Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 5397 - Royal Coachman - Grade and FillCITY OF TUKWILA Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433-104g- Work to be done Site Address Building Use Property Owner Address Contractor Address BUILDING PERMIT Grading/Fill 6450 Southcenter Blvd. Suite # Office Assessors Solly Development Co. 8009 S. 180th St., Suite 104, Kent, WA Poe Construction ;PO- EC- 0I -247SZ 3207 E St. N E., Auburn, WA PERMIT # Sr 3 9 7 Control # 88 -254 Tenant Royal Coachman Account # 000320 - 0011 -00, 0012 -09 Phone # 251 -5000 Zip 98032 Phone # 575 -4283 FOR BUILDING PERMIT ONLY Aooro e_d for issuance Sq. Ft. Office Saretorahou se ge/ W Retail Other Occ. Load 1st F1. 2nd F1. `3rd F1. Total Fire Protection: ❑ Sprinklers ❑ Detectors Zoning Type of Construction by Zip 98002 Date: ees sq. ft. sq. ft. sq, ft. sq. ft. Total Valuation Bldg. Permit Fee Plan Check Fee Demolition Surcharges Other Other TOTAL 1st F1. $ 2nd F1. $ other $ other $ of Construction $ 8,000 Receipt # 5c),8 $ Receipt # Receipt # $ Receipt # $ Receipt # $ Receipt # $ 153.00 30.00 183.00 Special Conditions . Obtain Hauling Permit from Public Works FOR SIGN PERMIT ONLY 0 Permanent ❑ Temporary EI Single Face ❑ Double Face [] Wall Mounted (] Free Standing ❑ Other Building face Setbacks: Front Side Side Rear Square Footage of each sign face Special Conditions Total square footage of sign THIS PERMII BEI:UMES NULL ANU VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 OAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION UR dORK IS ',IiSPENUED OR ABAN0ONtU FuR A PER r OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. HA READ AND EXAMINE/171M APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ANU ORDINANCES LL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TU GIVE AUTHORITY TO VISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING COONNSSTRR OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. Oate I HEREB GOVERN VIOLA Signed LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I am licensed under provisions of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is in full force and effect. Date Contractor (signature)__ as owner p offered for I. as owner 0 Owner (signature) _ he p ale. the pr OWNER - BUILDER DECLARATION operty, oyees, with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not Intended or er y xcl iveif contra' tang with licensed contractor's to con rut t project, Date ,A65 I CITY OF TUKWILA Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 - r-, BUILDING PERMIT Work to be done Site Address Building Use Property Owner Address Contractor Address Grading /Fill 6450 Southcenter Blvd. Office Solly Development Co. 8009 S. 180th St., Suite 104, Kent, WA Poe Construction #P0- EC- 0I -247QZ 3207 E St. N.E., Auburn, WA PERMIT # Control # 397 88 -254 Suite # Tenant Royal Coachman Assessors Account # 000320 - 0011 -00, 0012 -09 Phone # 251 -5000 Zip 98032 Phone # 575 -4283 Zip 98002 FOR BUILDING PERMIT ONLY 1 S Ft. Sq. • Office Storage/ Warenouse Retail Other IOcc. Load 1st F1. 2nd F1. 3rd Fl. Total Fire Protection: [] Sprinklers 0 Detectors Zoning Type of Construction Special Conditions ees sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. Total Valuation Bldg. Permit Fee Plan Check Fee Demolition Surcharges Other Other TOTAL 1st F1. $ 2nd F1. $ other $ other $ of Construction $ 8,000 Receipt # Sc-I9 $ Receipt # S -a,$$ Receipt # $ Receipt # $ Receipt # $ Receipt # $ Obtain Hauling Permit from Public Works 153.00 30.00 $ 183.00 FOR SIGN PERMIT ONLY E] Permanent ❑ Temporary ❑ Single Face Building face ❑ Double Face ❑ Wall Mounted Setbacks: Front Square Footage of each sign face Special Conditions ❑ Free Standing ❑ Other Side Side Rear Total square footage of sign THIS PERMIT BECOMES AHANDUNcU FuR A PER I HEREBY GOVERN VIULA Signed NuLL ANU VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION uP .URK lS ,. :SPEti,E] n:R OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK I5 COMMENCEO. READ AND EXAMINED -1Rt5 APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS ANU JROINANCES LL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TU GIVE AUTHORITY TO VISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTR OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. Date I hereby affirm that I am licen Contractor lstgnature) _ l ) 1, as owner o offered for 1, as owner o Owner (signature)___ LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION: ed under provlslons of the Business and Professions Code, and my license is In full force and effect. Date OWNER - BUILDER DECLARATION oyees, with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is ively,contritting with licensed contractors to con Date not intended or CITY OF TUKWILA Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard_ Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 Type of Inspection i e ' Fs Site Address 6' g,/c., 641 Requestor Special Instructions INSPECTtIN RECORD PERMIT # 5-3 7 7 Date 4 / /�J Date Wanted ///,/89' Project ',sJ.t. C>/,411AP rt/ Phone # a.m. p.m Inspection Results /Comments: Inspector Date /4 CITY OF TUKWILA Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 INSPEC1r,N RECORD PERMIT # S.4' Date Type of Inspection ,9'C/(/1V Date Wanted 3 ^ / %r.r Project na/45tL• 40,9G,/9/ i//n✓ Phone # 9,/7/..2 ufJw. akv s Via/ i7, �ri�6r'i Site Address Z,s/g"� S,/C. Requestor `'' 144 Special Instructions P • 111 • Inspection Results /Comments: OKI /�� ,r- /�r/,��� v �j AfiA) Inspector Date 7 -c5=7 kM1M}iYOCiN W.wnaenw,...,, ew«W na.vw. +.n Mqr� CITY OF TUKWILA Building Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 Type of Inspection C /a/ %4-&,'!j' Site Address � / /f.4 t Requestor Special Instructions INSPECTION RECORD •1 PERMIT # 3 Date Date Wanted /'-- /1/-cP 7 t a p.m. Project Phone # Inspection Results /Comments: /4%)' // /4( r (1 //� //��' .ii!