] II
•
ja 'J.. 3 1987
DEPT.
Job No. 2310
Control No.
Epic File No. EP►C-
Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 302</
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Marriott Courtyard Hotel
2. Name of applicant: Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Wayne Potter
6625 South 190th Street, Suite 102, Kent, WA 98032
7 -/3 -Y7
4. Date checklist prepared: July 1, 1987
5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
"Sep Attached Addendum" for remaining questions_
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will
be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not
need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete
description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be
summarized here.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if
any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over
a range of area, provide the range or.boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal
description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably
available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica-
tions related to this checklist.
13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land
Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive?
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat,
rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate
percent slope)?
c. What general types of soils are found on the site
(for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If
you know the classification of agricultural soils,
specify them and note any prime farmland.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable
soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti-
ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate
source of fill.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing,
construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)?
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the
immediate vicinity of the site (including year -
round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes,
ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and
provide names. If appropriate, state what
stream or river it flows into.
-5-
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or
adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach
available plans.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material
that would be placed in or removed from surface
water or wetlands and indicate the area of the
site that would. be affected. Indicate the
source of fill material.
4) Will the proposal require surface water
withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quan-
tities, if known.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year
floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of
waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated
volume of discharge.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be
discharged to ground water? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quan-
tities, if known.
2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged
into the ground from septic tanks or other sour-
ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
industrial, containing the following
chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the
general size of the system, the number of such
systems, the number of houses to be served (if
applicable), or the number of animals or humans
the system(s) are expected to serve.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm
water) and method of collection and disposal, if
any (include quantities, if known). Where will
this water flow? Will this water flow into
other waters? If so, describe.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface
waters? If so, generally describe.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface,
ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the
site:
_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
_ grass
pasture
_ crop or grain
_ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush,
skunk cabbage, other
_ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed
or altered?
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on
or near the site.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other
measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the
site, if any:
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been
observed on or near the site or are known to be on
or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bas, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,
other:
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to
be on or near the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,
explain.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife,
if any:
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil,
wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether
it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar
energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are
included in the plans of this proposal? List other
proposed measures to reduce or control energy
impacts, if any:
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards,
including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire
and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? If so,
describe.
1) Describe special emergency services that might
be required.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ-
mental health hazards, if any:
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may
affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
2) What types and levels of noise would be created
by or associated with the project on a short-
term or a long -term basis (for example: traf-
fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate
what hours noise would come from the site.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise
impacts, if any:
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent
properties?
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so,
describe.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e. What is the current zoning classification of the
site?
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation
of the site?
If applicable, what is the current shoreline master
program designation of the site?
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an
"environmentally sensitive" Srea? If so, specify.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work
in the completed project?
j. Approximately how many people would the completed
project displace?
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement
impacts, if any:
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com-
patible with existing and projected land uses and
plans, if any:
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if
any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income
housing?
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli-
minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low -
income housing.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing
impacts, if any:
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed
structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be
altered or obstructed?
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic
impacts, if any:
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro-
posed for, national, state, or local preservation
registers known to be on or next to the site? If
so, generally describe.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of
historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural
importance known to be on or next to the site.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if
any:
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the
site, and describe proposed accss to the existing
street system. Show on site plans, if any.
. Is the site currently served by public transit? If
not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest
transit stop?
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project
have? How many would the project eliminate?
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets,
or improvements to existing roads or streets, not
including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate
vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If
so, generally describe.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated
by the completed project? If known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor-
tation impacts, if any:
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for
public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, health care, schools, other)? If
so, generally describe.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct
impacts on public services, if any.
Evaluation for
Agency Use Only
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the
project, the utility providing the service, and the
general construction activities on the site or in
the immediate vicinity which might be needed.
C. Signature
The above answers are true and complete to the best of
my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency
relying on them to -ke s decision.
Signature:
Date Submitted:
is
PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ADDENDUM
FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA
FOR THE MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
MARRIOTT JOB NO. C870
JOB NO. 2310
6 The proposed timing for this project will be to submit technical
drawings to receive approvals within the next several months and apply
for building permits soon thereafter. The Marriott Corporation plans
to begin construction in August or September of this year and complete
the project in 1988.
7 No.
8. The following information has been prepared directly relating to this
proposal.
a. The Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Report
dated January 1987, prepared by Rittenhouse /Zeman & Associates.
b. Traffic Impact Analysis dated April 1987, prepared by David Hamlin
& Associates for The Marriott Corporation.
9. Not to our knowledge.
10. The following governmental approvals and /or permits will be needed.
a. Public Works approvals regarding off - street improvements, sewer,
water, sanitary storm, and site plan.
b. Building permit.
c. Cooperative parking agreement.
11. The Courtyard Hotel proposed by The Marriott Corporation for this
site, is a new concept in the hotel industry. This facility is
intended to accommodate the needs of the business traveller rather
than the general public. The Courtyard Hotel has approximately 149
rooms, a 50 seat coffee shop, two meeting rooms for guests only, and a
lounge (or quite area) of approximately 40 seats. The coffee shop is
not advertised (on the signage) and the lounge area is not the tradi-
tional bar, but a living room style seating area.
2310.06 -1-
The building area for the proposed hotel is broken down by the
following:
a. Guest rooms (149 rooms) 68,775 square feet
(approx. 11,462.5 square feet
per floor)
b. Public space area 10,935 square feet
c. Pool and spa area 2.360 square feet
Approximate total area 82,070 square feet
Please note that these figures are approximate, however, they will
be finalized once the architectural plans are completed.
The site is an irregularly shaped, located on the east side of Andover
Park West, just north of the existing UPS terminal and south of
Strander Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington. The property extends
approximately 609 feet along Andover Park West and approximately 376
feet deep east of Andover Park West. Please note that the east
property line, southeast corner and south property lines are abutting
an existing railroad line.
12 The proposed site is located on the east side of Andover Park West,
north of the existing UPS terminal and south of Strander Boulevard in
Tukwila, Washington (please see vicinity map). The property is a
portion of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter and the
northeast quarter /southeaster quarter of Section 26, Township 23 North,
Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. The site is approximately 4.4
acres in size and is zoned C -2 (Regional Retail Business).
13. No.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. Flat
b. The steepest slope on the site is approximately two percent.
c. Please see Geotechnical Report prepared by Rittenhouse /Zeman &
Associates, dated January 1987.
d. Please see attached Geotechnical Report.
e. Approximately 20,000 cy of soil will be imported on site from local
borrow pits. Fill will raise grades on site to approximately elevation
25 -26 above mean sea level per city requirements.
2310.06 -2-
un,, IL
4
16TH •
H ST
ST
11-
TH
_
<
z i
SW 19L
miST
cn -,
1
13
Mil• 23R
c5„E,_- :-.,1',,,,IT-:-'
. s
i:.
c., ..,
:0.j 52:73{8fV4,
SI
S2
711' Pt 0::::4;He •
ei.
41., 9 —
30TH
f:0" ST S 3IST
CT
3c
x
3
68TH
S 167TH ST
ST
SETH LN I I
70" ST
182ND '
ILE 1:4_ _Sr.
> ul
tg S
I31S1 2
IT 16p
Se 170TH ST
IS 172ND ST
EMERGENCY
CENTER
18.1111 T
PeigsAy_o QR
C--±"-IktrEP-PR
183H
1
...... ST I/
1>w
S I14TH ST
• 1
s
ST \ g
V13;1"
0
179TH
si7ITTI -ST
SE...173R Si
F
76 TS T
• >
a
SE 179TH PL
s
SE Isom Pi.F711.,
SE IS
SE '1LT
o- JaIRO
- SE PL
S 184 TH $
VALLV
h.CDGEc°
, 166TH t<ST
S 45TH
t 1913TH T
tlJ
SE 186TH
SE 187TH STI
S 188TH ST
z
1%1T14 ST
I lo
I :gj
IO
SE 190TH STI
SE 1 TH
1—
0
• '8C31 Ci• f: SE
2164n4
e`c ST
4, SE 1136TH et
1
194TH
NNO ST
194TH ST
1./)
TH
189TH
I9OTH $T,,,
R1_
z
SE-1927410-
ST
S 192NO
ST
r
I
ti)
S 19 T T
I ,
198Tk< S
SE 194TH SE 194TH P
19574
Pl.
SE 196TH ST
N63
U6Ef
STRANDER
638.955
ilvT--Y OF SEATTLE
17. 74 Ac.
1CORPORA;T -E -1
.19.7
+-- �--6I3 3i
NO..o C2.
60
0
u
•
1
,
-f � -vs- --1 N..: -
/o:Urur ESML 27 Z I 16' 1 ur?Urr t•SM
-- SSB97-- G - - - - -- - -, 1�
BLVD.
12.
Ja ism
/ . c %' I
A.
n/ ay l'' // ' I li
4 �/ / 1
�1' / 2. i r
/ /� ♦ I I
4/
(1'‘
1b
TL.SITE
1
PUGET W- O3TERN INC
3.14 Ac.
TL. 6
a.
•
A
tn
M
4
QR
�1 - - - -' 'IS94J -_ -.
R•, R R I N O � I
NDOWER,a
5,„„0f -6 ,NC J
1 II
60l.
•
�I - - -)
a P. /
LN °oPjOP4PL Co '/
PtlC' 401 /
OS 5
PARK /
II
77 -14 -SS
1
,� i 555�1iGES
1
I 56
zj �tE' � 545
o
c , -'-
I 1- L
0 g �I 575 1
B r I
1 r 565 I. 0 s' T H `C • - -E- -N-
- - -
,!
'
CORPORATE ; OR. N. ;
�y 'J
•
/ 1 510
\ I
1520
1 1
(8)
550
O
P4 R 1( / N G
- 518 Ac.
rC 94
:f• SAN SErre. EJnr.
6 c`
�p.1'
s
p�rEa 455
486 .
PAp� „vG
?Mal- -/i
AREA MAP
TUKWILA, WASHI
Ni
GTON
a6
P °1
QA1 ON
COppO
f. Erosion could occur as a result of clearing of this site during the
construction phases of this project. The site would be cleared of all
organic and vegetative materials during the site grading. However, a
complete engineering design for temporary erosion and sedimentation
control facilities will be prepared and approved by the City of Tukwila
prior to proceeding with grading operations.
g. Approximately 80 to 90 percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after the project is completed. The reviewer will
note that this is conformance with existing city zoning code.
Approximately 55 percent will be building coverage, 35 percent parking,
and 10 percent landscaping.
h. The proposed measures to reduce or control erosion for the site may
include the construction of mirafi silt fences, temporary erosion and
sedimentation control plans, temporary conveyance ditches, as well as
rock check dams during the construction phases of this project, if
applicable. These measures are recognized as an adopted acceptable
construction methods as related to temporary erosion and siltation
control for projects of this size. The reviewer will note that these
measures to reduce possible erosion will be consistent with design
standards of the City of Tukwila Public Works Department regarding
erosion control measures.
2. Air
a. The primary source of emissions during the construction phase of this
project will consist of diesel /construction equipment exhaust typically
associated with construction. However, the emissions would be
temporary in nature and in our opinion, would not have any lasting or
harmful affects on adjacent communities.
Aside from construction vehicle emissions, a certain amount of dust
could be anticipated during the construction phase of the project.
Dust particles could be induced into the atmosphere which would be air
borne during the normal operation of construction vehicles. However,
potential dusting problems could be controlled by watering various
areas of the site during construction.
