Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L95-0046 - CITY OF TUKWILA - FIRE STATION #53 APPEAL
l95-0046 fire station 53 appeal TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 17.14 DETAILED PROCEDURES FOR SUBDIVISIONS Sections: 17.14.010 Scope. 17.14.020 Preliminary plat. 17.14.030 Final plat. 17.14.040 Phasing. 17.14.050 Expiration. 17.14.010 Scope. Any land being divided into 10 or more parcels, lots, tracts or sites, for the purpose of sale or gift, any one of which is less than 20 acres in size, or any land which has been divided under the short subdivision procedures within five years and is not eligible for further short platting pursuant to Section 17.12.010 shall conform to the procedures and requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 1833 § 1(part) , 1995) 17.14.020 Preliminary plat. A. DECISION PROCESS: Applications for preliminary plat approval shall be processed as Type 5 decision subject to the provisions of TMC 18.108.050. B. APPLICATION: The following items are required, in quantities specified by DCD, for a complete application for preliminary short plat approval. Items may be waived if in the judgment of the DCD Director the items are not applicable to the particular proposal: 1. Completed Preliminary Plat Application Form and fee as identified in TMC Chapter 18.88. 2. Completed Application Checklist. 3. A complete SEPA Checklist application if project is not exempt from SEPA. 4. Complete applications for other required land use approvals. 5. A vicinity map showing location of the site. 6. A survey prepared to the standards identified in TMC 17.04.060. 7. All existing conditions shall be delineated. Site and development plans shall provide the following information: a. Owners of adjacent land and the names of any adjacent subdivisions. b. Lines marking the boundaries of the existing lot(s) (any existing lot to be eliminated should be a dashed line and so noted). c. Approximate names, locations, widths and dimensions of existing and proposed, public street rights-of-way and easements and private access easements, parks and other open spaces, reservations, and utilities. d. Location, floor area and setbacks of all existing structures on the site. e. Lot area, dimensions and average widths for each lot. f. Location of proposed new property lines and numbering of each lot. g. Location, dimension and purpose of existing and proposed easements. Provide recorded documents which identify the nature and extent of existing easements. h. Location of any proposed dedications. i. Existing and proposed topography at two foot contour intervals extending to five feet beyond project boundaries. j. Location of any sensitive areas and sensitive area buffers (slopes 20% or greater, wetlands or watercourses) on the site. k. Location, size and species of any trees located within a sensitive area or its buffer or the shoreline zone unless none of these trees are to be removed and their location is not likely to create undue hardship on individual lots with respect to TMC Chapter 18.54, Tree Regulations. 1. Source of water supply, method of sewage disposal, and manner of surface runoff control. m. Location of existing and proposed fire hydrants to serve the project. n. Description, location and size of existing and proposed utilities, storm drainage facilities and roads to serve the lots. o. A survey of existing trees and vegetation with a retention /removal plan for the preservation of significant trees and vegetation. p. Expected location of new buildings, their driveways and finished floor elevations. 8. Letter of water and sewer availability if the provider is other than the City of Tukwila. 9. King County Assessor's maps which show the location of each property within 500 feet of the subdivision; three sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subdivision. 10. Items required by TMC 18.104.060 not already listed above. C. REVIEW PROCEDURES: 1. Referral to Other Offices: Upon receipt of a complete preliminary plat application, the Department of Community Development shall transmit a notice of application and one copy of the preliminary plat to each of the following offices, where appropriate: Public Works, Building Division, Fire Department, Police Department, King County Health Department, the appropriate school district, and each public utility agency serving the area in which the property proposed for subdivision is located. 2. Public Notice and Public Hearing: The process for public notice, hearings, decisions and appeals shall be as provided for Type 5 decisions as identified in TMC Title 18, Zoning Code. Page 17 -8 Printed January 17, 2002 z _1-'; mow' JU 00 N • U) w. J CO IL UJ w a. z �.. !