Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit PL17-0023 - CHICK-FIL-A DESIGN REVIEW - DESIGN REVIEW / ADMINISTRATIVE
CHICK-FIL-A DESIGN REVIEW 2623049066 Associated Files: PL17-0023 This File: L17-0029 DESIGN REVIEW/ADMINISTRATIVE City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director January 22, 2018 NOTICE OF DECISION TO: Carlos Arias, 4G Development, Applicant Michael Kometani, Property Owner King County Assessor, Accounting Division Washington State Department of Ecology This letter serves as a notice of decision and is issued pursuant to TMC 18.104.170 on the following project and permit approval. FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUESTS: ASSOCIATED PERMITS: LOCATION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATION: SEPA DETERMINATION: I. PROJECT INFORMATION L17-0029 (Administrative Design Review) Carlos Arias, 4G Development Design review approval for construction of a 5,134 sq. ft. Chick-Fil- A fast food restaurant to include a 22 vehicle queuing area for drive -through orders, 42 onsite parking spaces and 20 additional shared parking spaces. D17-0313 (Development) D17-0315 (Demolition) 17333 Southcenter Pkwy, APN# 2623049066 Tukwila Urban Center —Commercial Corridor Project Categorically Exempt II. DECISION SEPA Determination: The City SEPA Responsible Official has previously determined that this application does not require a SEPA threshold determination because it is categorically exempt. Decision on Substantive Permit: The Community Development Director has determined that the application for an Administrative Design Review does comply with applicable City and state code Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov requirements and has approved that application as based upon the Staff Report prepared by the Planning Division. III. YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS The Decision on this Permit Application is a Type 2 decision pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code §18.104.010. Other land use applications related to this project may still be pending. No administrative appeal of a DNS or an EIS is permitted. One administrative appeal to the Board of Architectural Review of the Decision on the Permit itself is permitted. A party who is not satisfied with the outcome of the administrative appeal process may file an appeal in King County Superior Court from the Board of Architectural Review decision. IV. PROCEDURES AND TIME FOR APPEALING In order to appeal the Community Development Director's decision on the Permit Application, a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 14 days of the issuance of this Decision. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116. All appeal materials shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Appeal materials MUST include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision, including any specific challenge to an MDNS. 4. The Notice of Appeal shall identify (a) the specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; (b) the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and (c) the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. 5. Appeal fee of $626. V. APPEAL HEARINGS PROCESS Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Board of Architectural Review based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented at the L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 2 open record hearing. The Board of Architectural Review decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the Board of Architectural Review decision on this application must file an appeal pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. An appeal challenging a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS may be included in such an appeal. If no appeal of the Board of Architectural Review decision is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on this permit will be final. The City's decision to issue a DNS, an MDNS or an EIS is final for this permit and any other pending permit applications for the development of the subject property. VI. INSPECTION OF INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington 98188 from Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Max Baker, who may be contacted at 206-431-3683 for further information. Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax purposes. Contact the King County Assessor's Office for further information regarding property tax valuation changes. The notice board must be removed at the expiration of the appeal period if no appeal is filed. Depa ment of Community Development City of Tukwila L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 3 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director Affidavit of Distribution Project Name: CHICK-FIL-A DESIGN REVIEW Project Number: L17-0029 Associated File Number (s): PL17-0023 Date Mailed: 1/25/2018 Mailing requested by: MAX BAKER Mailer's signature: ❑ Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet ❑ Notice of Application for ❑ Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Shoreline Mgmt Permit ❑ Determination of Non -Significance 1 Notice of Decision ❑ Determination of Significance & ❑ Notice of Public Hearing Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Public Meeting ❑ Mitigated Determination of Non- ❑ Official Notice Significance ❑ Other: ❑ Notice of Action ❑ Shoreline Mgmt Permit ❑ Notice of Application ❑ Short Subdivision Agenda Parties of Record: MICHAEL KOMETANI 1823 HALEKOA DR HONOLULU HI 96821 APPLICANT, KC ASSESSOR, SEPA REGISTER City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE DCD DIRECTOR Prepared January 22, 2018 FILE NUMBER: L17-0029 (Administrative Design Review) APPLICANT: Carlos Arias, 4G Development REQUESTS: Design review approval for construction of a 5,134 sq. ft. Chick-Fil- A fast food restaurant to include a 22 vehicle queuing area for drive -through orders, 42 onsite parking spaces and 20 additional shared parking spaces. ASSOCIATED PERMITS: D17-0313 (Development) D17-0315 (Demolition) LOCATION: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy, APN# 2623049066 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATION: Tukwila Urban Center —Commercial Corridor SEPA DETERMINATION: Project Categorically Exempt STAFF: Max Baker, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Building Elevations C. Landscaping Plan D. Applicant's Response to the Design Criteria E. Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Transportation Engineering Northwest F. Tukwila Urban Center - Commercial Corridor Standards Summary G. Memo from Public Works regarding traffic analysis Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov FINDINGS VICINITY/SITE INFORMATION Project Description This project is to construct a 5,134 sf restaurant with drive-thru service and accompanying site improvements, including a new trash enclosure, landscaping, frontage improvements, accessible parking and pedestrian access to the building from the public right-of-way. The resulting plan will provide a total of 42 parking spaces on the subject parcel, with non-exclusive mutual access to an additional 20 parking spaces on the adjacent parcels, and a drive-thru queuing lane with a capacity of 22 spaces, located to the rear of the building and largely shielded from the public right-of-way. The project shares a driveway off Southcenter Parkway with neighboring retail uses. One freestanding sign, one wall -mounted sign, and two incentive signs are proposed for the project. Figure 1 Project Location Existing Development The site was previously occupied by Ethan Allen furniture; the existing structure is currently vacant. The applicant has applied for a demolition permit for the existing structure (D17-0315). The parcel contains 1.04 acres and is zoned Tukwila Urban Center — Commercial Corridor (TUC -CC). Southcenter Parkway, which runs east of the site and provides access to the property, is classified as a Commercial Corridor. L17-0029 Staff Report 12/26/2017 2 igure 2: Existing Development, Ethan A 1rn Southcenter Pkwy :51 4, 41 \ 4 *ie ak Figure 3: Existing Development, Ethan Allen Store L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 3 Surrounding Land Uses The site is located in the Tukwila Urban Center — Commercial Corridor (TUC -CC) district. Use of the site for a drive -through restaurant is permitted in the TUC -CC zoning district. The subject property is located on the west side of Southcenter Parkway, north of S 180th St. and South of Minkler Blvd. Properties to the north and south of the property are in the TUC -CC zoning district, and include the retail stores Vitamin Shoppe, T-Mobile, Casual Male XL, Famous Footwear and La-Z-Boy furniture. Topography & Vegetation The parcel is generally flat, with a steep hill to the west of the parcel. Much of the existing development consists of impervious surfaces (building, parking lots) with few landscaped areas. DESIGN REVIEW This project is subject to Administrative Design Review under Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.28.030.D. As a small-scale project, the project is subject to the applicable district -based standards, corridor -based standards, and supplemental standards in TMC Chapter 18.28 and the guidelines set forth in the Southcenter Design Manual. This discussion below is grouped into four sub -sections: District Based Standards; Corridor Based Standards; Supplemental Standards; and Southcenter Design Manual. The standards can be found online at: http://www.tukwi lawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/DCD-Planning-TMC-18.28-Tukwila-Urban-Center.pdf The Design Manual can be found at: http://www.tukwi lawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/DCD-Planning-Southcenter-Design-Manual.pdf I. District -Based Standards Structure Height (TMC 18.28.070): The proposed building reaches a maximum height of 21' 8", which is in conformance with the building height restriction of 45' for TUC -CC. Maximum Block Face Length (TMC 18.28.080): The proposed building is in compliance as it does not exceed the 900' maximum block length for TUC -CC. Side and Rear Setbacks and Landscaping Requirements (TMC 18.28.100-110): The building meets the minimum 5 foot setback and landscaping requirement for the side and rear yards. II. Corridor -Based Standards Southcenter Parkway is considered a Commercial Corridor. See Attachment F for Commercial Corridor standards summary sheet. Public Frontage Standards (TMC 18.28.150): The proposed project meets the requirements for public frontage standards along Southcenter Parkway, including streetscape width and landscaping. Vehicular L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 4 lights shall be installed along the frontage per the Department of Public Works standard. Applicant shall submit a street lighting plan to satisfy this requirement with the building permit materials. The existing public sidewalk located at the back of curb will be removed and replaced with a new sidewalk behind a nine foot landscape area, as is the Public Frontage standard for the Commercial Corridor. Building Orientation/Placement & Landscaping (TMC 18.28.160-.190): The proposed project meets building orientation standards. The building will be oriented to Southcenter Parkway, with parking provided to front, south side and rear of the building. No parking is proposed along the northern side of the building. Along Southcenter Parkway, one double -loaded aisle of parking is proposed between the building and the street. Architectural Design Standards (TMC 18.28.200): Commercial Corridor Architectural Design Standards Design Response Acceptable Partial Unresponsive Not applicable Facade articulation Increment Commercial/mixed use maximum — 50 feet X Major vertical modulation maximum — 200 feet X Ground level Transparency Commercial -use minimum — 50% X Table 1. Architectural Design Standards for the Commercial Corridor I11. Supplemental Standards Special Corner Feature (TMC 18.28.220): The building is not located at the corner of two public streets. Landscaping Types and General Landscaping Requirements (TMC 18.28.230-.240): The landscaping plan includes all required information for proposed vegetation. Spacing, dimensional, and screening/cover specifications are all satisfied. Irrigation plans have been submitted and approved by the urban ecologist. The setbacks are planted with sufficient shrubs and groundcovers to fulfill the landscaping requirements. Perimeter and interior landscaping square footage requirements have been satisfied. The landscaping islands and trees provided within the landscape islands are consistent with the code requirements. The City's Urban Environmentalist has reviewed and approved proposed plant material to ensure appropriate species selection and spacing. Open Space Regulations (TMC 18.28.250): Provision of open space is not a requirement for retail uses within the Commercial Corridor. While the Planning Division made a recommendation to provide L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 5 outdoor seating if possible, the applicant concluded that the site was too constrained to allocate open space without affecting drive -aisles and/or parking. General Parking Requirements and Guidelines (TMC 18.28.260-.270): The proposed project provides 42 parking spaces on the subject parcel, a drive-thru queuing lane with a capacity of 22 spaces, and non-exclusive mutual access to an additional 20 parking spaces on adjacent parcels via a cross access and parking agreement, which is sufficient to fulfill the parking requirements for a fast food restaurant use (1 space for each 50 square feet of usable floor area. 2,108 square feet usable floor area/50 square feet = 43 spaces minimum). The parking lot meets requirements for compact car stalls, stall dimensions, setbacks, curb cuts, access, and provision of pedestrian walkways. Parking lot landscaping, layout, and bicycle parking are provided per code requirements. Site Requirements (TMC 18.28.280): A pedestrian walkway connecting Southcenter Parkway to the front entrance of the building has been provided through the eastern parking lot. A second walkway from the northern exit of the building through the drive -through aisle to the waste container area has been provided for employees to safely dispose of refuse. A third walkway along the southern edge of the building connects the restaurant through the drive -through aisles to the western parking area and adjacent properties. The proposed project shares the site entrance with the neighboring retail stores, located directly to the south and north. A drive -aisle providing vehicular access to neighboring retail destinations is located along the eastern portion of the property, connecting to an existing drive -aisle to the north. The proposed sidewalk along Southcenter Parkway will continue to connect to the public sidewalks to the north and south. The proposed structure is similar in magnitude to neighboring buildings and will be complementary to existing development in the area. IV. Southcenter Design Manual The Southcenter Design Manual guidelines support and complement the community vision described in the Southcenter Subarea Plan, supplement and expand upon the design requirements in Chapter 18.28, and provide a flexible tool for quality and innovation. The Design Manual is organized into two main sections: Site Design Elements and Building Design. Site Design Elements covers a number of design topic areas, including Site Design, Service Areas and Mechanical Equipment, Lighting, Walls and Fences, and Open Spaces. The section on Building Design covers Architectural Concept, Entrances and Doors, Building Facade — Base and Top, Corner Treatments, Building Massing, Building Details and Elements, Building Materials and Colors, Windows, Weather Protection, Blank Walls, and Parking Structures. For each topic area, there are one or more Design Criteria, which can be general in nature. The Design Criteria explain the requirements for development proposals. They are the decision criteria by which the Department of Community Development decides whether to approve, condition or deny a project. The examples and explanations which augment each Design Criteria, provide guidance to the project L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 6 applicant, to City Staff in reviewing a project proposal, and to the decision maker in determining whether the project meets the Design Criteria. A. Site Design/Elements 1. Site Design The intent of the site design/elements criteria is to encourage site design which is easily understood, appropriate to the area, takes advantage of unique opportunities, and is a positive element in the architectural character of the District within which it is located. The design criteria address various elements including: facilitation of traffic circulation by connecting through -streets; provision of safe, convenient, and connected pedestrian access; encouragement of harmonious visual character (where desirable); arrangement of buildings to enhance street frontages and the pedestrian environment; incorporation of open space and landscaping as a unifying feature; incorporation of screening, environmental mitigation, utilities and drainage as positive design elements; incorporation of opportunities for joint development of sites; and the use of site design to take advantage of and/or enhance views of and access to natural amenities such as the Green River. The project meets the design criteria. The site design provides an easily understood arrangement of building, landscaping, and circulation elements that are consistent with adjacent sites. Restaurant patrons will enter the site off Southcenter Parkway from a shared driveway. Drive -through traffic will be directed in a one-way loop from the site entrance to the drive -through entrance along the western (rear) portion of the parcel. The majority of patron parking spaces for inside dining are located in front of the building to the east, with supplemental parking provided to the south and west of the building. Landscaping helps to separate walkways adjacent to the building from the parking lot. Proposed landscaping on the east side of the property and along the street frontage help to soften the built environment, provide screening, and are consistent with TMC requirements. 2. Service Areas and Mechanical Equipment The intent of the service areas and mechanical equipment design criteria is to minimize the potential negative impacts of service elements through thoughtful siting and screening while meeting functional needs. Design criteria include: service element location and design; minimizing public visibility of loading docks and service bays, location and/or design of utility meters; electrical conduit and other service utility apparatus; rooftop equipment screening; and concealment and design incorporation of downspouts. The project meets the design criteria. The refuse and disposal area is accessible and properly screened by appropriate enclosures and landscaping. The drive -through aisles are located to rear of the building away from Southcenter Parkway. Rooftop equipment is adequately screened with the use of parapets around the perimeter. 3. Lighting Site lighting should be designed to promote safety as well as enhance the nighttime appearance of buildings and landscaping. L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 7 The project meets the design criteria. New lighting on site will provide adequate illumination throughout property: fifteen 12,542 lumen LED lights are proposed for installation throughout the parking lots/drive aisles, four 2,400 lumen downlights are proposed for entryways and the drive -through window, and fourteen 1,616 lumen building -mounted lights are proposed along the east and west elevations of the structure. Proposed landscaping should not interfere with site illumination. 4. Walls and Fences Walls and fences shall be designed to be compatible with the building, improve the appearance of the site, and improve safety. The proposed building meets the design criteria. The only fencing proposed is around the refuse and disposal area, will utilize similar materials and colors as the restaurant, and will not be visible from Southcenter Parkway or the eastern entrance of the building. 5. Open Space Provide safe, attractive, and usable open spaces that promote pedestrian activity and enhance the setting and character of the development. Retail uses in the Commercial Corridor are not required to allocate open space for new developments. However, the proposed development's frontage improvements along Southcenter Parkway and the pedestrian pathways provided through the site shall provide a safer and more attractive pedestrian experience in comparison to the existing development. B. Building Design 1. Architectural Concept The architectural design criteria encourages building design with easily understood organization, an appropriate relationship to the site, and with a positive impact on the architectural character of the District within which it is located. Architectural design should unify the massing and components of a structure or structures on a site into a cohesive and consistent thematic or stylistic architectural character or style that is responsive to the functional requirements of the development. The facades include notable elements of modulation, variation in material and color, and elements of detail such as modern aluminum awnings, parapet wall coping and lights which satisfy the design criteria (see Attachment B). 2. Entrances and Doors The primary entrance should be located and designed to represent the overall style and architectural character of the building and ensure a welcoming public face to the building. The project meets the design criteria. The primary entrance is located on the eastern side of the building facing Southcenter Pkwy and is consistent with the building's architectural details (Figure 4). L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 8 Figure 4. East elevation rendering of proposed restaurant. Figure 5. South elevation Figure 6. North elevation 3. Building Facade — Base & Top Create a building base where the horizontal articulation of the lower part of a building fagade's design establishes a human scale for pedestrian users and passers-by, and aesthetically "ties" a building to the ground. Create a "top" on buildings through a substantial horizontal articulation of the facade at the uppermost floor of the building to provide an attractive facade skyline and complete the upper facade composition. Rooflines should reflect the architectural style of the building and be a distinctive design element. Roof surfaces should be punctuated with varying roof forms to break up large massing of roof surfaces and/or to provide opportunities to daylight interior spaces. Roof overhangs for both flat and sloping roofs are encouraged to add depth, shadow and visual interest. Building design meets design criteria. The facade is finished with alternating brick and stucco materials to provide horizontal articulation and a durable exterior. A slightly overhanging, modern roofline and permanent awnings over entrances and windows further produces a pedestrian scale experience. Variations in building height and depth help to break up the facade and roof line. 4. Corner Treatments The design criteria serve to emphasize building corners at important intersections with a distinctive building element. The proposed development is not located at a public intersection. L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 9 5. Building Massing The use of horizontal and vertical modulation is required to maintain the desired human scale and character for the Southcenter area. The requirements encourage the design of building facades which incorporate interesting architectural details that add variety to the fagade, animate the street presence, and are attractive at a pedestrian scale. The project meets the design criteria. The project utilizes decorative awnings, roofline differentiation, variation in materials, transparency, vertical and horizontal modulation, and architectural details to reduce the perceived scale and add visual interest. 6. Building Details and Elements Detail elements are required to encourage the incorporation of design details and small-scale elements into building facades that are attractive at a pedestrian scale. The project meets the design criteria. The project employs protruding awnings, decorative building - mounted Tight fixtures, and an assortment of building materials and colors. 7. Building Materials and Colors The use of natural materials that reflect our Northwest setting such as stone, local woods like cedar and fir, and functional materials like concrete, brick, and metal are encouraged. Wall cladding materials appropriate to the architectural style and building type shall be used. Authentic materials and methods of construction should be used to the degree possible. More than two colors and materials should be incorporated into each building's design. Monochromatic schemes are discouraged. Color choices should include warm rich colors that reflect and complement the woodlands, water and open sky of the region; weathered wood and oxidized metal colors relate to industrial and agricultural influences. The project meets the design criteria. A variety of building materials are incorporated in the design, including stucco, brick veneer, metal parapet coping and aluminum awnings/window frames. Colors are not monochromatic, ranging from white for the stucco facade to dark bronze for the aluminum awnings. 8. Windows Ornamental framing and hardware should be used to provide a utilitarian opportunity for craftsmanship and decoration. Window frames and sills should be designed to be prominent and substantial in order to enhance openings and add additional relief. The project meets the design criteria for windows by utilizing window frames and sills that add textural relief and detailing to the facade. The project includes dark bronze colored aluminum awnings above windows which provides additional articulation. 9. Weather Protection Design buildings with non-residential ground floor uses to provide pedestrian weather protection along adjacent street front sidewalks and open spaces using awnings, canopies, or building overhangs such as porticos, covered porches and arcades. Where building orientation to streets/open spaces is required L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 10 for the applicable Corridor Type, weather protection at least 6 feet in width along at least 75 percent of the facade must be provided. Proposed restaurant is oriented towards Southcenter Parkway, though building orientation is not a requirement for developments along a Commercial Corridor. Awnings are provided over entrances and drive through windows to provide weather protection. 10. Blank Walls Blank walls are not permitted facing streets, sidewalks, open spaces, or pedestrian pathways and instead shall be designed to provide visual interest and human scale. The proposed project includes a pattern of windows, awnings and articulation that is consistent with code requirements. 11. Parking Structures Design criteria do not apply as the project does not include a parking structure but rather a parking lot. V. Public Comments Public notice is not required for Administrative Design Review. CONCLUSIONS 1. District -Based Standards Structure height, length, and setback requirements are in compliance with the Tukwila Urban Center -Commercial standards. 2. Corridor -Based Standards Public frontage, building orientation and landscaping, facade articulation, blank wall, and transparency requirements have been fulfilled in accordance with the Commercial Corridor standards. 3. Supplemental Standards Landscaping is in compliance with all TUC -CC requirements. The City's Urban Environmentalist has reviewed and approved proposed plant materials to ensure appropriate species selection and spacing. The site design provides sufficient open space, parking, and pedestrian access to meet code requirements. Additional features, such as pedestrian pathways through the site, serve to increase the utility of the site. L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 11 4. Southcenter Design Manual a. Site Design Elements The project meets the design criteria. The proposed development meets the minimum setback requirement and is oriented towards Southcenter Parkway. A pedestrian connection from Southcenter Parkway to the building entrance is proposed through the eastern parking area. Frontage improvements will enhance pedestrian safety along the street and create an inviting environment for restaurant patrons. Landscape islands and stamped concrete pedestrian crossings will promote efficient vehicular circulation and access to parking spaces while providing safe and convenient pedestrian access throughout the site. Interior parking lot landscaping and perimeter landscaping follow a coherent design concept, which will soften the built environment and create an inviting, pedestrian -friendly atmosphere. Proposed lighting matches the contemporary building design and will improve visibility of the building at night by illuminating areas of the fagade. b. Building Design The proposed building achieves a more contemporary architectural design than neighboring buildings, enhancing the architectural character of the TUC -CC District. The renderings demonstrate a cohesive style and high quality design with ample modulation, articulation, and attention to detail. The color palate features a sufficient spectrum of colors that complement one another and a variety of materials that add visual interest. The scale of the proposed one-story building is in harmony with neighboring developments in the Tukwila Urban Center Commercial Corridor. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the approval of the Design Review application. Informational Items 1. Signage shall be reviewed as part of separate sign permit. Proposed wall -mounted signs on north and south elevations qualify as Incentive Signage, but will need to be reduced in size. The requirements for Incentive Signage (TMC. 19.20.050.F.4) state that the allowable area of a sign permitted under the provision is 50 percent of that calculated in Table 2, "Allowable Message Area for Permanent Wall Signs in Commercial and Industrial Zones." In this case, the north and south elevations are approximately 867 sq. ft., allowing for the installation of 20 sq. ft. signs ((867-500)*.04+25)*.5). The proposed signs are estimated to be 35.15 sq. ft. in size, 15.15 sq. ft. greater than the allowable area. 2. Address shall be installed on the low monument sign in addition to above the main entrance. 3. Project is subject to Transportation Concurrency Test application and Transportation Impact fee to be paid at the time of building permit issue. 4. The anticipated traffic volumes created by the proposed Chick-Fil-A development necessitate that the driveway adjacent to the proposed site shall be signed and marked for "Right Turn Only" exit. The Developer shall install a standard "Right Turn Only" sign and a "Right Turn L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 12 Arrow" pavement marker at the eastbound driveway approach to Southcenter Pkwy. The Traffic Control Plan prepared by the Developer shall include on -site monitoring to assist in directing traffic to comply with proper exiting from the site. Additionally, the City will monitor traffic operations and impacts to Southcenter Parkway. The City reserves the right to implement additional improvements or restrictions, as necessary, to address safety or congestion issues after opening of the proposed development. 5. An easement for public sidewalk along Southcenter Blvd shall be executed if none is existing. 6. The Developer shall obtain an access agreement and license to construct from the adjacent property owners. L17-0029 Staff Report 1/22/2018 13 tSt TDT €111141161411 #4094 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 98188 rfo National Sign & Marketing Corporation NOV 13 2017 Community Development Bar MOM WWI INN ELECTRONIC SIGNS 13580 5th Street • Chino, CA 91710 • Tel: 909.591.4742 • FAX: 909.591.9792 • Toll Free: 877.877.NSMC L /7-.if 5 o - ----- Scope of Work toNEW 5'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" CHANNEL LETTERS SIGN to NEW 6'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" ICON LOGO CABINET co (a NEW D/F ILLUM. DIRECTIONAL SIGN ® NEW D/F ILLUM. MONUMENT SIGN LANDSCAPE AREA EXISTING 10'-0" SANITA SEWER EASEMENT ,9 CONCRETE DRIVI%d4'4RU EXISTING AC DSE ISLE TO REMAIN 1 Install Only Manufacturing By O DRIVE-THRU CANOPY NOTE: er I-4EIGWT CLEAR4 ARM TYP OF 2 /./ //`'' 1 /// t0 \ SEWER AWMOLE - 1.51 31.51 181f GONG Ht9 = 16.07 \8 - COyC MU - 21.31 .L4NC SE-T7.41 - r2 \GONG SSE - 20.16 CM. 1.0' SOUTH 441 ALL NEW SIGNAGE TO CONNECT TO CLIENT PROVIDED ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS ice^ � i CHICK—FIL-A - Tukwil SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" r(0 I 1 1 1 / / 1 / I 1 1 / 1 / I\ • LANE .h • \ I, 4 EXISTIT4G 4 RKING STRIPING' {— - Site PI fi FLAG POLE BIKERACKS MENU/ORDER BOA TYP OF 2 20 WIDE PSPRL EASEAAH1 641129E 7tM 9) 70 _20' 8AE PSPEd. EASEMENT 8411290970 (r1EM 9) AFFECTS NORTH 7 FEET OF THE 12 FOOT JOG r o11 on) 1111 mommi 1111 DIRECTIONAL SIGN T7P G7F 3 � I =ham .I�� � ■ rr R 11IL CMU SCREENTRETAiNINS W4kL—,„FINIS4 4,. Q_'_RFitt� TRASH ENCLOSURE W/STORAGE AREA- 21' DSCAPE AREA n' 19' 2 ®@ ®@®0® 4 5l D ;• \ I _ � NG LANDSCAPING EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE \ • \ EXISTING 10'-0" WATER `\ `\ \\ \ EASEMENT \ \ \ \ EXISTING AC PAVING \•\ \\\ \ \• ` 1 0 fi 0 MD IUEG181E REBAR/CAP LANDSCAPE AREA CONCRETE WALK HANDICAP RAMP, SIGN PER LOCAL AUTHORITY O FIRE ACCESS 1.,,.- EXISTING INGRESS, r EGRESS EASEMENT SEWER MANHOLE RIO = 24.60 TOP SUYP PUMP = 22.35 !'2Si78 8• PVC SE - NOT AVAILABLE (BEIWD BAFFLE) li 4 EXISTING ANDSC NEW PEG —.AGA F I7 PATH OF BUILD LANDSCA SETBACK (STING RESS, SS T SIGN ID LETTER mn s..«.,.. ?Owns hl.* , WA NIU T—~ -�-VICINITY MAP FACE A Na ack 111 drive �i thru FL thank ,may (/Y you 4 THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE N CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOH yOu BY NSNIC, IT IS NOT TO BE_SHOW OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR IISED. RFPRODUC.FD. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION IINI FSS AUTHORizFn IN WRITING, RY AN nFFiCFR OF NSMc National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Chick-RI-A#4094 - Southcenter Pkwy 8a MinkkPr Address: 17333 Southcentet Parkway,sukwiIa,_WA_90-ir�0 Phone: Account Mgr. S Rosenhlnnm `Designer: Duffy, S Scale:_tiD.ted Date: 01/24/2617 Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in ouoldante with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or ether applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. aus Revisions: 11/01/7017 SD. Change sit�nlan change pyl to mon add o ce war I gn • 1 Drawing Number 27R592 FACE B N/A N/A Fdrive f;i thru 'fY do not enter i"a.•d su"d.w N/A NOV 13 2017 Development Imr Mai • Immela IMMO MI AIM —41111 ELECTRONIC SIGNS I I — /l/9 7 GI 1 Scope of Work ® NEW SINTRAADDRESS NUMERALS too NEW HANDICAP PARKING SIGNS CO NEW PEDESTRIAN SIGNS • NEW WINDOW VINYL Install Only LANDSCAPE AREA EXISTING 10'-0" SANITA. SEWER EASEMENT /1/ CONCRETE DRI41-1RU EXISTING AC 04 ISLE TO REMAIN / /// , Manufacturing By 0 I NT CLE DRIVE-THRU CLEARANCE A TYP. OAF2F 2A FLAG POLE /%7 O I i \,J 1 ALL NEW SIGNAGE TO CONNECT TO CLIENT PROVIDED ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS *,i CHICK-FIL-A - Tukwil SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" SEtiWER AV 8HOIE RN - 31.51 CONE NW - 16.07 B CONE NW 21.31 '•6ONC SE-17.41 ''12 \CONE SSE - 20.16 C1R. 1.0' SOIJM !a r NCLOSURE ll/STORAGE AREA FLAG POLE BIKERACKS MENU/ORDER BOA TYP OF 2 11111 I•) AN.'. APE AREA I 1�1 DIRECTIONAL SIGN f j TYP OF 3 I�I MIla Srifraiir/////////////.//IiZIr: AMP rn 20 WIDE PSP&L BAUM {j1tM 9) AC PAVING LANDSCAPING EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE EXISTING 10'-0" WATER P12 LC LRG PLAYGROUND GSF 5.134 S.F. 11291970 t-20' WIDE PSP&L EASEMENT 8411290970 (REM 9) AFFECTS NORTH 7 FEET OF THE 12 FOOT JOG FNO ILLECSBLE 9EBAR/CAP LANDSCAPE AREA CONCRETE WALK HANDICAP RAMP, SIGN PER LOCAL AUTHORITY FIRE ACCESS EXISTING INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT SEWER MANHOLE R M 24.60 TOP SUMP PUMP - 22.35 —a- PVC VENT - t.3.1.5 6' PVC SE - NOT AVAILABLE (BEHIND BAFFLE) , , , , , , , EXIST SIGN ID LETTER - - 1555 S.. VgA, n-A rw-x.. wA SA1a �r VICINITY MAP FACE A 17333 17333 THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED ron YOUR PERSONAL USE N CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU Bt' NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXIil811 EU IN ANY FASHIUN UNLESS AUI HUHIIEIJ IN WHII ING HY AN fIFFI(:FR DF NSMC National Sign oill & MARKETING CORPORATION r 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909,591,4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project Chick Eil-A #i4094 - SouthCenteLPkwy & Minkler Address: 11333 Southrenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 9$1a8.— Phone: Account Mgr. S_RDSenbloom_ Designer: Duffy, S Scale:_Nnted Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date• rThis sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Notional Electrical (ode and/or other opplicable lot& codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign- C US Revisionns. J Drawing Number 275921 FACE B NOV 13 2017 Development EMU IWINV ▪ IWO • INNS MEM MEW= WNW NI /11111 AIIM Ilik M▪ OW - WEER▪ . WW • — ELECTRONIC SIGN IAd, r NEW 5'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" CHANNEL LETTERS SIGN North Elevation SCALE: 3/32", 1'-0" NEW 5'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" CHANNEL LETTERS SIGN South Elevation SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" EHIS 1S AN UHIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YbU' ' i AL 1 E IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED REPRODUCED. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY AN OFFICER OF NSMC National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick Fi1AA4D94 - Southcenter. Pkwy & Minister Address: 17333 Southcenter Parkwayjukwila, WA98188 Phone: ___ Account Mgr. S. Rosenbtoont Designer: Duffy,S Scale: Noted Date: 01/24/20.17_ Client Approval: Date: This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. Revisions: 11/01@017 SD Change site plan change pyl to mon add pad move wall sign (Drawing Number 27R592 NOV 13 2017 eve opment ..... . ELECTRONIC SIGNA I I7—ed2 West Elevation SCALE: 3/32" = 1•-0" NEW 6'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" ICON LOGO CABINET NEW SINTRA ADDRESS NUMERAL NEW WINDOW VINYL East Elevation SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED ron YOU BY NSMO. IT IS NOT TO DE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED, REPRODUCED, COf3I€D OM EXHIBITED IN ANY FAHION UNLESS AUTHORIZED IN WHITING BY AN NEI II:FH NI- NSMI: ere National Sign & MARKETING C ATION �� 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @rismC.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 'I I - Project: Chick-Fil-A#4094 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler eSS h P WA 981 Tukwila, Addr : 17333 Southcenter Parkway, 88 Phone: Account Mgr. S Rosenbloom Designer: Duffy, s Scale: Doted Date:Ai/2417017 Date: • Client Approval: 1 This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Nationol Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. c�+us \mil Revisions: 11 /01 /2017 SDChange site plan, mange pyI to mon add ped move wall sign Drawing Number 27R92 • .114 Cor`lmunjt a _ la Ia. OM ELECTRONIC 7 d� 2 FACES' TRIM CAP: RETURNS: STANDOFF: REGISTERED: DISCONNECT: ILLUMINATION: t 0 Ln vot- 11'-9" .040 ALUMINUM STIFF -ARM SUPPORT REVEALS PAINTED TO MATCH MOUNTING SURFACE COLOR 45 NEW 5'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" CHANNEL LETTERS SIGN Specifications: BODY: S/F CUSTOM FABRICATED ALUMINUM CABINET CONSTRUCTED OF .040 WITH .080 ALUMINUM BACKS. ALUMINUM RETURNS MECHANICALLY FASTENED TO BACKS. INTERIOR OF SIGN TO BE PAINTED MATTE WHITE. 3/16" #2793 RED ACRYLIC OR EQUIVALENT. 1" TRUE RED JEWELITE TRIM CAP (ADHERED VIA WELD ON RETURNS) 5" DEEP RETURNS PAINTED TO MATCH MOUNTING SURFACE COLOR 3/8" SLEEVE ANCHORS WITH 1/2" ALUMINUM SPACERS. 3/16" CLEAR POLYCARBONATE FLAG WITH 3M 3632-53 CARDINAL RED VINYL ® APPLIED FIRST SURFACE ATTACHED TO BACK OF 'A' ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH WATERPROOF BOOT RED LED LIGHTING WITH REMOTE TRANSFORMERS. ALL WIRING & COMPONENTS TO MEET U.L. STANDARDS R & H 2793 / 3M RED 3632-53 POWERWALL WHITE AREA: 58.75 SQ. FT. AREA: 35.15 SQ. FT. 8 STRAIGHT LINES LETTER RETURN: PAINTED TO MATCH MOUNTING SURFACE. REGISTRATION MARK: 3/16" CLEAR POLYCARBONATE 3M 3632-53 CARDINAL RED (OR EQUIVALENT) VINYL ® APPLIED FIRST SURFACE TRIM CAP: WAGNER JEWELITE TRUE RED TRIM CAP FACE: #2793 3/16" RED TRANSLUCENT ACRYLIC OR EQUIVALENT PAINT INTERIOR OF CAN MATTE WHITE ALL PAINTS TO HAVE SEMI GLOSS FINISH RENDERING COLORS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. ALL MATERIALS SHOULD BE MANUFACTURED TO COLOR SPECIFICATIONS. CHICK-FIL-A S/F LED ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" (00 1" TRIM CAP 1/2" STAND OFF MOUNTING AND ELECTRICAL PENETRATIONS HARDWARE NOTE: THRU-BOLT FASTENERS ARE THE PREFERRED METHOD FOR ATTACHMENT FASTENER SCHEDULE (H. 3/8" LAG SCREW FOR USE WITH WOOD OR EIFS WALL SYSTEMS. 1-1/2" MIN PENETRATION (EXCL. TIP) 3/8" DIA. THREADED ROD FOR USE WITH WOOD, CONCRETE BLOCK OR EIFS WALL SYSTEMS. 3/8" RED HEAD L.D.T. LARGE DIAMETER ( TAPCON) FOR USE WITH CONCRETE BLOCK, BRICK OR CONCRETE. EMBED A MIN. OF 2 1/2". `?;.1 '`yz"`" titi 3/8" DIA. HILTI HIT ROD WITH HY150 MAX ADHESIVE FOR USE WITH CONCRETE. EMBED A MIN. OF 2". coll*2234178 SESSi 3/8" DIA. HILTI HIT ROD WITH HY20 ADHESIVE FOR USE WITH MASONRY AND BRICK. EMBED A MIN. OF 3 3/8". cil�. �j 3/8" DIA. HILTI HIT ROD WITH HY20 ADHESIVE FOR USE WITH CONCRETE BLOCK. EMBED A MIN. OF 2". yX• .;:1 �',+.. 3/8" DIA. HILTI HLC SLEEVE ANCHOR FOR USE WITH CONCRETE, MASONRY AND BRICK. EMBED A MIN. OF 3 3/8". INSTALLER SHALL VERIFY THAT FASTENERS CHOSEN ARE SUITABLE WITH WALL CONDITIONS .040 ALUMINUM LYSErSSIACFASTENED 1' RED TRIM CAP #8X'W PAN HEAD SCREW 080 ALUMINUM BACK RED LED STRIP 82 93LL0800 C FA SLEEVE 5 ACER SEE FASTENER SCHEDULE AS REO'D 11X1•X.065• WEEP COVER 1i PER tENi WALUBLDG. FASCI BUILDING FASCIA PERSP CTIVE VIEW S• 'A c.G To s4P_P_Sv PRIM-ARYPOW €Rj S_OUR4g A1,1. GOMPONENTSSO Bg U.r.,, LISTED&.APPRQYEO SCREWAWFXCONNECTOR IggMppAOUOISSCSUEONppL��yy 1I p CON�UTPa' h0/8P WER WESTRIM TRANSFORMER BOX WATT C OWE1IR77SUPPLY PRSOV�I6NEN0Ep8Y $CCUSI�OMER WI7M WATEaPR`WIF B00T LED ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS tiTI P..) v THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A RROJ€CT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO 6E SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED, REPRODUCED, COPIED OR EXHIBI I tU IN ANY FASHIIIN UNLESS All I HUHI/1-11 IN WHI I INI; HY AN IIFFtI:FH (IF NSNII; National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Cfick-Fil-A #4094 - SDuthrenter Pkwy & Minkler Address: 17333 SDuthrenter_P_arkway_Tukwila,_WA.981a8 Phone: Account Mgr. S Rosenbloom_ Designer: fluffy, S kale: Noted Date• 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. C US (Revisions: 11/01/2017 SD- ("hanae site elan yl to mnn a kl pert mnve wall Rign Drawing Number 27R592 N AIMS MINIUM= MINIM 111111111111 D- aVt f-u4ariIn ELECTRONIC SIGNS l ... /Y,' 0 6'-0" FACE VIEW AREA: 36.00 SQ. FT. toNEW 6'-0" ILLUM. "CHICK-FIL-A" ICON LOGO CABINET ALUMINUM TENSION RETAINE RLON CAST FLEX SUBSTRATE RETAINER SECTION VIEW ELECTRONIC BALLAST / DISCONNECT SWITCH FLUORESCENT LAMPS IT — FRAME AND LAMP VIEW BRACE SUPPORT VIEW 1� SECTION VIEW Specifications: ISOMETRIC VIEW 11111 4*14%4L4.411 SECTION C-C CABINET: INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED SIGN CABINET. FACES: ARLON CAST FLEX SUBSTRATE WITH CARDINAL RED #3632-53 TRANSLUCENT VINYL OVERLAY WITH WHITE SHOW THRU. RETAINER: ALUMINUM TENSION RETAINER PAINTED MATHEWS RED MP 10252. RETURNS: 8" DEEP ALUMINUM RETURN PAINTED MATHEWS RED MP 10252. ILLUMINATION: 800MA HO FLUORESCENT LAMPS PLACED ON CENTER FOR EVEN LIGHTING. DISCONNECT: ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH BOOT ALL WIRING & COMPONENTS TO MEET U.L. STANDARDS — 3M VINYL #3632-53/ MATHEWS RED MP 10252 SEMI WHITE NEW S/F ILLUMINATED ICON LOGO CABINET SCALE: IA" =1'-0" 8" SIDE VIEW NOV 13 2011 pvl r��lTRi�lY�� Development THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHEUIIHI1WINl1 I:KEAII:U FUH YUUH NEHSUNAL USE IN CUNNEU I IUN WIIH A f HUJI U I FLANNEL/ IUH YUIJ NY NSMIL 11 IS NUI Ill BE SHUWN Utl ISO* YUIIH IIHHANIZAIIUN NUN 11S1-11, HFPHl1UIICFII 1IIPIPl1 OH FXHIHITFN IN ANY FASHION IINI FSS AIITHNRI/FL/ IN WRITING RY AN fFFICFR nF NSMC National Sign iii& MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909:591,9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4094 - SouthrentetEkwy & Minkter Address: 17333 Snuthcenter Parkway Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: Account Mgr. _S.Rosenbloom Designer: Duffy, S_Scale: Noted Date:_0112412017 Client Approval: Date - This sign intended to be in nttonlante with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other opplicoble local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. C US Revisions: 11/01/2017 Cr). ChanOP site plan change pyl to mon add ped move wait sign 1 Drawing Number I c _ AIM• _ OA _ 27592 AIM = Ri • ELECTRONIC SIGNS 2'-7%" 2'-51h" Specifications: CABINETS: FABRICATED .080 ALUMINUM 8" DEEP, WITH ALUMINUM ANGLE FRAME CABINET PAINTED MATTE BLACK. FACES: ALUMINUM FACE ROUTED OUT AND BACKED UP WITH WHITE #7328 ACRYLIC WITH APPLIED FIRST SURFACE 3M RED #3632-53 TRANSLUCENT VINYL BACKED UP. RETAINERS TO BE 1". POST: 4"X4" SQUARE STEEL TUBE WITH MATCH PLATE POLE PAINTED MATTE BLACK. ILLUMINATION: WHITE LED ATTACHED TO CLEAR POLYCARBONATE BAFFLE. SWITCH: ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH BOOT NOTE: TRY TO KEEP DIRECTIONALS 5'-0" FROM CURBS WHEREVER POSSIBLE TO INSURE VEHICLES WILL NOT HIT THEM. ALL COMPONENTS TO BE U.L. APPROVED 3M RED 3632-53 MATTHEWS MP 929 MATTE BLACK MATTHEWS #N6425SP WHITE / #7328 ACRYLIC c drive i thru FL thank FM' You FABRICATED ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET / INTERNALLY W/ WHITE LED / W/ 1" X 1" X 1,4" ALUMINUM ANGLE FRAME 3/16" #7328 WHITE ACRYLIC WITH FIRST SURFACE APPLIED 3M RED 3632-53 TRANSLUCENT VINYL .080 ALUMINUM ROUTED OUT BACKED UP FACES PAINTED MATTHEWS #N6425SP WHITE " X 4" ALUMINUM TUBE CHICK-FIL-A - NEW D/F ILLUMINATED DIRECTIONAL SIGNS SCALE: 3/4" =1'-0" drive thru do not enter ouNEW D/F ILLUM. DIRECTIONAL SIGN taNEW D/F ILLUM. DIRECTIONAL SIGN 2" DIA. VENT ON BOTH SIDES ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH BOOT NOV 13 2011 corn -runty THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED, FOR YOU, BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR UHGANIZATION NOR USED. REPRODUCED. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY AN OFFICER OF NSMC National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Chick -Fit -A #4094 - S.nuthcenter PkwT$t.MinklAr Address: i333_4_SoithcPntRr Parkway.lukwila. WA 981a8 Phone:. Account Mgr. S. RosPnhtnnm Designer: JDuffy, S Scale:_._Linted` Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date: This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. CUS /Revisions: 11/01/7017 Sm. Change site plan change pyt to mon add pert move_wan sign Drawing Number 27592 R1 ELECTRONIC SIG I / 7 ••/in% 9'-4" 9'-0" 8'-6 7/8" %%Op closed sunday 1 FABRICATED ALUMINUM SIGN CABINET INTERNALLY CWHO FLUORESCENT LAMPS W/ 2" X 2" X'/" ALUMINUM ANGLE FRAME POLYCARBONATE WHITE WITH FIRST SURFACE APPLIED 3M RED 3632-53 TRANSLUCENT VINYL 'CLOSED SUNDAY' TO BE ROUTED OUT AND BACKED UP WITH WHITE ACRYLIC HARDI BACKER BOARD WITH ALUMINUM FRAME. / TEXCOATED AND PAINTED OR STONE OR BRICK VENEER TO MATCH BUILDING (VENEER TO BE DONE BY OTHERS) Specifications: MAIN CABINET: FABRICATED .080 ALUMINUM 1-3" TOTAL DEPTH, WITH 2" RETAINERS AND RETURNS PAINTED MATTE BLACK INTERIOR PAINTED MATTE WHITE. FACES: MAIN CABINET: 3/16" WHITE POLYCARBONATE WITH APPLIED FIRST SURFACE 3M RED #3632-53 TRANSLUCENT VINYL. CLOSED SUNDAY: .125 ALUMINUM ROUTED OUT AND BACKED UP WITH WHITE ACRYLIC. ILLUMINATION: INTERNAL T12 CW/HO FLUORESCENT LAMPS FOR MAIN CABINET. BASE: ALUMINUM FRAME CLAD IN HARDI BACKER BOARD AND CORONADO PROLEDGE STONE VENEER TO MATCH BUILDING. SWITCH: ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH BOOT ALL COMPONENTS TO BE U.L. APPROVED 1'h" It 12" �it 11h • 3M RED 3632-53 MATTE BLACK / MP 929 I j WHITE LEXAN I -BEAM CHANNEL RETURN PAINTED MATTE BLACK 4" DIA. VENT ON BOTH SIDES ELECTRICAL TOGGLE DISCONNECT SWITCH WITH BOOT ® NEW D/F ILLUM. MONUMENT SIGN NEW D/F ILLUMINATED LOW MONUMENT SIGN RECEIVED NM 13 2011 SCALE: 1/2" =1' Community Development TIIIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU By NSNIC. MS NOT TORE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED. REPRODUCED. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AU I HUHIIkU IN WHI I INH RY AN RFFII:FH (IF NSW: 440 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales ga nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: £hick-Fil-A #4Q94 - Sauthrenter_P_kwai Minkler Address: 17333 Southcenter a_WA 98188 Phone: _ Account Mgr. S_Rosenbloom Designer: Duffy, s Scale: Noted_ Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to he In accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Notional Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. a Revisions;= 11PoV7017 SD`Change nite plan change pyl to mon_add.pEd—move wall sign Drawing Number 27R 92 UM MUNI MINK MIMI MENU /1111.. V MINN IN IW ELECTRONIC SIGNS/� / % - t , % �1 FACE: POLYCARBONATE WHITE 3M 3632-53 CARDINAL RED TRANSLUCENT VINYL APPLIED FIRST SURFACE. BASE: HARDI BACKER BOARD WITH ALUMINUM FRAME. TEXCOATED AND PAINTED OR STONE OR BRICK VENEER TO MATCH BUILDING (VENEER TO BE DONE BY OTHERS) COLOR DETAIL COLOR AND COPY DETAIL: ALL EXTERIOR PAINTS TO HAVE SEMI -GLOSS FINISH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MATTE BLACK. RENDERING AND GRAPHICS COLORS ARE FOR REFERENCE ONLY. ALL MATERIALS AND COPY SHOULD BE MANUFACTURED TO SPECIFICATIONS ON PREVIOUS PAGE NEW D/F ILLUMINATED LOW MONUMENT SIGN SCALE: NTS CABINET: INTERIOR PAINT MATTE WHITE RETURNS COLOR SEE PREVIOUS PAGE RETAINER SYSTEM: PAINT TO MATCH COLOR ON PREVIOUS PAGE ROUTED READER FACE: PAINT TO MATCH COLOR ON PREVIOUS PAGE ROUTED OUT AND BACKED UP WITH WHITE ACRYLIC NOV 13 2017 Community THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSW,. IS NOT TO BE.S_HGWN OUTSIUE YOUR UHGANILAIIUN NUN I1S1711. HI-PHIII1UGhll. 1:11PIE11 OH IXHIHI I EH IN ANY FASHION IINI I SS All I HIIHIIHI IN WHIIINl HY AN IIFFICFH OF NSNII: r(0 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4Q94 - SOuthcenteLPkwy & Minkler Address: 17333 SnNthoentet_P_arkway, Tukwila, WA.9818.R Phone: Account Mgr. __S. Rosenbloom_ Designer: _Duffy, S Scale: Noted Date: 01/24I9Q17_ Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Notional Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. Revisions: 11/0112017 SDL Chang 1 Drawing Number 27592 WOK MIER MEIN • moo la IMIllimm.i VENOM .. ELECTRONIC SIGNS I/7f, ,Q 1 1 0 r al '7 3 3 SPECIFICATIONS' NUMERALS: TO BE "'A" THICK FLAT -CUT NON -ILLUMINATED SINTRA NUMERALS WITH FACES AND RETURNS EDGES TO BE PAINTED MATHEWS RED MP 10252. MOUNTING: NUMERALS TO BE FLUSH MOUNTED TO FASCIA WITH THREADED ROD INTO LETTER BACKS & SET INTO PRE -DRILLED HOLES WITH SILICONE. MATHEWS RED MP 10252. NEW SINTRAADDRESS NUMERALS NEW SINTRA NON -ILLUMINATED ADDRESS NUMERALS SCALE: 3" =1' J '/>' THICK SINTRA LETTER '/4' DIAMETER THREADED ROD SET INTO LETTER BACK THREADED ROD SET INSIDE WITH SILICONE CEMENT BUILDING FASCIA 11 C. A§ VC. NOV 13 2017 Community Development fr THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANI7ATION NOR IISFD. RFPRODUCFO, COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNI FSS AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY AN OFFICER OF NSMC j 0 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591,4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chink-Fil-A#4094 - SnuthaenterPkwy & Minkler Address: 17333 S.Duthcenter Parkway, Tukwi a, WA 9818.8 Phone: Account Mgr. S_RD.senbtoonn Designer:.Duffy,.SScale: Noted_ Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date - This sign intended to be in octordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code ond/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding boonding of this sign. cvus V L Revisions: ,uoU2R17 SP. Change site..ptan,..chang% pyl to mon, add pad move wall sign Drawing Number 27592 Ri NM M./ IN MI 1MI MEI MIN ELECTRONIC SIGNS & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 BOLLARD TO BE SET BY OTHERS FINISHED WITH POST AND PANEL SIGN BY NSMC Specifications: PANEL: .080 ALUMINUM PANELS WITH 1" RADIUS CORNERS. ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLTS. BACKS PAINTED MATTE BLACK. BACKGROUND: REFLECTIVE WHITE. COPY & GRAPHICS: POST: FOOTING: TO BE REFLECTIVE PANTONE REFLEX BLUE, PANTONE 3282 C, AND WHITE 2" X 2" ALUMINUM POLE CAPPED ON TOP, WITH 6" DIAMETER CONCRETE BOLLARD . POLE TO BE PAINTED MATTE BLACK. CONCRETE FOOTING PER CITY REGULATIONS. PANTONE REFLEX BLUE C PANTONE 3282 C MATTHEWS #N6425SP WHITE MATTE BLACK / MP 929 NON -ILLUMINATED HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGN ® NEW HANDICAP PARKING SIGNS reserved parking van accessibl ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLT. HEAD PAINTED TO MATCH SIGN COPY 2" x 2" ALUMINUM SQUARE TUBE. TO BE CAPPED ON TOP. BOLLARD PROVIDED BY G.C. UNEW HANDICAP PARKING SIGNS reserved parking ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLT. HEAD PAINTED TO MATCH SIGN COPY 2" x 2" ALUMINUM SQUARE TUBE. TO BE CAPPED ON TOP. BOLLARD PROVIDED BY G.C. Pell/13 2011 SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" Commur: y Development THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PI.ANNFO FOR YOII BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BF SHOWN OIITSIf1F YOIIR nRGANI7ATION NOR IISFD, RFPROnIICFD CnPIFD nR FXHIRITF❑ IN ANY FASHION IINI FSS AIITHf1RI7Fn IN WRITING RY AN OFFICFR OF NSMC .. National Sign (Project: Chick-Fil-A #40A4 _Southcenter_P_kwy 8alinkler Address: 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: Account Mgr.—S.Rosenbioom— Designer: Duffy, S Scale: Noted Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Notional Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. ceus U� Revisions: 11/01/7017 R1T Change Rite.plan.sla, Drawing Number 27592 • INV 111. Mb MI MIN ELECTRONIC SIGNS I los ..,1 i,G Specifications: PANEL: BACKGROUND: COPY & GRAPHICS: POST: FOOTING: .080 ALUMINUM PANELS WITH 1" RADIUS CORNERS. ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLTS. BACKS PAINTED MATTE BLACK. REFLECTIVE WHITE. TO BE REFLECTIVE PANTONE 186C, AND WHITE 2" X 2" ALUMINUM POLE PAINTED MATTE BLACK. CONCRETE FOOTING PER CITY REGULATIONS. - PANTONE 186 C RED [ J MATTHEWS #N6425SP WHITE MATTE BLACK / MP 929 st- booNEW PEDESTRIAN SIGNS 1'-0" AelowTh watch for ATTACHED TO POLE vehicles WITH CARRIAGE w —BOLT. HEAD PAINTED TO MATCH MATHEWS RED MP 10252. SIDE A 2" x 2" Aluminum Square Tube Capped on Top CONCRETE FOOTING 1'-6" NON -ILLUMINATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK AND VEHICLE CROSSING SIGNS SCALE: 3/4" =1' pedestrian crosswalk SIDE B NEW PEDESTRIAN SIGNS • watch for vehicles 1'-6" THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FON YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR US€O. REPRODUCED COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AIIIHUHIZEII IN WHI IING HY AN UFFICFH Uh NSMC 100 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St, Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4b94 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkter Address: 17333 Sauthcenter Parkway ila, WA 98188 Phone: _ Account Mgr. SSRosenbioom._ Designer: Day, s Scale:_N.oted— Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Dater This sign Intended to he In accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. c" us �L Revisions: 11/01/2017 SD' fhanpe eita plan._ch Drawing Number 27R592 0% r.,11 l c T, r—,, is so ui Community EL CTRONIC SIGNS lFI7..."V/Q I • Specifications: PANEL: BACKGROUND: COPY & GRAPHICS: POST: FOOTING: .080 ALUMINUM PANELS WITH 1" RADIUS CORNERS. ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLTS. BACKS PAINTED MATTE BLACK. REFLECTIVE WHITE. TO BE REFLECTIVE PANTONE 186C, AND WHITE 2" X 2" ALUMINUM POLE PAINTED MATTE BLACK. CONCRETE FOOTING PER CITY REGULATIONS. PANTONE 186 C RED MATTHEWS #N6425SP WHITE MATTE BLACK / MP 929 00 NEW PEDESTRIAN SIGNS watch for vehicles ATTACHED TO POLE WITH CARRIAGE BOLT. HEAD PAINTED TO MATCH MATHEWS RED MP 10252. 2" x 2" Aluminum Square Tube Capped on Top SIDE A / CONCRETE FOOTING 1'-6" NON -ILLUMINATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK AND VEHICLE CROSSING SIGNS SCALE: 3/4" =1' rip pedestrian crosswalk SIDE B RECEIVE NOV 13 2017 Comnunity Development THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED. HEYHUIIIII;tl1. fUNltli UK EXHIKII1-I1 IN ANY FASHIHIN IINI FSS AIIIHUHIIFu iN WHI IINI; HY AN IIFFIEFH nF NSMI: National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St,, Chino; CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4Q94—Sauthcenter_Pkw.y & Minkler Address: 17333 Southceenter_P_arkway,Tukwila, WA981&8 Phone: Account Mgr. S Rosenhloom Designer: Duffy, S Scale: Noted__ Date: 01/24/2917 Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in occotdonce with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other epplicohle local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. C PUS "Revisions: _11/0117017 Si). Change site plan change pyl to mnn add o d mave_w la_I sign Drawing Number 27592 RI 1011 Min MUM UMW ▪ MINN ELECTRONIC SIGMAS i v.../%6912 MN 8' 10" 12" drains hours 3,0 mom. =1 O p0 dosed Sunday free wAfi A t iietA wt 'U :1 VISA ADDRESS APPLIED FIRST SURFACE DINING HOURS APPLIED SECOND SURFACE Credit Card icons should be individually / cut out, not printed on dear substrate °i°y� Blue line around credit cards represents the die line DOES NOT PRINT smoke free prope, - no soRfthing STORE HOURS TO BE VERIFIED NEW WINDOW VINYL WHITE DOOR WINDOW VINYL APPLIED SECOND SURFACE SCALE: 3" =1' Top Ot Grapnlc OLo" Grade 3'-0" w DOOR ELEVATION SCALE: 3/4" = 1' 3M 7025-510 OPAQUE WHITE ECAr:v NOV 13 2011 Community --i vcrcJ't.Jri-roi?t THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BYNSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED, REPRODIICED. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY AN OFFICER OF NSMC re.0 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909.591,9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4094 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Address:17333.Southcenter_Parkway,lukwila,_WA98188 Phone: Account Mgr. _S Rosenbloom_ Designer: Duffy, S Scale: Noted— Date: f11/ 4/2017 Client Approval:} `Date - This sign Intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. C Sus Revisions: it/017017 SO. Cjg pge_site plan change pyl n mon add ped moye_waltsign Drawing Number 27R 92 Ma • mum AMMO • AMU- . - AMMO. • ELECTRONIC SIGNS 1�wA�G FOOTINGS BY OTHERS, FINAL SETTING BY NSMC 6'-0" 1'-8" PYLON COVER x ALUMINUM C-CHANNEL CANOPY TOP ALUMINUM PYLON -� COVER \ ALUMINUM POP -\ \ SIGNAGE COVER (OPTION 1) CAMERA (BY OTHERS) HOUSING - TO HAVE SMOKED PLEX COVER 0 H 3'-8_ ViSUAL DPENIN II B �N f -2" VISUAL OPENING- . - DM4 MICROPHONE (BY OTHERS) ALUMINUM MENU BOARD SP2500LP SPEAKER (BY OTHERS) jr 2'-2" ALUMINUM CAGE COV 5'-6 N COLOR NOTES POWDER COAT TO MATCH SW #5402 "MATTE BLACK TEXTURED" 2. POWDER COAT TO MATCH SW #5403 "GRAY" PAINT ALL HARDWARE, PINS, BOLTS, WASHERS TO MATCH "MATTE BLACK TEXTURED" si ni _in ii.1, 2'-0" C-CHANNEL CANOPY TOP, i" PER I'-0" SLOPE TOWARD REAR FOR WATER DRAINAGE ALUMINUM PYLON COVER i" CLEAR P99 NON -GLARE ACRYLIC SHEET (19) ROWS OF "BITRO LATTICE` LED CURTAIN AT EACH SIDE OF MENU (MODEL LAT60-24S-W, SOFT WHITE 6500K, 24V-DC, RANK B) ALUMINUM MENU BOARD SOUTHCO E3-15-35 LOCK WITH 90-3 COVER (KEY E3-5-15) LEFT MENU TO HAVE DOUBLE PIN STOP TO ALLOW MENU TO BE SET AT A 6' ANGLE IN TOWARDS CENTER OF PYLON MENU BOARD ANGLE SET PIN ALUMINUM CAGE COVER 5'-6" PYLON COVE.JR 9' LED "RED/GREEN" LIGHTS -' (LIGHTS BY SIGNAL -TECH) (MENU -BOARD SIZE/AREA STATISTICS: 0'W 1'-11" CURB 1'-6" 2'-0" LEFT MENU: - 2'-8)"-5i"wx4'-2i"H (CABINET DIM.) - 2'-1i"Wx3'-8"H (MENU DIM.) - 11.18 SF (TOTAL CABINET AREA) - 8.50 SF (TOTAL MENU AREA) "MENU ROTATES TO IDENTICAL CABINET/MENU ON REVERESE SIDE RIGHT MENU: - 2'-8i1" 5 "Wx4'-2g"H (CABINET DIM.) - 2'-1i"Wx3'-8"H (MENU DIM.) - 11.18 SF (TOTAL CABINET AREA) - 8.50 SF (TOTAL MENU AREA) "'MENU ROTATES TO IDENTICAL CABINET/MENU ON REVERESE SIDE TOTALS: - 44.72 (COMBINED TOTAL CABINET 'AREA) - 34.13 (COMBINED TOTAL MENU AREA) ""MENU AREA TOTAL INCLUDES TOP RED/GREEN LED SIGN OPTIONAL POP OVERLAY FRAME: - 1'-2"Wx4'-3g`"H (FRAME DIM.) - 8"Wx2'-9i"H (MENU DIM.) 5.28 SF (TOTAL FRAME AREA) 1.88 SF (TOTAL MENU AREA) MATTE BLACK TEXTURED 440 DRIVE-THRU CANOPY DRIVE THRU CANOPY WITH MENU BOARD (TO BE FABRICATED BY OTHERS) SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" fr i i 0 11'-U SE i i SCALE: 1/8" =1'-0" THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED, REPRODUCED. COPIED OR EXHIBITED IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AUTHORI7FD IN WRITING RY AN OFFICFR QF NSrnC National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909-591.4742 Fax 909,591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick-Eil-A#4094 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkter_ Address: 17333 S.outhcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 9818.A Phone: Account Mgr. _S&Rosenbloom Designer Duffy, S Scale: Noted Date: 0112412017__ Client Approval: Date - This sign Intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. (Revisions: 11/01/2017 SOLChangesde pl arr0- pyl to man add ped jnove_yalleign Drawing Number 27R592 pmmuni VI./ I INK WPM MINS `11, MINN MO ELECTRONIC SIGNS I I �M7Q' FOOTINGS BY OTHERS, FINAL SETTING BY NSMC TOP OF CONCRETE SET 2" BELOW TOP OF CURB FOR 9'-0" CLEARANCE W/ 6" EXPOSED ANCHOR CAGE 6"X6" SQUARE TUBE ALUMINUM CAGE COVER 4" FRONT VIEW DRIVE-THRU CLEARANCE ARM 10'-0" c earance 9 -0 3"X3" SQUARE TUBE INSTALL LOAD BEARING NYLON BLOCK IN END OF 3X3 TUBE TO PREVEN CRUSHING TUBE 711111. - NOTE TO INSTALLERS: INSTALL (3) CARRIAGE BOLTS FROM BOTTOM -UP (AS SHOWN) GRADE FROM BOTTOM OF CURB MINIMUM 3" OF THREAD FOUR (4) J-BOLT ANCHOR SUPPORTS SIDE VIEW CHICK-FIL-A - NEW CLEARANCE ARM (TO BE FABRICATED BY OTHERS) SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" r(0 1-3/8" TOP VIEW THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WIT 1 &PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUl SIDE YOuH OHUANILAI INN NMI UStU, HtrHNW R:t u, 1:UPIHI IIH FXHIHI IFI! IN ANY FASHION IINI I -SS All I HIIHIIFII IN WHIIINN; HY AN OFFI WH I1F NSW: National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909.591.4742 Fax 909:591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick-RI-A#4094 - Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Address: 17333_Southcenter Parkway..iukWila WA 98.28 Phone: Account Mgr. _S Rosenhlnnm Designer: Duffy, S Scale: Noted Date' 01/24/2011 Client Approval: Date. This sign Intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. C "S Revisions: 11/01/2017 SD. Change site plan ch Drawing Number 27R592 FOOTING BASE PLATE BACK OF CURB 14"X14"X1 /2" PLATE W/6" DIA. HOLE IN CENTER AND FOUR (4) 3/8" DIA. HOLES IN EACH CORNER 4" FROM CENTER AND FOUR (4) ANCHOR SUPPORTS. BASE PLATE DETAIL CLEARANCE ARM SUPPORT DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 1'-0" SPECIFICATIONS: CLEARANCE ARM: TO BE FABRICATED BY OTHERS TO BE PAINTED MATTE BLACK TEXTURED. COPY: CLEARANCE COPY TO BE WHITE OPAQUE HIGH PERFORMANCE VINYL APPLIED FIRST SURFACE. NOTES: STANDARD HEIGHT ACCORDING TQ-CLEARANCE.,.. DRIVE THRU GRADE TO BOTTOM ciF cLBARANCg BAR' HEIGHT OF CAGE WILL NEED TO BE ADT,JUSTED 9 THE BAR AND GRADE. T HE MUST BE`�ATY NTO ACCOMMODATE THE DISTANCE .L 201 i LEAST 3" OF BOLT THREAD ABOVE BASE PLATE. Community ■., MNIMINIM -.41111 ELECTRONIC SIGN ~I 4 1 3'-6" FOOTINGS BY OTHERS, FINAL SETTING BY NSMC 10'-0" MINIMUM 3" OF THREAD FOUR (4) J-BOLT ANCHOR . SUPPORTS SIDE VIEW DRIVE-THRU CLEARANCE ARM 9'-23/" 3"X3" SQUARE TUBE INSTALL LOAD BEARING NYLON BLOCK IN END OF 3X3 TUBE TO PREVENT CRUSHING TUBE 6"X6" SQUARE TUBE NOTE TO INSTALLERS: INSTALL (3) CARRIAGE BOLTS FROM BOTTOM -UP (AS SHOWN) ALUMINUM CAGE COVER GRADE FROM BOTTOM OF CURB 4" / 6" d 3" 61/4" 3/4" FRONT VIEW TOP OF CONCRETE SET 2" BELOW TOP OF CURB FOR 9'-0" CLEARANCE W/ 6" EXPOSED ANCHOR CAGE CHICK-FIL-A - NEW CLEARANCE ARM (TO BE FABRICATED BY OTHERS) TOP VIEW SCALE: 1/2" =1'-0" FOOTING BASE PLATE 1'-2" BACK OF CURB 1'-4" 14"X 14"X1 /2" PLATE W/6" DIA. HOLE IN CENTER AND FOUR (4) 3/8" DIA. HOLES IN EACH CORNER 4" FROM CENTER AND FOUR (4) ANCHOR SUPPORTS. BASE PLATE DETAIL 2"L 51/2" 2"r 11 Y4" 2" 51/2" 2" • Ommpor-- CLEARANCE ARM SUPPORT DET xTCERJE SCALE: 1" = 1'-0" SPECIFICATIONS: rr CLEARANCE ARM: TO BE FABRICATED BY OTHERS TO Bf�P I Ed �t MATTE BLACK TEXTURED. COPY: NOTES: CLEARANCE COPY TO BE WHITE OPAQUE HIGH PERFORMANCE VINYL APPLIED FIRST SURFACE. STANDARD HEIGHT ACCORDING TO CLEARANCE , DRIVE THRU GRADE TO BOTTOM OF CLEARANCE BAR. HEIGHT OF CAGE WILL NEED TO BE ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BAR AND GRADE. THERE MUST BE AT LEAST 3" OF BOLT THREAD ABOVE BASE PLATE. THIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUBLISHED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A_PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORf,ANI7ATION NOR IISFD RFPROOIICFn. COPIFn nR FXHIRITFf IN ANY FASHION IINI FSS AIITHORI7F11 IN WRITING RY AN OFFICFR nF NSMC r(0 National Sign & MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909:591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01/31/18 Project: Chick-Fil-A #4a94—Siuthcenter Pkwy & Minkler Address: 17333 Snuthrpnter Parkway, Tnkwila,MA_98i88 Phone: Account Mgr. _S_ Rosenbloom Designer: C}uffy, 5 Scale:Jloted_ Date: 01/24/2017 Client Approval: Date' This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the National Electrical Code and/or other applicable local codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. CUS /Revisions: 11/01I2017 SD Change site plan change pyl to mne2dd pednlave Wan sign Drawing Number 27592 R1 ONWIt • MEMO N V ▪ IMIN "NNW WNW — ELECTRONIC SIGN I / 1 9 .. /fd FOOTINGS BY OTHERS, FINAL SETTING BY NSMC FLAG POLE FLAG POLE SCALE: NTS Flan. Flag Pole 35'-0" FLAG POLE TO HAVE 5'-0" X 8'-0" FLAG HEIGHT A B C 20' 3'-6" 30" 24" 25' 3'-6" 30" 24" 30' 3'-6" 30" 24" 35' 4'-0" 36" 30" 40' 4'-6" 42" 36" 45' 5'-0" 48" 42" 50' 5'-6" 48" 42" Size Chart Ground sleeve and concrete installed by the general contractor Pole installed on pre -installed ground sleeve by sign contractor Gold anodized spun aluminum Ball, flush seam Cast aluminum truck revolving non -fouling type Swivel snaps & covers Halyard (Rope) —� Halyard cover (Optional) —� Cleat cover box (Optional) 9" Cast aluminum cleat (Optional) Aluminum flash collar 3000 PSI concrete Hardwood wedges (supplied by others) Fill space with packed dry sand Foundation sleeve — hot dip galvanized steel Steel centering wedges Steel base plate - Steel support plate welded to ground spike 2nd Halyard (Optional) 9" Cast aluminum cleat Standard Flash Collar 0 M Flag Pole Elevation E Y'IP NOV 13 2011 TIIIS IS AN ORIGINAL UNPUDLISIIED DRAWING CREATED FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE IN CONNECTION WITH A PROJECT PLANNED FOR YOU BY NSMC. IT IS NOT TO BE SHOWN OUTSIDE YOUR ORGANIZATION NOR USED. REPRODUCEU, (Ut'IEU UH LAMB' I EU IN ANY FASHION UNLESS AU I HUHIIEU IN WHI I INR HY AN NFFII:FR I1F NSMC National Sign MARKETING CORPORATION 13580 5th St., Chino, CA 91710 Tel 909,591.4742 Fax 909.591.9792 e-mail : sales @nsmc.com Lic# 745030 - Exp. 01 /31 /18 Project: t hick-Fil-A#4Q94-Sauthcenter Pkwy & Minkle> Address: 17333_SouthcentetPa; kway. Tukwila, WA 9 1$8 Phone: Account Mgr. Ft Rosenbloom__ Designer: Duffy, s Scale: doted Date: 01/24/2017_ Client Approval: Date. This sign intended to be in accordance with the requirements of Article 600 of the Notional Electrical Code and/or other applicable load codes. This includes proper grounding and bonding of this sign. Revisions: 11/01/2(117 Sn' Chan site plan. change_pgI to man add.ped.mose_ ayLsign 1 Drawing Number 27R 92 UI Development of NM ELECTRONIC SIGNS NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION Stucco ISTC 1I Parapet Wall Coping Aluminum Awning - EC -I I • Brick Veneer IRR-t I EAST ELEVATION Parapet Wall Coping WEST ELEVATION oto PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS Tukwila, WA File Name: 16.105-P12-LC-I,ARCE: Elevations 5-25-17 Revised: 8-28-17 Revised: 10-18-17 Revised: 10-24-17 Note: All roof top mechanical equipment shall be located in equipment well and screened from view by parapet walls. COLOR AND MATERIAL LEGEND I STC-I BR -I I I EC -I I A-1 I Stucco - STO - Powerwall "White" Brick Veneer - Boral Brick - Color: Citadel Parapet Wall Coping - Durolast/Enceptional Metals - Dark Bronze (Mattel Aluminum Awning - Color: Dark Bronze 10 20 30 IIIIII I M I C • R • H • 0 Architecture Interiors Planning 195 South "C" Street Suite 200 Tustin, California 92780 ---_ 714 832 1834 FAX 714 832 1910 l:�tl 13 2017 L/7-Od29 off. SOUTHEAST ELEVATION C • R • H • 0 Architecture Interiors Planning 195 South "C" Street Suite 200 Tustin, California 92780 714 832 1834 FAX 714 832 1910 PRELIMINARY RENDERING Tukwila, WA File Name: t6-105-Pt2_LC-LARGE-Elevations 5-25-17 Revised: 8-28-17 Revised: 10-18-17 Revised: 10-24-17 2311 ji SOUTHWEST ELEVATION frigA PRELIMINARY RENDERING Tukwila, WA File Name: 16-185-P12-LC-LARGE-Elevations 5-25-17 Revised: 8-28-17 Revised: 10-18-17 Revised: 10-24-17 C • R • H • 0 Architecture Interiors Planning 195 South "C" Street Suite 200 Tustin, California 92780 714 832 1834 FAX 714 832 1910 G/7-oo29 NORTHEAST ELEVATION PRELIMINARY RENDERING Tukwila, WA File Name: 16-1854.12-LC-LARGE-Elevations 5-25-17 Revised: 8-28-17 Revised: 10-18-17 Revised: 10-24-17 C • R • H • 0 Architecture lntenows Planning 195 South "C" Street Suite 200 Tustin California 92780 --- — 714 832 1834 FAX 714 832 1910 xi 's g • \ t� CATCH 6A51N RIM = 27.15 12' CONC N = 26.65 _� � v� rr^>• ,�U �.,. —nw1 = rtwi ems' 3_" 1\ � 4.&\ I'K?I \ P12 LC LRG 121 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND G5F 5,134 S.F. r STORM MANHOLE LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL-A TUKWILA SECTION 26, TWP. 23 N., ROE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON Il STORM MANACLE <d' RIM 2526 8" CMP E 6 17.58 TOP CMP 5) ER • 19.7 12, OW W 17.48 fEAV7 SAND I77 Me' T 0: 1/2 R.014 r-2o' 0 10' 20' 40' LEGEND STATE OF WASHINGTON REGISTERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT JEFF M. vARLEY CERTIFICATE No. 774 ExPIRES 6-25-2016 EX6TNG &AIM OR OTHER LANDSCAPING TO REVAM. PROTECT DURING CONSTRUCTION. RETURN TO PRE -CONSTRUCTION COMMON IF DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAMES SIZE CONDITION SPACING QUANTITY REMARKS MEI . � ACER TRUNCAi W x A PUTANOIOES / WARRENS RED' PACWIC 2.5' CN. AS SHOWN 7 NURSERY GROWN VA VA MA SUNSET MAPLE CLEDITSA TRMOWTIOS INTERNS 'SIMDEWSTER & B 25. C#. A5 SHOWN II FOR STREET TREE U50, BRANCHED AT 5' NURSERY GROWN /I10NEVL000ST S'NTDEMASTER' B & B FOR STREET TREE LASE, BRANCHED AT 5' O ULMIIS PARC54 'R I' / ATHEN4 C14co'DER D1A 2.5" CAL AS SHOWN 7 NURSERY GROWN B & B FOR STREET TREE USE. BRANCHED AT 5' PER 18.28240.11.8, CMIPER IS MEASURED 6• ABOVE FL656 GRADE 111811115; © CAIAMAGROSTIS ACUTWLORA 'KARL FOERSTER / 18' IEIGM 36' 0.C. 200 FULL AND BUSH' KARL /IMLa8R FEATHER REED CRASS 0 PE 416SEI UM M GRASS UROIDES 'HAMELN' / 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 24 FULL AND BUSHY ® NANONN 00MESTICA 'MOON BAY / 16' HEIGHT 60" 0.C. 62 FULL AND BUSHY MOON BAY HEAVENLY BAMBOO Q uvANDULA ANGUSTFOUA 'HIDCOTE BLUE' / 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 107 FULL AND BUSHY ENGUSN LAVENDER O NORMAN TENAx 'ROSIE CHAMELEON' / I8' HEIGHT 48. 0.C. 46 FULL AND BUSHY NEW ZEAIAND FLAX ® HEL.ICTOTRICHON SEIAPERARENS 'SAPPHIRE' / BLUE OAT GRASS 18'HEIGHT 38' Q.C. 92 FULL AND BUSHY ® MISCANTHUS SMENSIS 'LITTLE MISS' / 18' HEIGHT 36' O.C. 82 FULL ANO BUSHY MAIDEN GRAB O FOTHERGLIA x IHERMEOIA 'BLUE SHADOW' / DWARF WTTCH ALDER 18' HEIGHT 60' O.C. 10 FULL AND BU51f! ® BERBERS TOUNBRGII 'CONCORDE' / 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 41 FULL AND BUSHY REDLFAF BARBERRY ® CC COPPER4AC/ DGE 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 178 FULL AND BUSH GROUNTT:TNFR• 4^.:,.V".k..,',.;'..I LAWN SHCREL CUT LAWN/LANDSCAPE BED TRANSR0N - NMLts: HATCH NOT SHOWN 2,3" DEPTH ORGANIC MULCH IN ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS NOTE: FOR ALL LAWN AND LANDSCAPE AREAS, SOILS MUST BE PREPARED FOR PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH BMP T5.13 "POST CONSTRUCTION SOIL QUALITY AND DEPTH" FROM THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL STRUCTURAL SOILS (CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRODUCT OR SIMILAR) MUST BE USED TO A PREFERRED DEPTH OF 36 INCHES TO PROMOTE TREE ROOT GROWTH. MINIMUM SOIL VOLUMES FOR TREE ROOTS SHALL BE 750 CUBIC FEET PER TREE. SEE SHEET 1.2 FOR DETAILS. APPLIES TO ALL PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREES A IT RECEIVED DEC 142017 Community Development 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By n 12/13/2017 JMV REVISIONS PER CLIENT Mark Dote By A Mork Dote By A Seal STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA. WA SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE PLAN VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Date .6-2-17 Drown By : JMV Checked By: JMV Sheet 1.O of 5 L/7-oolf LANDSCAPE PLANTING NOTES AND MATERIALS SCOPE OF WORK FURNISH ALL MATERIALS. LABOR. EQUIPMENT AND RELATED ITEMS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH TOPSOIL TREATMENT AND PREPARATION OF SOIL, FINISH GRADING, PLACEMENT OF SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIALS, FERTILIZER. STAKING, MULCH. CLEAN-UP, DEBRIS REMOVAL, AND 90-DAY MAINTENANCE. QUALIFICATIONS: LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO BE SKILLED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THE FIELD OF WORK AND HAVE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEAR'S EXPERIENCE INSTALLING SIMILAR WORK. CONTRACTOR TO BE LICENSED TO PERFORM THE WORK SPECIFIED WITHIN THE PRESIDING JURISDICTION. JOB CONDITIONS: IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THE SITE AND REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE OWNER OR THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVES. ALL PLANT MATERIAL AND FINISH GRADES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE OWNER. PROTECTION: SAVE AND PROTECT ALL EXISTING PLANTINGS SHOWN TO REMAIN. DO NOT PLANT UNTIL OTHER CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS WHICH CONFLICT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. IF AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS TO BE INSTALLED DO NOT PLANT UNTIL THE SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSTALLED, TESTED. AND APPROVED BY THE OWNER. HANDLE PLANTS WITH CARE - DO NOT DAMAGE OR BREAK 9001 SYSTEM, BARK, OK BRANCHES. REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE ITEMS DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF WORK, OR WORK NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. AS DIRECTED BY OWNER AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. REPAIR OF EXISTING PLANTINGS: DURING THE COURSE OF WORK, REPAIR ALL EXISTING PLANTING AREAS BY PRUNING DEAD GROWTH. RE-ESTABLISHING FINISH GRADE AND RE -MULCHING TO SPECIFIED DEPTH. REPAIR OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM: DURING THE COURSE OF WORK, REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO MATCH CONDITIONS PRIOR TO THE DAMAGE. GUARANTEE: GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE JOB BY OWNER. 90-DAY MAINTENANCE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE OWNER WITH A SCOPE OF WORK AT TIME OF INITIAL PROJECT BID TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE FOR 90 DAYS FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF PROJECT (ACCEPTANCE) OF FACILITY BY OWNER. WORK TO INCLUDE MAINTENANCE AS DESCRIBED BELOW, IN PLANTING AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE. SUBMITTALS: SUBMIT FIVE (5) COPIES THE FOLLOWING TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY WORK: A) DOCUMENTATION THAT ALL PLANT MATERIAL HAS BEEN ORDERED. B) TOPSOIL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS. C) TREE STAKING AND GUYING MATERIALS. D) ONE (1) QUART SIZE OF TOPSOIL AND MULCH. E) PLANTING SCHEDULE INCLUDING DATES AND TIMES. F) MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ONE (1) FULL YEAR. MATERIALS: PLANT MATERIALS: PLANT MATERIALS TO BE GRADE N0. 1, SIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH (AAN) AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1-2004). PRUNE PLANTS RECEIVED FROM THE NURSERY ONLY UPON AUTHORIZATION BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. "B & B. INDICATES BALLED AND BURLAPPED; "CONT." INDICATES CONTAINER; "BR" INDICATES BARE ROOT; "GAL' INDICATES GALLON. A)SPECIFIED 8 BALL ZENA D TY SIZE CALIPERUISL THE NDITION ACCEPTABLE CONTAINER E BLE CON NE OR BALL SIZE AND ESTABLISHES MINIMUM PLANT CONDITION TO BE PROVIDED. B) QUALITY: PLANT MATERLAL TO COMPLY WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS FOR DISEASE INSPECTION, PLANTS TO BE FULLY LIVE. VIGOROUS, WELL FORMED. WITH WELL DEVELOPED FIBROUS ROOT SYSTEMS. ROOT BALLS OF PLANTS TO BE SOLID AND FIRMLY HELD TOGETHER, SECURELY CONTAINED AND PROTECTED FROM INJURY AND DESICCATION. PLANTS DETERMINED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO HAVE BEEN DAMAGED; HAVE DEFORMITIES OF STEM, BRANCHES, OR ROOTS; LACK SYMMETRY. HAVE MULTIPLE LEADERS OR 'Y' CROTCHES LESS THAN 30 DEGREES IN TREES. OR DO NOT MEET SIZE OR ANSI STANDARDS WILL BE REJECTED. PLANT MATERIAL TO BE FROM A SINGLE NURSERY SOURCE FOR EACH SPECIFIED SPECIES/HYBRID. NURSERY SOURCES TO BE THOSE LOCATED IN THE SAME REGION AS THE JOB SITE. C) SUBSTITUTION: NO SUBSTITUTION OF PLANT MATERIAL, SPECIES OR VARIETY. WILL BE PERMITTED UNLESS WRITTEN EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER FROM TWO QUALIFIED PLANT BROKERAGE OFFICES. SUBSTITUTIONS WHICH ARE PERMITTED TO BE IN WRITING FROM THE OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THE SPECIFIED SIZE. SPECIES AND NEAREST VARIETY, AS APPROVED, TO BE FURNISHED. SUBSTITUTIONS MAY REQUIRE SUBMITTAL TO REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN TO CITY FOR APPROVAL. D) LABEL AT LEAST ONE (1) TREE, SHRUB, AND GROUNDCOVER OF EACH VARIETY WITH A SECURELY ATTACHED WATERPROOF TAG BEARING LEGIBLE DESIGNATION OF BOTANICAL AND COMMON NAMES, E) DELIVER PLANT MATERIAL AFTER PREPARATION OF PLANTING AREAS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND PLANT IMMEDIATELY. IF PLANTING IS DELAYED MORE THAN SIX (6) HOURS AFTER DELIVERY, SET MATERIAL IN SHADE, PROTECT FOR WEATHER AND MECHANICAL DAMAGE, AND KEEP ROOT BALLS MOIST BY COVERING WITH MULCH, BURLAP OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS OF RETAINING MOISTURE. SOIL PREPARATION: TOPSOIL. AMENDMENT, AND BACKFILL, ARE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLANS. SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZER NOTED BELOW ARE TO BE USED FOR BID PRICE BASIS ONLY. SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS WILL BE MADE AFTER SOIL SAMPLES ARE LABORATORY TESTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. PROVIDE CHANGE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL OR REDUCTION OF MATERIALS REQUIRED OR NOT REOUIRED BY THE SOILS REPORT. SOIL FERTILITY AND AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: AFTER ROUGH GRADING AND PRIOR TO SOIL PREPARATION, CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN TWO REPRESENTATIVE SOIL SAMPLES. FROM LOCATIONS AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, TO NORTHERN LIGHTS ANALYTICAL & CONSULTING INC. RAVENSDALE WA, TEL. 253-653-5770 OR, EQUIVALENT TESTING LABORATORY, FOR TEST /A05-2. SUBMIT RESULTS TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. TESTS TO INCLUDE FERTILITY AND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS WITH WRITTEN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOIL AMENDMENT, FERTILIZER. CONDITIONERS, APPLICATION RATES. AND POST -CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, TESTS TO BE CONTRACTED WITH AND PAID FOR BY THE CONTRACTOR. A) TOPSOIL: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING ALL TOPSOIL AND FOR DETERMINING THE VOLUME OF TOPSOIL REQUIRED PER THE INFORMATION ON PLANS AND NOTED HERE -IN. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY NECESSARY WEED CONTROL RESULTING FROM CONTAMINATED OFF SITE SOURCES. B) TOPSOIL TO CONSIST OF WINTER MIX AS PRODUCED AND REMIXED BY PACIFIC TOPSOILS, INC. WINTER MIX TO CONSIST OF I/O BY VOLUME SANDY LOAM, 1/3 BY VOLUME COMPOSTED GARDEN MULCH, AND 1/3 BY VOLUME COARSE WASHED SAND OR EQUIVALENT. AT MINIMUM, TOPSOIL PRODUCTS BROUGHT ON SITE TO CONTAIN AMENDMENTS AS LISTED IN "C". C) TOPSOIL TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS AS NECESSARY: THE FOLLOWING AMOUNT PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET: 1. 6-CUBIC YARDS ORGANIC COMPOST. COMPOST TO BE FREE OR NON -FARM ANIMAL SOURCES, NOR TO BE FROM SOURCES CONTAINING REDWOOD OF CEDAR PRODUCTS. 2. 30-POUNDS NITROFORM (38-0-0) 3. 5-POUNDS AMMONIUM SULFATE 4. 40-POUNDS CALCIUM CARBONATE LIMESTONE 5. 40-POUNDS DOLOMITE LIMESTONE 6. 5-OUNES BORON (AS BORAX) ALL AMENDMENTS TO BE THOROUGHLY MIXED PRIOR TO INCORPORATION INTO TOPSOIL. LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL-A TUKWILA SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., ROE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON D) PLANTING BACKFILL FOR ALL TREES, SHRUBS. AND GROUNDCOVERS: 1. 0.6-CUBIC YARDS PER VOLUME TOPSOIL 2. 0.4-CUBIC YARDS ORGANIC COMPOST. 3. 3-POUNDS NITROFORM (38-0-0) 4. 1-POUNDS AMMONIUM SULFATE 5. 2-POUNDS CALCIUM CARBONATE LIMESTONE 6. 2-POUNDS DOLOMITE LIMESTONE E) TOPSOIL PREPARATION AND INSTALLATION: 1. VERIFY SUBGRADES TO -7 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS AND -18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS BELOW FINISH ELEVATION, OR AS INDICATED ON PLANS. THIS ACCOMMODATES, TOPSOIL. AMENDMENTS. AND MULCH. 2. ERADICATE ANY SURFACE VEGETATION ROOTED IN THE SUB -GRADE PRIOR TO SUB -GRADE PREPARATION. 3. THOROUGHLY SCARIFY AND RIP ALL LANDSCAPE SUB -GRADES WHICH HAVE BECOME COMPACTED TO A DEPTH OF 12 INCHES WITH MULTIPLE PASSES. 90 DEGREES TO EACH OTHER. SCARIFY AREAS INACCESSIBLE TO MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT AND AROUND EXISTING PLANTINGS NOTED TO REMAIN WITH HAND TOOLS. 4. REMOVE SOIL LUMPS, ROCK, VEGETATION AND/OR DEBRIS LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM ALL SUB -GRADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF SPECIFIED TOPSOIL. 5. REMOVE ANY ASPHALT EXTENDING BEYOND 6 INCHES FROM CURBS INTO ADJACENT LANDSCAPE AREAS. 6. PARKING LOT PLANTER ISLANDS TO BE OVER EXCAVATED BY BACKHOE. REMOVE PAVING WASTE, GRAVEL BASE MATERIAL AND UNDERLYING SUBSOIL TO 18 INCHES BELOW TOP OF PAVING. SCARIFY AND OVER EXCAVATE PLANT PIT BOTTOM 12 INCHES TO MINIMIZE STRUCTURAL COMPACTION. F) TOPSOIL PLACEMENT: 1. PROVIDE A TOTAL FINISH COURSE OF 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL FOR LANDSCAPE AREAS AND 18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS. 2. IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. PLACE 2 INCHES (6 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS) OF TOPSOIL MIX WITH AMENDMENTS OVER THE PREPARED SUB -GRADE AND THOROUGHLY ROTOTILL WITH MULTIPLE PASSES INTO THE TOP 6 INCHES OF SUB -GRADE FOR A TOTAL DEPTH OF 8 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS (12 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS). PLACE AN ADDITIONAL 2 INCH LIFT OF TOPSOIL. IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS AND A MINIMUM 12 INCH LIFT IN ALL PARKING LOT ISLANDS. FOR THE FINAL TOPSOIL DEPTH OF 4 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS AND 18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS. 3. PLACE ADDITIONAL TOPSOIL AND SOIL MIX AS REOUIRED TO MEET FINISH ELEVATIONS. MULCH (TOPDRESSING): ORGANIC MULCH IN ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS HERBICIDE: HERBICIDE IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR THE FIRST YEAR AFTER INSTALLATION. ANTI -DESICCANT: 'WILT -PROOF," 48 HOURS PRIOR TO SHIPMENT TO SITE FROM JUNE 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER. THOROUGHLY ROOT WATER PLANTS PRIOR TO DELIVERY. PLANT MATERIAL DELIVERED TO SITE TO BE KEPT CONTINUALLY MOIST THROUGH INSTALLATION. EXECUTION: CONTAMINANTS: VERIFY THAT ALL SOIL CONTAMINANTS (E.G., PAINT. SEALANTS. SOLVENTS. OILS, GREASES. CONCRETE/ASPHALT SPOILS. ETC.) HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORY REMOVED FROM ALL PLANTING AREAS. DO NOT BEGIN WORK UNTIL UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. FINISH GRADES: FINE GRADE AND REMOVE ROCKS, DEBRIS, AND FOREIGN OBJECTS OVER 2 INCHES DIAMETER FROM TOP SURFACE OF PREPARED LANDSCAPE AREAS. FINISH ELEVATIONS TO BE DEFINED AS 2 INCHES BELOW CURBS. WALKS AND/OR OTHER ADJACENT HARDSCAPE FOR ALL PLANTING BED AREAS AND 1-INCH BELOW CURBS, WALKS AND/OR OTHER ADJACENT HARDSCAPE FOR ALL LAWN AREAS. FINISH GRADE REFER TO GRADES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MULCH OR LAWN. ALL FINISH GRADES TO BE SMOOTH EVEN GRADES, LIGHTLY COMPACTED. AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND DETAILED. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. SITE CML DRAWINGS IDENTIFY FINAL ELEVATIONS. MOISTEN PREPARED AREAS BEFORE PLANTING IF SOIL IS DRY. WATER THOROUGHLY AND ALLOW SURFACE TO DRY BEFORE PLANTING. DO NOT CREATE MUDDY SOIL. TREES AND SHRUBS: ARRANGE TREES AND SHRUBS ON SITE IN PROPOSED LOCATIONS PER DRAWINGS. EXCAVATE PIT, PLANT AND STAKE OR GUY, AS CALLED OUT AND DETAILED. ALL TREES, SHRUBS, AND SUPPORTS TO STAND VERTICAL. BACKFILL SHALL BE PIT SPOILS. SETTLE BACKFILL USING WATER ONLY. NO MECHANICAL COMPACTION. GROUNDCOVERS: EXCAVATE PITS TO A MINIMUM OF 3 INCHES BELOW, AND TWICE THE ROOT BALL DIAMETER. WATER THOROUGHLY AND TAKE CARE TO ENSURE THAT ROOT CROWN IS AT PROPER GRADE. AS DETAILED. MULCH: MULCH ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS NOT COVERED BY LAWN AND/OR SEED. APPLY SUFFICIENT QUANTITY TO PROVIDE A 2"-3' DEPTH. UTILITY CLEARANCES: FIELD ADJUST PLANT LOCATIONS FOR 8-FOOT SEPARATION OF TREES/SHRUBS AND 2-FOOT SEPARATION FOR GROUNDCOVER FROM FIRE HYDRANTS AND UTILITY VAULTS. CLEANUP AND PROTECTION: DURING LANDSCAPE WORK, KEEP ALL PAVEMENT CLEAN AND WORK AREAS IN AN ORDERLY CONDITION. PROTECT LANDSCAPE WORK AND MATERIALS FROM DAMAGE DUE TO LANDSCAPE OPERATIONS AND TRESPASSERS. MAINTAIN PROTECTION DURING INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE PERIOD. TREAT. REPAIR, OR REPLACE DAMAGE LANDSCAPE WORK AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. PLANTING MAINTENANCE: PROVIDE FULL MAINTENANCE BY SKILLED EMPLOYEES OF LANDSCAPE INSTALLERS. CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PLANTINGS THROUGH COMPLETED INSTALLATION, AND UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. PLANTING MAINTENANCE TO INCLUDE WATERING, WEEDING. CULTIVATING, TIGHTENING AND REPAIRING OF TREE GUYS, RESETTING PLANTS TO PROPER GRADES OR POSITION, RE-ESTABLISHING SETTLED GRADES; AND MOWING LAWNS WEEKLY AFTER LAWN ESTABLISHMENT. HERBICIDE IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR ONE YEAR FOLLOWING LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. INCLUDED IS REPLACEMENT OF DEAD PLANTS AND PLANTS SHOWING LOSS OF 40 PERCENT OR MORE OF CANOPY. IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE: THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE MAINTAINED INCLUDING ADJUSTMENTS FOR BALANCED WATER DISTRIBUTION AND PRECIPITATION. FAILED OR MALFUNCTIONING IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT SHALL BE REPLACED AND/OR CORRECTED. PLANTING AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE TO INCLUDE THOSE OPERATIONS NECESSARY TO THE PROPER GROWTH AND SURVIVAL OF ALL PLANT MATERIALS. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THIS WORK IN ADDITION TO SPECIFIC WARRANTY/GUARANTEES. SHRUB - PRUNE AS DIRECTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MULCH LAYER. HOLD MULCH BACK FROM STEM 4' SAUCER FOR WATERING SCARIFY ROOTBALL ON CONTAINER MATERIAL. REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURLAP ON B&B MATERIAL DUST ROOT BALL WITH ROOT GROWTH HORMONE 3. THE ROOTBALL DIAMETER NOTE: APPLY ADDITIONAL a OZ. 8-32-16 FERTILIZER INTO TOP 2" OF PLANTING MIX. PLANT SHRUB HIGH ENOUGH TO ALLOW POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ROOTBALL. ROUGHEN ALL SURFACES OF PIT. CUT AND REMOVE BURLAP FROM ROOT BALL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE PRUNE DAMAGED TWIGS AFTER PLANTING PLACE IN VERT. POSITION: DOUBLE LEADERS WILL BE REJECTED NOTE: KEEP ROOTBALL MOIST AND PROTECTED AT ALL TIMES. HOLD CROWN OF ROOTBALL AT OR JUST ABOVE FINISH GRADE. PROTECT TRUNK AND LIMBS FROM INJURY. BACKFILL TO BE SETTLED USING WATER ONLY - NO MECHANICAL COMPACTION. REMOVE ALL WRAP, TIES & CONTAINERS, REGARDLESS OF MATERIAL. PROTECTIVE WRAPPING DURING SHIPMENT TO SITE AND INSTALLATION REMOVE AT COMPLETION OF PLANTING MULCH, INSTALL PER NOTES THIS SET FINISH GRADE PREPARE PLANTING BED PER SPEC'S; AT MIN.. LOOSEN AND MIX SOIL TO 18" OR DEPTH OF ROOTBALL AND 2 TIMES BALL DIAMETER SCOREA�LLLL 511R8g9p TTII 5 ANp CONTAIN B5 I.JOTNALLPANDF WONK NORSERYFSOIL AWAY FROM PERIMETER ROOTS SET BALL ON UNDISTURBED BASE OR COMPACTED MOUND UNDER BALL PENETRATION TO SUBBASE 24" MINIMUM DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING/STAKING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE MULCH LAYER FEATHER EXCESS _ SOIL UNDER MULCH 1" MULCH AT CROWN 1/2" ABOVE GRADE 1" ABOVE GRADE— PREPAR N NOTE: ��'/',`T� REMOVE CONTAINER AND WORK ROOTS FREE OF SOIL. BACKFILL TO BE SETTLED USING WATER ONLY. SEE PLANT LIST FOR PLANT SPACING. TF( P1565ED1 AFTER MULCH )INER I ( PUNTED BEFORE MULCH) F8 GROUNDCOVER PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE STATE OF WASHINGTON REGISTERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MULCH LAYER 1'TO MAX. TOPOF MUOF LCH CURB TOP CURB MULCH AT CURB DETAIL NOT TO SCALE OVER ALL TOPSOIL DEPTH OF 3 FEET BERM HEIGHT 6" MIN. SOIL LINE. 3" IN MULCH, 1' IN LAWN SUBGRADE REMOVE EXCESS GRAVEL AND PAVING COARSE TRANSITION FROM TOPSOIL TO SUBSOIL NOTE: 7TOLOO5 NR VCOMPACTEDGSUBBASE PLANTERS JEFF M. VARLET CERRRCATE No. 771 EXPIRES 8-25-2018 TOPSOIL SETTLED (COMPACTED CONDITION) �CURB 1-1/2" DRAIN AT LOW POINTS & 10' SPACING II MAXIMUM 12" MAX. LIP GRADING CO PARKING LOT PLANTERS DETAIL PAVING (SEE CML PLANS) NOT TO SCALE FINISH GRADE AT 4:1 SLOPE MAXIMUM 2% SLOPE MINIMUM CURB PER CIVIL DRAWINGS (WALK SIMILAR) LAWN CONDITION MULCH CONDITION (CURB LK (CURB SI PLANTER SECTION DETAIL MULCH LAYER TOPSOIL AS SPECIFIED FINISH GRADE AT 3:1 SLOPE MAXIMUM 10:1 SLOPE MINIMUM PREPARED SUBGRADE 1" MAX. CLEAR ILAR) NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED DEC 14 2011 Community Development 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanto Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Dote By Al2/13/2017 JMV REVISIONS PER CLIENT Mork Date By A Mork Date By Seal 0 CV 1.0 CV CV 0 CV CO z CO m ccoo N I I "3v1 in N N fl 7 Z N N STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Dote • 6-2-17 Drown By : JMV Checked By: JMV Sheet 1.1 of 5 \18000s\18363\engineering\01-04094—L.d» Z./7d-0902.9 LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL-A TUKWILA CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® BREAK—OUT ZONE FROM NARROW TREE LAWN TO ADJACENT PROPERTY SCALE: N.T.S DRAB BY: NARROW TREE LAWN'• CURB STREET\` � �� \`T �1 . 1 �� ii1 ' ' • ' ei i�� rre- • g,•`'� • •) 1 �j �. /,�G,,J 1 • • %,, EXISTING SIDEWALK ADJACENT PROPERTY (EX. FRONT YARD) 3" BARK MULCH �}:. EXISTING TREE LAWN SOIL CURB STREET 8' +,, d -s II : �•,,• 41. �_� _L. CONCRETE PAVEMENT SIDEWALK•' FRONT YARD VARIES �rS= j `� 1, BREAK OUT ZONE: NARROW 2 SECT ONS OF EXISTING TREE LAWN PAVEMENT REPLACED, 3.5'-6' CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL6 BELOW 1111111 IIIIIIIIJ " ..� •, ``•.: 1 I r-3� �1 {., ra*aj C t z • . —I r.g:...:off' X::IC • !..::.:da:rk �� PREF 36" NOTES: BREAK-OUT ZONES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN TREE LAWN IS LESS THAN 6' WIDE. FOR EACH TREE. TWO 5'x5' SIDEWALK SLABS ARE TO BE REMOVED AND RECONSTRUCTED WITH A BASE OF 24' MIN (36" PREF) CU-STRUCTURAL SOILW TO ALLOW TREE ROOTS TO SAFELY GROW UNDER SIDEWALK AND INTO ADJACENT PROPERTY WITHOUT HEAVING SIDEWALK. -) I—, I —III I I ( -III— I —III— CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL% PREPARED SUBGRADE TYPICAL TREE PLANTING PIT WITH CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® ALONG SIDEWALK SCALE: N.T.S DRAWN BY: ORD 24' MIN 36" PREF VARIES. MIN 8' PREF 15' J 7 BUILDING FACE SIDEWALK POROUS OPENING AT LEAST 50 SOFT (EX 5'x10' OR 8'x8') I I-11 I —III —I 1 E I I —I E I lE1. I-1IHIHIEIIHII=III-III1IH A CONTINUOUS CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL® BASE UNDER THE ENTIRE SIDEWALK GREATLY INCREASES THE VOLUME OF SOIL USABLE BY THE TREES. aiwa 3" THICK MULCH. NO SHREDDED BARK OR WOOD CHIPS TO LAY AGAINST TRUNK OF TREE PLANTING SOIL MIX CURB ASPHALT PAVEMENT BASE COURSE CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL® DRAINAGE PIPE TO STORM SEWER PREPARED SUBGRADE PLANTING SOIL MIX CU-STRUCTURAL SOILS SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON TYPICAL TREE PLANTING ISLAND IN A PARKING LOT WITH CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® SCALE N.T.S DRAWN BY: ORD VARIES PREF 36" VARIES, 8' MIN DRAINAGE PIPE TO STORM SYSTEM 3" THICK BARK MULCH. NO SHREDDED BARK OR WOOD CHIPS TO LAY AGAINST TRUNK. SOIL MIX UNDER ROOTBALL SETTLED WITH WATER OR GENTLY TAMPED BEFORE TREE IS PLACED PLANTING SOIL MIX AS SPECIFIED POROUS ASPHALT DESIRABLE BASE COARSE (6' TYPICAL) CU-STRUCTURAL SOILC PREPARED SUBGRADE A TYPICAL 36' x 8' PARKING LOT ISLAND WITH 3' DEPTH OF SANDY LOAM SOIL CAN SUPPORT: WITH NO CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL® • 2 SMALL TREES (<30' TALL AT MATURITY) WITH 150 CU FT CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL® (EX, 36' x 4 25' x 3') • 1 LARGE TREE (30.-50' TALL AT MATURITY) WITH 1215 CU FT CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL (EX. 36' x 12' x 3') • 1 VERY LARGE TREE (>50' TALL AT MATURITY) SMALL TREES LARGE TREE PLANTING ISLAND CURB CU-STRUCTURAL SOIL® VERY LARGE TREE STATE OF WASHINGTON REGISTERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT JEFF M. VARLEY GERM -MATE No. 774 ExPIRES 8-2S-2018 RECEIVED DEC 14 u! Comn - ;y Development 1.2 of 5 1 74-022 9 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlonta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By A,12/13/2017 JW REVISIONS PER CLIENT Mork Dote By A Mork Dote By A Seol STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Date .6-2-17 Drown By • JMV Checked By' dMv Sheet 12/13/2017 3:23 PM JVARLEY 0 LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL-A TUKWILA IRRIGATION POINT OF CONNECTION WITH NEW 1" WATER METER Mw, Mw)S� MOUNT 0 ON ' 10R WALL. INPUT: 117VAC +/-10%, 60 Hz. OUTPUT: 26.5 VAC, 1.5 A INSTALL 1' DIAMETER PVC CONDUIT 6 FOR 24V ELECTRICAL WIRING FROM THE CONTROLLER TO LANDSCAPE AREA PANT CONDUIT ITO MATCH BUILDING COLOR. MOUNT RAN SENSOR ON WEATHER EXPOSED PORTION 0 EXTERIOR WALL AT 8' — 9 HEIGHT. \ \ \ \� .,4 . 41pS.\ t \ 1, re FORM MANHOLE 84• P12 LC LRG 121 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND GSF 5.134 S.F. SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., ROE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON SEWER 49.0902E PVC • i112 CSW 15.3 14. 9 9 TOP CARP 5I$ER = 19.1 i 12' CONC W 17.98 �— NEAV7 SAND IN My- 111,c1 a Q Al , jg p 1/2 R.01N- I I W' I I , I IRRIGATION LEGEND SYMBOL NOZZLE PSI GPM 1-20' O 10' 20' 40' RADIUS STATE OF WASHINGTON REGISTERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT JEFF Y. VARLEY CERTIFICATE No, 776 EXPIRES 8-25-2018 HUNTER-60 and 6H H. 0 SERIES 30 0.98. 0.51 6' HUNTER—I000 8-15 F. TH, 17, H. 0 SERIES 35 0.65, 0.48, 0.37, 0.32. 0.16 8' HUNTER-1000 8-15 F. TH, TT, H. 0 SERIES 35 0.65, 0.48, 0.37. 0.32. 0.16 10' HUNTER-1000 8-15 F. TH, TT, H. 0 SERIES 35 0.65. 0.48, 0.37, 0.32. 0.16 12' HUNTER-2000 13-21 F. TO, TT, H. 0 SERIES 30 1.29, 0.95, 0.74, 0.63, 0.33 15' HUNTER ES515. 5S530 SERIES 35 1.41. 0.65 S;x30' 5 x15' • SPRAY IRR1CATION: HUNTER ICV 101/151G REMOTE CONTROL VALVE, IN VALVE BOX, ONE VALVE PER BOX l HUNTER SOLAR SYNC WIRE RAIN SENSOR COMBO HUNTER PRO—C CONTROLLER 3 TO 15 STATIONS. (HARDWIRE CONNECTION); PROVIDE GROUND AND BATTERIES PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS P.O.C. ® KI9LI509 W 0 XLLTT— 1" DOUBLE CHECK VALVE (STATE APPROVED); TEST AND CERTIFICATION BY LICENSED BACWU(INS 850 — BALL VALVE. SIZE TO MATCH PIPE CARSON INDUSTRIES /1730 (TWO AT P.O.C.) GRADE LEVEL VAULT WITH BOLT LOCK UD ▪ PLASTIC BALL VALVE. MATCH LINE SIZE, IN VALVE BOX () HUNTER HO-33DLRC 3/4' QUICK COUPLING VALVE. IN VALVE BOX, PROVIDE TWO KEYS AND SWIVELS — • — • — • — • — MAINLINE — SCH 40 PVC (18' COVER); SIZE PER PLAN. 2" SIZE MINIMUM LATERAL — SCH 40 PVC (12' COVER); SIZE PER PLAN, 3/4' SIZE MINIMUM SLEEVE — CLASS 200: 24' MINIMUM COVER AT VEHICLE CROSSINGS AND 18' MINIMUM COVER IN LANDSCAPE AREAS, 6' SIZE IRRIGATION SHOWN DMGRAIAATICALLY FOR PLAN CLARITY. COMMON TRENCH AND PLACE EQUIPMENT IN LANDSCAPE: MANIFOLD GROUPED VALVES IN ADJACENT SHRUB AREAS WHERE FEASIBLE. SCH 40 PIPE SIZING CHART PIPE SIZE FLOW GPM 3/4" 1-8 8.1-13 1 1/4" 13.1-23 1 I/2" 23.1-32 2" 32.1-53 2 1/2" 53.1-74 GPM (MAX.) RECEIVE:17. DEC 14201; Community Development 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By Al2/13/2017 JMV REVISIONS PER CLIENT Mork Dote By 0 Mork Dote By A Seal 4 � e STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE IRRIGATION PLAN VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Dote • 6-2-17 Drown By • : JMV Checked By• JMV Sheet r 12/13/2017 323 PM JVARLEY 2.0 of 5 1 i 7-adZ9 T FNCH CONDITION FINISH GRADE PAVING SEE CIVIL PLANS COMPACTED BACKFILL AT 90% DENSITY (TOPSOIL) AT 95R DENSITY (STRUCTURAL) SLEEVE(S) PVC LATERAL PVC MAINLINE VALVE WIRING ALT. WIRE SLEEVE PIPE BED MATERIAL TO BE CLEAN AND FREE OF ROCK LARGER THAN 1/2' PVC MAINLINE/LATERAL SLEEVE CONDITION NOTE: DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM CLEARANCES. ALL IRRIGATION SLEEVING TRENCH BACKFILL MATERIAL TO BE CLASS B" OR BETTER (MAX. OF 10% PASSING N0.40 SCREEN) AND BE COMPACTED TO MIN. 956 OPTIMUM DENSITY PER ASTM D-1557-70 (MODIFIED PROCTOR) SLEEVE/TRENCHING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE: A) INSTALLATION OF 110V ELECTRICAL SERVICE FROM ELECTRICAL SOURCE TO AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER, INCLUDING WIRE HOOK-UP INTO MOUNTED CONTROLLER. IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR WILL MOUNT CONTROLLER PER DESIGN AND COORDINATE WITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR. B) INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION/SERVICE METER AND STUB TO IRRIGATION POINT OF CONNECTION. PER UTILITY PLAN(S), UNLESS AN EXISTING METER IS USED. PROVIDE STANDARD THREADED STUB -OUT WITH THREADED CAP ON DISCHARGE SIDE OF METER. STUB -OUT TO BE INSTALLED APPROXIMATELY 18 INCHES BELOW FINISH GRADE. C) VERIFICATION OF STATIC WATER PRESSURE AT POINT -OF -CONNECTION (P.O.C.) CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER AND BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC., OF ANY VARIATION IN STATIC PRESSURE OVER 5 PSI GREATER/LESS THAN DESIGN PRESSURE. D) INSTALLATION OF SLEEVING. 2. PROVIDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, TRANSPORTATION, AND SERVICES NECESSARY TO FURNISH AND INSTALL A COMPLETE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS AND/OR NOTES. PROVIDE A ONE (1) YEAR WARRANTY/GUARANTEE FROM FINAL ACCEPTANCE AGAINST ALL DEFECTS IN MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND WORKMANSHIP. 3. COORDINATE IRRIGATION INSTALLATION WITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, OWNER, ARCHITECT. AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO TEST AVAILABLE WATER PRESSURE PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORN. PROVIDE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WITH WRITTEN PSI RESULTS. 5. ALL WORK PER LOCAL CODE. INSTALLATION PER MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS. 6. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN AND PAY FOR ALL PERMITS. FEES, AND REOUIRED CITY INSPECTIONS. 7. SUBMITTALS: A) SUBMIT FIVE (5) COPIES OF EACH ITEM LISTED BELOW FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL. B) PRODUCT DATA: FOR EACH TYPE OF PRODUCT INDICATED, C) CONTROL WIRING PATH DIAGRAM, D) "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS. E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUALS. B. PROVIDE AND KEEP UP TO DATE A COMPLETE "AS -BUILT" RECORD SET OF PRINTS WHICH ARE TO BE CORRECTED DAILY AND SHOW EVERY CHANGE FROM THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS AND NOTES AND EXACT "AS -BUILT" LOCATIONS, SIZES AND KIND OF EQUIPMENT. THIS SET OF DRAWINGS. ARE TO BE KEPT ON SITE AND ARE TO BE USED ONLY AS THE RECORD SET. ALL WORK IS TO BE NEAT AND LEGIBLE ANNOTATIONS THEREON DAILY AS THE WORK PROCEEDS, SHOWING WORK AS ACTUALLY INSTALLED. DIMENSION FORM TWO (2) PERMANENT POINTS OF REFERENCE, BUILDING CORNERS, WALKS, OR ROAD INTERSECTIONS, ETC., THE LOCATION OF THE FOLLOWING: A) B) C) D) E) F) CONNECTION TO WATER LINES (P.O.C.). CONNECTIONS TO ELECTRICAL POWER, GATE VALVE. QUICK COUPLERS, AND REMOTE CONTROL VALVE, ROUTING OF MAINLINE (DIMENSION MAXIMUM 100' ALONG ROUTING). ROUTING OF CONTROL WIRING, OTHER RELATED EQUIPMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 9. PREPARE AND PROVIDE PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, A THREE RING BINDER CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: A) INDEX SHEET STATING CONTRACTOR'S ADDRESS. TELEPHONE NUMBER, FAX, E-MAIL AND A, LIST OF EQUIPMENT WITH NAME AND ADDRESS OF LOCAL MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVES. B) CATALOG AND PARTS SHEETS ON EVERY MATERIAL AND EOUIPMENT INSTALLED UNDER THIS. CONTRACT, C) GUARANTEE STATEMENT. D) COMPLETE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS ON ALL MAJOR EQUIPMENT. E) CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FROM THE PROJECT, F) COMPLETE TROUBLE -SHOOTING GUIDE TO COMMON IRRIGATION PROBLEMS, G) WINTERIZATION AND SPRING START-UP PROCEDURES, H) CHART OF APPROXIMATE WATERING TIMES FOR SPRING. SUMMER, AND FALL. I) A COPY OF THE "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND CONTROLLER CHART. PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL-A TUKWILA SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON MOUNTING BRACKET RAIN SENSOR SECURE PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS NOTE: MOUNT ON WEATHER EXPOSED WALL 8' ABOVE GRADE RAIN SENSOR DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 10. ALL VALVES TO BE PLACED IN "CARSON" GRADE LEVEL BOXES WITH BOLT -LOCK LIDS (OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT). SET BOXES 2 INCHES HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE IN MULCH AREAS AND FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE IN LAWN AREAS. JUMBO BOX FOR CHECK VALVE, 10" ROUND BOX FOR GATE/QUICK COUPLER/WIRE SPLICES, AND 12" STANDARD FOR CONTROL VALVES. PROVIDE BOX EXTENSIONS AS REQUIRED. 11. MAINLINE PIPE TO BE BURIED 18 INCHES. LATERALS 12 INCHES. AND SLEEVES 24" INCHES BELOW FINISH GRADE. NO ROCK OR DEBRIS TO BE BACKFILLED OVER PIPE. 12. HEAD AND LINE POSITIONING IS DIAGRAMMATIC ON PLAN. ADJUST IN FIELD AS NECESSARY FOR 100 PERCENT COVERAGE. VALVES TO BE POSITIONED ADJACENT TO PAVEMENT/CURBS, IN SHRUB BEDS WHERE POSSIBLE. 13. FAMILIARIZE OWNERS FACILITY OPERATOR WITH IRRIGATION SYSTEM FUNCTION, CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING, SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. 14. SPRINKLERS ON RISERS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED UNLESS NOTED ON PLANS. 15. RADIUS REDUCTION TO BE MADE BY USE OF PRESSURE ADJUSTMENT, SCREENS, AND/OR ALTERNATE NOZZLES. IN -NOZZLE ADJUSTMENT IS LIMITED TO 10 PERCENT FOR SPRAY HEADS AND PER MANUFACTURER'S LIMITS FOR OTHER SPRINKLERS. SPRINKLER SPACING NOT EXCEED 60% OF THE DIAMETER OF THE PUBLISHED DATA. 16. ALL CONTROL WIRE SPLICES TO BE MADE AT VALVE BOXES WITH WATER TIGHT ELECTRICAL SPLICES, 3M, SCOTT'S LOCK SEAL TACK 3576-78, OR EQUIVALENT. 17. EACH VALVE BOX TO CONTAIN A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) SPARE ORANGE CONTROL WIRES FOR JACKETED WIRE. ROUTE SPARE WIRES FROM THE CONTROLLER TO THE LAST VALVE OF EACH MAINLINE BRANCH. COMMON WIRE TO BE WHITE. SINGLE STRAND WIRE TO BE A MINIMUM OF 14 GAUGE. 18. ALL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE U.L. TESTED AND APPROVED, AND BEAR THE U.L. LABEL. 19. CROSS CONNECTION PROTECTION INSPECTION REOUIRED. THE BACKFLOW DEVICE TO BE TESTED UPON THE ORIGINAL INSTALLATION. THE TESTING TO BE PERFORMED BY A PERSON HOLDING A CURRENT CERTIFICATE AS A BACKFLOW TESTER. THE TEST REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE LOCAL WATER DISTRICT, OR PURVEYOR, AND OWNER WRH A COPY TO BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. CONTRACTOR TO INCLUDE TESTING IN THE SCOPE OF WORK. OWNER 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR ANNUAL INSPECTIONS AFTER THE INTIAL INSPECTION. 20. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SYSTEM WINTERIZATION/SPRING SERVICE WHEN INSTALLATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS OF NOVEMBER 1 FOR WINTERIZATION. OR MAY 15 FOR SPRING SERVICE. SERVICE TO BE PERFORMED AS NEAR AS PRACTICAL TO THE ABOVE DATES. OR AS FREEZE/PRECIPITATION CONDITIONS DETERMINE SERVICE NEED. 21. IRRIGATION SCHEDULING: THE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER CONTAINS A WATER BUDGET FEATURE. PERIODIC (WEEKLY) ADJUSTMENT OF THE WATER SCHEDULE IS INTENDED TO BE MADE VIA BUDGET ADJUSTMENT. RE -ADJUST WATERING DAYS AT 100 PERCENT BUDGET WHEN ADJUSTMENT EXCEEDS 30%. SET CONTROLLER FOR HIGHEST ETo WATER SCHEDULE. BASED ON PUBLISHED LOCAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA. SYSTEM HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR 50 TO 80 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION UNIFORMITY. LAWN ZONES SHOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR 100 PERCENT REPLACEMENT FACTOR ON A TYPICAL MINIMUM 3-DAY CYCLE. SHRUB ZONES SHOULD BE PROGRAMMED AT 40 TO 70 PERCENT OF THE MONTHLY LAWN WATER REQUIREMENT ON A ONCE PER WEEK CYCLE. ALL WATERING IN EXCESS OF THE LOCAL ETo ("FIELD RECHARGE") TO BE COMPLETED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE WHILE THE CONTRACTOR IS ON THE JOB SITE. OVER WATERING OF LANDSCAPE DUE TO CONTROLLER SCHEDULING TO BE GROUNDS FOR CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR ANY RESULTANT DAMAGES AT CONTRACTOR'S OWN EXPENSE. 22. SUBSTITUTION OF IRRIGATION MATERIAL/EQUIPMENT TO BE MADE ONLY UPON WRITTEN APPROVAL OF OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. 23. ALL ZONES TO PASS A MINIMUM DISTRIBUTION UNIFORMITY OF 62 PERCENT. AS TESTED THROUGH AN IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION CERTIFIED WATER AUDIT. 24. CLEANUP AND PROTECTION: DURING IRRIGATION WORK. KEEP ALL PAVEMENT CLEAN AND WORK AREAS IN AN ORDERLY CONDITION. PROTECT IRRIGATION WORK AND MATERIALS FROM DAMAGE DUE TO LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION OPERATIONS AND TRESPASSERS. MAINTAIN PROTECTION DURING INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE PERIOD. TREAT. REPAIR. OR REPLACE DAMAGE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION WORK AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. IRRIGATION MANLINE PVC SCH 80 UNION CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY PER DETAIL THIS SHEET PVC SCH 80 UNION QUICK COUPLING VALVE NOTE: THE BACKFLOW DEVICE TO HAVE 6" MINIMUM UNOBSTRUCTED CLEARANCE ON ALL SIDES JUMBO VALVE 80X WITH LOCKING LID PVC SCH 80 UNION WILKINS 600 PRES. REDUCING VALVE AS NECESSARY — T z S COUPLING: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THREADED FITTING AND CAP ON DISCHARGE SIDE OF MEETING METER STOP IRRIGATION WATER METER - PER CITY STANDARDS PVC IPER CITY STDS. POINT OF CONNECTION (P.O.C.) DETAIL NOT TO SCALE POP UP PAVING SPRINKLER FLUSH AT LAWN AND FLUSH WRH MULCH LINE SPRINKLER PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE PVC LATERAL '1-4111- 6" CLEAR OF OBSTRUCTION MULCH CONDITION FINISH GRADE ADJUST COVERAGE CONDITIONS. 50% OF SLOPE ANGLE - TYPICAL NOTE: MANUFACTURER'S LIMITS PREVAIL FOR INSTALLATION AND ADJUSTMENTS. PROVIDE SWING JOINT RISERS AT WALKS AND CURBS. 24' FLEXIBLE RISERS ACCEPTABLE ELSEWHERE. POP-UP RISER ASSEMBLY MARLEX 90' ELBOWS PVC SCH 40 TEE SzSzT (SIDE INLET ONLY) NOT TO SCALE 1 ti NOTE: zi I-) 0,4 ; ea fe. ••WO S�•••• 4, lb041070 0 WNW PVC SCH 80 SzT 90' ELBOW PVC SCH 80 UNION WIRE WITH WATERPROOF WIRE CONNECTOR - TYPICAL FINISIH GRADE SPARE WIRE WITH WATERPROOF WIRE CONNECTOR ON CUT END VALVE BOX WITH COVER PVC LATERAL ONE VALVE PER BOX. PROVIDE EXTRA COILS (18") OF EACH WIRE IN VALVE BOX. COMPACT SOIL AROUND VALVE BOX. USE TEFLON OR FLOWABLE SEALANT IN ALL THREADED FITTINGS. PER MANUFACTURES SPEC S. REMOTE CONTROL VALVE ASSEMBLY TO SPRINKLERS PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE AND FEMALE ADAPTOR PVC SCH 80 UNION PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE: BODY CLEAR OF SUMP 1 C.F. 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP PVC MAINLINE PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE NOT TO SCALE STATE OF WASHINGTON REGISTERED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT JEFF M. VARLEY CERTIFICATE No. 774 EXPIRES 8-25-2018 FROM IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE DOUBLE GRADE LEVEL JUMBLE BOX SIZE TO PERMIT 12' MINIMUN CLEAR FROM WALLS TO TEST COCKS; BOLT LOCK LID DOUBLE CHECK VALVE (STATE APPROVED ASSEMBLY) RESILIANT SEATED VALVES AND TEST COCKS: INSTALL ASSEMBLY AS SHOWN OR THE TEST COCKS IN HORIZONTAL POSITION. PER LOCAL REOUIREMENTS. PVC MAINLINE PER PLAN PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE AND FEMALE ADAPTER PVC SCH 80 UNION - TYPICAL PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE - TYPICAL BLOCK AS NECESSARY WITH BRICKS AT BASE OF BOX 1 C.F. 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP NOTE: INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ASSEMBLY BY CERTIFIED TESTER REQUIRED. DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY NOT TO SCALE VALVE BOX WITH COVER FINISH GRADE QUICK COUPLING VALVE CENTER IN BOX 1 C.U. FT. 7/8" GRAVEL SUMP MARLEX ELL - TYPICAL PVC SCH 80 PVC NIPPLE PVC SCH 40 PVC SXSXT TEE QUICK COUPLING VALVE ASSEMBLY NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED DEC 142017 Community Development 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgio, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Dote By A 12/13/2017 JMV REVISIONS PER CLIENT Mork Dote By A Mork Date By A Seal STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA. WA SHEET TITLE IRRIGATION NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Dote . 6-2-17 Drawn By : JMV Checked By• JMV Sheet I 2.1 of 5 Ia L♦ 7 Zi 9 DEVELOPMEr CONSULTING, INC PO Box 270571 • San Diego, CA 92198-2571 (858) 408-1894 Office • (866) 311-3658 Fax June 1, 2017 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Application for Design Review, Administrative Chick-fil-A #03093 17333 Southcenter Parkway Attachment D Please accept the attached Application for Administrative Design Review for the proposed new Chick-fil-A restaurant at 17333 Southcenter Parkway. Chick-fil-A proposes to demolish the existing retail building and construct an approximately 4,843 sf restaurant with drive-thru service and accompanying site improvements (including a new trash enclosure with storage area, landscaping, and accessible parking and pedestrian access to the building from the public right-of-way. The resulting site plan will provide a total of 42 parking spaces on the subject parcel, with non- exclusive mutual access to an additional 29 parking spaces on the adjacent parcels, and a drive- thru queuing lane with a capacity of 22 spaces, located to the rear of the building and largely shielded from the public right-of-way. The following items are submitted along with the signed application and check for fees: Plan Set: • Title Sheet • Site Plan • Grading Plan • Utility Plan • Survey • Stormwater Plan • Landscape Plan, notes and details • Irrigation Plan, notes and details • Photometric Site Plan • Floor Plan • Roof Nan • Exterior Elevations RECEIVED Preliminary Signs Plans w� �� 2017Color Elevations Cc rri iunify -iev6Opnf;nt June 3, 2017 Page 2 Soils Report (Draft Geotechnical Report by Terracon, dated 5/19, 2017) Technical Information Report Materials Board The following Additional Information is provided for this application: SEPA: It is our understanding that a SEPA Review will not be required for this application. UTILITIES: The site is currently serviced by all wet and dry utilities. Preliminary discussions with the city water and sewer utilities reveal no concerns with respect to serviceability of the proposed building. SENSITIVE AREA PLANS AND STUDIES are not required TRAFFIC: It is our understanding that a Traffic Impact Analysis will not be required. Net new PM Peak Hour Trips Generated for this project will be 70 Trips (37 In, 33 Out). Please see the calculations below: PM PEAK HOUR LU' i li>ir Proposed Use :;st-(::c>d Resi.'1r 1... _ii -.,-. 'jar!. Less Existing Use J u r:al Split rl, I,':It: �fll'` l:vrtr:'atr ._' A Y`4 52%• 43% 32.65 31 /6 SF? 3 79 41 :i8 79 Net New PM Peak Hour Trips G•R•fbted = 37 33 70 COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA: A careful examination of the proposed site plan, building elevations, and landscaping plan will reveal that the proposed development meets or exceeds all of the Development Criteria in the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Commercial Corridor (CC) delineated in TMC section 18.28.030.D. Highlights of our design include: • Building architectural elements, materials, colors, height, scale, and site design components are of high quality and in harmony with the neighboring developments. • Mechanical equipment and other utility hardware on the roof and on the ground are screened from view. • Parking, drive-thru, and service areas are located so as to minimize the visual impact of large paved areas and screen on -site vehicle traffic from view from the public right-of- way. June 3, 2017 Page 3 • The site has been designed to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of vehicles and vehicle -pedestrian interaction minimized to the maximum available. • The site plan and landscaping improvements provide an attractive and inviting and stable appearance, with a conspicuous handicapped accessible path of travel for pedestrians from the public right-of-way We look forward to hearing from the city with respect to our building and site design. On behalf of the applicant, Ed Hale Sr. Project Manager 4G Development and Consulting, Inc 2153 Oak Hill Drive Escondido, CA 92027 Email: ehale@4Gdev.com Mobile: 760.884.7011 Attachment E 6TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: September 21, 2017 TO: Ed Hale 4G Development & Consulting, Inc. FROM: Jeff Schramm/Spenser Haynie TENW SUBJECT: Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Chick-fil-A Tukwila at Southcenter Parkway TENW Project #5527 This memorandum summarizes the traffic impact analysis and development of a traffic management plan conducted for the proposed Chick-fil-A Tukwila project for the purpose of documenting traffic impacts. The document includes a project description, trip generation estimate, trip distribution and assignment, future traffic volumes, Level of Service analyses, and a Traffic Management Plan. Project Description The project site is located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in the City of Tukwila. A vicinity map of the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1. The project includes the development of a 4,843 square foot (SF) fast-food restaurant with drive -through that replaces the previous Ethan Allen furniture store. Primary vehicular access will be provided via the existing shared access drive on the south side of the site that intersects with Southcenter Parkway. Secondary vehicular access will also be provided to the north and south through the parking lots of the adjacent businesses that also have access to Southcenter Parkway. Project buildout is expected in 2018. A preliminary site plan concept is shown in Figure 2. Trip Generation The proposed project includes a 4,843 square foot (SF) Chick-fil-A fast food restaurant with a drive -through. The trip generation estimate for the proposed Chick-fil-A were based on traffic counts conducted at 2 existing Chick-fil-A restaurants in Bellevue and Tacoma. Driveway counts were collected at the Bellevue and Tacoma Chick-fil-A locations on 3 consecutive weekdays in November 2015. The traffic counts are considered Normalized Conditions because both restaurants had been open for over 6 months at the time of the counts. The resulting trip generation rates were derived for weekday lunch and PM peak hours based on the average of the 3-day counts at both locations. Adjustments to the trip generation estimates were made to account for pass -by trips based on ITE data. Pass - by trips are made by vehicles that are already on adjacent streets and make intermediate stops at the site en - route to a primary destination (e.g. on the way from work to home). Because the existing building is vacant, no credit was taken for an existing use. The resulting weekday daily, lunch peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation estimates are summarized in Table 1. The detailed trip generation calculations are included in Attachment B. Transportation Planning j Design j Traffic Impact & Operations 11400 SE 8m Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 j Office (425) 889-6747 Figure 1: Project Site Vicinity Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila N (1!) NOT TO SCALE VTENW September 21, 2017 Page 2 ISHIR hi ��-} �.) t j` Shared Access Drive - —1-1 Ai \''�'4y\i� \I!: II I a Figure 2: Preliminary Site Plan r Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila 7-1 (1!) NOT TO SCALE 6TENW September 21, 2017 Page 3 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila Table 1 Chick-fil-A Tukwila — Trip Generation Summary Net New Trips Generated Time Period In Out Total Weekday Daily 915 914 1,829 Weekday Lunch Peak Hour 77 74 151 Weekday PM Peak Hour 60 60 120 As shown in Table 1, the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant is anticipated to generate 1,829 net new trips per weekday, with 151 net new trips during the weekday lunch peak hour (77 entering, 74 exiting) and 120 net new trips during the weekday PM peak hour (60 entering, 60 exiting). Additional pass -by trips are also expected at the site driveways and are included in this traffic analysis. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of project generated vehicle trips by the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant was based on existing travel patterns in the area, and recent turning movement count data collected in August 2017. The net new weekday lunch and PM peak hour project -generated trips were distributed to the vicinity street system as fol lows: • 50 percent to/from the north via Southcenter Parkway • 35 percent to/from the south via Southcenter Parkway • 15 percent to/from the east via Minkler Boulevard The assignment of weekday lunch and PM peak hour project -generated traffic to the adjacent street system is shown in Figure 3. Pass -by trips were assigned based on the existing travel patterns on Southcenter Parkway. Future Traffic Volumes Year 2017 existing weekday lunch and PM peak period traffic volumes at the study intersections were based on counts collected by All Traffic Data in August 2017. The lunch peak hour represents the highest one -hour time period between 1 1:30 and 1:30 PM at each study intersection. The PM peak hour represents the highest one -hour time period between 4:00 and 6:00 PM at each study intersection. The existing traffic count worksheets are included in Attachment A. Year 2018 No Action (without -project) peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections were estimated by applying a 2 percent annual growth rate to existing volumes. The future 2018 No Action peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure 4. Adding the net new trip assignment and pass -by trips for the project (shown in Figure 3) to the future No Action traffic volumes (shown in Figure 4) results in the 2018 With -Project peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections (shown in Figure 5). TENW September 21, 2017 Page 4 Project Site Lunch Peak Hour Southcenter Pkwy / Minkler Blvd 0— 12 1 ,y v. MiixJw 14v.1 1 n - PM Peak Hour Southcenter Pkwy / r Minkler Blvd s t k'oh- Tr4i w/!a Southcenter Pkwy / Shared 5i e Dwy J)48 p 26 � P) M Southcenter Pkwy / Shaed Site Dwy r I )39_.) 21 Corporate D Figure 3: Lunch and PM Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila inttMorIAertriP LEGEND 13 Study Intersection Peak Hour XX Project Trips (XX) (Pass -By Trips) Southcenter Pkwy / 17500 Block + n o a 4 Southcenter Pkwy / 17500 Block i-e t 2 ..� I/WO A t G TENW September 21, 2017 Page 5 Project Site Lunch Peak Hour Southcenter Pkwy / Minkler Blvd ena3 I11 3M - oN �' p R-196 4-6 175 IN.1 19- - 7 . t er 32 n v _.h w -` PM Peak Hour Southcen er Pkwy / Minkler Blvd e o �174 cv_ ;.4-8 i y' 4. la r- 184 rrwr fily, r 8 ,•y� 1 t f 4i a o ,n - P� G 7Thk Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila Iw`Isarn sv,,xrt ea.u,, Corporate ^' t►tst : upland n upl Pkwy / Shored Site Dwy �165 rSouthcenter �� I �Y t0— + r 4i "'! h 14 Southcenter Pkwy/ Shared Slte Dwy r 51443 LI17 �' 8 , 1 _0- r o ;:v 19 -� o r,llri4 ('^Fw LEGEND ® Study Intersection Peak Hour XX Traffic Volume Southcenter Pkwy / 17500 Block �97 ,p a ^ _ b t-- 16 4.1.4. J.,-89 -n Ii, ti fWw 4 74 -1 1 r 16 —a. P4 o' N 42 - Southcenter Pkwy/ 1/500 Blok u o.a ccvv L 4-14 '- r 17410 Ad ..& 80 - t 15-9. * 41 , a Figure 4: 2018 Baseline Lunch and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes G TENW September 21, 2017 Page 6 Project Site Lunch Peak Hour Southcenter Pkwy / Minkler Blvd ro N v i 196 -e°C4 f 4-6 i 4 ..- 187 1,w, -. MilAlve H&J 19 -1 t r 7� co PM Peak Hour Southcentet Pkwy / Minkler Blvd n -o0. P - - Al 4 ��' s k 174 FB �,93 8-1 4-0. 7 The, f 1 t .... .d a v 11 - No/ers Southcernrr Squa Southcenter F'kwyShored Site Dwy NIL I5 4 k r C- 28 9.5- 1 t Pr 4 -. f 77 411, Southcenter Pkwv / Shaed Si a Dwy �Ww1 O� Sc-O!Ncrr,IIe, I 1 E V P (V r 77 -1 t er o n v m- , 74 - Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila .77 ". fl rvf,rpftY oN/:Li t txdr A7y LEGEND ® Study InterSeCfion Peak Hour XX Traffic Volume Southcen er Pkwy / 17500 Block v,fn �97 ^m i^- = E-I6 4 t I r ,r-89 74 -1 t 16 -0. 74 4'. a 42 et Pkwy / 17500 Block 3 rSouthcen Rn 9 t l 5 -1.- * &D. n 41 mik Figure 5: 2018 With -Project Lunch and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6TENW September 21, 2017 Page 7 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila Level of Service Analysis Future 2018 weekday AM and PM peak hour level of service (LOS) analyses were conducted at the three study intersections along Southcenter Parkway based on methodologies and procedures outlined in the latest edition of the Highway Capaci/y Manual (HCM 6th Edition). The LOS methodology is described in Attachment C. The Synchro Version 10 software package was used to determine LOS results for stop controlled and signalized intersections. The analysis at the shared access drive considers its proximity to coordinated signals and the effect that the platooning of traffic from the signals has on the stop -controlled intersection based on HCM methodologies. Table 2 summarizes the weekday lunch and PM peak hour LOS analyses results at the study intersections. The detailed LOS calculation sheets are included in Attachment C. Table 2 Future 2018 Weekday Peak Hour LOS Summary Without -Project With -Project Delay Delay Study Intersection/Movement LOS (sec) LOS (sec) Lunch Peak Hour (11:30 - 1:30) Signalized 1. Southcenter Pkwy / Minkler Blvd B 10.9 B 11.0 3. Southcenter Pkwy / 17500 Block B 11.7 B 11.5 Stop Controlled 2. Southcenter Pkwy / Shared Access' Northbound Left -Turn A 8.2 A 8.6 Eastbound Shared Left-Thru-Right B 14.6 D 28.0 Westbound Left -Turn B 13.2 C 17.1 Westbound Right -Turn B 11.1 B 10.8 Southbound Left -Turn A 8.8 A 8.8 PM Peak Hour (4:00 - 6:00 PM) Signalized 1. Southcenter Pkwy / Minkler Blvd B 11.0 B 11.2 3. Southcenter Pkwy / 17500 Block B 10.3 B 10.2 Stop Controlled 2. Southcenter Pkwy / Shared Access' Northbound Left -Turn A 8.6 A 8.8 Eastbound Shared Left-Thru-Right C 17.3 E 40.2 Westbound Left -Turn C 17.7 C 20.3 Westbound Right -Turn B 10.6 B 10.6 Southbound Left -Turn A 8.8 A 8.8 1. Analysis considers the effect of an upstream signal based on HCM methodologies. As shown in Table 2, the adjacent signalized study intersections on Southcenter Parkway are expected to continue to operate at LOS B during the weekday lunch and PM peak hours in 2018 without or with the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant. All turn movements at the stop controlled shared access drive are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the weekday lunch and PM peak hours without or with the proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant. 6 TENW September 21, 2017 Page 8 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila Traffic Management Plan During Opening Weeks, a combination of manual control and signage will be used to accommodate higher traffic demands, if necessary. Manual control will include presence of a Chick-fil-A staff that will be positioned strategically at various locations around the site to help direct entering and exiting Chick-fil-A vehicle traffic. Signage will direct people and also be used to restrict parking of Chick-fil-A customers in neighboring properties. The following manual control and signage locations are shown in Attachment D with a description of their operation next. M1. A Chick-fil-A staff member will be positioned at the drive -through entrance to take drive - through orders and ensure the drive aisle is not blocked, allowing exiting Chick-fil-A customers to pass through and exit to Southcenter Parkway via the shared access drive aisle on the south side of the site. M2. A Chick-fil-A staff member will be positioned near the drive -through exit to take drive -through orders and to direct exiting Chick-fil-A customers to the west and to exit via the shared access drive aisle on the south side of the site. The staff member will also assist customers entering and exiting from the internal parking area by creating temporary gaps in the drive-thru queue. M3. A Chick-fil-A staff member will be positioned near the access on the east side of the building to direct drive -through and dine -in customers to appropriate places. M4. A Chick-fil-A staff member will be positioned on the east side of the building to assist dine - in customers leaving their parking spaces. Si. Signage will be located at the north site border with the adjacent retail use along the east and west drive aisles indicating "no Chick-fil-A parking beyond this point." S2. Signage will be located at the internal site driveway just west of Southcenter Parkway directing dine -in and drive -through customers to appropriate places. S3. Signage will be located at the east drive aisle entrance for the adjacent use to the south indicating "no Chick-fil-A parking beyond this point." S4. Signage will be located throughout the parking lot for the adjacent use to the south indicating "no Chick-fil-A parking." These traffic management plan measures are expected to be reviewed and approved by the adjacent property owners to the north and south, and are intended to help direct entering vehicles to areas with more drive -through queueing capacity and eliminate queue spill -back onto adjacent streets. The duration of the management plan will be reviewed and collaborated with City staff. "Normalized Conditions" are shown graphically in Attachment E. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this analysis, please feel free to contact me at (425) 250-0581 or schramm@tenw.com. Attachments: A. Existing Traffic Count Data B. Trip Generation Calculations C. LOS Methodology & Calculations D. Opening Weekend Traffic Management Plan E. Normalized Conditions TENW September 21, 2017 Page 9 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila ATTACHMENT A Existing Traffic Count Data All Traffic Data M M1_11010110 Services Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour Location: 1 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER BLVD Noon Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 12:15 PM - 01:15 PM All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 1,060 1,030 1 1rEr:yL____ MINKLER BLVD "' c J 1 L. It 34 — 0 N L 192 370 0 19 jW 2,424 E 4., 6 29 .y 3 .y S r 172 378 1 y 7..1t1i ir(7o A 1 982 HV% MINKLER BLVD i 26 21 1 1 o 0zJ1 Lb. 5 0 N /� p /— 6 -W0 OEE 1 —Ig co y 12 nitr 1 965 18 18 PHF EB 3.4% 0.60 WB 1.6% 0.88 NB 1.9% 0.95 SB 2.5% 0.95 All 2.1% 0.96 lAkimm0 0 t 1 1 4 1�2 2 Traffic Counts - All Vehicles MINKLER BLVD MINKLER BLVD SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Tum Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 11:30 AM 0 3 3 0 0 36 1 40 0 1 162 22 1 52 147 4 472 2,185 11:45 AM 0 4 1 1 0 35 5 42 0 1 197 28 0 66 177 6 563 2,343 12:00 PM 0 3 2 2 0 41 0 33 1 3 191 29 0 45 197 4 551 2,357 12:15 PM 0 7 1 0 0 37 0 49 0 3 202 31 0 52 213 4 599 2,424 12:30 PM 0 4 0 2 0 54 0 51 0 6 211 36 0 69 194 3 630 2,414 12:45 PM 0 6 2 4 0 41 2 45 0 5 192 34 0 65 177 4 577 1:00 PM 0 2 0 1 0 40 4 47 0 1 214 30 0 58 219 2 618 1:15PM 0 0 1 2 0 38 1 49 0 3 220 23 0 51 194 7 589 Count Total 0 29 10 12 0 322 13 356 1 23 1,589 233 1 458 1,518 34 4,599 Peak Hour 0 19 3 7 0 172 6 192 0 15 819 131 0 244 803 13 2,424 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 11:30 AM 0 6 0 7 13 11:30 AM 1 0 2 1 4 11:45 AM 0 1 3 6 10 11:45AM 0 1 3 2 6 12:00 PM 0 8 3 7 18 12:00 PM 2 1 8 7 18 12:15PM 0 6 2 5 13 12:15PM 0 2 3 0 5 12:30 PM 0 2 1 5 8 12:30 PM 0 0 2 0 2 12:45 PM 1 4 2 7 14 12:45 PM 1 0 6 0 7 1:00 PM 0 6 1 9 16 1:00 PM 0 2 2 0 4 1:15PM 0 8 2 4 14 1:15PM 0 0 6 0 6 Count Total 1 41 14 50 106 Count Total 4 6 32 10 52 Peak Hour 1 18 6 26 51 Peak Hour 1 4 13 0 18 All Traffic Data NMI M ar a a i o i o 11 o Services Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour CENTRAL DWY Location: 2 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & CENTRAL DWY Noon Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 12:15 PM - 01:15 PM All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 950 924 1 15 17 1 i 41 N 162 ▪ 189 1 N ▪ 1 10, W 1,978E ~ 0 0 ,W E �0 4 28 �► 14 ~ S r 27 y 236 0 ▪ 0 ~ S r 0 ..y 1 Dilitr` �riiire e p o � N N CENTRAL DWY � o 0 0 c x r- 1 1 1 1 1 .g 777 811 14 17 HV% PHF EB 0.0% 0.54 WB 0.5% 0.81 NB 2.1% 0.93 SB 1.6% 0.92 All 1.7% 0.95 Isms 0 _► 0 Traffic Counts - All Vehicles CENTRAL DWY CENTRAL DWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Tum Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 11:30 AM 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 25 0 3 152 13 0 35 128 4 364 1,763 11:45AM 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 31 0 1 185 12 0 70 143 5 454 1,908 12:00 PM 0 3 1 4 0 7 0 25 0 4 175 13 0 47 169 7 455 1,914 12:15 PM 0 1 0 2 0 5 0 40 0 2 194 11 0 42 186 7 490 1,978 12:30 PM 0 3 0 2 0 4 0 32 0 2 200 15 0 42 204 5 509 1,964 12:45 PM 0 4 2 7 0 10 0 40 0 2 177 12 0 43 148 15 460 1:00 PM 0 2 2 3 0 8 0 50 0 1 181 14 0 53 198 7 519 1:15 PM 0 5 0 3 0 7 0 35 0 0 181 10 0 46 177 12 476 Count Total 0 23 5 24 0 44 0 278 0 15 1,445 100 0 378 1,353 62 3,727 Peak Hour 0 10 4 14 0 27 0 162 0 7 752 52 0 180 736 34 1,978 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 11:30 AM 0 5 1 4 10 11:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1 11:45 AM 0 1 0 2 3 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 1 6 0 8 15 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 12:15PM 0 5 0 2 7 12:15PM 1 0 1 0 2 12:30 PM 0 2 0 4 6 12:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 12:45 PM 0 4 0 3 7 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 PM 0 6 1 6 13 1:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1:15PM 0 7 0 3 10 1:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 1 36 2 32 71 Count Total 1 0 3 0 4 Peak Hour 0 17 1 15 33 Peak Hour 1 0 2 0 3 All Traffic Data mom mow a=ioioiio Service Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.a I Itrafficdata. net Peak Hour All Vehicles 805 776 ! i 17500 BLOCK 0SJ!1.L. Location: 3 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & 17500 BLOCK Noon Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 12:15 PM - 01:15 PM 0 132 73 N 96 al 198 2 — 2 N 1I....1 W 1,826E , W E 1 130 .4.41 ~ S r 87 �y 241 2 ...► 0 S o my 2 ����tr` 0 �41.1trc ' O' o V 17500BLOCK -1 o o a F A i 1 1 i -1 677 693 15 16 Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 17 17 1 i HV% PHF EB 1.5% 0.86 WB 0.5% 0.93 NB 2.3% 0.97 SB 2.1% 0.93 All 2.0% 0.96 ,N,ol o �J 11, ltL o I«�0 4ININ► 1 1 i o N 1 s 2 M�2 r-- 0�y Traffic Counts - All Vehicles 17500 BLOCK 17500 BLOCK SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 11:30 AM 0 18 1 7 0 16 0 17 0 4 124 14 0 31 80 24 336 1,640 11:45 AM 0 27 6 8 0 25 0 21 0 6 142 19 0 28 102 17 401 1,778 12:00 PM 0 16 5 10 0 16 2 17 0 10 163 22 0 30 124 25 440 1,803 12:15 PM 0 18 3 7 0 29 1 23 0 5 152 17 1 46 137 24 463 1,826 12:30 PM 0 22 8 8 0 18 5 29 0 13 155 10 0 47 140 19 474 1,801 12:45 PM 0 18 1 13 0 17 4 22 0 6 158 13 0 30 126 18 426 1:00 PM 0 15 4 13 0 23 6 21 0 7 142 15 0 47 146 24 463 1:15PM 0 31 8 8 0 21 2 23 0 5 137 21 0 33 125 24 438 Count Total 0 165 36 74 0 165 20 173 0 56 1,173 131 1 292 980 175 3,441 Peak Hour 0 73 16 41 0 87 16 95 0 31 607 55 1 170 549 85 1,826 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 11:30 AM 0 3 0 3 6 11:30 AM 0 0 3 3 6 11:45 AM 0 2 3 2 7 11:45 AM 0 0 1 2 3 12:00 PM 0 4 0 6 10 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 12:15PM 1 5 0 3 9 12:15PM 1 1 0 3 5 12:30 PM 0 2 0 4 6 12:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 12:45 PM 1 3 0 4 8 12:45 PM 0 1 1 0 2 1:00 PM 0 6 1 6 13 1:00 PM 1 0 0 1 2 1:15PM 1 5 1 2 9 1:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 3 30 5 30 68 Count Total 2 2 6 9 19 Peak Hour 2 16 1 17 36 Peak Hour 2 2 2 4 10 All Traffic Data MOB ....aaaoio110 Services Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour All Vehicles 1,205 1,053 1 MINKLER BLVD 0 F Location: 1 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER BLVD PM Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 1 L 26 4....8 N 871 — 359 W 2,576 E 19 my4 .4S r 180 y 292 ' ...111 '1 t r` 0 0 A MINKLER BLVD 1 Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 17 12 1 i o N n o L 0 �i 1 L. tit..., ♦ N 1~ 0 N ~0 0...4 1 1 0..►W Er3 N WE 0 y S y 5 o f o 1 t 1,205 993 15 12 HV% PHF EB 0.0% 0.79 WB 1.1% 0.86 NB 1.2% 0.85 SB 1.4% 0.98 All 1.3% 0.91 1 s l i 1..0 1 In* Traffic Counts - All Vehicles MINKLER BLVD MINKLER BLVD SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 4:00 PM 0 5 1 4 0 42 1 41 0 1 184 18 0 44 251 3 595 2,429 4:15 PM 0 4 1 3 0 55 1 38 0 5 203 19 2 39 231 4 605 2,438 4:30 PM 0 4 1 0 0 45 1 62 0 1 201 25 0 46 215 1 602 2,538 4:45 PM 0 0 1 2 0 49 2 32 0 7 209 17 0 52 256 0 627 2,576 5:00 PM 0 3 1 1 0 39 3 42 0 2 194 24 0 51 244 0 604 2,493 5:15 PM 0 3 1 2 0 52 2 50 0 5 253 34 1 47 253 2 705 5:30 PM 0 2 1 2 0 40 1 47 1 2 217 28 0 35 264 0 640 5:45 PM 0 5 1 3 0 31 1 29 1 2 174 26 0 47 220 4 544 Count Total 0 26 8 17 0 353 12 341 2 25 1,635 191 3 361 1,934 14 4,922 Peak Hour 0 8 4 7 0 180 8 171 1 16 873 103 1 185 1,017 2 2,576 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehides Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 4:00 PM 0 1 1 5 7 4:00 PM 0 1 3 0 4 4:15PM 0 3 3 5 11 4:15PM 0 0 5 0 5 4:30 PM 0 2 0 5 7 4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 4:45 PM 0 4 1 3 8 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 3 2 3 8 5:00 PM 0 0 2 1 3 5:15PM 0 3 1 6 10 5:15PM 1 0 2 3 6 5:30 PM 0 2 0 5 7 5:30 PM 1 1 1 1 4 5:45 PM 0 0 0 2 2 5:45 PM 2 2 1 0 5 Count Total 0 18 8 34 60 Count Total 4 4 15 5 28 Peak Hour 0 12 4 17 33 Peak Hour 2 1 5 5 13 All Traffic Data Mr 17r a IL 1o1o110 Services Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour CENTRAL DWY All Vehicles 1,188 926 1 CCP NJ N 35 1� 0 �� ~ bL, 115 134 N 11 W 2,180 E 4.. 18 31 ...0 19 .41"S 0 may, 216 , 47 nitr c 0 w m , CENTRAL OW z A 1 I 1,003 827 Location: 2 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & CENTRAL DWY PM Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM HV% PHF EB 6.5% 0.65 WB 1.5% 0.86 NB 1.0% 0.91 SB 1.3% 0.94 All 1.2% 0.97 0 — 2 .y Heavy Vehicles 15 10 1 O�tio o 1 a.► tk 2 0 , N �o W OE= E 0 �y S" r 0 2 �i i 1*r0 0 0 CO 0 1 15 8 2 ..► 2 Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 1 1�0 0 — s 0 /•"0 0 dm► 1 1 Traffic Counts - All Vehicles CENTRAL DWY CENTRAL DWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 4:00 PM 0 6 2 2 0 3 0 24 0 4 138 3 0 46 251 5 484 2,061 4:15 PM 0 0 0 3 0 4 1 28 0 1 180 7 0 43 241 8 516 2,095 4:30 PM 0 5 1 9 0 6 0 29 0 2 188 9 0 40 220 7 516 2,137 4:45 PM 0 3 0 7 0 2 0 37 0 3 183 6 2 37 263 2 545 2,180 5:00 PM 0 2 0 2 0 5 1 22 0 0 193 8 0 48 225 12 518 2,120 5:15 PM 0 4 0 8 0 4 0 31 0 3 219 5 0 56 222 6 558 5:30 PM 0 2 1 2 0 7 0 25 0 2 203 2 0 53 256 6 559 5:45 PM 0 1 0 5 0 4 0 24 0 2 179 12 0 47 203 8 485 Count Total 0 23 4 38 0 35 2 220 0 17 1,483 52 2 370 1,881 54 4,181 Peak Hour 0 11 1 19 0 18 1 115 0 8 798 '21 2 194 966 26 2,180 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 4:00 PM 0 1 0 3 4 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15PM 0 5 0 5 10 4:15PM 0 0 2 0 2 4:30 PM 0 1 0 3 4 4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 4:45 PM 1 3 1 3 8 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 3 0 4 7 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15PM 1 2 0 5 8 5:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 1 3 4 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 1 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 2 15 2 27 46 Count Total 0 0 3 0 3 Peak Hour 2 8 2 15 27 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 All Traffic Data -_=.12iolo110 Services Inc. (303) 216-2439 www.alltrafficdata.net Peak Hour Location: 3 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & 17500 BLOCK PM Date and Start Time: Tuesday, August 22, 2017 Peak Hour: 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM All Vehicles Heavy Vehicles 1,005 820 0 16 8 1 1 1 i ili o I,p'�I 17500 BLOCK �^' ' .J 1 L. � «J 1 L. It 152 1� 0 N L 8601111 197 1 0 N L OInn 1 78 W 2,098E 4.. 14 0, w E~ 0 15 y r 97 0— r 1 133 .y 40 S 0 ..► 206 0 0 S 0 ...1,1 �n1 tr` zt"i try ofC o co 1 1 920 763 HV% PHF 17500 BLOCK EB 0.0% 0.92 WB 0.5% 0.95 NB 1.0% 0.98 SB 1.6% 0.90 All 1.2% 0.97 0 0 CO 0 1 15 8 Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk 1 1 i 0 1 Traffic Counts - All Vehicles 17500 BLOCK 17500 BLOCK SOUTHCENTER PKWY SOUTHCENTER PKWY Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Tum Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 4:00 PM 0 15 5 12 0 26 0 15 0 7 122 13 0 38 188 17 458 1,970 4:15 PM 0 16 8 11 0 25 6 15 0 6 147 14 0 34 201 21 504 2,017 4:30 PM 0 10 7 5 0 24 4 19 0 3 158 15 0 37 168 18 468 2,038 4:45 PM 0 17 4 9 0 20 4 18 0 10 158 20 0 36 223 21 540 2,098 5:00 PM 0 14 7 15 0 22 2 28 0 7 168 13 0 23 178 28 505 2,018 5:15 PM 0 25 1 9 0 29 2 20 0 9 163 23 0 32 194 18 525 5:30 PM 0 22 3 7 0 26 6 20 0 11 167 14 0 30 188 34 528 5:45 PM 0 24 3 11 0 24 2 20 0 10 138 15 0 26 157 30 460 Count Total 0 143 38 79 0 196 26 155 0 63 1,221 127 0 256 1,497 187 3,988 Peak Hour 0 78 15 40 0 97 14 86 0 37 656 70 0 121 783 101 2,098 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 4:00 PM 0 1 0 3 4 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15PM 0 3 0 6 9 4:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 1 2 0 1 4 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 3 0 4 7 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 5 1 4 10 5:00 PM 1 1 0 0 2 5:15PM 0 0 0 4 4 5:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 4 4 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 1 0 1 2 5:45 PM 1 1 2 0 4 Count Total 1 15 1 27 44 Count Total 2 2 2 0 6 Peak Hour 0 8 1 16 25 Peak Hour 1 1 0 0 2 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila ATTACHMENT B Trip Generation Calculations Chick-fil-A Restaurant - Tukwila Trip Generation: Weekday DAILY Size ITE Directional Split Trip Rate 2 Trips Generated Land Use LUC 1 In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Use Fast -Food Rest. With Drive-Thru Pass -by Trips 3 4,843 GFA 50% 934 50% 50% 755.35 Net New Weekday Daily Trips Generated = 1,829 -914 1,829 -915 3,658 -1,829 915 915 914 914 1,829 1,829 LUNCH PEAK HOUR ITE Directional Split Trip Rate 2 Trips Generated Land Use Units LUC 1 In Out In Out Total Proposed Use Fast -Food Rest. With Drive-Thru Pass -by Trips 3 4,843 GFA 50% 934 51% 49% 62.34 New Lunch Peak Hour Trips Generated = 154 -77 148 -74 302 -151 77 77 74 74 151 151 PM PEAK HOUR Units ITE Directional Split Trip Rate 2 Trips Generated Land Use LUC' In Out In Out Total Proposed Use Fast -Food Rest. With Drive-Thru Pass -by Trips 3 4,843 GFA 50% 934 50% 50% 49.71 Net New PM Peak Hour Trips Generated = 120 -60 121 -61 241 -121 60 60 60 60 120 120 Notes: 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012 Land Use Codes. 2 Lunch and PM Trip rates derived from driveway counts at 2 existing CFA locations in Bellevue and Tacoma. Daily trip rate based on ratio of observed CFA PM trip rate to ITE (49.71 / 32.65 * 496.12 = 755.35) 3 Daily pass -by % assumed to be equal to PM pass -by % and based on data from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition). Chick-fil-A Restaurant Kirkland, WA 9/8/2017 Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila ATTACHMENT C LOS Methodology & Calculations Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila Level of Service Methodology Level of service calculations for intersections were based on methodology and procedures outlined in the 2016 update of the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board (HCM 6th Edition) using Synchro 10.0and Sidra 6. I traffic analysis software. LOS generally refers to the degree of congestion on a roadway or intersection. It is a measure of vehicle operating speed, travel time, travel delays, and driving comfort. A letter scale from A to F generally describes intersection LOS. At signalized intersections, LOS A represents free -flow conditions (motorists experience little or no delays), and LOS F represents forced -flow conditions where motorists experience an average delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. The LOS reported for signalized intersections represents the average control delay (sec/veh) and can be reported for the overall intersection, for each approach, and for each lane group (additional v/c ratio criteria apply to lane group LOS only). The LOS reported at stop -controlled intersections is based on the average control delay and can be reported for each controlled minor approach, controlled minor lane group, and controlled major -street movement (and for the overall intersection at all -way stop controlled intersections. Additional v/c ratio criteria apply to lane group or movement LOS only). Table Cl outlines the current HCM 6th Edition LOS criteria for signalized and stop -controlled intersections based on these methodologies. Table Cl LOS Criteria for Signalized and Stop Controlled Intersectionsf SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS STOP -CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS LOS by Volume -to Capacity (V/CI Ratio2 Control Delay Control Delay (sec/veh) <_ 1.0 > 1.0 (sec/veh) <_ 1.0 > 1.0 510 A F 510 A F > 10to<_20 B F > 10to515 B F >20to535 C F > 15to<_25 C F >35to555 D F >25to535 D F >55to_580 E F >35to550 E F >80 F F >50 F F LOS by Volume -to Capacity (V/C) Ratio3 1 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2016. 2 For approach -based and intersection -wide assessments at signals, LOS is defined solely by control delay. 3 For two-way stop controlled intersections, the LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major -street approaches or for the intersection as a whole at two-way stop controlled intersections. For approach -based and intersection -wide assessments at all -way stop controlled intersections, LOS is solely defined by control delay. Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila 2018 Without -Project 5.0 10.0 14.0 14.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 21.0 50.0 50.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 10.0 20.0 20.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 21.0 56.0 56.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations hj T+ ' t+ ij 4t ' 41+ Traffic Volume (vph) 19 3 7 175 6 196 15 835 134 249 819 13 Future Volume (vph) 19 3 7 175 6 196 15 835 134 249 819 13 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 90 0 175 0 210 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 183 367 430 284 Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.3 8.4 5.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 4 1 13 13 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 25.0 25.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode Intersection Summa Area Type: Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 40 (40%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated None None None None Other 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 `fir 4- k- 4\ t �► �, Rovemenr EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBA SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 19 t+ 111 (, 1 +l 19 +1 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 19 3 7 175 6 196 15 835 134 249 819 13 Future Volume (veh/h) 19 3 7 175 6 196 15 835 134 249 819 13 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 20 3 7 182 6 204 16 870 140 259 853 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 Cap,veh/h 119 83 193 300 8 258 459 1861 299 538 2356 39 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 1159 492 1147 1395 45 1536 1781 3060 492 1767 3549 58 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 10 182 0 210 16 505 505 259 424 443 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1159 0 1639 1395 0 1581 1781 1777 1775 1767 1763 1844 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 0.5 12.6 0.0 12.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 5.1 10.6 10.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.4 0.0 0.5 13.1 0.0 12.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 5.1 10.6 10.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.03 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 119 0 276 300 0 266 459 1081 1080 538 1170 1224 V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.61 0.00 0.79 0.03 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.36 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 214 0 410 414 0 395 587 1081 1080 673 1170 1224 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.8 0.0 34.8 40.3 0.0 39.9 7.1 0.0 0.0 5.2 7.4 7.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 3.4 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.2 0.9 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.5 0.0 0.2 4.3 0.0 5.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 1.6 3.8 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.0 0.0 34.8 41.0 0.0 43.3 7.1 1.5 1.5 5.5 8.3 8.3 LnGrp LOS D A CD A D A A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 30 392 '1026 1126 Approach Delay, s/veh 43.0 42.2 1.5 7.6 Approach LOS D D A A )Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.4 65.8 21.8 6.8 71.4 21.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 45.0 25.0 9.0 51.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.1 2.0 16.4 2.3 12.6 15.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 4.6 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.8 intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 10.9 CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ) r ) n 1 }i, Traffic Volume (vph) 10 4 14 28 0 165 7 767 53 184 751 35 Future Volume (vph) 10 4 14 28 0 165 7 767 53 184 751 35 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 50 0 50 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 283 417 658 430 Travel Time (s) 7.7 11.4 12.8 8.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ) r ) +4 11 + [r, Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 4 14 28 0 165 7 767 53 184 751 35 Future Vol, veh/h 10 4 14 28 0 165 7 767 53 184 751 35 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 2 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 0 - 125 50 - 50 Veh in Median Storage, # 1 1 0 0 Grade, % - 0 - 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 11 4 15 29 0 174 7 807 56 194 791 37 Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1619 2078 417 1639 - 436 829 0 0 865 0 0 Stage1 1199 1199 851 Stage 2 420 879 788 Critical Hdwy 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.52 - 6.92 4.14 - 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 5.5 6.52 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 5.5 6.52 Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4 3.3 3.51 - 3.31 2.22 - 2.22 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *458 120 *803 *457 0 *770 1141 - *1148 Stage 1 *359 380 - *726 0 Stage 2 *728 633 - *755 0 Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *306 98 *800 *381 - *767 1140 - *1146 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *304 210 - *469 Stage 1 *356 315 - *720 Stage 2 *559 628 - *606 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 14.6 11.4 0.1 1.7 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1140 - - 403 469 767 * 1146 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.006 - 0.073 0.063 0.226 0.169 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 - 14.6 13.2 11.1 8.8 HCM Lane LOS A - B B B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.6 "Votes -: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour 5.0 10.0 20.0 20.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 24.0 37.0 37.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 10.0 25.0 25.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 27.0 42.0 42.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 27.0 42.0 42.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) I ' I ►j +I l ft r Traffic Volume (vph) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 619 56 174 560 87 Future Volume (vph) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 619 56 174 560 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 125 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 275 375 346 658 Travel Time (s) 7.5 10.2 6.7 12.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 24.5 24.5 29.5 29.5 Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 Total Split (%) 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode Area Type: Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 62 (62%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated None None None None Other 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 sfr -► C k t 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I f t ' 'ft r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 619 56 174 560 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 619 56 174 560 87 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone 0n Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hlln 1870 1870 1870 1885 1885 1885 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 17 44 93 17 101 33 645 58 181 583 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 183 71 183 235 36 214 660 2122 191 588 2384 Arrive 0n Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.64 0.64 0.11 1.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1267 459 1187 1343 234 1389 1781 3297 296 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 61 93 0 118 33 347 356 181 583 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh/In 1267 0 1646 1343 0 1622 1781 1777 1817 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 3.3 6.5 0.0 6.6 0.6 8.7 8.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.5 0.0 3.3 9.8 0.0 6.6 0.6 8.7 8.7 3.6 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 183 0 253 235 0 250 660 1144 1169 588 2384 V/C Ratio(X) 0.42 0.00 0.24 0.40 0.00 0.47 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 551 478 0 543 874 1144 1169 842 2384 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.3 0.0 37.2 41.5 0.0 38.6 5.4 7.9 7.9 5.2 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50%),veh/In 1.9 0.0 1.3 2.2 0.0 2.7 0.2 3.1 3.2 1.0 0.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.9 0.0 37.3 41.9 0.0 39.1 5.4 8.6 8.6 5.3 0.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D D A D A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 138 211 736 764 A Approach Delay, s/veh 41.5 40.3 8.4 1.4 Approach LOS D D A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.7 69.4 19.9 8.0 72.1 19.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 32.0 33.5 15.0 37.0 33.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 10.7 14.5 2.6 2.0 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 4.2 0.3 0.0 4.2 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 11.7 B Notes - -- --- -- - 1 Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - Lunch Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT IVBR d SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) I+ fj I 11 ft4 'I +t Traffic Volume (vph) 8 4 7 184 8 174 17 890 105 190 1037 2 Future Volume (vph) 8 4 7 184 8 174 17 890 105 190 1037 2 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 90 0 175 0 210 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 183 367 430 284 Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.3 8.4 5.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 1 1 5 2 5 5 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Heavy Vehicles(%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 25.0 25.0 26.0 26.0 Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode Area Type: Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 25 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated None None None None Other Splits and Phases: 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 5.0 10.0 14.0 14.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 21.0 55.0 55.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 10.0 15.0 15.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 6 5.0 21.0 56.0 56.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR,' Lane Configurations I+ +1+ ' +1+ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 4 7 184 8 174 17 890 105 190 1037 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 4 7 184 8 174 17 890 105 190 1037 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 9 4 8 202 9 191 19 978 115 209 1140 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cap,veh/h 144 100 200 313 13 271 354 1967 231 501 2391 4 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1196 562 1124 1402 72 1524 1795 3227 379 1795 3668 6 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 0 12 202 0 200 19 543 550 209 557 585 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1196 0 1686 1402 0 1596 1795 1791 1815 1795 1791 1884 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.6 13.9 0.0 11.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.2 15.7 15.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.5 0.0 0.6 14.5 0.0 11.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.2 15.7 15.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 144 0 300 313 0 284 354 1092 1107 501 1167 1228 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.65 0.00 0.70 0.05 0.50 0.50 0.42 0.48 0.48 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 230 0 422 414 0 399 479 1092 1107 568 1167 1228 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.5 0.0 34.0 40.1 0.0 38.6 7.4 0.0 0.0 5.7 8.8 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.2 1.4 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.2 0.0 0.2 4.8 0.0 4.7 0.1 0.5 0.5 1.4 5.8 6.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.6 0.0 34.1 40.9 0.0 39.9 7.5 1.6 1.6 5.9 10.2 10.1 LnGrp LOS D A C D A D A A A A B B Approach Vol, veh/h 21 402 1112 1351 Approach Delay, s/veh 38.6 40.4 1.7 9.5 Approach LOS D D A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.2 66.0 22.8 7.1 70.2 22.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 50.0 25.0 9.0 51.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.2 2.0 14.5 2.4 17.7 16.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.1 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.8 1 ntersection Summary 1 HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 11.0 CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 )_ane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ) V II 4i1 1 4,4 Traffic Volume (vph) 11 1 19 18 1 117 8 814 21 200 985 27 Future Volume (vph) 11 1 19 18 1 117 8 814 21 200 985 27 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 50 0 50 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 283 417 658 430 Travel Time (s) 7.7 11.4 12.8 8.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 ntersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 Future Vol, veh/h 11 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % - Peak Hour Factor 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 Mvmt Flow 11 NBR r +t 1 19 18 1 117 8 814 21 1 19 18 1 117 8 814 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free None - - None - - None 0 - 125 50 - 50 1 1 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 - - 0 - 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 7 7 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 19 1 121 8 839 22 206 1015 28 SBR SBL 200 200 0 Free SBT 985 985 0 Free 27 27 0 Free None 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Minorl Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1877 2318 522 1786 2321 431 1043 0 0 861 0 0 Stage 1 1441 1441 - 866 866 Stage 2 436 877 - 920 1455 - Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.12 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 - 6.54 5.54 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.54 5.54 Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.21 - 2.21 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *69 37 *665 *89 *40 *768 *1015 - *1154 Stage 1 *317 330 - *724 *634 Stage 2 *714 624 - *637 *330 Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *49 30 *665 *74 *32 *768 *1015 - *1154 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *181 162 - *301 *181 Stage 1 *315 271 - *718 *629 Stage 2 *596 619 - *506 *271 ;4pproach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 17.3 11.5 0.1 1.5 HCM LOS C B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR 1 Capacity (veh/h) *1015 - - 325 301 768 *1154 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.008 - 0.098 0.062 0.157 0.179 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.6 - 17.3 17.7 10.6 8.8 HCM Lane LOS A - C C B A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.6 Notes -: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) i ►j /I t ft r Traffic Volume (vph) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 669 71 123 799 103 Future Volume (vph) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 669 71 123 799 103 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 125 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 275 375 346 658 Travel Time (s) 7.5 10.2 6.7 12.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 24.5 24.5 29.5 29.5 10.0 24.0 10.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 16.0 47.0 17.0 48.0 48.0 Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 16.0% 47.0% 17.0% 48.0% 48.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max None C-Max C-Max Area Type: Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 20 (20%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Other Splits and Phases: 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I +I+ 4+ r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 669 71 123 799 103 Future Volume (veh/h) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 669 71 123 799 103 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 82 15 42 102 14 91 39 690 73 127 824 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 184 64 178 227 31 204 575 2163 229 560 2407 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.66 0.66 0.10 1.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1308 441 1234 1355 217 1411 1795 3268 345 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 82 0 57 102 0 105 39 378 385 127 824 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1308 0 1675 1355 0 1628 1795 1791 1823 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.1 0.0 3.0 7.2 0.0 5.9 0.7 9.0 9.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.0 0.0 3.0 10.2 0.0 5.9 0.7 9.0 9.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.19 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 184 0 242 227 0 235 575 1185 1206 560 2407 V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.24 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.23 0.34 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 407 0 528 458 0 513 713 1185 1206 688 2407 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.6 0.0 37.9 42.4 0.0 39.1 4.8 7.2 7.2 4.8 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 2.0 0.0 1.3 2.5 0.0 2.4 0.2 3.2 3.3 0.6 0.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.2 0.0 38.1 42.9 0.0 39.6 4.8 8.0 7.9 4.8 0.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D D A D A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 139 207 802 951 A Approach Delay, s/veh 42.3 41.2 7.8 1.0 Approach LOS D D A A Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s Change Period (Y+Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s Green Ext Time (p_c), s intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS totes 9.9 5.0 12.0 4.3 0.1 2 71.2 5.0 42.0 11.1 5.1 10.3 B 4 19.0 4.5 31.5 14.0 0.3 8.3 5.0 11.0 2.7 0.0 6 72.7 5.0 43.0 2.0 6.6 19.0 4.5 31.5 12.2 0.5 Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila 2018 With -Project Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 19 + 1/ I 'I t+ 11 Traffic Volume (vph) 19 3 7 187 6 196 15 872 145 249 858 13 Future Volume (vph) 19 3 7 187 6 196 15 872 145 249 858 13 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 90 0 175 0 210 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 183 367 430 284 Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.3 8.4 5.5 Confl. Peds. (#Ihr) 4 4 1 13 13 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 25.0 25.0 26.0 26.0 10.0 21.0 10.0 21.0 Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 14.0 50.0 20.0 56.0 Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 14.0% 50.0% 20.0% 56.0% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max None C-Max Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 40 (40%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 01 4\ 05 -11'04 08 CFA Tukwila 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 - "111k 4\ t p 1 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL INBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) 'I I 'I +I vi 144 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 19 3 7 187 6 196 15 872. 145 249 858 13 Future Volume (veh/h) 19 3 7 187 6 196 15 872 145 249 858 13 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 .1856 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 20 3 7 195 6 204 16 908 151 259 894 14 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96. 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 Cap,veh/h 126 85 198 306 8 266 438 1835 305 521 2341 37 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.07 0.66 0.66 Sat Flow, veh/h 1159 492 1148 1395 45 1536 1781 3044. 506. 1 767 3552 56 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 10 195 0 210 16 530 529 259 444 464 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In '1159 0 1639 1395 0 1581 1781 1777 1773 1767 : 1763 1845 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 0.5 13.5 0.0 12.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 5.2 11.5 11.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 14.3.. 0.0 0.5 14.0 0.0 12.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 . 5.2 . 11.5 11.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.03 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 126 0 284 306 0 273 438 1071 1069 521. 1162 1216 V/C Ratio(X) 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.64 0.00 0.77 0.04 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.38 0.38 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 215 0 410 414 0 395 566 1071 1069 655 1162 1216 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) '1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.3 0.0 34.4 40.2 0.0 39.4 7.3 0.0 0.0 5.4 7.8 7.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.6 1.6 0.3 1.0 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 . 0.0 0.2 4.7 0.0 5.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 1.6 4.1 4.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp De1ay(d),s/veh 46.5 0.0 34.4 41.1 0.0 42.4 7.3 1.6 . . 1.6 5.7 8.7 8.7 LnGrp LOS D A CD A D A A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 30 405 1075 1167 Approach Delay, s/veh 42.5 41.7 1.7 8.0 Approach LOS D D A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.4 65.3 22.3 6.8 70.9 22.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.0 45.0 25.0 9.0 51.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.2 2.0 16.3 2.3 13.5 16.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 4.9 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 11.0 B CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 I r 11 +I+ 11 +1 Traffic Volume (vph) 95 4 77 28 0 165 72 728 53 184 713 124 Future Volume (vph) 95 4 77 28 0 165 72 728 53 184 713 124 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 50 0 50 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 283 417 658 430 Travel Time (s) 7.7 11.4 12.8 8.4 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free intersection Summary j Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.2 Movement EBL Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 95 Future Vol, veh/h 95 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # - Grade, % - Peak Hour Factor 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 Mvmt Flow 100 EBT 4 4 4 0 Stop 1 0 95 0 4 Major/Minor Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 1743 Stage 1 1206 Stage 2 537 Critical Hdwy 7.5 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.5 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.5 Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *277 Stage 1 *355 Stage 2 *757 Platoon blocked, % 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *178 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *237 Stage 1 *329 Stage 2 *549 2182 1206 976 6.5 5.5 5.5 4 80 376 516 1 61 164 312 478 Approach EB HCM Control Delay, s 28 HCM LOS D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Notes EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL 77 28 0 165 72 77 28 0 165 72 1 2 0 2 1 Stop Stop Stop Stop Free None - - None - 0 - 125 50 1 0 - 95 95 95 95 95 0 1 1 1 2 81 29 0 174 76 Vinod 444 1716 - 948 - 768 6.9 7.52 - 6.52 - 6.52 3.3 3.51 *803 *303 - *567 *755 1 1 *800 *219 *328 *526 *555 NBT 728 728 0 Free NBR SBL SBT SBR 53 184 713 124 53 184 713 124 2 2 0 1 Free Free Free Free None - None - 50 0 0 0 - 0 95 95 95 95 95 2 2 2 2 2 766 56 194 751 131 Majorl Major2 - 415 883 0 0 824 0 0 - 6.92 4.14 - 3.31 2.22 0 *801 1073 0 0 1 1 - *798 1072 WB NB 11.7 0.7 B - 4.14 - 2.22 - 1148 - 1146 SB 1.6 NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR 1072 - - 337 328 798 1146 - 0.071 - 0.55 0.09 0.218 0.169 8.6 - 28 17.1 10.8 8.8 A - DC B A 0.2 - 3.1 0.3 0.8 0.6 -: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR \. 4, SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T ►j I+ ►9 +I ) +t rr Traffic Volume (vph) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 645 56 174 586 87 Future Volume (vph) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 645 56 174 586 87 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 125 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Tum on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 275 375 346 658 Travel Time (s) 7.5 10.2 6.7 12.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Minimum Split (s) 24.5 24.5 29.5 29.5 Total Split (s) 38.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 Total Split (%) 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% 38.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode Intersection Summa Area Type: Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 62 (62%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated None None None None 5.0 10.0 20.0 20.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 24.0 37.0 37.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 10.0 25.0 25.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lead Yes None 5.0 27.0 42.0 42.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max 5.0 27.0 42.0 42.0% 4.0 1.0 0.0 5.0 Lag Yes C-Max Splits and Phases: Other 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block CFA Tukwila 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 t ( 4-- k' 4\ t p Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations lli 4 ) 4 ►j +4 ) ++ f Traffic Volume (veh/h) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 645 56 174 586 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 74 16 42 89 16 97 32 645 56 174 586 87 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1885 1885 1885 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 77 17 44 93 17 101 33 672 58 181 610 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 .2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 183 71 183 235 36 214 647 2130 184 575 2384 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.64 0.64 0.11 1.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1267 459 1187 : 1343 234 1389 1781. 3310 285 1781.. 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 77 0 61 93 0 118 33 360 370 181 610 0 Grp SatFlow(s),veh/h/In '1267 0 1646 1343 0 1622 1781 1777 1818 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 0.0 3.3 6.5 0.0 6.6 0.6 9.1 9.1 3.6 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.5 0.0 3.3 9.8 0.0 6.6. 0.6 9.1 9.1 3.6 :.. 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 183 0 253 235 0 250 647 1144 1:170 575 2384 V/C Ratio(X) 0.42 0.00 0.24 0.40 0.00 0.47 0.05 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 412 0 551 478 0 543 861 1144 1170 829 2384 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.3 0.0 37.2 41.5 0.0 38.6 5.4 8.0 8.0 5.2 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50%),veh/In 1.9 0.0 1.3 2.2 0.0 2.7 0.2 3.3 3.4 1.0 0.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.9 0.0 37.3 41.9 0.0 39.1 5.4 8.7 8.7 5.3 0.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D D A D A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 138 211 763 791 A Approach Delay, s/veh 41.5 40.3 8.5 1.4 Approach LOS D D A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.7 69.4 19.9 8.0 72.1 19.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 32.0 33.5 15.0 37.0 33.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 11.1 14.5 2.6 2.0 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 4.4 0.3 0.0 4.5 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS Notes 11.5 B Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 With -Project - Lunch Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 k- t i d Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 t 1 T 1 +T 19 +t Traffic Volume (vph) 8 4 7 193 8 174 17 920 114 190 1067 2 Future Volume (vph) 8 4 7 193 8 174 17 920 114 190 1067 2 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 90 0 175 0 210 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 30 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 183 367 430 284 Travel Time (s) 5.0 8.3 8.4 5.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 5 1 1 5 2 5 5 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 HeavyVehicles(%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Tum Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 25.0 25.0 26.0 26.0 10.0 21.0 10.0 21.0 Total Split (s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 14.0 55.0 15.0 56.0 Total Split (%) 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 30.0% 14.0% 55.0% 15.0% 56.0% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max None C-Max Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 25 (25%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Splits and Phases: 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd '1/44101 4\05 t02• 06 ' MEI 08 L 11111111 CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Southcenter Pkwy & Minkler Blvd 09/08/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations /I t+ ' 1+ II +1 li +1+ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 4 7 193 8 174 17 920 114 190 1067 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 4 7 193 8 174 17 920 114 190 1067 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 : 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 . 1900 1900 1885 '1885 1885 1885 : 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 9 4 8 212 9 191 19 1011 125 209 1173 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cap,veh/h 152 103 207 321 13 280 339 1934 239 486 2369 4 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.06 0.65 0.65 Sat Flow, veh/h 1196 562 .1124 1402 72 1524 1795. 3207 396 1795 3669 6 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 0 12 212 0 200 19 564 572 209 573 602 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1196 0 1687 1402 0 1596 1795 : 1791 1812 1795 1791 1884 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.6 14.6 0.0 11.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.2 16.6 16.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.4 0.0 0.6 15.2 0.0 11.7 0.4 :. .0.0 0.0 . 4.2 : . 16.6 16.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.67 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 152 0 310 321 0 293 339 1080 1093 486 1157 1217 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.66 0.00 0.68 0.06 0.52 0.52 0.43 0.50 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 231 0 422 414 0 399 464 1080 1093 552 1157 1217 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 . 