Once the project is completed, the primary source of emissions would be
from automobile exhaust particularly during hours of peak use of the
hotel. However, again, we anticipate that these emissions would be
insignificant relative to human health and safety.
b. Currently, the surrounding properties of
typical emissions to the air (i.e. dust,
exhaust, and possible industrial smoke).
that these sources of emissions will not
2310.06 -3-
the proposed project introduce
vehicle odors, vehicle
However, it is our opinion,
adversely affect the proposal.
c. The proposed measures to control emissions or other impacts during
construction will include the watering of the site, as necessary, to
reduce air borne dust particles. Emissions of construction vehicle
equipment will be on a short -term basis, however, vehicular emissions
will remain on a permanent basis, yet they are not anticipated to be at
a significant level.
3. Water
a. Surface
1) Not to our knowledge.
2) No
3) N/A
4) The proposed development will not require surface water with-
drawals or diversions. The existing storm drainage patterns in
the area will be preserved and the existing storm drainage runoff
rates will be maintained through the construction of detention
systems currently required by the City of Tukwila.
Landscape irrigation will be accommodated through the use of
sprinkler systems characteristic of this type of development.
5) Yes, a portion of the flood fringe, will be filled which is
authorized by FEMA at the city. The published 100 flood elevation
is 23.0 per FEMA. However, due to flood characteristics of the
area, the city has required a minimum building elevation of 24.0.
6) No. The proposed Marriott Hotel will be utilizing the existing fl-
inch sanitary sewer line along Andover Park West. Therefore, the
proposal does not involve any discharges of waste material into
surface waters.
b. Ground
1) Not to our knowledge.
2) Because the proposed hotel will be connected directly into the
sanitary sewer system, domestic sewage, industrial waste, and
chemicals will not be discharged into the existing ground aquifer.
c. Water Runoff (including stormwater):
1) Surface runoff resulting from storm drainage will be collected in
a catch basin /pipe conveyance system typically associated with
this type of development. In addition, a standard City of Tukwila
detention pipe /pond will be constructed on the project to limit
the post development discharge rate to that of the predevelopment
2310.06 -4-
site. The detention pipe for the proposed project is 180 lineal
feet of 72 -inch cmp.
The stormwater flow patterns will be drained away from the
proposed hotel and channeled down the centerline of perimeter
roads and collected by catch basins located at specific points
(please see grading and storm drainage plan). The storm drainage
then will be conveyed directly to the detention pipe and disch-
arged to the existing catch basin along Andover Park West.
2) Due to the construction of city approved oil /water separator catch
basins, waste materials would not enter either the ground or
surface waters.
d. The proposed measures to reduce or control surface and ground water
runoff impacts are indicated as above. The systems will be designed in
accordance with the City of Tukwila design criteria in order to limit
the post development discharge rate to that of the predeveloped site.
4. Plants
a. Existing types of vegetation found on the site mainly consist of shrubs
and various wild grasses. The site has been previously cleared, and
therefore, the vegetation is of minimal importance.
b. The majority of the existing vegetation on the property will be
removed. However, a complete landscape plan will be designed for the
project in conformance with current City of Tukwila zoning criteria.
Therefore, the finished project will be much more aesthetically
pleasing which will include ornamental trees, shrubs, and grasses.
c. None to our knowledge.
d. The proposed project, as stated earlier, will incorporate various
deciduous, evergreen trees, various ornamental shrubs, and sod. The
landscape plan will be designed in accordance with all of the City of
Tukwila zoning ordinances.
5. Animals
a. The primary animal types found on or near the site are various song-
birds and small rodents.
b. None to our knowledge.
c. None to our knowledge.
d. Because existing property does not serve as a significant habitat for
animal life, no preservation measures are proposed.
2310.06 -5-
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. The completed project will require mainly electricity and natural gas
on an on going basis to service lodging for the business traveller.
b. Not to our knowledge. Because the building will be approximately 42 to
43 feet in height and also considering the fact that the hotel will be
located a significant distance away from the property lines, the
affects to adjacent properties in regard to solar energy access are not
anticipated.
c. The proposed energy conservation features included in the project will
consist of insulation of general construction standards as per the
State of Washington Energy Code.
7. Environmental Health
a. Due to the nature of the proposed development, health hazards as a
result of exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion,
etc., are not anticipated.
1) Emergency services required would include those normally
associated with construction activities of wood frame structures.
2) None are proposed.
b. Noise
1) The proposed project is located adjacent to Andover Park West
which will be the major source of noise in the area aside from the
air traffic as generated by the Seattle - Tacoma International
Airport. Additionally, the project is abuts a railroad tracks to
the east, which will create train noise during certain periods of
the day. However, the adjacent traffic noise and train noise
generated by Andover Park West and adjacent tracks will not have
harmful affects to the proposed development.
2) The short term noise levels that will consist of construction
vehicles for a period of several months. However, the long term
noise levels will consist of those normally associated with
pedestrian and automobiles in and around commercial developments.
However, these impacts; in our opinion, would be negligible due to
the relative intensity of traffic noise generated from the
adjacent Andover Park West and railroad traffic.
3) None are proposed.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. Vacant
2310.06 -6-
b. Not to our knowledge.
c. The site is currently vacant.
d. No.
e. The current zoning is C -2 (Regional Retail Business).
f. The comprehensive plan designation is commercial.
g. Not applicable.
h. No.
i. Approximately 40 employees will work in the completed project.
Additionally, there will 149 units available for overnight lodging for
business travellers.
J•
None.
k. Not applicable.
1. Clearly, due to the proximity of the site, the project is compatible
with existing and projected land uses in the area. Again, the proposed
development is in conformance with existing City of Tukwila policies
with regard to business and commercial developments in the area.
9. Housing
a. The project will provide 149 units for overnight lodging of business
travellers. Additionally, there will be a small lounge and restaurant
provided for customers lodging in the facility.
b. The hotel will include approximately 140 guestrooms which will be
targeted for the middle income hotel patron.
c. The proposed project will reduce the need of overnight lodging for
business travellers within the area. Clearly, the surrounding land
uses and business development will benefit from the proposal.
10. Aesthetics
a. The approximate height of the proposal at the highest point will be
approximately 43 feet. Additionally, the principle exterior building
surface will be concrete plaster.
b. There are no significant views in the immediate vicinities which would
be altered or obstructed due to this development. Currently, the
surrounding properties are developed for commercial and business uses
which do not produce substantial views.
2310.06 -7-
c. The final grades of the proposed project will be adjusted in order to
maintain an aesthetically pleasing affect relative to the adjacent site
grades.
11. Light and Glare
a. Light and glare will result from the project during evening hours,
which is typical of this type of development. The light and glare
will result from parking lot lighting, individual room lighting, and
lighting of the hotel itself. However, individual units will cause
minimal lighting during various hours throughout the day.
b. Not to our knowledge.
c. None to our knowledge.
d. Proposed measures to control lighting impacts for the proposed develop-
ment include lighting which could be adjusted on an aerial basis and
the use of reflectors to force light inwardly toward the development.
The reflectors would guard against stray light adversely affecting
adjacent properties.
Additionally, light generated from the individual units themselves
would be mitigated through the use of curtains and /or blinds to control
stray light or glare.
12. Recreation
a. There are approximately two parks within a mile of the proposed
project. Bicentennial Park and Christianson Greenbelt Park are situated
along the Green River and within easy access.
b. No.
c. None are proposed.
13. Historical and Cultural Preservation
a. None to our knowledge.
b. None to our knowledge.
c. None are proposed.
14. Transportation
a. The proposed site will utilize access from two curb cuts along Andover
Park West. These locations are at the northwest and southwest corners
of the site. However, the City of Tukwila anticipates the construction
of Treck Drive along the southerly property line in the near future
(approximately 5 years). Therefore, the northwest access will be
2310.06 -8-
eliminated and access will be from the proposed Treck Drive once
completed.
b. The site is served by public transit (METRO) which is available
immediately adjacent to the project.
c. The proposed site will provide 172 parking stalls (119 standards, 49
compact, and 4 barrier free). The reviewer will note that The Marriott
Corporation will be pursuing a cooperate parking agreement with the
City.
d. Please reference the enclosed Traffic Report prepared by David Hamlin &
Associates, dated April 1987.
To summarize the results of this study, the intersection of Strander
Boulevard and Andover Park West indicates that the level of service
will decrease over the next two years with or without the proposed
hotel. The additional trips from the Marriott Courtyard Hotel would at
a very small percentage of trips to the intersection volumes. The
addition of left turn storage lanes on the north and south legs would
provide a higher level of service at the intersection and will be need
wether or not the Marriott facility is developed. The number of trips
into and out of the site will be able to operate efficiently without
any additional facility such as a two -way left turn lane along the site
frontage. Additional 6.5 feet of right -of -way will be dedicated along
Strander Boulevard and a 17.22 -foot landscape area will be incorporated
along the north property line to minimize disruption to the property of
Treck Drive is extended in the futures.
e. No, not to our knowledge.
f. See attached Traffic Impact Analysis.
g. See attached Traffic Impact Analysis.
15. Public Services
a. Yes, all types of public service normally associated with this type of
development would need to be increased. This would primarily include
increased fire protection and police protection. Additionally, health
care, schools, etc., which are normally associated with population
increased would not be increased in need because of the proposed
Marriott Courtyard Hotel.
b. Clearly, the proposal would increase the tax base for the county in
this area significantly. These additional funds would be utilized to
expand existing fire protection, police protection, etc. Services as
necessary to adequately serve this project and surrounding communities.
2310.06 -9-
16. Utilities
a. The following utilities currently are available at the site,
electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, and
sanitary sewer.
b. The utilities that are proposed for the project and the purveyor
providing the service are as
follows:
1) Sanitary sewer /City of Tukwila
2) Water /City of Tukwila
3) Natural gas/Washington Natural Gas
4) Electricity /Puget Power
5) Telephone /Pacific Northwest Bell
C. Signature
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I under-
stand that the 11 d -:ency is relyi on them to make its decision
77717 %7
Date
Signature:
2310.06 -10-
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
MARRIOTT COURTYARD - SOUTHCENTER
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
APRIL 1987
DAVID I. HAMLIN AND ASSOCIATES
1606 8TH AVENUE NORTH
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98109
(206) 281 -8111
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
a) Transportation System
b) Traffic Volume
c) Level of Service
4. FUTURE CONDITIONS /DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
a) Traffic Volumes
b) Trip Generation
c) Trip Distribution
d) Level of Service
e) Site Access
5. TRAFFIC IMPACTS /MITIGATION
6. CONCLUSIONS /RECOMMENDATIONS
FIGURE 1:
FIGURE 2:
FIGURE 3:
FIGURE 4:
FIGURE 5:
FIGURE 6:
FIGURE 7:
FIGURE 8:
TABLE 1:
TABLE 2:
TABLE 3:
TABLE 4:
TABLE 5:
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1
1
3
3
3
3
6
6
6
8
8
11
11
15
Page
VICINITY MAP 2
CITY OF TUKWILA AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 4
1987 PEAK HOUR VOLUMES - STRANDER BLVD./
ANDOVER PARK WEST 5
ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE 9
ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR TRIP DISTRIBUTION 10
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOURS VOLUMES W /OUT
DEVELOPMENT - STRANDER BLVD: /ANDOVER PARK
WEST 12
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VOLUMES W/
DEVELOPMENT - STRANDER BLVD. /ANDOVER PARK
WEST 13
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VOLUMES - ANDOVER
PARK WEST /MARRIOTT ENTRANCE 14
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TRIP GENERATION - MARRIOTT COURTYARD 7
TRIP GENERATION RATES - MARRIOTT COURTYARDS 7
TRIP GENERATION. - REVISED 8
LEVEL OF SERVICE 11
LEVEL OF SERVICE - MODIFIED 15
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
MARRIOTT COURTYARD - SOUTHCENTER
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
1. INTRODUCTION
The study which follows has been undertaken to identify and
analyze the traffic impacts which can be expected from the
development of the Marriott Courtyard - Southcenter in the
City of Tukwila, Washington. City Staff has requested that
special emphasis be placed on the intersection of Andover
Park West at Strander Blvd. as part of the analysis. It is
the intent of this study to determine the existing level of
service at this intersection and the future level of service
with and without the proposed development.
