HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-15 - MCDONALD'S - RESTAURANTMCDONALDS
SOUTHCENTER PY &
STRANDER BLVD
EPIGFD -15
j � \
f ;;n:•
RECREAT
CITY of TUKWILA
OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
29 April 1977
Jim Ewins
c/o McDonald's Corporation
2750 Northrup Way
Bellevue, Washington 98004
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE: TUKWILA PROJECT
Dear Mr. Ewins:
Thank you for dropping by our office yesterday afternoon and
giving us additional information on what McDonald's intends to
do at their Tukwila site.
The "Soils and Foundation Engineering Study" completed by FIart -
Crowser & Associates which you submitted yesterday has helped
tremendously to clear up the questions we had on the environmental
questionnaire. As a result of this new information, this office
is issuing a negative declaration for the above referenced project.
Please note that this negative declaration is conditioned upon the
fulfillment of the slope regrading and erosion control measures
spelled out in the abovementioned soils report, Sections XV - XIX,
pp. C -4 to C -8. If there is any modification in your proposal
which would affect these mitigating measures, I would advise that
you contact this office promptly.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me
at 242 -2177.
Sy erely
red atterstrom
lanning Supervisor
FNS /cw
cc: Kjell Stoknes, Responsible Official
6230 So.lthc.ant_r £:.:,u1evjcd ' Tut ::.iL , :Jushinytor 9S.fi T (206) 242-2177
CITY OF TUKWILA
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PRB /FINAL
DECLARATION OF t E /i'1ON -S I G► I I F I CAi'ICE
Description of proposal McDonald's Restaurant
Proponent.
Location of Proposal
Lead Agency
McDonald's Corporation (Jim Ewins)
Southcenter Parkway at Strander Blvd.
City of Tukwila
File No. EPIC =FD -15
This proposal has been determined to ( /not have) a significant adverse im-
pact upon the environment. An EIS ( /is not) required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)
(c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency.
Responsible Official
Position /Title
Kjell Stoknes
Director, Office of Community Development
Date April 29, 1977 Signature g itttgAITA 4711( Kjt(it MD biLP si
COMMENTS: This negative declaration is conditioned upon the fulfillment of the
regrading and erosion control measures as outlined in the "Soils and
Foundation Engineering Study" completed for McDonald's by Hart - Crowser
& Associates (dated March 16, 1977), and specifically Sections XV - XIX
of that report, pp. C -4 through C -8.
•
•
XII. DRAINAGE MATERIAL: All draiundatonedrainslsiiouldnconsistcofon
with perforated perimeter fo
a clean,ifree- draining granular material. This material should
conform to the State of Washington, Standard Specification
"Gravel Backfill for Drains ", Section 9- 03.12(4), . 1977.
XIII. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread
or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable
weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy
rain, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils
Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of the
previously- placed fill are as specified.
XIV. TRENCH DRAINS: Trenches sPgemethodsto Immedi-
ately and width using conventional trenching
ately upon completing each segment or progressively as trenching
is completed, Mirafi 140 fabric or equivalent shall be placed
in the drainage ditch conforming to the design and trench
configuration. Whenever more than one segment of fabric is
used, the fabric shall be overlapped by at least 3 feet.
In addition, sufficient fabric shall remain exposed above
trench grade to allow for fabric overlap to close the drain.
Following fabric placement, a shallow layer
yereofhaggregateashall
be backfilled into the trenc backfilled to
on top of the aggregate. and additional aggregate
the desired grade. The slotrodledpipe
outhinto the
fill PVC or similar material and
the Soil
fill shall be a clean, open wotk overlapping
Engineer. The drain structur e
the fabric at grade. No special joining
th an
techniques
aggregate corequired.
The exposed fabric shall be protected
and trenches shall be sealed in non -paved areas with at least
18 inches of relatively impermeable soil.
XV. SLOPE REGRADING: Regrading of the west westspropertyshall
be completed to a uniform slop e extending
boundary and having a slope shall beeaccomplished following
installation 2
horizontal. Slope grading drains
installation of trench drains connection
northfsouthcsegments
to appropriate storm sew system and /or
not greater than 50 -foot concurrent wh
slopestshallnbesewer
connection of trench drains.
compacted prior to seeding and prepared using a sheepsfoot
roller or similar heavy equipment
so designed
tthat leaves
anddepressions
constructed
the surface. Equipment shall
to produce a - uniform rough textured
thesurface riadydio seeding
and mulching, and which ��ou bed material. The entire
soil to the underlying undistur
regraded area shall be covered by a minimum of two complete
coverages with the compaction equipment. If the surface soils
are too wet to provide proper compaction they shall be scar-
ified and allowed to dry prior to compaction. If the soils
are dry, less than 27 of optimum water content (optimum
being that water content which allows maximum density to
be attained as determined by ASTM D1557 -70 Test Procedure),
they shall be adjusted to the proper moisture content and
thoroughly mixed prior to compaction.
XVI. EROSION CONTROL - GENERAL: The contractor shall provide
seeding, fertilizing, mulching, and other measures required
to prevent erosion on this project, all in accordance with
the State of Washington, Standard Specifications for Road
and Bridge Construction, 1977, and as modified herein.
XVII. EROSION CONTROL - MATERIALS:
Water: The Contractor shall make, at his own expense,
whatever arrangements may be necessary to ensure an adequate
supply of water required for erosion control. He shall
also furnish all necessary hose, equipment, attachments, and
accessories for the adequate irrigation of planted areas
as may be required to complete the work as specified. All
costs shall be included in the bid items involved and no
further compensation shall be made.
Topsoil: The Contractor shall provide a two -way mix planting
soil consisting of 2/3 naturally occurring surface sandy loam
as specified in Section 9- 14.01(1) of the Standard Specifi-
cations, except as modified herein, and 1/3 sphagnum peat
moss by volume. Sphagnum peat moss shall contain not less
than 80% organic content by weight.' The two -way mix shall
have a pH range of 5.0 to 6.5. Mixed planting soils shall
meet the following requirements:
Sieve Size Percent Passing
3/4 - 100
3/8 95 - 100
10 80 -.100
#270 14 - 35
Clay 5 - 13
The mixed topsoil shall have a loss due to ignition of
9 to. 12% by weight.
The Contractor shall submit at least 30 days prior to topsoil
delivery acceptable written evidence, such as a laboratory
report, which clearly states that the proposed source for
topsoil has a sufficient quantity of acceptable material to
meet the requirements of this contract. Following acceptance
of the source of supply, the Contractor shall stockpile and
protect not less than 50 % of the estimated quantity of the
_ge C -6
specified topsoil mix, not less than seven (7) working days
prior to beginning of delivery to the stockpileite. Topsoil
must be inspected and approved
to the initial delivery. Th�sContractor shall 1bearequireddeliver
whatever additional quantities topsoil as may
e
to meet the needs of this contract. ntrof samples shall bere
tested by King County during progress
lt in
of any test sample to meet the nspecifications
topsoilmay
orrasportion
suspension of work and rejection
thereof as deter wined by the Engineer.
Topsoil shall be measured by the cubic .yardeinihauloco nyance
at the point of delivery. All costs ng
topsoil shall be included in the unit abidnpricelfor "Topsoil"
per cubic yard and no further comp ei
Grass Seed: The Contractor shall provide grass seecatn ions.
speci ie in Section 9-14.2
Seed shall be mixed by the dealer. TheaContractorashall of
furnish to the Engineer the dealer's g unit
the composition of the miaTiet and
Grasspseednshallobepcomposed
and germination of each v Y
of the following varieties mixed in the proportions indicated.
Proportions
°
Name by Weight % Purity /� Germination
Kentucky Blue-
grass (Adelphi, 50% 85% 80%
Baron or Fylking)
Creeping Red 40% 98% 90%
Fescue (Dawson)
Perennial Rye lo% 95% 90%
(Pennfine or Pelo)
Fertilizer: All areas which are seeded shall receive fertilizer
o -e— alowing proportions and formulations:
al Available Nitrogen 10% (of ,ihich 50% is derived from
(Analyzed 30% slow release ureaf_orm)
(Analyzed as N)
Available Phosphorous
207.
(Analyzed as P205)
Available Potassium
20%
(Analyzed as K20)
Above percentages are proportioned by weight.
XVIII_. EROSION CONTROL - PLANTING OPERATIONS:
Seed Bed Pre aration: Section 8- 01.3(1) of the Standard
Specifications sha.1 apply except as modified herein.
Cultivation: All disturbed areas which are not otherwise
treateTshall be seeded. All areas to.be seeded shall be
raked or similarly treated so as to provide a smooth, con-
sistent, friable surface, acceptable for seeding or topsoil
placement as determined by the Engineer /Owner.
Preparation: All areas to be seeded shall be free of visible
clods, rocks and debris measuring two inch or larger in any
dimension. Any exposed tree roots in cut- slopes shall be
neatly pruned at the finished grade of the slope and the
cut treated with an approved sealer. All costs involved in
seed bed preparation shall be included in the unit price bid
unit, "Seeding".
Topsoil Placement: Topsoil will generally not be required
for erosion control but may be placed in some areas as directed
br 1, t shallrbeevenly distributed used
con-
trol, it
to a depth of two (2) inches.
Seeding: Where feasible, the hydroseeding method of application
shall be used. A slurry consisting of seed,. fertilizer, mulch
and water shall be uniformly applied over all unpaved, dis-
turbed areas
Seedwithin
shalleasements
appli right
ed at theorate ways
ofll s
120pod c
undspe
a
otherwise.
acre.
• Fertilizing: Fertilizer shall be applied at the rate of 400
pounds per acre. Fertilizer shall be incorporated into the
seed, mulch, and water slurry and shall be .applied as specified
under "Seeding ". In the event that additional fertilizer is
required to thick
the Engineer /Own
application.
Mulching: Mulch shall be applied at the rate of 2000 pounds
per acre. .The Contractor shall follow manufacturer's recom-
mended quantities of mulch in pounds to the tank capacity
in gallons. One thousand (1,000) pounds of mulch shall be
included in the slurry of seed, fertilizer and water and
applied to the areas to be seeded. The remaining 1,000 pounds
of mulch shall he applied in a separate operation within 48
hours of the first application. The unit price for mulching
per'acr_e shall include two separate applications as specified
and no further compensation shall be made.
Temporary Protection: In the event slopes and other disturbed
areas cannot be prepared and seeded during the specified
periods, they shall be protected by polyethelene sheeting
or other- approved cleans as determined by the Engineer. All
costs of temporary protection shall be included in the
bid item "Seeding" and no further compensation shall be
made.
XIX. EROSION CONTROL - MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION:
Maintenance: Maintenance shall begin immediately following
seeding operations and shall extend for a minimum of ten
weeks or longer as needed to establish a uniform, healthy,
thick stand of grass: Seeded areas shall be watered as nec-
essary for healthy growth. All costs involved in the
maintenance and establishment of seeded areas shall be
Mulchin "
included in the unit prices per acre for "Seeding",
g
and "Fertilizing ". Any areas damaged by erosion or the Con-
tractor's operations shall be immediately repaired by the
Contractor.