- O. w f- uj U .o ww U. z UN O BEFORE THE COUNCIL, CITY OF TUKWILA IN THE MATTER OF: ) 4nr RECEIVED AUG 4 1995 '41 ¥ OF TUtcirvu. -, CITY CLERK THE APPEAL OF JACKIE DEMPERE ) OF THE DECISION OF THE ) DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT ) Case No. L95 -0027, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ) L95- 0031,L95 -0030, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON A ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ) APPLICATION, ) NOTICE OF APPEAL ) Appellant. ) ) ) TO: THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL; AND TO: STEVE LANCASTER, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Pursuant to TUKWILA'S MUNICIPAL CODES (TMC), SEPA and the KING COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM and other Laws, appellant, Jackie Dempere, hereby appeals the Analysis and Decision of the Director of. the Department of Community Development and the Planning Commission Case No. L95 -0027, L95 -0031, L95 -0030. The decision consists of the issuance of a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS), approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Design Review approval by the Planning Commission, for the construction of a new fire station at the Northeast corner of 4202 S 115th Street, and on the East side of the Duwamish river, Tukwila, Washington. 1. Appellant • Jackie L. Dempere 4033 S.128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Phone:(206) 433 -8539 NOTICE OF APPEAL 1 - ''�.'.`i,FR+^....- � „.isiltlr :`",V d-?? C;;; Cj fiz': �i+ i; w.. a�” e:+ ! W !:iiwd:l:is;.i�:.:.fd.'d•:,.��r n-�. �.�. -r.�r aart :�,• Grounds for Appeal The issuance of a Determination of Non- Significance and the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, including Design Review; The inadequate disclosure and lack of disclosure of the adverse impacts associated with the proposal; The inadequate conditions and lack of conditions imposed upon the project to mitigate adverse impacts, including but not limited to: The failure to require a traffic study where this project will encroach a Scenic Drive Road and protect the safety of Tukwila residents and non - residents who use roadway for work or pleasure. The location of a Fire station in a site where the access may be cut off and equipment locked in the case of natural disaster. The inadequate application of the existing Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Plus cumulative adverse impacts on the Wetland Habitat from Excessive Noise and Light. The loss of five low income housing units and inadequate compensation of its displaced low income tenants. Disregard for previous citizen in put and of the recommendation for Single Family zoning of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizens Committee and Planning Commission for the property. The lack of protection of architectural and historical significant buildings of a neighborhood as mandate by the Comprehensive Plan Guidelines. The impossibility of providing proper buffers of surrounding Single Family homes from a fire station activity. NOTICE OF APPEAL -2 Relief Requested Appellant respectfully requests that the Director's DCD decision and Determination of Non Significance be reversed and that the applicant be required to prepare an EIS and a Traffic Study. Appellant further request that the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval be rescinded. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 7 day of August, 1995. NOTICE OF APPEAL -3 Jackie L. Demp re Appellant ••• AFFIDAVIT OF 1, n.* ILI 141.4466-in 0 Notice of Public Hearing ONotice of Public Meeting Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet fl Board of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet fl Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit fl Shoreline Management Permit DISTRIBUTIFFIEWEED hereby declare that: 3FIL:.-1 1995 cummuvai Y OEVELOPMENT ODetermination of Non- significance Mitigated Determination of - Nonsignificance ODetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action Official Notice NOther r)). ••■•■■•■ Other Ai 1111,e ChP d-wo-rta-/ was mailed to each of the following addresses on g64— Name of ProjectaIld yX/ 1A Signatur : File Number DRISCOLL, DENNIS P 3944 S 113TH ST TUKWILA. WA 98168-1911 TUSTISON, KENT A & ALIDA W 4023 S 114TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168-1914 CLARK, M VIVIAN 2427 NW NEPTUNE PL SEATTLE WA 98107 GAV I GL I 0 .ALBERT 4008 S 114TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168-1915 PHITSANOUKANE, SOMMAY 4217 S 116TH ST.' TUKWILA WA 98168-1969 • JOHNSTON, DONNA A 4110 S 114TH'ST TUKWILA WA 98168 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR BNRR PROPERTY TAX DEPT 777 MAIN ST #1206 FT 'WORTH TX 76102 "Th CAMPBELL, MICHAEL D % TAX TITLE PROP #16619 4001 HILLCREST AVE SW SEATTLE WA 98116 STEVENS, LOUIS A & ERMA L 4218 S 116TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168-1968 EVINGER, OLIVE ANN 31662 PASOE RITA SAN JUAN CA.92675 -KING COUNTY REAL PROPERTY DIV 500 KING CO ADMIN BLDG SEATTLE WA 98104 RITCH, LLOYD E & DORIS J 11616 42ND AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 DINGLE, HELEN 4115 S 114TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 FRITZINGER, MERRY 4219 S 116TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168-1969 tv • z .11•eriVW,,,,W,:rt,eMAr UNTERSEHER, ROSEMARY—. 