Much of the information presented in this report will use
previous documentation prepared for the Marriott Corporation
regarding the trip generation rates for an establishment of
this type. These studies were conducted using the Marriott
Courtyard facilities in Atlanta.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Marriott Courtyard - Southcenter is located on
the east side of Andover Park West south of Strander Blvd. in
the City of Tukwila. (See Figure 1.) The proposed project
lies on approximately 4.4 acres of land upon which a three -
story hotel containing 149 guestrooms will be built. The
property is currently zoned "C -2 ", regional retail business.
The project lies in an area of intense commercial /office
development. Southcenter shopping center is located to the
northwest of the site between Andover Park West and
Southcenter Pkwy. Several other smaller shopping
centers /areas can also be found along Southcenter Pkwy.
Longacres Race Track (which falls within the city limits of
Renton) is located approximately one mile to the northeast of
the site.
The Marriott Courtyard differs from traditional hotels by
catering to the needs of the business traveler rather than
the general public. The hotel does not offer the traditional
,banquet /convention facilities found in hotels nor the
restaurant /lounge facilities which attract the general
public. A small coffee shop and lounge are offered for use
by the hotel guests. The hotel seems to operate in some
respects similarly to a motel, with the exception that many
of the guests use limousine or taxi service as their mode of
transportation.
1
VICINITY MAP
FIGURE 1
2
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
,a) Transportation System - Several multi - laned streets lie
within close proximity of the proposed development, including
Andover Park West, from which the site will receive direct
access. Andover Park West is a north -south four -lane roadway
with curb, gutter, and sidewalk along most sections of it.
Andover Park West intersects Strander Blvd. north of the
site. This intersection is signal controlled and operates
with six phases. Strander Blvd. is a five -lane roadway
consisting of two through lanes in each direction plus a
left -turn or two -way left -turn lane. Strander Blvd. connects
Southcenter Blvd. with West Valley Highway.
b) Traffic Volume - The traffic volumes for streets in the
area were obtained from the City of Tukwila. Figure 2 shows
the estimated traffic volumes for the City for 1987. It can
be seen from the figure that the highest volumes are
occurring adjacent to Southcenter shopping center, which is
to be expected.
Twenty -four hour mechanical traffic counts were available'
from the City of Tukwila which were conducted in December of
1985 along Strander Blvd. west of Andover Park West and on
Andover Park West at Tukwila Pond. These counts were used to
determine the peak hours of traffic at the intersection of
Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West. It was found from
these counts that the peak hours of traffic occurred at
approximately 11:00 A.M. -12:00 (noon) and from 2:45 -3:45 P.M.
rather than the typical peak hours of 7:00 -8:00 A.M. and
5:00 -6:00 P.M. This is most likely due to the proximity of
the intersection to Southcenter shopping center and the
effect that it has on the peak traffic hours. Generally, the
peak hours of a shopping center are not the same as the peak
hours for the general motoring public.
Manual traffic counts were conducted at the intersection of
Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West on Thursday, March 19,
1987 as part of this report. These volumes are shown on
Figure 3. It can be seen from the figure that the higher
volume hour occurs from 11:30 AM -12:30 PM.
c) Level of Service - A capacity analysis was conducted at
the intersection of Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West for
the existing conditions to determine the "level of service ".
"Level of service" is a common term used in the Traffic
Engineering profession which is defined as a qualitative
measure describing operational conditions within a traffic
stream, and its perception by motorists and /or passengers.
These conditions are usually described in terms of such
factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver,
traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety.
Six levels of service are designated, ranging from A to F,
with level of service "A" representing the best operating
conditions and level of service "F" the worst.
3
4
NOON PEAK HOUR
14510
15 o'Z
PM PEAK HOUR
"3
1013
4—
1Zo
720
231
34.
•
b9%
12542
I4
Zlb
ISA 313
Hz
387.
9b
32.1 b tol
988
Strander Blvd.
32
•
NORTH
Strander Blvd.
S°1Z.
IH
1987 PEAK HOUR VOLUMES - STRANDER BLVD. /ANDOVER PARK WEST
FIGURE 3
5
Calculations for the level of service were conducted using
the computer program CAPCALC '85, by Roger Creighton and
Associates, Inc., which is based on the 1985 Highway Capacity
Manual, Special Report 209. The results of the capacity
analysis for the existing volumes shown on Figure 3, indicate
the intersection of Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West is
currently operating at level of service "D" during the noon
peak hour and level of service "C" during the PM peak hour.
4. FUTURE CONDITIONS /DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
a) Traffic Volumes - The traffic volumes in the area of the
proposed site are expected to continue to grow for several
years until such time that all available land in the area has
been developed. A comparison of counts conducted in February
of 19.84 and December of 1985 on Strander Blvd. (west leg) and
Andover Park West (north leg) indicated that the volume at
these two locations had grown 25 -35% per year. The data used
for this comparison was quite limited and this high growth
rate is not a realistic rate.
A discussion with City of Tukwila staff indicated that the
traffic volume growth along Southcenter Parkway over several
years had recently been reviewed and was found to be in the
range of 5% per year. It is reasonable to assume that the
traffic volumes in the vicinity of the intersection of
Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West would be at least 5% due
to the close proximity to Southcenter Parkway. It was
decided that an 8% growth factor would be used for this
report in order to be conservative and allow for heavier
growth in the area.
b) Trip Generation - In order to assess the traffic related
impacts which will result from a particular development, it
is necessary to predict the number of trips that will be
generated by the proposed development. The ITE Trip
Generation Manual, published by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 1976, is normally used for
estimating the trips which will be attributed to a new
development, if no site specific data is available. Land Use
Code 310, Hotel, is the closest designation for the proposed
development at this time. Table 1 shows the trip generation
rates and total trips which could be expected by the proposed
development based on ITE trip generation rates.
6
TABLE 1
TRIP GENERATION*
MARRIOTT COURTYARD
149 GUESTROOMS
Trip Rate Total
Period /Room Trips
Daily 10.50 1564
AM Enter 0.58 86
Exit 0.29 43
Total 0.87 129
PM Enter 0.36 54
Exit 0.37 55
Total 0.73 109
* ITE trip generation rates.
As mentioned earlier, the Marriott Courtyard is a new concept
in the lodging industry and does not have the traditional
trip generation characteristics associated with hotels which
provide banquet or convention facilities. If one examines
the ITE trip rates in Table 1, it can be seen that there is a
fairly high trip rate entering the site during the AM peak
hour. This would normally be associated with a convention/
seminar type of operation.
The traffic studies conducted in the Atlanta area for four
Marriott Courtyard facilities produced trip generation rates
for the AM, noon, and PM peak hours. The studies was
conducted in June of 1984 and updated in February and October
of 1985.
The following trip rates per occupied room were averaged from
the study:
TABLE 2
TRIP GENERATION RATES - MARRIOTT COURTYARDS
AM Peak Hour Noon Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Enter 0.18 0.17 0.18
Exit 0.28 0.15 0.14
Total 0.46 0.32 0.32 6.10
It can be seen from a comparison of the two tables that the
trip generation rates for the courtyard facilities are
considerably lower than the traditional hotel rates due to
the lack of banquet and convention facilities. The revised
trip generation table would be as follows:
7
TABLE 3
TRIP GENERATION - REVISED*
MARRIOTT COURTYARD
149 GUESTROOMS
Trip Rate Total
Period /Room Trips
Daily 6.10 909
AM Enter 0.18 27
Exit 0.28. 42
Total 0.46 69
PM Enter 0.18 27
Exit 0.14 21
Total 0.32 48
* Marriott Courtyard trip generation rates.
The trip rates for the courtyard facility appear to be
reasonable when one considers that it is not a traditional
hotel. Table 3 indicates that relatively few trips will.be
generated by the Marriott Courtyard during either the AM or
PM peak hour. It is felt that the Marriott data is
appropriate for use in this analysis.
c) Trip Distribution - The trips that will be generated by
the proposed development will be distributed onto the
adjacent streets via Andover Park West. The trips generated
by the Marriott Courtyard will be distributed onto the
adjacent street system based on the directional desires and
the relative convenience of the various transportation
systems which are available for use. It is felt that the
majority of the guests will be business - oriented, although
the summer months may attract some vacation - oriented guests.
Figures 4 and 5 show the trip distribution patterns by
percentage and peak hour trips for the proposed development.
A range of percentage values for the distribution pattern was
shown to account for the uncertainty of the distribution of
traffic. It is felt that the majority of the trips generated
by the proposed development will be going to or coming from
the interstate system (I -405 or I -5). The remaining traffic
will be distributed to other major arterials such as
Southcenter Parkway, S. 180th Street or West Valley Highway.
d) Level of Service - Level of service calculations at the
intersection of Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West were
conducted for future conditions with and without the proposed
development. The anticipated date of completion of the
proposed development is 1989. The projected volumes of
traffic at Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West using an 8%
per year growth factor and the trips attributed to the
8
•
Southcenter Pkwy.
35-40%
40 -50%
Strander Blvd.
j1O -15
ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE
FIGURE 4
9
•
Sou thcenter Pkwy
:
m
3
x
IA
a.
w
0
(7 -8)
15 -17
XXX - Noon peak hour
(XXX) - PM peak hour
(9 -111
9 -11 (1
1
(19 -20)
38 -404
(1 -2)
2 -4
(8 -10)
17 -21
(2 -3)
4 -6
Strander Blvd.
24 -'6 project.
�4 -" Site
(1-
S. 180th Street
ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR TRIP DISTRIBUTION
FIGURE 5
10
proposed Marriott Courtyard are shown on Figures 6 and 7.
The results of the level of service calculations are shown
below:
TABLE 4
LEVEL OF SERVICE
STRANDER BLVD. AT ANDOVER PARK WEST
1989 w /out project
1989 w/ project
Noon Peak PM Peak
F D
F D
It can be seen that the additional trips from the Marriott
Courtyard will not make a significant difference in the level
of service at the intersection of Strander Blvd. at Andover
Park West. The drop in the level of service from "D" to "F"
during the noon peak hour can mostly be attributed to the
projected growth in the area. The level of service
calculations for the analyses above assumed that no
modifications to the signal phasing or lane configuration at
the intersection had occurred.
e) Site Access - Two driveways serving the site have been
shown on the preliminary site plan. The number of trips
generated into the site during the peak hours indicates that
access should not be a problem. However, a capacity analysis
was conducted for these driveways to confirm this. The
volumes at the driveways were estimated using the earlier
trip generation values and the traffic count conducted at
Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West. Additionally, all of
the traffic entering and exiting the site was assigned to one
driveway in order to be conservative. (See Figure 8.)
The results of the analysis indicate that no significant
problem will be encountered at the driveway locations. The
level of service during the noon peak would be "E" for the
exiting left -turns (all other movements would operate at
level of service "B" or higher) and during the PM peak hour
the level of service would be "D" for the exiting left -turns
with all other movements operating at level of service "A ".