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 • 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.9 0.0 33.6 39.8 0.0 38.1 7.8 0.0 0.0 5.8 9.2 9.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.8 1.8 0.2 1.5 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/In 0.2 0.0 0.2 5.1 0.0 4.6 0.1 0.5 0.5 1.4 6.2 6.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.9 0.0 33.6 40.9 0.0 39.2 7.8 1.8 1.8 6,1 10.7 10.7 LnGrp LOS D A CD A D A A A A BB Approach Vol, veh/h 21 412 1155 1384 Approach Delay, s/veh 38.0 40.1 1.9 10.0 Approach LOS D D A B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.3 65.3 23.4 7.1 69.6 23.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 50.0 25.0 9.0 51.0 25.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.2 2.0 14.4 2.4 18.7 17.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.4 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.7 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 11.2 B CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 ) r vi ft '1 ft Traffic Volume (vph) 77 1 74 18 1 117 56 787 21 200 952 99 Future Volume (vph) 77 1 74 18 1 117 56 787 21 200 952 99 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 50 0 50 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 283 417 658 430 Travel Time (s) 7.7 11.4 12.8 8.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%) 7% 7% 7% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1 % 1% 1% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 2: Southcenter Pkwy & Site Access 09/08/2017 Mntersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 1 Lane Configurations 4+ ) r ' +1 ) 414 Traffic Vol, veh/h 77 1 74 18 1 117 56 787 21 200 952 99 Future Vol, veh/h 77 1 74 18 1 117 56 787 21 200 952 99 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length 0 - 125 50 - 50 Veh in Median Storage, # 1 1 0 0 Grade, % - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 7 7 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Mvmt Flow 79 1 76 19 1 121 58 811 22 206 981 102 Major/Minor Minor2 Minors Majorl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1966 2393 542 1841 2433 417 1083 0 0 833 0 0 Stage 1 1444 1444 938 938 Stage 2 522 949 903 1495 - Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.12 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 6.54 5.54 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.54 5.54 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.21 - 2.21 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver *- 55 32 *696 *78 31 *768 1011 - *1154 Stage 1 *283 306 *642 580 Stage 2 *714 563 *666 289 Platoon blocked, % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 Mov Cap-1 Maneuver *- 38 25 *696 *57 24 *768 1011 - *1154 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver *157 140 - *254 131 Stage 1 *267 251 - *606 547 Stage 2 *566 531 - *485 237 Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 40.2 11.9 0.6 1.4 HCM LOS E B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR 1 Capacity (veh/h) 1011 - - 252 254 768 *1154 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - 0.622 0.073 0.157 0.179 HCM Control Delay (s) 8.8 - - 40.2 20.3 10.6 8.8 HCM Lane LOS A - - ECB A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 3.8 0.2 0.6 0.6 )Votes -: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) 1 ) T l ft 11 4j r Traffic Volume (vph) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 690 71 123 820 103 Future Volume (vph) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 690 71 123 820 103 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 125 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 25 25 35 35 Link Distance (ft) 275 375 346 658 Travel Time (s) 7.5 10.2 6.7 12.8 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Tum Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 24.5 24.5 29.5 29.5 10.0 24.0 10.0 27.0 27.0 Total Split (s) 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 16.0 47.0 17.0 48.0 48.0 Total Split (%) 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 36.0% 16.0% 47.0% 17.0% 48.0% 48.0% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max None C-Max C-Max Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Offset: 20 (20%), Referenced to phase 2:NBTL and 6:SBTL, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Splits and Phases: 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block \,01 11111 4\ 05 1 02 ♦ 06 • -,4 .- 08 CFA Tukwila 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Synchro 10 Report HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: Southcenter Pkwy & 17500 Block 09/08/2017 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11 t T +I ++ r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 690 71 123 820 103 Future Volume (veh/h) 80 15 41 99 14 88 38 690 71 123 820 103 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1900 1900 1900 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1885 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 82 15 42 102 14 91 39 711 73 127 845 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 Cap,veh/h 184 64 178 227 31 204 566 2170 223 550 2407 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.66 0.66 0.10 1.00 0.00 SatFlow,veh/h 1308 441 1234 1355 217 1411 1795 3279 336 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 82 0 57 102 0 105 39 388 396 127 845 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1308 0 1675 1355 0 1628 1795 1791 1824 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.1 0.0 3.0 7.2 0.0 5.9 0.7 9.4 9.4 2.3 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.0 0.0 3.0 10.2 0.0 5.9 0.7 9.4 9.4 2.3 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.74 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.18 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 184 0 242 227 0 235 566 1185 1207 550 2407 V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.24 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.23 0.35 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 407 0 528 458 0 513 704 1185 1207 678 2407 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 44.6 0.0 37.9 42.4 0.0 39.1 4.8 7.3 7.3 4.8 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile Back0fQ(50%),veh/In 2.0 0.0 1.3 2.5 0.0 2.4 0.2 3.4 3.4 0.6 0.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.2 0.0 38.1 42.9 0.0 39.6 4.8 8.0 8.0 4.9 0.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D D A D A A A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 139 207 823 972 A Approach Delay, s/veh 42.3 41.2 7.9 1.0 Approach LOS D D A A frimer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 l Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.9 71.2 19.0 8.3 72.7 19.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 42.0 31.5 11.0 43.0 31.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 11.4 14.0 2.7 2.0 12.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.3 0.3 0.0 6.9 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 10.2 B i Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. CFA Tukwila Synchro 10 Report 2018 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila ATTACHMENT D Opening Weekend Traffic Management Plan z 11 MilraZilliAitcvsu ac ment D: 0 •ening Weekend Traffic Management Plan Capaci y = 30 + 10 Z Lu 1--- Se Traffic Impact Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila ATTACHMENT E Normalized Conditions z A7iTA diiwi1P1'7 I • 'ac men E: Norma ize• on•i ions a•aci = ' ve is es; LMNAR -.'A Z W S 0 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development • File Number L17-0029 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM TO: building El Planning ❑Public Works ❑Fire Dept. ❑Police Dept. ❑Parks/Rec Project: CHICK-FIL-A: REVISION 1 SUBMITTAL Address: 17333 Southcenter Parkway Date transmitted: 11/15/2017 Response requested by: 11/30/2017 Staff coordinator: Max Baker Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60-day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) 1 Plan check date: Comments Update date: /' /7 prepared by: City•of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southeenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Web site: http://www.TukwilaWA.gov Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: 11/13/2017 Plan Check/Permit Number: L17-0029 ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # 1 ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner CrryikCe/V ❑ Deferred Submittal # Op TvkG NOV� � ic. Project Name: Chick -fit -A 03093 3 2Uy/ Project Address: 17333 Southcenter Parkway pekorr Carlos Arias, 4G DevelopmentC Contact Person:Phone Number: (951) 970- 1 Summary of Revision: Site Plan and Elevations Revisions. See summary description of revisions in attached cover letter The Sheet Numbers Revised are: T1, C1.0, C2.0, SP-1, L1.0, L1.1, L1.2, L2.0, L2.1, PH1, A1.1A, A1.7, A2.1, A2.2, Signs Plans and Color Elevations Sheet Number(s): See List Above "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: ❑ Entered in TRAKiT on \ I \SI 'Vern* Center\Tenglates\Forms\Revision Submittal Fonn.doc vised: August 2015 CODE INFORMATION 2012 WASHINGTON STATE CODES BUILDIIG DATA OCCUPANCY, FIRE SPRINKLERED, CONSTRUCTION TYPE, SITE AREA BUILDING AREA. FAR: ZONING, PARKING A2 (REST4URAN-i YES ve 4.5,431 S.F. 5,134 S.F. .I1 -JC-CC STANDARD SPACES REQUIRED. TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED, PARKING PROVIDED ON CFA PARCEL, ADDITIONAL PARKING AVAIL VIA CROSS ACCESS AND PARKING AGREEMENT, TOAL PARKING PROVIDED! ArcldtEct: 195 50JrH '0' 8TQEET 200 USTINI, CA. 92780 -ONE: (714) 832- 8341 FAX (714) 832-191C CO`'ACT RL/9SELL 'HA FIELD E"AIL RL.SSELL0CRH0.COM 1 SPACE PER 50 SE. OF '.,SABLE SPACE 'OTA_ BULDING AREA IS 5,134 S.' 5,134 - 3.026 = 2.102 2;03 / 50 - 42.16 = 43 SPACES. 42 SPACES 20 SPACES e2 SPACES Ovli b landscape: BAQGHAL.SEN 18215 72\D AVENUE SOUTH. 8NT 124,.98032 ?)BONE (425) 25 -5222 FAX (425) 251-8752 CONiTGC- 1MA1_ CUENSE\wBARG-AL!SENCOM 5200 BUF=IiNGTON ROAD ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30349-2998 PI —ONE (404) 755-8000 FAX' (404) 684-8550 17333 SOUTNCENTER PARKWAY TUKWILA, WA. Applkant CHICK-FIL-A PHONE: (760) 884-7011 CONTACT ED -A_E E-MAIL:EHALEC4GDEV.COM Drawing Index T-I TITLE S-EET S� SITE PLAN C1.0 GRADING AND D24INAGE PLAN C20 UTILITY PLAN Ai-A%\SPS 'LAND `1-LE SURVEY 1.0 LANDSCAPE PLAN 1.1 LANDSCAPE NOTES AND DETAILS 1.2 _A\DSCAPE NOTES AND DETAILS 2.0 ;RRIGA-hON PLAN 2.1 IRRIGA- ION NOTES AND DE -AILS P-I- Pi-IOTOMETR C 5' P_AN A -1.1 4 A 2.1 A 22 FLOOR 1-'_AN ROOF PLAN EX'ERIOR ELEVATIONS EX`ERIO2 ELEVATIONS VIONITY MAP NTS 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgie, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark I:ate By A C7-05 17 Mark Date By /n 10-19-17 Mark Date By Seal C° R° H° 0 At 4ThRure Wei., '95 SoJ91 "C. wee 27 T�sli+, C°,ilorn.o 52780 714 832-IE34 rAX 832-!910 i". 3 STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA FT fill, COVER SHEET JERSSO'J: V7.001 ISSUE /n11 08-2016 b N . 16-105 to a 04094.- I)ntc ')rcwr B'y . RD_ B✓•-RH 01-06-16 SI oot T-I /7-oe'ZQ uthcenter PKWY, Tukwila, WA \ Graphics \ 20 Custom Design \ 20.2 Schematic Uesigmeaz - uauua awg, 11/W.I1 11:14:90 IVIly LANDSCAPE AREA EXISTING 10'-0" SANITA.6/ R.12 SEWER EASEMENT 2. CONCRETE DR1v8.,THRU /// EXISTING AC DRIVE ISLE TG REMAIN LI,/ ,r/;// A * ) ® ii:i•r -..., li 1L.„ 44- ll HEIGOT CLEARA TYP. OF 2 /// • (2) — — 1 / CO1IC WA/ = 16.37 coNew, = 21 31 C'AC SE - 741 .014 SSE ,. 20.16 \ , C-R. 1,0. SOU, :.... _ -7-..-... , ii Hi 1 1 i Iil i .NNSI .1p 21=111 It i• 1 ,(.„.91 -..... LANE 1 ,-.1111 I EXISTINfG4ARKING STRIPItir. 1 I 1 1 • 7 RASP ENCLOSURE /STORA(E AREA— ANDSCAPE AREA ifRECTIONAL SIGN EXISTING PARKING Sf WEIR MANHOLE 627/ ,28 .14 • 1 12'osr S = I 5.39 E =,`4. 99 10 Ole( 41.4119/4 11 P12 L0 Lft0 PLAYGROUND GSF 5,134 St LANDSCAPING EXISTING LIGHT FxTURE 1 EXISTING 10'-0" WATER EASEMENT 111 EXISTING AC PAVING (,) t LANDSCAPE AREA CONCRETE WALK HANDICAP RAMP, SIGN FEW LOCAL AUTHORITY -44— ARE ACCESS LANE-- - . N EXISTING INGRESS, EGRESS EASEMENT —1 t _ - —1— -- PE`.10, TOP SUMP PL1P' -:. 22 24153.5 PVC 2690 - 23.10 9 C 26- r.or 059I44E 17.111PID 13AF091 T SIGN 1 EXISTING STREET LIGHTI LAN CAFNCA-.8WE >- NELU PE ESTRIAN IGHTING IPATH TWAvEL ISTING RESS, RESS SEMENT PARKING) 15411 ACES REQUIRED, TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED. SPACE P00 50 S.F. OF USAB_E SPACE TOTS _ BUOING AREA IS 5,134 S.F 5,134 - 3,025 = 2,105 2,108 / 50 = 42.16 = 43 SPACES. PARKING PROVIDED ON CFA PARCEL, 42 SPACES ADDITIONAL PARKING AVAL VIA CROSS ACCESS AND PARKING AGREEMENT. 20 SPACES TOAL PARKING PROVIDED, 62 SPACES TUKWILA, WASHINGTON NeUtlairalrgiate 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Date By A 07-05-17 Mark Date By 10-19-17 Mark Date By Seal C.R-Th 0 444him Welim Awing 195 South -C. Stre4 200 Tustin, Cdifcrria 92780 714 832-1334 FAX 832-910 STOPE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA ':-HEET PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN VERLS01,1: V7.001 i rss ow-E: 08-2016 :1 Job No. : 16-105 Store '04094 [We . 01-06-16 Drawn By : _77 _ / // TRASH ///,/ / / / . //�/ j/ 0 /i/% 1 i j / / /1_l/l d i -7/-7 / / 'J JP/ / / / / " LIGHT-- \, i'/ / / //J/ �� I //---/// / / 7 . ' ///�.'l i l / / L / / / ( /; w / l f-777, I I v\ / I ,// ---1 LIGHT 1 1 / /' " BASE I _ 1 ' / r ) / fr i yF! 11 I /// / /7/ ' 1 fI / /:; /^ {o�y �/ \\ vt �^ SEWER RI /,//. 8' CONC NW /// \ �. E" CCNC SE - t7.41 "\ \ 'CAC SSE= 20.16 CTR "Y SOUr" //�R WALL-\� �/ ;/// 'yam-�."s' / GRAVEL \/ __ -- i \`I 1/11113�1'kW n / / CAT01 BASIN -,-IS" ADS ENE 2J 3T 5 .Y,�1 - 12" CCNC 5E = 23,50 12' COLIC W - 23,90 CIR. 1.0' SE -STORM MANHCLE W/TRAyi RACK RIM = 228,78 INGRESS. EGRESS 3 EASEMENT PEI, REC. NO. 9507210 83 CONCRETE SWALE , 4YORANT 9434,4 RIM = 27 15 '4 CCNC N = 24,55 / WATER FPSP HOTBOX PRELIMINARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN R CHICK-FIL AFOT UKWILA SECTION 26, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. SHRUBBERY CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTOt� POWER PANEL ON WALL E110 OF EASEMENT REC. r ET,WER r N0. 7911200472 M4000. F / A.P.N. 262304-9024 20" MAX HEIGHT TR5 LLC N01'08'20'E RETAINING WALL tt<I (ucl -,M "-�`-S88 16034 20 LF 6" PVC SD 0 1.00% P12 LC LRG 721 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND GSF 5,134 S.F. CA$ [ 310G VETER ON „S88 14t1"e ifi,oD' 50P08'201N '1207' /- STORM MANHOLE 48' .RIM = 25.26 / 8' CVP E _ ' 7.99 TOP CAP 0I5E32, = 19.11 12"•GONG 3f.= 1793 IiE.AVi RAND IN MN. „TRENCH DRAIN THRU CRVEWAY :BOX '1 a $B8'St 1-66 4 LF fi PVC Tl `m tt TCIzc19TC �w'f�/ SD LOOS s rRI a LF 12" PVC SD OOSOS 21 LF 12reitetrArefirted �� RIDGE LINE " T' E al I I W LF 12" PSD 0 0.5oz(' 781E 8=SEWER PVC a07E 5D 00. 28. R P80 12' CONC = I,. 2' CONC = 15 4 4 8351'4pw 27 551 E RES 262304- EO STGIAN E/S(4EN. i \ i WINNERS 3 L ER RE gyp 01 20.300pARkii4ING ST LES __ , ==s=� RIDGE LINE 1 _. ___.-w-r-1.-w-=-• " • "� a1NGfiE5 a-w t�. - ,- 5,"-..,_ q3' \rA,O\ w\ ` \\ r`�\ \\1 STORM MANHOLE 84" A.P.N. 262 to 9067 \.84'l45 \ et "'1 4 /- RIM =3J45 CUP=-111KW1 LP \ \ '''''FP \ +40, \ -N.1 36' DI = 20.26 \ \ 4UOs\\c�\ ' L0-\ / 35" 01.E = 20.16 \ J4 y�.\ / \ LICRT \ -� �i I \ i0 57A:ES CATCH BASIN RIM = 19.92 11" CONC 5 T. 25.22 1. l:,.N,. NW' = 7S 9> 7-STORM MANHOLE 84• 61N . 3G.17 12" PVC 5W = 21.93 R' WC S 25.98 \\- STORM MANHOLE 48' RIM = 30.23 12' CONC 5W = 23.28 12" PVC NE - 23.08 4' PVC VEP,T - 21.38 TOP BAFFLE - 23.85 70P SLAP PUMP - 23,58 ESTIMATED EARTHWORK OUANTrnES CUT: 3,000 CY FILL: 200 CY NET: 2,800 CY (CUT) AREA TO BE DISTURBED -1.08 AC EARTHWORK QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE AND HIGHLY DEPENDANT ON SOIL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHOULD PERFORM INDEPENDENT ESTIMATE FOR BIDDING. 0 - 51OP4 MANHOLE G0'-'/ RM= 26.50 36' 0.. 'R - 16,22 36- 0.4 SE = 18.70 ID0511AG 1911OING BIG /U �17401 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. d.21 TUKWILA, WA A.P.N. 262304-9120 WINNERS 3 LLC VP ‘7- 6' SEWER MANHOLE Eq 469 /11428 9111% e 22.15 4' PVC VERT = 23.08 8' PC SE = NET AVAILABLE (BEHIND BAFFLE) SITE INFORMATION EXISTING ON -SITE SURFACE AREAS SERE UGH, LO" ;ATE TOTAL SITE AREA 47,241 SF (1.08 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 43,165 SF (0.99 AC) PERVKKIS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 4,076 SF (0.09 AC PROPOSED ON -SITES IRFACE AREAS TOTAL SITE AREA 47,241 SF (1.08 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 30.968 SF (0.71 AC) TOTAL PERVIOUS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 16,273 SF (0.37 AC) 7 LF 12" PVC„ SD 0 0.50% 0 2.905 ° LF 12Is i=l CL 1 I , a (N O 0.505 ' NECT TO E% CB g 19.25 12" 15 _ I'6�o I I I 15' UTILITY EASEMENT ' a) PER 6343681 1LE SANITARY SEWER - -'r� PER 6660143 1 I' CATCH BASIN = 2299 6' CONC E - 1798 1 ASPHALT SWALE A-5'20'39" ASPHALT SWALE "WN-MKT IS UTILITY EASEMENT PER 63434E62 a\ 3 I .-4- I�YC. '' / CATCH 6ASIN Ate, ' I yr WM _ 2378 6' `PP N.= 2178 6"._PP SW - n33 KART OF 1585 TAKEN TO 80 LARGE (307,1 RECESSED OPENI AORTA SIDE GI STRL;GTUPE (NOT ABLE TO VERIFY DIRECCI STRUCTURE FULL OF STANDING CATCH BASIN RIM = 23.34 12' 02SW- 21.10 991.37' L-92.4 ' (, _ CA'Cn BASIN � -- RM = 23,26 IFULL Of SLUDGE 'IC' SANITARY SEWER PER 20160914000620 SEWER MANACLE r"- RIM 23.72 24' GONG N 7T 1302 14" CONC S = 13.12 12- CONC W = '3.22 CTR. 10' WEST CATCH BASH RM = 23.85 8' CONC 509 = 22.23 ENO MONUMENT 1N CASE LEAD 8 TACK APPROK 0.80' BELOW GRADE AT PI C/L SOLITHCENTER PKWY CATCH BASIN RIM - 23.90 8' CONC MY = 22.35 CATCH BASIN TABLE ADR1, W/AO0 GRATE RIM = 26.58 IE=22.35 (5' W) IE=22.35 (5' E) ADA2, W/ADS CRATE RIM = 26.58 IE=22.55 (6' E) CB5I, TYPE I, W/STANDARD CRATE RIM = 24,33 IE=20.79 (12' W) IE=20.79 (12" S) CBµ2. TYPE I, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 24.01 1E0420.84 (12" 5) 1E=20.84 (12' E) CB#3, TYPE 1, W/STANOARC GRATE RIM = 24.02 IE=21.02 (12" S) IE=21.02 (12' N) C854, TYPE I. W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 24.40 IE=21.29 (12' S) IE=21.29 (12' N) C855, TYPE I, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 24.59 IE=21.59 (12' W) IE-21 59 (12' N) CBA6, TYPE 1, W/SOUS LOCKING LID RIM = 27.16 IE=22.32 (8' N) IE=22.18 (12' E) CB#7, TYPE 1, W/STANDARC GRATE RIM = 26.11 1E=22.41 (9" W) IE=22.41 (8" N) IE=22.41 (8" 5) CB58, TYPE 1, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 26.84 IE=23.73 (8" NW) IE=23.73 (8" E) C859, TYPE 1, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 27.63 IE=24,63 (8' SE) C6510 TYPE 1, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 25.67 IE=22.79 (8' N) IE=22 79 (8' S) CB;111. TYPE 1, Vf/STANDARD CRATE RIM = 2588 IE 22.91 (8' N) IE=22.91 (8' W) IE=22.91 (8' S) CB§I2, TYPE 1, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 25.92 IE-23.25 (8' E) CB513, TYPE 1, W/STANDARD GRATE RIM = 25.82 IE-23.15 (8' S) MW #1, MODULAR WETLAND MWS-L-6-8 RIM = 24.62 IE=20.69 (12" N) IE=19.36 (12" SE) OYl5I, MODEL 660-CPS RIM = 24.43 1E=20.76 (12' N) IE=20.76 (12' S) 5000/1, W/CONCRETE COLLAR RIM = 24 24 IE=21.53 (6" NW) IE=21.53 (6" 5) SDC052, W/ADS LID RIM = 26.19 1E=22.05 (6' S) I=c=22.05 (6" N) IE=22.05 (6" E) SDCO#3, W/ADS LID RIM = 26.52 IE=22.18 (6' W) IE=22.18 (6" S) SDCOJ4. W/ADS LID RIM = 26.09 1E=22.32 (6" S) IE=22.32 (6" N) SOCO#5, W/ADA LID RIM = 26.04 IE=22.56 (6' N) Know what's below. Call before you dig. Dial 811 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-299B Revisions: Mork Date By A10/27/2017 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Date By / \ Mork Date By A 1- 0 N STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN RECEIVED. Nov 13tul VERSION: 014 1 ISSUE DATE4 " "H"„nt Job No • 16-105 Store '04094 Date • 8-28-17 Drawn By : SN Checked By: CRC Sheet C1.10 LIT -dozy 1'-20' 0 10' 20' 40' 00 L0.,:4_.3 i /// GRAVEL / / / EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT ////////// / / / / / /,''.1 /2///=/��i/ I / / / / /,,, mc0 AP'j / //i L /�4 / /6- CL52 DI FIRE /.. . %.,;SERVICE TO FDCr II 77 /' / /�� 6" CL52 DI �/� �- FIRE SERVICE / / ( " 51- 1/2- DOMESTIC METER // YW/BACKFLOW PREVENTER J {' /' 1-1/2. DOMESTIC SERVICE =_ ,GBA5 .,,�11 / 1' METER FOR IRRIGATION, / INSTALL BACKFLOW PREVENTER f CATCH BAS*N-\ TYPE 2 - 48' RIM = 33.10 ADS ENE = 23.35 12- CONC SE _ 23.50 12* ANC W = 23.90 CIR. I .C' SE \ i ( i r//zr TRASH E'BMRE /j /%/// SEWER JAANHOL R!M • 31.51 9CONC JAW = 1607 \'\ _58' CONC NW • 21.31 B=C6NC SE • 17.41 `Cy FGNC SSE = 20.16 CTR. 1-0' SOUTH LSIORM MANHOLE W/IRA 4 RACK RIM =�28. 78 INGRESS, EC. ESS & EASEMENT P REC. NO 9507210 83 a a fi' ! -- / 1 • CONNECT TO EXISTING POWER METER Of ALL L 812 /- CAS METER PIN EL ON B_OG WALL END OF EASEMENT REC.TELEPHONE/ISP SERVICE [POWER �NO. J9111oo4 J2 r / MANHOLE / AP.N. 262304- 'KOn •�� r._�=v-`»-"S6B5,'90'E I80.54•, FOG _pc.�PC AREA ORAN FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE TO SANITARY '. � tt0 t3E VAT CATCH 0 PE 2 B' IM • 991 36" 'CONC WNW : 21.22 36" D.. ESE • 21.12 1/?' CONE WSW • 22.22 SEVER MANHOLE RI = 28. 4 = 2LAjj�1 PVC S • 15.3 12'1 CONC - 14. 12 CONC = 15 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN FOR CHI CK-FIL A T UKWILA SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. r5NRU36ERY CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON 2 r -- !R51C. NOt'OB'20'E 1r 6' CL52 DI FIRE SERVICE 2- DOMESTIC SERVICE P12 LC LRG 121 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND GSF 5,134 S.F. 586st•40E 36.00• EGRESS & ' PEDESTRAN EASEMENT\ PER ROC. M11)- 200+0601000456 EXISTING 12- SS N88'51'40W 271.65 55 *06055 8 a EDF.. N F.A Lq ER RE NN,, Bolo 00070 33 PARKING 51+ ��\ 1 TORM MANHOLE 64- A.P.N. 2623�F 9067 ! RIM • 30.46 GLPF-IUKWIIA LP 36" D.I. 5 = 20.26 230'-'i20 53 L' CATCH BASIN- -RN = 29.92 12' CONC 5 = 26,22 12' CONC NNE - 26.22 ' ACT lwnT SKARN M ,11-1Ut 54' RIM • 30.17 36" O.I. N 20.53 36' 0.1, WAN = 20. J3 12' F4C SW= 21.93 61CS • 25,98 S10PM MANHOLE 45' RIM - 30.23 12' CONC Sri • 23.2E 12' PVC NE . 250E 4' PVC VEST = 26 36 10P BAFFLE = 23.83 70P SUN' PUMP - 23.58 STORM LUNHO_E 60'- RM - 26.60 36' O.L W= 18.70 36' 01. SE = 18.70 BLOC TIT EXISTM0 BUILDING 442's 17401 SOUTHCENTER RIYK) TUKYNU. WA &P.N. 262304-912C WINNERS 3 ;.LC 501'08'20W 12.00' (-STORM MANHOLE 45' RM • 25.26 8' CM. E = 1798 TOP CRP 55EN 12''ONIC W Frs20 NO ILLEGIBLE DAR/CAP UTILIZE EXISTING GAS SERVICE / \1 StASL . SEWER MANHOLE - ' RIM = 24.60 TOP SUMP PUMP • 72.35 A' PVC VERT • 230E 8- PAC 5E • NOT AVA'LABIE (BEHIND BAFFLE) STREEi- L0OT - LIGHT, '- EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT R RU DRIVEWAY Ii ,�, I p, O' Af _.._� � 3 1 5' UTILI ASEM[ ' PER 6343882 S1j I CATCH BASIN - HMI = 23.73 IL II <• 5 CPP N. = 21.78 6' ..PP SO = 22.33 :WEPT OF 15.65 TAKEN TO 90 JdNOE (30'4) RECESSED OPENi NORTH SIDE OF STRUCTURE NOT ABLE TO VERIFY0RECIICI I STRUCTURE FULL OF 5TANGNG I N8851DW 36,00„ -J CAiCN 2A51N RM = 7299 6- CORO E • 17.9E 6=5'20'39' •'99A.37' L=92.4 i • END MONUMENT IN CASE LEFD & GCK A PRCX OBO BELOW OP}OE Al PI •;� IN C/L SOUIHCENTER PKWY CATCH BASIN ft!M= 23.34 12" OA 5W= 21.10 15' 611197 EAS040' PER 6343E81 10 SANTARY SEWER PER 6680143 CATCH 849N PoN = 2326 FALL OF SLUDGE 10 5183M" SEWER PER 2C'.00914003620 SEWER MANHOLE RIM - 23.12 24' CONC N • 13.02 24' CONC S - +3.12 12' CONC W • '3.22 C1R. '.0' WEST CA1G1 6ASI3.9EN =�P.M • 3 8' CONC SW = 22.23 1 CATCH BASIN RIM = 23,90 9' CONC NW = 22.35 Know what's below. Call before you dig. Dial 811 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlonta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By t 10/27/2017 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Dote By A Mork Dote By / \ STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE UTILITY PLAN 1 LIVED D1! D_c VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Stor Dote Drown Checked By' CRJ Sheet e 04094 . 8-28-17 By SN C2.0 TU(WLA WABWNOTON MINTY MAP N,TA 0 10 20 40 HORIZONTAL DATUM - BASIS OF BEARINGS - NAD 83/91 NORTH 14'37'00' EAST AS MEASURED BETWEEN WSDOT MONUMENTS GP17005-349 AND HC17-6. VERTICAL DATUM - BASIS OF ELEVATIONS - NAVD88 THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THIS SURVEY IS NAVD88 PER WSDOT MONUMENT GP17005-349, BEING A FOUND 3 1/2"BRASS DISK WRH PUNCH IN CONCRETE SIDEWALK CN NORTH 510E OF 5. 17811H ST. AND 1-5 OVERPASS ELEV.=286.51 US FEE' PROCEDURE / NARRATIVE A FIELD TRAVERSE USING A TOPCON PS AND A TCPCON GR-5 SUPPLEMENTED WITH FIELD NOTES. WAS PERFORMED, ESTABUSHING THE ANGULAR, VERTICAL AND DISTANCE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE MONUMENTS, PROPERTY LINES AND IMPROVEMENTS. THE RESULTING DATA MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE STANDARDS FOR LAND BOUNDARY SURVEYS AS SET FORTH IN WAC 332-130-090. DATES OF SURVEYS: FIELD SURVEY BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. CONDUCTED IN FEBRUARY 2017. ALL MONUMENTS SHOWN AS FOUND WERE VISITED AT THAT TIME. TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 262304-9066 CALCULATED AREA: 45,431t SQ. FT (1,043t ACRES) PROPERTY ADDRESS: 17333 50UTHCEN'ER PARKWAY, TUKWILA, WA 98188 FLOOD ZONE INFORMATION: DESIGNATION OF THE FLOOD ZONE :5 SCALED PER FEMA FIRM MAP NUMBER 53033C0959F, PANEL 959 OF 1725 EFFECTIVE MAY 16, 19995 AND DOWNLOADED FROM FEMA MAP SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE (htip://msc.fema.gov) ON FEBRUARY 17, 2017: ZONE X - AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ZONING CLASSIFICATION: TUKWILA URBAN CENTER (TUC) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS LYING WITHIN THE TUKWILA URBAN CENTER ZONE AS SHOWN ON THE CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. SETBACKS ARE DEPENDANT ON USE TYPE, BASIC SETBACKS ARE: FROM 15 FEET SIDE & REAR 10 FEET MAX BLDG HEIGHT: 115 FEET PLEASE CONSULT THE TUKWILA ZONING CODE (CH.18.28) FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR RESTRICTIONS THAT N1AY AFFECT THIS SITE. (NO ZONING REPORT PROVIDED TO CR REVIEWED BY SURVEYOR) PARKING: EXISTING (WITHIN PARCEL BOUNDARY LINES) 24 REGULAR STALLS 2 BARRIER FREE STALLS 26 TOTAL PARKING STALLS SURVEYORS NOTES: 1. UNDERGROUND UTI'_S,ES AND FEATURES DEPICTED HEREON ARE BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATION, MARKINGS. DEVELOPMENT PLANS, AND/OR AVAILABLE RECORD DOCUMENTS ONLY, THE TRUE LOCATION, NATURE AND/OR EXISTENCE OF BELOW GROUND FEATURES, DETECTED OR UNDETECTED, SHOULD BE VERIFIED. 2. ALL DISTANCES ARE IN US FEET 3. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF CURRENT EARTH MOVING WORK, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION OR BUILDING ADDITIONS OBSERVED IN THE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING THE FIELDWORK. 4. THERE WERE NO PROPOSED CHANGES IN STREET RIGHTS -OF -WAY OR RECENT STREET OR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION OBSERVED IN THE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING THE FIELDWORK. 5. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF SITE USE AS A SOLID WASTE DUMP, SUMP OR SANITARY LANDFILL, 6. NO DIRECT ACCESS TO PUBLIC RICHT-OF-WAY 7. ALL MATTERS SHOWN ON RECORDED PLATS SHOWN LEGEND © POWER NRT al TELEPHONE PADLI • WAh4 WILT SRtEE, TUE a�-0LOT LOD O YARD Obit OP WO 53 POWER VETS O- POWER POE WT Mlff o WARM 5[J:4 6. EOM. PUSH BIER. El 09(00N BOX (1835) CO TE1O'MriE VNNOLL (NM ❑ CATCH EARN (CB) O STORM MYRTLE (SOVH) O B]z Y O 9.111LY WANES (AS (ODD) SECTION CORIWR (AS LTD) i6D. STIRA_Y MMPO1 (AS NCIFD) CONCRETE f;T bWAgt --' -- CAW 1111 FENCE ,7 WOOD TINS SWIM SERE2 WHOLE (S9W) = AT FENCE NWT. 5EIER QEMOUT (SSC0) I " ,, b PAN. / HMO Rol CAS METER'CM) i W- WATER MA PNMRMACS GAS AWE 00 1d O WATER VETE (W6 RTE CG`Ai:0381 (FP9) MT MP. ODD) WATER VMRXTE (WARN) WAPJN NEAR ON) SPRN4A 1946:V05 60I (PR) 819911981'MEW (NR) SCR G- fAS VA P.11DW06 -1(1C)- IEIEPIIGE 9M PMNNN83 -P(LC)- POWER Nil PANIMPXS .. 0,fl8CA0 POWW, LAES T EMTOWUI+ TREE 11/9EE OECAXWEB TREE 11/92E ROLE NOT N1 SMBOS MIL AMOR IN 180 0RURO SCALE: 1'-20' -- 1 J GRAVEL J / ALL RIM='2T.9E'1 8' COMC ENE - 20:64' ' BP 1 .601.1 OF 9LLb0Ek. -'" SEWER JIA?'HOLE 8CCIY'f ee'-CONC SE = : 0060) SE 12:41 �0.4l -(pNC SSE - 20.16 T- 1.0'±OLTIH ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY A PORTION OF THE SEY4 OF THE SWYa OF SEC. 26, TWP. 23 NORTH, RGE. 4 EAST, W.M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ' "CATCH BASIN \ W4 = 27.15 P05606 PANEL 12' GONG N - 24.65 / ON WALL END OF EASEMENT REC. NO ]7gt1' t._Z71.20 472772. ' 11004412 1F IHOi80% P MANHOLE A.P.N. -9024 TR5 RS LLC LLC I NOi'O 20 069NT = ' -"' 1 nGN' ,= - U1 2_00" 0' rt.) m.1-Ll>T s:e.. • /� I -,.�., . .'L,1mN1•�- 588'51'40'E 180549= 20' WIDE PSP&L EASEMENT 041129C970 / `20' WIDE PSP&L EASEMENT 8411290970 (ITEM 9) AFFECTS NORTH 7 FEET OF 'HE 12 FOOT JOG 501'081201V iSHRUBBERY r (REM 9) / 12.00' GAS METER ON SLOG STORM MANHOLE 48' RIM 25.26 8' CUP E - 17.98 TOP CAIP. gt:ER - 19. iI O1RU DRIVEWAY EXISTING BUILDING 17377 SOUTHCENTER BLVO. TUKWRA. WA 1G' WATERLINE EASEMENT PER REC. NO. 7703220818 53.1'3 PArNO' STALLS.. �. �ENO MONUMENT IN CASE LEAD 3: TACK AP.RO% C.90' BELOW GRAK AT C/L SOLRHCENT9 Pkr CATCH BASIN RIM = 22.99 6' CONC E = 17,d8 15' 1011)0' EASEMENT PER 6343882 ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY O to w w I1 O w CD w H O 0 1- cc O d CATCH BASIN RIM = 23.34 12' D.1 SW = 21.'0 O MIT= EASEMENT R 6343881 'R 6680(ANRARSY43EWESR CATCH BASIN RIM = 23.26 FULL OF SLUDGE 10' SANRARY SEWER PER 201E0914000620 STORM MANHOLE 84' PoM = 30.17 36' D.I. N - 20.53 36' D,I. WNW = 20.73 12' PVC SW = 21,93 8"PVC S= 25.98 STORM MANHOLE 45" RIM - 30.23 12" CONC SW - 23.28 12" PVC NE = 23.08 4' NC PERT = 26,30 TOP BAFFLE = 23.83 TCP SUMP PUMP - 23.58 STORM MANHOLE 60' RM= 26.60 36' 0.1. W= 18.70 36' D.I. 5E = 18.70 / IXIS810 BUILDING BLOC HT- '17401 SOUIHCENTER 0LVO. 44.1t TUKV4LA, WA A,P.N 262304-9120 WINNERS 2 LLC WATER LIKE PER 89122290659 (CONNECTS TO WATER LOW T400585 T 7203220818) SEWER MANHOLE \ PoN = 24.60 TOP SUMP PUMP = 22.35 4' EVC IERT = 23.08 8' PVC SE - NOT AVAILABLE (BEHND BAFFLE) SEWER MANHOLE RM 25.34 24' CONC N - 15.34 24' CONC. 5 - 14.99 24' CONC. E - 15.14 CRT. 1.0' UST 36.0 SEVIER MANHOLE RIM = 23.72 2i CONC N = 13.02 24" CONC S = 13.12 12' CONC 1V = 13.22 CTR. 1.0' WEST TPOB 00 atm 9. 20' WIDE PSP&L EASEMENT 8411290970 (THENCE SWLY 1'0'. 00600E WIT 103 TO A POWER VAULT.) "ATOLL BASIN RIM = 23.88 8" CONC SW - 22.23 MONUMENT IN CASE 00 TACK APPRO% d0' BELOW GRADE AT PI I04 C/L SOLD ICENTER PKWY TCH BASIN 1M = 23.90 GONG IW/ = 22.35 C')132017 S.180TH ST. LFOUND MONUMENT IN CASE BRASS IN LEAD DOWN 0.75 (EASTERLY OF TWO) CHICK-FIL-A INC 15635 ALTON PARKWAY SUITE 350 2. CO CO IRVINE, CA 0 O LTT W F^ N 1V CC 1Z OT TO 3 n v n ^ N 4E N Z N N OD tf. E ' T 117--00t, LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL A T UKWILA %%No — C3�. 0101 BASH 4 - 27.15 12- CONE N = 24.85 N. P P12 LC LRG 121 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND GSF 5,134 S.F. \\ \. \ \ 1. /- STORM 4ANH018 84' SECTION 26, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON STUN/ LIAIHGLE 4E' 8I4 = 25.26 8' C4PL - 17.98 TOP CUP 1AER = '9.11 i2V C'XIC W12.98 11fi119T SAND 2 4F. --1i 1s-2O' 0 10' 20' 40' LEGEND STA E CF WASH NGTO E' L E LAN TECT JEFF M. VARLET CERTFICAIE N.. 774 EXPIRCS 8-25-2017 �• --_--�. EXISTING LAWN TO REMAIN. RETURN TO PRE-CONSTRUCI10N CONDITION AFTER LANDSCAPING 15 INSTALLED. PROAQ IRPoGATDN. PLANT SCHEDULE SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAMES SIZE CONDITION SPACING QUANTITY REMARKS TRE-S' ACED TRUNCATUM x A PUTAN0DE5 / 'WARRENS RED' PACIFIC SUNSET MAPLE 2.5' CAL. AS SHOWN 7 NURSERY GROWN `�. 8 k B FFOR STRE TREE USE. CLEDRSIA TRMCWTHOS INTERNS 'SHADEWSTER' 'SRMDE4ASTER' 25 CAL A5 SHOWN 12 NURSERY GOWN o /HONEILOCUST U.MUS PARWFp.N 'EMER I' / AMENA CLASSIC ELM B k 8 S 2.CAL 8 & B AS SHOWN 8 FOR STREET TREE USE, BRANCHED AT NURSERY GROWN FOR STREET TREE USE, BRANCHED AT 5' PER 18.28.240.8.1.d. CALPER 5 MEASURED 6' A80VE FINISH GRADE SHRUBS: ® CNA9AGROSTS ACUTFLORA 'KART. FORESTER' / 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 202 FULL AND BUSHY IGARL FORESTER FEATHER REED GRASS n 0 PENNSETUM ALOPECURODES iW8ELN' / 18' HEIGHT 36' O.C. 29 FULL AND BUSHY �'/ GRASS 1J"1 '1100N © yy /// NBNFOUNTAIN N41 004ESTICA BAY / MOON BAY HEAVENLY BV/B00 18' HEIGHT 60' 0.C. 76 FULL AND BUSHY Q LAVANDU1A ANGUSTFOUA 'HDCOTE BLUE' / 18' NEICNT 36' 0.C. 124 FULL MA BUSHY ENGLISH LAVENDER ® PHORMAM TEWU) tEON' / 18' HEIGHT 48' 0.C. 53 FULL AID BUSHY NEW ZEALMID FL/Qt (9 HEUCTOTRCHOH 501180RWIENS 'SAPPHIRE' / BLUE OAT GRASS G 3 18' HD080 36' 0.C. 102 FuLL All)BU"1TY ® UISCAITHLS SINEN515 'LR1IE MISS' / 18' HEIGHT 36- O.C. 91 . FULL AND BUSHY MAIDEN GRASS D J F07HERGLLLA x WTERMEDIA 'BLUE SHADOW / 18' HEIGHT 60' O.C. 10 FULL AND BUSHY DWARF WITCH ALDER OS BER400LEAiBERS RGII 'CONCORDE' / BMBERRY Mr ' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 41 FULL AND BUSHY ® CARES TESTACEA / 7 COPPER SEDGE I, 18' HEIGHT 36' 0.C. 178 FULL AND BUSHY MULCH. HATCH NOT SHOWN 3-4' DEPTH OF 2' ONAETER WASHED COBBLE IN ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS. TAPER MULCH DOWN 70 BASE OF PLANTS. DO NOT COVER STEMS 0R TRUNKS OF PUHTS WITH ROCK MULCH \ SHOVEL CUT LAWN/LANDSCAPE BED TRANSITION SOILS MUST BE PREPARED FOR PLANTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH BMP T5.13 "POST CONSTRUCTION SOIL QUALITY AND DEPTH" FROM THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL STRUCTURAL SOILS (CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRODUCT OR SIMILAR) MUST BE USED TO A PREFERRED DEPTH OF 36 INCHES TO PROMOTE TREE ROOT GROWTH. MINIMUM SOIL VOLUMES FOR TREE ROOTS SHALL BE 750 CUBIC FEET PER TREE. SEE SHEET 1.2 FOR DETAILS. 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By 10/27/2012 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Dote By A Mork Dote By A Seol STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER /�l iT�C'lI�FX C1 ;''t1:Y CUP r).r6! ,d,K.t l7G�Ii C ER PKWY !A PE ?�L� , 1 • 16-105 i=I cl+ l .04094 • 6-2-17 G ` f 16) I.,s.Yx. ' JMV R:CE:`.' 7 I; V 11 2017 a.'.., Sheet 1.0 of 5 10/27/2017 3:40 PM LANDSCAPE PLANTING NOTES AND MATERIALS SCOPE OF WORK FURNISH ALL MATERIALS, LABOR, EQUIPMENT AND RELATED ITEMS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH TOPSOIL, TREATMENT AND PREPARATION OF SOIL, FINISH GRADING, PLACEMENT OF SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIALS, FERTILIZER, STAKING, MULCH, CLEAN-UP, DEBRIS REMOVAL, AND 90-DAY MAINTENANCE. QUALIFICATIONS: LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO BE SKILLED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE IN THE FIELD OF WORK AND HAVE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) YEAR'S EXPERIENCE INSTALLING SIMILAR WORK, CONTRACTOR TO BE LICENSED TO PERFORM THE WORK SPECIFIED WITHIN THE PRESIDING JURISDICTION. J08 CONDITIONS: IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THE SITE AND REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE OWNER DR THE OWN_R 5 REPRESENTATIVES. ALL PLANT MATERIAL AND FINISH GRADES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE OWNER, PROTECTION: SAVE AND PROTECT ALL EXISTING PLANTINGS SHOWN TO REMAIN. DO NOT PLANT UNTIL OTHER CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS WHICH CONFLICT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. IF AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS TO BE INSTALLED DO NOT PLANT UNTIL TILE SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSTALLED, TESTED, AND APPROVED BY THE OWNER. HANDLE PLANTS WITH CARE - DO NOT DAMAGE OR BREAK ROOT SYSTEM, BARK. OR BRANCHES. REPAIR AND/OR REPLACE ITEMS DAMAGED AS A RESULT OF WORK, OR WORK NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AS DIRECTED BY OWNER AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. REPAIR OF EXISTING PLANTINGS: DURING THE COURSE OF WORK, REPAIR ALL EXISTING PLANTING AREAS BY PRUNING DEAD GROWTH. RE-ESTABLISHING FINISH GRADE AND RE -MULCHING TO SPECIFIED DEPTH. REPAIR OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM: DURING THE COURSE OF WORK. REPAIR ANY DAMAGE TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO MATCH CONDITIONS PRIOR TO THE DAMAGE. GUARANTEE: GUARANTEE ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE JOB BY OWNER. 90-DAY MAINTENANCE: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE OWNER WITH A SCOPE OF WORK AT TIME OF INITIAL PROJECT BID TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MA. NTENANCE FOR 90 DAYS FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF PROJECT (ACCEPTANCE) OF FACILITY BY OWNER. WORK TO INCLUDE MAINTENANCE AS DESCRIBED BELOW, IN PLANTING AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE. SUBMITTALS: SUBMIT FIVE (5) CONIES THE FOLLOWING TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY WORK: A) DOCUMENTATION THAT ALL PUNT MATERIAL HAS BEEN ORDERED. B) TOPSOIL ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS. C) TREE STAKNG AND GUYING MATERIALS. D) ONE (1) OUART SIZE OF TOPSOIL AND MULCH. E) PLANTING SCHEDULE INCLUDING DATES AND TIMES. F) MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ONE (1) FULL YEAR. MATERIALS: PLANT MATERIALS: PLANT MATERIALS TO BE GRADE NO. 1, SIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH (AAN) AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK (ANSI Z60.1-2004). PRUNE PLANTS RECE'VED FROM THE NURSERY ONLY UPON AUTHORIZATION BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. '$ & 8" INDICATES BALLED AND BURLAPPEO: "CONT.' INDICATES CONTAINER: "BR" INDICATES BARE ROOT: 'GAL" INDICATES GALLON. A) SPECIFIED PLANT CANOPY SIZE OR CALIPER IS THE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE CONTAINER OR BALL SIZE AND ESTABLISHES MINIMUM PST CONDITION TO BE PROVIDED. B) DUALITY: PLANT MATERIAL TO COMPLY WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS FOR DISEASE INSPECTION, PLANTS TO BE FULLY LIVE, VIGOROUS, WELL FORMED. WITH WELL DEVELOPED FIBROUS ROOT SYSTEMS. ROOT BALLS OF PLANTS TO BE SOLID AND FIRMLY HELD TOGETHER, SECURELY CONTAINED AND PROTECTED FROM INJURY AND OESICCATION. PLANTS DETERMINED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO HAVE BEEN DAMAGED; HAVE DEFORMITIES OF STEM, BRANCHES, OR ROOTS: LACK SYMMETRY. HAVE MULTIPLE LEADERS OR •Y" CROTCHES LESS THAN 30 DEGREES IN TREES, OR DO NOT MEET SIZE OR ANSI STANDARDS WILL BE REJECTED. PLANT MATERIAL TO BE FROM A SINGLE NURSERY SOURCE FOR EACH SPECIFIED SPECIES/HYBRID. NURSERY SOURCES TO BE THOSE LOCATED IN THE SAME REGION AS THE JOB SITE. C) SUBSTITUTK)N: NO SUBSTITUTION OF PLANT MATERIAL, SPECIES OR VARIETY, WILL BE PERMITTED UNLESS WRITTEN EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER FROM TWO QUALIFIED PLANT BROKERAGE OFTICES. SUBSTITUTIONS WHICH ARE PERMITTED TO BE IN WRITING FROM THE OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THE SPECIFIED S2E. SPECIES AND NEAREST VARIETY, AS APPROVED. TO BE FURNISHED. SUBSTITUTIONS MAY REQUIRE SUBMITTAL TO REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN TO CITY FOR APPROVAL. 0) LABEL AT LEAST ONE (1) TREE. SHRUB, AND GROUNDCOVER OF EACH VARIETY WITH A SECURELY ATTACHED WATERPROOF TAG BEARING LEGIBLE DESIGNATION OF BOTANICAL AND COMMON NAMES. E) DELNER PLANT MATERIAL AFTER PREPARATION OF PLANTING AREAS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND PLANT IMMEDIATELY. IF PLANTING IS DELAYED MORE THAN SIX (6) HOURS AFTER DELIVERY. SET MATERIAL IN SHADE, PROTECT FOR WEATHER AND MECHANICAL DAMAGE, AND KEEP ROOT BALLS MOST BY COVERING WITH MULCH, BURLAP OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE MEANS OF RETAINING MOISTURE. SOIL PREPARATION: TOPSOIL, AMENDMENT, AND BACKFILL, ARE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LANbSCAPE AREAS, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE ON THE PLANS. SOIL AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZER NOTED BELOW ARE TO BE USED FOR BID PRICE BA5:5 ONLY. SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS AND FERTILIZERS WILL BE MADE AFTER SOIL SAMPLES ARE LABORATORY TESTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. PROVIDE CHANCE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL OR REDUCTION OF MATERIALS REQUIRED OR NOT REQUIRED BY THE SOILS REPORT. SOIL FERTILITY AND AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY ANALYSIS: AFTER ROUGH GRADING AND PRIOR TO SOIL PREPARATION, CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN TWO REPRESENTATIVE SOIL SAMPLES, FROM LOCATIONS AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. TO NORTHERN LIGHTS ANALYTICAL & CONSULTING INC. RAVENSDALE WA, TEL. 253-653-5770 CR, EQUNALENT TESTING LABORATORY, FOR TEST 1A05-2. SUBMIT RESULTS TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. TESTS TO INCLUDE FERTILITY AND SUITABILITY ANALYSIS WITH WRITTEN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOIL AMENDMENT, FERTILIZER, CONDITIONERS, APPLICATION RATES. AND POST -CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM. TESTS TO BE CONTRACTED WITH AND PAID FOR 0Y THE CONTRACTOR, A) TOPSOIL: CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING ALL TOPSOIL AND FOR DETERMINING THE VOLUME OF TOPSOIL REQUIRED PER THE INFORMATION ON PLANS AND NOTED HERE -IN. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY NECESSARY WEED CONTROL RESULTING FROM CONTAMINATED CFF SITE SOURCES. B) TOPSOIL TO CONSIST OF WINTER MIX AS PRODUCED AND REMIXED BY PACIFIC TOPSOILS, INC. WINTER MIX TO CONSIST OF 1/3 BY VOLUME SANDY LOAM, 1/3 9Y VOLUME COMPOSTED GARDEN MULCH, AND 1/3 BY VOLUME COARSE WASHED SAND OR EQUIVALENT. AT MINIMUM, TOPSOIL PRODUCTS BROUGHT ON SITE TO CONTAIN AMENDMENTS AS LISTED IN "C". C) TOPSO:I TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS AS NECESSARY: THE FOLLOWING AMOUNT PER 1.000 SQUARE FEET: 1, 5-CUBIC YARDS ORGANIC COMPOST. COMPOST TO BE FREE OR NON -FARM ANIMAL SOURCES, NOR TO BE FROM SOURCES CONTAINING REDWOOD OF CEDAR PRODUCTS, 2, 30-POUNDS NITRCFORM (38-0-C) 3. 5-POUNDS AMMONIUM SULFATE 4. 40-POUNDS CALCIUM CARBONATE LIMESTONE 5. 40-POUNDS DOLOMITE LIMESTONE 6. 5-DUNES BORON (AS BORAX) ALL AMENDMENTS TO BE THOROUGHLY MIXED PRIOR TO INCORPORATION INTO TOPSOIL. LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHICK -FM -A TUKWILA SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON C) PLANTING BACKFILL FOR ALL TREES. SHRUBS, AND GROUNOCOVERS: 1. 0.6-CUBIC YARDS PER VOLUME TOPSOIL 2. 0.4-CUBIC YARDS ORGANIC COMPOST. 3. 3-POUNDS NITROFORM (38-0-0) 4. 1-POUNDS AMMONIUM SULFATE 5. 2-POUNDS CALCIUM CARBONATE LIMESTONE 6. 2-POUNDS DOLOMITE LIMESTONE E) TOPSOIL PREPARATION AND INSTALLATION: 1. VERIFY SUBGRADES TO -7 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS AND -18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS BELOW RNi5H ELEVATION, OR AS INDICATED ON PLANS. THIS ACCOMMODATES, TOPSOIL. AMENDMENTS. AND MULCH. 2. ERADICATE ANY SURFACE VEGETATION ROOTED IN THE SUB -GRADE PRIOR TO SUB -GRADE PREPARATION. 3. THOROUGHLY SCARIFY AND RIP ALL LANDSCAPE SUB -GRADES WHICH HAVE BECOME COMPACTED TO A DEPTH OF 12 INCHES WITH MULTIPLE PASSES. 90 DEGREES TO EACH OTHER. SCARIFY AREAS INACCESSIBLE TO MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT AND AROUND EXISTING PLANTINGS NOTED TO REMAIN WITH HAND TOOLS. 4. REMOVE SOIL LUMPS. ROCK. VEGETATION AND/OR DEBRIS LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM ALL SUB -GRADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF SPECIFIED TOPSOIL. 5. REMOVE ANY ASPHALT EXTENDING BEYOND 6 INCHES FROM CURBS INTO ADJACENT LANDSCAPE AREAS. 6, PARKING LOT PLANTER ISLANDS TO BE OVER EXCAVATED BY BACKHOE. REMOVF PAVING WASTE, GRAVEL BASE MATERIAL AND UNDERLYING SUBSOIL TO 18 INCHES BELOW TOP OF PAVING. SCARIFY AND OVER EXCAVATE PLANT PIT BOTTOM 12 INCHES TO MINIMIZE STRUCTURAL COMPACTION, F) TOPSOIL PLACEMENT: 1. PROVIDE A TOTAL FINISH COURSE OF 4 INCHES OF TOPSOIL FOR LANDSCAPE AREAS AND 18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS. Z. IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS, PLACE 2 INCHES (6 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS) OF TOPSOIL MIX WITH AMENDMENTS OVER THE PREPARED SUB -GRADE AND THOROUGHLY ROTOTILL WITH MULTIPLE PASSES INTO THE TOP 6 INCHES OF SUB -GRADE FOR A TOTAL DEPTH OF 8 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS (12 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS). PUCE AN ADDITIONAL 2 INCH LIFT OF TOPSOIL, IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS AND A MINIMUM 12 INCH LIFT IN ALL PARKING LOT ISLANDS, FOR THE FINAL TOPSOIL DEPTH OF 4 INCHES IN LANDSCAPE AREAS AND 18/24 INCHES IN PARKING LOT ISLANDS. 3. PLACE ADDITIONAL TOPSOIL AND SOL MIX AS REQUIRED TO MEET FINISH ELEVATIONS. MULCH (TOPDRESSINC): 2"-4" DIAMETER WASHED COBBLE, ROUNDED AND NOT ANGULAR HERBICIDE: HERBICIDE IS NOT RECOMMENDED ION 1HE FIHSI YEAR AFTER INSTALLATION. ANTI -DESICCANT: "WILT -PROOF,' 48 HOURS PRIOR TO SH'.PMENT TO SITE FROM JUNE 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER. THOROUGHLY ROOT WATER PLANTS PRIOR TO DELIVERY. PUNT MATERIAL DELIVERED TO SITE TO BE KEPT CONT':NUALLY MOIST THROUGH INSTALLATION. EXECUTION: CONTAMINANTS: VERIFY THAT ALL SOIL CONTAMINANTS (E.G.. PAINT, SEALANTS, SOLVENTS. OILS. GREASES, CONCRETE/ASPHALT SPOILS, ETC.) HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORY REMOVED FROM ALL PLANTING AREAS. 00 NOT BEGIN WORK UNTIL UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED. FINISH GRADES: FINE GRADE AND REMOVE ROCKS, DEBRIS. AND FOREIGN OBJECTS OVER 2 INCHES DIAMETER FROM TOP SURFACE OF PREPARED LANDSCAPE AREAS. FINISH ELEVATIONS TO BE DEFINED AS 2 INCHES BELOW CURBS, WALKS AND/OR OTHER ADJACENT HARDSCAPE FOR ALL PLANTING BED AREAS AND 1-INCH BELOW CURBS. WALKS AND/OR OTHER ADJACENT HAROSCAPE FOR ALL LAWN AREAS. FINISH GRADE REFER TO GRADES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF MULCH OR LAWN. ALL FINISH GRADES TO BE SMOOTH EVEN GRADES, LIGHTLY COMPACTED, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND DETAILED. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. SITE CIVIL DRAWINGS IDENTIFY FINAL ELEVATIONS. MOISTEN PREPARED AREAS BEFORE PLANTING IF SOIL IS DRY. WATER THOROUGHLY AND ALLOW SURFACE TO DRY BEFORE PLANTING. DO NOT CREATE MUDDY SOIL. TREES AND SHRUBS: ARRANGE TREES AND SHRUBS ON SITE IN PROPOSED LOCATIONS PER DRAWINGS. EXCAVATE PIT, PLANT AND STAKE OR GUY, AS CALLED OUT AND DETAILED. ALL TREES, SHRU65, AND SUPPORTS TO STAND VERTICAL. BACKFILL SHALL BE PIT SPOILS. SETTLE BACKFILL USING WATER ONLY. NO MECHANICAL COMPACTION. GROUNDCOVERS: EXCAVATE PITS TO A MINIMUM OF 3 INCHES BELOW, AND TWICE THE ROOT BALL DIAMETER. WATER THOROUGHLY AND TAKE CARE TO ENSURE THAT ROOT CROWN IS AT PROPER GRADE, AS DETAILED. MULCH: MULCH ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS NOT COVERED BY LAWN AND/OR SEED. APPLY SUFFICIENT QUANTITY TO PROVIDE A 3-4-INCH DEPTH. UTILITY CLEARANCES: FIELD ADJUST PLANT LOCATIONS FOR 8-FOOT SEPARATION OF TREES/SHRUBS AND 2-FOOT SEPARATION FOR GROUNDCOVER FROM FIRE HYDRANTS AND UTILITY VAULTS. CLEANUP AND PROTECTION: DURING LANDSCAPE WORK, KEEP ALL PAVEMENT CLEAN AND WORK AREAS IN AN ORDERLY CONDITION. PROTECT LANDSCAPE WORK AND MATERIALS FROM DAMAGE DUE TO 1ANOSCAPE OPERATIONS AND TRESPASSERS. MAINTAIN PROTECTION DUPING INSTALLATION AND MANTENANCE PERIOD. TREAT, REPAIR, OR REPUAE DAMAGE LANDSCAPE WORK A3 DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. PLANTING MAINTENANCE: PROVIDE FULL MAINTENANCE 8Y SKILLED EMPLOYEES OF LANDSCAPE INSTALLERS. CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PLANTINGS THROUGH COMPLETED INSTALLATION, AND UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. PLANTING MAINTENANCE TO INCLUDE WATERING, WEED'NG, CULTIVATING, TIGHTENING AND REPAIRING OF TREE GUYS, RESETTING PLANTS TO PROPER GRADES OR POSITION, RE-ESTABLISHING SETTLED GRADES: AND MOWING LAWNS WEEKLY AFTER LAWN ESTABLISHMENT. HERBICIDE IS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR ONE YEAR FOLLOWING LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION. INCLUDED IS REPLACEMENT OF DEAD PLANTS AND PLANTS SHOWING LOSS OF 40 PERCENT OR MORE OF CANOPY. IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE: THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE MAINTAINED INCLUDING ADJUSTMENTS FOR BALANCED WATER DISTRIBUTION AND PRECIPITATION. FAILED OR MALFUNCTIONING IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT SHALL BE REPLACED AND/OR CORRECTED. PLANTING AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE TO INCLUDE THOSE OPERATIONS NECESSARY TO THE PROPER GROWTH AND SURVIVAL OF ALL PLAINT MATERIALS. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THIS WORK IN ADDITION TO SPECIFIC WARRANTY/GUARANTEES. SHRUB - PRUNE AS DIRECTED 8Y LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 2" 4" ROCK MULCH LAYER. HOLD MULCH BACK FROM STEM 4" SAUCER FOR WATERING SCARIFY RCOTBALL ON CONTAINER MATERIAL. REMOVE TOP I/O OF BURLAP ON B&B MATERIAL DUST ROOT BALL WITH ROOT GROWTH HORMONE 3x THE ROOTBALL DIAMETER NOTE: APPLY ADDITIONAL 4 OZ. 8-32-15 FERTILIZER INTO TOP 2" OF PLANTING MIX. PLANT SHRUB HIGH ENOUGH TO ALLOW POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ROOTBALL. ROUGHEN ALL SURFACES OF PIT. CUT AND REMOVE BURLAP FROM R001 BALL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE PRUNE DAMAGED TWIGS AFTER PLANTING PLACE IN VERT. POSITION: DOUBLE LEADERS WILL BE REJECTED NOTE: KEEP RCOTBALL MOIST AND PROTECTED AT ALL TIMES. HOLD CROWN OF ROOTBALL AT OR JUST ABOVE FINISH GRADE. PROTECT TRUNK AND LIMBS FROM MJURY. BACKFILL TO BE SETTLED USING WATER ONLY - NO MECHANICAL COMPACTION. REMOVE ALL WRAP, TIES & CONTAINERS. REGARDLESS OF MATERIAL.. PROTECTIVE WRAPPING DURING SHIPMENT TO SITE AND INSTALLATION REMOVE AT COMPLETION OF PLANTING MULCH, INSTALL PER NOTES THIS SET FINISH GRADE PREPARE PUNT'.NG BED PER SPEC'S; AT MIN., LOOSEN AND MIX 501L TO 18" OR DEPTH OF ROOTBALL AND 2 TIMES BALL DIAMETER SCORES ALLY TNU-8ORK fJURS 9? SOIL AWAY FROM PERIMETER ROOTS SET BALL ON UNDISTURBED BASE OR COMPACTED MOUND UNDER BALL PENETRATION TO SUBBASE 24" MINIMUM DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING/STAKING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 2' 4" ROCK MULCH LAYER FEATHER EXCESS SOIL UNDER MULCH 1" MULCH P.T CROWN 1/2" ABOVE GRADE 1' ABOVE GRADE -I PREPAR ' PLANTIN • BED-' NOTE: REMOVE CONTAINER AND WORK ROOTS FREE OF SOIL. BACKFILL TO BE SETTLED USING WATER ONLY. SEE PLANT LIST FOR PLANT SPACING. GALLON CONTAINER <Ind IF( PUN EDIAFT RO MULCHT)INEB 1 ( PUNTED BEFORE MULCH ) GROUNDCOVER PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE MULCH LAYER 1" MAX. TOP OF CURB TO TOP OF MULCH CURB MULCH AT CURB DETAIL NOT TO SCALE OVER ALL TOPSOIL DEPTH OF 3 FEET BERM HEIGHT 6" SOIL LINE: 3" IN MULCH, I' IN LAWN SUBGRADE -A -- REMOVE EXCESS GRAVEL AND PAVING COARSE TRANSITION FROM TOPSOIL TO SUBSOIL NOTE: OVER EXCAVATE PARKING LOT PLANTERS TO LOOSEN COMPACTED SUBBASE STATE OF WASHINGTO TECT ,4FF M. VARLET CERTIFICATE No. 774 EXPIRES 8-25-2017 TOPSOIL SETTLED (COMPACTED CONDITION) CURB 1-1/2" DRAIN AT LOW POINTS & 10' SPACING MAXIMUM ''2" MAX. LIP GRADING ® PARKING LOT PLANTERS DETAIL PAVING (SEE CIVIL PLANS) NOT TO SCALE FINISH GRADE AT 4:1 SLOPE MAXIMUM 2% SLOPE MINIMUM CURB PER CIVIL DRAWINGS (WALK SIMILAR) 1 MULCH LAYER TOPSOIL AS SPEC:FIED F'NISH GRADE AT SLOPE MAXIMUM 10:1 SLOPE MINIMUM PREPARED SUBGRADE 1" MAX. CLEAR D .LAWN 00801010N MULCH CONDITION (CSIURBEWALK SIMILAR) PLANTER SECTION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE r.- 5200 Buffington Rd. Atianto Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By , \ 10/27/2017 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Dote By A Mork Dote By A Seal STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOU THCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No '16-105 Store •04094 A* Dote :6-2-17 Drown By ' JMV Checked By: JMv E Sheet 11of5 s 1./7--001, LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHI CK FIL A T UKWILA CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® BREAK—OUT ZONE FROM NARROW TREE LAWN TO ADJACENT PROPERTY NSS eRa BY: NARROW TREE LAWN CONCRETE PAVEMENT SIDEWALK FRONT YARD /ly4=ssc;--VARIES EXISTING SIDEWALK ADJACENT (EX. FROM YARD) OUT ZONE: OF EXISTING REPLACED, SOIL BELOW CURB STREET • o ' ^ • • .,,, Zu % s"ij-- ✓y, �' i:✓, — �ISTREET • A , ' • � ', • •. 'PROPERTY �, ,•• •BREAK •JI 3" MULCH �4 • EXISTING TREE LAWN SOIL CURB _ '//r 111111111111M Y�✓ IIIi M• `It •kik, Ant � • ~ ! ' N1 111I) U I7 :,� NARROW TREE LAWN 3.5.-6' 2 SECTIONS PAVEMENT GU -STRUCTURAL .r'-• —F t I PREF 36" > '`i . •r . T,r p •pl, � '"t' taa.t'� •-•'.,^"S !—III—I .....s.N1 • • y-. NOTES: BREAK-OUT ZONES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN TREE LAWN IS LESS THAN 6' WIDE. FOR EACH TREE, TWO 5'x5' SIDEWALK SLABS ARE TO BE REMOVED AND RECONSTRUCTED WITH A BASE OF 24" MIN (36' PREF) CU-STRUCTURAL SOILT6 TO ALLOW TREE ROOTS TO SAFELY GROW UNDER SIDEWALK AND INTO ADJACENT PROPERTY WITHOUT HEAVING SIDEWALK. -III—ICI— I——IIII — , _ —(I I- CU-STRUCTURAL SO:LW PREPARED SUBGRADE TYPICAL TREE PLANTING PIT WITH CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® ALONG SIDEWALK SCALE N.TS DRAWN BY two 24" MIN 36" PREF _J POROUS OPENING AT LEAST 50 SOFT (EX 5'x10' OR 8•x8') VARIES. MIN 8' PREF 15' BUILDING FACE - SIDEWALK -111--111-111=111-1 11=1 A CONTINUOUS CU-STRUCTURAL ENTIRE SIDEWALK GREATLY USABLE�'BY�THE TREES. SOILW BASE UNDER THE INCREASES THE VOLUME OF SOIL m �t� 1 .. . . .4. [� j� Iiir - .11I,:vooi_� _ It-gri--4--zti-ic----- ..... PLANTING SOIL MIX �,a��r' DRAINAGE CU-STRUCTURAL PIPE SOILW 3" THICK MULCH. NO SHREDDED BARK 0R WOOD CHIPS TO LAY AGAINST TRUNK OF TREE PLANTING SOIL MIX CURB ASPHALT PAVEMENT BASE COURSE. CU -STRUCTURAL SOILW DRAINAGE PIPE TO STORM SEWER PREPARED SUBGRADE SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON TYPICAL TREE PLANTING ISLAND IN A PARKING LOT WITH CU—STRUCTURAL SOIL® sue: N.TS DRAWN BY: BRD VARIE PREF 36"I DRAINAGE PIPE TO STORM SYSTEM 3" THICK BARK MULCH. NO SHREDDED BARK OR WOOD CHIPS TO LAY AGAINST TRUNK. SOIL MIX UNDER ROOTBALL SETTLED WITH WATER OR GENTLY TAMPED BEFORE TREE IS PLACED PLANT:NG SOIL MIX AS SPECIFIED POROUS ASPHALT DESIRABLE BASE COARSE (6" TYPICAL) CU-STRUCTURAL SOILW PREPARED SUBGRADE A TYPICAL 36' x 8' PARKING LOT ISLAND WITH 3' DEPTH OF SANDY LOAM SOIL CAN SUPPORT: WITH NO CU-STRUCTURAL SOILS • 2 SMALL TREES (<30' TALL AT MATURITY) WITH 150 CU FT CU-STRUCTURAL SOILW (EX. 36' x 4 75' x 3' 1 • 1 LARGE TREE (30'-50' TALL AT MATURITY) WITH 1215 CU FT CU-STIRUGTURAL S01L'>` (EX. 36' x 12' x 3'1 • 1 VERY LARGE TREE (>50' TALL AT MATURITY) SMALL 1REE5 LARGE TREE PLANTING ISLAND CURB CU-STRUCTURAL SOILW VERY LARGE TREE STATE OF WASHINGT0 E e EI LAN TECT JElF M. VARLET CERTIFICATE Mo. 774 EXPIRES 6-25-2017 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Date By A10/27/2017 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Dote By A Mark Dote By A Seal x O N Q LL STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWLA, WA SHEET TITLE LANDSCAPE NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No •16-105 Store •04094 Dote • 6-2-17 Drown By • JMV Checked By• JMv Sheet 1.2 of 5 10/27/2017 3:40 PM BSNYOER �SOo-C\ S LANDSCAPE and IRRIGATION SET FOR CHI CK FIL A T UKWILA IRRIGATION POINT OF CONNECTION WITH NEW 1" WATER METER MOUNT CONTROLLER ON EXTE•K)R WALL INPUT: 117VAC 1-/-10%, 60 Hz. OUTPUT: 26.5 VAC, 1.5 A. INSTALL I' DIAMETER PVC CONDUIT_ FOR 24V ELECTRICAL WIRING FROM THE CONTROLLER TO LANDSCAPE AREA PAINT CONDUIT__ - TO MATCH BUILDING a-CO MOUNT RAIN SENSOR N WEATHER EXPOSED PORTION OF — EXTERIOR WALL AT 8' - 9' HDGHT. SEWER NANI(.OLE R 28. 12 PYC S = 15. 12 CO`:C - 14_ 12•COIIC 1= 15 P12 LC LRG 121 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND GSF 5,134 S.F. SECTION 26, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON r — -_ \ w `,� 1 ` / \ ` r010RM Ma8H0LE 81' ' . II / TOP CAMP TER - 19.11 7 12' CONC 'W.• t7.38 • ' ,1 I _ w 1 IRRIGATION LEGEND SYMBOL NOZZLE PSI GPM 1'=20' 0 10' 20' 40' 111111,I92II RADIUS ARLEY CERTIFICATE Na. 774 EXPIRES 8-25-2017 HUNTER-60 and 6H H, 0 SERIES 30 0.98. 0.57 6' HUNTER-1000 8-15 P. TH, TT, H, 0 SERIES 35 0.65, 0.48, 0.37, 0.32. 0.16 8' HUNTER-1000 8-15 F. TH, TT, H, 0 SERIES 35 0.65, 0.48, 0.37, 0.32, 0,16 10' HUNTER-1000 8-15 F, TH, TT, H, 0 SERIES 35 0.65, 0.48, 0.37. 0.32. 0.16 12' HUNTER-2000 13-21 F, TO, TT, H. 0 SERIES 30 1.29, 0.95, 0.74, 0.63, 0.33 15' HUNTER E5575, 55530 SERIES • 35 1.41, 0.65 5'x30' 5'x15' • SPRAY IRRIGATION: HUNTER ICV 101/151G REMOTE CONTROL VALVE, IN VALVE BOX, ONE VALVE PER BOX HUNTER SOLAR SYNC WERE RAIN SENSOR COMBO HUNTER PRO-C CONTROLLER 3 TO 15 STATIONS, (HARDWIRE CONNECTION); PROVIDE GROUND AND BATTERIES PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS P•O'C' 3m B*ALCK6LOW50E5TER 1' DOUBLE CHECK VALVE (STATE APPROVED); TEST AND CERTIFICATION BY LICENSED VALKINS 850 - BALL VALVE. SIZE TO MATCH PIPE CARSON INDUSTRIES /1730 (TWO AT P.O.C.) GRADE LEVEL VAULT WITH BOLT LOCK Le PLASTIC BALL VALVE, MATCH LINE SIZE. IN VALVE BOX C) HUNTER HO-33DLRC 3/4' QUICK COUPLING VALVE, 9N VALVE 80X, PROVIDE TWO KEYS AND SWIVELS MMNLINE - SCH 40 PVC (18' COVER); S7ZF PER P1AN, 2' SIZE MINIMUM LATERAL - SCH 40 PVC (12' COVER); SIZE PER PLAN, 3/4' SIZE MINIMUM SLEEVE - CIA55 200; 24' MINIMUM COVER AT VEHICLE CROSSINGS AND 18' MINIMUM COVER IN LANDSCAPE AREAS, 6' SIZE IRRIGATION SHOWN DIAGRAMATICALLY FOR PLAN CLARITY. COMMON TRENCH AND PLACE EOU6MdENT 64 LANDSCAPE; MANIFOLD GROUPED VALVES IN ADJACENT SHRUB AREAS WHERE FEASIBLE. SCH 40 PIPE SONG CHART PIPE SIZE FLOW GPM 3/4* 1-8 i' 8.1-13 1 1/4' 13.1-23 1 1/2' 23.1-32 32.1-53 2 1/2' 53.1-74 GPM (MAX.) 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgic), 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By A10/27/2017 JC REVISIONS PER CITY COMM. Mork Dote By Mork Dote By Seol STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKW TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE IRRIGATION PLAN VERSION - ISSUE DATE: Job No Store Dote -16-105 • 04094 . 6-2-17 Drown By • JMv Checked By: JMV Sheet 2.Oof5 a. L/ 7 -ao241 TRENCH CONDITION FINISH GRADE PAVING SEE CIVIL PLANS COMPACTED BACKFILL AT 90% DENSITY (TOPSOIL) AT 95% DENSITY (STRUCTURAL) SLEEVE(S) PVC LATERAL PVC MAINLINE VALVE WIRING ALT. WIRE SLEEVE PIPE BED MATERIAL TO BE CLEAN AND FREE OF ROCK LARGER THAN 1/2" PVC MAINLINE/LATERAL SLEEVE CONDITION NOTE: DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM CLEARANCES. ALL IRRIGATION SLEEVING TRENCH BACKFILL MATERIAL TO BE CLASS "B" OR BETTER (MAX. OF 10% PASSING NO 40 SCREEN) AND BE COMPACTED TO MIN. 95% OPTIMUM DENSITY PER ASTM D-1557-70 (MODIFIED PROCTOR) SLEEVE/TRENCHING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION NOTES 1. GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE: A) INSTALLATION OF 110V ELECTRICAL SERVICE FROM ELECTRICAL SOURCE TO AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER. INCLUDING WIRE HOOK-UP INTO MOUNTED CONTROLLER. IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR WILL MOUNT CONTROLLER PER DESIGN AND COORDINATE W'TH GENERAL CONTRACTOR. B) INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION/SERVICE METER AND STUB TO IRRIGATION POINT OF CONNECTION, PER UTILITY PLAN(S), UNLESS AN EXISTING METER IS USED. PROVIDE STANDARD THREADED STUB -OUT 'WITH THREADED CAP ON DISCHARGE SIDE OF METER. STUB -OUT TO BE INSTALLED APPROXIMATELY 18 INCHES BELOW FINISH GRADE. C) VERIFICATION OF STATIC WATER PRESSURE AT POINT -OF -CONNECTION (P.O.C.) CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER AND BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.. OF ANY VARIATION IN STATIC PRESSURE OVER 5 PSI GREATER/LESS THAN DESIGN PRESSURE. D) INSTALLATION CF SLEEVING. 2. PROVIDE ALL LABOR. MATERIALS, TRANSPORTATION, AND SERJCES NECESSARY TO FURNISH AND INSTALL A COMPLETE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS AND/OR NOTES. PROVIDE A ONE (1) YEAR WARRANTY/GUARANTEE FROM FINAL ACCEPTANCE AGAINST ALL DEFECTS IN MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT. AND WORKMANSHIP. 3. COORDINATE IRRIGATION INSTALLATION WITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. OWNER, ARCHITECT, AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR TO TEST AVAILABLE WATER PRESSURE PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK. PROVIDE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WITH WRITTEN PSI RESULTS. 5. ALL WORK PER LOCAL CODE. INSTALLATION PER MANUFACTURER'S WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS. 6. CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN AND PAY FCR ALL PERMITS, FEES, AND REQUIRED CITY INSPECTIONS. 7. SUBMITTALS: A) SUBMIT FIVE (5) COPIES OF EACH ITEM LISTED BELOW FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL, B) PRODUCT DATA: FOR EACH TYPE OF PRODUCT INDICATED, C) CONTROL WIRING PATH DIAGRAM, 0) "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS. E) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUALS. 8. PROVIDE AND KEEP UP TO DATE A COMPLETE "AS -BUILT" RECORD SET OF PRINTS WHICH ARE TO BE CORRECTED DAILY AND SHOW EVERY CHANGE FROM THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS AND NOTES AND EXACT 'AS -BUILT" LOCATIONS, SIZES AND KIND OF EQUIPMENT. THIS SET OF DRAWINGS. ARE TO BE KEPT ON SITE AND ARE TO BE USED ONLY AS THE RECORD SET. ALL WORK IS TO BE NEAT AND LEGIBLE ANNOTATIONS THEREON DAILY AS THE WORK PROCEEDS. SHOWING WORK AS ACTUALLY INSTALLED. DIMENSION FORM TWO (2) PERMANENT POINTS OF REFERENCE. BUILDING CORNERS. WALKS. OR ROAD INTERSECTIONS, ETC., THE LOCATION OF THE FOLLOWING: A) 13) C) 0) E) CONNECTION TO WATER LINES (P.O.C.), CONNECTIONS TO ELECTR CAL POWER, GATE VALVE, OUICK COUPLERS, AND REMOTE CONTROL VALVE. ROUTING OF MAINLINE (DIMENSION MAXIMUM 100' ALONG ROUTING), ROUTING OF CONTROL WIRING. F) OTHER RELATED EQUIPMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 9. PREPARE AND PROVIDE PRIOR TO COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. A THREE RING BINDER CONTAINING THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: A) INDEX SHEET STATING CONTRACTOR'S ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NUMBER. FAX, E-MAIL AND A, LIST OF EQUIPMENT WITH NAME AND ADDRESS CF LOCAL MANUFACTURER'S REPRESENTATIVES. 8) CATALOG AND PARTS SHEETS ON EVERY MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT INSTALLED UNDER THIS. CONTRACT, C) GUARANTEE STATEMENT, D) COMPLETE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE '.NSTRUCTIONS ON ALL MAJOR EQUIPMENT. E) CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FROM THE PROJECT. F) COMPLETE TROUBLE -SHOOTING GUIDE TO COMMON IRRIGATION PROBLEMS. G) WINTERIZATION AND SPRING START-UP PROCEDURES, H) CHART OF APPROXIMATE WATERING TIMES FOR SPRING. SUMMER, AND FALL. I) A COPY OF THE "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND CONTROLLER CHART. PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS LANDSCAPE and aiRIGATION SET FOR CHICK-FIL A TUKWILA SECTION 28, TWP. 23 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF TUKWILA, KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON MOUNTING BRACKET RAIN SENSOR SECURE PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS NOTE: MOUNT ON WEATHER EXPOSED WALL B' ABOVE GRADE RAIN SENSOR DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 10. ALL VALVES TO BE PLACED IN "CARSON" GRADE LEVEL BOXES WITH BOLT -LOCK LIDS (OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT). SET BOXES 2 INCHES HIGHER THAN FINISH GRADE IN MULCH AREAS ANC FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE IN LAWN AREAS. JUMBO BOX FOR CHECK VALVE. 10` ROUND BOX FOR GATE/QUICK COUPLER/WIRE SPLICES, AND 12" STANDARD FOR CONTROL VALVES. PROVIDE BOX EXTENSIONS AS REQUIRED. 11. MAINLINE PIPE TO BE BURIED 18 INCHES. LATERALS 12 INCHES. AND SLEEVES 24" INCHES BELOW FINISH GRADE. NO ROCK OR DEBRIS TO BE BACKFILLEO OVER PIPE. 12 HEAD AND LINE POSITIONING IS DIAGRAMMATIC ON PLAN. ADJUST IN FIELD AS NECESSARY FOR 100 PERCENT COVERAGE. VALVES TO BE POSITIONED ADJACENT TO PAVEMENT/CURBS, IN SHRUB BEDS 'WHERE POSSIBLE. 13 FAMILIARIZE OWNERS FACILITY OPERATOR WITH IRRIGATION SYSTEM FUNCTION. CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING, SYSTEM OPERATON AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. 14. SPRINKLERS ON RISERS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED UNLESS NOTED ON PLANS. 15. RADIUS REDUCTION TO BE MADE BY USE OF PRESSURE ADJUSTMENT, SCREENS. AND/OR ALTERNATE NOZZLES. IN -NOZZLE ADJUSTMENT IS LIMITED TO 10 PERCENT FOR SPRAY HEADS AND PER MANUFACTURER'S LIMITS FOR OTHER SPRINKLERS. SPRINKLER SPACING NOT EXCEED 60% OF THE DIAMETER OF THE PUBLISHED DATA. 15. ALL CONTROL WIRE SPLICES TO BE MADE AT VALVE BOXES WITH WATER TIGHT ELECTRICAL SPLICES, 3M, SCOTT'S LOCK SEAL TACK 3576-78, OR EQUIVALENT. 17. EACH VALVE BOX TO CONTAIN A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) SPARE ORANGE CONTROL 'WIRES FOR JACKETED WIRE. ROUTE SPARE WIRES FROM THE CONTROLLER TO THE LAST VALVE OF EACH MAINLINE BRANCH. COMMON WIRE TO BE WHITE. SINGLE STRAND WIRE TO BE A MINIMUM OF 14 GAUGE. 18. ALL ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT TO BE U.L. TESTED ANC APPROVED, AND BEAR THE U.L. LABEL. 19. CROSS CONNECTION PROTECTION INSPECTION REQUIRED. THE BACKFLOW DEVICE TO BE TESTED UPON THE ORIGINAL INSTALLATION. THE TESTING TO BE PERFORMED BY A PERSON HOLDING A CURRENT CERTIFICATE AS A GACKFLOW TESTER. THE TEST REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE LOCAL WATER DISTRICT, OR PURVEYOR. AND OWNER WITH A COPY TO BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. CONTRACTOR TO INCLUDE TESTING IN THE SCOPE OF WORK. OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANNUAL INSPECTIONS AFTER THE INTIAL INSPECTION. 20. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SYSTEM WINTERIZATION/SPRING SERVICE WHEN INSTALLATION HAS BEEN COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS OF NOVEMBER 1 FOR WINTERIZATION, OR MAY 15 FUR SPRING SERVICE. SERVICE TO BE PERFORMED AS NEAR AS PRACTICAL TO THE ABOVE DATES, OR AS FREEZE/PRECIPITATION CONDITIONS DETERMINE SERVICE NEED. 21. IRRIGATION SCHEDULING: THE IRRIGATION CONTROLLER CONTAINS A WATER BUDGET FEATURE. PER ODIC (WEEKLY) ADJUSTMENT OF THE WATER SCHEDULE IS INTENDED TO BE MADE VIA BUDGET ADJUSTMENT. RE -ADJUST WATERING DAYS AT 100 PERCENT BUDGET WHEN ADJUSTMENT EXCEEDS 30%. SET CONTROLLER FOR HIGHEST ETo WATER SCHEDULE. BASED ON PUBLISHED LOCAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA. SYSTEM HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR 50 TC 80 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION UNIFORMITY. LAWN ZONES SHOULD BE SCHEDULED FOR 100 PERCENT REPLACEMENT FACTOR ON A TYPICAL MINIMUM 3-DAY CYCLE. SHRUB ZONES SHOULD BE PROGRAMMED AT 40 TO 70 PERCENT OF THE MONTHLY LAWN WATER REQUIREMENT ON A ONCE PER WEEK CYCLE. ALL WATERING IN EXCESS OF THE LOCAL ETo ("FIELD RECHARGE") TO BE COMPLETED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE WHILE THE CONTRACTOR IS ON THE JOB SITE. OVER WATERING OF LANDSCAPE DUE TO CONTROLLER SCHEDULING TO BE GROUNDS FOR CONTRACTOR TO REPAIR ANY RESULTANT DAMAGES AT CONTRACTOR'S OWN EXPENSE 22. SUBSTITUTION OF IRRIGATION MATERIAL/EQUIPMENT TO BE MADE ONLY UPON 'WRITTEN APPROVAL OF OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. 23. ALL ZONES TO PASS A MINIMUM DISTRIBUTION UNIFORMITY OF 62 PERCENT, AS TESTED THROUGH AN IRRIGATION ASSOCIATION CERTIFIED WATER AUDIT. 24. CLEANUP AND PROTECTION: DURING IRRIGATION Y/ORK, KEEP ALL PAVEMENT CLEAN AND WORK AREAS IN AN ORCERLY CONDITION. PROTECT IRRIGATION WORK AND MATERIALS FROM DAMAGE DUE TO LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION OPERATIONS AND TRESPASSERS. MAINTAIN PROTECTION DURING INSTALLATION ANO MAINTENANCE PERIOD. TREAT. REPAIR. OR REPLACE DAMAGE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION WORK AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER. IRRIGATION MAINLINE PVC SCH 80 UNION CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY PER DETAIL THIS SHEET PVC SCH 80 UNION QUICK COUPLING VALVE LIMBO VALVE BOX WITH LOCKING LID PVC SCH 80 UNION WILKINS 600 PRES. REDUCING VALVE AS NECESSARY — T S COUPLING: CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THRFATJFD FITTING AND CAP ON DISCHARGE SIDE OF MEETING NOTE: THE BACKFLOW DEVICE TO HAVE 6" MINIMUM UNOBSTRUCTED CLEARANCE ON ALL SIDES "-METER STOP IRRIGATION WATER METER - PER CITY STANDARDS PVC 1PER CITY STDS. POINT OF CONNECTION (P.O.C.) DETAIL NOT TO SCALE REMOTE CONTROL VALVE PVC MAINLINE FLUSH MTII ,AWN (11, AND MULCH )3-) - PRESSURE REGULATOR —PVC LATERAL SCH. 80 UNION VALVE BOX EXTENSION AS REQUIRED BRICK SUPPORTS 1 C F. 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP REMOTE CONTROL VALVE, PRESSURE REGULATOR AND FILTER DETAIL Not TD SCALE 6" ROUND VALVE BOX AIR/VACUUM RELIEF VALVE 1/2 PVC TEE COMPRESSION ADAPTER TYPICAL DRIPUNE - TYPICAL OR BLANK TUBING - TYPICAL 1 C.F. 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP BRICK SUPPORTS NOTE: AIR/VACUUM RELIEF VALVE CANNOT BE CONNECTED LOWER THAN DRIPLINE LATERALS FOR USE ON ZONES OF 7 GPM OR LESS ONLY (PLUMBED TO TUBING). 1/2' AIR/VACUUM RELIEF VALVE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE ,I_lii_:I DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY STA E OF WASH NGTO LAN 1 i [ TECT JEFF M. VARLEY CERTIFICATE No. 774 EXPIRES 8-75-2017 FROM IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE DOUBLE GRADE LEVEL JUMBLE BOX SIZE TO PERMIT 12" MINIMUN CLEAR FROM WALLS TO TEST COCKS: BOLT LOCK LID DOUBLE CHECK VALVE (STATE APPROVED ASSEMBLY) RESILIANT SEATED VALVES AND TEST COCKS: INSTALL ASSEMBLY AS SHOWN OR THE TEST COCKS IN HORIZONTAL POSITION, PER LOCAL REQUIREMENTS. PVC MAINLINE PER PLAN PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE AND FEMALE ADAPTER PVC SCH 80 UNION - TYPICAL PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE - TYPICAL BLOCK AS NECESSARY WITH BRICKS AT BASE OF BOX 1 C.F. 7/8" WASHED GRAVEL SUMP NOTE: INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ASSEMBLY BY CERTIFIED TESTER REQUIRED. NOT 10 SCALE av� 0 VALVE BOX WITH COVER FINISH GRADE QUICK COUPLING VALVE CENTER IN BOX 1 C.U. FT. 7/8" GRAVEL SUMP MARLEX ELL - TYPICAL PVC SCH 80 PVC NIPPLE PVC SCH 40 PVC SXSXT TEE OUICK COUPLING VALVE ASSEMBLY NO7 TO SCALE NOP l FINISH GRADE 6" ROUND VALVE BOX AUTOMATIC FLUSH VALVE BLANK TUBING COMPRESSION ELBOW TYPICAL BRICK SUPPORTS I I'"— 1 1 20 G 1PE 7/8" WASHED CRAYEI SUMP AUTOMATIC FLUSH VALVE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE ,•go 5200 Buffington Rd, Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mork Dote By n 10,27,2017 JC REVISIONS PER ON COMM. Mork Dote By Mork Dote By A Seol uN STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TITLE IRRIGATION NOTES and DETAILS VERSION: ISSUE DATE: Job No • 16-105 Store •04094 Dote .6-2-17 Drown By • HMV Checked By• JMV Sheet 2.1of5 28 E 8 //% ,61 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.1 'o.t ,��.1 '0.1 `0.7 '1.6 %/i 'O.11. `0.1 '0.2 '1.4 '3.3 '3.7 '3.9 '3.6/ '4 /// 1 /Of2 '0.9 `2.3 y _15.3 -'`.'9.52 ] '9.9 `7.6 cr 00.3 0,9 5.2 '.10.(I '10.8 '7.3 --�j l 1/'03 093 5.2 '89 1 9.1 t74 " ^ ^ ^ �^ ' ' ! '` ^ 1'5.9 I 4.9 '5.3 0 2 0/ 2.4.31 '2.0 '2.6 '3.21 4.4 / 4.6 7 f '01 .2 'OA `0.8 09 '16 '2.4 4.2 '9.9 '0.3 '0.4 /-_ '1.0 / '1.8 ! `1 2.1i '4,7� Schedule A Icc arn Architectural Light n9 i PROGRESS .Statistics ;Description S• ymbcl 1 Avg I M. I Min I Max/Min . Avg!Mn jCalc Zone Ct 1 } i24k itl.6 tc iCOki N!A 1 N;A 0.1 ;'1tiy4 'O.t=et4:1-8:4-=8:t-=0:t=o'f---fT-1---to-.1- '0.1 l,= 0.,4 . o.a-� ova-;=oz..._x .i 6t y o.r - o.t- -*¢t-- *o* - l '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 1,0.1 p 0.1 '0.2 0.0 '0.0 0.0 '0.1 !(!'0 Y '0.3 8.7 '0.0 '0.0 00.1 •b; 0.1 '0.6c 71.4l '0.0 '0.0 0.1 fi/0.1 '0.2 0. / '1.8 '3./! '7.1 '0.0 '0.1 0;4 0.1 0.3 0.8 '1.91 d' ggql '0:1 '0.10'0.1 '0.3 '0.7 1.3 2.4 '2.1• '33I 1 '31.8 '7. 11 •i ; A 0.3 `0.4 '0.6 1.2 '2.3 '3.9 '9.9 / 0.1 0.7 '1.2 '2.0 2.6 t 3.8 '5.0 '9. J 0 6 `'{1.2 '2,0 '4.. *4.7 ('5.7 '5.5 0.9 6 '1'15 '2.8 7.21 '7.4/ '7.8 '6.1 '4.7 r '0.6 :1.4 '3.1 90 . '19.7 '9.6 '5.9 '3.2 ;:;:: '3.0 '9U.,.1 '4.9 i'4.9 mot, 3>7 1.1 '6.1 2.2 2.1 124 i oa oa *o-m-woejfyi '0.0 '0.0 0.1 '0.1 '0.2 '0.2 '0.2 '0.3 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 0.0 1'0.0 1'0.1 '0.1 /4.9 4 '0.0 '0.0 '0.0 ' '0.0 '0.0 0.0 '0.0 '0.0 • -0.1- .0.'f' '-0,1 .'0i '0.2 14.7 '2.0 '1.4 '0.6 '0.2 '0.3 '0.3 '0.4 t7.f 1. 7.4"1.8 '0.8 2.2 ;A� 14 t8.9 nr �.y Old +6.4//`7'2.7 a '0.8 `0 34 3.91s 2.3 2.0 412.5: '3.0 '3. .. _2.9--'1-8 Q 2.5 5.0 I i t2 � 4.0 7.5 `iQ, - '9.7 '4.1 A, rA,_ ,_ 4 9 6.0, '8.3 r 8.2 4.1 79 90I '8.9 '1013I 9.3 '4.0 t10.8 7.5 6.8 5.9 3.0 4:e_ 9.71 '5.0'"18.9; '28 '1.7 '3.2 Doscriolion !Lamp 3000K. Type 5 Short Optics tvtth HOUSE - SIDE SHIELD OPEN 4" VERTICAL FLUORESCENT 32 FLUORESCENT VERTICAL Lamps Fdenarne omens Per Lamp Light Loss Factor 'Wattage 151 diameter up/clown wall nt LED cylisder P12 LC LRG .8 121 SEATS W/ `0 '0.2 '0.2 0.3 '1.1 '2.3 '3 _3 3.6 PLAYGROUND B H- i GSF 5,134 S.F. '3.6 '4.3 54 56 "5d 1 C ` 05 02 '0.2 '0.3 '1.0 23 3.3- :37 3.9 '4.5 5 2 _ ''5 0 45: B '0A='02- -9.2 0,3 - `0.9 , 2 2 '/ 3.6- 47 • C ,� ,,�� '3.7 '5.0 57 t157j 768, ( -''0' 02 - 0.3 ;0.3 -=09 z20 _'95_ 5 ` .., s r' ` �4% r _-1 I G Cam" ' 5.3z a 09 . ` a ' 9 �45"'_a P �� ,4/ 9:8- '117--0.7 .4 -=Z 9-1'11-1-•=•-tf..:+f-.---1 -°'1"3"4-$4 -4-0--="469 t9.. •35- '4:7-5:3- 2.7 12.1 '1.3 '1.0.- -�; w y s _ .� 8,�='h.5`"''32 �.5-'_0:3-- 5:3 `4.1 '2.6 '1.3 '1.1 '1.2 '1.2 '1.3 1.4 '1.7 '3.1 4.9 '7.1 7.2-��7.3 ,.$Y.4 ;- 1.0 '1.4 '1.5 _+4.5' `1.7Y '2.3 '2.7 '2.9 '2.8 2.6 '2.3 '1.8 '1.6 ;1.8 '2.3 '2.3 '2.5 '22 _2.1 3.5 8.2 9.4 '10.0 `8.9 l'. ' PHOTOMETRIC SITE PLAN • +3.51 +39' +40 +30 . -1'2-6 ''.\--4 )44. /11 Pi N chat 3000K LEDs P5675- 33 1616 GRAPHIC SCALE 10 0 10 20 40 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 20 ft. NORTH CATALOG NO: OPTICAL SYSTEM: ES aAss, LINE VOLTAGE ARM SPeciFicarionts. CATALOG NO: POLE SPECIFICATIONS. CATALOG ND POLE POLE WEIGHT: BOLT CIV2aE ANCHOR BOLT& BOLT PROJECTION STREE 32.9 FLAT ARRAY, GLASS SHALLOW TYPE III 40W SC)_.:D STATE LIGHT -INS) 7042 120V (MULTI -TAP) ALUMINUM II 112' 3' HIGH ANTHLIF-ING RING (DURBAN LIGHT FIXTURE r 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisicns: Mork Date By Mark Date By 10-9-17 Mark Dete Seal SOU TFICEN TER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET TriL, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN VERSION: V7.001 DaTe Li 7 •-velZ9 hiChick fI A\16 Jobs \16 105 17333 Southcenter PKWY, Tukwila, WkGraphics1.20 Custom DesigrA20.2 Schematic Design \10.04094.A1i1A.dwg, 10/232017 711:09 PM, tong 126-0" 12-8 1/2" 105-3 1/2" 0 DRIVE THRU 9 /-2111: SERVING 7- L]ks 0 • j • ' BEI 0 KITCHEN [•Lo ECADE 11E01 .4.7= ',;t•;1 KD 0 0 I O PO O Q — MULTI -PURPOSE OFFICE 6 L _ _ 4,— =1=f SERVICE RR VEST MEN 5. C00:01 WOMEN PLAY i . 1. 07 891 34'-4" 15'-0" •"441111 • 59'-4" 126-0" 17.-4" FLOOR PLAN , NORTH \ /9 r 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Dote By A 07-05-17 • Mark Date By 10-19-17 Mark Date Seal C.R.1-1° 0 4•097*,9, frJS 59,949.5 '95 SoJtt, Strecl 200 TISti 1. Cohfornia 92780 714 832-1e34 832-910 STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA r_igEET T LE FLOOR PLAN V7.001 ISSUE DAL. 08-2016 Job • 16-105 Store :04094 .01-06-16 Dale Drnwn By — Checked 8 1 St eel A-1.1A 0 ROOF PLAN Ghick-fil A118 Jubs\16 L 1 t GENERAL NOTES: 020KEI5 S-4614 EE :6766STPJC7670 OE PIS 0 [615L1.47 06 65 PECARBO TC PPVICE 5:60PE 168. PE-P FOOT P0 2 545(7445 ENPCSE0 GAS REM Gni ROOF 01.26 SPONSE (2 COP,S, a ALA CONDENSATE [ PES SAALA M TP67 eALED 72 PPOVIDE POSITIVE OP< AA.. 400264 C.77260603 54044PROVE, [ACOPt. 45 5. -4021ZONIAL .700EING PeveP.A.A=0., .66-6TE. 6 PEATICAL POOP046 VE663PANE,.6:50-46, SE TAT6 V.IALK•...D nen,0111,E.5 RE CPA, 8 0600+ESS 90006,EO POP 4.10 P006 050227087 30420 TO ME, PEEKS., ENE,. 05002570703 PE. SPEC FICATEr0 NOTE 10 GC. P-veLLE ,6.66 /APT I-m.6E60PP, 06 rA60.1-60.1,61P. ESTAMTE P-55 PEP NO- OP I 4CAP.ESS I . ' L /4. 7-7 7 ,/ 77/ t, I 0 NTT fOrpuis [Xmas,. ,Py L i NORTH 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Date 3 A 07-05-17 Mcrk Date By A 10-19-17 Mark Date Archdeehre Interix Panclirc 195 Seta •Street 200 Tust,n. Coliforric 92780 714 832-14,54 FkX 532-1910 STORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTE PKWY 11JKWILA, WA S-;EET MILE ROOF PLAN 5- 55/151 V7.001 ISSUE DATE08-2016 16-105 Stye 04094 D' 'site 01-06-16 : y • R.H. Sheet, A-I.7 /7 --DOZ9 FI U. (:ANO, 70P LOW \Grnphics,20 Custom Design 8 ;R EX'IERIO BCC-J R F)N75AFS RRU XVDIM • BO RA I.HW K MODULAR C0 LO R: CRA DEL MORTAR: ARC OS SAN'MN �1 �P'1=4 1 -�� PA NT I/7 SEi WA' WIILAMS- F SW 2807 ROC KWO 0 D ® S10 RCM NT TM - YES 4u COLOR- DARKBRONZ61MAfLJ ( PA RA Mr W AML(:0 PING • DUKL)IASI :' OW KPINl NAL NEIItIS CO DO R: UA RKBRO NZE I ATM—/ �� '� PT-9 I PANTO SHERW 9C WILIAMS DARKBRONZI. S(T) STUCC0 ••STD PO W172WAILW IEEE MIMI- SAND MEDUM u SOUTH ELEVATION 3/16" - 1'-0" oc i�vr aAr= NORTH ELEVATION 3/1E" = 1'-0" EC� rCJV BR-3 SLAB ao'Fra S-A3Q, 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisiors: Mork Date By A 07-05--17 Mark Date By 1C-19-17 t'ark Date By Seal C° Rn Hn 0 A2M(8thre talent. Porky 195 Sou% C Street 21)8 Tml'n. Cal1mric 92790 714 832-I834 F1Y 932-1910 5-ORE SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA S4'FT Lfll EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ', RS;N: V7.001 s<ut 0/1TE: 08-2016 :16-105 St -C :04094 _ Da ie ' 01-06-16 Dr'Tan J - TThec.ed Sy: R.H. Sleet A-2.1 raphics\20 Custom Design ''t20. OEAST ELEVATION 3/ 16,. = 1._0, TRANSPARENCY CALCULATIONS: GLAZING AREA PERCENTAGE, 619 S=. (628) TRANSPARENCY PERCENTAGE FOR THE AREA 9E'V9EEN TI-E-I.EIG' R 00 2 670 10 FEET 1008 SF, ROCS) EX1E RIO R F tNSHES BR-3 BRLCKVFIDL- BO RAI. REM K MODULAR CO TOR' CTIADFL MORTAR: I1.KC OS, SA ,N TAN /"'1 (,...7.1.) PA CVTf7 SIiFRW LK W IIIIA MS- 5 SN 2807 ROC KWO 0 D t Sf-1 1 %10R921'RO NT YKK. YES45 COLOR- DARK BRON7.FAMATIE3 F ' PA RA PPI'W.AILCO PINT:, DURO LAST/ g7CFPTH) NA I. METH IS F.OI,OTC DARKBRO NLE(MATIE) PTf) I ! PAINT 49 SFIFRWLNWllllAMS- DARK BRON7E `1 Slit CO -SIO POWDUEFRW AIL L F80II . SAND MFDIUM -/ / ! ' 1 TrIcA r=i6 y-g WEST ELEVATION 2 3/16'—" 5200 Buffington Rd. Atlanta Georgia, 30349-2998 Revisions: Mark Date By 07-05-17 Mork Dote By A 10-.19-17 Mark Date By Seal C=R°Ha0 ArcM0,Wvre 6090, Panting 95 South 'C Street 230 Ca omit 32780 714 832-1834 — - - t4X 852-1910 SOUTHCENTER PKWY & MINKLER 17333 SOUTHCENTER PKWY TUKWILA, WA SHEET -IT. -- EXTERIOR ELEVATION vI t-:51:/N V7.001 ISSUE 1 A__ : 08-2016 .n.iD `o. :16-i05 .'are ' 04094 Late 01 06-16 awn = . lVPy- R.H. 92 act A-2.2 DEVELOPMENT & CONSULTING, INC S PO Box 270571 • San Diego, CA 92198-2571 (858) 408-1894 Office • (866) 311-3658 Fax November 13, 2017 Max Baker, Assistant Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: L17-0029 Application for Design Review, Administrative Chick-fil-A #03093 17333 Southcenter Parkway Dear Max, Please accept the attached Revisions in response to Design Review Comment Letter 1 for Administrative Design Review for the proposed new Chick-fil-A restaurant at 17333 Southcenter Parkway. The following items have been revised, with five copies of each revised sheet included with this resubmission: Plan Set: • Title Sheet • Site Plan • Grading and Drainage Plan • Utility Plan • ALTA • Landscape Plans • Photometric Site Plan • Floor Plan • Roof Plan • Exterior Elevations • Preliminary Signs Plans • Color Elevations Our responses to the specific comments in Comment Letter are provided below: 1. Architectural Design Standards. a. Horizontal Facade: i. The building has been revised to provide different patterns as follows: 1. The brick lines have been pull back slightly. 2. The stucco areas have been increase slightly. t 3. A portion of the building (windows) fronting SouthceR lG e if ED projected forward to increase the change on the buildir�c$de.20'7 Community Development November 10, 2017 Page 2 4. The roof line has been revised to coordinate with the building changes. The changes we have provided adds the visual interest from all observable distances while maintaining the Chick-fil-A corporate image. These changes provide the vertical variations requested. b. Commercial Ground Level Transparency i. Transparence calculations have been provided, see exterior elevations, A-2.2. C. Roofline ‘itiLseA, i. The parapet has been revised, we have continued the larger overhang throughout the building perimeter. ii. Chick-fil-A, likes to provide patio seating at all locations when possible. Unfortunately, at this site we do not have the area to provide this feature to our customers. 2. Frontage Improvements a. Improvements to the public frontage are proposed as requested, per TMC 18.28.130. See site plan(s). i. We have provided a 6' sidewalk behind a 9' wide continuous planning strip located at the back of the curb. ii. We have added street trees iii. We have added vehicular -scaled decorative lighting as required 3. Parking and Circulation a. We understand that Planning and Public Works will review circulation and traffic management plan and additional comments may be forthcoming. i. Bicycle parking has been added to the site, 4 spaces have been provided, ii. We submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis and Management Plan prepared by our Traffic Engineer to you on September 22, 2017. iii. We have inquired with the property owner to the north about connecting our sidewalk that runs along the front of our building with their sidewalk running along the front of their building. The property owner has denied our request to construct this sidewalk, as they believe it will encourage CFA / customers to park on their parcel. ./ iv. With respect to the City's desire that we provide a pedestrian crossing(s) along the access road to neighboring southern parcels, we believe that even if the property owner would agree to the modifications, there would be no appreciable increase in pedestrian safety. Furthermore, any modification to the existing lot configuration would necessarily reduce the amount of parking spaces provided — a condition the property owner to the south would not approve. dkike4ti '.r 4. Landscaping: a. Proposed trees are now not columnar per TMC 18.52.060.B.2.d and are listed on Tukwila's approved tree list. b. Species diversity requirements have been met per TMC 18.52.060.A.5. c. All planting areas are served with irrigation per TMC 18.52.070.B.2. d. Per TMC 18.52.070.A, structural soil has been indicated for parkinfaZEIle VD e. Soil amendment has been indicated for planting areas along Southcenter Par way, in accordance with BMP T5.13 "Post Construction Soil Quality and De'.13 2017 f. Soil amendment within planting holes is no longer proposed. Community Development .. " November 10, 2017 Page 3 g. Trees are no longer indicated as staked. h. Landscape cloth has been eliminated from plan. Plant spacing is not indicated on plant schedule. j. Mulch will be installed in all landscape beds, and will be held away from stems and trunks. k Spray irrigation is now proposed: 5. Signs a. We have modified our stand alone sign proposal to provide a monument sign in compliance with TMC 19.20.040. Also, please note that Carlos Arias, with 4G Development and Consulting, is now the primary point of contact for the applicant moving forward on this project. My contact information is provided below Carlos Arias C: 951-970-9138 carias@4gdev.com Project Engineer 4G Development and Consulting, Inc ii,:-CEIVED NOV 13 2017 Community Development City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION July 13, 2017 - Ed Hale 2153 Oak Hill Drive Escondido, CA 92027 Subject: Chick-Fil-A Design Review Dear Mr. Hale, Your application for a Design Review — Administrative permit is considered complete on July 13, 2017 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. This notice of complete application applies only to the permits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits issued by other agencies. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at 206-431-3683 or Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov. Sincerely, Max Baker Assistant Planner Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director Design Review Comment Letter #1 — Chick-Fil-A File#: L17-0029 August 23rd, 2017 Ed Hale 2153 Oak Hill Drive Escondido, CA 92027 Subject: Initial Proposed Design Review Comments for Chick-Fil-A at 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Dear Mr. Hale, On June 6th, 2017 you submitted a design review application for the proposal of Chick-Fil-A located at 17333 Southcenter Pkwy, with additional revisions submitted on July 12th, 2017. Review of the documents showed that additional corrections are needed to the proposal before we can proceed with the design review permitting process. Based upon review of your design review application the following information is required to further process your application. Planning Department The proposed development is subject to the standards of the Southcenter Design Manual, design standards of the Tukwila Urban Center — Commercial Corridor district, as well as meet the Commercial Corridor criteria, for which Southcenter Parkway is designated (Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.28). See Attachment A for Tukwila Urban Center — Commercial Corridor district standards. See Attachment B for Commercial Corridor standards. 1. Architectural Design Standards o Horizontal facade articulation is required for every 50 feet along a building's facade. Facade articulation must employ at least three of the following features at intervals no greater than specified by the applicable corridor type to reduce the perceived scale of buildings and add visual interest: • Window fenestration patterns and/or entries; • Use of weather protection features; • Use of vertical piers or columns; • Change in roofline form; Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Welite: TukwilaWA.gov outdoor/covered seating at other Chick-Fil-A restaurants in the region as well as other restaurants in the Southcenter Parkway corridor generally, and recommends installation of such space if possible. 2. Frontage Improvements The Southcenter Plan calls for new investments in public frontage improvements as redevelopment takes place to move towards the community's vision of a more walkable urban center. These improvements include creating safe and attractive public sidewalks and better pedestrian connections between buildings and sidewalks to encourage walking as the area intensifies. TMC 18.28.130 establishes appropriate public frontage standards for "Commercial Corridors", which is the Corridor Type identified for Southcenter Parkway. Per these standards: o A 6' sidewalk is required behind a 9' wide continuous planting strip located at the back of curb (see "Public Frontage" figure in Attachment B). o Street trees are required every 20-30', depending on species. o Vehicular -scaled decorative street lighting is required. While your parcel has existing frontage improvements, upgrading to the future standard now would create a more inviting pedestrian environment and prevent the street trees from having to be removed and replaced at a later point. 3. Parking and Circulation o As was discussed at our meeting on August 16th, 2017, the Planning and Public Works Departments will review your updated circulation and traffic management plan for the site once it is submitted. o 1 bicycle space is required per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Please indicate where these will be located on site. o Pedestrian crossing(s) along the access road to neighboring southern parcels should be provided to ensure pedestrian safety. o Please indicate if connections to pedestrian sidewalks on neighboring northern parcels will be retained to ensure adequate pedestrian facilities. 