Inspection: All cut and fill slopes will be inspected by
the Engineer /Owner prior to seeding. Determination shall
be made at this time as to topsoil.utilization and hydro -
seeding procedures. Written authorizations shall be required
for all subsequent changes as determined by the Engineer /
0 ner.
Section 8- 01.3(10) of the Standard Specifications is hereby
deleted in its.entirety and the following substituted therefor:
Inspection of all areas shall be made upon completion
of seeding operation and at the completion of the
maintenance period.
Areas not established with a uniform, healthy, thick stand
of grass, as determined by the Engineer /Owner,. shall be re-
seeded, remulched, or refertilized at the Contractor's
expense prior to payment.
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENV I ROw ri NTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: MC.D0041Adt s KG hltAAX ,t.t1
PROJECT ADDRESS: .,OIA;t1WNU.l' PAX 1E514.
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 24/ Ari 14'T7
. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date)
❑ Building: by:
❑ Engineering: by:
!d" Fire: irR, /911 by:
❑ Planning:. by:
❑ Police: by:
(reviewer)
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
Alo 41/11e44 eL4-&o." 4,,c",•...4_
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL)
3�. Agency review of environmental checklist determined that:
The project is exempt by definition.
The project has no significant environmental impact and application should
be processed without further consideration of environmental effects.
The project has significant environmental impact and a complete environ-
mental impact statement must be prepared prior to further action for permit.
More specific information is needed to determine impact.
Signature and Title of Responsible Official Date
4. Applicant was notified of decision on:
Date
Staff Person • Letter, Phone
In accordance with Washington State Environmental Policy Act and City of Tukwila
Ordinance No. 986.
CITY OF TUKWILA
EVV I ROcTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REV I E� Ro
PROJECT NAME: M, DO 4.4.44'b tZ *+Lt4VXM/t
PROJECT ADDRESS: POl An4QPI .*c r filAIPARA4101 .tr AnAke S:v4 •
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 4' Aril tern
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer)
❑ Building: by:
2/Engineering: Cg �? /977 by: -4-.
❑ Fire: by:
❑ Planning: by:
❑ Police: by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL)
3. Agency review of environmental checklist determined that:
The project is exempt by definition.
The project has no significant environmental impact and application should
be processed without further consideration of environmental effects.
The project has significant environmental impact and a complete environ-
mental impact statement must be prepared prior to further action for permit.
More specific information is needed to determine impact.
Signature and Title of Responsible Official Date
4. Applicant was notified of decision on:
by by
Date Staff Person Letter, Phone
In accordance with Washington State Environmental Policy Act and City of Tukwila
Ordinance No. 986.
CITY OF TUKWI LA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for a permit .
from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible Official
that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible Official
previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be completed.
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent: M c- DoNAw g Co2pcp2 to N
. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 2-150 woe --tNu p 1_1304,y)
e-
rev
3. Date Checklist Submitted:
00 S21' 9:102.,
4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Cctt_i F
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Al Lpo t+_n s
6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to
its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an ac-
curate understanding of its scope and nature):
7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well
as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, in-
cluding any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of
the environmental setting of the proposal): :..
Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal:
9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the
Proposal (federal, state and local) :.
(a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc.
(b) King County Hydraulics Permit
(c) Building permit
YES NO•X
YES X NO
YES X hi0__
(d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit
(e) Sewer hook up permit
(f) . Sign/permit
(g) Water hook up permit
Storm water system permit
Curb cut permit
Electrical permit (State of Washington)
Plumbing permit (King County)
Other:
YES NO X
YES x NO
YES X NO
YES X NO
YES.X NO
YES NO X
YESX NO X
• YES NO •X
10., Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain:
No.
11. /Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by
your.proposal? If yes, explain:
No.
12. / Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro-
- pbsal;"if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future
date, describe the nature of such application form:
N/A
II! ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations. of all - "yes" and "maybe" answers are•required
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
(b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or•overcover-
ing of the soil? , •
(c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea-
tures?
YES MAYBE NO
YES MAYBE NO
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or 'off the site?
(f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which
may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? _
Explanation: Stripping of several feet of existing soil and replacement
with well draining base will be necessary since site soil is high in clay
content and drains poorly.
2.1 Air. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality?
(b) The creation of objectionable odors?
(c) Alteration of air movement, moisture
or temperature, or any change in climate, either .
locally or regionally?
X
Explanation: There is the possibility of air quality deterioration due
to 65 parking spaces; restaurant use implies the generation of cooking odors.
•
3. Jblater. Wi 11 the proposal result in:
• (a)- Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
(b)
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood. waters?
(d)
(e)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
(f)
(9)
Change iri'the amount 'of surface water in any water
body?
Discharge.into surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to temperature, dissolved oxygen -or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of .
ground waters?
Change in • the quantity of ground waters, either -
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
X
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either
through direct injection, or through the seepage
of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne
virus or bacteria, or other substances into the
ground waters?
(i)
YES !MAYBE MO
Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail-
able for public water supplies?
Expl anati on: Impervious materials in buildings /parking will .modify
runoff and drainage patterns. Controlled drainage via pipe will possibly
modify the flow rate in natural drainageways and receiving water bodies.
4.' Flora. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of flora?
(c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area,
or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
(d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
Explanation: The preparation of the site for the purpose proposed
will necessitate the removal: of much of the-existing vegetation which is
predominantly grasses and shrubs. Decorative flora will be introduced.
X
5. "Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
•
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of .fauna (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects or microfauna)?
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of fauna?
(c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an
area, or result in a barrier to the migration _
or movement of fauna?
(d) : Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
Explanation: The development will minimally reduce the amount of
wildlife habitat in the area.
-4-
X
Ilk P 9
levels?
YES MAYBE NO
X
.Explanation: It is possible that ambient noise :levels will increase due to
local traffic. Generally, such increases would be insignificant when weighed
against traffic on the adjacent I -5 and Southcenter Parkway.
7./ Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new
. light or glare?
X
Explanation: Proposed building will produce light and glare during night
operating hours.
S Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera-
tion of the present or planned land use
of an area?
Explanation:
9. /Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources ?.
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural
resource?
X
X
Explanation: Commercial development, regardless of scale, will
increase the rate of natural resources and irretrievably commit
natural resources of iron, steel, cement, and asphalt..
I0./ Risk of Upset. Does the p '-oposal involve a risk of an
. explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radi-
ation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
Explanation:
Noise. Will th o osal increase existing noi•
6 o
5-
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate
of the human population of an area?
Explanation:
12., Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
• or create a demand for additional housing?
Explanation:
YES MAYBE MO
X
13.E Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
(a). Generation of additional vehicular movement?
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems?
(d) AIterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and /or goods?
(e). Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
(f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
Explanation: The only increases in local vehicular movements might be-during-
traditional dining hours but the existing signals are expected to safely regulate •
these short term increases, should they. occur.. Pedestrian traffic may also
increase.but the pressure of special pedestrian "walk" and "don't walk" signs
at Southcenter Parkway and Sirander Blvd. should safely regulate this increase.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon,
or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the
following areas:
(a) Fire protection? )'e. Mft j t. 101/1T14t X
(b) Police protection? X
(c) Schools?
(d) Parks or other recreational facilities?
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
X
(f) Other governmental services?
YES MAYBE MO
Explanation: Any development places some additional responsibility on fire
and police services. Only minor alterations will be necessary to provide
for public safety on the site.
15/ Energy. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
(b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or
require the development of new sources of
.energy?
Explanation: Food purveying enterprises consume energy but in lesser
quantities than the same foodstuffs prepared in private, households.
16 ie Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for
new systems, or alterations to the
following utilities:
(a) Power or natural gas?
(b) Communications systems?
(c) Water? �ia..,, 4N6,ib .
(d) Sewer or septic tanks?
(e) Storm water drainage?
(f) Solid waste and disposal?
Explanation: These services are currently available in the immediate
area and could be extended to provide Necessary service to the proposed
restaurant.
17./ Human Health. 'Will the proposal result in the crea-
tion of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Explanation:
X
_/ •
•
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc-
tion of any scenic vista or view open ti
the public, or will the proposal result
in the creation of an aesthetically of-
fensive site open to public view?
1
Explanation:
19./ Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of exist-
ing recreational opportunities ?.
Explanation:
YES MAYBE NO
20./Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in .
an alteration of a signifi-
cant archeological or histor-
ical site, structure, object
or building?
Explanation:
•
CITY of Tt..iKWLA
OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
25 April 1977
Jim Ewins
c/o McDonald's Corporation
2750 Northrup Way
Bellevue, Washington 98004
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MCDONALD'S TUKWILA
PROJECT
Dear Mr. Ewins:
With regard to the abovementioned project, a $50.00
fee is required with the environmental checklist in
order for the application to be considered complete.
This fee must be paid before any permits can be issued.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
red N. Satterstrom
Planning Supervisor
FNS/cw
cc: Al Pieper, Building Official
•
SOILS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED McDONALD'S RESTAURANT
SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
MARCH 16,. 1977
J -382
HART - CROWSER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
705 NE NORTHLAKE WAY
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98105
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
INTRODUCTION 1
SUMMARY 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS -- 5
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
Slope Stability 9
Permanent Site Dewatering 11
Slope Regrading and Erosion Protection 13
Site Preparation - Building and Paved Areas 14
Structural Fill or Backfill 16
Building Foundations 17
Slab -on- Grade Floors 17
Backfilled Walls 18
Parking and Paved Areas 19
Surface Drainage Requirements 20
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site and Exploration Plan
McDonald's Restaurant, Southcenter Parkway
Figure 2 Idealized Site Profile
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Figures A -1
through A -3
Figure A -4-
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Figure B -1
Figure B -2
Figure B -3
Figure B -4
Test Pit Logs TP -1 through TP -8
Boring Logs B -1 and B -2.
P- las- ticity Chart
Grain Size Classification
Direct Shear Test Results
Triaxial Compression Tests
J -382
SOILS AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED McDONALD'S.RESTAURANT
SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of subsurface explorations,
laboratory tests, and engineering studies accomplished for the
proposed McDonald's Restaurant, to be located on the west side
of Southcenter Parkway south of Strander Boulevard in Tukwila,
Washington..
The purpose of this investigation was to assist in the design
of the facility by determining the general subsurface conditions
at the proposed restaurant site, including groundwater, from which
foundation design and construction recommendations could be for-
mulated. Particular emphasis was directed towards evaluation of
the overall site stability relative to the construction of the
proposed facility. The scope of work included a site reconnais-
sance, field explorations, laboratory testing, . and engineering
studies. The investigation has been accomplished in general .
accordance with your letter of transmittal dated November 29,
1976, and your December 28, 1976 acceptance of our revised scope
of work as outlined in our December 20 transmittal. _
Field explorations consisted of excavating eight test pits and
drilling two test borings at the approximate locations shown on
the Site Plan, Figaire 1. Field exploration procedures and results`
are presented in Appendix A and interpretive logs of all explora-
tions are presented on Figures A -1 through A -4.