The capacity analysis indicates that the left -turns into the
site will not encounter any difficulty and that a level of
service "B" or higher will be maintained even without the
existence of a left -turn lane for this movement.
5. TRAFFIC IMPACTS /MITIGATION
The calculations for the capacity analyses indicate that
11
NOON PEAK HOUR
t 4 -
451
257
Strander Blvd.
1 —
PM PEAK HOUR
Andover Park West
Z 7 3
131 v H
191 \� Eck
t13
v 25
93S
140
Strander Blvd.
3-1 5 111
1 Z
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VOLUMES W /OUT DEVELOPMENT
STRANDER BLVD. /ANDOVER PARK WEST
FIGURE 6
12
•
NOON PEAK HOUR
053 4F—
H
PM PEAK HOUR
Andover Park West
1 %0
1'0 0
SSA
9g
Strander Blvd.
Andover Park West
83?
113
41354
Strander Blvd.
45))S
iszA
4I vZ :10j0;191
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VOLUMES W/ DEVELOPMENT
STRANDER BLVD. /ANDOVER PARK WEST
FIGURE 7
13
NOON PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
y
a
Andover Park West
v
4754
•
e) , Entrance
3
—♦21,
'711 —Si 21
Akr.*
1989 ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR VOLUMES
ANDOVER PARK WEST /MARRIOTT ENTRANCE
FIGURE 8
14
there will be a drop in the level of service at the
intersection of Strander Blvd. and Andover Park West with or
without the development of the proposed project. One of the
concerns mentioned by the City of Tukwila has been the need
for left -turn storage lanes on Andover Park West in the north
and south directions. The north and south legs are currently
striped for four lanes.
Another series of capacity analyses was conducted to
determine what difference, if any, the addition of left -turn
lanes in the north and south directions would make. This
also assumes that the phasing of the traffic signal would be
modified to operate with eight phases instead of the current
six. The results of these analyses are shown below:
TABLE 5
LEVEL OF SERVICE
STRANDER BLVD. AT ANDOVER PARK WEST - MODIFIED
196:3, w /out project
1989 w/ project
Noon Peak PM Peak
D D
D C
It can be seen from Table 5 that an increase in the level of
service would occur at the Strander Blvd. /Andover Park West
intersection with the addition of left -turn storage lanes and
revised signal phasing. Again, very little difference was
noted in the level of service with or without the project.
6. CONCLUSIONS /RECOMMENDATIONS
The Marriott Courtyard is a unique lodging facility which
does not have the typical trip generation of traditional
hotel facilities. The lower trip generation rate can be
attributed to the lack of banquet or convention facilities
which normally attract much of a hotel's traffic. The end
result of this lack of banquet facilities is that the
proposed Marriott Courtyard will generate considerably less
traffic, especially during the peak hours.
A review of the intersection of Strander Blvd. and Andover
Park West indicates that the level of service will decrease
over the next two years with or without the project. The
additional trips from the Marriott Courtyard would add a very
small percentage of trips to the intersection volumes. The
addition of left -turn storage lanes on the north and south
legs would provide a higher level of service at the
intersection and will be needed whether or not the Marriott
facility is developed.
15
The Marriott Courtyard will have very little impact on the
adjacent street system, as demonstrated by the limited trip
generation rates. The number of trips into and out of the
site will be able to operate efficiently without any
additional facilities such as a two -way left -turn lane along
the site frontage. No mitigation for this project is
recommended at this time due to its limited impact and the
lack of any needs directly attributable to the proposed
Marriott Courtyard.
16
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT
Seattle- Southcenter, WA
Prepared For
Marriott Corporation
W -5108
January 1987
RZA
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES
Geotechnical Consultants
RZARITTENHO
Geotechi l USConsultan E -ZEMAN ts & ASSOCIATES, INC.
E449* ‘;‘43
nca
1400 140th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
(206) 746 -8020
28 January 1987 W -5108
Marriott Corporation
Architecture and Construction Division
10400 Fernwood Road
Bethesda, Maryland 20058
Attention: Ms. Marianne Ramey
Subject: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Report
Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
Tukwila, Washington
Gentlemen:
We are pleased to present herein a copy of the above referenced report. This
report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical
engineering study relative to the foundation and construction considerations for
the proposed project. Authorization to proceed with this study was provided
verbally from Ms. Marianne Ramey on 29 December 1986. This study has been completed
in general accordance with our proposal letter dated 6 January 1986.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and would be pleased to
discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of the project with you at
your convenience.
Respectfully submitted,
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Ma,a_
1 a�w
Mark J. Anl hein,
Project Engineer
Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Report
Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
Tukwila, Washington
Prepared By
Marriott Corporation
Architecture and Construction Division
10400 Fernwood Road
Bethesda, Maryland 20058
Prepared By
Rittenhouse -Zeman & Associates, Inc.
1400 - 140th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
January 1987
W -5108
1.0 SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
W -5108
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Page
1
2
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS . 2
3.1 Surface Conditions 3
3.2 Subsurface Conditions 3
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4
4.1 Site Preparation 4
4.2 Structural Fill 5
4.3 Seismic Risk 6
4.4 Pile Foundations 7
4.4.1 Uplift Pile Capacity 8
4.4.2 Lateral Pile Capacity 8
4.4.3 Pile Installation Considerations 10
4.5 Floor Support Considerations 11
4.6 Drainage Considerations 11
5.0 CLOSURE 12
Figure 1 - Site and Exploration Plan
Appendix A - Subsurface Exploration Procedures and Logs
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT - SOUTHCENTER
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
1.0 SUMMARY
The proposed project construction is feasible with respect to subsurface conditions
encountered at the subject site. A brief summary of the project's geotechnical
considerations is presented below:
o Subsurface conditions at the site were explored with a program of two
hollow -stem auger borings and two Dutch cone penetrometer probes.
G Subsurface conditions disclosed in our explorations generally consisted
of medium dense to very dense fill to a depth on the order of 10 feet at
exploration locations. Interbedded alluvial deposits were then encountered
which consisted of loose to medium dense, silty, fine sands and soft to
medium stiff, fine sandy silts. Two zones of denser material were
encountered between approximately 25 to 30 feet and at 45 to 50 feet,
respectively. Ground water was approximately 13 feet below the existing
ground surface at the time of the exploration program.
G Based on the loose condition of the saturated sands, the potential for
liquefaction of some of the site soils during an earthquake is considered
high. Liquefaction of saturated granular soils is the loss of soil strength
due to large magnitude ground shaking during an earthquake, which can
result in large local and areal settlements.
G In our opinion, shallow spread footings founded in the upper, existing
fill would perform satisfactorily with respect to bearing capacity and
settlements in static conditions. In our opinion, due to the public nature
of the development and the high potential for liquefaction and resulting
risk to life and property, strong consideration should be given to a pile
foundation to minimize these risks. We recommend that timber piles be
driven to approximately a depth of 55 feet below the existing ground surface
to obtain an allowable vertical capacity of 25 tons per pile.
G We recommend that the floor system be a slab -on -grade if the risk of some
settlement during an earthquake is acceptable. However, to minimize this
risk, the floor could be structurally supported.
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 2
This summary is presented for introductory purposes and should be used only in
conjunction with the full text of this report. The project description, site
conditions and our detailed design recommendations are presented in the text of
this report. The exploration procedures and logs are presented in Appendix A.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The site is an irregularly- shaped parcel located on the east side of Andover Park
West just north of the existing UPS Terminal and south of Strander Boulevard in
Tukwila, Washington. The property extends approximately 609 feet along Andover
Park West and approximately 376 feet deep east of Andover Park West. The east
side, southeast corner and south side of the property are bounded by a curved
railroad line.
The proposed project is to include four basic structures enclosing a courtyard.
The east and west buildings are to be a three - story, wood -frame motel structures,
the south building is to enclose a pool and spa, and the north building is to be a
one - story, lobby and public space. We anticipate the footing and column loads to
be relatively light. The development will be surrounded by parking and landscaping.
The purpose of this study was to establish general subsurface conditions at the
site from which conclusions and recommendations for foundation design and
construction for the project could be formulated. The scope of work consisted of
field explorations, geotechnical engineering analyses and report preparation. In
the event of any changes in the nature, design or location of the structures, the
conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and
modified if necessary, to reflect those changes. This report has been prepared
for the exclusive use of the the Marriott Corporation and their agents, for specific
application to this project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices.
3.0 SITE CONDITIONS
The site conditions were evaluated in January 1987. The surface and subsurface
conditions are described below, while the exploration procedures and detailed
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 3
interpretive logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A. The approximate
locations of the explorations are indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 1.
3.1 Surface Conditions
The site appeared to have had fill placed over it and was graded to a gentle hill
with a high point near the center of the property. A low area, which ponded water,
existed in the northwest corner of the property. The site was covered with short,
sparse grass. The site grades were about 3 to 5 feet above the surrounding street
grades.
3.2 Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface exploration program consist of a series of two hollow -stem auger
borings and two cone penetrometer probes. The two cone penetrometer probes were
advanced to "refusal" within a very dense sand layer at approximately 46 to 48 foot
depth. The borings were advanced to a maximum depth of 59 feet. The exploration
procedures and detailed interpretive logs of the explorations are presented in
Appendix A.
The subsurface conditions encountered across the site were somewhat consistent.
The fill encountered in our explorations consists of medium dense to very dense,
silty, gravelly sand. The depth of the fill encountered ranged from 9 to about
14 feet. Our exploration program found this fill to be of generally good quality
at exploration locations, however its consistency across the site can only be
assumed . Beneath the fill, we encountered interbedded deposits of silty, fine
sand and fine sandy silts typical of an alluvial depositional environment. These
deposits ranged in density from loose to medium dense sands and soft to medium
stiff silts. These spread footings would experience the majority of the settlements
from this upper interbedded deposit. At an approximate depth of 25 to 30 feet, a
dense, silty, fine sand layer and very stiff, fine sandy silt layer was encountered.
This layer was found to be only 5 to 10 feet in thickness and is considered not
dense enough or thick enough for support of a pile foundation. Beneath this denser
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 4
zone, we encountered additional alluvial sand deposits in a loose to medium
consistency and medium stiff silts to depths ranging from 44 to 47 feet. Below
these depths, our explorations encountered a medium dense, quickly grading to very
dense, fine to medium sand with some silt. This material would provide suitable
support for piles bearing in this layer. The borings and probes both were terminated
in this layer.
An observation well was installed in boring B -1 and the ground water level recorded
the day following installation. The ground water level was found to be 13 feet
below the ground. surface. This data would indicate that the ground water level
is approximately elevation 11 feet. The ground water level in the area will
probably be controlled somewhat by the elevation maintained in the pond across
Andover Park West. It should be noted that the groundwater level may fluctuate
due to variation in rainfall , season changes in site utilization and other factors.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed project consists of four basic structures enclosing a courtyard. The
east and west buildings are to be three - story, wood -frame motel structures. The
south and north buildings are to be an enclosed pool and spa and a lobby and public
space, respectively. Due to the public nature of the development and the high risk
of liquefaction of the saturated, granular soils during an earthquake, we recommend
that the development be supported by either pressure- treated timber piles or
Augercast (cast -in- place) concrete piles.
4.1 Site Preparation
All building areas, pavement areas, sidewalks and areas to receive structural fill,
should be stripped of all brush, vegetation, topsoil and other near - surface
deleterious material. Based on our observations, the stripping effort will
typically encounter on the order of 2 to 3 inches or less of topsoil. Any areas
of random fill or deeper root accumulations encountered in the initial site work
should be removed and backfilled with structural fill as outlined subsequently.