4. Landscaping o Trees need to be chosen that are not columnar per TMC 18.52.060.B.2.d. o Species diversity requirements need to be met per TMC 18.52.060.A.5 o On page L1.0 of 4 the top of the Legend it says to retain grass areas and to return them to pre-existing conditions. However, it doesn't appear that there will be irrigation in these areas; could you clarify this? Also per code, TMC 18.52.070.B.2, all areas must be served with irrigation. Will this include the retained wall? 3 J • Change in building material or siding style • Vertical elements such as a trellis with plants, green wall, or art element; • Providing vertical building modulation of at least 12 inches in depth if tied to a change in roofline or a change in building material, siding style, or color; • Other design techniques that effectively reinforce the pattern of small shopfronts and/or effectively reduce the perceived scale of the building and add visual interest. • Alternative designs will be considered provided such techniques effectively reduce the perceived scale of the building and add visual interest from all observable distances. The City shall consider the following in determining whether the treatment meets the intent of the guidelines: • a) Types of materials used and how they help to achieve the intent; • b) The type of articulation treatments and how effective they are in meeting the intent; • c) How effective the articulation treatments respond to the site's context and visibility (for instance, side streets warrant greater flexibility than primary streets where facades are more visible). ■ The current proposed facade treatment does not meet the standards as defined above. It is recommended articulation is incorporated at least every 50' along the building's eastern face that utilizes a combination of the features mentioned above in order to meet the standards set forth by the Commercial Corridor. o Commercial Ground Level Transparency (windows) standard is 50% of a building's facade. Please provide calculations showing area of transparency in relation to overall facade. o Roofline The intent of the design standard is to encourage "prominent rooflines that give buildings an attractive and distinctive top, contribute to the character of the area, and are consistent with the type of building function and uses," (Southcenter Design Manual, pg. 17). Updating this roofline with a cornice would create a more prominent roofline, as the design manual intended. • Roof overhangs for both flat and sloping roofs are encouraged to add depth, shadow and visual interest. J� Outdoor Seating • While provision of open space for retail use is not required within the Commercial Corridor, the City would like to highlight the success of 2 o Per TMC 18.52.070.A soil in parking lot areas must be Structural Soil. This needs to be detailed and shown on the plans per code. o In areas where structural soil is not required — along Southcenter Parkway adjacent to the grass and NW corner soil amendment must comply with the above code. That means in short, subsoil scarified, topsoil incorporated into the bed (not into just the planting hole) to a minimum of 12 inches depth. Topsoil needs to have organic matter to about 10% volume (please demonstrate how this is met). o No amendment in the planting holes will be necessary since all beds will have been amended. o Trees do not need to be staked as this isn't a windy area. o No landscape cloth to be used on site. o Plant spacing — please add plant spacing (specifically for the tall grasses) into the plant schedule to provide a better idea of how final installation will look. o Mulch — Provide a more detailed estimate of how much ground area will be covered by proposed stones. Have wood chips been considered as an alternative to stone? o Irrigation — Drip irrigation under weed barrier and rocks may create difficulties as there will be fewer options for repairing broken or damaged lines. 5. Signs o Proposed wall -mounted signs meet design standards set forth by TMC 19.20.050. o Proposed pole sign is not permitted as designed. Monument design standards for properties with ROW Tess than 400 feet are as follows (See TMC 19.20.040 for additional criteria): • Allowable Sign Message Area: 36 square feet per side/72 square feet total. • Total Allowable Sign Size: 54 square feet per side/108 square feet total. • Maximum Height: 6 feet. • Number of Monument Signs: One. Please note, for the building permitting process, a transportation impact fee applies. You shall submit a Trip Generation evaluation based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition (or) the most current edition. The City Engineer will determine the final transportation impact fee amount. Also, note per TMC 18.104.130-1B, "If the applicant fails to provide a request or correction of additional information within 90 days of the request the Department may cancel the application due to inactivity." If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. Sincerely, Max Baker Assistant Planner Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov 206-431-3683 4 Attachment A Table 3 District Standards Regional 1 Corridor District Standards Center TOD Pond District Comm. Workplace 18.28.070 Structure Heitht Minimum Height 25 ft fronting Baker Bi. 25 ft fronting Baker BI. n/a nia n/a Maximum Height without incentives 85 45 ft 45 ft 45 ft 4 Frontal Improvement Height incentive 115 ft, or 214 ft w/in 300 ft of Tukwila Pkwy & Southcenter Pkwy 70 ft, 115' if combined with MF, LEED or Affordable Housing Incentive 70 ft, no increase w/in 150 ft of Pond edge n/a Multi -Family Height Incentive 115 ft, or 214 ft w/in 300 ft of Tukwila Pkwy & Southcenter Pkwy 18.28.080 Maximum Block Face Length 70 ft, 115' if combined with Frontal LEED or Affordable Housing Incentive 70 ft, no increase wrn 150ftof Pond edge n/a 70 ft River adjacent parcels only Provision of New Streets 18.28.090 Permitted Corrid 850 ft max2 Types for New Streets 700 ft max ft Max 900 ft Max 900 ft max Pedestrian Corridor - permitted permitted - Walkable Corridor permitted permitted - - Neighborhood Corridor permitted permitted permitted - permitted' Urban Corridor permitted permitted permitted Commercial Corridor permitted permitted Workplace Corridor - - permitted permitted Tukwila Pond Esplanade - Pedestrian Walkway permitted _permitted 18.28.100 Side and Rear Setbacks Side and Rear Yards. 5ft4 18.28.110 Side and Rear Landscaping Requirements Side and Rear Yards ( 5ft 18.28.220 Special Corner Feature 5ft4 5ft' 5ft` Sft 5ft Oft I0 Special Corner Feature on Building permitted permitted permitted 5 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director Affidavit of Distribution Project Name: CHICK-FIL-A Project Number: PL17-0023 Associated File Number (s): L17-0029 Date Mailed: 7/21/17 Mailing requested by: MAX BAKER Mailer's signature: ❑ Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet ❑ Board of Appeals Agenda Packet ❑ Determination of Non -Significance ❑ Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice ❑ Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance ❑ Notice of Action • Notice of Application Parties of Record: ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit ❑ Notice of Decision ❑ Notice of Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Public Meeting ❑ Official Notice ❑ Other: ❑ Shoreline Mgmt Permit ❑ Short Subdivision Agenda KING COUNTY ASSESSORS PSE WASTE MANAGEMENT AGENCY LABELS ( ) City Clerk Office - Ana Le PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS need to go to Ana to include in Digital Records Center ( ) US Corps of Engineers ( ) Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 ( ) Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service Section 2 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) Office of Archaeology ( ) Dept of Social & Health Services ( ) Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) ( ) Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Div. ( ) Dept of Natural Resources SHORELINE NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT ( ) Office of the Governor ( ) Dept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically ( ) WA State Department of Commerce (formerly Community Dev) ( ) Office of Attorney General ( ) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Office ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner () WA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 Section 3 ( ) KC Boundary Review Board ( ) Fire District # 11 ( ) Fire District # 2 ( ) KC Wastewater Treatment Div ( ) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation (X) KC Assessor's Office ( ) KC Watershed Coordination WRIA 9 KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) Health Department ( ) Port of Seattle ( ) KC Dev & Environmental Services-SEPA Info Center ( ) KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque ( ) KC Public Library System ( ) Foster Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( ) Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Westfield Mall Library ( ) Tukwila School District ( ) Highline School District ( ) Seattle School District ( ) Renton School District ( ) Century Link ( ) Seattle City Light (X) Puget Sound Energy ( ) Highline Water District ( ) Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept ( ) Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES ( ) BP Olympic Pipeline ( ) Seattle Public Utilities ( ) Val-Vue Sewer District ( ) Water District # 20 ( ) Water District # 125 ( ) City of Renton Public Works ( ) Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist (X) Waste Management ( ) Cascade Water Alliance ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk (PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS) Section 6 CITY AGENCIES ( ) Kent Planning Dept ( ) Renton Planning Dept ( ) City of SeaTac ( ) City of Burien ( ) City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects Section 7 OTHER * send notice of all applications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition * ( ) Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Fisheries Program ( ) Wildlife Program ( ) Duwamish Indian Tribe * ( ) People for Puget Sound * LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) Puget Sound Clean Air Agency ( ) Sound Transit/SEPA ( ) Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) Washington Environmental Council ( ) Futurewise ( ) Puget SoundKeeper ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce ( ) Tukwila Historical Society** ** send notices for all Tukwila projects which require public notice — via email to: tukwilahistsocietv@tukwilahistorv.orq and rcwieserOcomcast.net ( ) Seattle Times ( ) Highline Times Section 8 MEDIA ( ) South County Journal ( ) City of Tukwila Website W:\\Planning\Development Review Manual\LU Application Review Process\Public Notice Procedures\Mailing\Agency Checklist Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS (Comment period starts on date of mailing) Notice of Application mailed to: Department of Ecology (send checklist with Notice of Application), applicant, other agencies as necessary, property owners and tenants within 500 feet. It is also posted on site. KC Transit Division — SEPA_Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand. Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice of Application SEPA Determination mailed to Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE at the time of SEPA determination: SEPA Determination Staff report SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to applicant, property owners and residents within 500 feet of subject property, agencies with jurisdiction. Comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21-day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included in SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the notice of decision and staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: One complete packet should also be sent to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe if they commented on the project during comment period. Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Decision (Signed by Director) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross -sections of site with structures & shoreline Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (Signed by Director) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) W:\\Planning\Development Review Manual\LU Application Review Process\Public Notice Procedures\Mailing\Agency Checklist City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Jack Pace, Director Notice of Application July 19, 2017 KING COUNTY ASSESSORS ACCOUNTING DIVISION 500 4TH AVE RM 709A SEATTLE, WA 98104 Project: Chick-Fil-A Restaurant Project #: PL17-0023 File #: L17-0029 Description: Proposal to demolish existing 19,992 sf retail building and construct a 4,842 sf restaurant with drive-thru service and accompanying site improvements. The resulting site plan would provide 42 parking spaces on the subject parcel and a drive-thru queue lane to the rear of the building. Your written comments on the project are requested and can be delivered to Dept. of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100,Tukwila WA 98188. Comments must be received by 5:00p.m. on August 2rd, 2017. You may view the application, request a copy of any decision, comment on the project, and learn your appeal rights by contacting the project planner listed above, or by visiting our offices Monday through Friday, 8:00am to 5:00 pm at DCD, 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100, Tukwila WA 98188. A Notice of Hearing will be sent following the finalization of a hearing date with the City's Hearing Examiner. Sincerely, Max Baker Assistant Planner Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 0400 TO: Building City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number L17-0029 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM Planning Public Works []Fire Dept. Police Dept. Parks/Rec Project: Chick-Fil-A Address: 17333 Southcenter Parkway Date 7/14/17 transmitted: Response requested by: 7/28/17 Staff coordinator: Max Baker Date response received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60-day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS (Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) Plan check date: •�' /g�/ / / 7 Comments Update date: _ prepared by: City if Tukwila REVISION SUBMITTAL Department of Community Development PLANNING DIVISION 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center, ACCOMPANIED BY RESPONSE DOCUMENTS AND THIS COMPLETED FORM. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, email, fax, etc. Date: / 12 / ZO i 3 Permit Number: L-) 7 CG2 c( Project Name: C H 1 C k- l L A t(-0 -( Project Address: 1 7 3 3 3 Sc),, i h CEiv r €YZ (J k Lk-) \( Project Contact: E d H A L e Contact Phone number: ?&O • '(' 70 (( City Planner: MA ( /34 K /Z PLEASE ATTACH A COPY OF ANY LETTER REQUESTING CORRECTIONS / ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ❑ Response to Preliminary Approval 0 Response to letter requesting additional information (Please attach a copy of the letter) ❑ Final Short Plat Submittal Summary of revision/response submittal: I2EvisEO C1i 1. 14N0 St r E PL 4 i2Fn'1OJ//04 P12o,aoSE 9 1/4P,2OUF446-)J,q Dl� (-%Sf+CENT C £ , Una W&S T — )JO inAPRouEI?n Ex-?S r Osu Sc,s'trl - Lou(/-,,J4 SccDPE OF- /vLtP,2ciJYLI>=wTS /Z) T-1(C- t_C.ockiraJ4 • /i4OOINIk LThc,ST Df21uE El«S Ti Ai 4 7) /2: rYI /� / 4) i /-tc6ESS & ? L y ✓1-PO4d K/0 TE) if" v/� L; TH /),211/E ntrSc-E 4 '2 / ca.vto //-rc l?a °Sb, Ne"w Pet2.lc//J4 2oc.J Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: d aCj" "` Entered in TRAKiT on W:\@SHAREPOINT FOLDER RESTRUCTURE\Reference\APPLICATIONS - Land Use Apps & Handouts\Revision Submittal Form.doc Revised: March 2014 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT Chick-fil-A 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington City of Tukwila File No. RECEIVED JUL 12 2011 Community Development Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 July 12, 2017 Our Job No. 18363 7/12/2017 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES ♦ TUMWATER, WA ♦ KLAMATH FALLS, OR ♦ LONG BEACH, CA ♦ ROSEVILLE, CA ♦ SAN DIEGO, CA Py www.barghausen.com ENG101. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1 — Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet Figure 2 — Site Location Figure 3 — Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics Figure 4 — Soils 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Analysis of the Core Requirements 2.2 Analysis of the Special Requirements 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology B. Developed Site Hydrology C. Performance Standards D. Flow Control System E. Water Quality System Figure 5 - Existing Site Map RECEIVED Figure 6 - Developed Site Map JUL 12 2011 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Community Development 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION (CSWPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan Analysis and Design B. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Design 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 18363.001.doc Figure 1 Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Chick-fil-A, Inc. Phone (303) 519-7206 Address 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350, Irvine, CA 92618 Project Engineer Chris Jensen, P.E. Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Phone (425) 251-6222 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION ❑ Landuse Services Subdivision / Short Subd. / UPD • Buildinc_Services M/F (ommercia) SFR ❑ Clearing and Grading ❑ Right -of -Way Use ❑ Other Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Chick-fil-A DDES Permit # Location Township 23 North Range 4 East Section 26 Site Address 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 98188 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS El DFW HPA COE 404 DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands Other ❑ Shoreline Management ❑ Structural Rockery/Vault/ ❑ ESA Section 7 Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Type of Drainage Review ®/ Targeted / Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type (circle one): ® / Modified mall Site Date (include revision / (circle): Large Site Date (include revision dates): dates): Date of Final: Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Approval: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Start Date: ® No Describe: Completion Date: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : NA Special District Overlays: NA Drainage Basin: Green River Basin Stormwater Requirements: NA Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS ❑ River/Stream ❑ Lake ® Erosion Hazard ❑ Wetlands ❑ Landslide Hazard ❑ Closed Depression ❑ Coal Mine Hazard ❑ Floodplain ❑ Seismic Hazard ❑ Other ❑ Habitat Protection 111 ❑ Steep Slope Part 10 SOILS Soil Type Wo-Woodville Silt Loam AkF-Alderwood & Kitsap Ur -Urban Land Slopes 0 to 2 25 to 70 ❑ High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) ❑ Other Erosion Potential ❑ Sole Source Aquifer ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ Additional Sheets Attached 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 2 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE ❑ Core 2 — Offsite Analysis ❑ Sensitive/Critical Areas ❑ SEPA ❑ Other LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharge at Natural Location Number a atural Discharge Locations: 0 Offsite Analysis Level: Q/ 2 / 3 dated: Flow Control Level: 1 3 or Exemption Number (incl. facility summary sheet) Small Site B s Conveyance System Spill containment located at:Northeast corner - Modular Wetlands Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: Contact Phone: After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: (Privat) Public If Private, Maintenance Lo Required: Yes No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes No Liability Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake Cnhanced Basicm Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Management Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as applicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MDP / BP / LMP / Shared Fac. None Requirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Blood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: Source Control Describe landuse: (comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 3 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High -use Site: Yes / No Treatment BMP: r Water Separator Maintenance Agreement: Yes with whom? Other Drainage Structures Describe: Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION /1 Clearing Limits I1 Stabilize Exposed Surfaces Cover Measures • Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities I Perimeter Protection // Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Traffic Area Stabilization ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas 0 Sediment Retention ►1 Surface Water Control Other ❑ Dewatering Control /1 Dust Control ❑ Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description Modular Wetland ■ Detention 0 Biofiltration ❑ Infiltration ❑ Regional Facility ❑ Shared Facility ❑ Flow Control BMPs ►1 Other ❑ Wetpool ❑ Media Filtration Oil/Water Separator /1 Oil Control ❑ Spill Control ❑ Flow Control BMPs ❑ Other Exempt 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 4 1 / 1 /09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Covenant ❑ Native Growth Protection Covenant ❑ Tract ❑ Other ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Rockery > 4' High ❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site condiitions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and t attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provide er• accurate. June 5, 2017 Signed/Date 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 5 1/1/09 18363.002.doc Figure 2 Site Location :-S=tfi7T4- 4-= S 170TH ST I I S-166TH ST ti78TH ST REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2017) S 16 Tukwila Fond Park 0 ti MINKLER BLVD --- TUKWILA PKWY 0 P1 Z ANDOVER PK MINKLER BLVD ANDO. ER PK E COSTCO DP Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRCNMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: VICINITY MAP DATE: 05 11;17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 vmap.cdr Figure 3 � Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics DRAINAGE BASINS, SUBBASINS, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS 1=40' 4 / CNN //i,.-- /i , EXISTING DRAINAGE SWALE/j/ EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE PATTERN (TYP) /7/ // 4:1 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CO 5i b0:5' SITE BASIN 1.08 ACRES D NO1'08'20"E t.'51'40"E 38: SD --SD SD-- - SO1'O8'20'W 12.00' CV O of O crp 88'51'40"W EXISTING PAVEMENT AND BUILDING STRUCTURE tl EXISTING DISCHARGE POINT AT CATCH BASINS IN SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY FIGURE 3 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits\18363-Figure 3.dwg 6/5/2017 11:24 AM JCAREY Figure 4 Soils REFERENCE: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service LEGEND: Wo = Woodinville silt loam AkF = Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Ur = Urban land Sca Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical N/A Tr�C EN G11464, 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington job Number 18363 Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP DATE: 05/11 /1 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 soil.cdr 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant will be constructed on a 1.04 acre lot located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington, and the total area of work will encompass 1.32 acres. It is also situated within the southwest quarter of Section 26, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. Please see Figure 2 - Vicinity Map for a more accurate depiction of the location of the site. The site consists of two parcels and is mostly covered with asphalt, an existing building, and other associated infrastructure that will be demolished with the proposed development. There are also existing trees, lawn grass, and shrubs located within various landscape areas. In the existing condition, the site runoff is unmitigated and untreated and discharges to the public storm system located along Southcenter Parkway. A small area of off -site flows from the adjacent property to the north flow onto the site and is conveyed to the same public system through asphalt and curb channel. The general stormwater conveyance will consist of catch basins with piped connections through the site. The finished grade will slope to low areas where runoff will collect in the catch basins. Stormwater runoff will convey to the northwest corner of the site for treatment by an oil/water separator and modular wetland prior to discharge into the public system located along Southcenter Parkway. The off -site flows from the north property will be intercepted by a trench drain and conveyed to the same public system as the existing condition. There will be a small amount of bypass on the two driveways connecting to the shared access located south of the project site. 18363.001.doc 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The following is a response to each of the core requirements delineated in the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM): 2.1 Analysis of the Core Requirements Core Requirement No. 1: Discharge at the Natural Location. Response: The site will discharge to the public storm system located along Southcenter Parkway as it does in the existing condition. Core Requirement No. 2: Off -Site Analysis. Response: A Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis has been prepared and is located in Section 3 of this report. Core Requirement No. 3: Flow Control. Response: The project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements; however, the site also falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions basin. Based on this, stormwater runoff from the developed site must be released at a rate that matches existing conditions. The project will see a reduction in impervious surface areas and, as such, flow rates will be less once the project is completed. Therefore, no additional flow control will be proposed as part of this project. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System. Response: The site development stormwater conveyance is comprised of a series of catch basins and pipes. The sizing of this conveyance network is based on the King County Rational Method delineated in the 2009 KCSWDM and sized to adequately convey the anticipated stormwater discharge based on the stormwater runoff developed from a 25-year storm event. Conveyance calculations will be provided in the final engineering plans and Technical Information Report (TIR). Core Requirement No. 5: Erosion and Sediment Control. Response: Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans will be included in the site development documents prepared for this project that meet the requirements of the 2009 KCSWDM. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance and Operations. Response: The property owner will assume the maintenance and operation of the stormwater facilities. See Section 10 of this report for the Operations and Maintenance Manual. Core Requirement No. 7: Financial Guarantees and Liability. Response: All financial guarantees and liability requirements for the property owner will be met and followed for this project site in accordance with the type of project proposed. 18363.001.doc Core Requirement No. 8: Water Quality. Response: A modular wetland unit is proposed for the purpose of providing enhanced basic water quality in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM and is sized per Department of Ecology's (DOE) General Use Level Designation (GULD). 2.2 Analysis of the Special Requirements Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements. Response: This special requirement does not apply to this lot. Special Requirement No. 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation. Response: This special requirement does not apply to this lot. The proposed development is not located within the mapped FEMA 100-year floodplain. Special Requirement No. 3: Flood Protection Facilities. Response: This project does not rely on the existing flood protections facilities, and does not propose to modify or construct a new flood protection facility. Special Requirement No. 4: Source Control. Response: Source controls are required for this project site and MI follow all necessary requirements as depicted in the 2009 KCSWDM. Special Requirement No. 5: Oil Control. Response: This site is considered a high -use site of greater than 100 vehicles per 1,000 square feet and, therefore, requires implementation of oil controls. The project proposes to use a Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separator. Please see Section 4.0 for more information. 18363.001.doc 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS The Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis is included in this section. 18363.001.doc m LEVEL 1 OFF -SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Chick-fil-A 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 June 5, 2017 Our Job No. 18363 GHAv 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES ♦ TUMWATER, WA ♦ KLAMATH FALLS, OR ♦ LONG BEACH, CA ♦ ROSEVILLE, CA ♦ SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com 'E Nr' ENG\N Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Our Job No. 18363 TASK 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS EXHIBIT A Vicinity Map EXHIBIT B Downstream Drainage Map EXHIBIT C Upstream Basin Map TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW EXHIBIT D FEMA Map EXHIBIT E Sensitive Areas Folios EXHIBIT F SCS Soils Map EXHIBIT G Assessor's Map EXHIBIT H Wetland Inventory Map EXHIBIT I Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT J 3.1 3.2 3.3 Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS 18363.003.doc TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS This proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant is located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. It is also situated within the southwest quarter of Section 26, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. A vicinity map of the site location is provided in Exhibit A. The site consists of two tax parcels (262304-9066 and -9120) of approximately 1.04 acres with an existing commercial building and asphalt parking area. UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Based on a site visit and review of the topography maps, there is a very minor amount of upstream flow onto the project site from the adjacent northern property. These flows currently convey through an asphalt and concrete curb channel to a catch basin located along Southcenter Parkway. The lot to the south of the project area appears to slope away from the site. There is a vegetated swale west of the property line that intercepts easterly flows from the hillside and conveys this runoff north into an existing catch basin. Southcenter Parkway abuts the east property line of the site and has its own stormwater collection and conveyance system. Please refer to Exhibit C - Upstream Basin Area Map for a graphic depiction of the surrounding topography and development. 18363.003.doc Exhibit A Vicinity Map 70 STL 5-166TH ST 5 3AV atJES 5 170TH ST - kit ND ST 5172ND:PL_ " STD 1781 REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2017) Tukwila 'outhcenter Mall u kwila Pond Park MINKLER BLVD *N-SITE Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Venicat N/A 4, I uctmla Park CC 0 2 0 0 m 1:1 0 DKVO -t X 6,AKER Et TRECK DP ,.Lti I I ft/INKIER BLVD COSTCO Dr-• Q. I:7' For: coVIA0 41P- 0 pG <,. ENG044. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: VICINITY MAP 1111111MMII DATE: 0501/17 P:118000s1183631exhibillgraphics118363 vmap.cdr Exhibit B Downstream Drainage Map The nformation included on this map has been compied by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, tmeiness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be fable for any general, special, indirect incidental, orconsequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or misuse of the infor matbn contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohbited except by written permission of King County. Date: 5/24/2017 kg1 King County GIS CENTER Exhibit C Upstream Basin Map opography s way from site a orth boundary Offsite f irainage dischargin in o exist n4 aspba It swalc Topography slopes away from site along south boundary The reformation included on this map has been compied by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, comple eness, tinniness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be fable for any general, special, redirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not united to, lost revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or muse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohbited except by written permission of King County. Date: 5/17/2017 inkier Blvd access road C Roadside curb _� gutter collected runoff along existin Southcenter VI t tt I + VI N i r ' King i_;I County L.41 King County GIS CENTER TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plans: This site is located within the Lower Green River Basin. • Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable to this project. Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: Please see Exhibit I for the Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report. • Critical Drainage Area Maps: No critical drainage area requirements apply to this site. Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: This project is not located within a 100-year floodplain. See Exhibit D for the FEMA map. Other Off -Site Analysis Reports: A review of the Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report and a site investigation were conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis. • Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on a review of the King County Sensitive Area Map Folio, a large part of the site is located in an Erosion Hazard area. • Road Drainage Problems: Road Drainage Complaints are not available for this report. • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: A soils map is included in this report (see Exhibit F). The soils map identifies three soil classifications that are located on the site: Wo - Woodinville silt loam, AkF - Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep slope, and Ur - Urban land. • Wetland Inventory Map: The Wetland Inventory Map is located within this report. As previously noted, there are no wetlands within or adjacent to the project site area. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable to this project. 18363.003.doc Exhibit D FEMA Map U E J CORPORATE nr CORPORATE' Dr CITY OF TUKWILA 530091 MINK LEGEND OTHER AREAS ZONE X Areas determined to be outside 500-year Ibodplain. REFERENCE: Federal Emergency Management Agency (Portion of Map 53033C0959 F, May 1995) Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A BHA (� • 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH to KENT, WA 98032 fa Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 �' CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, r�NG ENGINE�p SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: FEMA MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 fema.cdr Exhibit E Sensitive Areas Map SITET i c Access r3dd`j _ AC SS road__ ) � P Legend 1 Parcels ▪ Potential landslide hazard areas (2016, see explanation--->) Potential steep slope hazard areas (2016, see explanation--->) Erosion hazard (1990 SAO) ® Seismic hazard (1990 SAO) Coal mine hazard (1990 SAO) REFERENCE: King County iMAP (2017) IBMS class 1 class 2 perennial class 2 salmonid class 3 unclassified Wetland (1990 SAO) Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical. N/A QGHA V 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH IQ ,�►I* F KENT, WA 98032 ►� Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 <Tr "G ENGIN-�P CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: SENSITIVE AREAS MAP DATE 0511/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 sens. cdr Exhibit F Soils Map REFERENCE: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service LEGEND; Wo = Woodinville silt loam AkF = Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Ur = Urban land Scale Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:\ 18000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 soil. cdr Exhibit G Assessor's Map REFERENCE: King County Department of Assessments (Nov. 2014) Scale: Horizontal:: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 114.11.14 For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: ASSESSOR MAP DATE: 05 11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 amap.cdr Exhibit H Wetland Inventory Map Lower Green River Green River Basin Alt - Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green River 20 LOCATION NE, SW 32-22-5 INVENTORY DATE: 8-27-81 ACREAGE: . 3 North A Approx. Scale: 1" = 200' COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR Green River DRAINAGE: CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PU83 Palustrine, Unconsolidated bottom, Mud Open Water NOTE: The wistlamd edge shown above Is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the 'transition from standing water to uplands Is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less dstinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Welland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and 'Guidelines for King County Wetlands." Lower vreen never Lu OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: IP, TL Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: Birds: MA, BS Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: None Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: 0 ac. ft. Potential Active: 0 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Heavily impacted by domesticated ducks. TLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in Kiag County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage 30 22 in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species 30 21 Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, 15 10 surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall 84 92 environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, 84 44 game birds or mammals of commercial value , WETLAND RATING: Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings.- The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are cribed in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in _ .eparate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 3 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green Ri ver 21 LOCATION: SE, SE 32-22-5 INVENTORY DATE: 8-27-81 ACREAGE: • 5 North A Approx. Scale: 1" = 200 COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR Green River DRAINAGE: CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name POW Palustrine , Open Water Open Water NOTE: The wetland edge shown above is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines 1or King County Wetlands." Lower Green It1 ver 21 OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: AR Herbs: Shrubs: SX, SD Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: CX, JE, LM Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Unknown Condition: Outflow enters: Stream POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: 0 ac. ft. 0 ac. ft. :TLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: uata was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Rank iby percentile) Sub -basin County -wide Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage 7 16 in downstream areas Biology: quarity.of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species 46 35 Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, 38 23 surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall 84 91 environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, 69 31 game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are 4<tscribed in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. t guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in eparate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 3 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green River 24 LOCATION INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE CLASSIFICATION: PEM5 W 4-21-5 8-27-81 39' Fish and MIAlife Service North -44 Approx. Scale: 1" = COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Palustrine, Emergent, Narrow - leaved persistent (Juncus effusus) Green River Common Name Shallow Marsh, 500' NOTE: The wetland edge shown above Is approximate. in marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands Is usually dear. However,, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a dIscussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." tuwer urccrr nl vu OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern:- Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: AR SX, SD EX, PA, JE RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 19 ac. ft. 19 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Heavy grazing by cattle. iTLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank.- The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage 92 88 in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species 38 29 Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, 53 35 surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall 38 67 environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, 46 69 garne birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are '-scribed in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in 4parate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 • ..i�s'1`d• Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green River 26 LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE: SW, NW 9-21-5; SE, NE 8-21-5 8-28-81 6.5 -44 North A Approx. Scale: 1" = 500' COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Green River CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PFO4 Palustrine, Forested, Needle- Forested leaved evergreen (Western Red Cedar) PFO1 Palustrine, Forested, Broad- leaved deciduous (Red Alder) Forested NOTE: The wetland edge shown above is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands Is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: PS, AR, FL, TS, TP Herbs: LA, MU, 0S, SD, TL Shrubs: SR, AC, CS, GS, MD, RP, RS, SD Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: AF, PA Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 2 ac. ft. 7 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Considerable amount of litter in north portion. .ETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: .a was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numeric& values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding Iandforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide 76 70 23 8 15 7 15 40 7 44 Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories, The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in .tparate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green Ri ver 29 LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE: SE 30-22-5 8-28-81 3.4 North Approx. Scale: 1" = 200' COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR Green River DRAINAGE: CLASSUFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PEM5 Palustrine, Emergent, Narrow- Shallow Marsh leaved persistent (Cattail) PSS1 Palustrine, Scrub -Shrub, Broad- Scrub -Shrub leaved deciduous (Willow) NOTE: The wetland edge shown above Is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands Is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands ere less dtstinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." L.VWCl u1CCr! ril YCl L7 OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: FL, PT RR, TL SX RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 0 ac. ft. 5 ac. ft. !TLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site.. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin 46 61 46 84 84 County -wide 38 50 31 93 51 Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks,- specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are ' -scribed in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in aparate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 Exhibit Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO. 24 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN JUNE 1987 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface Water Management Division King County, Washington King County Executive Tim Mill King County Council Audrey Gruger, District 1 Cynthia Sullivan. District 2 Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director Surfacc Water Management Division Joseph J. Sinnler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Dave Clark. Manager. River & Water Resource Section Larry Gibbons, Manager, Project Management and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bruce Barker, Engineer Arnv Stonkus, Engineer Ray Steiger, Engineer Pete Ringen, Engineer Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants, Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist, Earth Consultants, Inc. Parks, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill. Division Manager Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section • Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Contributing Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager R Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert R. Fuerstenberg, Biologist & Team Leader Matthew J. Bruengo, Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Dyanne Sheldon. Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker, Earth Scientist Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support 'Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Truax, Planning Support Technician Brian Vanderburg, Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Byerly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig, Technical Writer Virginia Newman, Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller, Typesetter Jaki Reed, Typesetter Lela Lira, Office Technician Marty Cox, Office Technician P:CR TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUM\I.\RY 1 II. INTRODUCTION III. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN 2 A. Overview 2 B. Effects of Urbanization 4 C. Specific Problems 4 1. Erosion damage 5 2. Threat of landstiding 5 3. Sedimentation 5 4. Destruction of fish habitat 5 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS 6 A. Prevent accelerated erosion and landsliding 6 B. Improve habitat 7 V. MAP 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A: Estimated Costs APPENDIX B: Capital. Improvement Project Ranking APPENDIX C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations A-1 B-1 C-1 I. SUMMARY The L,otrrr Green Raver Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila and Auburn. The study area considered here includes the unincorporated areas of the basin. which can be roughly separated into northern and southern portions that are divided b% the Lower Green River. The two portions are distinctly different in their development patterns, with the northern area dominated by the commercial development of South Center shopping mall, two major interstate freeways, and light industrial activities. In tiie southern portion, single-family residential land uses dominate. Urbanization processes in this basin are expected to continue, with impervious surfaces in some areas expanding as much as five times their present levels. As might be expected in a basin so heavily urbanized, there are numerous environmental problems. The basin contains many sensitive areas, particularly along the steep slopes of tributary valley walls that are susceptible to erosion and landsliding. Stormflows, which have increased as the basin has been developed, have caused gullying, landsliding, and other damage along many steep slopes. These problems have also increased sedimentation downstream. Flooding has occurred in some places as both natural and artificial conveyance systems have become clogged with sediment. Worst -case examples of erosion were found at the Kent Highlands landfill, adjacent to King County's Grand View Park, where storm flows have caused erosion of the landfill material. Sediments and chemicals from decomposing trash have washed into the stream system. Flooding potential was found on Tributary 0068 at two locations. Fish habitat !assess were significant in the northern portion of the basin, with one of the worst examples located on Tributary 0036. Recommended solutions in the Lower Green River Basin include 1) preventing further erosion and landsliding by using both natural and artificial retention/detention (R/D), prohibiting certain harmful development practices (such as routing storm flows over steep slopes), and revegetating streambanks; and 2) improving habitat in the basin by preventing the further deterioration of water quality, protecting riparian corridors, and reestablishing streams and streambanks, where feasible. II. INTRODUCTION: History and Goals of the Program In 1985 the King County Council approved funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water Management Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of 29 major drainage basins located in King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins •-Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks -- in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recommend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field observations to examine geology, hydrology, and habitat conditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important element of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to 1) critical problems needing immediate solutions, 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage conditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them in developing more detailed regulatory measures and specific capital improvement plans. They P:LGR 1 are not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems: instead. they are to be used as initial surveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be mad. Due t0 the limited amount of time available for the field work in each basin, the reports crust be viewed as descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. Recommendations contained in each report provide a description of potential mitigative measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental protection through capital project construction or development approval conditions. The appropriate extent of such measures will be decided on a case -by -case basis by County officials responsible for reviewing applications for permit approvals and for choosing among competing projects for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute for a more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on a site -specific basis for any proposal. M. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN The field investigation in the Lower Green River Basin was conducted in February 1987 by Ray Heller, resource planner; Arny Stonkus, engineer; and Lee Benda, geologist. Their findings and recommendations are presented in the following discussion. A. Overview of the Basin Geographic and land use features. The Lower Green River Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila on the north and Auburn on the south. Parts of the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn lie within the basin, which is divided into two portions. The southern portion lies east of the Green River between the cities of Kent and Auburn; the northern portion lies west of the Green River between the Kent -Des Moines Road and State Road (SR) 518. The southern portion of the basin, which includes large residential and commercial areas within the city of Auburn, was not included in the study area. The areas that were studied --the unincorporated parts of this southern portion of the basin -- are primarily contained in the Soos Creek Community Planning Area. Single-family residential land use dominates in this area, although small farms also occupy sizable acreages. The effects of future development may be dramatic, as some subcatchments are projected to expand in impervious surfaces to as much as five times their current levels. This development will be mainly single-family residential, interspersed with some multi -family units. The northern portion of the basin is dominated by the commercial areas of the South Center shopping mall, its surrounding commercial and light -industrial land uses, three major arterials (Interstates 5 [I-51 and 405 [I-405} and Pacific Highway south), and the shopping district north of Seattle -Tacoma (Sea-Tac) International Airport. Single-family residences greatly outnumber multi -family units in this portion of the basin, which is contained in the Highline and Green River Community Planning Areas, Future growth in this northern portion will consist of commercial and multi -family land uses, including the conversion of some areas presently zoned single-family to denser zoning classifications. Dominant geologic and geomorphic features. The composition of the geologic materials in the Lower Green River valley is dominated by glacial sediments. The glacial sediments include an extensive till layer that is located at the top of the valley scarp. Deposits of recessional outwash sand and other glacio-fluvial sands are locally P:LGR interspersed on lop of the till deposits and along the edges of the valley. The valley bottom is made up of more recent alluvial sand and silt deposited by the Green and White Rivers before diversion of the White into the Puyallup River in lc)(?;:. The v.ide floodplain through which the Green River used to meander (before it was diked) is composed of deep floodplain, channel, and lacustrine sediments up to 100 feet thick. There are a few outcrops of sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Puget (croup in the basin. The morphology of the Lower Green River basin is dominated by the valley that was formed by the Green and White Rivers prior to the most recent glacial advances. The east and west valley walls were cut by numerous minor tributaries originating in the uplands above the valley escarpment. These tributaries formed steep -sided valleys and alluvial -debris fans at the mouths of the basins. Along the tributaries, landslides and slumps play an active role in maintaining the steep, hummocky valley walls. Historically. the Green and White Rivers meandered through the extensive floodplain located between the valley walls. The White River was diverted south to the Puyallup River; the Green has been straightened, diked, and cleaned of organic and inorganic debris, such as trees and boulders. This essentially isolates the river from its natural floodplain and reduces its present role as a geomorphic agent along the valley floor and walls. The upland areas of the basin have a general morphology indicative of glacial abrasion, deposition, and more recent fluvial erosion caused by minor tributaries. Hydrologic and hydraulic features. The Lower Green River Basin is composed of numerous smaller subbasins which are significantly different from each other in their drainage characteristics. The subbasins are mostly urbanized in the northern and rural in the southern portions of the basin where flows enter the Green River via relatively natural stream channels. Alterations in natural stream corridors occur at or near either the Lower Green River itself or at I-5 culvert crossings. Whereas most subbasins studied exhibited serious effects from urbanization, many were in relatively good condition and/or might be potential sites for stream restoration projects. A number of wetlands in the southern section of the basin and a few small lakes scattered throughout the basin help to mitigate some of the effects of peak flows and excess volumes generated from urbanization. Tributaries flowing from the northern side of the basin into the Lower Green River are highly urbanized drainages which are in need of R/D facilities to reduce the present and anticipated runoff associated with expanses of impervious areas. The rural southern drainages are slated for the greatest increases in impervious surface due to proposed developments, and are in need of regional R/D/ facilities. Habitat characteristics. The habitat conditions in the streams of the Lower Green River Basin vary considerably. In the northern portion of the basin habitat has been almost completely destroyed; in the southern portion, there are reaches which have been damaged but might be restored to use by fish and other wildlife. At present, there are no tributaries in this basin which support anadromous fish. Commercial development in the northern portion of the basin has severely altered streams and riparian corridors. The clearing and filling of land, construction of buildings. and roadways and piping and diking of streams have eliminated spawning gravel, and other natural features necessary for fish use. In addition, the extensive acres of impervious surfaces associated with intense commercial development have greatly increased the volumes and rates of storm runoff, thereby eroding and destroying those P:LGR 3 few. remaining natural reaches downstream in the northern portion. Complicatinf these conditions even further are the flap gates placed along the main stem of the Green River at most points where tributaries enter; these structures would effecti\ely prevent anv fish from entering the streams. The southern portion of the basin experiences many of the same habitat problems as the northern portion, however to a lesser extent. This problems could worsen as residential development expands these next few years. Without specific efforts to protect the environment, habitat will be lost in the southern portion of the Lower Green River Basin, as it has been in the northern portion. B. Effects of Urbanization in the Basin As in many other rapidly growing basins in the County, the Lower Green River Basin suffers from increased rates and volumes of runoff generated by the impervious surfaces of roofs, roads, and parking lots. When this runoff flows into natural channels, it causes erosion, scour, and downstream sedimentation. Sedimentation fills spawning gravels and pools, eliminates fish habitat; limits channel capacity; and creates the conditions for bank overtopping and flooding. Surface water originating on pavement incorporates greases, oils and other toxic hydrocarbons associated with urban areas. The stormwater that enters drainage ditches flows at an even faster rate than in natural channels, thereby magnifying the damage it can cause. The damages caused by increased runoff in urban areas such as the Lower Green River Basin might be less severe if wetlands, floodplains, and other natural features had been left intact to attenuate and filter the flows. These elements for the most part have disappeared with development. While development has been accompanied by the installation of artificial conveyance and R/D systems, these have often been undersized, poorly designed and installed, or otherwise inadequate to handle the cumulative effects of runoff from new development. For example, the lower portions of Tributaries 0061, 0068, and 0069 were found to contain particularly serious damage in the form of erosion, scour, sedimentation and the elimination of vegetation from streambanks and corridors. Flooding in these tributaries seems to have increased, in part, from the use of undersized drainage pipes. This problem is repeated along the lower reaches of Tributaries 0036A, 0036B, 0036C, and 0038, where flows have have been piped on their approach to 1-5 or the Lower Green River. Several extreme cases of erosion -incised channels, and landslides -- in part resulting from flows diverted from their natural drainage course and passing through King County Grandview Park -- were noted on the Kent Highlands landfill area. The destruction of pre-existing tightlined conveyance systems has caused surface water at this location to flow unchecked over the unconsolidated former gravel pit slopes and natural hillslopes. Erosion in this case will also cause water quality deterioration, as toxicants from deteriorating garbage and sediments eventually enter the Lower Green River. C. Specific Problems Identified Problems -- both existing and anticipated -- in the Lower Green River Valley are clearly development -related. Earlier descriptions of the basin and the effects of urbanization pointed out these problems in a general way. Specific details of the most serious problems identified during reconnaissance are provided below. 1. Erosion is damaging both public and private property in the Laver Green River Basin. The majority of the erosion problems in the basin are P:LGR 4 associated with the steep slopes within the small tributary valleys and along the major valley walls. a. Gully erosion is occurring adjacent to King County's Grandy,v.v Park, where the routing of concentrated storm flows over the steep =hillslopcs could cause even more serious mass -wasting. Such intense gullying is also occurring in the glacio-fluvial sand adjacent to the Kent Highlands landfill, a situation requiring immediate solution. b. Channel and bank erosion from high peak flows is occuring along many tributaries, particularly those with narrow, relatively steep sides. On Tributary 0016 (RM. 10) and Tributary 0069 (RM. 50) there are examples of this type of erosion. 2. Landsliding is both a present and future threat on steep valley walls. The removal of vegetation, as well as the routing of stormwater along steep slopes (see also 1.a. above), may result in landslides. Many of the valley walls show evidence of historic landslide activity, such as scarps, tilled blocks, chaotic terrain, and tilted trees. A portion of land along the valley wall in the landslide terrain has been put up for sale at S 312th St. and 104th Ave. SE. This area should be assessed for its stability prior to development and all regulatory safeguards (statutory and other regulations) should be used to prevent landsliding. 3. Sedimentation accompanies the kind of erosion processes discussed above. For instance sediment is filling the stream channel on Tributary 0068 at river miles .30 and .60. This is reducing channel capacity (increasing the possibility of flooding at these locations), as well as degrading fish habitat and water quality. Severe sedimentation in the lower portion of Tributary 0069, where a sediment fan presents a potential barrier to fish. 4. Fish habitat has been destroyed by urbanization throughout the basin, particularly in the northern portion. a. The elimination of habitat features from streambeds and riparian corridors has made most of the basin's tributaries unusable for fish. As discussed in III.A. above, stream channels have been severely altered in the Lower Green River Basin. As a result, large organic debris, pools, gravels, and other elements of godd instream habitat have disappeared. One of the worst cases was found on Tributary 0036, along the north side of SR 518 near 42nd Avenue S. b. Poor water quality is caused by three separate problems in this basin. First, streams are contaminated by the domestic garbage dumped directly into streambeds and ravines. Second, streams are being adversely affected by the accelerated erosion in the Kent Highlands landfill. Sediment from the landfill is being carried downstream, polluting water and eroding banks along the way. The latter is expected to continue and worsen, if not addressed. Third, greases, oils, and toxic hydro -carbons from highways, parking lots, and commercial areas around South Center are degrading water quality. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS The solutions proposed for this basin focus on eliminating damage to the natural drainage system, restoring natural drainage conditions where possible, and preventing further damage P:LGR 5 throughout the basin as the urbanization process continues. In most cases these solutions will require the cooperation of local government and other interested agencies. At the present time such arrangements already exist among the King County Surface \kilter Managment Division: the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn; and the Washington State Department of Transportation. The purpose of these arrangements is to identify and propose solutions to hydraulic and habitat problems in the basin and to develop cost -sharing agreements where capital improvements are required. These efforts should continue, and similar joint work should be undertaken among other interested agencies; as appropriate. A. Prevent further accelerated erosion and landsliding in the Lower Green River Basin, where possible. Erosion is the source of many other problems discussed in this and other basins reports. By reducing erosion and landslide problems, sedimentation will also be minimized in the both natural and artificial conveyance systems. When sedimentation is reduced flooding problems will be reduced throughout the basin. The steps toward erosion control are listed below. 1. Preserve wetlands for their RID values, and for the valuable roles they play in enhancing water quality (through filtration) and providing fish and wildlife habitat. Natural R/D facilities, such as wetlands help to attenuate storm flows and prevent accelerated erosion in downstream areas susceptible to erosion damage. The southern portion of the basin contains several wetlands that serve as natural R/D areas. 2. Promote infiltration of excess surface water in upland areas where geologic analysis indicates it will not cause landsliding and other similar problems. Groundwater contaimination should also be considered in this analysis. 3. Preserve vegetation along steep slopes by establishing native growth protection easements, and appropriate building setbacks, and prohibiting vegetation removal. Protected vegetation should include trees as well as shrubs and groundcover. 4. Prohibit the concentration of sormflows over steep slopes. Require that stormflows be attenuated from above with adequate R/D, tightlined or diverted to stable channels. The drainage and erosion problem adjacent to King Countv's Grandview Park should receive immediate attention to alleviate the severe gully erosion that is presently occurring. 5. Prohibit construction along steep slopes identified as landslide hazard areas in the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (SAMF). In addition, strengthen the criteria used by Building and Land Development to review development proposals in landslide hazard areas below valley walls. More restrictive criteria will minimize the potential for property damage for property damage caused by erosion and landsliding in the basin. 6. Prevent instream and bank erosion caused by livestock by limiting their access to stream channels. This will preserve streambank vegetation and eliminate the trampling of banks (a direct source of sedimentation). This is particularly important along the Green River, where livestock are presently causing damage. P:LGR 6 7. Construct or upgrade R/D facilities to assure adequacy to contain both current and anticipated stormwater flows. Tributary channels currently experiencing channel and bank erosion (c.g.. 0061 and 0069) should be analyzed immediately for their R/D needs. Future developments should be reviewed using criteria that require Rill provisions to maintain stormwater runoff at the level necessary to prevent adverse impacts such as erosion. b. Upgrade the existing earthern berm and R/D pond on Tributary 0036D at collection point 7 (47th Avenue S and S 173rd) and add energy: dissipators for outflow from the pond. This will improve the overall function of the facility. 8. Replace undersized conveyance pipes, where necessary. Analyze the adequacy of pipes at key locations in all areas where development has occurred or is planned. Review natural capacities as part of this assessment for stormwater conveyance. B. Improve habitat in the Lower Green River Basin stream system where practicable. 1. Prevent the deterioration of water quality from the toxicants of road and parking lot runoff, from domestic trash (including erosion at the Kent Highlands landfill), and from sedimentation. a. Construct an R/D facility on Tributary 0069 adjacent to Wetland 3226 to provide 3 acre-feet of storage. The facility will intercept drainage from roadside ditches on Southeast 312th Street and cleanse it by means of an oil/water separator. b. Increase enforecment of regulations against the dumping of domestic garbage into ravines and stream channels. Garbage not only degrades water quality as it deteriorates, but it creates fish blockages in tributaries (e.g.. Trib. 0069 at RM .65). c. See A.4. above, regarding the attenuation of stormflows near Kent Highlands landfill and Grandview Park. Preventing severe erosion at these locations will also decrease the washing of chemicals and sediments from the landfill (adjacent to the Grandview Park) into the stream system. 2. Protect against further destruction to channels and riparian corridors in order to preserve the essential features of fish habitat. a. See A.2., 3. and 6. above for recommendations related to the protection of these resources. b. Establish stream -corridor guidelines to prohibit clearing, filling and building within riparian corridors. All streams in the basin would benefit from these guidelines. 3. Reestablish stream and streamside habitat in the northern portion of the basin where these elements have already been severely altered. These restoration efforts should occur during development (or redevelopment) of a site. Opportunities for restoration presently exist on Tributaries 0036A, 0036B, 0036D, and 0038. P:LGR 7 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (North Section) Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary 0 Collection Point Stream 0038 Tributary Number •3205 Proposed Project o Yx July, 1987 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (South Section) Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary 0 Collection Point Stream 0061 Tributary Number •3201 Proposed Project July, 1987 APPENDIX A LSTIMATED COSTS: PROPOSED CAPITAL. IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN NOTE: Indicates project was identified by the Surface water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. Project Collect. Number Point Project Description 3201* 18 Construct R/D facility with 3.0 acre-ft. of storage adjacent to upper end of Wetland 3226. Intcrceptthc roadside runoff on SE 312th so that it will be retained in the upper wetland. Further biological assessment is needed to assure this project does not decrease habitat values. 3204 15 Construct R/D facility on Trib.0061 at RM 1.25 which would have a capacity of approx. 3.7 acre ft. 3205* Install a control sinicture and excavate Iwo existing stream channels to provide 2.5 acre-ft. of storage (Trib. 0036B, 0036C). Problem Addressed Decreases potential downstream flooding and improves water duality. Lessen impact on downstream riparian habi- tat. Provides storage for runoff from future development. Eliminates channel scouring, road erosion and potential downstream flooding Estimated Costs and Comments $99,00O (subject to right of way acquisitions). $160,000 (dependent on land acquisitions). $85,000 (Dependent on right-of- way acquisitions) P:I.(IR.APA A -I APPENDIX B CAPITAL_ IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN :A total of three sites had been proposed for Surface Water Management (SWM) projects prior to the field reconnatssance of the Lower Green River Basin. One project remains proposed as iden- tified. one project has been changed to an R/D facility. one R/D facility has been added, and one proposed R/D facility has been eliminated by the consensus of the field team because it is located in the wetland serving as the cite of Kent's water supply. The previous SWM project list for the Lower Green River Basin had an estimated cost of S700.000. compared to a revised figure of S34 t.000 for the remaining three projects. The revised costs are a result of lower estimates for right-of-way acquisitions. These projects are listed in the table below, which summarizes the scores and costs of the proposed projects in the basin. These projects were rated according to criteria set forth by the SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee. The first rating question. ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO GO." could be answered affirmatively for the projects below. These projects can now be considered for merging into the "live" CIP list. Any projects scoring more than 100 points should be considered for incorporation into the six -year CIP plans. Project No. Score Rank No. Cost 3201 * 103 1 S 99,000 3205' 73 2 85.,000 3204 60 3 160.000 TOTAL S344 000 x Indicates project was identified by Surface Water Management prior to reconnaissance. P:CLGAPB/mlm B-1 APPL ADIX C DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN All items listed here are located on final display maps in the offices of Surface Water Management, Building and Land Development, and Basin Planning. 'frig. & Collect. Existing Item" River Mile Point Category Prop. Proj. Conditions and Prohlems 1 Section 15 12 Cicology & hydrology 2 0001 RM .29-.3(1 16 Geology 3 0001 20 Geology RM .31 4 0001 20 Geology RM 30.60 P:I..CiAPC/mlm Runoff from Kent highlands landfill and sub -basin tributary to King County Grandview Park is causing extensive gullying and steep -walled valleys. Presents a potential hazard. Extensive sedimen- tation is resulting from erosion. Lower portion of channel is experiencing channel and bank erosion. A very large gully (small valley) is developing due to discharging con- centrated flow on steep Slopes. Landslide area is posted for sale. C-1 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued extensive erosion. Fill material will continue to scour away because of lack of compaction. Considerable volumes of fill (contributing to poor water quality) will still he conveyed. Uncontrolled runoff is the cause. Increasing erosion with in- creasing flows in the basin. • Continued erosion; may be a public hazard due to 30' vertical walls. Possible hazards associated with development could occur. Recommendations 'I'ightline runoff down to valley floor in a sale, nonerosivc manner. Plan and develop adequate rcgional R/D facilities in the basin. Determine whether existing facilities should be upgraded for greater control of flows and storage. "l'ightline drainage to Green River. Perform critical predevelopment review. Trib. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 5 0001 20 Geology RM 31.00 6 0036A 9 ilabitat RM .80 7 0036B 8 00368 9 0036B 10 003613 P:I.CiAI'C/mlm 4 Hydrology 3205 4 I Iabitat 4 Iydrology 4 Ecology [.urge gully (small valley) formed by development- rciated drainage. Wash water from Segale truck center flowing under Trager Rd. contains oil film and quantities of algae. Backwater in channel appeared to be caused by defective riser control. Low -gradient stream chan- nels on Tribs. 0036B and 0036C. FIoodplain approxi- mately 25' wide. Stream corridor and in - stream habitat both heavi- ly impacted by erosive storm flows, clearing, and sedimentation. Manhole inlet with trash rack next to new extensive roadfill. Damaged inflow pipes into manhole control structure. Channel is experiencing channel and hank erosion. Cause is probably high flows. (:-2 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued erosion. Recommendations i'ightline drainage. Same. Install and maintain a wastewater treatment facility before releasing water to ditch and ultimately the Green River. If no upstream R/D exists, then water may back up during storms. Riser replacement may eliminate this problem. Further deterioration of the stream system. Roadfill embankment will continue to erode. Erosion will continue. Excavate and install control struc- ture for an R/D pond. This system needs R/D to lessen impacts an the system from urban runoff. -Locate control at intersection of Tribs. 36B and 36(:. -Reduce existing storm flows. -Restrict future development to release runoff at noncrosive rates. -Require setbacks from tops of ravines. -Repair and replace pipes in manhole structure_ -Stabilize roadfill. Build upstream R/') f,u:tltty. 'Drib. & Collect. Item River Mile Point Category 11 0036D 7 I Iyd rology 12 0061 14,15 Habitat RM .00-1.40 13 0061 RM .01-.15 14 0061 RM .02 1':I .(;APC/m1m Geology 14 1lydrology Proposed Existing Project Conditions and Problems R/D berm has collapsed. Severe Instrcam erosion above and below the faci- lity. Sedimentation and erosion in lower reach by farm adjacent to the Green River. Middle reaches have nice pools and riffles. Four waterfalls up to 10' high keep this from being an anadromous stream. Stream ravine is steep and mostly vege- tated. Best trout stream habitat in the basin. I3ank erosion and sedimen- tation in channel located on private property at mouth of basin. Erosion is limited to this sec- tion. Cause of this ero- sion is not certain. Scouring, hank erosion, channel erosion, sediment build up in stream. The channel capacity is too small for the flows pre- sently generated. C-3 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Instrcam erosion will con- tinue. No energy dissipation from Drisco pipe above berm area. Sediment build up from erosion will migrate downst ream. Future development could create up to four times the current amount of impervious surface. This could fill pools with sediment and destabilize the large organic. debris in stream. Possibly continued erosion with increased development in the basin. Degradation of riparian corridor will continue. Erosion will continue. Recommendations -Stabilize and upgrade earthen berm. -Provide energy dtssipators for Drisco pipe outflow. -Establish a stream corridor pro- tecting the stream and adjacent ravine sidcslopes from clearing. -Future development should release stormwater at nonerosive rates. -Develop adequate RID for the basin to prevent erosion. -Reestablish the channel floodplain at the mouth of the basin. Use onsitc infiltration to the ma‘i- mum extent possible for new construction. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 15 0061 15 IIydrology 3204 RM 1.25 16 0061 14 I lyd rotogy RM 1_50 17 0068 17 RM .25-.35 I labitat 18 0068 17 hydrology RM .25 19 0068 17 12M .30 P:1.(iAPC/rnlm habitat Stream segment meanders with little change in ele- vation. Erosion and down - cutting exist in lower segments of stream. Existing outlet of Wetland 3224. Floods over existing gravel road. This wetland is owned by the city of Kent as a water supply source (approx. 86 acres). Nice -looking stream with few pools. Good stream - side cover and instrcam stabil-ity. Lots of bcnthic organisms. No fish observed. Outfall has instream ero- sion taking place. large fill of combustible and construction debris on left bank. Fill is unstable and sliding downhill toward stream. C-4 Anticipated Conditions and Problems No change in existing con- ditions. Impact on downstream areas will con- tinue. Increased flows and flood frequency due to develop- ment. Use as a well field for water supply. Further instream instability from future development storm runoff. Probable vegetation clearing in stream corridor from development. Erosion of stream channel/ hank, if flows continue unchecked. llealth and water quality hazard. Recommendations Construct an RID facility with 3.7 ac/ft. of storage to mitigate downstream problems. Develop an interlocal agreement to examine the possibility of using part of the wetland for a regional 12/1..) facility. -Lstabtish and enforce tit ream corri- dor guidelines. -Future development should release stormwaters at non -erosive; rates. Subcatchment 17 should use; onsite 12/I) and infiltration systems to the maxi- mum extent possible for control of peak flows. -I3ALD grading and filling section has been contacted. -Stabilize and r_.egetate slope down to stream. -Prohibit filling in st ream ravine. 'Trip. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 20 0068 17 RM .60 21 0069 18 RM .00-.90 22 0069 18 RM .10-.90 23 0069 18 RM .10 P:I fiAPC/mlm I lahitat Habitat Geology Geology Strum becomes eroded from road ditch flows above I0S111 Ave. SE. Fill occurring adjacent to stream in SW corner of SE 299th St. and 108th Ave. SE. Minimal fish habitat potential in this stream. Access to stream is open to Green River, but stream is heavily impacted by runoff. This is causing sedimen- tation of the channel in lower portion, erosion and garbage in mid- section, and ditches by trailer park in upper section. High frequency of hank erosion, some small streamside landslides associated with bank ero- sion. Sedimentation resulting from channel and bank erosion described above. Sedimentation is occurring over a large area and may threaten private property. Anticipated Conditions and Problems More erosion and possible flooding due to fill in the stream corridor. Subcatchment projected to quadruple in amount of impervious surface. The subcatchment is pro- jected to expand in imper- vious surface five times that in 1985. All problems exhibited in 1987 will pro- bably get worse. As development increases in the basins, erosion will increase. Sedimentation will increase with continued development in the basin. Recommendations No obvious regional 12/t.) sites, so onsilc 12/I) will he critical in this subcatchment. Release rates of stornlwuter should be at nunerosivc levels. Assess the fish -habitat potential of this stream before doing any habitat projects. Reducing existing and future storm runoff will be key to maintenance of a good stream. 1Zcleasing stormwater runoff at noncrosive rates would help accomplish this goal. Plan and develop adequate R/1.) as population and development increase in the basin. Same as RM .10.90. Also construct sediment detention pond. at the mouth of the stream. hrih. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 24 0069 1 k I2M .10 25 0069 18 12M .65 26 0069 18 RM .90-1.10 P:l .GAPC/m1m I lydrology 1 labitat llydrology 3201 Undersized pipe for existing flows. Evidence of debris from backwater. Ciarbagc pushed over ravine embankment is blocking stream. Presents fish blockage and is visually very unpleasant. Wetland 3226 is bissected by SE 312th St. Flows into the northern wetland are blocked due to non- functional culvert on opposite side of SE 312th. This has caused the asphalt road to begin to fail from saturation and standing water. Wetland 3226 contains a wide variety of trees. C-6 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Increase in flows from development in upper catch- ment. Instrcam erosion and headwall erosion will result. Possible water quality problem and further fish blockage. Potential road failure of SE 312th St. Continued impact on northern portion of Wetland 3226 if road- side ditch flow is not curtailed. Introduction of petroleum by-products into wetland system. Recommendations Increase the capacity of the existing pipe system. Consider project to remove garbage to allow fish passage without further destabilization of the stream»bed. -Construct an R/O facility on the southern portion of Wetland 3226. -Intercept the roadside flows on S1 312th to southern portion of Wetland 3226. This will incorporate a major flow source of the region into an R'1> facility and mitigate a major impact on the northern section of wetland. -Perform a detailed wetland study to determine environmental impact. TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION A site visit was conducted on May 23, 2017. There were no problems reported or observed during the field inspection. Based on the review of the topographic maps and the site inspection, in general most surface water is sheet flowing from the west side of the site to the east. There is one catch basin located at a low area on the west side of the existing building which conveys the runoff from the west side of the site. This catch basin is currently full of sludge. All other surface runoff sheet flows to four catch basins located along the east property boundary which abuts Southcenter Parkway.. Surface water on the northwest corner of the site conveys to an existing asphalt swale and discharges into a catch basin. The southwest corner of the property north of the project area discharges surface water into the same asphalt swale within the project area. Furthermore, there was no defined drainage course leaving the site along the south boundary line. Therefore, it is presumed that any off -site discharge from the low area near the southwest corner of the site would leave the site along the west property line and flow into the right-of- way. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general, are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems are defined as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructed conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a 10-year event. Examples include inundation of a shoulder or lane of a roadway. Examples include overflows collecting in yards or pastures, shallow flows across driveways, minor flooding in crawlspaces or unheated garages/outbuildings, and minor erosion. Based on the site inspection there was no conveyance, flooding, or erosion problems observed within the downstream drainage course. Three of the four catch basins within the site area appear to be full of sludge and debris and will need to be maintained if they are to remain. 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the concentration of runoff into erosion -sensitive open drainage features. Severe erosion problems warrant additional attention because they pose a significant threat either to health and safety or to public or private property. Based on the site inspection, there was no evidence of potential erosion sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to the downstream conveyance system. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." 18363.003.doc As previously mentioned, there was no evidence of flooding observed during the site inspection on May 23, 2017. The downstream drainage system is contained within the existing public right- of-way and primarily consists of catch basins west side of Southcenter Parkway and the north side of Minkler Boulevard. 18363.003.doc Exhibit J Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table Basin: Lower Green Basin OFF -SITE ANALYSIS DMINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Chick-fil-A Subbasin Name: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Subbasin Number: Symbol Drainage Component Type, Name, and Size Drainage Component Description Slope Distance from Site Discharge Existing Problems Potential Problems Observations of Field Inspector, Resource Reviewer, or Resident See Map Type: sheet Clow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume % Ft. Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing. sedimentation, incision, other erosion Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts 1 Sheet/shallow flow Runoff discharges from the site would flow into the Southcenter Parkway right -a- way into a series of catch basins. <1 0-10 None None No defined drainage path observed during site visit 2 Series of pipes and catch basins. Runoff flows north along the east side of Southcenter Parkway through a series of pipes, ranging in diameter from 30-42 inches, and catch basins. <1 10-500 None None 3 Series of pipes and catch basins. Runoff flows east along the north side of Minkler Blvd. through a series of pipes, ranging in diameter from 30-42 inches, and catch basins <1 500-4,000 None None . 