4111 S 113TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168-1967 SALA, ARTHUR L 11624 40TH AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 RAMEY, CHARLES E 4104 S 114TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 ADDINGTON, ARLENE 4230 S 116TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 HELLSTROM & DILLON 211 NW 44TH SEATTLE WA 98107 DECKER, DEAN ' 11520 42ND AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168-1959 STATE OF WA DEPT OF TR REAL ESTATE SERVICES P 0 BOX 330310 MS 118 SEATTLE WA 98133-9710 f 'Nrthur Lee Jacobsc' 2215 East Howe Street Seattle, Washington 98112, USA (206) 323-0179 Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 1000 Tukwila, WA RECEIVED SEP • 51995 Guiviivw +va 1 Y DEVELOPMENT. August 30, 1995 Re: The proposed Tukwila Fire Station No. 53, planned for the River Bend property at 42nd Ave S & S 115th Street. The large giant sequoia tree near 42nd Avenue will be sorely squeezed by the construction of a combination return driveway / bicycle trail. Yes, the tree is able to endure such activity, but will be stunted. Right now it is about 80 inches in trunk diameter. The largest in Washington is 122 inches; the largest in,the British Isles 136 inches; the largest in New Zealand 168 ". These, of course, are planted specimens many hundreds of years younger than the titans in the wild Sierra ranges. Even if a 20 foot wide driveway has 5 feet of porous material near the tree, there will be injury to the roots, and not ultimately enough room for the trunk to grow as large as it might otherwise. I think the return driveway could be abandoned, by making the vehicles use the one main entrance, Although they would need to turn around and back in slowly..+.his loss of convenience would appear to be well offset by the station's other perfections. The eventual 42nd Avenue bicycle route, and the remarkable tree, would coexist peacefully. Thank you, 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. 26 27 28 BEFORE TEE COUNCIL, CITY OF TUKWILA IN RE: ) Appeal of the issuance of ) the following: Determination ) of Non - Significance, a ) Shoreline Substantial Deve- ) lopment Permit & Conditional ) use permit by either Staff ) of the Planning Commission ) ) Appellant. ) ) ) RECE1vED SEP 181995 cITyoF twnrsitinAZIA Case No. L95 -0027, L95- 0031,L95- 0030, Appellant's Memorandum In support of Notice of Appeal. INTRODUCTION Tukwila's Department of Community Development (DCD) has granted a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (MDNS), applied for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Conditional Use permit to construct Fire Station No.53 at 4202 S. 115th Street which the Planning Commission approved. This is a substantial development in a site which exhibits environmentally sensitive features. e.g., a steep slope, an unusual rock formation, trees, "a tree ", surface water, a class II wetland. It sits on the Osceola Mud Flow making it high risk in an earthquake, and there may be Indian artifacts. The buildings on the property have historical and cultural r 1 8 9 1Q 11 12 13 14. 15 16 17 18 19 20 2f 22 25 24 2S 26' 2f 28, • value, and there is a designated bike /ped trail path. Existing buildings are built on post foundations, and the there are no impervious surfaces in the 4 acres (roads, parking).except for the home's roof tops. The fire station has more than 6,000 feet of roof surface and twice this amount will be paved for driveway and parking. These omissions and misrepresentations render the Environmental Checklist void and unreliable and requires the lead agency (City of Tukwila) to withdraw the DNS issued. The lead agency shall withdraw a DNS if: (ii) There' is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal's probable significant adverse environmental impacts. WAC197 -11 -340 (30) (a) CM ZONING This is a residential neighborhood. The existing CM zoning is a sample of bad urban planning and miscommunication that causes detriment to the quality of life of the residents. The DNS can't treat this property as CM, instead it should address the existing use that is single family. The zoning in the new Comprehensive plan returns it to single family status and best use. �2 «.