// i.f// Gam/ fr4 -'G/ GEOTECH CONSULTANTS 13240 N.E. 20th St. (Northup Way), Suite 11 Bellevue, WA 98005 (206) 747 -5618 (206) 343-7959 Solley Development Company 8009 South 180th Street, Suite 104 Kent, Washington 98032 Attention: Chuck Wiegman Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study and Environmental Audit, Proposed Office Building, 6450 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Gentlemen: We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report tor the proposed office building to be constructed at 6450 Southcenter Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington. The purpose of our work was to explore site conditions and provide earthwork and foundation design criteria, along with conducting an environmental audit of the property. The work was authorized by your acceptance of our proposal, P -8843 dated May 6, 1988. The subsurface conditions of the proposed building site were explored with three test pits. We found the site to be underlain at relatively shallow depths by weathered sandstone, sandstone, or hard silt. These soils can be relied upon to support the proposed building founded on, conventional footings. No evidence of any site contamination from hazardous materials was found during our field activities or environmental audit. The attached report contains a more detailed discussion of the study and recommendations. It you have any questions, or if we can be of any further service, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. times . R. Finl . P.E. ' +�aK�x ?Rh;•�ni''^'�,? °r >`'iWf.ti'v; �k.� +i�sl'<"''r.t "i, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 6450 SOUTHCENTER BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering study of the site of the proposed office building in Tukwila. The site is located at 6450 Southcenter Boulevard as indicated on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1. Based on preliminary plans furnished to us, we anticipate that the building will consist of one story with a building height of fifteen feet above the finish floor. The building will cover 15,000 square feet of area and will be constructed with a slab -on- grade. Although we were not given any structural plans, we believe the building loads will be light. Based on the site plan furnished to us by the architect on June 3, 1988, the building will have a finished floor elevation of forty feet. This will require a ten -foot cut on the north side of the building and a fill of about eight feet at the south foundation line. A concrete retaining wall will be constructed on the north boundary of the parking area varying in planned height from two feet on the east side to eleven feet on the west side. This wall w ill . be below an existing rockery varying from about three feet high on the west side to seven feet in height on the east side. A 2:1 (horizontal :vertical) slope is planned between the wall and rockery. SITE CONDITIONS SURFACE The tract is eight -sided and irregular in shape. It is located at the northwest corner of Southcenter Boulevard and 65th Avenue South, just north of Interstate 405. In general, the site slopes downward from north to south. At the northern and southern sides of the site the slope is gentle, while it is moderate near the middle of the site. On the southwest edge of the site, there is a steep slope sloping downward to the southeast. This slope begins at the edge of a small, vacated, asphalt road existing along the property line. The road is the only existing development on the site. However, in reviewing aerial photographs, it appears that a large barn -type building Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 2 occupied, the southeastern portion of the site prior to 1974. Also, the small existing road extended the entire length of the site from west to east. Presently, evidence of the road exists near the middle of the site. The vegetation across the site generally consists of tall grasses and weeds with scattered small trees and occasional bushes. There are two areas where the trees are dense- -one on the northeastern portion of the site and another on the south - western portion of the site. The properties adjacent to the site have been developed with office - type buildings. The northern property contains a three to seven -toot rockery near the property line adjacent to the subject site. The rockery appears to be in good condition. SUBSURFACE The subsurface conditions were explored by three test pits at the approximate locations shown on Plate 2. The test pits were excavated on May 26, 1988 with a rubber -tired backhoe owned and operated by Evans Brother Excavating. A geotechnical engineer from our staff observed the excavation process, logged the test pits and obtained representative samples of the soils encountered. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 and 4. The soils varied throughout the site. In Test Pit 1, the uppermost soil unit consisted of one and one -half feet of black sandy silt intermixed with imported quarry spalls. This till is underlain by dense, orange- brown, silty sand. This soil is weathered sandstone which becomes very dense with depth. In Test Pit 2, the uppermost soil unit consists of four and one - half feet of medium- stitf, mottled to blue -gray, sandy silt and silt. This silt is underlain by extremely dense, gray sand- stone. In Test Pit 3, the uppermost soil unit consists of medium- stift, mottled silt which became gray and hard beginning at a depth of approximately three feet. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory examination and tests of field samples. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundary between soil types. In actuality, the transition may be gradual. GROUNDWATER Groundwater seepage was observed at a depth of one and one - half feet on the southwestern portion of the site. The test pits were lett open only for a short time period, therefore, the Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 3 seepage levels recorded represent the location of water seepage in the side of the test pit. It should be noted, however, that groundwater levels vary with rainfall and other factors. We anticipate that run -off water could be found at the ground surface in periods of wet weather. ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT As part of our geotechnical study, we have conducted an environmental audit of the subject property. Our approach to an environmental investigation of a site we believe to be in the ;? low -risk category generally consists of a historical land use review and an area and site reconnaissance. For historical land use review, we gather information on the site's land use history that includes the types ot chemi- cals used on the site, the types ot wastes generated on the site, disposal of those wastes and where, if any, chemical spills may have occurred. Property ownership is traced by searching county records and interviewing previous owners, if possible. Historical air photos are examined to estimate the extent, changes and consequences ot site development. Federal, state and local agencies are interviewed for an indication it hazardous substances were handled or disposed ot on the property and possible adjacent properties. We also research the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) lists of known potentially hazardous.waste sites. Reports of previous studies and investigations are also reviewed for possible information on historical land use and potential contamination. LAND USE In addition to conducting an area and site reconnaissance, we also reviewed aerial photographs maintained by Walker and Associates, Inc. of Seattle. Photographs from 1936, 1946 and 1960 indicate a large barn on the property surrounded by roads. A madadam road (James A. Clark Road No. 2) extends from Southcenter Boulevard (Renton -Three Tree Point Road) around the barn to the north and back to Southcenter Boulevard to the east of present 65th Avenue South. The eastern section of the road was called Old Bluff Street, or Old 65th South. This macadam road was vacated by Tukwila Ordinance No. 671 and only vestiges of the road remain. By 1969, the eastern extension of the barn has been demolished and the present 65th Avenue South has been built, dividing the original property into two parcels. The western Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 4 section of the building existed in 1969, but by 1974 the site was vacant, with construction progressing on the present housing authority building north of the site. The subject site has remained vacant since 1974, while buildings were developed both to the east and to the west. Review of the EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System revealed no superfund sites in the immediate area. Sites considered as potentially hazardous include: Bowers Machine Company, 13032 Interurban Avenue South; Red Dot Corporation', 495 Andover Park East; Try -Way Industries, Inc., 520 Andover Park East; Schneider Homes, Inc., 65th Avenue South; and Widgen Incorporated, 6519 - 153rd. All of these sites are relatively distant from the subject site and in our opinion do not affect the subject site or its use. Based upon record search, air photo interpretations, site inspection, and test pit examination, we found no evidence or documentation to indicate that the site investigated was ever used to manufacture, handle, store, or dispose of hazardous substances as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. It is our professional opinion that the risk is very low of encountering any significant contamination from hazardous materials and wastes on this site. FOUNDATION AND EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL The native soils encountered on the site can be relied upon to support the one -story building using conventional footings The native soils were encountered at shallow depths in our test pits. However, in reviewing the aerial photographs, it was noted that a building and small road previously existed at the site. There is a possibility that till soils could be encountered in the area where these structures existed. If fill soils are found, they should be removed in the building area, but could remain in the parking areas if they are stable and compactible. Performing cuts and fills on this site will be very diffi- cult. The very dense silts and sandstones will probably require some ripping to remove. The soils and weathered rock is well over the optimum moisture content for compaction. The silts are highly moisture - sensitive and difficult to compact, even at the optimum moisture content. We do not recommend that the silts be used as fills in the building area. The sandstone, if broken up Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 5 and dried., can be used for structural fill. The earthwork should only be accomplished in dry warm weather when the soils can be dried by aeration. Work will be slow even under optimum conditions. The retaining wall construction near the north property line should not undermine the existing rockery. It appears that some of this rockery will need to be taken down for safety reasons. The excavations can be made near vertical in the sandstone rock, but should be sloped at an angle of 1:1 (H: V) above the rock. FOUNDATIONS The proposed structures may be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on the medium -stiff silt or weathered sandstone soil underlying the topsoil or fills or on structural till placed above competent native soils. Structural fill placed under footings should extend outwards from the edge of the footings at least an amount equal to the depth of fill underneath the footings. Exterior footings should be bottomed at a minimum depth of twelve (12) inches below the lowest adjacent outside finish grade. Interior footings may be at a depth of twelve (12) inches below the top of the slab. Footings founded on competent native soils or on structural fill place above the native soils may be designed tor an allowable soil bearing capacity of two thousand (2000) pounds per square foot (pst) . It the footings are founded on the sandstones or hard silt soils, the allowable bearing capacity can be raised to five thousand (5000) psf. . Continuous and individual spread footings should have minimum widths of twelve (12) and eighteen (18) inches, respectively. A one -third increase in the above bearing pressures may be used when considering short term wind or seismic loads. Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundations and the supporting compacted fill subgrade or by passive earth pressure on the foundations. For the latter, the foundations must be poured "neat" against the existing soil or backf i l led with a compacted till meeting the requirements of structural fill. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used between the structural foundation concrete and the supporting subgrade. The passive resistance of undisturbed natural soils and well compacted fill may be taken as equal to the pressure of a fluid having a density of three hundred fifty (350) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) . Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 6 SLAB -ON -GRADE FLOORS We recommend that concrete slabs be placed on undisturbed competent native soils. Isolation joints should be provided where the slabs intersect columns and walls. Control and expansion joints should also be used to control cracking from expansion and contraction. Saw cuts or preformed strip joints used to control shrinkage cracking should extend through the upper one - fourth of the slab. The spacing of control or expansion joints is a function of the amount of steel placed in the slab. Reducing the water /cement ratio of the concrete and curing of the concrete by preventing evaporation of tree water until cement hydration occurs, will also reduce shrinkage cracking. A 6 -mil polyethylene plastic vapor barrier should be used under floors likely to receive an impermeable floor finish or where passage ot water vapor through the floor is undesirable. Based on American Concrete Institute recommendations, we suggest placing a two to three -inch layer of sand over the vapor barrier to protect the vapor barrier and to allow some moisture loss through the bottom of the slab to reduce warping in the curing process. Sand should be used to aid in the tine grading process of the subgrade to provide uniform support under the slab. PERMANENT RETAINING AND FOUNDATION WALLS Retaining and foundation walls should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these structures. Walls that are designed to yield an amount equal to at least 0.002 times the wall height can be designed to resist the lateral earth pressure imposed by an equivalent tluid with a unit weight ot thirty -tive (35) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) . We recommend that the north parking lot retaining wall be designed to include a surcharge equal to one hundred (100) pounds times the height of the rockery to account for the 2:1 (H: V) slope and the weight of the rockery and soil behind the rockery. It walls are to be restrained at the top trom tree movement, a uniform force of one hundred (100) pounds per square foot (psf) should be added to the equivalent tluid pressure force. For calcu- lating the base resistance to sliding, we recommend using a passive pressure equivalent to that exerted by a tluid having a density of three hundred fifty (350) pcf and a coefficient of friction of 0.35. It is assumed that no hydrostatic pressures act behind the wall. Retaining and foundation walls should be backfilled with compacted tree - draining granular soils containing no organics. Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 881 88 Page 7 The wall backfill should contain no more than 5 percent silt or clay and no particles greater than four inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25 and 70 percent. The on -site soils should not be used as backfill. The purpose of this is to assure that the design criteria for the retaining wall is not exceeded because of a build -up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. SITE DRAINAGE We recommend the use of footing drains at the base of all footings where there are crawl spaces and l .iv i ng areas below the outside site grades and all earth retaining walls. Roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. The footing drains should be surrounded by at least six inches of one -inch -minus washed rock. The rock should be wrapped with non -woven geotextile filter fabric (Mi raf i 140N, Supac, or similar materials) . At the highest point, the perforated pipe invert should be at least as low as the bottom of the footing and it should be sloped for drainage. A typical footing drain detail is attached to this report as Plate 5. The excavation and site should be graded so that surface water is directed oft the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where