8363.005.docx TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS Based on our site inspection and available topographic maps, the majority of the site slopes to a low area on the west side which abuts Southcenter Parkway. There is an existing driveway on the parcel to the south that runs parallel to the south boundary. This driveway appears to be higher in elevation which parallels the project site. Therefore, it is presumed that any stormwater discharge from the site would flow into Southcenter Parkway where the west parcel boundary abuts. From this point, stormwater flows to the north along the west side of Southcenter Parkway in a series of pipes and catch basins for a distance of approximately 250 feet. At this point, flows turn east and continue to flow in a series of catch basins and pipes along the north side of Minkler Boulevard for a distance of about 4,000 feet towards the Green River Trail. Based on our inspection of the downstream drainage course for the proposed project, there did not appear to be any current conveyance capacity, erosion, or flooding issues. The project will not see any increased flows compared to the existing site conditions. So, it is not anticipated that this project will create or exacerbate any problems in the downstream drainage infrastructure. 18363.003.doc 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology The existing 1.04-acre site consists mostly of pavement, a building structure, and vegetated landscaping. Soils are "till" type (Alderwood) and silt loam (Woodinville). Based on a site reconnaissance, available topography maps and adjacent developments, there are no significant upstream contributing basin areas. The site sheet flows to the south and east. See the attached Existing Basin Area Map. B. Developed Site Hydrology In the developed condition, the site will contain a commercial quick -serve food establishment with associated infrastructure such as parking area. An underground pipe conveyance system will be installed to convey stormwater runoff from the developed site to a water quality facility prior to public discharge. The facility has been design to provide the required water quality per the 2009 KCSWDM. Please refer to the Developed Site Map within this report for a detailed breakdown of the on -site land covers, as well as the calculations for the proposed drainage systems. C. Performance Standards This project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements, Enhanced Basic Water Quality, and falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions Basin. D. Flow Control System The project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements; however, the site also falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions basin. Based on this, stormwater runoff from the developed site must be released at a rate that matches existing conditions. The project will see a reduction in impervious surface areas and, as such, flow rates will be less once the project is completed. Per the 2009 KCSWDM, this project is required to apply flow control BMPs, if feasible, per Section 5.2.1.3 (Large Lot High Impervious BMP Requirements). Based on the findings noted in the Geotechnical Report, there is a moderate to high level of risk for liquefaction. Additionally, the Geotechnical Report recommends adequate positive drainage be provided to prevent an increase in moisture content of the building foundation, pavement, and backfill materials. Because of these concerns, this project will not propose to infiltrate or manage any stormwater on site. Therefore, no additional flow control will be proposed as part of this project. E. Water Quality System The proposed water control system has been sized and designed to meet enhanced basic water quality requirements in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. Enhanced water quality will be provided for this site by a Modular Wetland, which has General Use Level Designation (GULD) per the DOE. 18363.001.doc Figure 5 Existing Conditions Site Map 1=40' EXISTING DRAINAGE SWALE EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE PATTERN (TYP) /. / /// , / - SUCO '63641 SASE / ir r _ I SEWEN 44453103 RIM • 31 5` r' CONC DT 8 C NY,,,,,!_;i;e 3" e. C.0 F 1- 41 " W. .• SSE 20 16 Cui. 1 050034 CATCH Er SOIN RM 64" • '7.91 GCMG ENE •• r 6 61, FIJo. OF 611,\ 5GC7 LO' 00713' J 41PO4,30Ni! STA/14j , , . .._ .__ HHia 1.,W , .,., I r rt. : . ST MANOE - , . W H RACK I! 93A • ,28 7E 1 REC `--A-rNURCES. EC ESS 84 -----lip9 ' NO 0507210i63 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES i 5? JF EXISTING SITE MAP / 2'0' 15.06 P5P3G. EASEMENT 64112009TC ° MT). 9) AFT-EGT5 NOXTH tH? 54' 'HE •'; I 5'1' ..,.. i SO ra8'201/V r, 20' ol.DE i,sPAE,. EASEMI"NT so, 206570 / r-I6118-.68655 E CATCH DANN 7 GAS METER / / 1 2.00' , WV ..: 27 16 r--HOWER PANG. I X ON E_DG ..--• END OE LASIA467.5 ,IEC. \ '41.rFr'r / 4•tiiiiix ; , i•'" l-- ' k 1 i X-1 ; H I FR.S.P.W 12' CONC N 2460 0$ WS,J. , L. WATER VAUT MANHOLE ,,...-'44"2t1,23D4N O1 08 20 E / '- 200106.0100046,6 111%.00.0) 131 15,61 -'-7 31,8 • 2074. (17) W.-4 ; JIR') pE410; WREATEeR6NN01. 71AS703V22EW0316 EXISTING 621.40 1737? SOUTH00,6109 E•YD T1/814-..A WA A.P.N 262304-9056 SITE BASIN 1.08 ACRES SD lOT Lb/1T s61,05.! 2134815 2Ht0...r. 4E" CMS F :? 93. 105 CMP fAEr, 70.1; C ht4 r40( . r5 P4RKING 11- G ;7- Z172 Aka ECRESI & '14 PPEF REC CZ:77- S-5 - SS EGE: S G -s --- SS 1 N., ' s E• . LOGE yr ...-...--'- AP 8 I 623044120 . i FEIN.- 14 ' MEND, 1 14 74 ERS 3 ,I.0 601 C. ° 10 i t'rr I - --N. 19 HIGFEC 1 I .....• \=JOH? -----'-*-'-'7:"4' - 'A '''''''‘'•••••___. \‘ \ \-,,A t it? , \ \ , \ \--SEWER MANNOLE • ;25.34 12" iS. • 15.34 c 12" ' E 1459 12" C FY «i 15 14 UGHT SO _ , k '1-N88'51'40"W 271 85>" r5-0:04 MANHOLE 84' / DV • N.45 Z.-...yr•-3"" r. 5 • 2C.26 3373., E - 20 16 A.cFlpf.N...24.16)20,3431;: 0,2067 0 37, SD -- SD S- ---cSD ---- 77 STORM MANHO-E 60" P'M MIX) 65X41.6. 14NNHOLL • STREE UGH' EH" S 01t70E44,7 57 ,IdOX r 1, CO 88'51 '40''W cr, ATO-, 414344 22 5. 5' :ONG E , 11 • - 14/ ,• ›„„„, ,1 < 6451044.N7 t 634383 co- c<, r-- W •CNZ 7G:3, ; O Ili p 1320)- 100' 0 _ • EADEMENI - GATC7 MTN / o, 523 34 12' D.I. SW • 21 10 6831 SANITARY UltrEN 643 CATCH 032.31 RIM - 23.16 311.1 OF 611130t I IP°E 'P.!:ETADC/II:1.410'0726 23 72 • I • I, 24" COW, Fr • 13.02 ; . • 1224.: coCONKC 4 63 2122 +44. woCiaRo. 1.7E1,0' Yi..T 9 20' 67137 95938, EASEMENT 844123170113 (THENCE SW; T 110 TIFFINCE WIT 103 10 A POWER IV YA•LX.1 * ---CA';"47UNCBAS236821.7 22.23 (..„141 ND MONUMENT DI CASE ; I ift7 bEF0,1,0WACK G.APPI.1.40.E7XAT P; \!. ,rir SOUTHCENTEM WIN? ieA 44- '4 ill' "A En: EXISTING OVERFLOW ROUTE THROUGH \ EXISTING DRIVEWAY RV • 23.10 CONC. NYr - 22.35 FIGURE 5 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits\ 18363-Figure 5.dwg 6/5/2017 11:33 AM JCAREY Figure 6 Developed Conditions Site Map 0 1"=40' PROPOSED STORM COLLECTION AND,/ CONVEYANCE SYSTEM (TYP) 6' rr�� 5 <T�HG ENG\N*. DISTURBED AREA 1.08 ACRES,- "/i 11 i�1� , / I; —fi 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • i \ DEVELOPED CONDITIONS SITE MAP P12 LC LRG 107 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND NET 4,343 S.F. FF=26.60 SITE INFORMATION EXISTING ON —SITE SURFACE AREAS TOTAL LOT AREA: 45,431 SF (1.04 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA: 47,241 SF (1.08 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 43,165 SF (0.99 AC) PERVIOUS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 4,076 SF (0.09 AC) PROPOSED ON —SITE SURFACE AREAS TOTAL LOT AREA: 45,431 SF (1.04 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA: 47,241 SF (1.08 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 30,968 SF (0.71 AC) TOTAL PERVIOUS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 16,273 SF (0.37 AC) 1 L $n, Ai.G'/iL 1 TRENCH DRAIN TO BYPASS OFF -SITE FLOWS OIL/WATER SEPARATOR MODULAR WETLAND FIGURE 6 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits\18363—Figure 6.dwg 7/10/2017 5:13 PM JCAREY 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Conveyance system calculations will be provided in the final TIR. 18363.001.doc 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES The following special reports and studies are included: 6.1 Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon Consultants, Inc. dated May 19, 2017 18363.001.doc DRAFT Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 Terracon Project No. 81175042 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Mountlake Terrace, Washington Offices Nationwide Established in 1965 Employee -Owned terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental llerracon Construction Materials Facilities May 19, 2017 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 5200 Bufington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349 Attn: Mr. Shwartz P: (303) 519-72063 E: steve.schwartz@cfacorp.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Terracon Project No. 81175042 . Dear Mr. Shwartz, lrerracon Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for the above referenced project. These services were performed in accordance with the Master Services Agreement (MSA) between Chick-fil-A, Inc. and Terracon, dated March 31, 2005. This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions conceming this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Brett O'Brien, EIT Staff Geotechnical Engineer David A. Baska, PE, PhD Geotechnical Department Manager Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical • Environmental Construction Materials • Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1 2.1 Project Description 1 2.2 Site Location and Description 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 Site Geology 2 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile 2 3.3 Groundwater 3 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations 4 4.2 Earthwork 5 4.2.1 Site Preparation 5 4.2.2 Materials Types 6 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements 6 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage 6 4.2.5 Construction Considerations 7 4.3 Foundations .8 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers .8 4.3.2 Design Recommendations 9 4.3.3 Construction Considerations 10 4.4 Seismic Considerations 11 4.4.1 Liquefaction 11 4.5 Floor Slab 12 4.5.1 Design Recommendations 12 4.5.2 Construction Considerations 13 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 13 4.6.1 Design Recommendations 13 4.7 Pavements 15 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation 15 4.7.2 Design Considerations 15 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness 16 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage 17 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance 18 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 18 Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental Construction Materials Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Site and Exploration Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibits A-4 to A-10 Boring Logs B-1 to B-7 APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Exhibit B-2 Grain Size Distributions APPENDIX C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification Exhibit C-3 Seismic Design Map Summary Report Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 64th Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental • Construction Materials • Facilities Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY lierracon A geotechnical exploration has been performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Terracon's geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of seven (7) exploratory borings to approximate depths of 11 % to 31'/2 feet below existing site grades. Based on our current understanding of the proposed development and the results of our subsurface investigation the site appears suitable for the proposed development. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: ■ The proposed restaurant structure may be supported on conventional spread footings if used in conjunction with a ground improvement system to mitigate potentially unsuitable soil conditions within the existing fill and the underlying soft, organic rich alluvial soils. ■ Assuming proper site preparation and the implementation of any necessary subgrade mitigation measures, total and differential building settlement should be within anticipated client/owner specifications. ■ In general, on -site native soils do _not appear suitable for reuse as engineered fill due to relatively high fines and organic content within the bulk structure of the soil. Some of the overlying, previously placed fill soils may be suitable for fill applications. Further sampling and testing should be conducted on soils generated during earthwork and grading efforts for a more specific suitability assessment. ■ A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded pavements and floor slabs. ■ Potentially liquefiable soils were identified below the water table at all boring locations that were explored to a sufficient depth. Measures to mitigate risk of damage associated with excessive total and differential settlements as a result of liquefaction should be anticipated. ■ Based on ASCE 7 table 20.3-1, the seismic site classification for this Site is E. Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be retained to monitor this portion of the work. This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Responsive ■ Resourceful • Reliable GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A #04094 17333 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Terracon Project No. 81175042 May 19, 2017 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 to be located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the advancement of seven (7) soil test borings to depths ranging between approximately 11% and 31'/2 feet below existing site grades (bgs). The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations pertaining to: • subsurface soil conditions ■ earthwork and grading ■ floor slab and pavement design ■ lateral earth pressures 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description ■ groundwater conditions • foundation design • construction considerations • seismic considerations ITEM DESCRIPTION Site layout Refer to the Site Location Map and Boring Location Diagram (Exhibits A-1 and A-2 in Appendix A) Structures A one-story 4,843 square -foot Chick-fil-A restaurant building with associated parking and drive through improvements. Building construction, Assumed Details not provided, but understood to be concrete masonry units (CMU) with steel and/or wood framing with concrete foundations Finished floor elevation Assumed to be at or near existing site grades. Maximum loads Building (details not provided, but assumed to be): Column Load —120 kips Load -Bearing Wall Loads — 3,500 plf Maximum Uniform Floor Slab Load —100 psf Grading in building and parking area A grading plan was not available when this report was prepared. Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ITEM DESCRIPTION Traffic loading, Assumed Design equivalent single axle Toads (ESAL's): On -site Pavement Light Duty: On -site Pavement Heavy Duty: 50,000 100,000 2.2 Site Location and Description ITEM DESCRIPTION Location 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, Washington Existing Improvements Vacant single story retail building with associated parking and drive through areas Current ground cover Asphalt pavement Existing topography The site slopes gradually to northeast corner of the project site with a maximum vertical relief of approximately 6 feet 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Site Geology The project site is situated within the extent of the Duwamish River floodplain. The USGS Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington (2004) was used to reference mapped geologic conditions at the project site. The site location is mapped as unit Qa, described as Holocene age alluvial deposits consisting of moderately well sorted cobbles, gravel, and silt. The subsurface conditions encountered in the boring explorations were generally consistent with the designated map unit. Soils consistent with map unit QW, described as Holocene age wetland deposits of peat and alluvium were also encountered in the explorations. 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile Presented below is a simplified, generalized soil profile that was generated using the information obtained during the subsurface investigation: Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 1 2 to 6 feet Existing Fill — silty sand with variable gravel Loose to Medium Dense Stratum 2(2) 5 to 12 feet Colluvium —unsorted landslide debris with organics VeryLoose/soft to Medium Dense Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 3 Undetermined(1) Alluvial/Wetland deposits — silt, sand, gravel, peat and organics in variable proportions Medium Dense to Dense 1. Exploration was terminated within the described stratum. Extent of deposit is unknown. 2. Stratum 2 was not encountered in boring B-4 Laboratory tests were conducted on select soil samples to obtain index properties for analysis purposes. Moisture content, grain size analysis, and #200 wash tests were performed as part of this study. Test results are presented in Appendix B. Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring Togs. Stratification boundaries on the boring Togs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in -situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can be found on the boring logs included in Appendix A of this report. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater levels were observed and recorded while drilling and do not necessarily reflect steady state conditions at the borehole location. Recorded depths are shown on the individual boring logs in Appendix A and have been summarized in the table below: Boring Number Approximate depth to groundwater while drilling, ft. Comments B-1 19 B-2 11 B-3 14% B-4 17 B-5 not encountered B-6 2 Likely Perched(1) B-7 1'/2 Likely Perched(1) 1. Perched water typically accumulates above soils with relatively low permeability; recorded levels do not necessarily reflect regional water table conditions. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. In addition, perched water can develop over low permeability soil strata. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon developing the design and construction plans for the project. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can be measured by implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater monitoring wells, and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations Our explorations were limited to the outside perimeter of the existing building due to access constraints. Although the information obtained in the explorations provides insight into the conditions beneath the building pad, the uncertainty involved with projecting the subsurface information from the explored locations to within the footprint of the structure can be reduced with additional (internal) explorations after the existing building is demolished. We would be pleased to provide a scope and cost of service if any additional explorations are desired. Existing fill soils were present at each exploration location conducted as part of our study and is anticipated to exist, to some extent, over the entire footprint of the proposed development. Due to the uncertainty associated with undocumented fills, there is an inherent risk for the owner that compressible fill or unsuitable material may exist within or buried by the fill and will go undetected. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill. The native alluvial soils underlying the existing fill generally exhibit very low in -situ strength and contain layers of peat and other organic rich soils that are prone to excessive and differential settlement when loaded. Settlement is primarily induced as water within the pore spaces in the soil dissipate under loading, and as it pertains to soft soils, the greater the in -situ moisture content of the soil layer the more compressible that layer becomes. The peat encountered in boring B-4 was found to have a moisture content of over 175 percent by weight, a full order of magnitude greater than any of the granular soils encountered during our subsurface exploration. In addition to the primary settlement that occurs under sustained loads, peat and other organic rich soils undergo a phenomenon known as secondary compression which is primarily a result of soil structure decomposition over time. If left in -place and unmitigated, the risk of sustaining damages to overlying improvements as a result of excessive settlement should be considered high. Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses, subsurface exploration and laboratory test program conducted as part of this study, we recommend that the proposed structure be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on densified (reinforced) subgrade soils. Soil densification is typically achieved by constructing stiff elements within the existing subsurface soils as a means to increase bearing capacity and decrease potentially damaging settlements Responsive • Resourceful is Reliable 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon within the targeted soil mass. We recommend soil densification by means of aggregate pier ground improvement. Geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation systems and other earth connected phases of the project are discussed in detail in the following sections. References to ASTM and WSDOT specifications refer to the current version of the American Society of Testing and Materials and the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation Standards and Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, publication number M 41-10, respectively. 4.2 Earthwork The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations, slabs and pavements are contingent upon adherence to the prescribed measures outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during construction efforts. 4.2.1 Site Preparation We anticipate construction will be initiated by demolishing existing improvements and stripping the surface of any vegetation and loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable material. Spoils consisting of vegetation, organics, and deleterious materials should be disposed of off -site, or used to vegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. Stripping depths between our boring locations and across the site could vary considerably as such we recommend actual stripping depths be evaluated by a representative of Terracon during construction to aid in preventing removal of excess material. The fine-grained and organic soils encountered in the borings will be sensitive to disturbance from construction activity and water seepage. If precipitation occurs prior to or during construction, the near -surface silty and organic soils could sustain increases in moisture content and become more susceptible to disturbance. Construction activity should be monitored, and should be curtailed if the construction activity is causing subgrade disturbance. A Terracon representative can help with monitoring and developing recommendations to aid in limiting subgrade disturbance. After stripping, proofrolling should be performed with heavy rubber tire construction equipment such as a loaded scraper or fully loaded tandem -axle dump truck. A geotechnical engineer or his representative should observe proofrolling to aid in locating unstable subgrade materials. Proofrolling should be performed after a suitable period of dry weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade and to reduce the amount of undercutting / remedial work Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon required. Unstable materials located should be stabilized as recommended by the engineer based on conditions observed during construction. Undercut and replacement and densification in place are typical remediation methods. 4.2.2 Materials Types The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on their grain -size distribution and moisture content when they are placed. As the fines content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soils become more sensitive to small deviations in moisture content. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is the moisture at which the maximum dry density for the material is achieved in the laboratory following ASTM procedures. Engineered fill should consist of approved materials, free of organic material, debris and particles larger than about 4 inches. The maximum particle size criteria may be relaxed by the geotechnical engineer of record depending on construction techniques, material gradation, allowable lift thickness and observations during fill placement. Engineered fill materials should be placed in horizontal, loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness and should be thoroughly compacted. Where light compaction equipment is used, as is customary within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. The native alluvial soils encountered in the borings are relatively high in fines content, contain a significant amount of organic material, and thereby do not appear suitable for use as engineered fill. If suitable material is generated during earthwork and grading operations and is intended for use in structural fill applications, stockpiled soils should be properly covered to prevent changes in moisture and other potential disturbances. 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements Structural fill materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 inches in loose thickness. We recommend that each lift then be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor to a uniform density of at least 95 percent, based on the modified Proctor test (ASTM D 1557). Where light compaction equipment is used, as is typical within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. Soils removed which will be used as structural fill should be protected by plastic sheeting to aid in preventing an increase in moisture content due to rain and other factors. Moisture contents at the time of compaction should be within ±2 percent of the optimum moisture content. 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage Adequate positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development to prevent an increase in moisture content of the foundation, pavement Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon and backfill materials. Surface water drainage should be controlled to prevent undermining of fill slopes and structures during and after construction. Gutters and downspouts that drain water a minimum of 10 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures are recommended. This can be accomplished through the use of splash - blocks, downspout extensions, and flexible pipes that are designed to attach to the end of the downspout. Flexible pipe should only be used if it is daylighted in such a manner that it gravity - drains collected water. Splash -blocks should also be considered below hose bibs and water spigots. It is recommended that all exposed earth slopes be seeded to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after completion. Seeded slopes should be protected until the vegetation is established. Sprinkler systems should not be installed behind or in front of walls without the approval of the civil engineer and wall designer. 4.2.5 Construction Considerations It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade moisture content prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements. If practical, construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be to prevent unnecessary disturbances. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become frozen, desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to floor slab and pavement construction under the supervision of Terracon. Surface water should not be allowed to pond on the site and soak into the soil during construction. Construction staging should provide drainage of surface water and precipitation away from the building and pavement areas. Any water that collects over or adjacent to construction areas should be promptly removed, along with any softened or disturbed soils. Surface water control in the form of sloping surfaces, drainage ditches and trenches, and sump pits and pumps will be important to avoid ponding and associated delays due to precipitation and seepage. Near surface (likely perched) groundwater was encountered to the west of the existing building on the proposed building site. If groundwater is encountered during construction operations, some form of temporary or permanent dewatering may be required. Conventional dewatering methods, such as pumping from sump excavations, should likely be adequate for temporary removal of any groundwater encountered during excavation at the site. Well points would likely be required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater. All excavations should be sloped or braced as required by OSHA regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading Responsive ■ Resourceful • Reliable 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon operations. The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interpreted to mean that Terracon is assuming any responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied or inferred. Our investigation did not include an analysis of slope stability for any temporary or permanent conditions. Shallow sloughing at the surface can occur when slopes are not properly constructed and/or exposed to inclement weather prior to placement of vegetative cover. Therefore, we recommend that fill slopes be laid back to in order to develop an adequately compacted slope face. In addition, for erosion protection, a protective vegetative cover should be established on _ permanent slopes as soon as possible. If steeper slopes are required for site development, stability analyses should be completed generate a proper design and grading plan. 4.3 Foundations In our opinion, the proposed building can be supported by a conventional spread footing foundation system bearing on sufficiently densified subgrade soils using an approved ground improvement method. The following subsections include a discussion of the recommended ground improvement method and the foundation design parameters that may be applied for the system described. 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers Ground improvement utilizing aggregate piers is a method that offers a practical and effective alternative to overexcavation and replacement of unsuitable subgrade soils, particularly when the depth to suitable bearing strata is greater than 6 or 7 feet. Aggregate piers are columns of crushed stone that, when configured in groups, can provide a significant increase in the overall density of the surrounding soil mass. The installation method can vary depending on the nature of the soils to be improved, but a typical procedure consists of a advancing a downhole vibrating mandrel from the working pad surface to the planned toe elevation of the pier and compacting successive lifts of crushed stone until the desired top of pier elevation is reached. The top of pier is commonly constructed to just above the finished subgrade elevation or to the existing surface of the working pad and can later be excavated to the base of footing elevation during final grading efforts. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon Based on the conditions encountered at our exploration locations, the required toe depth of the aggregate piers will be on the order of 30 feet below current site grades. Relative spacing of the aggregate piers is typically specified by a specialty contractor that accounts for the anticipated building loads in order to determine the level of improvement deemed necessary to sustain the required loads. Aggregate piers beneath column spread footings and perimeter strip footings are generally arranged in tighter configurations than beneath areas to receive slab -on -grade. As a rule of thumb we recommend that aggregate piers extend approximately 5 feet beyond all building limits for adequate support of the structures. The surficial condition of the existing fill on -site varies considerably and may require pre -drilling in order to construct aggregate piers if the soils are in a relatively dense in -situ condition. Boring B-2 encountered medium dense to (possibly) dense fill conditions within the upper 10 feet of the exploration before encountering the loose, wet alluvial soils beneath. 4.3.2 Design Recommendations The following design summary table applies to conventional spread footings supported by a mitigated subgrade using the recommended ground improvement method. The design bearing pressures are preliminary and should be reviewed by the ground improvement contractor. If the ground improvement contractor recommends a system that warrants greater design pressures Terracon should be retained for additional review. FOR SPREAD FOOTINGS BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE DESCRIPTION Column Wall Net allowable bearing pressure 1 3,500 psf 3,000 psf Minimum dimensions 24 inches 16 inches Minimum embedment below finished grade for frost protection 2 18 inches 18 inches Approximate total settlement 3 <1 inch <1 inch Estimated differential settlement 3 <'/2 inch between columns <%2 inch over 40 feet Ultimate coefficient of sliding friction 0 4 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if encountered, will be undercut and replaced with engineered fill. 2. And to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. For perimeter footing and footings beneath unheated areas. 3. The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon include wind or seismic conditions. The weight of the foundation concrete below grade may be neglected in dead load computations. Interior footings should bear a minimum of 12 inches below finished grade. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings. Footings, foundations, and masonry walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required. 4.3.3 Construction Considerations If unsuitable (e.g., loose sand) bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended deeper to suitable soils and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on properly compacted backfill extending down to the suitable soils. Overexcavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 8 inches per foot of overexcavation depth below footing base elevation. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with granular material placed in lifts of 8 inches or less in loose thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the material's maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). The overexcavation and backfill procedure is described in the figure below. °v. rexcavation I Sackful NOTE: Excavation shown vertical for convenience; excavations should be sloped as necessary for safety. Areas of loose or disturbed soils may be encountered at foundation bearing depth after excavation is completed for footings. When such conditions exist beneath planned footing. areas, the surficial subgrade soils should be compacted prior to placement of the foundation system. If sufficient compaction cannot be achieved in -place, the loose soils should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. For placement of engineered fill below footings, the excavation should be widened laterally, at least eight inches for each foot of fill placed below footing base elevations. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 4.4 Seismic Considerations lierracon DESCRIPTION VALUE 2012 International Building Code Site Classification (IBC)' E2 Site Latitude 47.447725° N Site Longitude 122.26323° W SS Spectral Acceleration for a Short Period for Site Class B 1.447g Si Spectral Acceleration for a 1-Second Period for Site Class B 0.539g Fa Site Coefficient for a Short Period 0.900 FvSite Coefficient for a 1-Second Period 2.400 ' Note: The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) indicates that the seismic site classification is based on the average soil and bedrock properties in the top 100 feet. The current scope does not include a 100-foot soil profile determination. This seismic site class definition considers that soils encountered at depth in our borings continue below the termination depth. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. 2 Note: The Site Class is E based on N-values as recorded in the field. 4.4.1 Liquefaction As part of our services, we evaluated the risk of liquefaction at the project site. Due to the regional seismicity and extent of loose soils that were encountered below the water table during our subsurface investigation, the risk of liquefaction at the site location is moderate to high, with predicted liquefaction induced settlements on the order of 8-inches for a magnitude M7 earthquake. Upper bound estimates for liquefaction induced differential settlements are on the order of 3 to 4 inches within the building footprint, or approximately 1-inch in 30 feet. Estimates of liquefaction induced settlements were based on calculations using the information obtained from borings B-3 and B-1 which were selected due to; (a) the available information at depth and (b) relative proximity to the building footprint. It is assumed that there are no liquefiable layers below 31'/2 feet (the termination depth of the borings). The alluvial drainage channel running through the site is sloped and may potentially result in lateral spread if liquefaction is induced during a seismic event. Based on our experience, if seismic ties are constructed between foundation elements in conjunction with the recommended Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ground improvement method, risk to life safety in the case induced liquefaction and lateral spread should be sufficiently mitigated. 4.4.2 Surface Rupture The nearest fault trace is located within the Seattle Fault Zone, a reverse thrust fault located at an approximate distance of 4 miles from the project site. At a distance of 4 miles from the fault zone, it is our opinion that the risk of surface rupture is low at the subject site. 4.5 Floor Slab In our opinion, the site is suitable for conventional, Portland cement concrete slab -on -grade floor slabs. Design recommendations for slab -on -grade bearing on an improved subgrade utilizing aggregate pier ground improvement are presented below: 4.5.1 Design Recommendations FOR SLAB BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE4 DESCRIPTION VALUE Interior floor system Concrete Slab -on -Grade (Portland Cement Concrete) Subbase/Capillary Break 6-inch compacted layer of free draining, granular subbase material 1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of any building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. Narrower, turned -down slab -on -grade foundations may be utilized at the approval of the structural engineer. The slabs should be appropriately reinforced to support the proposed loads. 2. We recommend subgrades be maintained at the proper moisture condition until floor slabs and pavements are constructed. If the subgrade should become desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements, the affected material should be removed or the materials scarified, moistened, and recompacted. Upon completion of grading operations in the building areas, care should be taken to maintain the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the building floor slabs. 3. The floor slab design should include a capillary break, comprised of free -draining, compacted, granular material, at least 6- inches thick. 4. Relative spacing of aggregate piers beneath slab -on -grade to be determined by an aggregate pier specialty contractor. A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded floor slabs. Where appropriate, saw -cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or any cracks in pavement areas that develop should be sealed with a water -proof, non -extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon The use of a vapor retarder or barrier should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and ACII 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder/barrier. 4.5.2 Construction Considerations On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, rainfall, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgrade may not be suitable for placement of base rock and concrete and corrective action may be required. We recommend the area underlying the floor slab be rough graded and then thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck prior to final grading and placement of base rock. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill. All floor slab subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement of the base rock and concrete. 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 4.6.1 Design Recommendations The lateral earth pressure recommendations herein are applicable to the design of rigid retaining walls subject to slight rotation, such as cantilever, or gravity type concrete walls. These recommendations are not applicable to the design of modular block - geogrid reinforced backfill walls. Recommendations covering these types of wall systems are beyond the scope of services for this assignment. However, we would be pleased to develop recommendations for the design of such wall systems upon request. Reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at rest" condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 S = Surcharge S Horizontal Finished Grade lrerracon For active pressure movement 4--(0.002 H to 0.004 H) For at -rest pressure - No Movement Assumed Horizontal Finished Grade {�— p2--014-p,-oi Retaining Wall EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS EARTH PRESSURE CONDITIONS COEFFICIENT FOR BACKFILL TYPE EQUIVALENT FLUID DENSITY (pcf) SURCHARGE PRESSURE, pi (psf) EARTH PRESSURE, p2 (psf) Active (Ka) 0.27 35 (0.27)S (35)H At -Rest (Ko) 0.43 55 (0.43)S (55)H Passive (Kp) 3.69 460 --- --- Applicable conditions to the above include: • For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height • For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance • Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure • In -situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 120 pcf • Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and of modified Proctor maximum dry density • Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included • No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall • No dynamic loading • No safety factor included in soil parameters • Ignore passive pressure in frost zone Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.4 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 14 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon To aid in reducing the potential for hydrostatic pressure behind walls, we recommend a perimeter drain be installed at the foundation wall with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If adequate drainage is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for granular backfill using an equivalent fluid weighing 80 and 90 pcf for active and at -rest conditions, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided. 4.7 Pavements 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However, as construction proceeds, excavations are made into these areas, rainfall and surface water saturates some areas, heavy traffic from concrete trucks and other delivery vehicles disturbs the subgrade and many surface irregularities are filled in with loose soils to temporarily improve trafficability. As a result, the pavement subgrades, initially prepared early in the project, should be carefully evaluated as the time for pavement construction approaches. Prior to placement of aggregate base and pavements, we recommend at least the 2 feet of structural fill be placed over a moisture conditioned and densified subgrade, if required, and compacted to at least 95 percent of their maximum dry density (MDD). Pavement subgrades should be within plus or minus 2 percent of their optimum moisture content (OMC) and should be evaluated and proofrolled within two days prior to commencement of actual paving operations. Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills. If a significant precipitation event occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgrade should be reviewed by qualified personnel immediately prior to paving. The subgrade should be in its finished form at the time of the final review. 4.7.2 Design Considerations Traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available at the time that this report was prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional delivery and trash removal trucks. The thickness of pavements subjected to heavy truck traffic should be determined using expected traffic volumes, vehicle types, and vehicle loads and should be in accordance with local, city or county ordinances. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 15 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Pavement thickness can be determined using AASHTO, Asphalt Institute and/or other methods if specific wheel Toads, axle configurations, frequencies, and desired pavement life are provided. Terracon can provide thickness recommendations for pavements subjected to loads other than personal vehicle and occasional delivery and trash removal truck traffic if this information is provided. Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and layout of pavements: • Final grade adjacent to parking Tots and drives should slope down from pavement edges at a minimum 2%; • The subgrade and the pavement surface should have a minimum '/4 inch per foot slope to promote proper surface drainage; ■ Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g., landscaping areas, etc.); ■ Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately; • Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils, and; • Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness As a minimum, we recommend the following typical pavement section be considered for car only areas. Material Thickness (inches) WSDOT Std. Spec. Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC Aggregate Base 4 9-03.9(3) Base Course Asphalt Surface Course 3 9-03.8(2) 1/2-inch HMA 9-03.8(6)1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 7 As a minimum, we suggest the following typical pavement section be considered for combined car and delivery truck traffic. Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MMD, -2 to +3% OMC Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 16 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Aggregate Base 6 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC Asphalt Surface Course 4 9-03.8(2)%-inch HMA 9-03.8(6)1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 10 The graded aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557, Method C) maximum dry density. Where base course thickness exceeds 8 inches, the material should be placed and compacted in two or more lifts of equal thickness. Asphalt concrete aggregates and base course materials should conform to the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) M 41-10 "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction". The listed pavement component thicknesses should be used as a guide for pavement systems at the site for the traffic classifications stated herein. These recommendations assume a 20-year pavement design life. If pavement frequencies or Toads will be different than that specified Terracon should be contacted and allowed to review these pavement sections. We recommend a Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement be utilized in entrance and exit sections, dumpster pads, loading dock areas, or other areas where extensive wheel maneuvering or repeated loading are expected. The dumpster pad should be large enough to support the wheels of the truck which will bear the load of the dumpster. We recommend a minimum of 6 inches of PCC underlain by 4 inches of crushed aggregate base. Although not required for structural support, the base course layer is recommended to help reduce potentials for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade "pumping" through joints. Proper joint spacing will also be required to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Portland cement concrete should be designed with proper air -entrainment and have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing. Adequate reinforcement and number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI requirements. The joints should be sealed as soon as possible (in accordance with sealant manufacturer's instructions) to minimize infiltration of water into the soil. 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 17 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance The pavement sections provided in this report represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on -going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required. 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth -related construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 18 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION 1 3th St S1'16th5 SeaTac LEGEND: • rs) CO Tukwila Starfire Sports Q Westfield Southcter (Q S'212ttt 5t APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION SOU THCENTER 17333 Southcenter Parkway Project Mngr Drawn By Checked By Approved By BCO Project No. 81175042 Scale. BCO not to scale RWS DAB Pile No Exhibits.dwg Da;e May 2017 lkrracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W., Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace. WA 98043 PH (425) 771-3304 FAX (425; 771-3549 Orfilta s 18ttth St :-v S 196th St 181i O'RRiEN LO Renton Rf o_ zica Basemap PDF file provided by aent and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google SITE LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington A-1 N LEGEND: SB-1 BORING NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION Protect Mngr. BCO Drawn By BCO Checked By. RWS Approved By Protect No. 81175042 Scale AS SHOWN File No. exhibits.dwg Date T — 1Erracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W., Ste 160 Mountlake Terrace. WA 98043 1 100.8 ft J SOUTHCENTER PKWY 0 25 SCALE IN FEET Basemap PDF file provided by Client and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington A-2 DAB May 2017 PH (425) 771-3304 FAX (425) 771-3549 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 Field Exploration Description lrerracon The subsurface exploration consisted of drilling and sampling 7 borings at various locations within the confines of the project site to depths ranging from approximately 11'/z to 31 % feet below existing grade. The boring locations were laid out by Terracon personnel and measured from existing site features. Distances from these locations to the reference features indicated on the attached diagram are approximate and were estimated. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. The borings were drilled with a truck mounted drill rig using hollow stem augers and to advance the boreholes. Representative soil samples were obtained by the split -barrel sampling procedure. In the split -barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -barrel sampler the last 12 inches of the typical total 18-inch penetration by means of a 140-pound automatic hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration resistance value (N). These values are indicted on the boring logs at the depths of occurrence. This value is used to estimate the in -situ relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. The sampling depths and penetration distance, as well as the standard penetration resistance values are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. The soil samples were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the laboratory for testing. Field logs of each boring were prepared by the on -site geologist. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the geologist's interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs included with this report represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and tests of the samples. The samples were classified in the laboratory based on visual observation, texture and plasticity. The descriptions of the soils indicated on the boring logs are in general accordance with the enclosed General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. Estimated group symbols according to the Unified Soil Classification System are given on the boring logs. A brief description of this classification system is attached to this report. Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit A-3 0 0 w a w 0 0 a N O 00 J U 0 z th cn J 0 0 it 0 a_ w J z Z 0 _0 0 u_ LL 0 a LL J c5 z 0 0 m w 1- BORING LOG NO. B-1 Page 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE -- cc w O 0 ou rt FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES '-�' -, ` ,, -2_/ASPHALT approximately 2-inch thickness /\ 28+1- _! 4 - _ _ ' 5 — / 10- — _ _ _ 15— - 20— 25— . \ \/ CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) 4.0 222+1- \\\/ /`v S A \ 13-8-12 f N=20 .1 0� ,' • a SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) with wood debris and organics, dark gray, medium dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) /',� t 11.0 / 15+/- 0 9-9-8 N=17 4X 5-10-10 N=20 )7 / \ 4 3- 3 7 48 29 SILT WITH SAND (ML), with organics, brown, soft, moist \ ''" (ALLUVIUM)" / i' fibrous organics observed in sample / thin sand interbeds observed in sample, becomes wet 14 N=2 X 14 N=2_ 81 Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \✓ While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 z 0 0 m x 1- BORING LOG NO. B-1 Page 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT () DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SILT WITH SAND (ML) with organics, brown, soft, moist _/X17 '30— // — ,/1 2-1-2 N=3 (ALLUVIUM) (continued) organics thin sand interbeds observed in sample 28.5-2.5+/- ,�` % \N=22 \\ \ ,-. WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GIN), gray, medium dense, wet 31.5 5.5+1- 10 6-10-12 8 2 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet V ` / ..... / Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 77 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 1- 0 g a i w a o� z 0 0 z 0 CO x 1- BORING LOG NO. B-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447884° Longitude: -122.262862° Approximate Surface Elev: 27 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES L° `lc t.: c- 0 2 ASPHALT approximately 2-inch thickness 7" 27+1,, — _,/\ — . — _ / - ✓ 10-- _ _ _ — 15- _ 20— _ \ \ �/ 2 CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) 2.5 24.5+/- 'la t 01 • 4_ • .s.o SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL. (SMI, gray to dark brown, medium dense, 6D \ 15 16 47 % N=63 moist //\/..? \\2 +/- I, r \ 10 7N 2-13-10 3 8 13 1 SILTY SAND (SMI, trace gravel, dark gray, very dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) \ trace fibrous organics observed in sample j __/" 12.0 / -N 1 15+/- 5-3-12 X05 8-7 N=15 r .� GRAVELLY SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, gray, loose, wet `.' (ALLUVIUM) � / 17.0 / ' 10+/- X X 3 11-4-3 N=7 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, gray to brown, loose, wet Vz 21.5 5.5+/- 12 4-1-1 N=2 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \�7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-5 0) 0 0 w J a w a of z 0 a 0 o -J 0 z th 0 J 0 W 0 0 uu -J Ex- z 0 0 0 u- 0 w a co LL 0 J J z it 0 m m x 1- BORING LOG NO. B-3 Pace 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447748° Longitude: -122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS ? SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES , i ASPHALT, approximately 3-inch thickness 9A+4, _ — ', _ — _ — 1 5— _ _ 20- — — 25— / \\ \`'. \7 c ° CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, 1.5 moist 26.5+/- (FILL) SILTY SAND (SMI, trace gravel, brown, loose to medium dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 ' 23+/-,•. '15 \ \ 4-8-9 N=17 12 25 \ ' \ ' W SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SMI, trace asphalt fragments, gray, loose( 3 9-6-3• •1 \, to medium dense, moist \ 7.5 20,5+/- SANDY SILT (MLA with decomposed and fibrous organicmatter, brown, \ 16 1-1-2 N=3 very soft, moist '' (/� (ALLUVIUM) , ' 11.0 \ 17+/_ / \ 16 1-1 N-2 PEAT (PT) brown, very soft to soft, moist to wet r IL, —14.5 � j�/ % 13.5+/- SILTY SAND (SMI, with decomposed'and fibrous organic matter, brown, `24.0 loose, wet / J 4+/- y 16 N1-4 5 82 28 y16 1-2-2 N=4 ' POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SPI, trace gravel and 1 organics, gray to brown, medium dense, wet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 EZ While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-6 J z 0 o m m x BORING LOG NO. B-3 Pane 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve o 0 J V x g _ 714 •• �t •/ jl / O. I LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447748° Longitude: -122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS > SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT WO DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP} trace gravel and —/ _ . 16 4-6-8 N=14 , gray to brown, medium dense, wet (continued) becomes gravelly trace silt 31.5-3:5+/- � / / \\ \ \�' 14 24-15-14 N=29 20 5 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet ( / i l 1 \ `' Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \✓ While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-6 0, 3 0 0 W of z 0 BORING LOG NO. B-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447749° Longitude: -122.263232° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE ix w > O w re FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (o) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES 1,1 ►1 • 0 .11 11 �. . SPHALT approximately 5-inch thickness 27 5+/- _/ — — , 5 _ ! _ '\ _ — — 15- - 20— ;' \ �. ,• / SILTY SAND (SM) trace gravel, gray, loose, moist (FILL) 5.0 / 23+/ �\ / \ , \ 6 \ 4-3-4 I SILTY SAND (SM), with organics, brown, very loose, with interbedded 12 1-1-2 N=3 sand seams approximately 1-inch thick (ALLUVIUM) / 7.5 20.5+(- — ," PEAT (PT) with sand and silt, brown, loose to very loose, moist \_,' 16 0-1-4 N=5 179 '��-_ ( / 11.5 \ 16.5+/- 14 0=2 N WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT 1SW'SM) with decomposed and fibrous organics, gray to brown, very1oose, moist to wet 21.5 6.5+/- /\ 12 1-1-2 N=3 ; 1-1-2 N=3 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-7 n rn 0 ui a a z 0 • a 0 J J 0 O J cr i (n 0 0 a. w -J 2 O O LL 0 w w w LL_ 0 F- n J c9 z it 0 rn x 1- BORING LOG NO. B-5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: 47.447736° Longitude: -122.263446° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES 4�4SPHALT, .4 1 approximately 4-inch thickness 5+/- —/ / •N _ _ ,N-'' ? — 1()-- _ / '.,�. r97 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL moist (FILL) WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) trace gravel and organics, moist (COLLUVIUM) <-\ ,/ 7.5 20.5+/- �8 �. \ 1-2-4 i N=6 X d 10-8-2 N=10 L , ' i, PEAT (PT) with silt and sand, brown, very soft, moist to wet N1 2 113 (ALLUVIUM) ��16 10.0 '. . 7 18+/- SILT (ML), with decomposed and fibrous organics, brown, soft; moist to X 12 3 2-3 N=5 ,wet '' 11.5 \ .,1 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet \ ; '` _;ice ! �' '7 / Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 Groundwater not encountered Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-8 0 w J 0 w w a 0 0i z 0 0 to J Lj J 0 z 0 O J CC 5) 0 0 0 0 a w -J z Z_ 0 0 0 2 0 LL 0 w 0 0 w m 0 0 z 0 m w x 1- BORING LOG NO. B-6 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447867° Longitude: -122.263688° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pct.) PERCENT FINES :�2.0 ASPHALT approximately 4-inch thickness 5+1. — — — —i- \`) — _ ( — — 10— — ` / — /_97 WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW), gray to brown, loose, moist (FILL) 26+/- • IF • • .II SILTY SAND ITH GRAVEL (SMI, dark brown, loose, wet (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 /23+/- \4 . \ 2-2-2 r N=4 X WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) with decomposed and /7 2 0-1-1 N=2 6.o fibrous organics, brown, very loose, wet ,22+/- # 6.5 \ (ALLUVIUM) 21.5+ SILTY CLAY (CL-ML) with organics, very soft, clay seam approximately \,5 -inch thickness\ 5 1-2-3 N=5 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT 1SW-SM), with organics, dark gray to brown, loose 1o.o \ ? -> 18+/- SILTY SAND (S ) trace organics, dark brown, medium dense; Wet / ' 22 7-9 13 N=22 31 19 , / 11.5 1 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet ,/ " �" N f / Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lrerracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-9 BORING LOG NO. B-7 Pa9e 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy I Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448028° Longitude:-122.263658° Approximate Surface Elev: 29 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE f x w iv FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES �n 4�ASPHALT approximately 5-inch thickness 28 5+/ _ — _ , .5 — \\> _ 10— — / \ - , / SILTY SAND (SM1 trace gravel and organics, gray to brown, soft, moist to wet (FILL) 2.5 26.5+/- i SILTY CLAY WITH SAND (CL-MLI, with organics and trace gravel, gray, \ / \ \ X V 6 \ ;r N's 71 soft, moist to wet (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 ' 24+/_ POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM1, gray, dense, moist 18 8-13-20 N=33 27 (ADVANCE OUTWASH) / becomes orange -brown, medium dense 1 � // 11.5 - 17.5+/- 14 2-4-12 1 \ -11-15 N=26 Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet \ 1 s Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-10 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 Laboratory Testing lferracon As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by experienced personnel and classified in accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. The group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is shown in the appropriate column on the boring logs and a brief description of the classification system is included with this report in the Appendix. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and the test results are presented in this appendix. The laboratory test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. Selected soil samples obtained from the site were tested for the following index properties: • Grain -size Distribution • In -situ Water Content • Fines Content Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit B-1 GKAIN SILL UIS 1 KIt3UTION ASTM D422 1 ASTM C136 U.S. SIEVE OPENING 4 2 6 3 IN INCHES 1 I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 1/2 3 6 10 16 30 50 100 200 �4 3/8 4 8 14 20 40 60 140 100 95 1 I I l i l l I I I I I I 90 \ ` 85 \\80 75 \, �4 70 65Xi\ \ 0 60 * \ \ 4> w \ m55\ LIJ 50 -w \ \ z LL 45 \ �! \ Z w w 40 * \ \ \ a 35 \w A \ 30 14 25 20 \ • \ 15 10 •\. \ 5 • 0 100 10 1 GRAIN SIZE 0 1 0.01 0.001 IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND coarse fine coarse medium ( fine SIILT OR CLAY Boring ID Depth USCS Classification We (%) LL PL PI Cc Cu • B-1 30 - 31.5 WELL -GRADED GRAVEL with SAND (GW) 1.31 17.92 IZ B-2 5 - 6.5 SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM) ♦ B-3 2.5 - 4 SILTY SAND (SM) * B-3 30 - 31.5 POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL (SP) 0.33 26.42 O B-6 10 - 11.5 SILTY SAND (SM) Boring ID Depth 13,00 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel °/«Sand %Silt %Fines %Clay • B-1 30 - 31.5 37.5 8.836 2.389 0.493 56.2 42.1 1.7 1 B-2 5 - 6.5 37.5 1.478 0.29 28.4 58.5 13.1 ♦ B-3 2.5 - 4 19 0.291 0.1 3.8 71.4 24.8 * B-3 30 - 31.5 37.5 3.072 0.344 0.116 35.8 59.3 4.8 0 B-6 10 - 11.5 19 0.286 0.141 3.3 77.3 19.4 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical PROJECT NUMBER: 81175042 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA lierracon 21905 64th Ave W Ste 100 CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 Mountlake Terrace, WA EXHIBIT: B-2 APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS GENERAL NOTES )RILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon — 1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted RS: Ring Sampler- 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample HS: PA: HA: RB: WB: Hollow Stem Auger Power Auger Hand Auger Rock Bit Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: WCI: DCI: AB: Water Level Wet Cave in Dry Cave in After Boring WS: WD: BCR: ACR: While Sampling While Drilling Before Casing Removal After Casing Removal N/E: Not Encountered Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may le added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the oasis of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Standard Penetration Standard Penetration Compressive or N-value (SS) Consistency or N-value (SS) Ring Sampler (RS) Relative Density Strength. Qu, psf Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. < 500 0-1 Very Soft 0 — 3 0-6 Very Loose 500 — 1,000 2-3 Soft 4 — 9 7-18 Loose 1,001 — 2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 10 — 29 19-58 Medium Dense 2,001 — 4,000 7-12 Stiff 30 — 49 59-98 Dense 4,001 — 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 50+ 99+ Very Dense 8,000+ 26+ Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of Maior Component Constituents Dry Weight of Sample Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15 — 30 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.'75 mm) Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s) of other Constituents Trace With Modifier Percent of Dry Weight <5 5-12 > 12 Particle Size Term Plasticity Index Non -plastic 0 Low 1-10 Medium 11-30 High 30+ Exhibit C-1 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group GroupName 8 Symbol Coarse Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Cu >_ 4 and 1 <_ Cc 5 3 E Less than 5% fines c Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E GW GP Well -graded gravel F Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines ° Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,c•H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,G,H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% fines D Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines ° Cu>_6and 1<Cc<3E SW Well -graded sand Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E Fines classify as ML or MH SP Poorly graded sand' SM Silty sand c Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand "I Fine -Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic: PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" lineCL Lean clayK,L,M PI < 4 or plots below "A" line' ML .Silt K,L•M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OL Organic clay K.L.M,N Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic: PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clayK•L•M PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt K,L.M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OH Organic clay K.L.M•P Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L•M.° Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve e If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. o Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well- nraded gravel with silt, GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly ed gravel with silt, GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay. Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well - graded sand with silt, SW -SC well -graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = F If soil contains >_ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. • If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or SC-SM. a. X W Z U H 0 60 " If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains >_ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel," whichever is predominant. L If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. If soil contains > 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. PI > 4 and plots on or above "A" line. o PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. • PI plots on or above "A" line. o PI plots below "A" line. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction 50 v_of coarse -grained soils Equation of "A" - line Horizontal at P1=4 to LL=25.5. 40 — then PI=0.73 (LL-20) Equation of "U" - line Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7, 30 — then PI=0.9 (LL-8) i,' 20 10 7 4- 0 CL - ML,. 0 10 16 20 , ML or OL 30 40 MH or OH 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Exhibit C-2 5/16/2017 Design Maps Summary Report m3USGSDesign Maps Summary Report User -Specified Input Report Title Proposed Tukwila CFA Tue May 16, 2017 21:35:08 UTC Building Code Reference Document 2012/2015 International Building Code (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 47.44775°N, 122.26323°W Site Soil Classification Site Class E - "Soft Clay Soil" Risk Category I/II/III USGS—Provided Output Ss = 1.447 g S1 = 0.539 g SMs = 1.303 g SMS = 1.294 g Sus= 0.868g Sol = 0.863 g For information on how the SS and Si values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. Ea i?estse Spectrum ©esgn Response Spectcuon Period- T (tee) Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject -matter knowledge. Project Mngr. DAB Project No. 81175042 Drawn By: BCO Scale: N/A Checked By RWS File No. exhibit C-3 Approved By: DAB Date: May 2017 1Erracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W., Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH. (425) 771-3304 FAX. (425) 771-3549 Basemap PDF file provided by USGS USGS SEISMIC DESIGN SUMMARY EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington C-3 7.0 OTHER PERMITS Other permits required for this development include: • NPDES Permit from the Department of Ecology • Grading Permit from the City of Tukwila • Building Permit from the City of Tukwila 18363.001.doc 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (CSWPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan Analysis and Design and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Design will be provided with a later submittal. 18363.001.doc 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT If the City of Tukwila requires, Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and a Declaration of Covenant, it will be provided with the final TIR submitted for this project. 18363.001.doc 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The drainage facilities on this project will be privately owned and maintained. An Operations and Maintenance Manual is included in this section. 18363.001.doc APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Structure • Sediment Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin. Sump of catch basin contains no sediment. Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the catch basin by more than 10%. No Trash or debris blocking or , potentially blocking entrance to catch basin. Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). No dead animals or vegetation present within catch basin. Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame and/or top slab Corner of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past curb face into the street (If applicable). Frame. is even with curb. Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than '/4 inch. Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than % inch of the frame from the top slab. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Cracks in walls or bottom Cracks wider than % inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Catch basin is sealed and structurally sound. Cracks wider than inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Settlement/ misalignment Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than '/:-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the catch basin at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than 1/4-inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment accumulation Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). No trash or debris in pipes. Damaged Cracks wider than '/%-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than %-inch wide at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-9 1 /9/2009 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Metal Grates (Catch Basins) Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than inch. Grate opening meets design standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Grate free of trash and debris. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Grate is in plate and meets design standards. Manhole Cover/Lid Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Covertlid protects opening to structure. Locking mechanism Not Working Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover/lid difficult to Remove One maintenance person cannot remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift. Cover/lid can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A- I0 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 6 - CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & debris accumulation Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Water flows freely through pipes. Vegetation/roots Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of water through pipes. Water flows freely through pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to protective coating or corrosion Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Sediment accumulation Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the design depth. Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Noxious and nuisance vegetation removed according to applicable regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. Water flows freely through ditches. Erosion damage to slopes Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. Rock lining out of place or missing (If Applicable) One layer or less of rock exists above native soil area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native soil. Replace rocks to design standards. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A 1/9/2009 A-11 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 11- GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Site Trash or litter Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Trash and debris cleared from site. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Noxious and nuisance vegetation removed according to applicable regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grass/groundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in height. Grass or groundcover mowed to a height no greater than 6 inches. Trees and Shrubs Hazard Any tree or limb of a tree identified as having a potential to fall and cause property damage or threaten human life. A hazard tree identified by a qualified arborist must be removed as soon as possible. No hazard trees in facility. Damaged Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or broken which affect more than 25% of the total foliage of the tree or shrub. Trees and shrubs with less than 5% of total foliage with split or broken limbs. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or knocked over. No blown down vegetation or knocked over vegetation. Trees or shrubs free of injury. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; dead or diseased trees removed. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-16 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 23 - COALESCING PLATE OILNVATER SEPARATOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Site Trash and debris Any trash or debris which impairs the function of the facility. Trash and debris removed frorn facility. Contaminants and pollution Floating oil in excess of 1 inch in first chamber, any oil in other chambers or other contaminants of any type in any chamber. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vault Treatment Area Sediment accumulation in the forebay Sediment accumulation of 6 inches or greater in the forebay. No sediment in the forebay. Discharge water not clear Inspection of discharge water shows obvious signs of poor water quality - effluent discharge from vault shows thick visible sheen. Repair function of plates so effluent is clear. Trash or debris accumulation Trash and debris accumulation in vault (floatables and non-floatables). Trash and debris removed from vault. Oil accumulation Oil accumulation that exceeds 1 inch at the water surface in the in the coalescing plate chamber. No visible oil depth on water and coalescing plates clear of oil. Coalescing Plates Damaged Plate media broken, deformed, cracked and/or showing signs of failure. Replace that portion of media pack or entire plate pack depending on severity of failure. Sediment accumulation Any sediment accumulation which interferes with the operation of the coalescing plates. No sediment accumulation interfering with the coalescing plates. Vault Structure Damage to Wall, Frame, Bottom, and/or Top Slab Cracks wider than %-inch and any evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks, or maintenance inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Vault replaced or repaired to design specifications. Baffles damaged Baffles corroding, cracking, warping and/or showing signs of failure as determined by maintenance/inspection person. Repair or replace baffles to specifications. Ventilation Pipes Plugged Any obstruction to the ventilation pipes. Ventilation pipes are clear. Shutoff Valve Damaged or inoperable Shutoff valve cannot be opened or closed. Shutoff valve operates normally. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment accumulation Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). No trash or debris in pipes. Damaged Cracks wider than '/2-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than Y.-inch wide at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. Access Manhole Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Any open manhole requires immediate maintenance. Manhole access covered. Locking mechanism not working Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover/lid difficult to remove One maintenance person cannot remove cover/lid after applying 80 Ibs of lift. Cover/lid can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. Ladder meets design standards. Allows maintenance person safe access. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-33 1/9/2009 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 23 - COALESCING PLATE OILNVATER SEPARATOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Large access doors/plate Damaged or difficult to open Large access doors or plates cannot be opened/removed using normal equipment. Replace or repair access door so it can opened as designed. Gaps, doesn't cover completely Large access doors not flat and/or access opening not completely covered. Doors .close flat and cover access opening completely. Lifting Rings missing, rusted Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door or plate. Lifting rings sufficient to lift or remove door or plate. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-34 WASHINGTON STATE O EPAOT ME NT OF ECOLOGY December 2015 GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC, ENHANCED, AND PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT For the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Ecology's Decision: Based on Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. application submissions, including the Technical Evaluation Report, dated April 1, 2014, Ecology hereby issues the following use level designation: 1. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Basic treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 2. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Phosphorus treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 3. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Enhanced treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 165 4. Ecology approves the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment at the hydraulic loading rate listed above. Designers shall calculate the water quality design flow rates using the following procedures: • Western Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using the latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology -approved continuous runoff model. • Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using one of the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastem. Washington (SWMMEW) or local manual. • Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality design flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility. 5. These use level designations have no expiration date but may be revoked or amended by Ecology, and are subject to the conditions specified below. Ecoloav's Conditions of Use: Applicants shall comply with the following conditions: 1. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain the MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units, in accordance with Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision. 2. Each site plan must undergo Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. review and approval before site installation. This ensures that site grading and slope are appropriate for use of a MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System unit. 3. MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System media shall conform to the specifications submitted to, and approved by, Ecology. 4. The applicant tested the MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System with an external bypass weir. This weir limited the depth of water flowing through the media, and therefore the active treatment area, to below the root zone of the plants. This GULD applies to MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems whether plants are included in the final product or not. 5. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stormwater treatment devices is often dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a particular drainage basin. Therefore, Ecology does not endorse or recommend a "one size fits all" maintenance cycle for a particular model/size of manufactured filter treatment device. • Typically, Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. designs MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a target prefilter media life of 6 to 12 months. • Indications of the need for maintenance include effluent flow decreasing to below the design flow rate or decrease in treatment below required levels. • Owners/operators must inspect MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a minimum of twelve months from the start of post -construction operation to determine site -specific 166 maintenance schedules and requirements. You must conduct inspections monthly during the wet season, and every other month during the dry season. (According to the SWMMWW, the wet season in western Washington is October 1 to April 30. According to SWMMEW, the wet season in eastern Washington is October 1 to June 30). After the first year of operation, owners/operators must conduct inspections based on the findings during the first year of inspections. • Conduct inspections by qualified personnel, follow manufacturer's guidelines, and use methods capable of determining either a decrease in treated effluent flowrate and/or a decrease in pollutant removal ability. • When inspections are performed, the following findings typically serve as maintenance triggers: • Standing water remains in the vault between rain events, or • Bypass occurs during storms smaller than the design storm. • If excessive floatables (trash and debris) are present (but no standing water or excessive sedimentation), perform a minor maintenance consisting of gross solids removal, not prefilter media replacement. • Additional data collection will be used to create a correlation between pretreatment chamber sediment depth and pre -filter clogging (see Issues to be Addressed by the Company section below) _ 6. Discharges from the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units shall not cause or contribute to water quality standards violations in receiving waters. Applicant: Applicant's Address: Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. PO. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 Application Documents: • Original Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., January 2011 • Quality Assurance Project Plan: Modular Wetland system — Linear Treatment System performance Monitoring Project, draft, January 2011. • Revised Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., May 2011 • Memorandum: Modular Wetland System -Linear GULD Application Supplementary Data, April 2014 • Technical Evaluation Report: Modular Wetland System Stormwater Treatment System Performance Monitoring, April 2014. 167 Applicant's Use Level Request: General use level designation as a Basic, Enhanced, and Phosphorus treatment device in accordance with Ecology's Guidance for Evaluating Emerging Stormwater Treatment Technologies Technology Assessment Protocol — Ecology (TAPE) January 2011.Revision. Applicant's Performance Claims: • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 80-percent of TSS from stormwater with influent concentrations between 100 and 200 mg/l. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 50-percent of Total Phosphorus from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.1 and 0.5 mg/1. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 30-percent of dissolved Copper from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.005 and 0.020 mg/l. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 60-percent of dissolved Zinc from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.02 and 0.30 mg/1. Ecology Recommendations: • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. has shown Ecology, through laboratory and field- testing, that the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System filter system is capable of attaining Ecology's Basic, Total phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment goals. Findings of Fact: Laboratory Testing The MWS-Linear Modular wetland has the: • Capability to remove 99 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 270 mg/L. • Capability to remove 91 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 84.6 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 93 percent of dissolved Copper in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.757 mg/L. • Capability to remove 79 percent of dissolved Copper in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.567 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 80.5-percent of dissolved Zinc in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.95 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 78-percent of dissolved Zinc in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.75 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. 