Laboratory tests consisted of water content determinations, Atter-
berg limits, grain size analyses, a series of direct shear tests,
J -382
Page 2
and a confined triaxial compression test on selected samples
retrieved from the explorations.' The results of the laboratory
tests are presented in Appendix B.
A summary of our conclusions and recommendations is presented
subsequently followed by a description of the general geologic
conditions, subsurface conditions at the restaurant site, and a
discussion of conclusions and recommendations. We have pro-
vided a basic outline of construction specifications preferable
for site preparation and foundation construction as Appendix C.
The analysis, conclusions and recommendations contained in this
report are based on site conditions as they presently exist and
further assume that the exploratory holes at the restaurant site
are representative of subsurface conditions in that area. If,
during construction, subsurface conditions different from those
encountered in the exploratory holes at the restaurant site are
observed or appear to be. present .in the excavations, we should be
advised at once so that we can review these conditions and re-
consider our recommendations where necessary. If there is a sub-
stantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and
the start of work at the site, or if conditions have changed due
to natural causes or construction operations at or adjacent to the
site, it is recommended that this report be reviewed to determine
the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering
the changed conditions and time lapse.
We recommend that we review those portions of the plans and speci-
fications which pertain to earth work and foundations to determine
if they-are-consistent -with the-recommendations presented herein.
In addition, we are available to inspect construction, particularly
site grading and excavations, installation of subsurface drainage
and dewatering, the compaction of structural fill, footing excava-
tions and such other field observations which may be necessary.
J -382
Page 3
This report was prepared forr the exclusive use of the owner
and /or engineer and the design of the subject facility. It
should be made available to prospective contractors and /or the
contractor for information on factual data only (i.e., test pit
logs and laboratory results) and not as a.warranty of subsurface
conditions such as those interpreted on the boring logs and
discussions of subsurface conditions included in this report.
SUMMARY
1 Based on the results of our field explorations, the on -site
soils generally consist of about 2 to 4 feet of surficial,
loose to soft, saturated, mixture of sand and silt with
organics.; underlain by a complex conglomeration of glacially
overconsolidated silts, sands, and silt -sand mixtures.
2 Most suitable foundation support for the proposed structure
would be shallow footings founded within the glacially over -
consolidated soils and /or within compacted structural fill
placed above these soils.
3 Site preparation within the building and paved areas requires
removal of the surficial loose and saturated soils, generally
on the order of 2 feet below existing grade. Because of the
near - saturated condition of the underlying on -site soils a
working surface of clean sand and gravel may be required for
construction.
4. Structural fill should consist of an imported predominantly
granular material, compacted to a dense, non - yielding state.
On -site soils are generally not considered suitable for
placement as structural fill.
S. Excavation of 4 to 9 feet would be required along the western
extremity. of the drive thru roadway. To accomodate this exca-
vation we recouunend that the western slope be regraded to
the west property line with maximum 1 vertical on 2 horizontal
J-382 .
Page 4
slopes. Rockeries or other such structures are not considered
desirable for retention of the slope.
6. Concurrent with site regrading, a permanent site dewatering
system consisting of trench drains would be required. A
permanent groundwater level at elevation 30 feet or lower should
be maintained at the base of the regraded slope.
7. The regraded slope should be protected from erosion through
seeding or other vegetal covering.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed restaurant site is to be located at the base of the
slope below the 1 -5 freeway, with the northbound lanes located some
50 feet in elevation above the building site. The site is a trap -
azoidal shaped tract 380 feet long and from 125 to 185 feet wide,
commencing 265 feet south of Strander Boulevard on the west side
of Southcenter Parkway. The general existing site topography
is illustrated on Figure 1 concurrent with the proposed site
development. The relationship of the proposed building site with
respect to I -5 and Southcenter Parkway is shown on the idealized
site profile, as based on our site reconnaissance and existing
topographic data. The near - surface soils throughout the site were
in a.very wet and near-saturated condition. The type of vegetation
existing along the western property edge, below the adjacent
1 -5 embankment, indicates that such wet conditions exist throughout
the year. A flowing PVC drain -pipe was observed extending from
the hill slope at the north end of the property adjacent to the
existing drive -in bank parking area.
The proposed restaurant would be Standard Class B(SL)R14F18 with
12 -foot storage and drive thru access, located as shown on Figure
1. The drive thru access would extend from the west property line
across Southcenter Parkway extending south across the property
• •
J-382
Page 5
to the west side of the restaurant building and exiting along the
south side of the building_ to Southcenter Parkway. The restaurant
structure would have a finished floor elevation of 35.6 feet. To
construct the proposed drive thru access, a general cut of 4 to 9
feet would be required in the western slope of the property.
GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
The area of investigation is situated along the western side of
the Green River. Valley, which is one of many prominent geomorphic
features on the extensive lowland area between the Cascade Range
and the Olympic Mountains.. The Puget lowland is comprised of a
series of north -south trending troughs with intervening, rolling
- upland= surfaces .- . Though.: somewhat= altered, the present—top.o.graphy .
is essentially a cast of the bottom of the ice of the last major
glacial advance (Vashon), which occupied the Puget Sound area
about 14,000 years ago. .During and since the retreat of the Vashon
ice -, various - modifications by erosion, deposition,- and .landsliding
have created the present topography at this site and throughout
the Puget Sound area. -
Construction of the I -5 Freeway along the west :side - of.the- valley
has somewhat masked the natural topography and geologic con-
ditions of this area. The predominant features of the pre- construc-
tion topography were very hummocky terrain along the toe of the
natural slope and.a'very prominent scarp -like ridge extending from
the present Tukwila Interchange about 4000 feet south along the
crest of the slope. Excavation of borrow areas within this area
during - the - -I -5- construction showed- evidence -that- the - hummocky
-terrain-is the result of post- glacia -1 sliding.
The results of our geological reconnaissance of the immediate
area surrounding the 'proposed restaurant site reveal a .generally .
• •
J -382
Page 6
hummocky terrain below the freeway, with slopes of about. 1 vertical
on 3 horizontal. Further, there is evidence that the south lateral
edge of the prominant scarp extending from the Tukwila Inter -
change area is located just south of the proposed site. Even
though the investigation area is in apparent slide terrain, no
evidence of recent slide movement was observed in our reconnais-
sance. An old inclinometer casing , installed during construction
of I -5 to monitor slope movements, is located below the north-
bound lanes south of the site. However, no evidence of recent
slope movement at this location was observed.
The southbound lanes of the freeway are in a cut area through
very dense glacially overridden soils as was generally encountered .
at depth below the proposed restaurant site. At the base of the
slope, generally beyond the site limits, the soils generally con-
sist of river sediments, with peat layers, underlain by compact
glacial deposits.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions at the proposed restaurant site have been
generalized from the eight test pits and two borings completed for
this study. The location of these field explorations are shown
on Figure 1 and generalized profiles of the soils encountered in
each of the test pits and borings are presented in the descriptive
logs in Appendix A, Figures A -1 through A -4. Generally, the
near - surface on -site soils consist of about 2 to 4 feet of loose to
soft, saturated, mixture of sand and silt with some organics and
gravel. This near - surface strata is considered to be in a dis-
turbed state, consisting of "colluvial slope debris and /or fill
apparently the result of construction activity for 1 -5 and /or
clearing within and adjacent to the property. Beneath this sur-
ficial disturbed zone the site soils appear to consist of a complex
J-382
Page 7
conglomeration of glacially o.verconsolidated lacustrine and
alluvial clayey silts, silts,•sands, and silt -sand mixtures
with some scattered gravels.
Test Pit TP -6 excavated in the southwest corner of the site encoun-
tered very dense to hard, gray, gravelly sandy silt or silty
sand. The texture of this soil was similar to that of glacial
till although it may represent an extreme sandy phase of the over -
consolidated silts observed_ elsewhere across . the site. This
material was excavated by the backhoe with extreme difficulty
and together with topographic constraints and the wet near -
surface site conditions, the test pit was limited to a depth of
about 1.5 feet. Conditions within Test Pit TP -6 were not
encountered elsewhere at the site, although the remainder of
the test pits were dug at lower elevations, where a variety of
soil conditions were also encountered. Within the main building
area, TP -5 uncovered 1.5 feet of very wet sandy silt with roots
and other scattered organics followed by wet sandy silt to a depth
of 3 feet, and then a wet fine to medium sand to. 11 feet. In
TP -3 and TP -4, disturbed surficial soils consisting of wet, silty,
gravelly sand and sandy silt was found from 0.5 to. 1.5 feet deep,
followed by a hard to very hard, slabby, gray silt to depths of
4.5 to 5.5 feet. The lower gray silt was excavated with moderate
to considerable difficulty by the backhoe. Similar conditions were
encountered at a lower elevation in the excavations for TP -7 and
TP -8 to terminal excavation depths of. 3.0 and 6.0 feet, respectively.
In Test Pits TP -1 and TP -2, fill and /or slope debris consisting
of loose to moderately dense silty sand and sandy silt mixed with
organics extended to a depth of 3.0 feet. Below that level, moist
to wet silty to clean (little or no silt) graded and fine sands
were found to the terminal excavation depths of 9.5 to. 12 feet,
respectively. Rapid to moderate groundwater seepage was encountered
at levels ranging from 1.5 to 9.0 feet in the sand zones in TP -5,
TP -1, and TP -2.
• •
J -382
Page 8
Predicated on the depth of the proposed building and drive thru
roadway excavation and relatively extensive site grading, in
addition to the variable subsurface conditions, it was considered
necessary to complete a series of 2 to 3 borings perpendicular
to the slope at the proposed building location. Two borings,
B -1 and B -2, were completed to depths of 15.5 and 21.5 feet,
respectively, at the locations shown on Figure 1. A third
boring was attempted uphill from these two locations along the
west property line. However, the existance of large gravels
and cobbles within the near - surface soils at this location,
believed to be fill placed for the construction of I -5 resulted
in refusal of the auger at a depth of about. 1.5 feet and termina-
tion of that boring. Boring B -1 completed within the proposed
basement excavation encountered about .3 feet of disturbed, loose,
wet, sandy silt with scattered organics underlain by a:thin
zone of fine to coarse sand. Below a depth of about 4 feet in
Boring B -1 extending to the terminal depth of 15.5 feet, was
encountered glacially overconsolidated hard, gray silt. At
boring location B -2, located some 40 feet in horizontal distance
upslope of B-1, variable subsurface conditions were again encoun-
tered. At this location below a mixed and possibly disturbed soil
zone about 4 feet thick of sands and silts with some organics,'
dense, saturated, gray, fine to medium sands with occasional thin
silt layers were encountered to a depth of about 17 feet. Below
this saturated sand strata, hard overconsolidated silts were
encountered similar to those in Boring B -1. Representation of
these variable soil conditions as projected through the proposed
building area is presented on the Idealized Site Profile in
Figure 2. Note groundwater was encountered at a. depth of 4.5 feet
in Boring B -2.