buildings, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. During construction, loose surfaces should be sealed at night by com- pacting the surface soils to reduce the infiltration of rain into the soils. .The final site grades in the landscape areas should be sloped away from the building at a slope of at least two percent. Si ight groundwater was observed in our test pits. Some seepage is possible, and, if encountered in the excavation, the water should be drained away from the site by use of drainage ditches, perforated pipe or French drains, or by pumping tram sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. EXCAVATIONS AND SLOPES No excavated slopes are anticipated other than for utility trenches. In no case should excavation slopes be steeper or greater than the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts up to a height of four feet may be made vertical. tor slopes having a height greater than four (4) feet, the cut should have an inclination Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 8 ( no steeper than 1:1 (H: V), from the top of the slope to the sandstone rock. Cuts in the rock may be made near vertical. All permanent cut slopes into native dense soils should be inclined no steeper than 1.5:1 (horizontal :vertical) . Fill slopes should not exceed 2:1 (horizontal :vertical) . Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any slope. Also, all permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surticial layer of soil. PAVEMENT AREAS All parking and roadway areas may be supported on native soils, structural tills, or competent existing tills provided these soils can be compacted to 95 percent density and are stable at the time of construction. However, the silt soils can become soft and unstable during wet weather or when large trucks are travelling across them. Structural till and /or fabric may be needed to stabilize soft, wet or unstable areas. In most instances twelve (12) inches of granular fill will stabilize the subgrade except for very soft areas where additional fill could be required. The subgrade should be evaluated by Geotech Consultants, Inc. after the site is stripped and cut to grade. The upper twelve (12) inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum density. Below this level a compact ive effort of 90 percent would be adequate. All subgrade areas must also be in a stable, non - yielding condition prior to paving. The pavement section for lightly loaded traffic and parking areas should consist of two (2) inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four (4) inches of crushed rock base (CRB) or three (3) inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) . We recommend that heavily loaded areas be provided with three (3) inches of AC over six (6) inches of CRB or four (4) inches of ATB. The heavily loaded areas are those areas such as main driveways and garbage bin locations. These guidelines are based on our experience in the area and on what has been successful in similar situations. We can provide recommen- dations based on expected traffic loads and R value tests, if requested. Some maintenance and repair of limited areas can be expected. To provide tor a design without the need for any repair would be uneconomical. SITE PREPARATION AND GENERAL EARTHWORK We recommend. that the building and pavement areas be stripped and cleared of all surface vegetation, all organic matter and loose, existing till soils. Stripped materials Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 9 should be. removed from the site or, if desired, stockpiled for later use in landscaping The stripped materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill. Structural till is defined as any fill placed under buildings. Geotech Consultants, Inc. should observe site conditions prior to till placement. Level benches should be cut on the sloping grade so that structural fill may be placed on a level surface. Structural fill under tloor slabs and foundations should be placed in horizontal lifts and compacted to a density equal to or greater than 95 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D- 1557 -78 (Modified Proctor) . The fill materials should be placed at or near the optimum moisture content. Fill under pavements and walks, and behind retaining walls, should also be placed in horizontal lifts and compacted to 90 percent of the maximum density except for the top twelve (12) inches which should be, compacted to 95 percent of maximum density. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type, compaction equipment and the number of passes made by the equipment. In no case should the lifts exceed twelve (12) inches in loose thickness. Proper compaction is very critical because of the differential fill thickness across the building area. On -site soils are not suitable for fill at the present moisture content as discussed in the "General" section of this report. Ideally, structural till which is to be placed in wet weather should consist of a granular soil having no more than 5 percent material passing the No. 200 sieve. The percentage of particles passing the 200 sieve should be measured on that portion of the soil passing the three - quarter inch sieve. The on -site soils should not be used as structural fill. Also, clean fill should be used tor backf it l of utility trenches in the pavement or building areas. LIMITATIONS Geological factors such as stratigraphic discontinuities that occur between test pits and soil exposures, or variations in groundwater conditions are not predictable with a limited exploration program or conventional engineering analysis. Such non - quantifiable risks must be borne by the owners. This report has been