168 Field Testing • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. conducted monitoring of an MWS-Linear (Model # MWS-L-4-13) from April 2012 through May 2013, at a transportation maintenance facility in Portland, Oregon. The manufacturer collected flow -weighted composite samples of the system's influent and effluent during 28 separate storm events. The system treated approximately 75 percent of the runoff from 53.5 inches of rainfall during the monitoring period. The applicant sized the system at 1 gpm/sq ft. (wetland media) and 3gpm/sq ft. (prefilter). • Influent TSS concentrations for qualifying sampled storm events ranged from 20 to 339 mg/L. Average TSS removal for influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L (n=7) averaged 85 percent. For influent concentrations in the range of 20-100 mg/L (n=18), the upper 95 percent confidence interval about the mean effluent concentration was 12.8 mg/L. • Total phosphorus removal for 17 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 65 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 58 percent. • The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 60.5 percent for dissolved zinc for influent concentrations in the range of 0.02 to 0.3 mg/L (n=11). The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 32.5 percent for dissolved copper for influent concentrations in the range of 0.005 to 0.02 mg/L (n=14) at flow rates up to 28 gpm (design flow rate 41 gpm). Laboratory test data augmented the data set, showing dissolved copper removal at the design flow rate of 41 gpm (93 percent reduction in influent dissolved copper of 0.757 mg/L). Issues to be addressed by the Company: 1. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect maintenance and inspection data for the first year on all installations in the Northwest in order to assess standard maintenance requirements for various land uses in the region. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should. use these data to establish required maintenance cycles. 2. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect pre-treatment chamber sediment depth data for the first year of operation for all installations in the Northwest. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. will use these data to create a correlation between sediment depth and pre -filter clogging. Technology Description: Download at http://www.modularwetlands.com/ Contact Information: Applicant: Greg Kent Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 gkent(aibiocleanenvironmental. net 169 Applicant website: http://www.modularwetlands.com/ Ecology web link: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wg/stormwater/newtech/index.html Ecology: Revision Histor Douglas C. Howie, P.E. Department of Ecology • Water Quality Program (360)"407-6444 douglas.howie(a ecy.wa.gov Date Revision June 2011 Original use -level -designation document September 2012 Revised dates for TER and expiration January 2013 Modified Design Storm Description, added Revision Table, added maintenance discussion, modified format in accordance with Ecology standard December 2013 Updated name of Applicant April 2014 Approved GULD designation for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment December 2015 Updated GULD to document the acceptance of MWS-Linear Modular Wetland installations with or without the inclusion of plants. 170 SITE SPECIFIC DATA PROJECT NAME PROJECT LOCATION STRUCTURE ID TREATMENT REQUIRED VOLUME BASED (CF) FLOW BASED (CFS) TREATMENT HGL AVAILABLE (FT) PEAK BYPASS REQUIRED (CFS) - IF APPLICABLE PIPE DATA I.E. MATER/AL DIAMETER INLET PIPE 1 INLET PIPE 2 OUTLET PIPE PRETREATMENT BIOFILTRATION DISCHARGE RIM ELEVATION SURFACE LOAD PARKWAY OPEN PLANTER PARKWAY FRAME & COVER 24" x 42" N/A N/A WETLANDMED/A VOLUME (CY) 0.83 WETLANDMEDIA DELIVERY METHOD TBD ORIFICE SIZE (DIA. INCHES) 0 1. 03" MAXIMUM PICK WEIGHT (LBS) 9000 NOTES: INSTALLATION NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATER/ALS AND INCIDENTALS REQUIRED TO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DRAWING AND THE MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURERS CONTRACT 2 UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON LEVEL BASE. MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDS A MINIMUM 6" LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE SPECIFICATIONS. 3. ALL PIPES MUST BE FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF CONCRETE. (PIPES CANNOT INTRUDE BEYOND FLUSH). INVERT OF OUTFLOW PIPE MUST BE FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE CHAMBER FLOOR. ALL GAPS AROUND PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATER TIGHT WITH A NON -SHRINK GROUT PER MANUFACTURERS STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL AND SHALL MEET OR EXCEED REGIONAL PIPE CONNECTION STANDARDS. 4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING PIPES. 5 CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL RISERS, MANHOLES, AND HATCHES. CONTRACTOR TO GROUT ALL MANHOLES AND HATCHES TO MATCH FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE 6. DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATION REQUIRED ON ALL UNITS WITH VEGETATION. GENERAL NOTES 1. MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS, WEIGHTS AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT MANUFACTURER. PATENTED PER/METER C/L VOID AREA WETLANDMED/A BED VERTICAL UNDERDRAIN MANIFOLD DRAIN DOWN LINE PLANT ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA PLAN VIEW 4' 0" 5' 0" ELEVATION VIEW THE PRODUCT DESCRIBED MAY BE PROTECTED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FLOWING US PATENTS. Z425,264 7, 470, 36Z 7, 674, 378,• 4303,816, RELATED FOREIGN PATENTS OR OTHER PATENTS PENDING OUTLET PIPE SEE NOTES PRE -FILTER CARTRIDGE INLET PIPE SEE NOTES PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING /S THE SOLE PROPERTY OF MODULAR WETLANDS SYSTEMS ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF MODULAR WETLANDS SYSTEMS /5 PROHIBITED. www.ModuiorWetionds.com 11855) 5MOD-WET 4'-O" 5' 0" LEFT END VIEW BIOFILTRATION C/L HATCH RIGHT END VIEW PRETREATMENT/DISCHARGE " FLOW CONTROL RISER TREATMENT FLOW (CFS) 0.052 OPERATING HEAD (FT) 3.4 PRETREATMENT LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) TBD WETLAND MEDIA LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.0 M WS-L -4-4- V STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM STANDARD DETAIL 1/1 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development — Jack Pace, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION June 30, 2017 Ed Hale 2153 OAK HILL DRIVE Escondido, CA 92027 EHALE@4GDEV.COM RE: Chick-Fil-A Design Review L17-0029 (Design Review Application), PL17-0023 (Project File) Dear Mr. Hale, Your application for a Design Review — Administrative permit has been found to be incomplete. The following must be submitted to the Permit Center to make the application complete: 1. Four copies of revised site and civil plans showing the exclusion of parcel 2623049120 from the development project. The City was informed by the applicant that an agreement to do work within this parcel was not reached with the parcel owner, making the current plans inaccurate. Upon receipt of these items, the City will re -review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. This application will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter, unless an extension is granted pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code 18.104.070(E). I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the short plat application. If you have any questions with this matter you may call me at (206) 433-3683. Sincerely, 7-1/ Max Baker Assistant Planner Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov DEVELOPMEr . CONSULTING, INC PO Box 270571 • San Diego, CA 92198-2571 (858) 408-1894 Office • (866) 311-3658 Fax June 1, 2017 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Application for Design Review, Administrative Chick-fil-A #03093 17333 Southcenter Parkway Please accept the attached Application for Administrative Design Review for the proposed new Chick-fil-A restaurant at 17333 Southcenter Parkway. Chick-fil-A proposes to demolish the existing retail building and construct an approximately 4,843 sf restaurant with drive-thru service and accompanying site improvements (including a new trash enclosure with storage area, landscaping, and accessible parking and pedestrian access to the building from the public right-of-way. The resulting site plan will provide a total of 42 parking spaces on the subject parcel, with non- exclusive mutual access to an additional 29 parking spaces on the adjacent parcels, and a drive- thru queuing lane with a capacity of 22 spaces, located to the rear of the building and largely shielded from the public right-of-way. The following items are submitted along with the signed application and check for fees: Plan Set: • Title Sheet • Site Plan • Grading Plan • Utility Plan • Survey • Stormwater Plan • Landscape Plan, notes and details • Irrigation Plan, notes and details • Photometric Site Plan • Floor Plan • Roof Plan • Exterior Elevations RECEIVED Preliminary Signs Plans 1UN f 2��7 Color Elevations Community Development June 3, 2017 Page 2 Soils Report (Draft Geotechnical Report by Terracon, dated 5/19, 2017) Technical Information Report Materials Board The following Additional Information is provided for this application: SEPA: It is our understanding that a SEPA Review will not be required for this application. UTILITIES: The site is currently serviced by all wet and dry utilities. Preliminary discussions with the city water and sewer utilities reveal no concerns with respect to serviceability of the proposed building. SENSITIVE AREA PLANS AND STUDIES are not required TRAFFIC: It is our understanding that a Traffic Impact Analysis will not be required. Net new PM Peak Hour Trips Generated for this project will be 70 Trips (37 In, 33 Out). Please see the calculations below: PM PEAK HOUR ITE Directional Split Trip Rote Trips Generated Land Use Units LUC 1 In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Use Fast -Food Resi. With Drive-Thru 4,843 GFA 934 52% 48% 32.65 82 76 158 Pass -by Trips 2 SO% -41 -38 -79 41 38 79 Less Existing Use Furniture Store 19,992 GFA 890 48% 52% 0.45 -4 -5 -9 Net New PM Peak Hour Trips Generated = 37 33 70 COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA: A careful examination of the proposed site plan, building elevations, and landscaping plan will reveal that the proposed development meets or exceeds all of the Development Criteria in the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Commercial Corridor (CC) delineated in TMC section 18.28.030.D. Highlights of our design include: • Building architectural elements, materials, colors, height, scale, and site design components are of high quality and in harmony with the neighboring developments.. • Mechanical equipment and other utility hardware on the roof and on the ground are screened from view. • Parking, drive-thru, and service areas are located so as to minimize the visual impact of large paved areas and screen on -site vehicle traffic from view from the public right-of- way. June 3, 2017 Page 3 • The site has been designed to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of vehicles and vehicle -pedestrian interaction minimized to the maximum available. • The site plan and landscaping improvements provide an attractive and inviting and stable appearance, with a conspicuous handicapped accessible path of travel for pedestrians from the public right-of-way We look forward to hearing from the city with respect to our building and site design. On behalf of the applicant, Ed Hale Sr. Project Manager 4G Development and Consulting, Inc 2153 Oak Hill Drive Escondido, CA 92027 Email: ehale@ 4Gdev.com Mobile: 760.884.7011 STC-1 BR-1 PO( COLORS & MATERIALS TUKWILA, WA (16-105) 05-19-17 EC-1 A-1 COLOR AND MATERIAL LEGEND STC-1 I Stucco - STO Powerwall "White" BR-1 I EC-1 A-1 Brick Veneer - Boral Brick - Color "Citadel Parapet Coping - Durolast/Exceptional Metals -Dark Bronze (Matte) Aluminum Awning - Color: Dark Bronze ti DRAFT Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 Terracon Project No. 81175(142 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Mountlake Terrace, Washington RECEIVED JUN 06 201/ Community Development Offices Nationwide Established in 1965 Employee -Owned terracon,com Geotechnical Environmental lierracon Construction Materials Facilities May 19, 2017 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 5200 Bufington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349 Attn: Mr. Shwartz P: (303) 519-72063 E: steve.schwartz@cfacorp.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Terracon Project No. 81175042 Dear Mr. Shwartz, lierracon Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for the above referenced project. These services were performed in accordance with the Master Services Agreement (MSA) between Chick-fil-A, Inc. and Terracon, dated March 31, 2005. This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations conceming earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions conceming this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Brett O'Brien, EIT Staff Geotechnical Engineer David A. Baska, PE, PhD Geotechnical Department Manager Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 64th Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental Construction Materials • Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1 2.1 Project Description 1 2.2 Site Location and Description 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 Site Geology 2 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile 2 3.3 Groundwater 3 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations 4 4.2 Earthwork 5 4.2.1 Site Preparation 5 4.2.2 Materials Types 6 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements 6 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage 6 4.2.5 Construction Considerations 7 4.3 Foundations 8 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers 8 4.3.2 Design Recommendations 9 4.3.3 Construction Considerations 10 4.4 Seismic Considerations 11 4.4.1 Liquefaction 11 4.5 Floor Slab 12 4.5.1 Design Recommendations 12 4.5.2 Construction Considerations 13 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 13 4.6.1 Design Recommendations 13 4.7 Pavements .15 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation 15 4.7.2 Design Considerations .15 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness .16 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage 17 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance 18 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS 18 Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical• Environmental • Construction Materials a Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued APPENDIX A— FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Site and Exploration Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibits A-4 to A-10 Boring Logs B-1 to B-7 APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Exhibit B-2 Grain Size Distributions APPENDIX C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification Exhibit C-3 Seismic Design Map Summary Report Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical • Environmental • Construction Materials Facilities Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY lierracon A geotechnical exploration has been performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Terracon's geotechnical scope of work included the advancement of seven (7) exploratory borings to approximate depths of 11 % to 31'/Z feet below existing site grades. Based on our current understanding of the proposed development and the results of our subsurface investigation the site appears suitable for the proposed development. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: ■ The proposed restaurant structure may be supported on conventional spread footings if used in conjunction with a ground improvement system to mitigate potentially unsuitable soil conditions within the existing fill and the underlying soft, organic rich alluvial soils. ■ Assuming proper site preparation and the implementation of any necessary subgrade mitigation measures, total and differential building settlement should be within anticipated client/owner specifications. • In general, on -site native soils do not appear suitable for reuse as engineered fill due to relatively high fines and organic content within the bulk structure of the soil. Some of the overlying, previously placed fill soils may be suitable for fill applications. Further sampling and testing should be conducted on soils generated during earthwork and grading efforts for a more specific suitability assessment. • A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded pavements and floor slabs. • Potentially liquefiable soils were identified below the water table at all boring locations that were explored to a sufficient depth. Measures to mitigate risk of damage associated with excessive total and differential settlements as a result of liquefaction should be anticipated. • Based on ASCE 7 table 20.3-1, the seismic site classification for this site is E. Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be retained to monitor this portion of the work. This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained) herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A #04094 17333 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Terracon Project No. 81175042 May 19, 2017 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 to be located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the advancement of seven (7) soil test borings to depths ranging between approximately 11'/2 and 31% feet below existing site grades (bgs). The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations pertaining to: • subsurface soil conditions • earthwork and grading • floor slab and pavement design • lateral earth pressures 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description • groundwater conditions ■ foundation design • construction considerations • seismic considerations ITEM DESCRIPTION Site layout Refer to the Site Location Map and Boring Location Diagram (Exhibits A-1 and A-2 in Appendix A) Structures A one-story 4,843 square -foot Chick-fil-A restaurant building with associated parking and drive through improvements. Building construction, Assumed Details not provided, but understood to be concrete masonry units (CMU) with steel and/or wood framing with concrete foundations Finished floor elevation Assumed to be at or near existing site grades. Maximum loads Building (details not provided, but assumed to be): Column Load — 120 kips Load -Bearing Wall Loads — 3,500 plf Maximum Uniform Floor Slab Load —100 psf Grading in building and parking area A grading plan was not available when this report was prepared. Reliable ■ Responsive ■ Convenient ■ Innovative 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ITEM DESCRIPTION Traffic loading, Assumed Design equivalent single axle loads (ESAL's):: On -site Pavement Light Duty: On -site Pavement Heavy Duty: 50,000 100,000 2.2 Site Location and Description ITEM DESCRIPTION Location 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, Washington Existing Improvements Vacant single story retail building with associated parking and derive through areas Current ground cover Asphalt pavement Existing topography The site slopes gradually to northeast corner of the project site with a maximum vertical relief of approximately 6 feet 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Site Geology The project site is situated within the extent of the Duwamish River floodplain. The USGS Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington (2004) was used to reference mapped geologic conditions at the project site. The site location is mapped as unit Qai described as Holocene age alluvial deposits consisting of moderately well sorted cobbles, gravel, and silt. The subsurface conditions encountered in the boring explorations were generally consistent with the designated map unit. Soils consistent with map unit QW, described as Holocene age wetland deposits of peat and alluvium were also encountered in the explorations. 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile Presented below is a simplified, generalized soil profile that was generated using the information obtained during the subsurface investigation: Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 1 2 to 6 feet Existing Fill — silty sand with variable gravel Loose to Medium Dense Stratum 2(2) 5 to 12 feet Colluvium —unsorted landslide debris with organics VeryLoose/soft to Medium Dense Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 3 Undetermined(1) Alluvial/Wetland deposits — silt, sand, gravel, peat and organics in variable proportions Medium Dense to Dense 1. Exploration was terminated within the described stratum. Extent of deposit is unknown. 2. Stratum 2 was not encountered in boring B-4 Laboratory tests were conducted on select soil samples to obtain index properties for analysis purposes. Moisture content, grain size analysis, and #200 wash tests were performed as part of this study. Test results are presented in Appendix B. Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in -situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can be found on the boring logs included in Appendix A of this report. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater levels were observed and recorded while drilling and do not necessarily reflect steady state conditions at the borehole location. Recorded depths are shown on the individual boring Togs in Appendix A and have been summarized in the table below: Boring Number Approximate depth to groundwater while drilling, ft. Comments B-1 19 B-2 11 B-3 14% B-4 17 B-5 not encountered B-6 2 Likely Perched(1) B-7 1'/ Likely Perched(1) 1. Perched water typically accumulates above soils with relatively low permeability; recorded levels do not necessarily reflect regional water table conditions. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. In addition, perched water can develop over low permeability soil strata. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring Togs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon developing the design and construction plans for the project. Fluctuations i,n groundwater levels can be measured by implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater monitoring wells, and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations Our explorations were limited to the outside perimeter of the existing building due to access constraints. Although the information obtained in the explorations provides insight into the conditions beneath the building pad, the uncertainty involved with projecting the subsurface information from the explored locations to within the footprint of the structure can be reduced with additional (internal) explorations after the existing building is demolished. We would be pleased to provide a scope and cost of service if any additional explorations are desired. Existing fill soils were present at each exploration location conducted as part of our study and is anticipated to exist, to some extent, over the entire footprint of the proposed development. Due to the uncertainty associated with undocumented fills, there is an inherent rusk for the owner that compressible fill or unsuitable material may exist within or buried by the fill and will go undetected. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill. The native alluvial soils underlying the existing fill generally exhibit very low in -situ strength and contain layers of peat and other organic rich soils that are prone to excessive and differential settlement when loaded. Settlement is primarily induced as water within the pore spaces in the soil dissipate under loading, and as it pertains to soft soils, the greater the in -situ moisture content of the soil layer the more compressible that layer becomes. The peat encountered in boring 13-4 was found to have a moisture content of over 175 percent by weight, a full order of magnitude greater than any of the granular soils encountered during our subsurface exploration. In addition to the primary settlement that occurs under sustained Toads, peat and other organic rich soils undergo a phenomenon known as secondary compression which is primarily a result of soil structure decomposition over time. If left in -place and unmitigated, the risk of sustaining damages to overlying improvements as a result of excessive settlement should be considered high. Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses, subsurface exploration and laboratory test program conducted as part of this study, we recommend that the proposed structure be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on densified (reinforced) subgrade soils. Soil densification is typically achieved by constructing stiff elements within the existing subsurface soils as a means to increase bearing capacity and decrease potentially damaging settlements Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 is Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon within the targeted soil mass. We recommend soil densification by means of aggregate pier ground improvement. Geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation systems and other earth connected phases of the project are discussed in detail in the following sections. References to ASTM and WSDOT specifications refer to the current version of the American Society of Testing and Materials and the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation Standards and Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, publication number M 41-10, respectively. 4.2 Earthwork The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations, slabs and pavements are contingent upon adherence to the prescribed measures outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during construction efforts. 4.2.1 Site Preparation We anticipate construction will be initiated by demolishing existing improvements and stripping the surface of any vegetation and loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable material. Spoils consisting of vegetation, organics, and deleterious materials should be disposed of off -site, or used to vegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. Stripping depths between our boring locations and across the site could vary consiiderably as such we recommend actual stripping depths be evaluated by a representative of Terracon during construction to aid in preventing removal of excess material. The fine-grained and organic soils encountered in the borings will be sensitive to disturbance from construction activity and water seepage. If precipitation occurs prior to or during construction, the near -surface silty and organic soils could sustain increases in moisture content and become more susceptible to disturbance. Construction activity should be monitored, and should be curtailed if the construction activity is causing subgrade disturbance. A Terracon representative can help with monitoring and developing recommendations to aid in limiting subgrade disturbance. After stripping, proofrolling should be performed with heavy rubber tire construction equipment such as a loaded scraper or fully loaded tandem -axle dump truck. A geotechnical engineer or his representative should observe proofrolling to aid in locating unstable subgrade materials. Proofrolling should be performed after a suitable period of dry weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade and to reduce the amount of undercutting / remedial work Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon required. Unstable materials located should be stabilized as recommended by the engineer based on conditions observed during construction. Undercut and replacement and densification in place are typical remediation methods. 4.2.2 Materials Types The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on their grain -size distribution and moisture content when they are placed. As the fines content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soils become more sensitive to small deviations in moisture content. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is the moisture at which the maximum dry density for the material is achieved in the laboratory following ASTM procedures. Engineered fill should consist of approved materials, free of organic material, debris and particles larger than about 4 inches. The maximum particle size criteria may be relaxed by the geotechnical engineer of record depending on construction techniques, material gradation, allowable lift thickness and observations during fill placement. Engineered fill materials should be placed in horizontal, loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness and should be thoroughly compacted. Where light compaction equipment is used, as is customary within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. The native alluvial soils encountered in the borings are relatively high in fines content, contain a significant amount of organic material, and thereby do not appear suitable for use as engineered fill. If suitable material is generated during earthwork and grading operations and is intended for use in structural fill applications, stockpiled soils should be properly covered to prevent changes in moisture and other potential disturbances. 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements Structural fill materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 inches in loose thickness. We recommend that each lift then be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor to a uniform density of at least 95 percent, based on the modified Proctor test (ASTM D 1557). Where light compaction equipment is used, as is typical within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. Soils removed which will be used as structural fill should be protected by plastic sheeting to aid in preventing an increase in moisture content due to rain and other factors. Moisture contents at the time of compaction should be within ±2 percent of the optimum moisture content. 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage Adequate positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development to prevent an increase in moisture content of the foundation, pavement Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon and backfill materials. Surface water drainage should be controlled to prevent undermining of fill slopes and structures during and after construction. Gutters and downspouts that drain water a minimum of 10 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures are recommended. This can be accomplished through the use of splash - blocks, downspout extensions, and flexible pipes that are designed to attach to the end of the downspout. Flexible pipe should only be used if it is daylighted in such a manner that it gravity - drains collected water. Splash -blocks should also be considered below hose bibs and water spigots. It is recommended that all exposed earth slopes be seeded to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after completion. Seeded slopes should be protected until the vegetation is established. Sprinkler systems should not be installed behind or in front of walls without the approval of the civil engineer and wall designer. 4.2.5 Construction Considerations It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade moisture content prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements. If practical, construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be to prevent unnecessary disturbances. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become frozen, desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to floor slab and pavement construction under the supervision of Terracon. Surface water should not be allowed to pond on the site and soak into the soiD during construction. Construction staging should provide drainage of surface water and precipitation away from the building and pavement areas. Any water that collects over or adjacent to construction areas should be promptly removed, along with any softened or disturbed soils. Surface water control in the form of sloping surfaces, drainage ditches and trenches, and sump pits and pumps will be important to avoid ponding and associated delays due to precipitation and seepage. Near surface (likely perched) groundwater was encountered to the west of the existing building on the proposed building site. If groundwater is encountered during construction operations, some form of temporary or permanent dewatering may be required. Conventional dewatering methods, such as pumping from sump excavations, should likely be adequate for temporary removal of any groundwater encountered during excavation at the site. Well points would likely be required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater. All excavations should be sloped or braced as required by OSHA regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon operations. The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interpreted to mean that Terracon is assuming any responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied or inferred. Our investigation did not include an analysis of slope stability for any temporary or permanent conditions. Shallow sloughing at the surface can occur when slopes are not properly constructed and/or exposed to inclement weather prior to placement of vegetative cover. Therefore, we recommend that fill slopes be laid back to in order to develop an adequately compacted slope face. In addition, for erosion protection, a protective vegetative cover should be established on permanent slopes as soon as possible. If steeper slopes are required for site development, stability analyses should be completed generate a proper design and grading plan. 4.3 Foundations In our opinion, the proposed building can be supported by a conventional spread footing foundation system bearing on sufficiently densified subgrade soils using an approved ground improvement method. The following subsections include a discussion of the recommended ground improvement method and the foundation design parameters that may be applied for the system described. 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers Ground improvement utilizing aggregate piers is a method that offers a practical and effective alternative to overexcavation and replacement of unsuitable subgrade soils, particularly when the depth to suitable bearing strata is greater than 6 or 7 feet. Aggregate piers are columns of crushed stone that, when configured in groups, can provide a significant increase in the overall density of the surrounding soil mass. The installation method can vary depending on the nature of the soils to be improved, but a typical procedure consists of a advancing a downhole vibrating mandrel from the working pad surface to the planned toe elevation of the pier and compacting successive lifts of crushed stone until the desired top of pier elevation is reached. The top of pier is commonly constructed to just above the finished subgrade elevation or to the existing surface of the working pad and can later be excavated to the base of footing elevation during final grading efforts. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon Based on the conditions encountered at our exploration locations, the required toe depth of the aggregate piers will be on the order of 30 feet below current site grades. Relative spacing of the aggregate piers is typically specified by a specialty contractor that accounts for the anticipated building loads in order to determine the level of improvement deemed necessary to sustain the required loads. Aggregate piers beneath column spread footings and perimeter strip footings are generally arranged in tighter configurations than beneath areas to receive slab -on -grade. As a rule of thumb we recommend that aggregate piers extend approximately 5 feet beyond all building limits for adequate support of the structures. The surficial condition of the existing fill on -site varies considerably and may require pre -drilling in order to construct aggregate piers if the soils are in a relatively dense in -situ condition. Boring B-2 encountered medium dense to (possibly) dense fill conditions within the upper 10 feet of the exploration before encountering the loose, wet alluvial soils beneath. 4.3.2 Design Recommendations The following design summary table applies to conventional spread footings supported by a mitigated subgrade using the recommended ground improvement method. The design bearing pressures are preliminary and should be reviewed by the ground improvement contractor. If the ground improvement contractor recommends a system that warrants greater design pressures Terracon should be retained for additional review. FOR SPREAD FOOTINGS BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE DESCRIPTION Column Wall Net allowable bearing pressure' 3,500 psf 3,000 psf Minimum dimensions 24 inches 16 inches Minimum embedment below finished grade for frost protection 2 18 inches 18 inches Approximate total settlement 3 <1 inch <1 inch Estimated differential settlement 3 <1/2 inch between columns <1/2 inch over 40 feet Ultimate coefficient of sliding friction 0 4 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if encountered, will be undercut and replaced with engineered fill. 2. And to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. For perimeter footing and footings beneath unheated areas. 3. The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon include wind or seismic conditions. The weight of the foundation concrete below grade may be neglected in dead load computations. Interior footings should bear a minimum of 12 inches below finished grade. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings. Footings, foundations, and masonry walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required. 4.3.3 Construction Considerations If unsuitable (e.g., loose sand) bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended deeper to suitable soils and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on properly compacted backfill extending down to the suitable soils. Overexcavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 8 inches per foot of overexcavation depth below footing base elevation. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with granular material placed in lifts of 8 inches or less in loose thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the material's maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). The overexcavation and backfill procedure is described in the figure below. Overaxcavatlon 1 Baekfill NOTE: Excavation shown vertical for convenience; excavations should be sloped as necessary for safety. Areas of loose or disturbed soils may be encountered at foundation bearing depth after excavation is completed for footings. When such conditions exist beneath planned footing areas, the surficial subgrade soils should be compacted prior to placement of the foundation system. If sufficient compaction cannot be achieved in -place, the loose soils should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. For placement of engineered fill below footings, the excavation should be widened laterally, at least eight inches for each foot of fill placed below footing base elevations. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 4.4 Seismic Considerations lrerracon DESCRIPTION VALUE 2012 International Building Code Site Classification (IBC)1 E2 Site Latitude 47.447725° N Site Longitude 122.26323° W Ss Spectral Acceleration for a Short Period for Site Class B 1.447g Si Spectral Acceleration for a 1-Second Period for Site Class B 0.539g Fa Site Coefficient for a Short Period 0.900 F„ Site Coefficient for a 1-Second Period 2.400 ' Note: The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) indicates that the seismic site classification is based on the average soil and bedrock properties in the top 100 feet. The current scope does not include a 100-foot soil profile determination. This seismic site class definition considers that soils encountered at depth in our borings continue below the termination depth. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. 2 Note: The Site Class is E based on N-values as recorded in the field. 4.4.1 Liquefaction As part of our services, we evaluated the risk of liquefaction at the project site. Due to the regional seismicity and extent of loose soils that were encountered below the water table during our subsurface investigation, the risk of liquefaction at the site location is moderate to high, with predicted liquefaction induced settlements on the order of 8-inches for a magnitude M7 earthquake. Upper bound estimates for liquefaction induced differential settlements are on the order of 3 to 4 inches within the building footprint, or approximately 1-inch in 30 feet. Estimates of liquefaction induced settlements were based on calculations using the information obtained from borings B-3 and B-1 which were selected due to; (a) the available information at depth and (b) relative proximity to the building footprint. It is assumed that there are no liquefiable layers below 31'/z feet (the termination depth of the borings). The alluvial drainage channel running through the site is sloped and may potentially result in lateral spread if liquefaction is induced during a seismic event. Based on our experience, if seismic ties are constructed between foundation elements in conjunction with the recommended Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ground improvement method, risk to life safety in the case induced liquefaction and lateral spread should be sufficiently mitigated. 4.4.2 Surface Rupture The nearest fault trace is located within the Seattle Fault Zone, a reverse thrust fault located at an approximate distance of 4 miles from the project site. At a distance of 4 miles from the fault zone, it is our opinion that the risk of surface rupture is low at the subject site. 4.5 Floor Slab In our opinion, the site is suitable for conventional, Portland cement concrete slab -on -grade floor slabs. Design recommendations for slab -on -grade bearing on an improved subgrade utilizing aggregate pier ground improvement are presented below: 4.5.1 Design Recommendations FOR SLAB BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE4 DESCRIPTION VALUE Interior floor system Concrete Slab -on -Grade (Portland Cement Concrete) Subbase/Capillary Break 6-inch compacted layer of free draining, granular subbase material 1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of any building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. Narrower, turned -down slab -on -grade foundations may be utilized at the approval of the structural engineer. The slabs should be appropriately reinforced to support the proposed loads. 2. We recommend subgrades be maintained at the proper moisture condition until floor slabs and pavements are constructed. If the subgrade should become desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements, the affected material should be removed or the materials scarified, moistened, and recompacted. Upon completion of grading operations in the building areas, care should be taken to maintain the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the building floor slabs. 3. The floor slab design should include a capillary break, comprised of free -draining, compacted, granular material, at least 6- inches thick. 4. Relative spacing of aggregate piers beneath slab -on -grade to be determined by an aggregate pier specialty contractor. A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded floor slabs. Where appropriate, saw -cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or any cracks in pavement areas that develop should be sealed with a water -proof, non -extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments. Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon The use of a vapor retarder or barrier should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder/barrier. 4.5.2 Construction Considerations On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, rainfall, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgradle may not be suitable for placement of base rock and concrete and corrective action may be required. We recommend the area underlying the floor slab be rough graded and then thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck prior to final grading and placement of base rock. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill. All floor slab subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement of the base rock and concrete. 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 4.6.1 Design Recommendations The lateral earth pressure recommendations herein are applicable to the design of rigid retaining walls subject to slight rotation, such as cantilever, or gravity type concrete walls. These recommendations are not applicable to the design of modular block - geogrid reinforced backfill walls. Recommendations covering these types of wall systems are beyond the scope of services for this assignment. However, we would be pleased to develop recommendations for the design of such wall systems upon request. Reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at rest" condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. Responsive a Resourceful ■ Reliable 13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 S = Surcharge S Horizontal Finished Grade -- + N--- p2--0I4-pi-►I lierracon For active pressure movement 4—(0.002 H to 0.004 H) For at -rest pressure - No Movement Assumed Horizontal Finished Grade Retaining Wall EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS EARTH PRESSURE CONDITIONS COEFFICIENT FOR BACKFILL TYPE EQUIVALENT FLUID DENSITY (pcf) SURCHARGE PRESSURE, pi (psf) EARTH PRESSURE, p2 (psf) Active (Ka) 0.27 35 (0.27)S (35)H At -Rest (Ko) 0.43 55 (0.43)S (55)H Passive (Kp) 3.69 460 --- --- Applicable conditions to the above include: • For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height • For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance • Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure • In -situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 120 pcf • Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and of modified Proctor maximum dry density • Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included • No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall • No dynamic loading • No safety factor included in soil parameters • Ignore passive pressure in frost zone Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.4 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 14 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon To aid in reducing the potential for hydrostatic pressure behind walls, we recommend a perimeter drain be installed at the foundation wall with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If adequate drainage is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for granular backfill using an equivalent fluid weighing 80 and 90 pcf for active and at -rest conditions, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided. 4.7 Pavements 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However, as construction proceeds, excavations are made into these areas, rainfall and surface water saturates some areas, heavy traffic from concrete trucks and other delivery vehicles disturbs the subgrade and many surface irregularities are filled in with loose soils to temporarily improve trafficability. As a result, the pavement subgrades, initially prepared early in the project, should be carefully evaluated as the time for pavement construction approaches. Prior to placement of aggregate base and pavements, we recommend at least the 2 feet of structural fill be placed over a moisture conditioned and densified subgrade, if required, and compacted to at least 95 percent of their maximum dry density (MDD). Pavement subgrades should be within plus or minus 2 percent of their optimum moisture content (OMC) and should be evaluated and proofrolled within two days prior to commencement of actual paving operations. Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills. If a significant precipitation event occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgrade should be reviewed by qualified personnel immediately prior to paving. The subgrade should be in its finished form at the time of the final review. 4.7.2 Design Considerations Traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available at the time that this report was prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional delivery and trash removal trucks. The thickness of pavements subjected to heavy truck traffic should be determined using expected traffic volumes, vehicle types, and vehicle loads and should be in accordance with local, city or county ordinances. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 15 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Pavement thickness can be determined using AASHTO, Asphalt Institute and/or other methods if specific wheel loads, axle configurations, frequencies, and desired pavement life are provided. Terracon can provide thickness recommendations for pavements subjected to loads other than personal vehicle and occasional delivery and trash removal truck traffic if this information is provided. Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and layout of pavements: • Final grade adjacent to parking lots and drives should slope down from pavement edges at a minimum 2%; ■ The subgrade and the pavement surface should have a minimum '/4 inch per foot slope to promote proper surface drainage; ■ Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g., landscaping areas, etc.); • Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately; • Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils, and; ■ Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness As a minimum, we recommend the following typical pavement section be considered for car only areas. Material Thickness (inches) WSDOT Std. Spec. Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC Aggregate Base 4 9-03.9(3) Base Course Asphalt Surface Course 3 9-03.8(2)'/�-inch HMA 9-03.8(6)1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 7 As a minimum, we suggest the following typical pavement section be considered for combined car and delivery truck traffic. Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MMD, -2 to +3% OMC Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 16 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Aggregate Base 6 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC Asphalt Surface Course 4 9-03.8(2)'/-inch HMA 9-03.8(6) 1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 10 The graded aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557, Method C) maximum dry density. Where base course thickness exceeds 8 inches, the material should be placed and compacted in two or more lifts of equal thickness. Asphalt concrete aggregates and base course materials should conform to the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) M 41-10 "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction". The listed pavement component thicknesses should be used as a guide for pavement systems at the site for the traffic classifications stated herein. These recommendations assume a 20-year pavement design life. If pavement frequencies or Toads will be different than that specified Terracon should be contacted and allowed to review these pavement sections. We recommend a Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement be utilized in entrance and exit sections, dumpster pads, loading dock areas, or other areas where extensive wheel maneuvering or repeated loading are expected. The dumpster pad should be large enough to support the wheels of the truck which will bear the load of the dumpster. We recommend a minimum of 6 inches of PCC underlain by 4 inches of crushed aggregate base. Although not required for structural support, the base course layer is recommended to help reduce potentials for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade "pumping" through joints. Proper joint spacing will also be required to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Portland cement concrete should be designed with proper air -entrainment and have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing. Adequate reinforcement and number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI requirements. The joints should be sealed as soon as possible (in accordance with sealant manufacturer's instructions) to minimize infiltration of water into the soil. 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 17 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance The pavement sections provided in this report represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on -going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required. 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth -related construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 18 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION N Renton UQ ryry 1, r�r- r3a �, �. �� RE 3 Tukwila rt ,,Sr b zt 't 0. Starfire Sports S 15Utti St ?} -1c R; s 1 e st S 1 lath St SeaTac LEGEND: 1kl8th St Westfield Southcenter Q ro s 204th St ,S•212ttt Si APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION Project Mngr BCO Project No 81175042 Drawn By. BCO Scale not to scale Checked By RWS Fie No Exhibits.dwg Approved By DAB Date May 2017 SOUTHCENTER 17333 Southcenter Parkway 5 ig4th St lierracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W. Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH.(425) 771-3304 FAX.(425)771-3549 (Nita s i lath st •a. M1 S 196th St ms aAy epsiolua O'BRIEN L. SW27th St SW41stSt ,F,t y CO a, Basemap PDF file provided by Client and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google SITE LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington A-1 r LEGEND: T —i tLttr4 I � _-�--i ----- ----.------- S B-1 BORING NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION SOUTHCENTER PKWY to 100.8 ft 0 25 SCALE IN FEET Basemap PDF file provided by Client and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google Project Mngr BCO Project No. 81175042 Drawn By. BCO Scale AS SHOWN Checked By Approved By RWS DAB File No Date exhibits.dwg May 2017 lrerracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W.. Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace. WA 98043 PH.(425) 771.3304 FAX. j425) 771-3549 SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington EXHIBIT A-2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 Field Exploration Description lierracon The subsurface exploration consisted of drilling and sampling 7 borings at various locations within the confines of the project site to depths ranging from approximately 111/2 to 31'/2 feet below existing grade. The boring locations were laid out by Terracon personne9 and measured from existing site features. Distances from these locations to the reference features indicated on the attached diagram are approximate and were estimated. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. The borings were drilled with a truck mounted drill rig using hollow stem augers and to advance the boreholes. Representative soil samples were obtained by the split -barrel sampling procedure. In the split -barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -barrel sampler the last 12 inches of the typical total 18-inch penetration by means of a 140-pound automatic hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration resistance value (N). These values are indicted on the boring logs at the depths of occurrence. This value is used to estimate the in -situ relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. The sampling depths and penetration distance, as well as the standard penetration resistance values are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. The soil samples were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the laboratory for testing. Field logs of each boring were prepared by the on -site geologist. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the geologist's interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs included with this report represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and tests of the samples. The samples were classified in the laboratory based on visual observation, texture and plasticity. The descriptions of the soils indicated on the boring logs are in general accordance with the enclosed General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. Estimated group symbols according to the Unified Soil Classification System are given on the boring logs. A brief description of this classification system is attached to this report. Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit A-3 BORING LOG NO. B-1 P<je 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy#350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve kr) (-) _ n �' � � J� GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS [> SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER I CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES approximately 2-inch thickness is 2s+/, _ / — _ „ _ — �' _ 10— _ — 1 20— — 25— f , V ' CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) i222+/- X X X 6 \ 13-8-12 ,' N=20 `• a I . I 4I' • • I11.0 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL jSM1, with wood debris and organics, dark gray, medium dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) \,, ' X `, 15+/- 9-9-8 N=17 4 5-10-10 N=20 4 3-3-448 29 SILT WITH SAND (ML), with organics, brown, soft, moist (ALLUVIUM)"--, \ , fibrous organics observed in sample "til thin sand interbeds observed in sample, becomes wet 14 2-1-1 N=2 X 14 1-1-1 N=2 81 Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 = While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 BORING LOG NO. B-1 P,aDc e 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve o 0 -J v x g LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS kSAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SILT WITH SAND (ML) with organics, brown, soft, moist — — — .31}— / f �� Xio 17 2-1-2 N=3 (ALLUVIUM) (continued) organics thin sand interbeds observed in sample 28.5-2.5+/- \ , . '`:- r `, WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) gray, medium dense, wet 31.5 \-5.5+/- 6-10-12 8 2 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet ` '� -- /' �1! l �\ \\ l Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 V While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 BORING LOG NO. B-2 Peae 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447884° Longitude: -122.262862° Approximate Surface Elev: 27 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS 1 WATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES ° . b . . Q c r AASPHALT, approximately 2-inch thickness r, 27+/r f C — \., — — —=X _ _ 15— — — 20— ; . N. � �� \ CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) 2.5 24.5+/- : ' O•. `I • SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM1, gray to dark brown, medium dense, ` 15-16-47 \�/ . N=63 moist /5 10 7-13-10 8 13 SILTY SAND ISMI trace gravel, dark gray, very dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) ` . , trace fibrous organics observed in sample \5-3-12 12.0 / , 15+/- 8 N=15 0 5-8-7 N=15 • • • • ' GRAVELLY SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, gray, loose, wet , (AtLUVIUM) `.. \, 17.0 ' , \. 10+/- �✓ \ 3 11-4-3 N=7 \ / WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, gray to brown, loose, wet 21.5 5.5+1- 12 4-1-1 N=2 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 = While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-5 BORING LOG NO. B-3 Pale 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447748° Longitude: -122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES t , )_ N -1.5 ASPHALT, approximately 3-inch thickness 211+` _ — _ `\ 5 — — —16 10- _ _ 15— — — — 20— _ _ 25— / \ XL4-8-9 X x CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASS, black, medium dense, moist 26.5+/- = (FILL) SILTY SAND (SM1 trace gravel, brown, loose to medium dense, moist 15 :, N=17 '12 25 (COLLUVIUM) / \. / .0 ,' 23+/- i r1 • ,I • )) SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM), trace asphalt fragments, gray, loose, 3 9-6-3 N=9 to medium dense, moist \ N\ \ 7.5 20.5+/- SANDY SILT (ML), with decomposed and fibrous organic matter, brown, \ 1-1-2 N=3 very soft, moist / (ALLUVIUM) 11.0 17+/- \ 16 0-1-1 N=2 l'- r, ' -14.5 PEAT (PT1 brown, very soft to soft, moist to wet 13.5+/- SILTY SAND (SM) with decomposed`and fibrous organic matter, brown, loose, wet \ \ ' \\ / 24.0 4+/- \ / 16 N=5= Eft 28 V1-2-2 /,\ 16 N=4 • ' • a POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) trace gravel and organics, gray to brown, medium dense, wet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 64th Mountlake Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \/ While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-fi BORING LOG NO. B-3 P2ge 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve 0 0 J 0 x g __, • 0 . •4 • / ' �31.5 LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447748° Longitude:-122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS VVATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT.(pcf) PERCENT FINES POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP) trace gravel and _ 3� / , . 16 N 6-8 organics, gray to brown, medium dense, wet (continued) becomes gravelly trace silt <.\ � \-3.5+/- X `\ 14 24 15-14 N 29 20 5 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet •, .. / / - / �\ �� ,\ \ Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 V While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-6 BORING LOG NO. B-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve a yr.—z GRAPHIC LOG am a am. dor LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447749° Longitude: -122.263232° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS a SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SPHALT approximately 5-inch thickness 27 5+/- — / ,-, — '\ _ .. _ 10- — — — 15— 20— — / '; '. ‘., / SILTY SAND (SM) trace gravel, gray, loose, moist (FILL) ` ` 5.0 /./ 23+/- \/ /\ X X14 16' 4-3-4 N=7 1 SILTY SAND (SM), with organics, brown, very loose, with interbedded / 12 1-1-2 N=3 sand seams approximately 1-inch thick \. \: (ALLUVIUM) \\ 7.5 20.5+/- / PEAT (PTl with sand and silt, brown, loose to very loose, moist \ 16 N=5 179 l f ,' 0-1-1 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT LSW-SM) with decomposed and fibrous organics, gray to brown, veryloose moist to wet (\ / \\ \,% 21.5 6.5+/- X 12 N=3 \ �\ 8 1-1-2 N=3 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 64th Mountlake Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-7' BORING LOG NO. B-5 Pace 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve c7 O J _v 1.11104—\ASPHALT to `► I '.2.0 LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447736° Longitude:-122.263446° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.l DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES approximately 4-inch thickness 544 _ % _ _ '-'5— ' ,' _ ,,, — f' \-/: x-16, \ / y \. ,-97 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL. moist (FILL) 26+/- WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) trace gravel and organics, moist (COLLUVIUM) /� \./" \ \, 7.5 20.5+/- 8 1-2-4 N=6 0 10-8-2 N=10 i — ,,, ,, If, PEAT (PT) with silt and sand, brown, very soft, moist to wet \ 1-1-1N=2 113 (ALLUVIUM) /` 10.o / 18+/- SILT (ML► with decomposed and fibrous organics, brown, soft, Moist to 12 3-2-3 N=5 wet 11.5 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet \. / Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: RSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 Groundwater not encountered Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-8 BORING LOG NO. B-6 PauC e 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: 47.447867° Longitude:-122.263688° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SPHALT approximately 4-inch thickness 5+/. — f / — \, — _ _ 5 - — — � 10— _ j .v c97 WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) gray to brown, loose, moist (FILL) 2.0 26+/- • I "y ! SILTY SAND ITH GRAVEL (SMI, dark brown, loose, wet (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 / 23+/- y\ X.ti / \I j�\ \% I� 4 2-2-2 2 N=4 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, with decomposed and f � 2 N12 6.o fibrous organics, brown, very loose, wet \ 22+/- G 6.5 \ (ALLUVIUM) \ 21.5+1- SILTY CLAY (CL-MLI, with organics, very soft, clay seam approximately -inch thickness 5 1-2-3 N=5 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, with organics,— dark gray to brown, loose io.o % % 18+/- SILTY SAND LSMI, trace organics, dark brown, medium dense, wet / 22 7-9-13 N=22 .11 19 11.5 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet xf Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 V While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-9 BORING LOG NO. B-7 PI9e 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448028° Longitude: -122.263658° Approximate Surface Elev: 29 (Ft.)+/ - DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES 1111111a-4—\ASPHALT, approximately 5-inch thickness 28 5+/ _ ^5 / J _ 10— \ i , SILTY SAND (SMl trace gravel and organics, gray to brown, soft, moist to wet (FILL) 2.5 26.5+/- / SILTY CLAY WITH SAND (CL-MLI, with organics and trace gravel, gray, 6 N=3 71 soft, moist to wet (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 2q+/_ \ POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SMI, gray, dense, moist 18 8-13-20 N=33 27 (ADVANCE OUTWASH) / becomes orange -brown, medium dense f 11.5 \ ( 17.5+/- 14 2-4-12 N=16 / \ 14 3-11-15 N=26 Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet \ / %/ Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS 1 Ierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-10 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 Laboratory Testing lrerracon As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by experienced personnel and classified in accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. The group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is shown in the appropriate column on the boring logs and a brief description of the classification system is included with this report in the Appendix. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and the test results are presented in this appendix. The laboratory test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. Selected soil samples obtained from the site were tested for the following index properties: • Grain -size Distribution • In -situ Water Content • Fines Content Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit B-1 V-SIOM vw I 111111160,10 11 ASTM D422 / ASTM C136 LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GRAIN SIZE: USCS-2 81175042.GPJ TERRACON2015.GDT 5/12/17 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 1 6 4 3 2 - 1 4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200 HYDROMETER I I II \v • 100 10 1 01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAN D coarse fine coarse medium fine SILT OR CLAY Boring ID • B-1 Depth 30 - 31.5 USCS Classification WELL -GRADED GRAVEL with SAND (GW) WC (%) LL PL PI Cc Cu 1.31 17.92 m 8-2 5-6.5 SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM) A B-3 2.5 - 4 SILTY SAND (SM) * B-3 30 - 31.5 POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL (SP) 0.33 26.42 B-6 10- 11.5 SILTY SAND (SM) Boring ID Depth • B-1 30 - 31.5 D100 37.5 D60 8.836 D30 2.389 D10 0.493 %Gravel 56.2 %Sand 42.1 %Silt %Fines %Clay 1.7 1 B-2 5-6.5 A B-3 2.5 - 4 * B-3 30 - 31.5 37.5 19 37.5 1.478 0.29 28.4 58.5 0.291 0.1 3.8 3.072 0.344 0.116 35.8 O B-6 10- 11.5 19 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical 0.286 0.141 3.3 71.4 59.3 77.3 13.1 24.8 4.8 19.4 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA lierracon 21905 64th Ave W Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA PROJECT NUMBER: 81175042 CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 EXHIBIT: B-2 APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS GENERAL NOTES DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon—1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted RS: Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample HS: PA: HA: RB: WB: Hollow Stem Auger Power Auger Hand Auger Rock Bit Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch 0.D. split -spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: WCI: DCI: AB: Water Level Wet Cave in Dry Cave in After Boring WS: WD: BCR: ACR: While Sampling While Drilling Before Casing Removal After Casing Removal N/E: Not Encountered Water levels indicated on the boring Togs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have Tess than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the basis of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Compressive or N-value (SS) Consistency Strength, Qu, psf Blows/Ft. < 500 0-1 Very Soft 500 —1,000 2-3 Soft 1,001 —2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 2,001 —4,000 7-12 Stiff 4,001 — 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 8,000+ 26+ Hard Standard Penetration RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS Standard Penetration Rinq Sampler (RS) or N-value (SSI Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. 0 — 3 0-6 4-9 7-18 10 — 29 19-58 30 — 49 59-98 50+ 99+ Relative Density GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of Major Component Constituents Dry Weight of Sample Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15 — 30 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense Descriptive Term(s) of other Constituents Trace With Modifier Percent of Dry Weight <5 5-12 > 12 Term Particle Size Plasticity Index Non -plastic 0 Low 1-10 Medium 11-30 High 30+ Exhibit C-1 M UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group GroupName s Symbol Coarse Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Less than 5% fines c Cu>_4and 1 <Cc<3E Cu<4and/or 1>Cc>3E GW GP Well -graded gravel F Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines c Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,G,H Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F,G,H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% finest' Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines D Cu>_6and 1 <Cc<3E SW Well -graded sand Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E Fines classify as ML or MH SP Poorly graded sand' SM Silty sand G,H.' Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G.H,' Fine -Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic: PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line J CL Lean clay K,L,M P1 < 4 or plots below "A" line J ML SIIt K.L,M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried < 0.75 OL Organic clay K,L,M," Organic silt K,L,M,o Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic: PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clayK,L,M PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt K.L.M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OH Organic clay K,L.M.F Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,L,M,o Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve s If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. o Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well - graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay. o Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well - graded sand with silt, SW -SC well -graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay E Cu = D60/D10 Cc = F If soil contains >_ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. G If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or SC-SM. PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) 60 - i - - ---r- T For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction 50 - of coarse -grained soils _ Equation of "A" - line Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5. 40 - then PI=0.73 (LL-20) , Equation of "U" - line ' Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7 30 — then PI=0.9 (LL-8) H K If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains >_ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel," whichever is predominant. If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. M If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. PI >_ 4 and plots on or above "A" line. o PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. '" PI plots on or above "A" line. o PI plots below "A" line. LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Exhibit C-2 A 5)16/2017 Design Maps Summary Report "3USGSDesign Maps Summary Report User -Specified Input Report Title Proposed Tukwila CFA Tue May 16, 2017 21:35:08 UTC Building Code Reference Document 2012/2015 International Building Code (which utilizes USGS hazard data available In 2008) Site Coordinates 47.44775°N, 122.26323°W Site Soil Classification Site Class E - "Soft Clay Soil" Risk Category I/II/III USGS-Provided Output Ss= 1.447g S1 = 0.539 g SMs = 1.303 g SM1 = 1.294 g SDs = 0.868 g SD1 = 0.863 g For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. MCEEResoc41se Spettruxl aaD aaa Period, T (sec) Design Response Spectrum ae3 Lai 1.3 t.a3 LW 1!1G Period, T (sea_) Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject -matter knowledge. Project Mngr: DAB Project No. 81175042 Drawn By. BCO Scale: NIA Checked By. RWS File No. exhibit C-3 Approved By: DAB Date: May 2017 1Irracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W., Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH. (425) 771-3304 FAX. (425) 771-3549 Basemap PDF file provided by USGS USGS SEISMIC DESIGN SUMMARY EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington C-3 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT RECEIVED JUN 06 2011 Community Development GHAV 1r ',f y�v- . tC -4V---,. o ? 2. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX t G ;. 'Os J - BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • KLAMATH FALLS, OR ♦ LONG BEACH, CA ♦ ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA sc. y, www.barghausen.com E Nr' N ENG� Chick-fil-A 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington City of Tukwila File No. (,13 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 June 5, 2017 Our Job No. 18363 6/5/2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1 — Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet Figure 2 — Site Location Figure 3 — Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics Figure 4 — Soils 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 2.1 Analysis of the Core Requirements 2.2 Analysis of the Special Requirements 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology B. Developed Site Hydrology C. Performance Standards D. Flow Control System E. Water Quality System Figure 5 - Existing Site Map Figure 6 - Developed Site Map 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION (CSWPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan Analysis and Design B. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Design 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 18363.001.doc Figure 1 Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Chick-fil-A, Inc. Phone (303) 519-7206 Address 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350, Irvine, CA 92618 Project Engineer Chris Jensen, P.E. Company Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Phone (425) 251-6222 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION ❑ Landuse Services Subdivision / Short Subd. / UPD • Buildinc_Services M/F (Commercials] SFR ❑ Clearing and Grading ❑ Right -of -Way Use ❑ Other Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Chick-fil-A DDES Permit # Location Township 23 North Range 4 East Section 26 Site Address 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA 98188 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS ❑ DFW HPA ❑ COE 404 ❑ DOE Dam Safety ❑ FEMA Floodplairr ❑ COE Wetlands ❑ Other ❑ Shoreline Management ❑ Structural RockeryNault/ _ ❑ ESA Section 7 Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Type of Drainage Review ® / Targeted / (circle): Large Site Date (include revision Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type (circle one): ® / Modified mall Site Date (include revision / dates): dates): Date of Final: Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Approval: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: No Start Date: Completion Date: Describe: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : NA Special District Overlays: NA Drainage Basin: Green River Basin Stormwater Requirements: NA Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS ❑ R• iver/Stream ❑ Lake ® Erosion Hazard ❑ W• etlands ❑ Landslide Hazard ❑ C• losed Depression ❑ Coal Mine Hazard ❑ Floodplain ❑ Seismic Hazard ❑ Other ❑ Habitat Protection ❑ Steep Slope Part 10 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Wo-Woodville Silt Loam 0 to 2 AkF-Alderwood & Kitsap 25 to 70 Ur -Urban Land - ❑ High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) ❑ Other ❑ Sole Source Aquifer ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ Additional Sheets Attached 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 2 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT ❑ Core 2 — Offsite Analysis ❑ Sensitive/Critical Areas ❑ SEPA ❑ Other ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET (provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area) Threshold Discharge Area: (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharge at Natural Location Number atural Dischar a Locations: 0 Offsite Analysis Level: 1 2 / 3 dated: Flow Control Level: 1 3 or Exemption Number (incl. facility summary sheet) Small Site B s Conveyance System Spill containment located at:Northeast corner - Modular Wetlands Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: Contact Phone: After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: CF5Tivate Public If Private, Maintenance Lo• Required: Yes , No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes No Liability Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake Enhanced Basicm Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Mana.ement Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as applicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MDP / BP / LMP / SharedNone Requirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Blood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: Source Control Describe landuse: (comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 3 1 / l /09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High -use Site: / No Treatment BMP: •t Water Separator Maintenance Agreement: Yes with whom? Other Drainage Structures Describe: Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION /1 Clearing Limits r Stabilize Exposed Surfaces /1 Cover Measures 0 Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities ® Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Perimeter Protection Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Traffic Area Stabilization ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas 0 Sediment Retention ►1 Surface Water Control Other ❑ Dewatering Control /1 Dust Control ❑ Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS (Note: Include Facility Summary and Sketch) Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description Modular Wetland ❑ Detention ❑ Infiltration ❑ Regional Facility ❑ Shared Facility ❑ Flow Control BMPs Other /1 Biofiltration ❑ Wetpool ❑ Media Filtration Oil/Water Separator /1 Oil Control ❑ Spill Control ❑ Flow Control BMPs ❑ Other Exempt 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 4 1/1/09 18363.002.doc KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS ❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Covenant ❑ Native Growth Protection Covenant ❑ Tract ❑ Other ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Rockery > 4' High ❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and t attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my knowledge the information provide er- " accurate. June 5, 2017 Signed/Date 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 5 1/1/09 18363.002.doc Figure 2 Site Location Iucvvila Park ( K A K tY 0 2 iukw1 a Pond Park MINKLER BtVD �— iR SITE REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2017) b3nOONV ANDOVER'PK V m Z 0 0 — m BAKER BLVD" MINKL€R BLVD a 141 2 COSTCO D17 Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical. N/A GHAV 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH 4 �►P �0 KENT, WA 98032 W j�I, Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 sG < hC ENG�N� CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: VICINITY MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 vmap.cdr Figure 3 Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics • 1=40' EXISTING DRAINAGE SWALE 7 DRAINAGE BASINS, SUBBASINS, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS 4/ EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE PATTERN (TYP) l i ,,G H�_ 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 �.� (425)251-8782 FAX 0 Zs / y• CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, ENGVN' SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SITE BASIN 1.32 ACRES i So /ii+�SD\ NO1'08'20"E `N88'S1'40"W 271.85' - SD —SD --tl'D S :T"—U S01'08'20"WI 12.00' '51'40"E 38,I0 < I a 'd:ef e OCR Qi w" y il.^cl. i f' ;7 L )" \\ P MINIS---11110 NUM MO EXISTING PAVEMENT AND i BUILDING STRUCTURE i I ® h I A .I co W N 88-51'40"W 3 :00 AI EXISTING DISCHARGE POINT AT CATCH BASINS IN SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY FIGURE 3 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits\18363—Figure 3.dwg 6/5/2017 11:17 AM JCAREY Figure 4 Soils REFERENCE: USDA, Natural Resources Conserva^ion Service LEGEND: Wo = Woodinville silt loam AkF = Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Ur = Urban land Scale Horizontal. N.T.S. Vertical N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNANG, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVIICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P::118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 soil.cdr 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant will be constructed on a 1.04 acre lot located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington, and the total area of work will encompass 1.32 acres. It is also situated within the southwest quarter of Section 26, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. Please see Figure 2 - Vicinity Map for a more accurate depiction of the location of the site. The site consists of two parcels and is mostly covered with asphalt, an existing building, and other associated infrastructure that will be demolished with the proposed development. There are also existing trees, lawn grass, and shrubs located within various landscape areas. In the existing condition, the site runoff is unmitigated and untreated and discharges to the public storm system located along Southcenter Parkway. A small area of off -site flows from the adjacent property to the north flow onto the site and is conveyed to the same public system through asphalt and curb channel. The general stormwater conveyance will consist of catch basins with piped connections through the site. The finished grade will slope to low areas where runoff will collect in the catch basins. Stormwater runoff will convey to the northwest corner of the site for treatment by an oil/water separator and modular wetland prior to discharge into the public system located along Southcenter Parkway. The off -site flows from the north property will be intercepted by a trench drain and conveyed to the same public system as the existing condition. There will be a small amount of bypass on the two driveways connecting to the shared access located south of the project site. 18363.001.doc 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The following is a response to each of the core requirements delineated in the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM): 2.1 Analysis of the Core Requirements Core Requirement No. 1: Discharge at the Natural Location. Response: The site will discharge to the public storm system located along Southcenter Parkway as it does in the existing condition. Core Requirement No. 2: Off -Site Analysis. Response: A Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis has been prepared and is located in Section 3 of this report. Core Requirement No. 3: Flow Control. Response: The project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements; however, the site also falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions basin. Based on this, stormwater runoff from the developed site must be released at a rate that matches existing conditions. The project will see a reduction in impervious surface areas and, as such, flow rates will be Tess once the project is completed. Therefore, no additional flow control will be proposed as part of this project. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System. Response: The site development stormwater conveyance is comprised of a series of catch basins and pipes. The sizing of this conveyance network is based on the King County Rational Method delineated in the 2009 KCSWDM and sized to adequately convey the anticipated stormwater discharge based on the stormwater runoff developed from a 25-year storm event. Conveyance calculations will be provided in the final engineering plans and Technical Information Report (TIR). Core Requirement No. 5: Erosion and Sediment Control. Response: Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans will be included in the site development documents prepared for this project that meet the requirements of the 2009 KCSWDM. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance and Operations. Response: The property owner will assume the maintenance and operation of the stormwater facilities. See Section 10 of this report for the Operations and Maintenance Manual. Core Requirement No. 7: Financial Guarantees and Liability. Response: All financial guarantees and liability requirements for the property owner will be met and followed for this project site in accordance with the type of project proposed. 18363.001.doc Core Requirement No. 8: Water Quality. Response: A modular wetland unit is proposed for the purpose of providing enhanced basic water quality in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM and is sized per Department of Ecology's (DOE) General Use Level Designation (GULD). 2.2 Analysis of the Special Requirements Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements. Response: This special requirement does not apply to this lot. Special Requirement No. 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation. Response: This special requirement does not apply to this lot. The proposed development is not located within the mapped FEMA 100-year floodplain. Special Requirement No. 3: Flood Protection Facilities. Response: This project does not rely on the existing flood protections facilities, and does not propose to modify or construct a new flood protection facility. Special Requirement No. 4: Source Control. Response: Source controls are required for this project site and will follow all necessary requirements as depicted in the 2009 KCSWDM. Special Requirement No. 5: Oil Control. Response: This site is considered a high -use site of greater than 100 vehicles per 1,000 square feet and, therefore, requires implementation of oil controls. The project proposes to use a Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separator. Please see Section 4.0 for more information. 