J -382
Page 9
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Construction of the McDonald's Restaurant at the site includes
a Class B(SL)R14F18 structure with. 12-foot storage and drive
thru, situated as shown on Figure 1. To accomodate the drive
thru access and adequate parking significant site regrading would
be required, generally necessitating a cut of 4 to -9 feet along
the western extremity of the drive thru roadway. Plan dimensions
of the building area would be 43 by 93 feet with a finished floor
slab elevation of 35.6 feet, ranging from near existing site grade
to some 6 feet below existing grade.
Predicated on the abutting I -5 roadway embankment, which extends
to an elevation of some 50 feet above basic final site grade,
and groundwater and seepage conditions on- site, our engineering
analysis has been directed toward overall site (slope) stability
and subsurface drainage, in addition to general site preparation
and foundation construction.
Slope Stability
As indicated by our site reconnaissance and general knowledge of
the geologic conditions of the project area, including discussion
with the Washington State Highway Department, the site is considered
suspect of potential slope instability. It must be realized that
the general area consists of landslide topography and slope move-
ments (slides) did occur during-construction of the nearby I -5
Tukwila Interchange. However, evidence of recent slope movements
were not observed in our site reconnaissance or explorations and
the State.Highway Department indicates that slope problems mitigated
to the south of Tukwila Interchange and the general locale Of the
proposed restaurant site.
J -382
Page. 10
In general, slope movements in this area have been the result
of groundwater seepage pressures within the alternating over -
consolidated sand -silt strata. If subsurface conditions in
this area change in the future, such as higher groundwater, or
if the area is subjected to strong earthquake forces, instability
and sliding is possible. Conversely, if the groundwater levels
are effectively lowered through proper drainage provisions the
overall site stability is improved and factor of safety against
sliding is increased, both for static and earthquake conditions.
To evaluate the overall site stability and the effects of the
proposed construction we completed slope stability analyses
utilizing the general profile presented on Figure 2 and basic
soil properties exhibiting a cohesion of 100 psf and internal
angle of friction equal to 32 °, both for the overconsolidated
in -situ silt and sand soils and the I -5 embankment fill. The
groundwater surface was idealized as a sloping surface ranging
from elevation +25 feet at the east property line to ±50 feet
beneath the crest of the I -5 embankment, which on -site generally
corresponds to levels encountered in the field explorations.
Predicated on these analyses a low factor of safety against slope
movement of 1.74 was computed for existing site conditions. A'
generally accepted factor of safety would be on the order of 1.5.
Considering the proposed excavation and regrading for the restaurant
and drive thru- roadway as shown on Figure 2, with the above soil
parameters and no change in the assumed groundwater levels, a low
factor of safety of 1.58 was computed. Although, this factor
of safety is greater than that generally considered acceptable
(1.5), we believe some degree of risk would exist towards slope:..
instability based on our experience with these soil types and
groundwater conditions. Further, the assumed soil parameters
should be considered as such and emphasis of the stability analyses
should be the reduction of magnitude of overall slope- stability.
(factor of safety).
J -382
Page 11
As slope stability (instability) is directly affected by ground-
water seepage pressures, the factor of safety against slope
movement for the proposed excavation and regrading could be increased
through a permanent reduction in the groundwater level. Such a
reduction would be feasible through construction of a controlled
permanent dewatering system. Considering the proposed excavation
and site regrading, and a reduction in the groundwater level at
the base of the regraded slope to elevation +30 feet, a low factor
of safety of 1.78 was computed in our stability analyses. In
comparison of our analyses of assumed existing conditions, which
yielded a low factor of safety of 1.74, we would consider any
risk of slope instability (movement) to be minimal for site
excavation and regrading in conjunction with permanent site de-
watering as recommended in the following section.
Permanent Site Dewatering
Site dewatering as a permanent controlled lowering of the ground -
water level is considered necessary, in our opinion, for slope
stability considerations. We recommend that the groundwater level
be maintained at elevation 30 feet or lower at the base of the
-- proposed regraded slope. We believe an appropriate and economical
drainage system would be trench drains lined with a filter fabric
such as Mirafi. 140 fabric. A minimum 6 -inch diameter perforated pipe
should be placed within the bottom of each trench drain above the
fabric 1 -iner- and the trench. Each lateral drain should be connected
to the drain beneath the drive thru roadway and extend downhill
across the property. The perforated pipe within each lateral drain
should be connected by tight line at the downhill end of each trench
for discharge-from the site into a storm sewer system.
J -382
Page. 12
To maintain a desired degree of overall site stability, the
installation of the fabric lined trench drains should be com-
pleted prior to the major site excavation and regrading and /or
be accomplished in maximum 5'0 -foot north - south segments concur -.
rent with site grading.. It should be noted that the prior instal-
lation of the drainage system would facilitate subsequent site
grading and earth work conditions as the existing groundwater
level is above portions of the proposed finished site grade.
Construction of the drains could be accomplished in much the
same manner as conventional drains. The trenches should be
progressively cut to the predetermined design depth and width
using conventional trenching methods (backhoe). Immediately
upon completing each segment or progressively as trenching is
completed the fabric is unrolled and placed accordingly in the
drainage ditch. Whenever more than one segment of fabric is
used, the fabric must be overlapped about 3 feet to assure . the
continuity of the filter. Also, enough fabric should remain exposed
above trench grade to allow for fabric overlap to close the drain.
Following fabric placement a shallow layer_of aggregate should be
backfilled into the trench. The slotted pipe should then be placed .
on top of the aggregate and additional aggregate backfilled to
the desired depth. The slotted pipe should consist of flexible
PVC or similar material and rolled out into the trench. With
these procedures it should not be necessary for workmen to enter
the trench excavations and thus eliminate shoring from a safety
standpoint. The drain structure is then completed by overlapping
the fabric at grade. No special joining techniques are required.
The exposed fabric should be protected with an aggregate cover and
the trenches should be sealed in non -paved areas with at least 18
inches of relatively impermeable soil. .
, J -382
Page 13
Slope Regrading and Erosion Protection
We recommend that the west slope of the property extending above
the drive thru access be regraded to the :west property line with
a maximum 2 horizontal to 1..vertical slope. As discussed in the
proceeding section, slope grading should be accomplished following
and /or concurrent with installation of site dewatering or drainage
trenches. If slope retention is required to maintain the above
maximum grade, it should be provided by properly designed retaining
walls. The use of rockeries is generally not recommended for
slope retention, particularly within the near - surface fill and
slope debris materials. If rockeries are used for slope protection,
they should be limited to a maximum height of about 2 feet where
ex tending parallel to the slope contour (north- south) and a
maximum height of about 4 feet where extending perpendicular
(east -west) and should only be utilized for protection of the
natural in -situ site soils. Retention or rockery structures
should =be = -provided-- with .a minimum. 18 -inch thick clean, well-graded
granular drainage blanket behind and for the full height of the
structure. Retaining structures supporting .a 2 horizontal to 1
vertical backfill slope should be designed to resist an equivalent
fluid weight of 60 pcf acting- against the full backfill height at
a vertical projection above the heel of the wall. Retaining walls
should be provided with weep holes . and /or minimum 4 -inch diameter
perforated pipe placed on or at the base of the wall footing within
the granular drainage blanket.
The regraded site slope should be protected from erosion through
seeding, fertilizing, mulching, or other necessary measures. All
areas to be seeded should be. free of undesirable weed, or plant
growth, and all clods, rocks and debris two inches or larger in
any dimension. Prior to seeding the regraded slope should be
compacted and prepared using a sheepsfoot roller or similar heavy
J -382
Page 14
equipment that leaves depressions in the surface. Equipment
should be so designed and constructed to produce a uniform
rough textured surface ready. for seeding and mulching, and which
would bond the surficial disturbed soil to the underlying, un-
disturbed material.. The entire area should be covered by a
minimum of two complete coverages with the compaction equipment.
If the surface soils are too wet to provide proper compaction, they
should be scarified and allowed to dry prior to compaction.
If the soils are dry of optimum they should be adjusted to the
proper moisture content and mixed prior to compaction.
Topsoil would generally not be required for erosion control, but
if it appears necessary in local areas it should be evenly distri-
buted over the area to a depth not less than two inches.
We recommend that the hydroseeding method of application be used
for seeding, where feasible. A slurry consisting of seed, fertilizer,
mulch and water should be uniformly applied over the regraded slope
and other unpaved disturbed areas. Seed should be applied at the
rate of 120 pounds per acre, fertilizer at the rate of 400 pounds
per acre, and mulch at the rate of 2000 pounds per acre. One
thousand (1,000) pounds of mulch should be included in the slurry
of seed, fertilizer and water and the remaining 1,000 pounds applied
in a separate operation within 48 hours of the first application.
In the event that slopes and other disturbed areas cannot be
prepared and seeded on a timely basis during construction, they should
be protected by polyethelene sheeting or other appropriate means.
Site Preparation Building 'an'd Paved Areas
Site preparation in the building and paved areas should include
stripping of the upper organic and disturbed soils and excavation
J -382
Page 15
to grade. Stripping operations within the building and paved
areas should include the removal of all vegetation, organic rich
soils, existing disturbed fill and slope debris, and contaminated
materials mixed with organics during prior site construction
activities and clearing operations. We would expect the normal
stripping depth to be approximately 24 inches over most of the
site. However, in some isolated areas such as observed in Test
Pit TP -1, up to 4 feet or so of disturbed and organic rich soil
is anticipated. Removal of this, material should be accomplished
prior to further site 'improvements.
Excavations of up to 9 feet would be required in the proposed
drive thru area with fill and backfill depths of 5 to 6 feet in
the site entrance /exit..areas. Following stripping and excavation
the areas which are to support slab -on- grade, paved surfaces or
receive structural fill should be prerolled to a non - yielding
compact surface. We generally recommend that prerolling be
accomplished with a relatively heavy vibratory roller (minimum
3000 pounds static weight) such that the upper 12 inches of the
exposed natural soils are compacted to 95 percent of modified
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTN D1557 -70 Test Procedure) beneath
buildings and to at least 92 percent beneath paved surfaces., •
However, because of the generally fine - grained nature and saturated
condition of the site soils, - together -with the anticipated
construction schedule, prerolling of the site may result in a
spongy and weaving condition. If such is encountered, we recommend
that the site be overexcavated at least 12 inches below subgrade
where required, and a 12 to. 18 -inch thick working surface of clean,
well - graded sand and gravel be placed and compacted as recommended
above. Because of these conditions, we recommend that a soils
engineer or engineering geologist be present during stripping to
observe the behavior of the in -situ materials during prerolling .
and inspect all stripped areas prior to placement of backfill and /or
structural fill.