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 5
The suitability of the native soils should be evaluated and proposed fill areas
prior to structural fill placement. If the soils exposed by stripping possess a
minimum density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density
(as determined by ASTM:D 1557 test procedure) the ground surface may be cleaned
and rolled and no further site preparation would be required. Should the site
soils not exceed this minimum standard, we recommend that the subgrade be prerolled
and compacted with a roller or other suitable heavy equipment to a firm and non -
yielding condition. Any soft, wet or significantly organic areas should be
overexcavated as necessary and backfilled with structural fill as described
subsequently. The near - surface site soils are silty and will be moisture sensitive.
These soils are prone to disturbance in wet weather conditions. The contractor
should minimize traffic above prepared subgrade areas. In very wet weather, a
working surface of quarry spalls or sand and gravel may be necessary to protect
the subgrade, especially from rubber -tired vehicular traffic.
4.2 Structural Fill
All fill placed under the building areas, roadways, parking lots and sidewalks
should be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural
fill. Prior to placement of structural fill, all surfaces to receive fill should
be prepared as previously recommended. Structural fill should be placed in loose
lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Individual lifts should be compacted
such that a density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry
density (ASTM:D 1557) is achieved. We recommend that a representative from our
firm be present during placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform
a representative number of in -place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of
the earthwork may be evaluated as grading progresses.
The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on the gradation
and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that
portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly
sensitive to to,small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes
more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soil containing more than about 5 percent
Marriott Corpohation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 6
fines by weight, such as the near - surface site soils, cannot be consistently
compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition when the moisture content is more than
about 2 percent from optimum.
We anticipate the near - surface site soils that would be available for fill, as a
result of site grading, would primarily be silty, gravelly sand. These soils may
be difficult or impossible to use as structural fill, except during dry, summer
months when the water content may be carefully controlled by aeration and drying.
Even during the summer, delays in grading may occur due to precipitation. If
inclement weather occurs, the upper wetted portions of the site soils may need to
be scarified and dried prior to further earthwork. If it is not practical to dry
the near - surface silty soils, it may be necessary to remove them. Soil used for
structural fill should have a maximum particle size on the order of 6 inches and
be free of organics and other deleterious material.
4.3 Seismic Risk
The Puget Sound Lowlands are an are of known seismic activity. A detailed
liquefaction analysis and seismic site evaluation was beyond the scope of our
study. In our opinion, the potential for the site soils to liquefy during an
earthquake is high. The requirements for liquefaction include the presence of
loose, saturated, granular soils with the occurrence of an earthquake of sufficient
magnitude, intensity and duration to trigger the liquefaction process. Liquefaction
is a process whereby saturated, loose granular deposits lose shear strength,
attributed to a buildup of pore water pressure in the soil during earthquake shaking
due to shear strains imposed by the earthquake. Liquefaction is generally defined
as the condition of total loss of strength and can result in potentially large and
damaging local and areal settlements, even over a level site. During the
1965 earthquake, settlements of up to 18 inches in the Kent Valley and Harbor
Island were recorded, when similar loose, saturated granular soils were present.
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 7
4.4 Pile Foundations
Due to the high potential for liquefaction of the site soils, we recommend that
the development be supported on piles. Piles will transfer the building loads
down through the potentially liquefiable zones to competent bearing materials.
Based on the anticipated light column loads and the relative cost of pile types in
the area, pressure- treated timber piles may be used. If higher capacity piles are
desireable or economical, cast -in -place concrete Augercast piles may be used. The
timber piles should be pressure- treated conforming to the standard specification
outlined in ASTM :D 25. For a timber pile with an 8 inch minimum tip diameter,
driven to bearing into the very dense, fine to medium sands at approximately 55 foot
depth, we recommend a maximum allowable vertical capacity of 25 tons. For a
12" nominal diameter Augercast pile, an allowable vertical capacity of 40 tons may
be used. A one -third increase in this value may be used for transient or site
seismic loads. This maximum allowable vertical capacity includes a factor of
safety of 2.5. We recommend that all piles be driven or penetrate at least 5 feet
into the very dense bearing stratum.
Settlements of a pile foundation are a function of many factors including: the
working load, type of pile, installation procedure, pile foundation configuration
and soil s below the tip of the pile. Based on assumptions with respect to anticipated
loads and pile configurations, we estimate the total and differential settlements
would be limited to less than 1/2 inch, for the design capacities provided
previously.
We encountered the very dense sand at depths ranging from 47 to 52 feet below the
existing ground surface at exploration locations. The piles are to be driven at
least 5 feet into the very dense material. We estimate that pile lengths would be
on the'order of 52 to 57 feet in length. However, if driven piles are selected,
we strongly recommend that a test pile driving program be performed with several
piles across the site before the production piles are ordered so that actual lengths
necessary can be determined in advance of production pile driving. This test pile
program will also provide the opportunity to determine the site's pile- driving
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 8
characteristics and determine if any difficulties can be foreseen during driving
of the piles through the upper fill or through the medium dense to dense layer
at 25 to 30 feet. Pile installation methods and considerations are further discussed
in Section 4.3.3. If larger allowable vertical capacities are required, we can
provide recommendations for larger diameter Augercast piles. Augercast piles have
the advantages of providing larger allowable capacities and their in their
installation would avoid many of the problems that may be encountered at this site
as discussed subsequently. However, they generally are less economical than timber
piles, and do not provide the site densification effects associated with driven
piles. For this reason, the following design recommendations are directed towards
driven - timber piles.
4.4.1 Uplift Pile Capacity
Uplift pile capacity develops as a result of the side friction between the pile
and the adjacent soil. Therefore, the uplift capacity available is a function of
the length of the pile. For preliminary estimating purposes, we recommend utilizing
an ultimate uplift capacity of 15 tons for an 8 -inch diameter tip -pile driven to
approximately a depth of 55 feet. Since the uplift capacity is primarily for
resistance to seismic and transient loads, we would suggest applying a minimum
factor of safety (such as 1.5) to this ultimate capacity. The recommended pile
capacity does not include the weight of the foundation elements, i.e., the pile
and pile cap or grade beam.
4.4.2 Lateral Pile Capacity
The response characteristics of a pile or pile group to lateral loads depends on
the structural configuration of the pile or pile group. Lateral pile capacities
are generally goverened by limiting deflection at the top of the pile. Deflection
will depend on the pile stiffness with respect to the surrounding soils, the length
of the pile and the degree of fixity of the pile cap. Lateral resistance and
deflection of pile foundations are goverened primarily by the soil materials
existing near the upper portion of the pile. The resistance to lateral loads
presented herein are based on assumed elastic lateral modulus appropriate for the
near - surface fill soils.
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter W -5108
28 January 1987 Page 9
Development of lateral pile criteria requires an assumption of the degree of fixity
at the pile cap. In this case, we have assumed the deflections at the top of the
pile caps for a given horizontally applied load at the pile cap can be based on
the fixed condition. This formulation is based on elastic lateral capacity analysis
with an assumed constant of horizontal subgrade reaction for the site soils
encountered within a depth of influence of lateral deflections below the pile cap
and the appropriate pile parameters. Parameters which are included in this analyses
are the elastic modulus (E) of the pile material, the moment of inertia (I) of the
pile and the constant of horizontal subgrade reaction of the site soils (nh).
Using these values, the relative stiffness factor (T) of the pile can be determined
based on the following relations: T= (EI /nh)1 /5. We recommend using a value of
20 pci (pounds per cubic inch) for the constant or horizontal subgrade reaction.
The deflection at the top of the pile can be calculated as the quotient of 0.92PT3/EI,
where P is the applied load. The point of zero deflection can be determined as 3.1T
below the ground surface. All units should be dimensionally consistent.
We recommend that the above equations be utilized with the actual anticipated
horizontal load to determine the deflection of the pile cap. This calculated value
should then be analyzed with respect to tolerable defelctions of the structure.
The deflection magnitude presented is our best estimate of the value that is likely
to develop for an isolated pile under applied long -term lateral load without any
knowledge of the foundation configuration. No modification for a factor of safety
or for repeated or cyclic loading conditions has been made. If the calculated
deflection is found to be excessive, we recommend that we analyze the particular
pile configuration with the actual fixity and center -to- center spacing of the piles
to obtain a more specific estimate. It may be necessary to add additional piles,
drive batter piles or use passive pressure against grade beams to augment the
lateral capacity of the piles.
The lateral capacity of closely spaced groups of piles can be significantly
different from that of a single isolated pile. Specifically, group effects tend
to influence deflection behavior- of piles when they are spaced closer than eight
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter
28 January 1987
W -5108
Page 10
pile diameters in the direction of the applied load. In general, the lateral
deflections of the piles in a group can approach twice that for a single isolated
pile. Individual piles subject to repetitive cyclic loads may result in deflection
magnitudes up to twice that of a pile subjected to a static load. Therefore in
lieu of more detailed analyses, for a given design load, we consider it appropriate
to generally double the computed static deflection values presented previously to
account for group effects and repetitive load applications.
4.4.3 Pile Installation Considerations
We recommend the pile spacing within groups be no less than three pile diameters
on- center. We recommend that timber piles be driven with a diesel, air, or steam -
hammer having a rated energy of not less than 15,000 foot pounds and no more than
26,000 foot pounds. The actual pile capacity should be verified in the field based
on an appropriate dynamic analysis or pile- driving formula. We recommend that the
installation of all piles be observed by a qualified representative from our firm.
Our observer would evaluate the contractor's operation, as well as collect and
interpret the installation data. At this particular site, it is imperative that
the pile installation be carefully monitored to determine that the piles had not
been structurally damaged, refusal has not been met due to presence of medium dense
zones above the bearing horizon, and that adequate penetration into the bearing
stratum has been achieved.
As mentioned previously, the contractor may encounter some difficult driving
conditions. The upper fill layer was found to vary from medium dense to very
dense. Obstructions to driving and debris may be present within the fill. This
fill layer may also require that the pile locations be predrilled or "spudded" so
that the pile can be driven through the fill without damaging the pile. Spudding
is the pre- driving and withdrawal of a steel pipe to loosen the soil at the pile
location. Predrilling and /or jetting may also be required in order to drive the
piles through the medium dense to dense zone at 25 to 30 feet. The test pile
program will aid greatly in determining what measures may be necessary in order
to extend the piles to the proper depth. In any case, the contractor should be
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter
28 January 1987
W -5108
Page 11
prepared to predill, jet or spud in order to obtain the.•desired pile length. We
also recommend that the tips and heads of all timber piles be banded due to
potentially difficult driving conditions. Predrilling or jetting should only be
allowed or accomplished at the direction of the field geotechnical engineer.
Predrilling or jetting should not be allowed within 5 feet of the desired pile tip
elevation.
4.5 Floor Support Considerations
Ideally, to minimize the risk of settlement and damage to the building slab during
an earthquake, the bottom floor should be structurally supported on the pile
foundation. However, if the risk of some settlement and damage to the bottom floor
during an earthquake can be tolerated, we recommend that the floor be constructed
as a slab -on -grade floor. The presence of the relatively thick fill pad may damp
differential settlements to an acceptable level. If a slab -on -grade floor is used,
the area should be prepared as discussed in Section 4.1. We recommend that the
floor slab be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sandy gravel, crushed rock
or pea gravel to serve as a capillary break and a working surface. Additionally,
an impervious moisture barrier should be placed beneath the slab.