prepared for specific application to this project and for the exclusive use of Solley Development Company and their representatives. Our recommendations and Solley Development Company June 3, 1988 JN 88188 Page 10 conclusions are based on the site materials observed, selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses. The conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report tor consideration in design. We recommend that this report, in its entirety, be included in the project contract documents for the information ot the contractor. ADDITIONAL SERVICES It is recommended that Geotech Consultants, Inc. provide a general review of the geotechnical aspects of the final design and specifications to verify that the earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and in the construction specifications. It is also recommended that Geotech Consultants, Inc. be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing, and observation services during construction. This is to contirm that subsurface conditions are consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation construction activities comply with the intent of contract plans and specifications, and to provide recommendations for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. We recommend that a representative of our tirm be present Lull -time during placement ot structural fill to observe the process and to conduct density tests in the fill. The following plates are attached and complete this report: Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Test Pit Location Plan Plates 3 and 4 Test Pit Logs Solley Development Company June 3,`1988 Plate. 5 Attachments DRW/JRF:cvb JN 88188 Page 11 Footing Drain Detail Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,, INC.: Olaule,41/ D. Robert Ward Geotechnical Engineer F z +'_ James R. Finley, Jr. P.E. ,Principal GEOTECH CONSULTANTS JOB NO.= VICINITY MAP SOLLEY DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 88188 • , PLATE: 1 -41. GEOTECH • CONSULTANTS IMMIMO TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN SOLLEY DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WA owe, JUNE 1988 -1 At : 0_ N1 65TH AVE SAf/TH 0 n 0 z 4fikiP 0 I0 15 uscs TEST PIT 1 Description E/evolion: v. Apt 0 22.7 19.5 10 I5 �1.I ML :1.1.11: Bieck sandy silt with extensive organics and quarry spall debris, wet, loose to medium dense (fill) Orange brown silty SAND, fine to medium grained, very moist, dense Becomes very dense uscs Test Pit terminated on 5/26/88 at 6 1/2 feet below existing grade. Slight groundwater seepage encount- ered at 1 1/2 feet during excavation. No caving. TEST PIT Description Elevation: II1 ML Very mottled sandy silt and silt with clay nodules, very moist, medium stiff Becomes blue —gre Gray sandstone, extremely dense Test Pit terminated on 5/26/88 at 4 1/2 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage encountered during excavation. No caving. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS TEST PIT LOGS SOLLEY DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON rw Mr. 0 I AW I Lertm, OPT Able r 88188 JUNE, 1988 DRW 1 3 I0 15 USCS TEST PIT 3 Description Elevation: 19.9 19.5 • Mottled silt, slightly plastic, moist, medium stiff Becomes dark gray, varved, non plastic, very stiff Becomes hard Test Pit terminated on 5/26/88 at 10 1/2 feet below existing grade. No groundwater seepage encountered during excavation. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS TEST PIT LOGS SOLLEY DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON uw * .+ an' L. one• 88188 JUNE, 1988 DRW 1 4 T /GHTL /NE ROOF DRAIN Do not connect to tooling drain. WASHED ROCK FREE -DRAINING SAND/ NAVEL 4" PERFORATED HARO PVC P /PE Invert al We as /ow as looting and /or crawl space. Sops to drain. Place weep/to/es downward. . FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL SOLLEY DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. "Land Planning, Survey, and Design Specialists" August 11, 1988 Mr. Pat Brodin City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Grading Permit Application for Southcenter Professional Building Our Job No. 2819 Dear Pat: Pursuant to our telephone conversation yesterday morning, I am forwarding three copies of the Grading and Temporary Erosion Control Plan prepared by our office for the above - referenced project, one completed Grading Permit Application, one copy of the Geotechnical Study and one copy of the DNS for your review and approval. Our client would like to begin grading operations for the proposed new Southcenter Professional Building during the dry season, and the enclosed plan indicates the location of the building pad, existing and proposed contours, and necessary temporary erosion control measures to control erosion and prevent silt -laden water from discharging from the site during the clearing and grading phase. Please process the enclosed plans and application at your earliest convenience, and feel free to contact me at this office if you have any, questions or need additional informa- tion. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, eV71/t'4Z Daniel K. Balmelli Project Engineer DKB /sm C376.25 enc: (3) Grading and Temporary Erosion Control Plan (1) Grading Permit Application cc: Mr. Chuck Wiegman, Solly Development (w /enc) Mr. Dave Kehle, Kehle Architects (w /enc) Home Office: 18215 72nd Avenue South • Kent, Washington 98032 • (206) 251-6222 Sacramento Office: 3134 -A Auburn Blvd., • Sacramento, California 95821 • (916) 484 -1212 WAC 197 -11 -970 c,:(G 6) 0 (3°-{1 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE ,/ • MAY r, a l Description of Proposal CONSTRUCT A ONE - STORY. 