•
J-382
Page 16
Structural Fill or Backf:ill
All fill and /or backfiil within the. building. area and beneath
paved surfaces should. be .densely compacted and 'considered as a
structural unit. Such, filling and backfilling should be accomp-
lished only after stripping of all unsuitable soils and subgrade
preparation have been accomplished as recommended... Structural
fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 9 inches in thickness
and thoroughly compacted to a dense, non- yielding state. A
density equal to at least 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum
dry density beneath the building. and 92 percent beneath the paved
surfaces (ASTM D1557 -70) should be achieved. .Structural fill
placed to bring parking areas to grade should extend at least
5 feet beyond the proposed paved surface, then down and out to
the stripped prerolled site soils:: To maintain a stable slope
and provide proper compaction we recommend that this fill be
placed having a final slope. no steeper than,1 vertical on 1.75
horizontal.
Structural fill should consist of a predominantly granular soil
which is free of organics and debris with a maximum particle size
of about 6 inches. The fines content .(soils finer than a No.'.
200 mesh sieve) should be limited to less than 5 percent, based
by weight on the minus 3/4 inch fraction using the wet sieve analysis,
and be non - plastic when placed during wet weather and /or above wet
on -site soils. The fines content may be as much as 30 percent when
placed during the dry season provided the moisture content is
near optimum and a non - yielding compact and dry working surface
has been established.
Classification of the on -site soils indicates that they are moisture
sensitive, containing greater than 5 percent . fines, and are pre-
sently in a near - saturated condition. Moisture content control
• •
J -382
Page 17
and compaction of these soils would be difficult and as such we
generally do not recommend the use of on -site $oils as structural
fill. Zf wet weather construction is considered, we recommend
that a predominantly granular, well- graded, free- draining soil
with non- plastic fines be imported for use as structural fill
as previously discussed.
Building Foundations
Based on the subsurface conditions disclosed in the test pits
and borings and the proposed building floor elevation shallow
spread or continuous footings placed within the natural undisturbed
site soils and /or-compacted structural fill should provide the
-= -most suitable structural support. Footings placed within the
stiff to dense undisturbed soils and /or compacted structural
fill could be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure
of 3 ksf (kips per square foot). Spread footings should have a
minimum width of 24 inches and continuous footings 16 inches. We
recommend that the base of all spread footings be located a minimum
depth of 18 inches below the top of the building floor slab or
adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower.
We believe that total and differential settlements of shallow
foundations would be generally limited to less than 3/4 inch
and 1/2 inch, respectively, provided the above recommended bearing
-_ pressures are not- exceeded.- Further, a major portion of these . --
settlements would be expected to occur during construction.
Slab -on -Grade Floors
The interior floors of the building could be constructed as slab-
on- grade'above the compacted in -situ soils and /or structural fill.
These floors should bear on a 6 -'inch layer of clean, free - draining
J-382.
Page. 18
sand and gravel or. crushed. rock placed over the compacted soils
to provide a capillary break...As.noted, in -situ soils and
structural.. fill should be compacted to. at least 95 percent of the
modified Proctor in these building areas.
Backfilled Wails
All backfill placed behind retaining walls or around foundation
units should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified
Proctor maximum density. Backfill material within 18 inches of any
retaining or foundation walls backfilled on one side only should
consist of a clean ;;free- draining granular material such as that
conforming to the_following general gradation requirements:
• Passing 2" square opening 95 to 100
% Passing 2" square opening 30 to 60
• Passing U.S. No. 8 sieve 20 to 50
• Passing U.S. No.50 sieve 3 to .12
• Passing U.S. No. 200 sieve 0 to 2
Lateral soil pressures on subgrade or foundation walls backfilled
on one side only will depend on the degree of compaction and
amount of lateral movement permitted at-the top of the wall during
backfilling operations. If walls are free to yield at the top
at least 0.001 of the height of the wall, soil pressures will be
less than if the movement is more limited by stiffness or by
construction of the structural. floor network prior to backfilling.
Using the recommended backfill and.compaction of 95 percent, we
suggest that an equivalent fluid weight of 35 pcf, (pounds per
cubic foot) and 50 pcf be used for lateral earth pressures on
yielding and non - yielding walls, respectively, in conjunction with
a horizontal backfill._ Conventional cantilever, yielding, retaining
walls, supporting a sloped backfill of 2 horizontal on 1 vertical
J -382
Page 19
should be designed for an equivalent. fluid weight of 60 pcf acting
for the. full backfill height '.at a .vertical projection behind the
heel of the wall footing.
These equivalent fluid weights are. based on the assumption of
uniform backfill and no buildup of.hydrostatic pressure behind
the wall. The 'effect of surcharges such as floor. loads should
also be included. For a uniformly distributed load behind the
wall a corresponding uniformly distributed lateral soil pressure
equal to 30 percent of the uniform.load should be considered
acting on the wall. Additionally; to prevent the buildup of lateral
soil pressure in excess of the above design pressures, over -
compaction of the fill behind the wall should be avoided. This
can be accomplished by placing the backfill located within 18 inches
of the wall in lifts not exceeding 8 inches-loose depth and com-
pacing with a hand - operated or small self - propelled vibrating
plate.
In conjunction with the drainage material placed behind the base-
ment walls or foundation units, we recommend that minimum 4 -inch
diameter .perforated perimeter drains be used to route any seepage
water out of the area.
Parking and Paved Areas
We suggest that all paved traffic and parking areas be stripped,
prerolled, and brought to grade with structural fill as previously
recommended. Site preparation for asphaltic concrete should
include grading the structural fill to a smooth surface ensuring
also that the upper 6 inches is compacted to at least 95 percent
compaction. A minimum thickness of. 4 to 6 inches of crushed rock
base coarse or select sand and gravel (containing less than 5 per-
cent fines) should be provided in conjunction with the 4 -inch
thickness of asphalt concrete.
J -382
Page 20
Surface Drainage Requirements
All incidental rainfall and accumulated surface runoff should
be directed from the site by controlled slopes, paved ditches,
catch basins, and tight lines to a storm sewer connect. We
recommend that a controlled drainage system be provided at the
base of the regraded slope. The permanent subsurface dewatering
trench system should not be used for this purpose. The surface
drainage system should consist of a paved ditch behind the drive
thru roadway curb line. Alternatively, a subgrade perforated
pipe could be placed behind the curb, surrounded and backfilled
to the surface with clean, well - graded sand and gravel . as_ pre-
viously recommended for wall drainage backfill. The base of the
sand and gravel surrounding the perforated pipe should consist
of compacted impervious soils or pavement and not be hydraulically
connected to the permanent dewatering system. The ditch or drain
line should be directed and /or connected by tight, line to a storm
drainage system.
Site paving and grading should be sloped to carry surface runoff
away from the building. Further, roof drains should be carried
by tight line and discharged away from the building site. Drainage
should be provided at any low or depressed area that may occur as
a result of landscaping or other reasons. Paving should be sloped
to a system of catch basins, connected by tight line to a storm
sewer connect.
HART - CROWSER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
'JOHN C. CROWSER
Professional Engineer
58 -
56,__ _
54- __
52 -
50- — -
48-
46-
44--
42-
40-
38- -
36-
34 —
1
, ) / �/ /- \
/// / 1 \
—./// I r�
--- / \ ---
•
Trash
Area
32� _
30 _
28
26 -
•
I \
N 133.0 FL'
28 - - - -
131.6 FL
135.01
TP-5
Primary eto te
Cyclone Fence
o
Drive
Thru
TP -4
PROPOSED RESTUARANT
[35. 6 F. E.
\TP -3 .
IN TP -7
A
36 Ft.
Highway
(Interstate
33.2 FL
/-5)
•
SITE and EXP
Mc Donald's R
South Center
• •
LORATION PLAN
estuarant
Parkway LEGEND
0 , 5 10 20
Scale In Feet.
T P -1
B -2
38 FL
Test Pit Location and Number
Boring Local on and Num ber
Proposed Final Elevat on , Feet
- - -40 -- Existing Site Eievotion Contours, Feet
39.0
TP'- 8
138.01
TP -2
Q
South Center Parkway
1370 FL
36 Ft.
/
1
2 /
- -60
_ 58
-56
- 54
-52
- - - 50
48
- 46
- _ 44
- -42
- -40
Rockery
,r-•- Retaining Wall
87' ±
o Building
ss
J -3132 MARCH 1977
HART- CROWSER ossociotes inc.
Figure 1
A
100
80
0
0 40
a)
w
20
0
IDEALIZED SITE PROFILE
Proposed Restuarant
Regrade Area
Interstate 1 —
and Slope .:Debris
Very Fine to
SAND
2
Fine to
Medium
SAND
Cloyey SILT
Gravel Drain
20
I0
0
20
SCALE IN FEET
J -382 MARCH 1977
HART - CROWS E R 8 associates inc.
Figure 2
A'
100
80
60
d
a
1
0
40 0
20
0
a�:
W
J-382 .
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
The field exploration program consisted of excavating eight test
pits, TP -1 through TP -8 and two test borings, B -1 and B -2, at
the restaurant site as shown on Figure. 1. Because of difficult
access, the borings were drilled using portable, continuous - flight
auger, hydraulic drilling equipment operated by a two -man crew from
our firm. All explorations were observed by a geologist from our
firm who also located the explorations by taping from existing cul-
tural features. The elevations shown on each.test pit and boring logs
were obtained by plotting the locations from the topographic site
plan.
Representative grab samples - were - generally obtained-in the test
pits at changes in soil type, moisture conditions•and density.
Representative soil samples from the two test borings were generally
obtained at 2.5 foot intervals. These representative but dis-
-- turb-ed = samples were obtained using the Porter sampling procedure:
This test is a means of estimating the relative density of granular
soil and the consistency of cohesive soil, and consists of driving
a standard 1 3/8 inch O.D., 1 inch I.D., split - barrel sampler a
distance of 18 inches using a 30 -pound hammer, free - falling 18
inches. The number of blows of the haininer required to drive the
sampler the last 12 inches is the Porter Penetration Resistance
shown graphically on the boring logs.
All samples were classified in the field, placed in air -tight jars
and transported to our laboratory for detailed examination and
classification. The test pit and boring logs, presented on Figures
A -1 through A -4, are based on- inspection of samples secured, lab-
oratory test results, and field logs.
TEST PIT At TP- I
Ground
Somple Water Water Depth SOIL INTERPRETATION
Content Depth feet
0/0
IL .
2
3 Zlecl
4
5
' 6
7
8
9
10 —
TEST PIT LOG TP-2
Ground
Somple Water Water Depth.
Content Depth feet
0
GRAY, SATURATED, SILTY SAND AND SANDY SILT
WITH ROOTS (FILL)
-BECOMES SATURATED-
GRAY, SATURATED, SANDY SILT-WITH ABUNDANT
ORGANICS (ORIGINAL TOPSOIL)
GRAY, SATURATED, FINE SAND AND MEDIUM COARSE
SAND
GRAY, MEDIUM DENSE, VERY WET, VERY SILTY SAND.