4.6 Drainage Considerations
The upper site sill soils are silty and highly susceptible to disturbance when
wet. Prior to construction, all sources of surface water should be routed away
from the construction and building areas as much as possible. We recommend that
the building be provided with a perimeter footing drain system to collect available
water. The footing drain should consist of at least 4 -inch diameter, perforated
pipe, surrounded by at least 4 inches of pea gravel on all sides. The drainpipes
should lead away from the building via gravity to a storm sewer or other suitable
discharge. Site grades should be planned to slope away from the building. Roof
and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system. Instead,
a separate tight -line drain network should be installed or splash blocks should
be used.
Marriott Corporation /Courtyard - Southcenter
28 January 1987
W- 5108
Page 12
5.0 CLOSURE
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the
explorations accomplished for this study. The number, locations and the depths
of the explorations were completed within the site and proposal constraints so as
to yield the information used to formulate our recommendations. Integrity of the
foundation depends on proper pile installation, site preparation and construction
procedure. We are available to provide geotechnical engineering services during
the pile installation, earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project.
If variations in the subsurface conditions were observed at that time, we would
be able to provide additional geotechnical recommendations to minimize delays as
the project develops.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. If you have any questions
concerning this project, please do not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted,
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
asi,d,„,‘,
Mark J. Air ei n,
Project Engineer
// �`
Kur �W. Groesch, P.E.,
Associate
44. CRp�s ti�
i JQS; ‘ WASH /4 C,S,es
ANDOVER PARK WEST
LEGEND
PARKING
® B -2 INDICATES BORING NUMBER AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
0 P -2 INDICATES PROBE NUMBER AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
BASE MAP FROM CONCEPTUAL PLAN DATED 10/6/86 BY•MARRIOTT CORP.
0
INDOORI
POOL !-
® & SPA
P -1 •
PROPERTY LINE
3-STORY MOTEL
® B -1
COURTYARD
S B -2
3- STORY MOTEL
it
1 -STORY
PUBLIC SPACE
P -2
PARKING
100 FEET
50
PARKING
COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT
SEATTLE - SOUTHCENTER
SITE & EXPLORATION PLAN
FIGURE 1
WO
By
Date
Scale
W -5108
MJA
JANUARY 1987
NOTED.
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN &
ASSOCIATES. INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
1-100 140th Avenue N. E.
Bellevue. Washington 98005
RZA
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES AND LOGS
APPENDIX A.
W -5108
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
The field exploration program conducted for this study consisted of advancing a
series of two hollow -stem auger borings and two cone penetrometer probes. The
approximate exploration locations are illustrated on the Site and Exploration Plan,
Figure 1. The locations were obtained in the field by taping from the property
corner survey markers. Elevations of the explorations were obtained by
interpolation between contours indicated on the above mentioned site plan with
respect to their. location.
Hollow Stem Auger Borings
The borings were drilled on 22, and 23 January 1987 by a local exploration drilling
company under subcontract to our firm. The borings consisted of advancing a fl-
inch inside diameter, hollow -stem auger with a truck - mounted drill rig. During
the drilling process, samples were obtained at generally 2.5 or 5.0 foot depth
intervals. The borings were continuously observed and logged by a geotechnical
engineer from our firm.
Disturbed samples were obtained by using the Standard Penetration Test Procedure
as described in ASTM:D 1586. This test and sampling method consists of driving a
standard 2 -inch outside diameter split barrel sampler a distance of 18 inches into
the soil with a 140 pound hammer free falling a distance of 30 inches. The number
of blows for each 6 inch interval is recorded. The number of blows required to
drive the sampler the final 12 inches is considered the Standard Penetration
Resistance ( "N ") or blow count. The blow count is presented graphically on the
boring logs in this appendix. If a total of 50 blows is recorded within one 6 inch
interval, the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the number of inches of
penetration. The resistance, or "N" value, provides a measure of the relative
density of granular soils or the relative consistency of cohesive soils.
Appendix A (continuation)
Page 2, W -5108
The soil samples obtained from the split - barrel sampler were classified in the
field and representative portions placed in watertight containers. The samples
were then transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and
laboratory testing. Samples are generally saved for a period of 30 days unless
special arrangements are made.
The boring logs presented in this appendix are based on the drilling action,
inspection of the samples secured, laboratory results and field logs. The various
types of soils are indicated as well as the depths where the soils or characteristics
of the soils changed. It should be noted that these changes may have been gradual,
and if the changes occured between sample intervals, they were interpreted.
The ground water conditions observed during the exploration program are indicated
on the boring logs. These subsurface water conditions were evaluated by observing
the moisture condition of the samples, or the free water on the sampling rods. The
ground water level is indicated on the boring logs where appropriate by the water
symbol. Observation wells were installed in one of the borings to monitor ground
water levels-following drilling. The observation well consist of a 3/4 -inch
diameter slotted PVC pipe placed in the boring, which extended to the ground
surface.
Static Cone Penetrometer Probes
Two static cone penetrometer probes or Dutch cone tests were performed for this
project on 22•and 23 January 1987 by a local exploration company under subcontract
to our firm. The equipment used for this test consists of a cone and friction
sleeve which are advanced hydraulically by rods reacting against a drill truck.
The static cone penetration test is performed as follows: 1) the cone is pushed
down by an inner rod and the point resistance is recorded; 2) the cone and the
sleeve are then pushed and their combined resistance is measured;
Appendix A (continuation)
Page 3, W -5108
3) the cone resistance is subtracted from the total resistance to provide the
frictional resistance. A direct correlation between point resistance and the
bearing capacity of the soils is obtained. The relative density or consistency
of the soil probed is empirically related to the cone resistance. Comparing the
cone bearing capacity and the friction ratio (sleeve friction /cone bearing) provides
an interpretive soil classification based on the Dutch Cone soil classification
chart prepared by J.H. Schmertman, 1969. The descriptive soil interpretations
presented on the static cone penetrometer probe logs have been developed by using
this classification chart as a guideline. Modifications to the classifications
were developed according to correlations of soil types disclosed in the adjacent
borings performed on the site and careful interpretation of the probe results.
The detailed interpretive logs of the static cone penetrometer probes accomplished
for this study are presented subsequently.
RZA
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC.
'.. Geotechnicn! / llydrogeologicnl Consultants
BORING NUMBER B -1 W O W -5108
PROJECT NAME Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Ground Surface Elevation Approximately 24 Feet
Dense, moist, brown and brownish -gray, silty,
gravelly SAND with trace organics (Fill)
Loose, wet to saturated, gray, silty, fine SAND
with some fine gravel
- decreasing gravel content
- grading to medium dense
1-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
Medium dense to dense, saturated, gray, fine to
medium SAND with some silt
-35
Stiff, saturated, gray, fine sandy SILT
SAMPLING
1 2' 00 SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
D 3' OD SHELBY SAMPLE
2.5' ID RING SAMPLE
B BULK SAMPLE
* SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
2
a.
i
0 • ft
o a
o
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
A BLOWS PER FOOT
(140 Ib. hammer, 30 Inch drop)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
=I
31
I
I
0
40
GROUND WATER
1/23/
WATER LEVEL "Q
AT TIME OF DRILLING Aro
SEAL
DATE
OBSERVATION
WELL TIP
LABORATORY TESTS
• % WATER CONTENT
NP NON PLASTIC
--•- -I -- LIOUID LIMIT
'1/4— NATURAL WATER
CONTENT
PLASTIC LIMIT
RZA
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC.
Geoteclmical / Ilyrlrogeologicnl Consultants
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Ground Surface Elevation Approximately
Louse, saturated, gray, silty, fine SAND
Feet
Dense to very dense, saturated, gray, fine to
medium SAND with some silt
- increasing silt content
Total depth = 59 feet
Boring completed 22 January 1987
BORING NUMBER B -1 (cont. ) w 0. W -5108
PROJECT NAME Cnurtvard by Marriott - Southcenter
2 m
0
O
0
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
♦ BLOWS PER FOOT
(140 Ib. hammer, 30 Inch drop)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
45
50
55
60
1
2
3
4
SAMPLING
1 2' OD SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
11 3' 00 SHELBY SAMPLE
2.5' ID RING SAMPLE
8 BULK SAMPLE
* SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
GROUND WATER
I SEAL
DATE
WATER LEVEL
AT TIME OF DRILLING ATO OBSERVATION
WELL TIP
LABORATORY TESTS
• % WATER CONTENT
NP NON PLASTIC
1— • LIQUID LIMIT
IL—NATURAL WATER
CONTENT
PLASTIC LIMIT
RZA
rifikl RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC.
Geotecl)nica! / llyrlrogeologicnl Consultants
BORING NUMBER 8-2 W 0. W -5108
PROJECT NAME Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Ground Surface Elevation Approximately 26 Feet
Very dense to medium dense, wet, brownish -gray
to gray, silty, gravelly SAND (Fill)
SAMPLING
7 • ccIU
o Fa
cc
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
♦ BLOWS PER FOOT
(140 Ib. hammer, 30 Inch drop)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-10
Soft to medium stiff, saturated, mottled gray
and rust, fine sandy SILT
Loose, saturated, gray, silty fine SAND
-15
-20
Very stiff, saturated, gray, fine sandy SILT 25
Loose, saturated, gray, silty fine SAND
Medium stiff, saturated, gray,
fine sandy SILT
1-30
1-35
SAMPLING
I 2' OD SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
II 3' OD SHELBY SAMPLE
E 2.5' ID RING SAMPLE
B BULK SAMPLE
* SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
40
GROUND WATER
WATER LEVEL 4
AT TIME OF DRILLING ^TD
SEAL
DATE
OBSERVATION
WELL TIP
LABORATORY TESTS
• % WATER CONTENT
NP NON PLASTIC
/LIQUID LIMIT
b--- NATURAL WATER
CONTENT
PLASTIC LIMIT
reAl RI1TENHOIISE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC.
Geotechuicnl / llydrogeological Consultants
BORING NUMBER _ B -2 (cont.) W O. W -5108
PROJECT NAME Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Ground Surface Elevation Approximately Feet
(As above)
Medium stiff, saturated, gray, fine sandy SILT
a. m
0 5
-45
Medium dense to very dense, saturated, gray,
fine to medium SAND with some silt
- increasing silt content
Total depth = 59 feet
Boring completed 23 January 1987
-50
-55
-60
z
0.
2
co
0 F • CC
ILI
0
0
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
A BLOWS PER FOOT
(140 Ib. hammer, 30 Inch drop)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
1
2
SAMPLING
I 2 OD SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
II 3' 00 SHELBY SAMPLE
g 2.5' ID RING SAMPLE
B BULK SAMPLE
* SAMPLE NOT RECOVERED
GROUND WATER
WATER LEVEL
AT TIME OF DRILLING AT°
I SEAL
DATE
OBSERVATION
WELL TIP
LABORATORY TESTS
• % WATER CONTENT
NP NON PLASTIC
• it---NATURAL LIQUID LIMIT
URAL WATER
CONTENT.
PLASTIC LIMIT
STATIC CONE PENETROMETER
PROBE NO. P -1
Soil Interpretation
Predriiled: Dense, silty, gravelly SAND
(Fill)
_ Loose, silty, fine SAND
'Soft, fine sandy SILT
Loose to medium dense, silty, fine SAND
Stiff, fine .sandy SILT
.Medium dense, fine to medium SAND with
some silt
Medium dense to dense, silty, fine SAND
with fine sandy SILT lenses
"Dense, fine to medium dense SAND with
some silt
Medium dense, silty, fine SAND
Stiff to medium stiff, fine sandy SILT
t - -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10.2
a.
o
0
5
10
15,
20
25
30
35
0
0
50
Cone Pressure (kg /cm2)
100
150
w.o.: W -5108
Project: Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
Date: 22 January 1987
Approx. Ground Surface Elev.: 26 feet
r
Friction
Ratio %
200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
50
100
150
200
250 0 2 4 6 8 10
RITTENHOI SE -ZEMAN
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
1-I00 1 lOth Avenue N.E.