15,000- SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON A 53,000 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL (SEE FILE 88 -3 -DR: 6450 BUILDING) Proponent BRUCE SOLLY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Location of Proposal, including street address, if any NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD /65TH AVENUE SOUTH INTERSECTION; SE 1/4 OF SEC. 23, TWN 23, RGE 4; TUKWILA, WA. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC-9 -88 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with-the . lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS (J This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by . The lead agency will not act on this proposa or 5 days rom the ate below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Address Date Planning Director 6200 Southcenter Boulevard T Phone 433 -1846 You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS PUBLISHED IN THE RECORD CHRONICLE ON THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 1988 • , -. CITY OF TUKWILA ,� ���, Building Division GRADING /FILL /EXCAVATION • .� 6200 Southcenter Boulevard fy Tukwila, Mashington 98188 (206)- 433 -1849 PERMIT APPLICATION CONTROL# ?$-',),5-7-/ Site Address 69-50 Sour t G.v-p,/-?F�'L- RLV19 Suite# Floor# •,„ Project Name /Tenant s, _ .„, ,.,,t L _ , C 86 Cc.G Coa atm/La— L ) Valuation of Grading /,80100, Assessors Account# 00632b QO //-OCR QO /. GP Property Owner ,So L Ly D6. y t o Piwes2T l0 , Phone 257- ,5000 Address g0.09 /,.5, /BO Th' 57 Sv/T /O ko.vrziP 9 'o 2' Appl i cant i G I- / ,0 _ �� Phone 05-/ -‘a0.2, Address `''Of4VE' S. XF —i/7! , /,)/%, ZiP 9 &D 3a r Architect /Engineer ii. a Tie:: U5,�__>"J �4•.Js . ,i■/e.<, Phone 0-5/ - G2� Address /g 2 /c- 7Z~ " 19.1/__7, .S tiTH rA77-, Gi/.9 . Zip 98032_ 1 Contractor f06 con bl1W(.T1_- License# PO--EC - OE -p?L/7 Phone Z--5.5"-e-/:?Fs? Address 3.207 6 >` ma, O, 4 & wig. 6 r Zip Q8006 , Hauling Co. Phone Address Zip Describe the purpose and extent of fill, excavation or grading jR,E73. 12, ,g1_o6. PAD Fi? Fryru2F Go ti).5 T'2_ UG7-70,./ fi ./z. ,9,0,.'$/ j 1F- Cut (c . u .) 4.000 'f' Fill (c . u .) 1000 t F7& P &2K /NG $ 0121U E. 132 9 Two (2) sets of grading /fill /excavation Qlans must be submitted which meet the application requirements of Section 7006(d), 1985 Uniform Building Code. A soils engineering report and engineering geology report may also be required. An Environmental Checklist is required to be submitted ($100.00 Fee) to the Planning Depart- ment for any grading /fill /excavation 500 cubic yards or more. A Hauling permit is required for any grading /fill /excavation of cubic yards or more. A $2,000 bond, certificate of insurance, route map, and permit fee of $25.00 are required. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT AND THAT I HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION TO DO THIS WORK. Applicant/Authorized , � Date 8-G/- Be pplicant /Authorized Agent (signature) ����_ -, � , ,,,,&,./. (print name) ,DAB/ I oz, K. ( /,q- L/-)2,E/LL/ Contact Person (please print) ,fD19-, i / 7 K. 5.9-z__1,-"7.e/..,1 � Phone 2�/ -G ? 77 OFFICE USE ONLY FEES: Grading Permit Fee (000/322.100) $ /53.00 Receipt# & o 9 ' Date Paid 9.4 -- - Plan Check Fee (000/345.830) o,or) Receipt# I Date Paid Other ( ) Receipt# V Date Paid TOTAL / 6 5 ,00 (OWES: $ /MAO ) Excavation Ordinance #1341: Bond Required: $ Cert. of Ins. Amount $ to KING 1 • ' 1, N P, 1 1• / BLDG H il 0 a 0,.l Et Approved for Issuance 's� A 0._Zei _ SO PLNG -I 8 Z 11616 Approved (Initials) 4 SEPA Checklist required: I ' Yes E No SEPA Determination IJS - 14) 06 0 SEPA File# EPIC- q -'3 3 jj 'PWD .S/j7 /`-Z6./(9 3 Approved (Initials) .:4% Hauling Permit Requires: es [J No 115155 I.O'MIN. FLOW a "- -CONC. PAD- - /i PLAN OVERFLOW EL. =30.0 0 0 0 0 KEY ROCK IN1D SWALE MiN. 0.25 0 SUMP BEHIND ROCK GIECK DAM SHALL BE INSPECTED DAILY, AND ^CLEANED WHEN COLLECTED DEBRIS EXCEEDS OF ITS DEPTH . NOTE : ROCK SHALL BE 4` MINUS QUARRY ROCK. to SWALE CROSS- SECTION AT ROCK CHECK DAM 3' 3' 1 SWALE 1 FLOWLINE I _ 1 ROCK CHECK rDAM 0.5' MIN . L _KEY ROCK INTO SWALE 0.25 (MIN.) ROCK DAM CROSS - SECTION ROCK CHECK DAM DETAILS NOT 1'0 SCALE 111111s.s va`iMM1r1011•1Iw11.. woarimerrimmou GRADINGAND TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN TEMPORARY EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN NOTES 1. All limits of cicar'i,g and areas of vegetation preservation as descri- bed on the plan shall be clearly !'lagged in the field and observed during construction. SWALE SLOPE CHECK DAM SPACING 0 -5% 150' 100' 5 -10% > 10% 50 -36' 4 CMP PERFORATED STANDPIPE 1 ",TYP. AT I0 "C -C 10 PER ROW TOTAL 40 PERF. / 21'TU CMP 0 • PERFORATED -�- STANDPIPE 0 O \ WASHED ROCK CONE rf) -(05 --I 1/2" M trvus 0 0 0 C ()-Z�6 C aC) e7 4 -0" x 4 -0" CONCRETE PAD ELEVATION c POND t 1I'. BOTTOM cco TEMPORARY "V" DITCH NOT TO SCALE *Nag P AI4 612400J4 Fla idoe147:0146 a/Vito -Rs ?ER/41rib e ; tvzoMpersHeo uao SuPe2U►StoN oF Sc►rtc g1441Nfrse, To ,4goies con7ploweE cviTl APi�t REIVer REpor CE Wootk. 4445 gceoempGS1167) ti1/41 �q GtJ1TH OtLS 1QePoRT'SNtlJLO BE Pe t% VIE APL f E-44 uVsei2 Al+ro SZaM ia Th(&f M 'O4 . 7)EPT F? /off To C,gGGt tA . Re. F,tJ4 l NsP III =l 111 t �tl ►:- TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PER DETAIL 'MAt'IKAT'A tN t.IN'�1�iG5 4 tgr7.viIi .6 M .G. - 1 75.52 r-� O4 '40r " A$ 1A6 L.v AO 38 • TEMPORARY OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE NOT TO SCALE 42 3$ O 35 L.F. 1�EMP. 8" CMP 1 e ui 0) 0) cc 1 Co 2. All required sedimentation /erosion control facilities must be con- structed :anti in operation prior to land clearing and /or other construc- tion to insure that sediment -laden water does not enter the natural drainage system. All erosion and sediment facilities shall be main- tained in a satisfactory condition until such time that clearing and /or construction is completed and potential for on -site erosion has passed. The implementation, maintenance, replacement. and additions to erosion - sedinientation control systems shall be the responsibility of the permittee. 