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
SOIL INTERPRETATION
GRAY, VERY COMPACT, MOIST, SILTY, GRAVELLY
SAND AND SANDY SILT (GLACIAL TILL FILL) WITH
ORGANICS IN TOP 1'
GRAY-TAN,-SLIGHTLY SILTY, VERY FINE SAND,
COMPACT, MOIST •
-VERY SLOW SEEPAGE-
GRAY.. COMPACT., SILTY, FINE SAND
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
J-382 DECEMBER 197
HART- CROWSER 8 associates in(
Figure 4-
1
1
1
2
TEST PIT LcTP- 3
Ground
Sample Water Water Depth
Content Depth • feet
°/0
1 i 0 ;
1
SOIL INTERPRETATION
' MOIS , RAY, SILTY, GRAVELLY SAND WITH
SLIGHT ORGANICS (VERY•WEATHERED TILL)
9 -
10 -
TEST PIT LOG TP- 4
Sample Water Depth
Content feet
0
LIGHT GRAY, VERY STIFF TO VERY HARD, PARTLY
INDURATED 5ILZ (EXCAVATES WITH DIFFICULTY).
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
SOIL INTERPRETATION
2
3
.4-
5
:6
T-
8 -
9
10 -
GRAY, VERY MOIST, SILTY SAND AND SILT WITH
ORGANICS (TOPSOIL)
GRAY, VERY STIFF TO HARD, PARTIALLY INDURATED
SILT, WITH SOME RARE SMALL'GRAVEL AND BOULDERS
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
TEST PIT LOG TP- 5
Ground
Sample- Water Water Depth - • SOIL INTERPRETATION
Content Depth feet
0 -7
1 -
2
3
4
- -.
V�w
•
5
6�
7
8
GRAY, SATURATED, SILTY, FINE SAND AND FINE
SANDY SILT WITH SOME ROOTS (TOPSOIL)
GRAY, SANDY SILT
INTO GRAY, SATURATED, FINE- MEDIUM-SAND
REMAINS CONSISTENTLY UNIFORM .�— DECEMBER 1976
TO BOTTOM OF TEST PIT HART- CROWSER a associates inc
Figure A -2
t3UrrUM Ur ltSI P1I
COMPLETED 12/8/76
•
TEST PIT LOG TP-6
Sample Water Depth SOIL INTERPRETATION
Content feet_ ...._. .
" LOOSE, GRAY, SILTY, GRAVELLY SAND, SATURATED
1 VERY WEATHERED TILL)
2 -* VERY DENSE, GRAY, SILTY, GRAVELLY SAND, VERY
ELL COMPACTED (GLACIAL TILL)
3-
4-
5-
6-
TEST PIT LOG TP -7
Sample Water Depth
Content .feet
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
SOIL INTERPRETATION
LESS THAN 6 INCHES OF SATURATED, VERY SANDY SILT,
WITH ORGANIC MATTER (TOPSOIL)
INTO VERY STIFF,TO VERY HARD, GRAY, PARTIALLY
INDURATED SILT, WITH SOME SMALL GRAVEL (EXCA-
VATED WITH DIFFICULTY INTO SLABBY CHUNKS)
TEST PIT LOG TP- 8
Ground
Sample Water Water Depth
Content Depth feet
0
2
3
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
SOIL INTERPRETATION
LESS THAN 6 INCHES OF SATURATED, GRAY, SILTY,
GRAVELLY SAND WITH SOME ROOTS (TOPSOIL)
INTO GRAY, VERY DENSE, FINE SAND
GRAY, VERY STIFF TO HARD SILT
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT COMPLETED 12/8/76
J- 382 DECEMBER 197
HART - CROWSER t3 associates in
Figure A -
BORING LOG B -I
PORTER PENETRATIOIMESISTANCE
( 30 pound neigh 1, 18 in op
BLOWS PER FOOT 0
CoorelGled lo:
STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE
(140 pound r•ighl, 30 inch drop)
BLOWS PER FOOT •
Somple 1 2 5 to ' 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
•7.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Depth
50 00 feet
1�
•
•
BORING LOG B -2
Sample 1 2
1
1
AUG
FLI
SA
5 10 20
—0
SOIL INTERPRETATION
SURFACE ELEVATION APPROXIMATELY 39 FEET
LOOSE, WET, GRAY TO BROWN, FINE SANDY SILT,
WITH ORGANICS
MEDIUM DENSE,.WET TO SATURATED, SLIGHTLY SIL.
5
10
15 -
• Depth
50 00 1ee1
SURFACE FLEVATION APPROXIMATELY 46 FEET
LOOSE, SATURATED, BROWN, SILTY SAND WITH
•
■
t
•
•
,y
ER
GHT
IPLE
•
0
e
1 2 5
WATER CONTENT
PERCENT •
LEGE NO
I0
20
50
100
FINE TO COARSE SAND, OCCASIONAL GRAVEL
SLIGHT SEEPAGE ABOVE SILT
HARD, MOIST TO WET, GRAY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY,
SLIGHTLY FINE SANDY SILT
.BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 12/21/76
OCCASIONAL GRAVEL
•••20
® 2" 0.0. Soli, Spoon Sample T7 Water Level
N3" 0.0. Shelby Semple Observation Well
* No Sample Recovery
NOTE: Soil descriptions ore interpretive and actual changes may be produoL'
VERY DENSE, WET, GRAY TO BROWN, SLIGHTLY,
GRAVELLY, FINE SANDY SILT' WITH ORGANICS
VERY DENSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, WET TO SATURATED
GRAY FINE SAND WITH OCCASIONAL SILT LAYERS
<1/2 INCH
BECOMING MORE COARSE, SANDY
HARD, MOIST, GRAY, SLIGHTLY CLAYEY SILT,
SCATTERED GRAVELS 1 TO 3 INCHES '
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 12/28/76
J -382 JANUARY • 1977 = •
HART - CROWSER & ossociotes inc.
• Figure . A— 4
J -382
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
A laboratory testing program was developed to establish the basic
index and engineering properties of site soils. Particular
attention was directed to determining the shear strength charac-
teristics of the natural on -site soils for use in stability
analyses.'
Classification: Tests
All samples were visually reclassified in our laboratory and the
field logs verified and modified as required. In addition, the
natural water content was determined for most samples and Atterberg
limits performed on a selected sample for the purposes of (1)
identification and correlation of the soils, and (2) providing
basic engineering properties. Natural water contents are pre-
sented on the logs of borings and test pits, Appendix A. Atter-
berg limits are presented on the plasticity chart, Figure B -1.
Grain Size Distribution
Sieve analyses were conducted on selected soil samples to provide
grain size distributions of representative soil types encountered
at the site.. The resulting grain size distribution curves are
presented on Figures B -2.
Direct Shear Tests
A series of direct shear tests was performed on •a selected sample
to- determine the shear strength characteristics of the soils. A-
test series was performed on fine to medium sand placed into.a
2.5 -inch diameter shear box. A normal load was applied and the
sample allowed to consolidate with access to water prior to testing.
J -382
Page B -2
Shearing was conducted at a constant strain rate with shear stress
measured using a calibrated proving ring.. Direct shear test results,
plotted in terms of normal and shear stress, are presented on
Figure B -3.
Triaxia1 Coinpressiori Tests
A consolidated- undrained triaxial compression test was performed
on a selected sample of slightly clayey silt to evaluate strength
characteristics of these soils. The test was performed on rela-
tively undisturbed soils extruded from the thin - walled steel tube
samples as a cylindrical test specimen 1.95 inches in diameter.
The specimen was trimmed flat on both ends, enclosed in a rubber
membrane and fit with a porous stone on the top and bottom. The
triaxial cell was then assembled and filled with water as the fluid .
providing the confining pressure.
After saturation and consolidation had occurred at the effective
confining pressure, the triaxial compression test was performed
at an axial compression rate of approximately 0.004 inches per
minute until 20 percent strain had been achieved. Triaxial
compression test results, plotted in terms of total stress,
are shown on Figure B -4.
PLASTICITY HART
70
60
50
w
0
z 40
•0
20
I0
I0
SAMPLE
B -I, S -4
20
1 CL
CL ML
AML I
OL
OH
MH
30
40 50
LIQUID LIMIT
60 70 80 90 . 1
• LL PL PI
35 27 8
• J -382 . FEBRUARY 197
HART - CROWSER a associates
Figure • B-
GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICATION
•
9
b
L 7
a
S
4o
0. 30
20
0
•'
4�
Sieve Analysis
Hydrometer Analysis
Sits of Opening in Ina.** !Number of 61saA par in.,US. Stondord
Groin Sirs 1a no. .
0 0 0 .o 0
ti 1 ,O
88 .13 O N
,r O
0
00
X ^~
0 0
0 0 0
s
o •
14S
-2
o TP -5, TP -I
S -2 S -I r
0
r
1
t Au 1s1_-: L J y — Al ,_LJ_ — i 1 11 LJ 1 1 ,1 1 _ 1` _
0
V .V
N
SD •
.
Groin Size in Milllmdte.rs
0 0 Q O O
i7 0. V n N
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
O
0
I CQbbies
j
Cooric _ J Fins Msdium F+»
J
JCoo(uj
j
Goral Sand
'� S
S -2
TP- 4
T
0
V .V
N
SD •
.
Groin Size in Milllmdte.rs
0 0 Q O O
i7 0. V n N
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
O
0
I CQbbies
j
Cooric _ J Fins Msdium F+»
J
JCoo(uj
j
Goral Sand
Semple Depth-tt. U.S.C. Clossification
TP -I, 1.0 'ML Fine Sandy SILT and /or CLAY With a Trace
S -I CL of Medium Coarse SAND _
TP -4, - 2.5 ML Fine to Medium Sandy Clayey SILT.
S -2 CL
TP- 5, 45 SP Clean Fine to Medium SAND
S -2
20
30
40
30
60
70
*0
90
F
1
• Nat. Atlnrb4rg Limits
W. C. % LL PL PI
22
TP -8, 3.5 ML SI ightly Fine Sandy SILT and / or CLAY 25
S -2 CL
• J — 382 FEBRUARY 1977
HART - CROWSER a associates inc.
Figure 1372
• •b
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
SHEAR STRESS
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
C = .025ksf 0
Or-34°
0
05
10
1.5
NORMAL STRESS c771 ksf
TEST SAMPLE DEPTH WET UNIT • . %W.C. ATTERBERG•
NO. FEET WEIGHT LIMITS
LL PL PI
B -2 12 -16 "II5 pcf
2.0
CLASSIFICATION
Fine to Medium SAND
2.5
J - 38 2 FEBRUARY 1977
HART - CROWSER & associates inc.
Figure B -3
40
30
z
10
•
TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TESTS
•
STRESS vs. STRAIN
al- 03= Deviator Stress
z
a
iii
BORING NO.
..
B-I
Total
---- Effective
Criteria:
. . .