18363.001.doc 3.0 OFF -SITE ANALYSIS The Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis is included in this section. i 18363.001.doc LEVEL 1 OFF -SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Chick-fil-A 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Parkway, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92618 June 5, 2017 Our Job No. 18363 GHA0 • 4T wi., i!, Q-aFBRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • KLAMATH FALLS, OR • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA l` � z 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX o4'IN g• ' www.barghausen.com ��: r' ENGoN TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS EXHIBIT A Vicinity Map EXHIBIT B Downstream Drainage Map EXHIBIT C Upstream Basin Map TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW EXHIBIT D FEMA Map EXHIBIT E Sensitive Areas Folios EXHIBIT F SCS Soils Map EXHIBIT G Assessor's Map EXHIBIT H Wetland Inventory Map EXHIBIT I Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT J 3.1 3.2 3.3 Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS 18363.003.doc TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS This proposed Chick-fil-A restaurant is located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. It is also situated within the southwest quarter of Section 26, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. A vicinity map of the site location is provided in Exhibit A. The site consists of two tax parcels (262304-9066 and -9120) of approximately 1.04 acres with an existing commercial building and asphalt parking area. UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Based on a site visit and review of the topography maps, there is a very minor amount of upstream flow onto the project site from the adjacent northern property. These flows currently convey through an asphalt and concrete curb channel to a catch basin located along Southcenter Parkway. The lot to the south of the project area appears to slope away from the site. There is a vegetated swale west of the property line that intercepts easterly flows from the hillside and conveys this runoff north into an existing catch basin. Southcenter Parkway abuts the east property line of the site and has its own stormwater collection and conveyance system. Please refer to Exhibit C - Upstream Basin Area Map for a graphic depiction of the surrounding topography and development. 18363.003.doc Exhibit A Vicinity Map c m w G SIt 1:•-STII — u+ 74 t67tli-ST 170TH-S -S 172N D:PL -H ST— S-t66TH.ST S 178TH ST Ill REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2017) S b5I' S©uthcenter Mall Tukwila Pord Park NIINKLER BLVD �R `-SITE TUKWILA KW MHdb3A !ANDOVER PK W rr BAKER:Bu,' u DFW Q0 MINKLER BLVD ANDOVER PK E CCSTCO D= Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical. N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: VICINITY MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitigraphics118363 vmap.cdr Exhibit B Downstream Drainage Map The reformation included on this map has been comp ied by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties. express or implied, as to accuracy. completeness. time in ess. or rghts to the use of such information. This document is not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be fable for any general. special, indirect, incidental. or consequential damages including, but not limited to. lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohbited except by written permission of King County. Date: 5/24/2017 LI King County GIS CENTER Exhibit C Upstream Basin Map xistin r Swale con rface ater nor om w st bounda Chick-fil-A - Upstream Basin Area Map Topography sl s t es away from site a i ng north boundary Topography slopes away from site along south boundary Minkler Blvd Offsite drainage disci] arging into exist ng asphalt swal6 SITE Jar The information included on this map has been compied by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County ma es no represen a ions or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, time iness, or rights to the use of such information. This document e not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be iable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including. but not Ignited to, lost revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohbited except by written permission of King County. Date: 5/17/2017 access road Roadside curb and gutter collected runoff along existin Southcenter kwfr� access rcc1f King County King County GIS CENTER TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plans: This site is located within the Lower Green River Basin. Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable to this project. Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: Please see Exhibit I for the Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report. Critical Drainage Area Maps: No critical drainage area requirements apply to this site. Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: This project is not located within a 100-year floodplain. See Exhibit D for the FEMA map. Other Off -Site Analysis Reports: A review of the Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report and a site investigation were conducted in preparation of this Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis. Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on a review of the King County Sensitive Area Map Folio, a large part of the site is located in an Erosion Hazard area. Road Drainage Problems: Road Drainage Complaints are not available for this report. United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey A soils map is included in this report (see Exhibit F). The soils map identifies three soil classifications that are located on the site: Wo - Woodinville silt loam, AkF - Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep slope, and Ur - Urban land. • Wetland Inventory Map: The Wetland Inventory Map is located within this report. As previously noted, there are no wetlands within or adjacent to the project site area. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable to this project. 18363.003.doc Exhibit D FEMA Map 0 0 C n CORPORATE nF CORPORATE OF CITY OF TUKWILA 530091 MINK LEGEND OTHER AREAS ZONE X Areas determined to be outside 500.year floodplain. REFERENCE: Federal Emergency Management Agency (Portion of Map 53033C0959 F, May 1995) Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: FEMA MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 fema.cdr Exhibit E Sensitive Areas Map Legend IJ Parcels MI Potential landslide hazard areas (2016, see explanation--->) Potential steep slope hazard areas (2016, see explanation--->) Erosion hazard (1990 SAO) ': l Seismic hazard (1990 SAO) Coal mine hazard (1990 SAO) REFERENCE: King County iMAP (2017) Minkler Blvd class 1 class 2 perennial class 2 salmonid class 3 unclassified Wetiand (1990 SAO) Scale: Horizontal. N.T.S. Vertical N/A GHA!! 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH zQ �►►A SF KENT, WA 98032 lm Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 i C T'NGENGisf-- CIVIL ENGINEERING. LAND PLANNING. SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: SENSITIVE AREAS MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 sens.cdr Exhibit F Soils Map REFERENCE: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service LEGEND: Wo = Woodinville silt loam AkF = Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep Ur = Urban land Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical. N/A GHA VIP* 0 ,,•• r <p 'V�4P G ENG\H 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: SOIL SURVEY MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000s1183631exhibitlgraphics118363 soil.cdr Exhibit G Assessor's Map 3 POP; PCL 2 a 41 1.71 AC *m: tail" ] 1K g LOT 2 BO'Ael° _� Pc! B .134291 n] BLA e4-1O-BLA 'tG 91T LOT 1 REFERENCE: King County Department of Assessments (Nov. 2014) Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 Z (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: Chick-fil-A Tukwila, Washington Job Number 18363 Title: ASSESSOR MAP DATE: 05/11/17 P:118000st 183631exhibitlgraphicsl18363 amap.cdr Exhibit H Wetland Inventory Map Lower Green River Green River Basin WETLAND: Lower Green River 20 LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: NE, SW 32-22-5 8-27-81 ACREAGE: . 3 CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service PUB3 Pal US trine, Unconsolidated bottom, !lud COMMUNITY PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Approx. Scale: 1" = 200' Soos Creek Green River Common Name Opera Water NOTE: The wetland edge shown above Is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakeS, the transition from standing water to uplands is usually dear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs ovew a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands, and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." Lower Green !fiver 2U OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: IP, TL Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: Birds: MA, BS Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: None Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: 0 ac. ft. Potential Active: 0 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Heavily impacted by domesticated ducks. WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example. a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage 30 22 in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species 30 21 Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, 15 10 surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall 84 92 environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, 84 44 game birds or mammals of commercial value , WETLAND RATING: Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings.- The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. The guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 3 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green Ri ver 2.1 LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE: CLASSIFICATION: POW SE, SE 32-22-5 8-27-81 • 5 Fish and Wildlife Service Pa1ustrine, Open Water North A Approx. Scale: 1" = 200 COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Green River Common Name Open Water NOTE: The wetland edge shown above is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone", For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." Lower Green River 21 i OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: AR Herbs: Shrubs: SX, SD Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: CX, JE, LM Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Unknown Condition: Outflow enters: Stream POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: 0 ac. ft. 0 ac. ft. WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For exampie, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide ' Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage 7 16 in downstream areas Biology: quality'of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species 46 35 Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, 38 23 surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall 84 91 environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, 69 31 game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. The guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 3 J Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green River 24 LOCATION: W 4-21-5 INVENTORY DATE: 8-27-81 ACREAGE: 39 North -t Approx. Scale: 1" = 500' COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR Green River DRAINAGE: CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PEM5 Palustrine, Emergent, Narrow- Shallow Marsh. leaved persistent (Juncus effusus) NOTE: The wetland •edge shown above is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transition from standing water to uplands Is usually dear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are teas distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone"„ For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." Lower green rti ver L4 OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: AR SX, SD EX, PA, JE RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 19 ac. ft. 19 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Heavy grazing by cattle. WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank.. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide 92 88 38 29 53 35 38 67 46 69 Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. The guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: Lower Green River 26 LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE: SW, NW 9-21-5; SE, NE 8-21-5 8-28-81 6.5 Approx. Scale: 1" = 500' COMMUNITY Soos Creek. PLAN AREA: BASIN OR DRAINAGE: Green River CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PF04 Palustrine, Forested, Needle- Forested leaved evergreen (Western Red Cedar) PF01 Palustrine, Forested, Broad- Forested leaved deciduous (Red Alder) from s Is NOTE: uThe sually clear. edge However,shown theed es of e Is forested ore. In scrub/shrub wetlands ds are less distinct. onds or lakes, e aThere,�the change fromwater wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". Fora discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guldellnes for King County Wetlands." OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: PS, AR, FL, TS, TP Herbs: LA, MU, 05, SD, TL Shrubs: SR, AC, CS, CS, MD, RP, RS, SD Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: AF, PA Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 2 ac. ft. 7 ac. ft. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Considerable amount of litter in north portion. WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Data was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site, For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin County -wide 76 70 23 8 15 7 15 40 7 44 Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks, specific data or percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. The guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 Photo Date: 5-80 WETLAND: LOCATION: INVENTORY DATE: ACREAGE: Lower Green River 29 SE 30-22-5 8-2 8- 81 3.4 North * Approx. Scale: 1" = 200' COMMUNITY Soos Creek PLAN AREA: BASIN OR Green River DRAINAGE: CLASSIFICATION: Fish and Wildlife Service Common Name PEM5 Palustrine, Emergent, Narrow- Shallow Marsh leaved persistent (Cattail) PSSI Palustrine, Scrub -Shrub, Broad- Scrub -Shrub leaved deciduous (Willow) NOTE: The wetland edge shown above Is approximate. In marshes, ponds or lakes, the transitionfrom standing water to uplands Is usually clear. However, the edges of forested or scrub/shrub wetlands are less distinct. There, the change from wetland to upland often occurs over a broad area called the "transition zone". For a discussion, see Wetland Plants of King County and the Puget Sound Lowlands and "Guidelines for King County Wetlands." Lower Green rover L7 OBSERVED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 1) Trees: Herbs: Shrubs: Sedges/Rushes/Grass/Fern: Birds: Mammals: Fish: Other: FL, PT RR, TL SX RARE/ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES: (refer to list in Appendix 2) Recorded/Observed: Potential: SIGNIFICANT HABITAT FEATURES: OUTLET: Type: Condition: Outflow enters: POTENTIAL STORAGE: Existing Active: Potential Active: GENERAL OBSERVATIONS: Channel Partially Blocked Stream 0 ac. ft. 5 ac. ft. WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY: Dato was collected in the five categories shown below. Within each category the data was evaluated to produce numerical values. Composite values for each category were produced in order to compare each wetland to other wetlands in its sub -basin and in King County. The result of that comparison was a percentile rank. The percentile is expressed on a scale of one hundred and indicates the percent of wetlands that scored equal to or below that particular site.. For example, a percentile rank of 80 under sub -basin means that the wetland scored equal to or better than 80 percent of all sites within the sub -basin for that evaluation category. NOTE: The percentile ranks are valid only within the individual evaluation category and are intended solely for reference and comparison. Evaluation Category Hydrology: runoff storage potential, water quality, potential for minimizing damage in downstream areas Biology: quality of habitat, abundance and diversity of plant and animal species Visual: diversity and contrast of wetland and surrounding vegetation, surrounding landforms Cultural: types of access, proximity to schools/institutions, overall environmental quality Economic: presence of agriculture/peat extraction, anadromous or game fish, game birds or mammals of commercial value WETLAND RATING: Rank (by percentile) Sub -basin 46 61 46 84 84 County -wide 38 50 31 93 51 Each wetland was assigned one of three possible wetland ratings. The 'wetland ratings were determined by examining the scores of selected inventory tasks,• specific data or -percentile ranks for individual evaluation categories. The criteria used to assign the wetland ratings are described in the Introduction. For each rating a number of specific guidelines for new development in or adjacent to wetlands were prepared. The guidelines are intended to assist in carrying out King County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and other wetland policies. They are included in a separate report titled "Guidelines for King County Wetlands". Wetland Rating: 2 Exhibit Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO, 24 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN JUNE 1987 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface Water Management Division King County, Washington King County Executive Tim Llill King County Council Audrey Geiger. District l Cynthia Sullivan. District Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director Surface Water Management Division Joseph J. Sint nler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Dave Clark. Manager, River & Water Resource Section Larry Gibbons, Manager, Project Management and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bruce Barker, Engineer Arne Stonkus, Engineer Ray Steiger, Engineer Pete Ringen, Engineer Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants, Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist, Earth Consultants, Inc. Parks, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill. Division Manager Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Contributing Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager & Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert R. Fuerstenberg. Biologist & Team Leader Matthew. J. Bruengo, Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Deanne Sheldon, Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker, Earth Scientist Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Truax, Planning Support Technician Brian Vanderburg, Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Byerly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig, Technical Writer Virginia Newman, Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller, Typesetter Jaki Reed, Typesetter Lela Lira, Office Technician Marty Cox, Office Technician P:CR TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY II. INTRODUCTION III. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN 2 A. Overview 2 B. Effects of Urbanization 4 C. Specific Problems 4 1. Erosion damage 5 3. Threat of landsliding 5 3. Sedimentation 5 4. Destruction of fish habitat 5 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS 6 A. Prevent accelerated erosion and landsliding 6 B. Improve habitat 7 V. MAP 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A: Estimated Costs APPENDIX B: Capital Improvement Project Ranking APPENDIX C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations A-1 B-1 C-1 I. SUMMARY The Lower Green River Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila and Auburn. The study area considered here includes the unincorporated areas of the basin. which can he roughly separated into northern and southern portions that are divided the Lower Green River. The two portions are distinctly different in their development patterns, with the northern area dominated by the commercial development of South Center shopping mall, two major interstate freeways, and light industrial activities. In the southern portion, single-family residential land uses dominate. Urbanization processes in this basin are expected to continue, with impervious surfaces in some areas expanding as much as five times their present levels. As might be expected in a basin so heavily urbanized, there are numerous environmental problems. The basin contains many sensitive areas, particularly along the steep slopes of tributary valley walls that are susceptible to erosion and landsliding. Stormflows, which have increased as the basin has been developed, have caused gullying, landsliding, and other damage along many steep slopes. These problems have also increased sedimentation downstream. Flooding has occurred in some places as both natural and artificial conveyance systems have become clogged with sediment. Worst -case examples of erosion were found at the Kent Highlands landfill, adjacent to King County's Grand View Park, where storm flows have caused erosion of the landfill material. Sediments and chemicals from decomposing trash have washed into the stream system. Flooding potential was found on Tributary 0068 at two locations. Fish habitat lossess were significant in the northern portion of the basin, with one of the worst examples located on Tributary 0036. Recommended solutions in the Lower Green River Basin include 1) preventing further erosion and landsliding by using both natural and artificial retention/detention (RID), prohibiting certain harmful development practices (such as routing storm flows over steep slopes), and revegetating streambanks; and 2) improving habitat in the basin by preventing the further deterioration of water quality, protecting riparian corridors, and reestablishing streams and streambanks, where feasible. Q. INTRODUCTION: History and Goals of the Program In 1985 the King County Council approved funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water Management Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of 29 major drainage basins located in King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins •-Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks -- in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recommend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field observations to examine geology, hydrology, and habitat conditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important element of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to 1) critical problems needing immediate solutions, 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage conditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them in developing more detailed regulatory measures and specific capital improvement plans. They P:LGR 1 are not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems: instead. they are to he used as initial surveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be made. Due to the limited amount of time available for the field work in each basin, the reports must be viewed as descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. Recommendations contained in each report provide a description of potential mitigative measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental protection through capital project construction or development approval conditions. The appropriate extent of such measures will be decided on a case -by -case basis by County officials responsible for reviewing applications for permit approvals and for choosing among competing projects for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute for a more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on a site -specific basis for any proposal. III. FINDINGS IN LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN The field investigation in the Lower Green River Basin was conducted in February 1987 by Ray Heller, resource planner; Arny Stonkus, engineer; and Lee Benda, geologist. Their findings and recommendations are presented in the following discussion. A. Overview of the Basin Geographic and land use features. The Lower Green River Basin is located in southern King County between the cities of Tukwila on the north and Auburn on the south. Parrs of the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn lie within the basin, which is divided into two portions. The southern portion lies east of the Green River between the cities of Kent and Auburn; the northern portion lies west of the Green River between the Kent -Des Moines Road and State Road (SR) 518. The southern portion of the basin, which includes large residential and commercial areas within the city of Auburn, was not included in the study area. The areas that were studied --the unincorporated parts of this southern portion of the basin -- are primarily contained in the Soos Creek Community Planning Area. Single-family residential land use dominates in this area, although small farms also occupy sizable acreages. The effects of future development may be dramatic, as some subcatchments are projected to expand in impervious surfaces to as much as five times their current levels. This development will be mainly single-family residential, interspersed with some multi -family units. The northern portion of the basin is dominated by the commercial areas of the South Center shopping mall, its surrounding commercial and light -industrial land uses, three major arterials (Interstates 5 [I-51 and 405 [I-405J and Pacific Highway south), and the shopping district north of Seattle -Tacoma (Sea-Tac) International Airport. Single-family residences greatly outnumber multi -family units in this portion of the basin, which is contained in the Highline and Green River Community Planning Areas. Future growth in this northern portion will consist of commercial and multi -family land uses, including the conversion of some areas presently zoned single-family to denser zoning classifications. Dominant geologic and geomorphic features. The composition of the geologic materials in the Lower Green River valley is dominated by glacial sediments. The glacial sediments include an extensive till layer that is located at the top of the valley scarp. Deposits of recessional outwash sand and other glacio-fluvial sands are locally P:LGR i interspersed on top of the till deposits and along the edges of the valley. The vallcv bottom is made up of more recent alluvial sand and silt deposited by the Green and White Rivers before diversion of the White into the Puyallup River in P'0(). The wide floodplain through which the Green River used to meander (before it was diked) is composed of deep floodplain, channel, and lacustrine sediments up to 100 feet thick. There are a few outcrops of sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Puget Group in the basin. The morphology of the Lower Green River basin is dominated by the valley that was formed by the Green and White Rivers prior to the most recent glacial advances. The east and west valley walls were cut by numerous minor tributaries originating in the uplands above the valley escarpment. These tributaries formed steep -sided valleys and alluvial -debris fans at the mouths of the basins. Along the tributaries, landslides and slumps play an active role in maintaining the steep, hummocky valley walls. Historically. the Green and White Rivers meandered through the extensive floodplain located between the valley walls. The White River was diverted south to the Puyallup River; the Green has been straightened, diked, and cleaned of organic and inorganic debris, such as trees and boulders. This essentially isolates the river from its natural floodplain and reduces its present role as a geomorphic agent along the valley floor and walls. The upland areas of the basin have a general morphology indicative of glacial abrasion, deposition, and more recent fluvial erosion caused by minor tributaries. Hydrologic and hydraulic features. The Lower Green River Basin is composed of numerous smaller subbasins which are significantly different from each other in their drainage characteristics. The subbasins are mostly urbanized in the northern and rural in the southern portions of the basin where flows enter the Green River via relatively natural stream channels. Alterations in natural stream corridors occur at or near either the Lower Green River itself or at I-5 culvert crossings. Whereas most subbasins studied exhibited serious effects from urbanization, many were in relatively good condition and/or might be potential sites for stream restoration projects. A number of wetlands in the southern section of the basin and a few small lakes scattered throughout the basin help to mitigate some of the effects of peak flows and excess volumes generated from urbanization. Tributaries flowing from the northern side of the basin into the Lower Green River are highly urbanized drainages which are in need of R/D facilities to reduce the present and anticipated runoff associated with expanses of impervious areas. The rural southern drainages are slated for the greatest increases in impervious surface due to proposed developments, and are in need of regional RID/ facilities. Habitat characteristics. The habitat conditions in the streams of the Lower Green River Basin vary considerably. In the northern portion of the basin habitat has been almost completely destroyed; in the southern portion, there are reaches which have been damaged but might be restored to use by fish and other wildlife. At present, there are no tributaries in this basin which support anadromous fish. Commercial development in the northern portion of the basin has severely altered streams and riparian corridors. The clearing and filling of land, construction of buildings. and roadways and piping and diking of streams have eliminated spawning gravel, and other natural features necessary for fish use. In addition, the extensive acres of impervious surfaces associated with intense commercial development have greatly increased the volumes and rates of storm runoff, thereby eroding and destroying those P:LGR 3 few remaining natural reaches downstream in the northern portion. Complicating these conditions even further are the flap gates placed along the main stem of the Green River at most points where tributaries enter; these structures would effecti•.eIv prevent any fish from entering the streams. The southern portion of the basin experiences many of the same habitat problems as the northern portion, however to a lesser extent. This problems could worsen as residential development expands these next few years. Without specific efforts to protect the environment, habitat will be lost in the southern portion of the Lower Green River Basin. as it has been in the northern portion. B. Effects of Urbanization in the Basin As in many other rapidly growing basins in the County, the Lower Green River Basin suffers from increased rates and volumes of runoff generated by the impervious surfaces of roofs, roads, and parking lots. When this runoff flows into natural channels, it causes erosion, scour, and downstream sedimentation. Sedimentation fills spawning gravels and pools, eliminates fish habitat; limits channel capacity; and creates the conditions for bank overtopping and flooding. Surface water originating on pavement incorporates greases, oils and other toxic hydrocarbons associated with urban areas. The stormwater that enters drainage ditches flows at an even faster rate than in natural channels, thereby magnifying the damage it can cause. The damages caused by increased runoff in urban areas such as the Lower Green River Basin might be less severe if wetlands, ftoodplains, and other natural features had been left intact to attenuate and filter the flows. These elements for the most part have disappeared with development. While development has been accompanied by the installation of artificial conveyance and R/D systems, these have often been undersized, poorly designed and installed, or otherwise inadequate to handle the cumulative effects of runoff from new development. For example, the lower portions of Tributaries 0061. 0068. and 0069 were found to contain particularly serious damage in the form of erosion, scour, sedimentation and the elimination of vegetation from streambanks and corridors. Flooding in these tributaries seems to have increased, in part, from the use of undersized drainage pipes. This problem is repeated along the lower reaches of Tributaries 0036A, 0036B, 0036C, and 0038, where flows have have been piped on their approach to 1-5 or the Lower Green River. Several extreme cases of erosion -incised channels, and landslides -- in part resulting from flows diverted from their natural drainage course and passing through King County Grandview Park -- were noted on the Kent Highlands landfill area. The destruction of pre-existing tightlined conveyance systems has caused surface water at this location to flow unchecked over the unconsolidated former gravel pit slopes and natural hillslopes. Erosion in this case will also cause water quality deterioration, as toxicants from deteriorating garbage and sediments eventually enter the Lower Green River. C. Specific Problems Identified Problems -- both existing and anticipated -- in the Lower Green River Valley are clearly development -related. Earlier descriptions of the basin and the effects of urbanization pointed out these problems in a general way. Specific details of the most serious problems identified during reconnaissance are provided below. 1. Erosion is damaging both public and private property in the Lower Green River Basin. The majority of the erosion problems in the basin are P:LGR 4 associated with the steep slopes within the small tributary valleys and along the major valley walls. a. Gully erosion is occurring adjacent to King Countv's Grand‘it:w Park, where the routing of concentrated storm flows over the steep hillslopcs could cause even more serious mass -wasting. Such intense gullying is also occurring in the glacio-fluvial sand adjacent to the Kent Highlands landfill, a situation requiring immediate solution. b. Channel and bank erosion from high peak flows is occuring along many tributaries, particularly those with narrow, relatively steep sides. On Tributary 0016 (RM. 10) and Tributary 0069 (RM. 50) there are examples of this type of erosion. 2. Landsliding is both a present and future threat on steep valley walls. The removal of vegetation; as well as the routing of stormwater along steep slopes (see also 1.a. above), may result in landslides. Many of the valley walls show evidence of historic landslide activity, such as scarps, tilled blocks, chaotic terrain, and tilted trees. A portion of land along the valley wall in the landslide terrain has been put up for sale at S 312th St. and 104th Ave. SE. This area should be assessed for its stability prior to development and all regulatory safeguards (statutory and other regulations) should be used to prevent landsliding. 3. Sedimentation accompanies the kind of erosion processes discussed above. For instance sediment is filling the stream channel on Tributary 0068 at river miles .30 and .60. This is reducing channel capacity (increasing the possibility of flooding at these locations), as well as degrading fish habitat and water quality. Severe sedimentation in the lower portion of Tributary 0069, where a sediment fan presents a potential barrier to fish. 4. Fish habitat has been destroyed by urbanization throughout the basin, particularly in the northern portion. a. The elimination of habitat features from streambeds and riparian corridors has made most of the basin's tributaries unusable for fish. As discussed in III.A. above, stream channels have been severely altered in the Lower Green River Basin. As a result, large organic debris, pools, gravels, and other elements of godd instream habitat have disappeared. One of the worst cases was found on Tributary 0036, along the north side of SR 518 near 42nd Avenue S. b. Poor water quality is caused by three separate problems in this basin. First, streams are contaminated by the domestic garbage dumped directly into streambeds and ravines. Second, streams are being adversely affected by the accelerated erosion in the Kent Highlands landfill. Sediment from the landfill is being carried downstream, polluting water and eroding banks along the way. The latter is expected to continue and worsen, if not addressed. Third, greases, oils, and toxic hydro -carbons from highways, parking lots, and commercial areas around South Center are degrading water quality. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS The solutions proposed for this basin focus on eliminating damage to the natural drainage system, restoring natural drainage conditions where possible, and preventing further damage P:LGR 5 throughout the basin as the urbanization process continues. In most cases these solution` will require the cooperation of local government and other interested agencies. At the present tine such arrangements already exist among the King County Surface hater Managment Division: the cities of Tukwila, Kent, and Auburn; and the Washington State Department of Transportation. The purpose of these arrangements is to identify and propose solutions to hydraulic and habitat problems in the basin and to develop cost -sharing agreements where capital improvements are required. These efforts should continue, and similar joint work should be undertaken among other interested agencies, as appropriate. A. Prevent further accelerated erosion and landsliding in the Lower Green River Basin, where possible. Erosion is the source of many other problems discussed in this and other basins reports. By reducing erosion and landslide problems, sedimentation will also be minimized in the both natural and artificial conveyance systems. When sedimentation is reduced flooding problems will be reduced throughout the basin. The steps toward erosion control are listed below. 4. Preserve wetlands for their R/D values, and for the valuable roles they play in enhancing water quality (through filtration) and providing fish and wildlife habitat. Natural R/D facilities, such as wetlands help to attenuate storm flows and prevent accelerated erosion in downstream areas susceptible to erosion damage. The southern portion of the basin contains several wetlands that serve as natural R/D areas. 2. Promote infiltration of excess surface water in upland areas where geologic analysis indicates it will not cause landsliding and other similar problems. Groundwater contaimination should also be considered in this analysis. 3. Preserve vegetation along steep slopes by establishing native growth protection easements, and appropriate building setbacks, and prohibiting vegetation removal. Protected vegetation should include trees as well as shrubs and groundcover. 4. Prohibit the concentration of sormflows over steep slopes. Require that stormflows be attenuated from above with adequate R/D, tightlined or diverted to stable channels. The drainage and erosion problem adjacent to King County's Grandview Park should receive immediate attention to alleviate the severe gully erosion that is presently occurring. 5. Prohibit construction along steep slopes identified as landslide hazard areas in the King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (SAMF). In addition, strengthen the criteria used by Building and Land Development to review development proposals in landslide hazard areas below valley walls. More restrictive criteria will minimize the potential for property damage for property damage caused by erosion and landsliding in the basin. 6. Prevent instream and bank erosion caused by livestock by limiting their access to stream channels. This will preserve streambank vegetation and eliminate the trampling of banks (a direct source of sedimentation). This is particularly important along the Green River, where livestock are presently causing damage. P:LGR 6 7. Construct or upgrade R/D facilities to assure adequacy to contain both current and anticipated stormwater flows. a. Tributary channels currently experiencing channel and bank erosion (e.g.. 0061 and 0069) should be analyzed immediately for their R/D needs. Future developments should be reviewed using criteria that require R;D provisions to maintain stormwater runoff at the level necessary to prevent adverse impacts such as erosion. h. Upgrade the existing earthern berm and R/D pond on Tributary 0036D at collection point 7 (47th Avenue S and S 173rd) and add energy dis.sipators for outflow from the pond. This will improve the overall function of the facility. 8. Replace undersized conveyance pipes, where necessary. Analyze the adequacy of pipes at key locations in all areas where development has occurred or is planned. Review natural capacities as part of this assessment for stormwater conveyance. B. Improve habitat in the Lower Green River Basin stream system where practicable. 1. Prevent the deterioration of water quality from the toxicants of road and parking lot runoff, from domestic trash (including erosion at the Kent Highlands landfill), and from sedimentation. a. Construct an R/D facility on Tributary 0069 adjacent to Wetland 3226 to provide 3 acre-feet of storage. The facility will intercept drainage from roadside ditches on Southeast 312th Street and cleanse it by means of an oil/water separator. b. Increase enforecment of regulations against the dumping of domestic garbage into ravines and stream channels. Garbage not only degrades water quality as it deteriorates, but it creates fish blockages in tributaries (e.g.. Trib. 0069 at RM .65). c. See A.4. above, regarding the attenuation of stormflows near Kent Highlands landfill and Grandview Park. Preventing severe erosion at these locations will also decrease the washing of chemicals and sediments from the landfill (adjacent to the Grandview Park) into the stream system. 2. Protect against further destruction to channels and riparian corridors in order to preserve the essential features of fish habitat. a. See A.2., 3. and 6. above for recommendations related to the protection of these resources. b. Establish stream -corridor guidelines to prohibit clearing, filling and building within riparian corridors. All streams in the basin would benefit from these guidelines. 3. Reestablish stream and streamside habitat in the northern portion of the basin where these elements have already been severely altered. These restoration efforts should occur during development (or redevelopment) of a site. Opportunities for restoration presently exist on Tributaries 0036A, 0036B, 0036D, and 0033. P:LGR 7 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (North Section) Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary 02 Collection Point Stream 0038 Tributary Number .3205 Proposed Project yr July, 1987 LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN (South Section) Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary V Collection Point Stream 0061 Tributary Number •3201 Proposed Project APPENDIX A ESTIMATED COSTS: PROPOSED CAPITAL, IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS LOWLR GREEN RIVER BASIN NOTE: indicates project was identified by the Surface Water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. Project Collect. Number Point Project Description 3201* 18 Construct R/D facility with 3.0 acre-ft. of storage adjacent to upper end of Wetland 3226. Intcrceptthc roadside runoff on SE 3I2th so that it will be retained in the upper wetland. Further biological assessment is needed to assure this project does not decrease habitat values. 3204 15 Construct R/D facility on Trib.0061 at RM 1.25 which would have a capacity of approx. 3.7 acre ft. 3205* Install a control structure and excavate two existing stream channels to provide 2.5 acre-ft. of storage ('I'rib. (103613, 0036(:). Problem Addressed Decreases potential downstream flooding and improves water quality. Lessen impact on downstream riparian habi- tat. Provides storage for runoff from future development. Eliminates channel scouring, road erosion and potential downstream flooding Estimated Costs and Comments $ 99,000 (subject to right of way acquisitions). $160,000 (dependent on and aC(IUISitions). $85,00() (Dependent on rig way l-ul- way acquisitions) I':I.UR.APA A- I APPENDIX B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING LOWER GREEN RIVER BASIN :A total of three sites had been proposed for Surface Water Management (SWM) projects prior to the field reconnaissance of the Lower Green River Basin. One project remains proposed as iden- tified. one project has been changed to an RID facility. one RID facility has been added, and one proposed RID facility has been eliminated by the consensus of the field team because it is located in tfie wetland serving as the city of Kent's water supply. The previous SWM project list for the Lower Green River Basin had an estimated cost of S700,000, compared to a revised figure of S344,000 for the remaining three projects. The revised costs are a result of lower estimates for right-of-way acquisitions. These projects are listed in the table below, which summarizes the scores and costs of the proposed projects in the basin. These projects were rated according to criteria set forth by the SWM Program Citizen Advisory Committee. The first rating question. ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO GO," could be answered affirmatively for the projects below. These projects can now be considered for merging into the "live" CIP list. Any projects scoring more than 100 points should be considered for incorporation into the six -year CIP plans. Project No. Score Rank No. Cost 3201' 103 1 S 99,000 3205 * 73 2 85.,000 3204 60 3 160,000 TOTAL S344,000 * Indicates project was identified by Surface Water Management prior to reconnaissance. P:CLGAPB/mlm B-1 APPENDIX C DETAILED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LOWER GREEN RIVER I3i\SIN ° All items listed here are located on final display maps in the offices of Surface Water Management. Building and Land Development. and Basin Planning. 'Crib. & Collect. Existing Item* River Mile Point Category 1'rop. Proj. Conditions and Problems 1 Section 15 12 Geology & I lydrology 0001 RM .29-.30 16 Geology 3 0001 20 Geology RM31 4 0001 20 Geology RM 30.60 P:L.CiAPC/mlm Runoff from Kent Highlands landfill and sub -basin tributary to King County Grandview Park is causing extensive gullying and steep -walled valleys. Presents a potential hazard. Extensive sedimen- tation is resulting from erosion. Lower portion of channel is experiencing channel and bank erosion. A very large gully (small valley) is developing due to discharging con- centrated flow on steep slopes. Landslide area is posted for sale. C-1 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued extensive erosion. Fill material will continue to scour away because of lack of compaction. Considerable volumes of fill (contributing to poor water quality) will still be conveyed. Uncontrolled runoff is the cause. Increasing erosion with in- creasing flows in the basin. Continued erosion; may be a public hazard due to 30' vertical walls. Possible hazards associated with development could occur. Recommendations Tightline runoff down to valley floor in a safe, noncrosive manner. Plan and develop adequate regional R/D facilities in the basin_ Determine whether existing facilities should be upgraded for greater control of flows and storage. Tightline drainage to (ireen River. Perform critical predcvelopmcnt review. Trib. Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile I'oint Category Project 5 0001 20 Geology RM 31.00 6 0036A RM .80 7 0036B 8 0036B 9 0036B 10 00360 .(iA1'C/mlm 1labitat 4 Ilydrology 3205 4 I labitat 4 hydrology 4 Geology Conditions and Problems Large gully (small valley) formed by development - related drainage. Wash water from Segate truck center flowing tinder Frager Rd. contains oil film and quantities of algae. Backwater in channel appeared to be caused by defective riser control. Low -gradient stream chan- nels on "]'ribs. 0036B and 0036C. Floodplain approxi- mately 25' wide. Stream corridor and in - stream habitat both heavi- ly impacted by erosive storm flows, clearing, and sedimentation. Manhole inlet with trash rack next to new extensive roadfill. Damaged inflow pipes into manhole control st ruct a re. Channel is experiencing channel and hank erosion. Cause is probably high flows. C:-2 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Continued erosion. Same. If no upstream R/D exists, then water may back up during storms. Riser replacement may eliminate this problem. Further deterioration of the stream system. Roadfilt embankment will continue to erode. Erosion will continue. Recommendations "1'ightlinc drainage. Install and maintain a wastewater treatment facility before releasing water to ditch and ultimately the Green River. Excavate and install control struc- ture for an R/D pond. This system needs R/D to lessen impacts on the system from urban runoff. -Locate control at intersection of Tribs. 36B and 36C. -Reduce existing storm flows. -Restrict future development to release runoff at nonerosive rates. -Require setbacks from tops of ravines. -Repair and replace pipes in manhole structure. -Stabilize roadfill. Build upstream Rig) f,acil�ty. 'Trig. & Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 11 0036D 7 I lydrology 12 0061 14,15 I labitat RM .00-1.40 13 0061 RM .01-.15 14 0061 RM .02 P:l ,GAPC/mlm Geology 14 llydrology R/D berm has collapsed. Severe instream erosion above and below the faci- lity. Sedimentation and erosion in lower reach by farm adjacent to the Green River. Middle reaches have nice pools and riffles. Four waterfalls up to 10' high keep this from being an anadromous stream. Stream ravine is steep and mostly vege- tated. Best trout stream habitat in the basin. Bank erosion and sedimen- tation in channel located on private properly at mouth of basin. Erosion is limited to this sec- tion_ Cause of this ero- sion is not certain. Scouring, hank erosion, channel erosion, sediment build up in stream. The channel capacity is too small for the flows pre- sently generated. (:-3 Anticipated Conditions and Problems lnstrcam erosion will con- tinue. No energy dissipation from i)risco pipe above berm area. Sediment build up from erosion will migrate downstream. Future development could create up to four times the current amount of impervious surface. This could fill pools with sediment and destabilize the large organic debris in stream. Possibly continued erosion with increased development in the basin. Degradation of riparian corridor will continue. Erosion will continue. Recommendat ions -Stabilize and upgrade earthen berm. -Provide energy drssipators for Drisco pipe outflow. -Establish a stream corridor pro- tecting the stream and adjacent ravine sideslopes from clearing. -Future development should release storniwater at noncrosive rates. -Develop adequate R/D for the basin to prevent erosion. -Reestablish the channel flood plain at the mouth of the basin. Use onsite infiltration to the maxi- mum extent po.»'ahte: for new construction. Trih. Collect. Proposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 15 0061 15 I Iydrology 3204 12M 1.25 16 0061 14 Iydrology 12M t_SO 17 0068 17 RM .25-.35 18 0068 17 RM .25 19 0068 17 12M .30 P:I .(;APC/m1m I Iabitat I ydrology habitat Stream segment meanders with little change in ele- vation. Erosion and down - cutting exist in lower segments of stream. Existing outlet of Wetland 3224. Floods over existing gravel road. This wetland is owned by the city of Kent as a water supply source (approx. 86 acres). Nice -looking stream with few pools. Good stream - side cover and instream stabil-ity. Lots of bcnthic organisms. No fish observed. Outfall has instream ero- sion taking place. Large fill of combustible and construction debris on left bank. Fill is unstable and sliding downhill toward stream. (C-4 Anticipated Conditions and Problems No change in existing con- ditions. Impact on downstream areas will con- tinue_ Increased flows and flood frequency due to develop- ment. Use as a well field for water supply. Further instrcam instability from future development storm runoff. Probable vegetation clearing in stream corridor from development. Erosion of stream channel/ hank, if flows continue , unchecked. Health and water quality hazard. Recommendations Construct an R/D facility with 3.7 ac/It. of storage tO i?lli) ,lil downstream problems. Develop an interlocal agreement tO examine the possibility of using part of the wetland for a regional R/D facility. -Establish and enforce stream corri- dor guidelines. -Future development should release stormwatcrs at non -erosive rates. Subcatchmcnt 17 should use onsite R/I) and infiltration systems to the maxi- mum extent possible for control of peak flows. -13AI.D grading and filling section has been contacted. -Stabilize and rex.esciate slope down to stream. -Prohibit filling in stream ravine. '('rib. cC Collect. Item River Mile Point Category 20 0068 17 RM .60 2l 0069 18 RM .00-.90 22 0069 18 RM .10-.90 23 0069 18 RM .10 P:I.CiAPC/mlm 1 labitat 1labitat Geology Geology Proposed Existing Project Conditions and Problems Stream becomes eroded from road ditch flows above 108I h Ave. SL. Fill occurring adjacent to stream in SW corner of SE: 299th St. and 108111 Ave. SE. Minimal fish habitat potential in this stream. Access to stream is open to Green River, but stream is heavily impacted by runoff. This is causing sedimen- tation of the channel in lower portion, erosion and garbage in mid- section, and ditches by trailer park in upper section. lligh frequency of bank erosion, some small streamside landslides associated with bank ero- sion. Sedimentation resulting from channel and bank erosion described above. Sedimentation is occurring over a large area and may threaten private property. C-S Anticipated Conditions and Problems More erosion and possible flooding due to fill in the stream corridor. Subcatchment projected to quadruple in amount of impervious surface. The subcatchment is pro- jected to expand in imper- vious surface five times that in 1985. All problems exhibited in 1987 will pro- bably get worse. As development increases in the basins, erosion will increase. Sedimentation will increase with continued development in the basin. Recommendations No obvious regional R!E) sites, so onsitc RID will be critical in this suhcatchmcnt. Release rates of stormwater should be a:t nonerosive levels. Assess the fish -habitat potential of this stream before doing any habitat projects. Reducing existing and future storm runoff will he key to maintenance of a good stream. Releasing stormwater runoff al nonerosive rates would help accomplish this goal. Plan and develop adequate R/1.) as population and development increase in the basin. Same as RM .1(i,')0. Also construct sediment detention pond. at the mouth of the stream. 'I'rih. & Collect. I'roposed Existing Item River Mile Point Category Project Conditions and Problems 24 0069 1S RM .10 25 0069 18 RM .65 26 0069 18 RM .90-I.10 P:I .CiAI'C./mlm 1lydrology Iabitat Ilydrology 3201 Undersized pipe for existing flows. Evidence of debris from backwater. Garbage pushed over ravine embankment is blocking stream. }'resents fish blockage and is visually very unpleasant. Wetland 3226 is hissected by SE 312th St. Flows into the northern wetland are blocked due to non- functional culvert on opposite side of SE 312th. This has caused the asphalt road to begin to fail from saturation and standing water. Wetland 3226 contains a wide variety of trees. C-6 Anticipated Conditions and Problems Increase in flows from development in upper catch- ment. Instream erosion and headwall erosion will result. Possible water duality problem and further fish blockage. Potential road failure of SE 312th St. Continued impact on northern portion of Wetland 3226 if road- side ditch flow is not curtailed. I nt rod uc t ion of petroleum by-products into wetland system. }2erornmcndations Increase the capacity of the cxistinm pipe system. Consider project to remove garbage to allow fish passage without further destabilization of the strcanihcd. -Construct an I2/O facility on the southern= portion of Wetland 3226. -Intercept the roadside flows on St 312th to southern portion of Wetland 3226. , This will incorporate a major flow source of the region into an It/I) facility and mitigate a major impact on the northern section of wctland. -Perform a detailed wetland study to determine environmental impact. TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION A site visit was conducted on May 23, 2017. There were no problems reported or observed during the field inspection. Based on the review of the topographic maps and the site inspection, in general most surface water is sheet flowing from the west side of the site to the east. There is one catch basin located at a low area on the west side of the existing building which conveys the runoff from the west side of the site. This catch basin is currently full of sludge. All other surface runoff sheet flows to four catch basins located along the east property boundary which abuts Southcenter Parkway. Surface water on the northwest corner of the site conveys to an existing asphalt swale and discharges into a catch basin. The southwest corner of the property north of the project area discharges surface water into the same asphalt swale within the project area. Furthermore, there was no defined drainage course leaving the site along the south boundary line. Therefore, it is presumed that any off -site discharge from the low area near the southwest corner of the site would leave the site along the west property line and flow into the right-of- way. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general, are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems are defined as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructed conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a 10-year event. Examples include inundation of a shoulder or lane of a roadway. Examples include overflows collecting in yards or pastures, shallow flows across driveways, minor flooding in crawlspaces or unheated garages/outbuildings, and minor erosion. Based on the site inspection there was no conveyance, flooding, or erosion problems observed within the downstream drainage course. Three of the four catch basins within the site area appear to be full of sludge and debris and will need to be maintained if they are to remain. 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the concentration of runoff into erosion -sensitive open drainage features. Severe erosion problems warrant additional attention because they pose a significant threat either to health and safety or to public or private property. Based on the site inspection, there was no evidence of potential erosion sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to the downstream conveyance system. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished area of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings. Flooding in electrical/heating systems and components in the crawlspace or garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100-year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." 18363.003.doc As previously mentioned, there was no evidence of flooding observed during the site inspection on May 23, 2017. The downstream drainage system is contained within the existing public right- of-way and primarily consists of catch basins west side of Southcenter Parkway and the north side of Minkler Boulevard. 18363.003.doc Exhibit J Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table Basin: Lower Green Basin OFF -SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Chick-fil-A Subbasin Name: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Subbasin Number: Symbol Drainage Component Type, Name, and Size Drainage Component Description Slope Distance from Site Discharge Existing Problems Potential Problems Observations of Field Inspector, Resource Reviewer, or Resident See Map Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume % Ft. Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts 1 Sheet/shallow flow Runoff discharges from the site would flow into the Southcenter Parkway right -a- way into a series of catch basins. <1 0-10 None None No defined drainage path observed during site visit 2 Series of pipes and catch basins. Runoff flows north along the east side of Southcenter Parkway through a series of pipes, ranging in diameter from 30-42 inches, and catch basins. <1 10-500 None None 3 Series of pipes and catch basins. Runoff flows east along the north side of Minkler Blvd. through a series of pipes, ranging in diameter from 30-42 inches, and catch basins <1 500-4,000 None None 18363.005.docx TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS Based on our site inspection and available topographic maps, the majority of the site slopes to a low area on the west side which abuts Southcenter Parkway. There is an existing driveway on the parcel to the south that runs parallel to the south boundary. This driveway appears to be higher in elevation which parallels the project site. Therefore, it is presumed that any stormwater discharge from the site would flow into Southcenter Parkway where the west parcel boundary abuts. From this point, stormwater flows to the north along the west side of Southcenter Parkway in a series of pipes and catch basins for a distance of approximately 250 feet. At this point, flows turn east and continue to flow in a series of catch basins and pipes along the north side of Minkler Boulevard for a distance of about 4,000 feet towards the Green River Trail. Based on our inspection of the downstream drainage course for the proposed project, there did not appear to be any current conveyance capacity, erosion, or flooding issues. The project will not see any increased flows compared to the existing site conditions. So, it is not anticipated that this project will create or exacerbate any problems in the downstream drainage infrastructure. 18363.003.doc 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology The existing 1.04-acre site consists mostly of pavement, a building structure, and vegetated landscaping. Soils are "till" type (Alderwood) and silt loam (Woodinville). Based on a site reconnaissance, available topography maps and adjacent developments, there are no significant upstream contributing basin areas. The site sheet flows to the south and east. See the attached Existing Basin Area Map. B. Developed Site Hydrology In the developed condition, the site will contain a commercial quick -serve food establishment with associated infrastructure such as parking area. An underground pipe conveyance system will be installed to convey stormwater runoff from the developed site to a water quality facility prior to public discharge. The facility has been design to provide the required water quality per the 2009 KCSWDM. Please refer to the Developed Site Map within this report for a detaUed breakdown of the on -site land covers, as well as the calculations for the proposed drainage systems. C. Performance Standards This project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements, Enhanced Basic Water Quality,- and falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions Basin. D. Flow Control System The project is subject to Level 2 Flow Control requirements; however, the site also falls within a Level 2 Conservation to Existing Conditions basin. Based on this, stormwater runoff from the developed site must be released at a rate that matches existing conditions. The project will see a reduction in impervious surface areas and, as such, flow rates will be less once the project is completed. Per the 2009 KCSWDM, this project is required to apply flow control BMPs, if feasible, per Section 5.2.1.3 (Large Lot High Impervious BMP Requirements). Based on the findings noted in the Geotechnical Report, there is a moderate to high level of risk for liquefaction. Additionally, the Geotechnical Report recommends adequate positive drainage be provided to prevent an increase in moisture content of the building foundation, pavement, and backfill materials. Because of these concerns, this project will not propose to infiltrate or manage any stormwater on site. Therefore, no additional flow control will be proposed as part of this project. E. Water Quality System The proposed water control system has been sized and designed to meet enhanced basic water quality requirements in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. Enhanced water quality will be provided for this site by a Modular Wetland, which has General Use Level Designation (GULD) per the DOE. 18363.001.doc Figure 5 Existing Conditions Site Map 1=40, EXISTING DRAINAGE SWALE EXISTING SITE MAP '---le4TCN OASN R:M 27.15 r-.POWE t- 12" CONC N x 24.65 ON 4 \ 1 P f (17100X / �f Hn;; Arr G) ......... _ FA..D'NG HT '6.6'# a- END Of CASEMENT 64.0 i 1'G. 70 2MA7'T POOR METE MANNO:.E A P 44 262304- r. uc CS0'1'C18'20"E (UG) T(tIG) 5 14U -E-tbU:SC 10' WATERLINE EA£M6NT 20,195# S.F. PER REC. N0. 7203220818 A.P.N. 262304-9066 EXISTING SURFACE 77/ tip DRAINAGE PATTERN (TYP) /�l RTMG 879N 3 //�� ) 6' CONC ENE _ 6.6c GAS M i 7/ ,� FLAT. CF SL1777771^/ \ 4P �ON B:DGETER J.. I / //,' ' , L'GF(f IFP5P c: 1 -G..,_.�1` / / i W 1 I 1 I 15 P,U2Km tfALLS I .. /'- -.-- G- -$ G 1 1 IJ\ / ! I I I 1 k_ -_ ss - s$ - ss ss��_"c / c /l \� I VA.;:7 J---'-^ 5$ ��---______SS - -yam �rINGRES5 EGRESS & b. .�./�''� f-"-'`x_________1.--- .,,,..--..++��'- PEDES1RiMl EASEMEHI "!Y' SEWER MN[HO!! Vx. \ 4 I _J��,-''- PER REC. NO 2007OfA1000466�1 (' 8' CONC NW = i6.07 �- 10 ?CR O 8 GGN" 17.41 C cc" ` ,I t2: CO ,. SSN .1B +.. (,-- _�tli� \-. RSFwER 2MANHa.E °�•.� CTN. 1.0' SOUTH ' S �` r \ I I 1 12" ♦ S - 5.34 I :-:•s Frarcc O �\ 72' CC�C E-I1f.99 C 4 \\\ I (� ` G 12 C W • 1574 H 8.78 .7_,...i_roilisum,......i,„, NM kw c. 4�PARKIN STALL' I r W"OE PSP1) EASEMEN' 6411290970 /, (REM 9) AFFECTS NORTH 7 FEET aE Te.10785L10 E- 20' WOE PS%'&: tASINC_NT 84112,.097P, SHRi:02ERY (1 EM 9) �12.00' ;-GAS METER r 570iiti MANHOLE: 48' RN - 2528 6' CUP E 17,98 10P CLAP. MISER = 19.IL � fm / 51'40 E 38:: -6li!LO'.Nf CO: UMN SUILO:NG COLUMN INGRESS, EGRESS & EASEMENT P14 REC N0. 5507210 83 <pH'4V0 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 o �1F� (425)251-8782 FAX r y0 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, G,NG ENG‘Nc • SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SITE BASIN 1.32 ACRES 71- S10RM MANHOLE 84' 3030.48 36" 6'0.1. S- 20.26 LOT 36' 0.1.E - 20. 16 UGHT A.P.N. 15062 61 LP67 0 SD -- SD --(SD o - S(9m'- °D' STORM MANHOLE 80"-' RN 28.80 57 �O. • \ SEWER MM:H 1(5 '2U DFMhl4A 4809 CATCH EtAS10 R'M - 22.89 6" CONC. E - +7 � ff tor -38.0 )� E 1,1 6.0' CV• Lri _ /N'x' , P ),\, _ 1 S 4 b ^ C2 1 8 -t15' 0T',m L83238;:N1 I PER 634336E CATCH 8451N f 16M - 23.34 12" 0.1. SW 21.10 Utif11' EASEMENT R 6343881 ' SAN?ARY SEWER :R 64580143 - CATCH 19AS N RIM - 23.26 FULL. CF SLUDGE ' 10' WRAP' SEWER )'"?---- PER 20100914000620 -. SEWER MANHOLE 1 RAM - 23 72 24"COtau N- 12,02 1 24" CONC S . 13 12 12" CONC W • 13.22 1 CIR 1.0' WEST TP00 OF Cat 0, 20' 410E PSP&L EA0;3IENT 8411290970 (THENCE SWAY 110', THENCE W'LY 103 TO A POWER VA'.LT.) c I{ '�.. �_ W1 IS! EXISTING OVERFLOW ROUTE THROUGH CT I II 88 _,----CATCH 84S.N RIM - 23.86 8' CONC SW - 22.23 NO MONJMENT IN CASE .AD & TACK APPROX .80' O1AW GRADE Ar P 1. C/.. 5OUTHCENIER PKWF I EXISTING DRIVEWAY 'CATCH OAS'.N RIM - 23.90 t{' CONC NW - 2235 FIGURE 5 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits\18363-Figure 5.dwq 6/5/2017 11:31 AM JCAREY Figure 6 Developed Conditions Site Map 11= 01 DISTURBED AREA 1.32 ACRES, - PROPOSED STORM. COLLECTION AND!" r CONVEYANCE SYSTEM (TYP if /� 0HAG = 71 O -.ft.I� U tis /+ a c?-,„ ENG�At(c I if 1 114711 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAX CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES J DEVELOPED CONDITIONS SITE MAP P(UG) — 8(U— It .1 a, warm' " SITE INFORMATION EXISTING ON -SITE SURFACE AREAS TOTAL LOT AREA: 45,431 SF (1.04 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA: 57,499 SF (1.32 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 54,450 SF (1.25 AC) PERVIOUS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 3,049 SF (0.7 AC) P12 LC ERG 107 SEATS W/ PLAYGROUND NET 4,843 S.F. FF=26.60 PROPOSED ON -SITE SURFACE AREAS TOTAL LOT AREA: 45,431 SF (1.04 AC) TOTAL SITE AREA: 57,499 SF (1.32 AC) TOTAL IMPERVIOUS: 42,253 SF (0.97 AC) TOTAL PERVIOUS/LANDSCAPE AREA: 15,246 SF (0.35 AC) L rl i TRENCH DRAIN TO BYPASS OFF -SITE FLOWS OIL/WATER SEPARATOR MODULAR WETLAND -- P(UGX --i- CC FIGURE 6 P:\18000s\18363\exhibit\TIR Exhibits \18363—Figure 6.dwg 6/5/2017 11:37 AM JCAREY 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Conveyance system calculations will be provided in the final TIR. 18363.001.doc 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES The following special reports and studies are included: 6.1 Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report by Terracon Consultants, Inc. dated May 19, 2017 18363.001.doc DRAFT Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 Terracon Project No. 81175042 Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, Georgia Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. Mountlake Terrace, Washington Offices Nationwide Established in 1965 Employee -Owned terracon.com Geotechnical Environmental lierracon Construction Materials Facilities May 19, 2017 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 5200 Bufington Road Atlanta, Georgia 30349 Attn: Mr. Shwartz P: (303) 519-72063 E: steve.schwartz@cfacorp.com Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Terracon Project No. 81175042 Dear Mr. Shwartz, lferracon Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for the above referenced project. These services were performed in accordance with the Master Services Agreement (MSA) between Chick-fil-A, Inc. and Terracon, dated March 31, 2005. This geotechnical engineering report presents the results of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the proposed project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions conceming this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. Sincerely, Terracon Consultants, Inc. Brett O'Brien, EIT Staff Geotechnical Engineer David A. Baska, PE, PhD Geotechnical Department Manager Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical • Environmental • Construction Materials Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description 2.2 Site Location and Description 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Site Geology 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile 3.3 Groundwater 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations 4.2 Earthwork 4.2.1 Site Preparation 4.2.2 Materials Types 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage 4.2.5 Construction Considerations 4.3 Foundations 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers 4.3.2 Design Recommendations 4.3.3 Construction Considerations 4.4 Seismic Considerations 4.4.1 Liquefaction 4.5 Floor Slab 4.5.1 Design Recommendations 4.5.2 Construction Considerations 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 4.6.1 Design Recommendations 4.7 Pavements 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation 4.7.2 Design Considerations 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 64th Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 13 15 15 15 16 17 18 18 Geotechnical • Environmental • Construction Materials Facilities TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Site Location Map Exhibit A-2 Site and Exploration Plan Exhibit A-3 Field Exploration Description Exhibits A-4 to A-10 Boring Logs B-1 to B-7 APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Exhibit B-2 Grain Size Distributions APPENDIX C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification Exhibit C-3 Seismic Design Map Summary Report Terracon Consultants, Inc. 21905 641h Ave W Suite 100 Mountlake Terrace, Washington 98043 P [425] 771 3304 F [425] 771 3549 terracon.com Geotechnical • Environmental Construction Materials • Facilities Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY lierracon A geotechnical exploration has been performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Terracon's geotechnical scope of work included the - advancement of seven (7) exploratory borings to approximate depths of 11 % to 31 % feet below existing site grades. Based on our current understanding of the proposed development and the results of our subsurface investigation the site appears suitable for the proposed development. The following geotechnical considerations were identified: ■ The proposed restaurant structure may be supported on conventional spread footings if used in conjunction with a ground improvement system to mitigate potentially unsuitable soil conditions within the existing fill and the underlying soft, organic rich alluvial soils. ■ Assuming proper site preparation and the implementation of any necessary subgrade mitigation measures, total and differential building settlement should be within anticipated client/owner specifications. ■ In general, on -site native soils do not appear suitable for reuse as engineered fill due to relatively high fines and organic content within the bulk structure of the soil. Some of the overlying, previously placed fill soils may be suitable for fill applications. Further sampling and testing should be conducted on soils generated during earthwork and grading efforts for a more specific suitability assessment. ■ A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded pavements and floor slabs. ■ Potentially liquefiable soils were identified below the water table at all boring locations that were explored to a sufficient depth. Measures to mitigate risk of damage associated with excessive total and differential settlements as a result of liquefaction should be anticipated. ■ Based on ASCE 7 table 20.3-1, the seismic site classification for this site is E. Close monitoring of the construction operations discussed herein will be critical in achieving the design subgrade support. We therefore recommend that Terracon be retained to monitor this portion of the work. This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the report limitations. Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A #04094 17333 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Terracon Project No. 81175042 May 19, 2017 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services performed for the proposed Chic-fil-A #04094 to be located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. Our geotechnical engineering scope of work for this project included the advancement of seven (7) soil test borings to depths ranging between approximately 11 %2 and 31'/2 feet below existing site grades (bgs). The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations pertaining to: • subsurface soil conditions • earthwork and grading • floor slab and pavement design • lateral earth pressures 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Project Description s groundwater conditions • foundation design • construction considerations • seismic considerations ITEM DESCRIPTION Site layout Refer to the Site Location Map and Boring Location Diagram (Exhibits A-1 and A-2 in Appendix A) Structures A one-story 4,843 square -foot Chick-fil-A restaurant building with associated parking and drive through improvements. Building construction, Assumed Details not provided, but understood to be concrete masonry units (CMU) with steel and/or wood framing with concrete foundations Finished floor elevation Assumed to be at or near existing site grades. Maximum Toads Building (details not provided, but assumed to be): Column Load — 120 kips Load -Bearing Wall Loads — 3,500 plf Maximum Uniform Floor Slab Load — 100 psf Grading in building and parking area A grading plan was not available when this report was prepared. Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ITEM DESCRIPTION Traffic loading, Assumed Design equivalent single axle loads (ESAL's): On -site Pavement Light Duty: On -site Pavement Heavy Duty: 50,000 100,000 2.2 Site Location and Description ITEM DESCRIPTION Location 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, Washington Existing Improvements Vacant single story retail building with associated parking and drive through areas Current ground cover Asphalt pavement Existing topography The site slopes gradually to northeast corner of the project site with a maximum vertical relief of approximately 6 feet 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3.1 Site Geology The project site is situated within the extent of the Duwamish River floodplain. The USGS Geologic Map of the Des Moines 7.5' Quadrangle, King County, Washington (2004) was used to reference mapped geologic conditions at the project site. The site location is mapped as unit Qa, described as Holocene age alluvial deposits consisting of moderately well sorted cobbles, gravel, and silt. The subsurface conditions encountered in the boring explorations were generally consistent with the designated map unit. Soils consistent with map unit QW, described as Holocene age wetland deposits of peat and alluvium were also encountered in the explorations. 3.2 Typical Subsurface Profile Presented below is a simplified, generalized soil profile that was generated using the information obtained during the subsurface investigation: Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 1 2 to 6 feet Existing Fill — silty sand with variable gravel Loose to Medium Dense Stratum 2(2) 5 to 12 feet Colluvium —unsorted landslide debris with organics VeryLoose/soft to Medium Dense Responsive ■ Resourceful • Reliable 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Description Approximate Depth to Bottom of Stratum Material Encountered Consistency/Density Stratum 3 Undetermined�'> Alluvial/Wetland deposits — silt, sand, gravel, peat and organics in variable proportions Medium Dense to Dense 1. Exploration was terminated within the described stratum. Extent of deposit is unknown. 2. Stratum 2 was not encountered in boring B-4 Laboratory tests were conducted on select soil samples to obtain index properties for analysis purposes. Moisture content, grain size analysis, and #200 wash tests were performed as part of this study. Test results are presented in Appendix B. Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs. Stratification boundaries on the boring Togs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in -situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can be found on the boring logs included in Appendix A of this report. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater levels were observed and recorded while drilling and do not necessarily reflect steady state conditions at the borehole location. Recorded depths are shown on the individual boring Togs in Appendix A and have been summarized in the table below: Boring Number Approximate depth to groundwater while drilling, ft. Comments B-1 19 B-2 11 B-3 14'/z B-4 17 B-5 not encountered B-6 2 Likely Perchedo> B-7 1% Likely Perchedo> 1. Perched water typically accumulates above soils with relatively low permeability; recorded levels do not necessarily reflect regional water table conditions. Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed. In addition, perched water can develop over low permeability soil strata. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 3 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon developing the design and construction plans for the project. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can be measured by implementation of a groundwater monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater monitoring wells, and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations Our explorations were limited to the outside perimeter of the existing building due to access constraints. Although the information obtained in the explorations provides insight into the conditions beneath the building pad, the uncertainty involved with projecting the subsurface information from the explored locations to within the footprint of the structure can be reduced with additional (internal) explorations after the existing building is demolished. We would be pleased to provide a scope and cost of service if any additional explorations are desired. Existing fill soils were present at each exploration location conducted as part of our study and is anticipated to exist, to some extent, over the entire footprint of the proposed development. Due to the uncertainty associated with undocumented fills, there is an inherent risk for the owner that compressible fill or unsuitable material may exist within or buried by the fill and will go undetected. This risk of unforeseen conditions cannot be eliminated without completely removing the existing fill. The native alluvial soils underlying the existing fill generally exhibit very low in -situ strength and contain layers of peat and other organic rich soils that are prone to excessive and differential settlement when loaded. Settlement is primarily induced as water within the pore spaces in the soil dissipate under loading, and as it pertains to soft soils, the greater the in -situ moisture content of the soil layer the more compressible that layer becomes. The peat encountered in boring B-4 was found to have a moisture content of over 175 percent by weight, a full order of magnitude greater than any of the granular soils encountered during our subsurface exploration. In addition to the primary settlement that occurs under sustained loads, peat and other organic rich soils undergo a phenomenon known as secondary compression which is primarily a result of soil structure decomposition over time. If left in -place and unmitigated, the risk of sustaining damages to overlying improvements as a result of excessive settlement should be considered high. Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses, subsurface exploration and laboratory test program conducted as part of this study, we recommend that the proposed structure be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on densified (reinforced) subgrade soils. Soil densification is typically achieved by constructing stiff elements within the existing subsurface soils as a means to increase bearing capacity and decrease potentially damaging settlements Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 llerracon within the targeted soil mass. We recommend soil densification by means of aggregate pier ground improvement. Geotechnical engineering recommendations for foundation systems and other earth connected phases of the project are discussed in detail in the following sections. -References to ASTM and WSDOT specifications refer to the current version of the American Society of Testing and Materials and the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation Standards and Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, publication number M 41-10, respectively. 4.2 Earthwork The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation and placement of engineered fills on the project. The recommendations presented for design and construction of earth supported elements including foundations, slabs and pavements are contingent upon adherence to the prescribed measures outlined in this section. Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. The evaluation of earthwork should include observation and testing of engineered fill, subgrade preparation, foundation bearing soils, and other geotechnical conditions exposed during construction efforts. 4.2.1 Site Preparation We anticipate construction will be initiated by demolishing existing improvements and stripping the surface of any vegetation and loose, soft, or otherwise unsuitable material. Spoils consisting of vegetation, organics, and deleterious materials should be disposed of off -site, or used to vegetate landscaped areas or exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. Stripping depths between our boring locations and across the site could vary considerably as such we recommend actual stripping depths be evaluated by a representative of Terracon during construction to aid in preventing removal of excess material. The fine-grained and organic soils encountered in the borings will be sensitive to disturbance from construction activity and water seepage. If precipitation occurs prior to or during construction, the near -surface silty and organic soils could sustain increases in moisture content and become more susceptible to disturbance. Construction activity should be monitored, and should be curtailed if the construction activity is causing subgrade disturbance. A Terracon representative can help with monitoring and developing recommendations to aid in limiting subgrade disturbance. After stripping, proofrolling should be performed with heavy rubber tire construction equipment such as a loaded scraper or fully loaded tandem -axle dump truck. A geotechnical engineer or his representative should observe proofrolling to aid in locating unstable subgrade materials. Proofrolling should be performed after a suitable period of dry weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade and to reduce the amount of undercutting / remedial work Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 5 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon required. Unstable materials located should be stabilized as recommended by the engineer based on conditions observed during construction. Undercut and replacement and densification in place are typical remediation methods. 4.2.2 Materials Types The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on their grain -size distribution and moisture content when they are placed. As the fines content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soils become more sensitive to small deviations in moisture content. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. Optimum moisture content is the moisture at which the maximum dry density for the material is achieved in the laboratory following ASTM procedures. Engineered fill should consist of approved materials, free of organic material, debris and particles larger than about 4 inches. The maximum particle size criteria may be relaxed by the geotechnical engineer of record depending on construction techniques, material gradation, allowable lift thickness and observations during fill placement. Engineered fill materials should be placed in horizontal, loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness and should be thoroughly compacted. Where Tight compaction equipment is used, as is customary within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. The native alluvial soils encountered in the borings are relatively high in fines content, contain a significant amount of organic material, and thereby do not appear suitable for use as engineered fill. If suitable material is generated during earthwork and grading operations and is intended for use in structural fill applications, stockpiled soils should be properly covered to prevent changes in moisture and other potential disturbances. 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements Structural fill materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about 8 inches in loose thickness. We recommend that each lift then be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor to a uniform density of at least 95 percent, based on the modified Proctor test (ASTM D 1557). Where light compaction equipment is used, as is typical within a few feet of retaining walls and in utility trenches, the lift thickness may need to be reduced to achieve the desired degree of compaction. Soils removed which will be used as structural fill should be protected by plastic sheeting to aid in preventing an increase in moisture content due to rain and other factors. Moisture contents at the time of compaction should be within ±2 percent of the optimum moisture content. 