3. The erosion and sedimentation control system depicted on this drawing are intended to be minimum requirements to 'need anticipated site conditions. As constructed progresses and unexpected or seasonal conditions dictate, the permittee should anticipate that more erosion and sedimentation control facilities will be necessary to insure complete siltation control in the proposed site. During the course of construction, it shall be the obligation and responsibility of the permittee to address any new conditions that may be created by his activities and to provide additional facilities, over and above minimum requirements, as may be needed to protect adjacent properties and water quality of the receiving drainage system. 4. Approval of this plan is for erosion/sedimentation control only. It does not constitute an approval of storm drainage, size nor location of pipes, restrictors, channels or retention facilities. 5. Any disturbed area which has been stripped of vegetation and where no further work is anticipated for a period of 30 days or more must be immediately stabilized with mulching, grass planting or other approved erosion control treatment applicable to the time of' year in question. Grass seeding alone will be acceptable only during the months of April thru September inclusive. Seeding may proceed outside the specified time period whenever it is in the interest of the permittee, but must be augmented with mulching, netting, or other treatment approved by the department. 6. All erosion/ sedimentation control ponds with a dead storage depth exceeding 6 inches must have a fence with a minimum height of 3 feet. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE: I ATTEND PRE - CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH CITY OF TUKWILA 2 INSTALL MIRAFI FILTER FENCE & TEMP. "V" DITCHES PER DETAILS 3. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION POND AND OUTLET STRUCTURE 4. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE PER DETAIL 5. CLEAR & GRUB SITE 6. GRADE SITE TO REQUIRED ELEVATIONS 7. PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROI . MEASURES AS NECESSARY TO CONTROL EROSION & PREVENT SILT LADEN WATER FROM DISCHARGEING FROM THE SITE i- CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY "V" DITCH PER DETAIL � -- INSTALL MIRAFI FILTER FENCE -32 7 /. 1 q0 0 AZ_ PER DETAIL ALONG EAST PROP. LINE Arta/f/1,4. 7E% /cam )210( kta' c w ppc ,ro •C coSEM O W E c `o co ,0 t0 0 O et s. 0 ›io 0 E TEMPORARY EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL POND TOP EL. =31.0 BOT. EL. =27.8 MAX. W.S. EL.x30.0 CAPACITY = 3100 C.F. LRIM . = = OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE 30.0 E2.7.7 MAX. W.S. EL. = 30.0 CMP 20 L.F. TEMP. 12" CMP @ 0.5% EXIST. CB RIM = 29.7 FILTER FABRIC I. E. = 27.6 MATERIAL, MIRAFI Inn OR ErN IAI i EXIST. 24" C • �. SD SS -- -- Ss SD w INSTALL MIRAFI FILTER FENCE PER DETAIL ALONG SOUTH - NHOF'ER i Y-C1NE �liL j Southcenter Boulevard CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY "V" DITCH PER DETAIL- LEGEND t TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SURFACE FLOW DIRECTION MIRAFI FILTER FENCE - -•-- • • • •-- -- --a- TEMPORARY. "V" DITCH 311101M811-----.7 -- 34-..., EXIST. CONTOUR PROPOSED STORM DRAIN _._. -- 32 - 1111111111111111 0 14 ill•. IN( PROPOSED CONTOUR 7i?.mwnt� ,.v� 8" MIN. • ,..... - t; //As . - .,. 50' MiN. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF -WAY EXIST. GROUN -�y�pc OAtV O7 D"'.1%;''"48.1' o$ L O O` Jed" .o`t • "e A$iaa USE 2" TO 4" OUARRY Sf'ALLS OR CRUSHED ROCK FOR SURFACING AS SHOWN. MATERIAL WITH "FINES" IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. THE 50' MINIMUM LENGTH SHALL BE LENGTHENED AS NECESSARY TO INSURE MATERIAL IS NOT TRACKED INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF -WAY EXISTING DRIVEWAY RAMP OR SITE ACCESS ROAD 1 11 z , 1 11 11 11 -- _.,...1._ ___ . - .- - __ __LII 11 11 ice\ U `- 2" x 4" DOUGLAS FIR v- STAPLES OR WIRE RINGS (TYP) AT 4' 0.C. -NEWLDISTUY DED ORBED GRASLOPE R 2x2x14GAGE W.W.F. FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL 2--•x 2 - x -1.4- -GAGE..._ WELDED WIRE FABRIC nr-1 rn1 1 A 1 11 11 �I 11 LI !1 u II II II II u ELEVATION 0 - 2' x 4" DOUG- .S I " -I II2" WASHED GRAVEL OR PEA GRAVEL LAS FIR OR 'r EOUAL in -BURY BOTTOM OF FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL ON 8" x 1' TRENCH Rut~ :.1 1(388 t CM OF itiliNILA APPROVED AUG . 9 88 z a .k.s1 v o 0. G 0 d. En§ el CI 1 ibis MOB Chi rem C tI�1 semal 440 S.) Awls c fl 0 its � TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE 1111i1111.1111Li11. 11111. 1111111 '11111111.1i1I.111111IjiJI I �I 1111I1111111111'111. 11111111' 111111111111 1111111111111111111111 2 :- • /F 5 6 I I7 8 I 0E: t,e 8e. Le i111111I11 11IIIIIIIIIIIII1111II11111i11 If the microfilmed document is less clear than this y . ctii'`e• it is due to the quality of the original document. (1, 5Z 1%z ce 6I ' ,L 4 II1111I11Inil111111i11Ii1I11 111111111 111IIIIIII{III!i! III! 1! II11I II II II IIIIIILi1111111IF. IIII111 I11111111lI:I hhI1111111IIlI111IfIIaMIIIIII IIIiI11I1l1I1IIIIIIII1Il nl!Hd1(II!Inl ., 1 1111I1111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111 9 10 11 UADFRIGFRMANr 12 TYPICAL CROSS- SECTION SILT FENCE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE L 9 5 '7 E; Z l V4" U II I I IIIIIIIIIIIH II11111I1II111111I11iIIIIIII11111111011I11111111I11I111111 (1