.........
S-4
.................
CHAMBER PRESSURE.
PSI
TO
HEIGHT. INCHES
5.11
DIAMETER, INCHES
1.95
0 4. 8 12
PERCENT STRAIN
z
16
•
20
Sample Classification
HARD, MOIST, GRAY. SLIGHTLY CLAYEY
LUX
LL 35 PL 27 PI 8
Type of Test
CONSOLIDATED
UNDRAINED
QUICK
TEST NO.
ENVELOPE
Stresses
Stresses
gi-13
z
a
iii
BORING NO.
..
B-I
Total
---- Effective
Criteria:
. . .
SAMPLE NO.
S-4
CHAMBER PRESSURE.
PSI
TO
HEIGHT. INCHES
5.11
DIAMETER, INCHES
1.95
UNIT WT., PCF.
128.4
W.C. X, BEFORE TEST
29
W.C. X, AFTER TEST
29
MOHR STRENGTH
ENVELOPE
Stresses
Stresses
gi-13
max
...... ...
.........
..
....1-Failure
.........
--..3
Total
---- Effective
Criteria:
. . .
.
3 10 20 30 40 50
PRINCIPAL STRESS IN PSI
• J- 382 FEBRUARY 197'
HART - CROWSER 131 associates inc
Figure B--'
• •
APPENDIX C
GEOTECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: This item of work shall consist of all
clearing and grubbing, preparation of land to be . filled,
filling of the land, spreading, compaction,.' control. of the
fill, - placement of backf.ill;.foundation preparation, installa-
tion of trench drains,. 'drainage' 'material, erosion control, and
all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the
cut and fill areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes
as shown on the approved grading plans. All unsuitable material
and unsuitable soil shall be disposed of at approved locations.
II. NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES: The Contractor shall notify the owner
(McDonald's Corporation) and owner's Soil Engineer before any
proofrolling, grading, b'ackfilling, compacting, installation
of trench drains, or placing concrete for foundation units is
done so that the Soil Engineer may be present prior to and /or
during these operations. The Contractor shall arrange the
work so that the number and length of visits by the Soil Engin-
e eer can be kept to a minimum.
The Contractor's requests for the Soil Engineer's appearance
on the project shall be made at least two days prior to
starting site preparation and at least one -half day prior to
needed ,site inspections thereafter..
The Soil Engineer shall be allotted sufficient time to perform
the necessary testing to assure that properly placed compacted
fill is being obtained; i.e., the filling operations shall
be arranged in a way that will permit making the necessary
control tests for each lift prior to placement of subsequent
lifts. Thickness of layers shall be determined by the Soil
Engineer.
III. PREPARATION FOR FILLING:
a) All timber, logs, stumps, trees, brush, large roots,
concrete and rubbish shall be removed, -piled or burned
or otherwise acceptably disposed of.
b) When material is to be disposed of by burning, necessary
permits for burning the debris shall be obtained -. Adequate
fire fighting protection shall be available during burning'
operations and for a sufficient time thereafter to eliminate
all fire hazards. Ashes and debris from burning shall be
acceptably disposed of... If a burning permit cannot be
obtained, all materials to be burned shall be removed from
the site and disposed elsewhere.
Page C -2
c) All vegetable matter, including but not limited to grass,
weeds, roots, and topsoil, shall be removed from the
area in which the. :fill is to be placed, and the surface
shall then be leveled until the surface is free from ruts,
hummocks, or other uneven features which •would tend to
• prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used.
d) Areas to receive fill shall be compacted to a depth of
12 inches with an approved compactor such as a vibratory
roller or other suitable equipment to a density equal to
95 percent of the maximum density as determined by the
modified Proctor compaction test (ASTM D1557 -70). Should
this rolling reveal the presence of soft, loose, excessively
wet and spongy, or other unsuitable materials, such mat-
erials shall be removed and replaced with suitable com-
pacted soil, or alternatively dried or moistened as may be
required, reworked and compacted until a firm, non- yielding
surface meeting the required compacted density is ready
for fill placement.
e) All areas shall meet the approval of the Soils Engineer
prior to commencing fill operations.
IV. FILL MATERIALS: All fill, imported or otherwise, shall be
approved by the Soil Engineer.. All fill material used shall
be free of vegetal matter and other deleterious substances
and shall not contain rocks or lumps having a diameter of
more than six inches. -Surface water or groundwater, if en-
countered, shall be contained and controlled in areas to be
excavated for fill material.. If placed during wet weather,
the fines content of fill materials shall be limited to no
more than 5% by weight passing the No. 200 mesh sieve, based
on the minus 3/4 inch size, and be non - plastic.
V. DEPTH AND MIXING OF FILL LAYERS: The selected fill materials
shall be placed in layers which before compaction shall not
exceed 9 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall
be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to ensure
uniformity of material and moisture in each layer.
VI. MOISTURE CONTENT: The fill material shall be compacted at a
moisture content within two percent (2 %) and not over one
percent (1%) of the optimum moisture content for the soils being
used, as determined by the Soils Engineer. Surface and ground-
water shall be contained and controlled in all areas receiving
fill in such a manner that adequate compaction can be achieved.
The addition of water to increase the moisture content, or aera-
tion to remove moisture, shall be performed in a conscientious
manner so as not to endanger previously placed fill. Flooding
of the area will not be acceptable.
Page C -3
VII. COMPACTION: After each layer (lift) has been placed, mixed
and spread evenly, it'.shall be thoroughly compacted to not
less than 95% of maximum dry density in building areas and not
less than 92% in parking areas in accordance: with the modified
Proctor compaction test, ASTM Designation D1557 -70.
VIII. COMPACTION OF FILL LAYER: Compaction shall'.be.by multiple -
wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, vibratory roller or.other
approved types of compaction equipment: Compaction equipment
'shall be of such design that it will be able to compact the
fill to the specified density. Compaction shall be accomp-
lished while the fill material is at the specified moisture
content. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over
its entire area and the compaction equipment shall make a
minimum of four complete coverages to ensure that the required
density has been obtained.
IX. COMPACTION OF SLOPES: Fill slopes shall be compacted by means
of approved equipment. Compacting operations shall be contin-
ued until the slopes are stable but not too dense for planting .
and there is no appreciable amount of loose soil on the slopes.
Compacting of the slopes may be done progressively . in increments
of 3 to 5 feet in fill height or after, the fill is brought to
its total height.
X. BACKFILL AGAINST RETAINING WALLS AND FOUNDATION UNITS:
a) All backfill against retaining walls below grade shall have
at least an 18 -inch (18 ") minimum thickness of clean, free -
draining granular fill against them conforming to the
State of Washington, Standard Specification "Gravel Backfill
for Drains ", Section 9- 03.12(4), 1977.
b) Backfill located within 18 inches (18 ") of the wall shall
be spread in lifts not exceeding 8 inches and compacted to
at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry
density (ASTM D1557 -70 Test Procedure).
c) Compaction should be accomplished with a hand - operated or
small self - propelled vibratory plate.
XI. DENSITY TESTS: Field density tests will be made by the Soils
Engineer on the compacted fill materials. Density tests shall
be taken in compacted material at or below. the surface. As
directed by the Soils Engineer, the Contractor shall assist in
the testing by excavating below the surface at selected density
test locations. Following each test, excavated soil shall be
suitably replaced and compacted. When these tests indicate
that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below
the 'required density, the particular layer or portion shall be
reworked until the required density has been obtained.
Page C -4
XII. DRAINAGE MATERIAL: All drainage material.. placed in conjunction
with perforated .perimeter ..foundation . drains .should consist of
a clean, free- draining; granular material.... This material should
conform to the State of Washington, Standard: Specification
"Gravel Backfill for Drains ", Section 9-03.12(4), 1977.
XIII. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall.be. placed, spread
or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable
weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy
rain, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils
Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of the
previously - placed fill are specified.
XIV. 'TRENCH DRAINS: Trenches shall be progressively cut to design
depth and width using conventional trenching :methods. Immedi-
ately upon completing each segment or progressively as trenching
is completed, Mirafi 140 fabric or equivalent-shall be placed
in the drainage ditch conforming to the design and trench
configuration. Whenever more than one segment of fabric is
used, the fabric shall be overlapped by, at least 3 feet.
In addition, sufficient fabric shall remain..exposed above
trench grade to allow for fabric overlap .. to close the drain.
Following fabric placement, a shallow layer of aggregate shall
be backfilled into the trench. Slotted pipe shall be placed
on top of the aggregate and additional aggregate backfilled to
the desired grade. The slotted pipe should consist of flexible
PVC or similar material and rolled out into the trench. Back-
fill shall be a clean, open work aggregate approved by the Soil
Engineer. The drain structure shall be completed by overlapping
the fabric at grade. No special joining techniques are required.
The exposed fabric shall be protected with an aggregate cover
and trenches shall be sealed in non -paved areas with at least
18 inches of relatively impermeable soil.
XV. SLOPE REGRADING: Regrading of the west slope of the site shall
be completed to a uniform slope extending to the west property
boundary and having a slope not greater than 1 vertical on 2
horizontal. Slope grading shall be accomplished following
installation of trench drains and connection of trench drains
to appropriate storm sewer. system: and /or north - south segments
not greater . than 50 -foot concurrent with installation and sewer
connection of trench drains. The regraded slopes shall be
prior; to seeding and prepared using a sheepsfoot
roller or similar heavy equipment that leaves . depressions in
the surface. Equipment shall be so designed and constructed
to produce a- uniform rough textured surface ready for seeding
and mulching, and which would bond the surficial disturbed .
soil to the underlying undisturbed'. material. The entire
regraded area shall be covered by a minimum of two complete
coverages with the compaction equipment. If the surface soils
• •
Page C -5
are too wet to provide proper compaction they shall be scar-
ified and allowed to dry prior to compaction. If the soils
are dry, less than-2% of optimum water content (optimum
being that water content which allows maximum density to
be attained as determined by ASTM D1557 -.70 Test Procedure),
they shall be adjusted to the proper moisture content and
thoroughly mixed prior to compaction.
XVI. EROSION CONTROL - GENERAL: The contractor shall provide
seeding, fertilizing, mulching, and other measures required
to prevent erosion on this project, all in accordance with
the State of Washington, Standard Specifications for Road
and Bridge Construction, 1977, and as modified herein.
XVII. EROSION CONTROL - MATERIALS:
Water: The Contractor shall make, at his own expense,
whatever arrangements may be necessary to ensure an adequate
supply of water required for erosion control. He shall
also furnish all necessary hose, equipment, attachments, and
accessories for the adequate irrigation of planted areas
as may be required to complete the work as specified. All
costs shall be included in the bid items involved and no
further compensation shall be made.