4.2.4 Grading and Drainage Adequate positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the development to prevent an increase in moisture content of the foundation, pavement Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 6 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon and backfill materials. Surface water drainage should be controlled to prevent undermining of fill slopes and structures during and after construction. Gutters and downspouts that drain water a minimum of 10 feet beyond the footprint of the proposed structures are recommended. This can be accomplished through the use of splash - blocks, downspout extensions, and flexible pipes that are designed to attach to the end of the downspout. Flexible pipe should only be used if it is daylighted in such a manner that it gravity - drains collected water. Splash -blocks should also be considered below hose bibs and water spigots. It is recommended that all exposed earth slopes be seeded to provide protection against erosion as soon as possible after completion. Seeded slopes should be protected until the vegetation is established. Sprinkler systems should not be installed behind or in front of walls without the approval of the civil engineer and wall designer. 4.2.5 Construction Considerations It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. Upon completion of filling and grading, care should be taken to maintain the subgrade moisture content prior to construction- of floor slabs and pavements. If practical, construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be to prevent unnecessary disturbances. The site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become frozen, desiccated, saturated, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed or these materials should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to floor slab and pavement construction under the supervision of Terracon. Surface water should not be allowed to pond on the site and soak into the soil during construction. Construction staging should provide drainage of surface water and precipitation away from the building and pavement areas. Any water that collects over or adjacent to construction areas should be promptly removed, along with any softened or disturbed soils. Surface water control in the form of sloping surfaces, drainage ditches and trenches, and sump pits and pumps will be important to avoid ponding and associated delays due to precipitation and seepage. Near surface (likely perched) groundwater was encountered to the west of the existing building on the proposed building site. If groundwater is encountered during construction operations, some form of temporary or permanent dewatering may be required. Conventional dewatering methods, such as pumping from sump excavations, should likely be adequate for temporary removal of any groundwater encountered during excavation at the site. Well points would likely be required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater. All excavations should be sloped or braced as required by OSHA regulations to provide stability and safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 7 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon operations. The grading contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means, methods and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the information provided herein be interpreted to mean that Terracon is assuming any responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be implied or inferred. Our investigation did not include an analysis of slope stability for any temporary or permanent conditions. Shallow sloughing at the surface can occur when slopes are not properly constructed and/or exposed to inclement weather prior to placement of vegetative cover. Therefore, we recommend that fill slopes be laid back to in order to develop an adequately compacted slope face. In addition, for erosion protection, a protective vegetative cover should be established on permanent slopes as soon as possible. If steeper slopes are required for site development, stability analyses should be completed generate a proper design and grading plan. 4.3 Foundations In our opinion, the proposed building can be supported by a conventional spread footing foundation system bearing on sufficiently densified subgrade soils using an approved ground improvement method. The following subsections include a discussion of the recommended ground improvement method and the foundation design parameters that may be applied for the system described. 4.3.1 Ground Improvement - Aggregate Piers Ground improvement utilizing aggregate piers is a method that offers a practical and effective alternative to overexcavation and replacement of unsuitable subgrade soils, particularly when the depth to suitable bearing strata is greater than 6 or 7 feet. Aggregate piers are columns of crushed stone that, when configured in groups, can provide a significant increase in the overall density of the surrounding soil mass. The installation method can vary depending on the nature of the soils to be improved, but a typical procedure consists of a advancing a downhole vibrating mandrel from the working pad surface to the planned toe elevation of the pier and compacting successive lifts of crushed stone until the desired top of pier elevation is reached. The top of pier is commonly constructed to just above the finished subgrade elevation or to the existing surface of the working pad and can later be excavated to the base of footing elevation during final grading efforts. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 8 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Based on the conditions encountered at our exploration locations, the required toe depth of the aggregate piers will be on the order of 30 feet below current site grades. Relative spacing of the aggregate piers is typically specified by a specialty contractor that accounts for the anticipated building loads in order to determine the level of improvement deemed necessary to sustain the required Toads. Aggregate piers beneath column spread footings and perimeter strip footings are generally arranged in tighter configurations than beneath areas to receive slab -on -grade. As a rule of thumb we recommend that aggregate piers extend approximately 5 feet beyond all building limits for adequate support of the structures. The surficial condition of the existing fill on -site varies considerably and may require pre -drilling in order to construct aggregate piers if the soils are in a relatively dense in -situ condition. Boring B-2 encountered medium dense to (possibly) dense fill conditions within the upper 10 feet of the exploration before encountering the loose, wet alluvial soils beneath. 4.3.2 Design Recommendations The following design summary table applies to conventional spread footings supported by a mitigated subgrade using the recommended ground improvement method. The design bearing pressures are preliminary and should be reviewed by the ground improvement contractor. If the ground improvement contractor recommends a system that warrants greater design pressures Terracon should be retained for additional review. FOR SPREAD FOOTINGS BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE DESCRIPTION Column Wall Net allowable bearing pressure 1 3,500 psf 3,000 psf Minimum dimensions 24 inches 16 inches Minimum embedment below finished grade for frost protection 2 18 inches 18 inches Approximate total settlement 3 <1 inch <1 inch Estimated differential settlement 3 <'/2 inch between columns <%/2 inch over 40 feet Ultimate coefficient of sliding friction 0 4 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if encountered, will be undercut and replaced with engineered fill. 2. And to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. For perimeter footing and footings beneath unheated areas. 3. The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. The allowable foundation bearing pressures apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon include wind or seismic conditions. The weight of the foundation concrete below grade may be neglected in dead Toad computations. Interior footings should bear a minimum of 12 inches below finished grade. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings. Footings, foundations, and masonry walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required. 4.3.3 Construction Considerations If unsuitable (e.g., loose sand) bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended deeper to suitable soils and the footings could bear directly on these soils at the lower level or on properly compacted backfill extending down to the suitable soils. Overexcavation for compacted backfill placement below footings should extend laterally beyond all edges of the footings at least 8 inches per foot of overexcavation depth below footing base elevation. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with granular material placed in lifts of 8 inches or less in loose thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the material's maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D-1557). The overexcavation and backfill procedure is described in the figure below. Owvxcavxt on itsctt itl NOTE: Excavation shown vertical for convenience; excavations should be sloped as necessary for safety. Areas of loose or disturbed soils may be encountered at foundation bearing depth after excavation is completed for footings. When such conditions exist beneath planned footing areas, the surficial subgrade soils should be compacted prior to placement of the foundation system. If sufficient compaction cannot be achieved in -place, the loose soils should be removed and replaced with engineered fill. For placement of engineered fill below footings, the excavation should be widened laterally, at least eight inches for each foot of fill placed below footing base elevations. Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 it Terracon Project No. 81175042 4.4 Seismic Considerations lierracon DESCRIPTION VALUE 2012 International Building Code Site Classification (IBC)1 E2 Site Latitude 47.447725° N Site Longitude 122.26323° W Ss Spectral Acceleration for a Short Period for Site Class B 1.447g Si Spectral Acceleration for a 1-Second Period for Site Class B 0.539g Fa Site Coefficient for a Short Period 0.900 Fv Site Coefficient for a 1-Second Period 2.400 1 Note: The 2012 International Building Code (IBC) indicates that the seismic site classification is based on the average soil and bedrock properties in the top 100 feet. The current scope does not include a 100-foot soil profile determination. This seismic site class definition considers that soils encountered at depth in our borings continue below the termination depth. Additional exploration to deeper depths would be required to confirm the conditions below the current depth of exploration. 2 Note: The Site Class is E based on N-values as recorded in the field. 4.4.1 Liquefaction As part of our services, we evaluated the risk of liquefaction at the project site. Due to the regional seismicity and extent of loose soils that were encountered below the water table during our subsurface investigation, the risk of liquefaction at the site location is moderate to high, with predicted liquefaction induced settlements on the order of 8-inches for a magnitude M7 earthquake. Upper bound estimates for liquefaction induced differential settlements are on the order of 3 to 4 inches within the building footprint, or approximately 1-inch in 30 feet. Estimates of liquefaction induced settlements were based on calculations using the information obtained from borings B-3 and B-1 which were selected due to; (a) the available information at depth and (b) relative proximity to the building footprint. It is assumed that there are no liquefiable layers below 31'/2 feet (the termination depth of the borings). The alluvial drainage channel running through the site is sloped and may potentially result in lateral spread if liquefaction is induced during a seismic event. Based on our experience, if seismic ties are constructed between foundation elements in conjunction with the recommended Responsive ■ Resourceful • Reliable 11 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon ground improvement method, risk to life safety in the case induced liquefaction and lateral spread should be sufficiently mitigated. 4.4.2 Surface Rupture The nearest fault trace is located within the Seattle Fault Zone, a reverse thrust fault located at an approximate distance of 4 miles from the project site. At a distance of 4 miles from the fault zone, it is our opinion that the risk of surface rupture is low at the subject site. 4.5 Floor Slab In our opinion, the site is suitable for conventional, Portland cement concrete slab -on -grade floor slabs. Design recommendations for slab -on -grade bearing on an improved subgrade utilizing aggregate pier ground improvement are presented below: 4.5.1 Design Recommendations FOR SLAB BEARING ON AGGREGATE PIER IMPROVED SUBGRADE4 DESCRIPTION VALUE Interior floor system Concrete Slab -on -Grade (Portland Cement Concrete) Subbase/Capillary Break 6-inch compacted layer of free draining, granular subbase material 1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of any building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. Narrower, turned -down slab -on -grade foundations may be utilized at the approval of the structural engineer. The slabs should be appropriately reinforced to support the proposed loads. 2. We recommend subgrades be maintained at the proper moisture condition until floor slabs and pavements are constructed. If the subgrade should become desiccated prior to construction of floor slabs and pavements, the affected material should be removed or the materials scarified, moistened, and recompacted. Upon completion of grading operations in the building areas, care should be taken to maintain the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the building floor slabs. 3. The floor slab design should include a capillary break, comprised of free -draining, compacted, granular material, at least 6- inches thick. 4. Relative spacing of aggregate piers beneath slab -on -grade to be determined by an aggregate pier specialty contractor. A subgrade prepared and tested as recommended in this report should provide adequate support for lightly loaded floor slabs. Where appropriate, saw -cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design Manual. Joints or any cracks in pavement areas that develop should be sealed with a water -proof, non -extruding compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet environments. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon The use of a vapor retarder or barrier should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 and ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the -use and placement of a vapor retarder/barrier. 4.5.2 Construction Considerations On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic, desiccation, rainfall, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgrade may not be suitable for placement of base rock and concrete and corrective action may be required. We recommend the area underlying the floor slab be rough graded and then thoroughly proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck prior to final grading and placement of base rock. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill. All floor slab subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement -of the base rock and concrete. 4.6 Lateral Earth Pressures 4.6.1 Design Recommendations The lateral earth pressure recommendations herein are applicable to the design of rigid retaining walls subject to slight rotation, such as cantilever, or gravity type concrete walls. These recommendations are not applicable to the design of modular block - geogrid reinforced backfill walls. Recommendations covering these types of wall systems are beyond the scope of services for this assignment. However, we would be pleased to develop recommendations for the design of such wall systems upon request. Reinforced concrete walls with unbalanced backfill levels on opposite sides should be designed for earth pressures at least equal to those indicated in the following table. Earth pressures will be influenced by structural design of the walls, conditions of wall restraint, methods of construction and/or compaction and the strength of the materials being restrained. Two wall restraint conditions are shown. Active earth pressure is commonly used for design of free standing cantilever retaining walls and assumes wall movement. The "at rest" condition assumes no wall movement. The recommended design lateral earth pressures do not include a factor of safety and do not provide for possible hydrostatic pressure on the walls. Responsive • Resourceful in Reliable 13 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 Horizontal Finished Grade S = Surcharge r S lierracon For active pressure movement 4—(0.002 H to 0.004 H) For at -rest pressure - No Movement Assumed Horizontal Finished Grade 14--p2---- -pi-N -Retaining Wall EARTH PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS EARTH PRESSURE CONDITIONS COEFFICIENT FOR BACKFILL TYPE EQUIVALENT FLUID DENSITY (pcf) SURCHARGE PRESSURE, pi (psf) EARTH PRESSURE, P2 (Psf) Active (Ka) 0.27 35 (0.27)S (35)H At -Rest (Ko) 0.43 55 (0.43)S (55)H Passive (Kp) 3.69 460 -- Applicable conditions to the above include: ■ For active earth pressure, wall must rotate about base, with top lateral movements of about 0.002 H to 0.004 H, where H is wall height • For passive earth pressure to develop, wall must move horizontally to mobilize resistance ■ Uniform surcharge, where S is surcharge pressure • In -situ soil backfill weight a maximum of 120 pcf • Horizontal backfill, compacted between 95 and of modified Proctor maximum dry density • Loading from heavy compaction equipment not included ■ No hydrostatic pressures acting on wall ■ No dynamic loading ■ No safety factor included in soil parameters • Ignore passive pressure in frost zone Backfill placed against structures should consist of granular soils. To calculate the resistance to sliding, a value of 0.4 should be used as the ultimate coefficient of friction between the footing and the underlying soil. Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 14 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon To aid in reducing the potential for hydrostatic pressure behind walls, we recommend a perimeter drain be installed at the foundation wall with a collection pipe leading to a reliable discharge. If adequate drainage is not possible, then combined hydrostatic and lateral earth pressures should be calculated for granular backfill using an equivalent fluid weighing 80 and 90 pcf for active and at -rest conditions, respectively. These pressures do not include the influence of surcharge, equipment or floor loading, which should be added. Heavy equipment should not operate within a distance closer than the exposed height of retaining walls to prevent lateral pressures more than those provided. 4.7 Pavements 4.7.1 Subgrade Preparation On most project sites, the site grading is accomplished relatively early in the construction phase. Fills are placed and compacted in a uniform manner. However, as construction proceeds, excavations are made into these areas, rainfall and surface water saturates some areas, heavy traffic from concrete trucks and other delivery vehicles disturbs the subgrade and many surface irregularities are filled in with loose soils to temporarily improve trafficability. As a result, the pavement subgrades, initially prepared early in the project, should be carefully evaluated as the time for pavement construction approaches. Prior to placement of aggregate base and pavements, we recommend at least the 2 feet of structural fill be placed over a moisture conditioned and densified subgrade, if required, and compacted to at least 95 percent of their maximum dry density (MDD). Pavement subgrades should be within plus or minus 2 percent of their optimum moisture content (OMC) and should be evaluated and proofrolled within two days prior to commencement of actual paving operations. Areas not in compliance with the required ranges of moisture or density should be moisture conditioned and recompacted. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the materials with properly compacted fills. If a significant precipitation event occurs after the evaluation or if the surface becomes disturbed, the subgrade should be reviewed by qualified personnel immediately prior to paving. The subgrade should be in its finished form at the time of the final review. 4.7.2 Design Considerations Traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available at the time that this report was prepared. However, we anticipate that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and occasional delivery and trash removal trucks. The thickness of pavements subjected to heavy truck traffic should be determined using expected traffic volumes, vehicle types, and vehicle Toads and should be in accordance with local, city or county ordinances. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 15 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lrerracon Pavement thickness can be determined using AASHTO, Asphalt Institute and/or other methods if specific wheel loads, axle configurations, frequencies, and desired pavement life are provided. Terracon can provide thickness recommendations for pavements subjected to loads other than personal vehicle and occasional delivery and trash removal truck traffic if this information is provided. - Pavement performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following recommendations in the design and layout of pavements: • Final grade adjacent to parking lots and drives should slope down from pavement edges at a minimum 2%; ■ The subgrade and the pavement surface should have a minimum 1/4 inch per foot slope to promote proper surface drainage; • Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting (e.g., landscaping areas, etc.); ■ Install joint sealant and seal cracks immediately; ■ Seal all landscaped areas in, or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils, and; _ ■ Place compacted, low permeability backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter 4.7.3 Estimates of Minimum Pavement Thickness As a minimum, we recommend the following typical pavement section be considered for car only areas. Material Thickness (inches) WSDOT Stdl. Spec. Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC Aggregate Base 4 9-03.9(3) Base Course Asphalt Surface Course 3 9-03.8(2) 1/2-inch HMA 9-03.8(6)1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 7 As a minimum, we suggest the following typical pavement section be considered for combined car and delivery truck traffic. Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Subgrade Upper 24 inches of existing soil or engineered fill 95% of Modified Proctor MMD,-2to+3%OMC Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 16 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 ■ Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon Material Thickness (inches) GDOT Aggregate Base 6 95% of Modified Proctor MDD, -2 to +2% OMC . Asphalt Surface Course 4 9-03.8(2)1/2-inch HMA 9-03.8(6)1/2-inch Aggregate Total Pavement Section 10 The graded aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the material's modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557, Method C) maximum dry density. Where base course thickness exceeds 8 inches, the material should be placed and compacted in two or more lifts of equal thickness. Asphalt concrete aggregates and base course materials should conform to the 2014 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) M 41-10 "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction". The listed pavement component thicknesses should be used as a guide for pavement systems at the site for the traffic classifications stated herein. These recommendations assume a 20-year pavement design life. If pavement frequencies or loads will be different than that specified Terracon should be contacted and allowed to review these pavement sections. We recommend a Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement be utilized in entrance and exit sections, dumpster pads, loading dock areas, or other areas where extensive wheel maneuvering or repeated loading are expected. The dumpster pad should be large enough to support the wheels of the truck which will bear the load of the dumpster. We recommend a minimum of 6 inches of PCC underlain by 4 inches of crushed aggregate base. Although not required for structural support, the base course layer is recommended to help reduce potentials for slab curl, shrinkage cracking, and subgrade "pumping" through joints. Proper joint spacing will also be required to prevent excessive slab curling and shrinkage cracking. All joints should be sealed to prevent entry of foreign material and dowelled where necessary for load transfer. Portland cement concrete should be designed with proper air -entrainment and have a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing. Adequate reinforcement and number of longitudinal and transverse control joints should be placed in the rigid pavement in accordance with ACI requirements. The joints should be sealed as soon as possible (in accordance with sealant manufacturer's instructions) to minimize infiltration of water into the soil. 4.7.4 Pavement Drainage Pavements should be sloped to provide rapid drainage of surface water. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavements could saturate the subgrade and contribute to premature pavement deterioration. In addition, the pavement subgrade should be graded to provide positive drainage within the granular base section. Responsive is Resourceful ■ Reliable 17 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 ■ Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 lierracon 4.7.5 Pavement Maintenance The pavement sections provided in this report represent minimum recommended thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. Therefore preventive maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on -going pavement management program. Preventive maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventive maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching) and global maintenance (e.g., surface sealing). Preventive maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to determine the type and extent of preventive maintenance. Even with periodic maintenance, some movements and related cracking may still occur and repairs may be required. 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth -related construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 18 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION tJ S 151i1t1 St la S 176th St SeaTac S 188th St CO 0 5- ro to LEGEND: CC 7 S eAV pup Tukwila Starfire Sports 0 Westfield Southcenter 0 i s re to S 204th St 21 2th St APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION SOUTHCENTER 17333 Southcenter Parkway Orlta s 180th St 5 196th S= 'SP/ sunnsL Renton DOH ,s,a RE L rp S'dl 2th St ro L SW41stSt t O'BRIEN vh 0. a Basemap PDF file provided by Client and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google Project Mngr. BCO Project No. 81175042 Drawn By: BC0 Scale: not to scale Checked By: RWS File No. Exhibits.dwg Approved By: DAB Date: May 2017 1E!rracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 640) Avenue W., Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH. (425)771-3304 FAX. (425)771-3549 SITE LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington A-1 B-1 BORING NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION SCALE IN FEET Basemap PDF file provided by Client and modified by Terracon. Map data ©2016 Google Project Mngr: BCO Project No, 81175042 Drawn By: BCO Scale: AS SHOWN Checked BY RWS He No. exhibits.dwg Approved By: DAB Date: May 2017 1Irracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W., Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH. (425) 771-3304 FAX. (425) 771-3549 SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, Washington A-2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 Field Exploration Description lierracon The subsurface exploration consisted of drilling and sampling 7 borings at various locations within the confines of the project site to depths ranging from approximately 11'/2 to 31 % feet below existing grade. The boring locations were laid out by Terracon personnel and measured from existing site features. Distances from these locations to the reference features indicated on the attached diagram are approximate and were estimated. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the means and methods used to define them. The borings were drilled with a truck mounted drill rig using hollow stem augers and to advance the boreholes. Representative soil samples were obtained by the split -barrel sampling procedure. In the split -barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -barrel sampler the last 12 inches of the typical total 18-inch penetration by means of a 140-pound automatic hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration resistance value (N). These values are indicted on the boring logs at the depths of occurrence. This value is used to estimate the in -situ relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. The sampling depths and penetration distance, as well as the standard penetration resistance values are shown on the boring Togs in Appendix A. The soil samples were sealed in airtight containers and transported to the laboratory for testing. Field Togs of each boring were prepared by the on -site geologist. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the geologist's interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring Togs included with this report represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory observation and tests of the samples. The samples were classified in the laboratory based on visual observation, texture and plasticity. The descriptions of the soils indicated on the boring logs are in general accordance with the enclosed General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. Estimated group symbols according to the Unified Soil Classification System are given on the boring logs. A brief description of this classification system is attached to this report. Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit A-3 BORING LOG NO. B-1 Page 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve ( GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION1Ft.). DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES 0 2 AAPPHALT approximately 2-inch thickness /\ 26+,, — , \i 5 ,, — - • ✓ - _ - 15— 20— _ 25— CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) /22+/- `6 13 8 12 N=20 '' • I •/ ;' ••4 1 �� •*lit SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM1 with wood debris and organics, dark f/ \. / /x� gray, medium dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) / \ _Y. / 0 % 15+/- Q 998 N=17 4 5-10-10 N=20 X / \ 4 3-3-4 48 29 SILT WITH SAND (MLI, with organics, brown, soft, moist (ALLUVIUM)4 fibrous organics observed in sample thin sand interbeds observed in sample, becomes wet \ / \ 14 2-1-1 N=2 \ 14 N= 2 81 Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 = While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 BORING LOG NO. B-1 Page 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448069° Longitude: -122.262888° Approximate Surface Elev: 26 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS kSAMPLE TYPE c x Lit O v w re FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SILT WITH SAND (ML), with organics, brown, soft, moist ,<.', _ "L30— ,,, — ' 17 2-1-2 N=3 (ALLUVIUM) (continued) organics thin sand interbeds observed in sample 28.5-2,5+/- \\., y \ -`` `- WELL GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND (GW) gray, medium dense, wet , ,> / - ,w V 31.5-5.5+I- 10 6 10 12 N=22 8 2 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet \ f ,, Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 77 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-4 BORING LOG NO. B-2 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447884° Longitude:-122.262862° Approximate Surface Elev: 27 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION IFt.I DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES , `\ —! �. — r \ "` 0 2 \ASPHALT approximately 2-inch thickness 7., 27+/, —/ — �J� — " % _ v' — 10— _ _ — 15-- — 20 — s ' CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, with asphalt fragements, moist (FILL) 2.5 24.5+/- ' ;SILTY r ill i1 Ns.o SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) gray to dark brown, medium dense, / `10 \ 15-16-47 , N=63 moist i 21+l-7-13-10 \ \ / // \\ \` 10 N=23 8 13 1 j SILTY SAND (SM), trace gravel, dark gray, very dense, moist (COLLUVIUM)-, \ trace fibrous organics observed in sample 7'`t- 12.0 ,,� \ t u - 15+/- 8 5-3-12 N=15 0 5-8-7 N=15 `.1 �, a.� • 1T ' •dia P#'11! j GRAVELLY SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) gray; loose, wet V (ALLUVIUM) 17.0 / 10+/- 3 11-4-3 N=7 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) gray to brown, loose, wet 21.5 5.5+/- 12 4-1-1 N=2 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-5 BORING LOG NO. B-3 Page 1 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447748° Longitude: -122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES .,., , ASPHALT, approximately 3-inch thickness 711+b _ — — _ _ �• f — — — — — 15— — 20— _ 25— \ "` rw CRUSHED AGGREGATE AND ASPHALT BASE black, medium dense, 1.5 moist [26.5+/- (FILL) SILTY SAND (SM) trace gravel, brown, loose to medium dense, moist (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 /23+/-5 \`15 \ \, 4-8-9 ;• N=17 12 25 X •1 �j 17.5 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) trace asphalt fragments, gray, loose/ 3 9-6-3 N=g to medium dense, moist. 20.5+/= SANDY SILT (ML1, with decomposed and fibrous organic matter, brown, 16 1-1-2 N=3 very soft, moist (ALLUVIUM) 11A 17+1- \j( / \ 16 0-1-1 N=2 ,\± — —14.5 PEAT (PT), brown, very soft to soft, moist to wet 1_ % 13.5+/- SILTY SAND (SM1 with decomposed`aod fibrou organic matter, brown, loose, wet 24.0 4+1- 16 1-1-4 N=5 82 28 /\16 1-2-2 N=4 • 7 1 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP), trace gravel and organics, gray to brown, medium dense, wet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lrerracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-6 BORING LOG NO. B-3 Page 2 of 2 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude: 47.447748° Longitude:-122.262969° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (In.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES �DEPTH • ' 1 10 O. .4 e1 .® �' �,31.5 POORLY GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP2 trace gravel and —' <'' _ ^ 3� \ v / \ 16 4-6-8 N=14 organics, gray to brown, medium dense, wet (continued) becomes gravelly trace silt \ -3.5+/- n / \ \ \� \ 14 24-15-14 N=29 20 5 Boring Terminated at 31.5 Feet \ Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 \-7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042: Exhibit: A-6 it 0 1- a z1 0 w a 0 -J 0 cn 0 0 J 5) 0 (0 0 a cc J Z_ (7 0 � 0 O re 5- u. 0 W o_ a w m 5_ 0 J a O cn c� O J c� BORING LOG NO. B-4 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve GRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447749° Longitude: -122.263232° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +1- DEPTH ELEVATION (FLY DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE aC ui O v w FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES •• I 110 dip .11 ASPHALT approximately 5-inch thickness 27 5+1- _ — _ 15— — 20— — / SILTY SAND (SPA) trace gravel, gray, loose, moist (FILL) 16 4-3=77, ,: N / \ \ / /�\ SILTY SAND (SMI with organics, brown, very loose, with interbedded Cx 12 1-1-2 N=3 sand seams approximately 1-inch thick ,x% (ALLUVIUM) / PEAT (PT), with sand and silt, brown, loose to very loose moist— 16 0-1-4 N=5 179 14 0=2 N WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW.SMI —with decomposed'and fibrous organics, gray to brown - veryloose moist to wet `;%' 21.5 6.5+/- 12 1-1-2 8 1-1-2 N=3 Boring Terminated at 21.5 Feet Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 64th Mountlake Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 7 While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-7 m q a J ui w w z 0 U Ix r- a. 0 N O 1- -J -J 0 z 0 O J 2 0 w 0 0 w w J z Z 0 2 0 u- LL O a LL O 0 E2 0 BORING LOG NO. B-5 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447736° Longitude: -122.263446° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE cr W > 0 L) ec FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES �I1 #4.2.0 .4—\4SPHALT approximately 4-inch thickness 5+4 _ — / — \, _ 1 0— / ./ \ \, \ i / \ , /.,97 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL moist (FILL) 26+/- WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMl trace gravel and organics, moist (COLLUVIUM) 7.5 20.5+1 � \ 1-2-4 N=6 0 10 8 2 N=10 r, o 1, PEAT (PTl with silt and sand, brown, very soft, moist to wet \ 16 N' 2 113 (ALLUVIUM) ALLUVIUM 10.0 A,, , — 18+/ SILT (MLU with decomposed and fibrous organics, brown, soft`n%t to X 123 2 3 N=5 wet 11.5 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet l Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 Groundwater not encountered Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-8 BORING LOG NO. B-6 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.447867° Longitude:-122.263688° Approximate Surface Elev: 28 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE RECOVERY (in.) FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER CONTENT (%) DRY UNIT , WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES 0-4—,ASPHALT approximately 4-inch thickness 5+/. —/ — — _ , — — 1 0— .' / \ I '� r.27 WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW► gray to brown, loose, moist z.o (FILL) 26+/- .74 ?I 4 .>" II SILTY SAND ITH GRAVEL (SMI, dark brown, loose, wet (COLLUVIUM) 5.0 / 23+/-,,5 4 2-2-2 N=4 \ v WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SM) with decomposed and 2 -1 N12 6.0 fibrous organics, brown, very loose, wet \ +/- f i 6.5 \ (ALLUVIUM) f 21 5+i- CLAY (CL-MLI with organics, very soft, clay seam approximately \SILTY 5 -inch thickness �' 5 1-2-3 N=5 WELL GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SW-SMI, with organics; dark gray to brown, loose 10.0 1 8+/- SILTY SAND (SMI trace organics, dark brown, medium dense; wet/ "' 7-9-13 N=22 31 19 11.5 \ .A 16.5+/- Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet V,°, /. Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 V While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-9 BORING LOG NO. B-7 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA Schwartz, Steve IGRAPHIC LOG LOCATION See Exhibit A-2 Latitude:47.448028° Longitude: -122.263658° Approximate Surface Elev: 29 (Ft.) +/- DEPTH ELEVATION (Ft.) I I DEPTH (Ft.) WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS SAMPLE TYPE ^ re W :> 0 111 re FIELD TEST RESULTS WATER ' CONTENT(%) DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf) PERCENT FINES SPHALT approximately 5-inch thickness 2R 5+/- — /_ y.., _ 5 ✓ — — 10— _ ,/\ / SILTY SAND (SMI, trace gravel and organics, gray to brown, soft, moist to wet (FILL) 2.5 26.5+/- SILTY CLAY WITH SAND ICL-ML) with organics and trace gravel, gray, �6 N13 71 soft, moist to wet 5.0 24+/- X POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP-SM), gray, dense, moist 18 8-13-20 N=33 27 (ADVANCE OUTWASH): becomes orange -brown, medium dense /\ 11.5 17.5+/- 14 2 4 12 N=16 X 143-11-15 N=26 Boring Terminated at 11.5 Feet \ ;' V Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic Advancement Method: HSA See Exhibit A-3 for description of field procedures. See Appendix B for description of laboratory procedures and additional data (if any). See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and abbreviations. Elevations were provided by others. Notes: Abandonment Method: Boring backfilled with bentonite chips upon completion. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS lierracon 21905 Mountlake 64th Ave W Ste 100 Terrace, WA Boring Started: 4/27/2017 Boring Completed: 4/27/2017 V While drilling Drill Rig: Mobile B-59 Driller: Holocene Project No.: 81175042 Exhibit: A-10 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 • Tukwila, Washington May 19, 2017 • Terracon Project No. 81175042 Laboratory Testing lierracon As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by experienced personnel and classified in accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System. The group symbol for the Unified Soil Classification System is shown in the appropriate column on the boring Togs and a brief description of the classification system is included with this report in the Appendix. Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and the test results are presented in this appendix. The laboratory test results were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. Selected soil samples obtained from the site were tested for the following index properties: • Grain -size Distribution • In -situ Water Content • Fines Content Reliable • Responsive • Convenient • Innovative Exhibit B-1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ASTM D422 I ASTM C136 LABORATORY TESTS ARE NOT VALID IF SEPARATED FROM ORIGINAL REPORT. GRAIN SIZE: USCS-2 81175042.GPJ TERRACON2015.GDT 5/12/17 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 w 60 >- m 55 • 50 1- • 45 z w o 40 w a_ 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I 6 4 3 2 - - 1 ; 4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 �..�I 1 i 1 I I I I I 11 \I\k • 1 i 1 \ \� ik HYDROMETER 100 10 1 0 1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND coarse fine coarse medium fine SILT OR CLAY Boring ID Depth USCS Classification we (%) LL PL PI Cc Cu • B-1 30 - 31.5 WELL -GRADED GRAVEL with SAND (GW) 1.31 17.92 M B-2 ♦ B-3 5 - 6.5 SILTY SAND with GRAVEL (SM) 2.5-4 SILTY SAND (SM) B-3 30 - 31.5 POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL (SP) 0.33 26.42 B-6 10 - 11.5 SILTY SAND (SM) Boring ID Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Fines %Clay • B-1 30 - 31.5 37.5 8.836 2.389 0.493 56.2 42.1 1.7 Z B-2 5 - 6.5 37.5 1.478 0.29 28.4 58.5 13.1 ♦ B-3 2.5 - 4 19 0.291 0.1 3.8 71.4 24.8 * B-3 30 - 31.5 37.5 3.072 0.344 0.116 35.8 59.3 4.8 B-6 10- 11.5 19 0.286 0.141 3.3 77.3 19.4 PROJECT: Proposed Chick-fil-A #04094 - Geotechnical SITE: 17333 Southcenter Pkwy Tukwila, WA lierracon 21905 64th Ave W Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA PROJECT NUMBER: 81175042 CLIENT: Chick-fil-A, Inc. 15635 Alton Pkwy #350 EXHIBIT: B-2 APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS t GENERAL NOTES DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon—1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted RS: Ring Sampler 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample HS: PA: HA: RB: WB: Hollow Stem Auger Power Auger Hand Auger Rock Bit Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: WCI: DCI: AB: Water Level Wet Cave in Dry Cave in After Boring WS: WD: BCR: ACR: While Sampling While Drilling Before Casing Removal After Casing Removal N/E: Not Encountered Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as days if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the basis of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Standard Penetration Standard Penetration Compressive or N-value (SS) Consistency or N-value (SS) Ring Sampler (RS) Relative Density Strength. Qu, psf Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. < 500 0-1 Very Soft 0 — 3 0-6 Very Loose 500 —1,000 2-3 Soft 4 — 9 7-18 Loose 1,001 — 2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 10 — 29 19-58 Medium Dense 2,001 — 4,000 7-12 Stiff 30 — 49 59-98 Dense 4,001 — 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 50+ 99+ Very Dense 8,000+ 26+ Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of Major Component Constituents Dry Weight of Sample Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15 — 30 Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier > 30 Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm) Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s) of other Constituents Trace With Modifier Percent of Dry Weight <5 5-12 > 12 Particle Size Term Plasticity -- Index Non -plastic 0 Low 1-10 Medium 11-30 High 30+ Exhibit C-1 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests A Soil Classification Group GroupName e Symbol Coarse Grained Soils: More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels: More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels: Cu >_ 4 and 1 <_ Cc <_ 3 E Less than 5% fines ° Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3 E GW GP Well -graded gravel F Poorly graded gravel F Gravels with Fines: More than 12% fines ° Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,G.H Fines classify as,CL or CH GC Clayey gravel F.G,H Sands: 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands: Less than 5% fines D Sands with Fines: More than 12% fines ° Cu>_6and 1<_Cc<3E SW Well -graded sand I Cu<6and/or 1>Cc>3E Fines classify as ML or MH SP Poorly graded sand I SM Silty sand G.H.I Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand G.H'I Fine -Grained Soils: 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Silts and Clays: Liquid limit less than 50 Inorganic: PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line CL Lean clay K,L,M PI < 4 or plots below "A" line ML Silt K,L,M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OL Organic clay K.L,M,N Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt K,,M,° Silts and Clays: Liquid limit 50 or more Inorganic: PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay" PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt K,L,M Organic: Liquid limit - oven dried < 0.75 OH Liquid limit - not dried Organic clay KL,M.P Organic silt K.L,M,° Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve a If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. o Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well - graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay. o Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well - graded sand with silt, SW -SC well -graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay E Cu = Deo/Dio Cc = F If soil contains >_ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. o If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or SC-SM. PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) 60 50 40 30 20 10 7 4 H If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains >_ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel," whichever is predominant. L If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. M If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. " PI >_ 4 and plots on or above "A" line. o PI < 4 or plots below "A" line. • PI plots on or above "A" line. o PI plots below "A" line. I � � For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction —of coarse -grained soils Equation of "A" - line Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5. — then PI=0.73 (LL-20) Equation of "U" - line Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7 - then PI=0.9 (LL-8) r � Gz• Vie MH or OH 0 0 CL4 ML or OL 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) 80 90 100 110 Exhibit C-2 5/16/2017 Design Maps Summary Report rig U Design Maps Summary Report User -Specified Input Report Title Proposed Tukwila CFA Tue May 16, 2017 21:35:08 UTC Building Code Reference Document 2012/2015 International Building Code (which utilizes USGS hazard data available in 2008) Site Coordinates 47.44775°N, 122.26323°W Site Soil Classification Site Class E - "Soft Clay Soil" Risk Category I/II/III USGS-Provided Output SS= 1.447g S1 = 0.539 g SMS = 1.303 g SM3 = 1.294 g Sus = 0.868 g SDI = 0.863 g For information on how the SS and S1 values above have been calculated from probabilistic (risk -targeted) and deterministic ground motions in the direction of maximum horizontal response, please return to the application and select the "2009 NEHRP" building code reference document. 1.40 1.23 1.12 023 a. o3 asc a42 aZ1 a# 003 ntrJ MCEa Res 40 a Spectrum Perlod.T (set) so Casegn Response Spectru a-32 a90 t12:1 a -2 ass i, a34 au aYS n.'7 012 am I t I 1 1 1 e 040 003 asa 1.03110 1.40 1.03 1210 103 Period. T (set) Although this information is a product of the U.S. Geological Survey, we provide no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the data contained therein. This tool is not a substitute for technical subject -matter knowledge. Basemap PDF file provided by USGS Project Mngr. DAB - Project No. 81175042 Drawn By: BCO Scale: N/A Checked By: RWS Fite No. exhibit C-3 Approved By: DAB Date: May 2017 1Irracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 21905 64th Avenue W.. Ste 100 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 PH. (425)771-3304 FAX. (425) 771-3549 USGS SEISMIC DESIGN SUMMARY EXHIBIT Proposed CFA 17333 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington C-3 7.0 OTHER PERMITS Other permits required for this development include: • NPDES Permit from the Department of Ecology • Grading Permit from the City of Tukwila • Building Permit from the City of Tukwila 18363.001.doc 8.0 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (CSWPP) ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Plan Analysis and Design and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Design will be provided with a later submittal. 18363.001.doc 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT If the City of Tukwila requires, Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and a Declaration of Covenant, it will be provided with the final TIR submitted for this project. 18363.001.doc 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The drainage facilities on this project will be privately owned and maintained. An Operations and Maintenance Manual is included in this section. 18363.001.doc APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Structure Sediment Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin. Sump of catch basin contains no sediment. Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than '% cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the catch basin by more than 10%. No Trash or debris blocking or potentially blocking entrance to catch basin. Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). No dead animals or vegetation present within catch basin. Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame and/or top slab Corner of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past curb face into the street (If applicable). Frame is even with curb. Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than % inch. Top slab is free of holes and cracks, Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than'% inch of the frame from the top slab. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Cracks in walls or bottom Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Catch basin is sealed and structurally sound. Cracks wider than inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Settlement/ misalignment Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than '/2-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the catch basin at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than '%-inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment accumulation Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). No trash or debris in pipes. Damaged Cracks wider than %-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than '%-inch wide at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-9 1 /9/2009 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Metal Grates (Catch Basins) Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than inch. Grate opening meets design standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Grate free of trash and debris. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Manhole Cover/Lid Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Any open structure requires urgent maintenance. Cover/lid protects opening to structure. Locking mechanism Not Working Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover/lid difficult to Remove One maintenance person cannot remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift. Cover/lid can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-10 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 6 - CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Pipes Sediment & debris accumulation Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Water flows freely through pipes. Vegetation/roots Vegetation/roots that reduce free movement of water through pipes. Water flows freely through pipes. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to protective coating or corrosion Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Pipe repaired or replaced. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Sediment accumulation Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the design depth. Ditch cleaned/flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Noxious and nuisance vegetation removed according to applicable regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the -public might normally be. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants presentother than a surface oil film. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. Water flows freely through ditches. Erosion damage to slopes Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. Rock lining out of place or missing (If Applicable) One layer or less of rock exists above native soil area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native soil. Replace rocks to design standards. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A 1/9/2009 A-11 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 11- GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Site Trash or litter Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Trash and debris cleared from site. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may constitute a hazard to County personnel or the public. Noxious and nuisance vegetation removed according to applicable regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and pollution Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. Materials removed and disposed of according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grass/groundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in height. Grass or groundcover mowed to a height no greater than 6 inches. Trees and Shrubs Hazard Any tree or limb of a tree identified as having a potential to fall and cause property damage or threaten human life. A hazard tree identified by a qualified arborist must be removed as soon as possible. No hazard trees in facility. Damaged Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or broken which affect more than 25% of the total foliage of the tree or shrub. Trees and shrubs with less than 5% of total foliage with split or broken _ limbs. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or knocked over. No blown down vegetation or knocked over vegetation. Trees or shrubs free of injury. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; dead or diseased trees removed. 1 /9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-16 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 23 - COALESCING PLATE OIL/WATER SEPARATOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Site Trash and debris Any trash or debris which impairs the function of the facility. Trash and debris removed from facility. Contaminants and pollution Floating oil in excess of 1 inch in first chamber, any oil in other chambers or other contaminants of any type in any chamber. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vault Treatment Area Sediment accumulation in the forebay Sediment accumulation of 6 inches or greater in the forebay. No sediment in the forebay. Discharge water not clear Inspection of discharge water shows obvious signs of poor water quality - effluent discharge from vault shows thick visible sheen. Repair function of plates so effluent is clear. Trash or debris accumulation Trash and debris accumulation in vault (floatables and non-floatables). Trash and debris removed from vault. Oil accumulation Oil accumulation that exceeds 1 inch at the water surface in the in the coalescing plate chamber. No visible oil depth on water and coalescing plates clear of oil. Coalescing Plates Damaged Plate media broken, deformed, cracked and/or showing signs of failure. Replace that portion of media pack or entire plate pack depending on severity of failure. Sediment accumulation Any sediment accumulation which interferes with the operation of the coalescing plates. No sediment accumulation interfering with the coalescing plates. Vault Structure Damage to Wall, Frame, Bottom, and/or Top Slab Cracks wider than'/: -inch and any evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks, or maintenance inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Vault replaced or repaired to design specifications. Baffles damaged Baffles corroding, cracking, warping and/or showing signs of failure as determined by maintenance/inspection person. Repair or replace baffles to specifications. Ventilation Pipes Plugged Any obstruction to the ventilation pipes. Ventilation pipes are clear. Shutoff Valve Damaged or inoperable Shutoff valve cannot be opened or closed. Shutoff valve operates normally. Inlet/Outlet Pipe Sediment accumulation Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe. Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). No trash or debris in pipes. Damaged Cracks wider than 1/2-inch at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. No cracks more than %-inch wide at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. Access Manhole Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Any open manhole requires immediate maintenance. Manhole access covered. Locking mechanism not working Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking cover/lid does not work. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover/lid difficult to remove One maintenance person cannot remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift. Cover/lid can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. Ladder meets design standards. Allows maintenance person safe access. 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-33 1/9/2009 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO. 23 - COALESCING PLATE OIUWATER SEPARATOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Large access doors/plate Damaged or difficult to open Large access doors or plates cannot be opened/removed using normal equipment. Replace or repair access door so it can opened as designed. Gaps, doesn't cover completely Large access doors not flat and/or access opening not completely covered. Doors close flat and cover access opening completely. Lifting Rings missing, rusted Lifting rings riot capable of lifting weight of door or plate. Lifting rings sufficient to lift or remove door or plate. 1/9/2009 2009 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix A A-34 1111511 WASAINOTON STATE OEPASiMENT OE ECOLOGY .December 2015 GENERAL USE LEVEL DESIGNATION FOR BASIC, ENHANCED, AND PHOSPHORUS TREATMENT For the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Ecology's Decision: Based on Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. application submissions, including the Technical Evaluation Report, dated April 1, 2014, Ecology hereby issues the following use level designation: 1. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Welland Stormwater Treatment System for Basic treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 2. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Phosphorus treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 3. General use level designation (GULD) for the MWS-Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System for Enhanced treatment • Sized at a hydraulic loading rate of 1 gallon per minute (gpm) per square foot (sq ft) of wetland cell surface area. For moderate pollutant loading rates (low to medium density residential basins), size the Prefilters at 3.0 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. For high loading rates (commercial and industrial basins), size the Prefilters at 2.1 gpm/sq ft of cartridge surface area. 4. Ecology approves the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment at the hydraulic loading rate listed above. Designers shall calculate the water quality design flow rates using the following procedures: • Western Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using the latest version of the Western Washington Hydrology Model or other Ecology -approved continuous runoff model. • Eastern Washington: For treatment installed upstream of detention or retention, the water quality design flow rate is the peak 15-minute flow rate as calculated using one of the three methods described in Chapter 2.2.5 of the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW) or local manual. • Entire State: For treatment installed downstream of detention, the water quality design flow rate is the full 2-year release rate of the detention facility. 5. These use level designations have no expiration date but may be revoked or amended by Ecology, and are subject to the conditions specified below. Ecology's Conditions of Use: Applicants shall comply with the following conditions: 1. Design, assemble, install, operate, and maintain the MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units, in accordance with Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. applicable manuals and documents and the Ecology Decision. 2. Each site plan must undergo Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. review and approval before site installation. This ensures that site grading and slope are appropriate for use of a MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System unit. 3. MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System media shall conform to the specifications submitted to, and approved by, Ecology. 4. The applicant tested the MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System with an external bypass weir. This weir limited the depth of water flowing through the media, and therefore the active treatment area, to below the root zone of the plants. This GULD applies to MWS — Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems whether plants are included in the final product or not. 5. Maintenance: The required maintenance interval for stormwater treatment devices is often dependent upon the degree of pollutant loading from a particular drainage basin. Therefore, Ecology does not endorse or recommend a "one size fits all" maintenance cycle for a particular model/size of manufactured filter treatment device. • Typically, Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. designs MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a target prefilter media life of 6 to 12 months. • Indications of the need for maintenance include effluent flow decreasing to below the design flow rate or decrease in treatment below required levels. • Owners/operators must inspect MWS - Linear Modular Wetland systems for a minimum of twelve months from the start of post -construction operation to determine site -specific 166 maintenance schedules and requirements. You must conduct inspections monthly during the wet season, and every other month during the dry season. (According to the SWMMWW, the wet season in western Washington is October 1 to April 30. According to SWMMEW, the wet season in eastern Washington is October 1 to June 30). After the first year of operation, owners/operators must conduct inspections based on the findings during the first year of inspections. • Conduct inspections by qualified personnel, follow manufacturer's guidelines, and use methods capable of determining either a decrease in treated effluent flowrate and/or a decrease in pollutant removal ability. • When inspections are performed, the following findings typically serve as maintenance triggers: • Standing water remains in the vault between rain events, or • Bypass occurs during storms smaller than the design storm. • If excessive floatables (trash and debris) are present (but no standing water or excessive sedimentation), perform a minor maintenance consisting of gross solids removal, not prefilter media replacement. • Additional data collection will be used to create a correlation between pretreatment chamber sediment depth and pre -filter clogging (see Issues to be Addressed by the Company section below) 6. Discharges from the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System units shall not cause or contribute to water quality standards violations in receiving waters. Applicant: Applicant's Address: Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. PO. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 Application Documents: • Original Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., January 2011 • Quality Assurance Project Plan: Modular Wetland system — Linear Treatment System performance Monitoring Project, draft, January 2011. • Revised Application for Conditional Use Level Designation, Modular Wetland System, Linear Stormwater Filtration System Modular Wetland Systems, Inc., May 2011 • Memorandum: Modular Wetland System -Linear GULD Application Supplementary Data, April 2014 • Technical Evaluation Report: Modular Wetland System Stormwater Treatment System Performance Monitoring, April 2014. 167 Applicant's Use Level Request: General use level designation as a Basic, Enhanced, and Phosphorus treatment device in accordance with Ecology's Guidance for Evaluating Emerging Stormwater Treatment Technologies Technology Assessment Protocol — Ecology (TAPE) January 2011 Revision. Applicant's Performance Claims: • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 80-percent of TSS from stormwater with influent concentrations between 100 and 200 mg/1. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 50-percent of Total Phosphorus from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.1 and 0.5 mg/1. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 30-percent of dissolved Copper from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.005 and 0.020 mg/1. • The MWS — Linear Modular wetland is capable of removing a minimum of 60-percent of dissolved Zinc from stormwater with influent concentrations between 0.02 and 0.30 mg/1. Ecology Recommendations: • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. has shown Ecology, through laboratory and field- testing, that the MWS - Linear Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System filter system is capable of attaining Ecology's Basic, Total phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment goals. Findings of Fact: Laboratory Testing The MWS-Linear Modular wetland has the: • Capability to remove 99 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 270 mg/L. • Capability to remove 91 percent of total suspended solids (using Sil-Co-Sil 106) in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 84.6 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 93 percent of dissolved Copper in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.757 mg/L. • Capability to remove 79 percent of dissolved Copper in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.567 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 80.5-percent of dissolved Zinc in a quarter -scale model with influent concentrations of 0.95 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. • Capability to remove 78-percent of dissolved Zinc in laboratory conditions with influent concentrations of 0.75 mg/L at a flow rate of 3.0 gpm per square foot of media. 168 Field Testing • Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. conducted monitoring of an MWS-Linear (Model # MWS-L-4-13) from April 2012 through May 2013, at a transportation maintenance facility in Portland, Oregon. The manufacturer collected flow -weighted composite samples of the system's influent and effluent during 28 separate storm events. The system treated approximately 75 percent of the runoff from 53.5 inches of rainfall during the monitoring period. The applicant sized the system at 1 gprn/sq ft. (wetland media) and 3gpm/sq ft. (prefilter). • Influent TSS concentrations for qualifying sampled storm events ranged from 20 to 339 mg/L. Average TSS removal for influent concentrations greater than 100 mg/L (n=7) averaged 85 percent. For influent concentrations in the range of 20-100 mg/L (n=18), the upper 95 percent confidence interval about the mean effluent concentration was 12.8 mg/L. • Total phosphorus removal for 17 events with influent TP concentrations in the range of 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L averaged 65 percent. A bootstrap estimate of the lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL95) of the mean total phosphorus reduction was 58 percent. • The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 60.5 percent for dissolved zinc for influent concentrations in the range of 0.02 to 0.3 mg/L (n=11). The lower 95 percent confidence limit of the mean percent removal was 32.5 percent for dissolved copper for influent concentrations in the range of 0.005 to 0.02 mg/L (n=14) at flow rates up to 28 gpm (design flow rate 41 gpm). Laboratory test data augmented the data set, showing dissolved copper removal at the design flow rate of 41 gpm (93 percent reduction in influent dissolved copper of 0.757 mg/L). Issues to be addressed by the Company: 1. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect maintenance and inspection data for the first year on all installations in the Northwest in order to assess standard maintenance requirements for various land uses in the region. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should use these data to establish required maintenance cycles. 2. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. should collect pre-treatment chamber sediment depth data for the first year of operation for all installations in the Northwest. Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. will use these data to create a correlation between sediment depth and pre -filter clogging. Technology Description: Download at http://www.modularwetlands.com/ Contact Information: Applicant: Greg Kent Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 869 Oceanside, CA 92054 gkent(dibiocleanenvironmental.net 169 Applicant website: http://www.modularwetlands.com/ Ecology web link: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wg/stormwater/newtech/index.html Ecology: Revision Histor Douglas C. Howie, P.E. Department of Ecology Water Quality Program (360) 407-6444 douglas.howie@ecy.wa.gov Date Revision June 2011 Original use -level -designation document September 2012 Revised dates for TER and expiration January 2013 Modified Design Storm Description, added Revision Table, added maintenance discussion, modified format in accordance with Ecology standard December 2013 Updated name of Applicant April 2014 Approved GULD designation for Basic, Phosphorus, and Enhanced treatment December 2015 Updated GULD to document the acceptance of MWS-Linear Modular Wetland installations with or without the inclusion of plants. 170 SITE SPECIFIC DATA PROJECT NAME PROJECT LOCATION STRUCTURE ID TREATMENT REQUIRED VOLUME BASED (CF) FLOW BASED (CFS) TREATMENT HGL AVAILABLE (FT) PEAK BYPASS REQUIRED (CFS) — IF APPLICABLE PIPE DATA I.E. MATERIAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE 1 INLET PIPE 2 OUTLET PIPE PRETREATMENT BIOFILTRATION DISCHARGE RIM ELEVATION SURFACE LOAD PARKWAY OPEN PLANTER PARKWAY FRAME & COVER 24" x 42" N/A N/A WETLANDMEDIA VOLUME (CY) 0.83 WETLANDMEDIA DELIVERY METHOD TBD ORIFICE SIZE (DIA. INCHES) 01.03" MAXIMUM PICK WEIGHT (LBS) 9000 NOTES: INSTALLATION NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND INCIDENTALS REQUIRED TO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DRAWING AND THE MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURERS CONTRACT 2. UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON LEVEL BASE. MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDS A MINIMUM 6" LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE SPECIFICATIONS. 3. ALL PIPES MUST BE FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF CONCRETE. (PIPES CANNOT INTRUDE BEYOND FLUSH). INVERT OF OUTFLOW PIPE MUST BE FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE CHAMBER FLOOR. ALL GAPS AROUND PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATER TIGHT WITH A NON —SHRINK GROUT PER MANUFACTURERS STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL AND SHALL MEET OR EXCEED REGIONAL PIPE CONNECTION STANDARDS. 4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING PIPES. 5. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL RISERS, MANHOLES, AND HATCHES. CONTRACTOR TO GROUT ALL MANHOLES AND HATCHES TO MATCH FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 6. DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATION REQUIRED ON ALL UNITS WITH VEGETATION. GENERAL NOTES 1. MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS, WEIGHTS AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT MANUFACTURER. PATENTED PER/METER VOID AREA WETLINDMEDL4 BED VERTICAL UNDERDRAIN MAN/FOLD DRAIN DOWN LANE PLANT ESTABUSHMENT MEDIA PLAN V/EIX/ 4' D" 5' Oa ELEVATION VIEW OUTLET PIPE SEE NOTES PRE —FILTER CARTRIDGE INLET PIPE SEE NOTES " 4' 0 5' Oa LEFT END V/EIX/ BIOFILTRATION C/L HATCH RIGHT END VIEW PRETREATMENT/DISCHARGE a FLOW CONTROL RISER TREATMENT FLOW (CFS) 0.052 OPERATING HEAD (FT) 3.4 PRETREATMENT LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) TBD WETLAND MEDIA LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.0 THE PRODUCT DESCRIBED MAY BE PROTECTED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING US PATENTS. 7, 425, 262,• 7, 470, 362,• 7, 674, 378,• 8303,816,• RELATED FOREIAI PA1EMS OR OTHER PATENTS PENDING PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: THE INFORM /70N CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF MODULAR WETLANDS S)S1EMS. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF MODULAR WETLANDS SYSTEMS IS PROHIBITED. MODULAR ETLANNS www.ModularWetlands.com I (835) 5MOD-WET M WS-L -4-4- V STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM STANDARD DETAIL 1/1 CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California } County of 'CttY,e On2� I� } before me, �At - -k. Q (A I� i�.ri •PuSI;1, Here insert name and tit a of the o cer) personally appeared --E` Wit e. who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person¢$ whose nme(e) is/are-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that else/they-executed the same in his//t e r authorized capacity(ic3}, and that by his/her/their signature(sj-on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persorr(s} acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Notary Public Seal) GABRIEL AVILA CoMM_# 2191132 to NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA NI COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO — MY CONN. EXP. APR. 11, 20211 ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT (Title or description of attached document) (Title or description of attached document continued) Number of Pages Document Date CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ❑ Individual (s) ❑ Corporate Officer (Title) ❑ Partner(s) ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee(s) ❑ Other 2015 Version wi w.NotaryClasses.corn 800-873-9865 INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM • This form complies with current California statutes regarding notary wording and, if needed, should be completed and attached to the document. Acknowledgments from other states may be completed for documents being sent to that state so long as the wording does not require the California notary to violate California notary law. • State and County information must be the State and County where the document signer(s) personally appeared before the notary public for acknowledgment. • Date of notarization must be the date that the signer(s) personally appeared which must also be the same date the acknowledgment is completed. • The notary public must print his or her name as it appears within his or her commission followed by a comma and then your title (notary public). • Print the name(s) of document signer(s) who personally appear at the time of notarization. • Indicate the correct singular or plural forms by crossing off incorrect fom3s (i.e. he/she/they, is /are) or circling the correct forms. Failure to correctly indicate this information may lead to rejection of document recording. • The notary seal impression must be clear and photographically reproducible. Impression must not cover text or lines. If seal impression smudges, re -seal if a sufficient area permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment form. • Signature of the notary public must match the signature on file with the office of the countyy clerk. eg I� Additional information is not r .4�tr� c ,"�C,�L re this acknowledgment is not misused or .1 a t erent ocument. Indicate title or type of attached docume t b o d date. • Indicate the capacity claimed by the si t a' J� apacity is a corporate officer, indicate the title (i.e. C� CFO, Secretary). • Securely attach this document to the signed documetedt qo: t-Ye-vstr,rmAnt submittal. Within 28 days of receiving , .tr application, City staff will determine if _ complete based on the attached checklist. If not complete City staff will mail you a letter outlining what additional information is needed. If you do not submit requested materials within 90 days from the City's request for additional information the City may cancel your application. Staff will meet with you as needed to help achieve project goals, and formulate a recommendation to the Director. Once all. design issues have been resolved we will issue a Notice of Decision. This approval will expire unless construction begins within three years of the decision. COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206-431-3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206-433-0179 (Department of Public Works). Check items submitted with application Information Required. May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. 1 2. Completed Application Form and drawings (5 copies). ✓ 3. One set of all plans reduced to 8 1/2" x 11" or 11" x 17". ✓ 4. Application Fee: See Land Use Fee Schedule online. 5. Completed and notarized Affidavit of Ownership and Hold Harmless Permission to Enter Property (1 copy attached). ✓ El 6. SEPA Environmental Checklist if required (see SEPA Application Packet) PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: 7. If the project requires SEPA review: Payment of notice board fee (see Land Use Fee Schedule) to Fast Signs Tukwila OR provide a 4' x 4' public notice board on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received (see Public Notice Sign Specifications Handout). Mailed notice is not required. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: 8. Concurrency test notices for water, sewer, surface water and traffic unless the project is exempt from SEPA (see SEPA Application Packet). 9. Sewer and water availability letters are required from the provider district if additional plumbing fixtures are proposed and the area is not serviced by the City of Tukwila. Forms are available at the DCD office. r,/ 10. A written discussion of project consistency with decision criteria. (See Application) 11. Provide two copies of sensitive area studies such as wetland or geotechnical reports if needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). See Geotechnical Report Guidelines and Sensitive Area Special Study Guidelines for additional information. \ \ citystore\ City Common\ Teri - DCD\ Kirby\ 2016 Applications\ Design Review -Administrative -March 2016.docx Check items submitted with application Information Requik__.. May be waived in unusual cases, upon at, oval of both Public Works and Planning SITE PLAN: 12 (a) The site plan must include a graphic scale, north arrow and project name. Maximum size 24" x 36". (b) Existing and proposed building footprints. , (c) Dash in required setback distances from all parcel lot lines. .., 4 (d) Fire access lanes and turn-arounds per Fire Department standards. (e) Parking lots with dimensioned stalls and drive aisles. _12 (f) Loading and service areas. (g) Fences, rockeries and retaining walls with called out colors and materials. (h) Street furniture such as benches and bike racks. 4 (i) Pedestrian connections between the building entrance(s) and the sidewalklpublic street. (j) In MDR and HDR zones provide a development coverage calculation (maximum 50%). Kic (k) Show all existing and proposed easements. (1) Vicinity Map with site location does not have to be to scale. LANDSCAPE PLAN: 13 (a) If the landscaping will be altered or the existing landscaping does not meet current standards (TMC 18.52; or if located in the TUC districts see TMC 18.28) provide a landscape planting plan by a Washington State licensed landscape architect. One set of all plans and analyses shall have an original Washington State registered Landscape Architect stamp and signature. Plans must include the type, quantity, spacing and location of all plantings. Maximum size 24" x 36". (b) Show all existing trees to be retained and any tree protection measures required (for example fencing at drip line). SENSITIVE AREAS PLAN (If the project will affect any sensitive areas): 14 (a) Location of all sensitive areas (e.g. streams, wetlands, slopes over 20%, coal mine areas and important geological and archaeological sites). For stream frontage provide existing and proposed top of stream bank, stream bank toe, stream mean high water mark, and base flood elevation (i.e., 100 yr. flood). Maximum size 24" x 36". (b) Location of all required sensitive area buffers, setbacks tracts and protection measures. (c) Show all significant trees (4" or more in diameter measured 4.5 feet above grade), indicating those to be retained and those to be removed. A tree permit will be required for removal of any significant trees within a sensitive area or its buffer. (—] (d) Existing and proposed building footprints. \ \ citystore\ City Common\ Teri - DCD\ Kirby\ 2016 Applications\ Design Review -Administrative -March 2016.docx t Check items submitted with application Information Requikir. May be waived in unusual cases, upon a«,•oval of both Public Works and Planning CIVIL PLANS (If utility or site work is proposed): 15 (a) One set of all civil plans and analyses shall be stamped, signed and dated by a licensed professional engineer. Include a graphic scale and north arrow. Maximum size 24" x 36". (b) Vertical datum NAVD 1988 and horizontal datum NAD 83/91. Conversion calculations to NGVD 1929, if in a flood zone or flood -prone area. /-74 (c) Existing (dashed) and proposed (solid) topography at 2' intervals. (d) Total expected cut and fill. 4 (e) Existing and proposed utility easements and improvements, on site and in street (water, sewer, power, natural gas, telephone, cable). Schematic designs to be provided regardless of purveyor (e.g. site line size, location, and size of public main). No capacity calcs, invert depth, valve locations or the like are needed. (f) Storm drainage design at least 90% complete, which meets the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Include a Technical Information Report (TIR) including feasibility analysis if required by the Manual. Call out total existing and proposed impervious surface in square feet. Include all storm drainage conveyance systems, water quality features, detention structures, maintenance access and safety features. For additional guidance contact Public Works or go to PERMIT CENTER. (g) Locate the nearest existing hydrant and all proposed hydrants. U (h) Show the 100 yr. flood plain boundary and elevation as shown on FEMA maps. I---)/ (i) Plan, profile and cross-section for any right-of-way improvements. u (j) Show planned access to buildings, driveways, fire access lanes and turn-arounds. OTHER: 16. Dimensioned and scalable building elevations with keyed colors and materials. Show mechanical equipment and/or any proposed screening. Maximum size 24" x 36". n 17. Color and materials board accurately representing the proposed project. 18. A rendering or photo montage showing the project in context is suggested. If submitted it must accurately show the project and be from a realistic perspective (5 to 6 feet above the sidewalk). 19. Luminaire plan including location and type of street and site lighting if any changes to the existing fixtures are proposed. Include proposed fixture cut sheets, site light levels (foot-candles), and measures to shield adjacent properties from glare. ✓ n 20. All existing and proposed signage with sign designs and locations. \ \ citystore\ City Common\ Teri - DCD\ Kirby\ 2016Applications\ Design Review -Administrative -March 2016.docx CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 ADMINISTRATIVE Telephone: (206) 431-3670 DESIGN REVIEW — APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P-DR Planner: File Number: Lt1--- Application Complete Date: Project File Number: all_ - Uy2: `J Application incomplete Date: Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Chick-fil-A #03093 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Free standing quick service restaurant with drive-thru LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, WA. Nearest intersection Southcenter Pkwy and Minkler Blvd. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Parcel number: 2623049066 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR: The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Ed Hale IL Address: 2153 Oak Hill Drive, Escondido, CA 92027 Phone: 760-884-7011 E-mail: ehale ev. FAX: 866-311-3658 Signature:Date: 5/25/2017 RECEIVED JUN 06 2011 Community Development 11 dtystore\ City Common\ Teri - DCD1 Kirby\ 2016Applications\ Design Review -Administrative -March 2016.docx ? tod 14,e.5 jaw 564, ? z- �2s" Z t z CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING - The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees. agents. engineers. contractors or other renresentatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 17333 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, CA for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non -responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on , 20 (Print Name) (Address) (Phone Number) (Signature) On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS DAY OF , 20 It 1 1,111 v'. \ \ citystore\ City Common Teri- DCD\ Kirby\ 2016Apptications\ Design Review -Administrative -March 2016.docx NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at My Commission expires on