Bellevue. IVashington 911005
RZA
STATIC CONE PENETROMETER
PROBE NO. P -1 (continued)
Soil Interpretation
Loose to medium dense, silty, fine SAND
Medium stiff, fine sandy SILT
Medium dense to very dense, silty, fine
SAND
Very dense, fine to medium SAND
Total depth = 51 feet
3.
8,
3 0
40
45
50
55
0
W.O.: W -5108
Protect: Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
Date: 22 January 1987
Approx. Ground Surface. Elev.:
26 feet
- -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)162
Cone Pressure (kg /cm2)
Friction
Ratio
50 100 150 200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
1
O 50 100 150 200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
1400 140th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
RZA
iXICRE
STATIC CONE PENETROMETER
PROBE NO. P -2
Soil Interpretation
- Predrilled: Dense, silty, gravelly SAND
(Fill)
Loose to medium dense, silty, fine SAND
Stiff, fine sandy SILT
Medium dense to dense, silty, fine SAND
Soft, fine sandy SILT
Dense, fine to medium SAND
Interbedded: Loose, silty fine SAND and
medium stiff, fine sandy
SILT
m
0 0
0
10
15
20
25
30
5
0
0
- -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)102
Friction
Ratio %
50 100 150 200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
Cone Pressure (kg /cm2)
w.o.: W -5108
Project: Courtyard by Marriott - Southcenter
Date: 23 January 1987
Approx. Ground Surface Elev.: 25 feet
50 100 150
200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
RITTENHOUSE- ZEb1AN
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geotechnical Consultants
1400 140th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98005
RZA
STATIC CONE PENETROMETER
PROBE NO. P -2 (continued)
Soil Interpretation
Loose to medium dense, silty, fine SAND
Stiff, fine sandy SILT
Very dense, fine to medium SAND with some
silt
Total depth = 51 feet
w.o.: W -5108
Project: Courtyard by Marriott
Date: 23 January 1987
Approx. Ground Surface Elev.: 25 feet
- -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10.2
Cone Pressure (kg /cm2)
0 0
40
45
50
55
60
Friction
Ratio %
50 100 150 200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
7
4-
0 50 100 150
200 250 0 2 4 6 8 10
RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN ���
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Ceotechnical Consultants 004416
1400 140th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue. Washington 98005
SITE DATA
•. N •!Y•li. STALL SILL - ••■15• V STAMM
MI
11110157 NU: 12.010 L.L. I I. .Z..,TAI Mi MI .
i B.f'..E' COWAN" K STAMINA ALIOmI
toms: •1- Z•_ DISTRICT RSIOW RTSIL stoma R0.'I CD STALLS - ITN
SETBACKS: DILLS Ldla` M t1�TmAL•
p• MR 0, 1.10657 NRT ,121 lL5)L[IDTIR MAIN NATRBfI
x '12 SIDE UK 510E 5' EIM MED STALLS .111 STAMM
RLL TO• NM O. 'Si w= OTi m
5711.. *3110157 NE 100 5 57571ES 011 T5 MI �TZ mu
ausaasas�--
1-_11
I —�a1 INIM
I■ ---
■ —e
. mum
M ---
El mom
-$.
:�=
�
,-- I
C=3 Andover Perk West • _
—W-
- — —
A0047.28"E ao,ter
aMCCA1_ 8A•
-- -- —_
001.05'01 1 *0915 CONCRETE .I•
—sLa1 TlBA�'Q
!v [LOUTIw MN LUrvR ROr
'
p0 e•NTO SIGN
Iw.e.�.
'-1----".-J.1----
1
L SCUD RRE
`
MINTED DAD. UK 1 WHITE I �`
{
l
°
C_
a
5t
LLL tr
0'
LATCBCAPE
..._
_
_—
(�PPI
TT
r
u
i±*1751*, _
I
;
I
0
DY.Dtr
i
q T
•
(
31.
1111
r m
• •
R� I
333
1, L,
. ` 'ON
3 Story
FF. 26A
I
r n.
„ALL
.
.a..
Utl...
BR
D q
]
d s
I
z�
\\
I
El
MI
E
I ---
O?i17
\'
\
Jr
5 {
's"""
a1 JRlI:7sellw
�,
�—
._q...
,.
NENITSIONS
N Pak
1
..111.5 ?..o
i—
Flooar Pool B �•
0
:�
\\
\ \' ) I
1 Story
Story
FF. 2 6.0
1
1
1,1
WKLY
I
K.
I
''.0.
3.
Dlu•troom
33101' Iu es
.. • —1
uald O$
W!!!fm.!11
i
i CC
_ SCREEN.. ` N' '%
+6-
FF.26.0
•
I
a
\1
Rim
Ii—•
y
t
te
-ir,..,,,, I-- 3 5' TIP
— — -- ... —
no w>rrtn LtclwllTq —Q
_—
-
TM
nsrui E.r
-no•
�l
i9�
TT AL
Ill
r w..
111
I
I
...AT9.NA T�
fir►
la -•Y7 /� \ ��'�I�M_�I
lj% E!�.Y'ilI
-_
,°
1111
Mil L•�
::
�� \III
Uil
Ts ✓-
�j
..
a
•
Ce
Layout SAL Mr
_ _ — I/
ii��
! ''
v5V�11
/
(l, (.l a.Ci JOa 12310
.. ER
l
9• d Ld v o L' m
Bar hausan
CanuklnB LIwYhas Inc.
.. E_ . ....., • •"_....
•
• •c"
871 Ci-1 "
/
►AI
L Emil
I �I,..
F ivlwryMPl•i
�I
LI' _
. , -.. EN s,-
p . , ,
I - o..,..57
4
0
7
1.0
11
SITE DATA
PAR. 1...: ,I41r ,IZE. - Y.1, STAT.. i -61'1.21'01"
'
. -•.,- - • fOR tir.R011ri MO. ..r.L111 I ' ,,r3....12...,....1.,..19.....E..J.1_,Mr.
3. 111 rte.. .• 4, r.FACI,S1
2.B2 4.
PINTS 0
E . tat 1
/
1
- 17.,1
1
.. Andover Park West
il
..,
> tral-N4 e• SANTARY StwER
,1-
'-' / .' 1 ' ..ii-.1.1,V,:r■ L,
3.0
•-• • 9:a -.4 46, '
c, „ ,,, , .
ir YEIMS01- ..011.-
t: II. . .-
.1 . • `'.. ----..
. t. 'T''
.
6.15'
t
COMMIT ..1.11
N.
1
.
_ _
f
0E0C.. MR .111/RE ROW f
, 7 2, 1_1.0 7u.. • :: '11
. ' • .T;161,-0gE 7 7
-- - LFEL
T
•
,.:.•
....
-.---- -01RECTIISSI7
I .E. 'a
,
g' gli • "'"" Ag " ,.
,.. .: •-.....
;''
t,
. i.. ..A TrrE II
Lt!.1'3•6;'
?_121.,.
7
es
•
-
. Vlie3..2'
-
, .. ,
A'
,-
1
'
..
._ ..
•
2 2
r
. , -. &. - ,.4..
'
s,..,
----. •
\
\
\
•
_
--14P--1.. -f ,. - --::. ,-.,._-- .- --1-- -:- -gi.
- -A. `r 'r
- ' .
1 1 , ! W LL. . •
L. I_L
1- I 1
`
1 1
. ,
.i
AWS.
.... i
...
3.0
21
' 1-17_4- .
= _I- I
,,.E., ::=.,
-
\
__',' ,4 r,:.. ,7.i'i-Ilt-.1 •, ‘2.21-
t V-,._
.
,
_-
. -,-
. . .
-- • , , )
____/4P c- ' -
■
.„., ,
., ..i.. '•--u.
R.S1 L,RANCE
. • • "° " i3--.1;,,
01.10StOOT Wrig .
"A
-
_
,
\
-
•
• a s .0
t.o..c..
.....
•
;
i•-,,
\ )..,,,, \ ,
.
'
-1 I '
....,„,
N
. PER w.f., AIriEwl6414.5 0
''..°--1 ' '
' -
\t,,,.■
.'
';'.-t:t..=.i'c'.'2'.01.
_.
■•••-
.
.
-
i •
•,, \ ,. •
, \ \ ,
. • •
E r IS I it. WAREHOUSES . '' \A
1
-
7'
36 V •
U", 't-.- 2
e•':.:.:
Indoor Pool & SPa
--71 ' --1
0 2.01, • .. 03
:;.•.-----,/ ICI, r_PvC ..,..1. 4....A.;,,,, .
U--'21.0----- '
.
___,I____,:.:, ,.. • 2030 . ----, ' • '.'. \
2 ,. ,. ., . ,
...._ar-
I
1 -T,,,
-
(
c
, ,
, ..
•_. . . 1:-.
Z.. , v •
". t P.I %Ube Space
,,, , o *se .....
D.,.
6,
c
`
REVISIONS
iirar7.1.:•:7-1,EF„.:2Z.:
1
1
l . R. I
• \ .
,
,,, cr4.
--•?
:4
r..-.-
,ICL • T2. 81.'111'
-1
. , 4
-L,A4,-.., . '..!?... 4
,..,..
!.. '''.- - _---0_,_tL,L.P÷ic • it, _ ZI-*
,._ ._
&s:-..a,,-1 17.71: ---f_
.t..:T.Ig
r.: u.. , story !
FF. 26.0FP1
' f:
: • -175.4.,--,-",-,
\ •-, • k'
:,:. : V
'• x :'- - -!;4•.tik"'"`:
,, - •
L
\ . - .1-
•,,
4.-
.0•,
.
0 . -I .
, '
,
4 •
Grading, Storm Drainage
FOR
MARRIOTT COURTYARD
SOUTHCENTER
Tukwila, W :: • on
,
I.. L . -4-.13..
Cioestrcom Wing a..-z0.-11
' 3 StOrV 2....
,_.....„..,,
,,,,,, q
, ,,
• _•-•-.
i 1
F.F. 26.0
--,..
1- .. .
. .\. ••'''.•."1-2.. ,.
, i- ., 1,,,. -, •
' . ..-..,..)......!i••'
• - ' ;-- • -,
n_.i[i
_
,
,
1^1:":',,,t°''''.-
1
ii
. ..
...,. -.,_. \ LP 6.PVC 01 It ai
2, , 60 LP 6. PVC 0 . Olt
E• 22
_
,• 1' ' -----
---
t.e.GEND ---.
-----
I
1
1 '
1 1 il".111
1 1 4i4t i II
• , - ,
• ,,,...,, ft,-,i----„, --„..
- -- - _ U..; 50.0.0... • ,.t.., ;044.2.<1.
1_,...- I ir_„
2i, _ •-.....- _ *--
,.,
.
t '
• ".1,3.- :
I
0- .- 11.31:74 CM 0 1.30*
-- •,
--,
-un- -
%Dr ''Il 441,
.
'' ■ _2. ri,....? ,...,,,,..,..,:. -... ,
,
.
'
23
-- a
, 19
A 1 c
a )
1.•::.
-___
..,... -- .