To soil: The Contractor shall provide a two -way mix planting
soil consisting of 2/3 naturally occurring surface sandy loam
as specified in Section 9-14.01(1) of the Standard Specifi-
cations, except as modified herein, and 1/3 sphagnum peat
moss by volume. Sphagnum peat moss shall contain not less
than 80% organic content by weight. The two -way mix shall
have a pH range of 5.0 to 6.5. Mixed planting soils shall
meet the following requirements:
Sieve Size Percent Passing
3/4 100
3/8 95 - 100
10 80 100
#270 . 14 - 35
Clay 5 - 13
The mixed topsoil shall have a loss due to ignition of
9 to. 12% by weight.
The Contractor shall submit at least 30 days prior to topsoil
delivery acceptable written evidence,.. such as a laboratory
report, which clearly states that the proposed source for
topsoil has a sufficient quantity of acceptable material to
meet the requirements of this contract. Following acceptance
of the source of supply, the Contractor shall stockpile and
protect not less than 50% of the estimated quantity of the
• •
Page C -6
specified topsoil mix, not less than seven (7) working days
prior to beginning of delivery to the 'project .si,te. Topsoil
must be inspected and approved at the stockpile site prior
to the initial delivery. The Contractor shall mix and deliver
whatever additional quantities of topsoil as may be required
to meet the needs of this contract. Control samples shall be
tested by King County during the progress of the work. Failure
of any test sample to meet the specifications may result in
suspension of work and rejection of the topsoil or a portion
thereof as determined by the Engineer.
Topsoil shall be measured by the cubic yard in haul conveyance
at the point of delivery. All costs involved in providing
topsoil shall be included in the unit bid price for "Topsoil"
per cubic yard and no further compensation shall be made.
Grass Seed: The_Contractor shall provide grass seed as
specified in Section 9 -14.2 of the Standard Specifications.
Seed shall be mixed by the dealer. The. Contractor shall
furnish to the Engineer the dealer's guaranteed statement of
the composition of the mixture and the percentage of purity
and germination of each variety. Grass seed shall be composed
of the following varieties mixed in the proportions indicated.
Proportions
Name by Weight % Purity % Germination
Kentucky Blue-
grass (Adelphi,
Baron or Fylking) 50% 85% 80%
Creeping Red
Fescue (Dawson) 40% 98% 90%
Perennial Rye
(Pennfine or Pelo) 10% 95% 90%
Fertilizer: All areas which are seeded shall receive fertilizer
of the following proportions and formulations:
Total Available Nitrogen
(Analyzed as N)
Available Phosphorous
(Analyzed as P205)
Available Potassium
(Analyzed as K20)
10% (of which 50% is derived from
30% slow release ureaform)
20%
20%
Above percentages are proportioned by weight.
Page C -7
XVIII. EROSION CONTROL - PLANTING OPERATIONS:
Seed Bed Preparation: Section 8-01.3(1) of the Standard
Specifications shall apply except as modified herein.
Cultivation: All disturbed areas which are not otherwise
treated shall be seeded. All areas to be seeded shall be
raked or similarly treated so as to provide a smooth, con-
sistent, friable surface, acceptable . for seeding or topsoil
placement as determined by the Engineer /Owner.
Preparation: All areas to be seeded shall be free of visible
clods, rocks and debris measuring two inch or larger in any
dimension. Any exposed tree roots in cut slopes shall be
neatly pruned at the finished grade of the slope and the
cut treated with an approved sealer. All costs involved in
seed bed preparation shall be included in the unit price bid
unit, "Seeding".
Topsoil Placement: Topsoil will generally not be required
for erosion control but may be placed in some areas as directed
by the Engineer /Owner. When topsoil is used for erosion con-
trol, it shall be evenly distributed over the specified area
to a depth of two (2) inches.
Seeding: Where feasible, the hydroseeding method of application-,
shall be used. A slurry consisting of seed, fertilizer, mulch
and water shall be uniformly applied over all unpaved, dis-
turbed areas within easements and right of ways.unless directed
otherwise. Seed shall be applied at the rate of. 120 pounds per
acre
Fertilizing: Fertilizer shall be applied at the rate of 400
pounds per acre. Fertilizer shall be incorporated into the
seed, mulch, and water slurry and shall be applied as specified
under "Seeding ". In the event that additional fertilizer is
required to establish a uniform, healthy, thick stand of grass,
the Engineer /Owner shall determine the method and rate of
application.
Mulching: Mulch shall be applied at the rate of 2000 pounds
per acre. The Contractor shall follow manufacturer's recom-
mended quantities of mulch in pounds to the tank capacity
in gallons. One thousand (1,000) pounds of mulch shall be
included in the slurry of seed, fertilizer and water and
applied to the areas to be seeded. The remaining 1,000 pounds
of mulch shall be applied in a separate operation within 48
hours of the first application. . The unit price for mulching
per acre shall include two separate applications as specified
and no further compensation shall be made.
Temporary Protection: In the event slopes and other disturbed
areas cannot be prepared and seeded during the specified
periods, they shall be protected by polyethelene sheeting
or other approved means as determined by the Engineer. All
Page C -8
• •
costs of temporary protection shall be included in the
bid item "Seeding" and no further. compensation shall be
made.
XIX. EROSION CONTROL - MAINTENANCE AND. INSPECTION:
Maintenance: Maintenance shall begin immediately following
seeding operations and shall extend for a minimum of ten
weeks or longer as needed to establish a uniform, healthy,
thick stand of grass. Seeded areas shall be watered as nec-
_essary for healthy growth. All costs involved in the
maintenance and establishment of seeded areas shall be
included in the unit prices per acre for "Seeding ", "Mulching ",
and "Fertilizing ". Any areas damaged by erosion or the Con-
tractor's operations shall be immediately repaired by the
Contractor.
Inspection: All cut and fill slopes will be inspected by
the Engineer /Owner prior to seeding: - Determination shall
be made at this time as to topsoil utilization and hydro -
seeding procedures. Written authorizations shall be required:
for all subsequent changes as determined by the Engineer/
Owner.
Section 8-01.3(10) of the Standard Specifications is hereby
deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor:
Inspection of all areas shall be made upon completion
of seeding operation and at the completion of the
maintenance period.
Areas not established with a uniform, healthy, thick stand
of grass, as determined by the Engineer /Owner, shall be re-
seeded, remulched, or refertilized at the Contractor's
expense prior to payment.'
r s i cFfnw c0Nas-rRJ.Icrmot.1
SUALL OE 11.1 A.CCOP'tGaNICM. WITJ -I
P J,A STpN� .rD SR�IFIGA-r .!S
P13' /MAR
GENERAL NOTES:
1. These Plans & Stieat>mtiam Are The Property Of McDomM's
• Corporation; One McDuold's Hasa, .Oak Brook: Illinois
60521 & Shall Not Be Reproduced Without .Their Written "
...:.•2. R•h The Responsibility Of The Contrector'.To Meet -All
Requirements Of State, Lood Authorities, Health Depts, &
Utility Companies,' Regardless Of Information Stated On The' •
Site & Building Plans.
3. Baer - &'Anchor Boltz. Conduit, & Wiring For Welcome & •
Thank You Signs & Flag Plea Are By General Contractor. -
•
4.. Mclbmld's Rod • Bign C & Bate Are By Sign Contractor.
1,A•• Conduit & Wiring Are By General Contractor.'
• 5. Contractor .To Fumish 1 Faopty Conduit, •From Balding
. To Lotligiting, As tndeated. Lot lighting, Barn, Conduit &
Wiring Are By Other.. • - -
6. Finished Walks & Curb.®e.atiom To Be 6" Above• Finish
Paving. '
T.
All Elevations Are In Reference To The ,Bench Mark & Mort
._: Be. Verified By Genera/ Contractor At Ground Break. . .
8.
All landscaped Arms To Be Rough Graded To S "..Belo. Top . •
• Of All Walks & Curbs. Final Grading & Landscaping By Others.
9. For Site Details Refer To Sheet S. P.. -
10. .PAVING SPECIFICATIONS °' - -
6EC z'N14N rOCl") WpLL
GN . 9ATTEPI xe
OF WALL,ET -I HORJZr.
TO 4 'veftTl% 1_.
.2" BEL.0v,
T•
11. , McDonald's 'Engineer Rmvn The Right To Request A
Compaction -Teat And/Or 'A= Core, Drilled • Through . The .
Paving..11 Test: Proem Correct; Per Above Paving Specifier-•
• tion, It Will Be At The Expense Of McDonald's,-Othenviae,
It Will Be Beck Charged To The General Contractor.
a9' TRON RAIL . .
(L) R014`FB�
.TORAGE
E a-HR(J
1-00E. of S1-0PE
40.. F6
40.57C.}-
23' IRON PAIL
• • x30 .0
6 RISER a`7"
,-
4' 5_e'IT.o. ".l2i H..{
N (24,5 TG).
'.
229'- ' � .. �. - --- - 9' •2�' '/3'
'S71.F: a" sLorrup PPIDIIJ Pre
TYP• tMdkGH BNTPSOAlcs
0 CO ° 34- 4e, ,YI .380 00' IAIOfcSLL IN Desk a virrk A
443A L I F P 6 ER -SPL IF 7'iONS-
MONI/M EA/7- 4_w 26," tv . /322 a /
Nco ° 4( 3/ 1322 +:y5
SOUTh'CEt/TEA) P.gQA \V,1 Y
NOTES:
1. y+ ` Parking. Spates 9X.20. .. 'a 90' `. .
2. Suro.y.Prepar.d By CNAD\wK 01.', VEY /NCq
ENGj/A/EE/?• /A/f7 ct< 40// 57 415 wAY. it/.
UTILITIES '& LOCATION:
Sanitary Sewer
• "Storm. Drain
Water
R
v
Elect 'col
No.
2
DESCRIPTION:
G '7 A.DE
DATE
.x•.24.77
4. ,3•77
S
0
N
5
Drawn
AAOET
Date
2.9.77
Stale
Regional /D',
APPROVALS
(2)SIGNATURES RIO. NAME
Regional/District Mgr. - j
Construction Dept.
Operations Dept.
'Soave
.CO-SIGN..
CONTRACTOR.
OWNER: •
DATE
`JOL THCEAITER PARKWAY
STREET , ADDRESS
7-UK 'ViLA '' WA5/i
LEGEND
Conduit
Water W
�000<oo'I
Landscape Arse'.
Exposed AWrpsta Bldg. Walk Finish
Tit. Walk Finish
CITY STATE •
•COUNTY
Corporate Dwg. No
5
FU t.\ TO 1 NT S AT 5 ' C - C M.MW1 5 pAc LNG .
IF CR 1 \.1 'cis:AN! .■AlioTH _
:501 t■>-1-
3 0
I -
• 1 — \
1
Vpsp-.%
F.Uka.... Is.111J.C11.1. -41,1CK 14"E
tVAR-1 larli
In
f
0 N
-5- PRL.:11...5PE-r.
— e."1 -- --- . 00°4 • 1
. project title
HP C NL. \I EW
des hy
hy . Irate
_ !
PUE1LBC Wit3PKS DEPT
242-2177
6230 ScAtcanter Blvd
SEIC67