I I
..-• •
• 1
:
Al:
.,Nkarriott
corporation
I
._
4 '"."(rals-■%----..,,..,
- LI
tt• •
r- -
,
'11 .
a • eo...„
---,
-
1111
ie..Ati
1,71,
.....H.,4-
ti
., f. ! "_,
, „ 4 0
' .
. -..!,!.7. •
C.I.M.P.170. RA. •
11111 ,
\ 1 ------g---i-7A... . >3 ---
‘
•
\...4117........2.1.4.111T..
1 7--
.. 1 ' 04
::
_
i,.1. _ .
1111-- - on ___.. -- 3 : 'AP:,
, --......„__
1 .
' SITE •
"..,..,..",?
' 7
:1,----
__
.13
1
111 ------ ran V.:4z= g al.-,
-
r • ' „-- • :
• ' if.„)) E .
Grading • Drainage
Plan
.
' -
_
_IIIII EX,ING waRENOUSE
n • •.C.E. JOB •2310
Iiir
..r., ',. '
•N'
r-
o0'
Barghausen • .__
Consulting Engineers inc.
■-•,..--,.....7,...0-,..,"."'"
-
.,.
C870
it-
C-2
- 'ffstriktAVVErri
- - •_.
I= INN ON
=
' , --.'
'- - . . ,, ,
r
opiw,
'&111
TARIM
1.7
NORTH ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE
361 a
S• OW. --,,
—
i•-•-•-•.• _
IMIIHOLMM .
M.O.
Lb Ei III CC Es gli (..1. ma LC MI KC DI LC ' 4" °
_ ___
°•-)P• . - 1741c4P REIM ,,,, _ _ _ . ._ _ . _
egt, i . i .......-, ..,..,
-. -77—,-2,---_,
_ _ CM MC _ _ _ CM all EC __ Leg I iiii Ets r co LC nil
tIt011.,):, IN MIMI ..11.1.)-un,
• ,,,, : a — nem 0.smaw:
__,... =_____ i mom ii re.) , r r Cr. L.in.r.
• •-"-% ■
NE ii .
il 1111111111 II it Et. .. I
•
EAST ELEVATION GUEST WING
aCall 1/11. • 1.-0.
sa r■••••■••■., ••■••la
,,, , •Sa-f•-
t,)
00 •
Nirrrc
WEST ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE
t2.
a
EAST ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE
1 1 1 T
•SSIO• ■ .
se. T I T
1
,_ ,
„
-.
-''-
i 2 atm am . c ma am gm El u D HO c, i, . Dm _ C Kg ' Cal , RC _
Ti
II gal --E"' , i ra,1),11;). MINIM IBMS= ;a' .;.>1•_}, 1 Fl !PpilliFRI NUM . . - . II i -•!!!!!!!!-:)) ' •-
--
-41111■ MU CM MI El MC CM MI II H la 21:1 IBM Iltill BE pi,. so imi. hi a,
w MI6 Tit IMAM 117,111111111,1, NOM= • 'MMUS 3111111116
- MI
— ....-
1 --(;,._
E '
-- =WA ill 1 —1—rm '. fiL li=v, .11 111- ii !t1 It EL . El ,
r--.
M al I _
• NI. ••••0,
S3; ELEVATION GUEST WING
PRINIS ISSUED
Immo... 4.0
REVISIONS
IIMME.P=
JERRY T+4EIS
ASSOCIATES...
•••• •••■•••• 1•••I
maarla "Mei WIND
Najaf/
corporation
3.17••■Trase• slya•••••11.•
amass, Maya
•••••
:a..6.SPO.CNTIN4
C87 A-7
T 1 _
_
•S003 T ., • T
T
,.. .
1
.. 1
1 ,
•....._. .
•-•
...LI sm}....
_ •
EAST ELEVATION GUEST WING
aCall 1/11. • 1.-0.
sa r■••••■••■., ••■••la
,,, , •Sa-f•-
t,)
00 •
Nirrrc
WEST ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE
t2.
a
EAST ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE
1 1 1 T
•SSIO• ■ .
se. T I T
1
,_ ,
„
-.
-''-
i 2 atm am . c ma am gm El u D HO c, i, . Dm _ C Kg ' Cal , RC _
Ti
II gal --E"' , i ra,1),11;). MINIM IBMS= ;a' .;.>1•_}, 1 Fl !PpilliFRI NUM . . - . II i -•!!!!!!!!-:)) ' •-
--
-41111■ MU CM MI El MC CM MI II H la 21:1 IBM Iltill BE pi,. so imi. hi a,
w MI6 Tit IMAM 117,111111111,1, NOM= • 'MMUS 3111111116
- MI
— ....-
1 --(;,._
E '
-- =WA ill 1 —1—rm '. fiL li=v, .11 111- ii !t1 It EL . El ,
r--.
M al I _
• NI. ••••0,
S3; ELEVATION GUEST WING
PRINIS ISSUED
Immo... 4.0
REVISIONS
IIMME.P=
JERRY T+4EIS
ASSOCIATES...
•••• •••■•••• 1•••I
maarla "Mei WIND
Najaf/
corporation
3.17••■Trase• slya•••••11.•
amass, Maya
•••••
:a..6.SPO.CNTIN4
C87 A-7
• NI. ••••0,
S3; ELEVATION GUEST WING
PRINIS ISSUED
Immo... 4.0
REVISIONS
IIMME.P=
JERRY T+4EIS
ASSOCIATES...
•••• •••■•••• 1•••I
maarla "Mei WIND
Najaf/
corporation
3.17••■Trase• slya•••••11.•
amass, Maya
•••••
:a..6.SPO.CNTIN4
C87 A-7
SOUTH ELEVATION INDOOR POOL AND GUEST WING
EAST ELEVATION GUEST WING FROM COURTYARD
.....
•••-. 1
...-..
".„--.12r.,
1-----
........f.,
wil. [•• i
...;,....
I —,.
—,_
- 7.=
,
-- 1
___,-• -- -=-47=
.11107
, ,._..
•.,,,,-, --,—
_- _
--.,____.„__
—....,..
,.......i......,....._,
-.-
.r..4.1
_
MI Ca tdil
iii
...1. I • • -
Kg
11111 MI
11111_
El
11/32
BM
IBM
,--°
•azt...,. .
.
- -
....at, . •
m e NI
ITEM
....
a 7'
LI=L,
Ma
Bill
BEI
E•U=
Mal BM
•IBM
DI
ell
Ea (di
(i.i `-',72.7 .
• '
1
•••• ".
ritligEll
111
, ,
MEM
*VMS
=MEM .........•
ITAI
MANI
1-111
_ aiii Fri
....1411
f, .0 ...■'
- ...;
MEM!
f•=7
I: CM
_
E
IM
i
rigrilH1*:_
'
1 II
1,E71,,
:,.
EAST ELEVATION GUEST WING FROM COURTYARD
.....
".„--.12r.,
........f.,
,...----••••MaLl Ma.. ..
.11107
, ,._..
... =
__
...1. I • • -
-,
' - - .--
III Mil BM
•,— ...
MI
r' .
MIN
IBM
,--°
El
•--- 4. 67,...,
IL
rinmv.!
S..3771*i.
1..a . .,
, 1
.—.
••• . ,......=_. ...
....
iiii
EY
BM
MI
MIT
E•U=
AIM
TEEM
ff11
WM
INI
..P'
1
Min
111
1111
..,7,...
Mil
ri
ITAI
MANI
—1:4
:. , rim
....1411
f, .0 ...■'
MEM!
I: CM
WW2
. c ,
[ —5]
.)—'
--IM
1,E71,,
:,.
•
1
( .
1....
4
•
—
'
t.T.,
72
,•:.;
1
a s
WEST ELEVATION GUEST WING COURTYARD
SOUTH ELEVATION PUBLIC SPACE FROM COURTYARD
am,
S47.•ft,
LFINTIN
NOVIV: 1ST
NORTH ELEVATION INDOOR POOL FROM COURTYARD
PRINTS ISSUED
REVISIONS
JERRY THEIS
ASSOCIATES-
04/1,1•010••• ,1111111.1•10
••• ■••MBLIA ISM/
corporation
•••••I'•;71:•L WC. MOON
[MOM 0.0•117•0
•■•
c-13701 A-13
Chapter 16.36
• SECURITY DEVICES
Sections:
16.36.010 Requirements.
16.36.020 Definitions.
16.36.030 Enforcement - -Right of entry.
16.36.040 Penalties for violations.
16.36.010 Requirements. The following requirements
shall apply to all apartment houses, hotels, and motels to
provide the maximum possible security from criminal actions
to the permanent and transient occupants thereof, and to
their possessions; provided, that nothing in this chapter
shall be construed to relieve any party from compliance with
the Uniform Building Code (Chapter 33) and the Uniform Fire
Code (Chapter 10):
(1) Entrance doors to individual housing units shall
be without glass openings and shall be capable of resisting
forcible entry equal to a wood, solid core door, one and three -
fourths inches thick. This subsection shall apply in a struc-
ture constructed after the effective date of the ordinance
codified in this chapter. Any door replaced in existing struc-
tures must comply with this chapter.
(2) Every entrance door to an individual housing unit
shall have a keyed, single - cylinder, one -inch dead bolt lock
The lock shall be so constructed that the dead bolt lock may
be opened from inside without use of a key. In hotels and
motels every entrance door to an individual unit shall also
be provided with a chain door guard or barrel bolt on the
inside.
(3) Housing unit to interior corridor doors shall have2
a visitor observation port, which port shall not be in excess
of one -half inch in diameter.
(4) In all apartment houses as defined in Section 16-
.36.020, lock mechanisms and keys shall be changed upon a
change of tenancy.
(5) All exit doors shall be openable from the interior
without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort.
(6) Dead bolts or other approved locking devices shall
be provided on all sliding patio doors which are less than
one story above grade or are otherwise accessible from the
outside. The lock shall be installed so that the mounting
screws for the lock cases are inaccessible from the outside.
(7) Subject to approval by the chief of police, locking
devices may substituted for those required herein, pro-
vided such devices are of equal capability to resist illegal
entry and further provided that the installation of the same
does not conflict with other requirements of this code and
other ordinances regulating safety for exit. (Ord. 1020 Si,
1977). .
16.36.020 Definitions. For the purpose of this chapter
the following definitions shall apply:
(1) "Apartment house" means any building or portions
thereof, which is designed, built, rented, leased, let, or
hired out to be occupied, or which is occupied as the home
or residence of three or more families living independently
of each other and doing their own cooking in the said build-
ing, and shall include flats and apartments.
(2) "Hotel" means any building containing four or more
guest rooms intended or designed to be used, or which are
used, rented, or hired out to be occupied, or which are oc-
cupied for sleeping purposes by guests.
(3) "Motel" means hotel as defined in this section.
(Ord. 1020 §2, 1977).
16.36.030 Enforcement- -Right of entry. The building
official is authorized and directed to enforce the provisions
of this chapter for all new construction. The chief of po-
lice is authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of
this chapter for all existing_buildings or premises.,_and_upon— ______ —_ _____
presentation of-proper credentials, the chief of police or
his duly authorized representative may, with the consent of
the occupant or pursuant to a lawfully issued warrant, enter
at reasonable times any building or premises for the purposes
of inspecting the physical security of exterior accessible
openings of such building or premises. (Ord. 1020 S3, 1977).
16.36.040 Penalties for violations. Any apartment house
hotel, or hotel owner and /or manager violating or failing to
comply with the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor. Upon conviction thereof, they shall be pun-
ishable by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars. It
shall be a separate offense for each and every day or portion
thereof during which any violation of any such provision is
committed. (Ord. 1020 §4, 1977).