•, 1 IA 5 6 7 8 9 10 11' 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The importance of this part of the river for recreational use and its unique pastoral feel make the Allentown neighborhood an asset worth protecting for all Tukwilans and visitors. Tukwila's Tomorrow Citizen Committee recommended that the zoning for this site be single family which is it's best use and protects the quality of life of it's residents. See exhibit PUBLIC NOTICE A major goal of SEPA is to, "encourage public involvement in decisions that significantly affect environmental quality" (WAC 197- 11- 030(2)(F). But before the public can become involved in the decision - making process, it must be aware that a decision is being contemplated. SEPA requires the lead agency to utilize "reasonable methods" to inform the public of proposed actions that may affect it. The agency must use the SEPA public notice methods designated in the SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -510), which are: posting the property for site - specific proposals and publishing ...where the proposal is located. The agency would be unable to use other methods, such as mailing to those who have indicated an interest in reviewing SEPA documents. r 3 1,4t1fra041V36v: "dJe24"xYFETdL `WO... wA...V.V t. xr+A SL'0i..w.axuraos z z: ,oc 1w' ; U o O' ' WW( J t%1u.c W o: J. LL. <. D. a W ?f-:. ►- o: z O. .o H w w: H V LLB!. O. • o O 1 - .•2 -,3 IA 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The City of Tukwila has written its own SEPA procedures that. are inadequate and fail to achieve both the letter and the spirit of the SEPA law. Only three people attended the advertised Open House for the fire station. A function that should have attracted a crowd. Two residents living next two the proposed project came to the Planning Commission Hearing and one of them told me "I don't want a fire station but I do not have a choice." They left soon after without voicing any opinion. I have noticed an attitude of powerlessness, "a give up" when dealing with a project the present City Administration pursues. There were only two more people at this hearing; Nadine Morgan whom I notified myself. Mrs. Morgan represented the Duwamish Valley Neighborhood Preservation Coalition ( DVNPC) of which I was cofounder. DVNPC has been involved in this property for several years and had requested be kept informed. Mrs. Morgan had been at the site recently and did not see a posting of -this public hearing. Most people think that Tukwila requires posting a site that requires SEPA review, Shoreline or Conditional Use permits. I learned of the existence of a memo to King County from the City of Tukwila showing interest in this property for a fire station. I personally called four council members.at home and enumerated the serious reasons for which a fire station at this location was a 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 bad choice. I was assured by them all that the city had no intention of buying the property for a fire station. Knowing that the property was heading for re- zoning to single family I took a break. When months later I discover that the city had indeed purchased the property with the intention of putting in a fire station, I was devastated. I called the Department of Community Development and talked with Anne Shigenthaler and she referred me to Randy Berg in Public Works. I left a message for Mr. Berg and when he finally called me, I requested to be informed of everything relating to this site. Mr. Berg told me that it was Ms. Liddy who was now in charge of this project. Ms. Liddy got my message on the 18th of July, but waited till late on the 25th to leave a message on my machine. When I talked to Ms Liddy she informed me that the SEPA comment period expired on July 21, 1995. It is clear that Tukwila's methods of communication are not working in the best interest of it's residents and this city is failing on its obligation. to inform the interested public of this project. The only method used via a local newspaper was not a "reasonable method" as evidenced by the lack of public involvement. See exhibit A 5 r 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 LOCATION OF A FIRE STATION A.,TMC 18.64.050 sets forth the criteria to be used by the Planning Commission in granting a CUP. criterion. (1) states in full: The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated. The fire station proposed location is totally contrary to this criterion:. Truck traffic is currently prohibited in the access roads to the proposed site and gross vehicle weight is limited to 5 tons. Fire trucks are extremely heavy and can cause considerable wear and damage to the fragile river bank. Future fire truck traffic can only increase and so would the safety hazards. The width of 42th Ave. S and 115th St. is not adequate for two way traffic of vehicles, trucks, pedestrians and bicycles. These two roads have physical barriers to expansion and can not be made safe for bicyclists and pedestrians on their way to home or work. The lack of sidewalks, safe crossings and visibility of the routes from this site are such, that the question is not if but when a death will occur. 6 • JU; •.0 O!. 10 la w CD LL . w o; • • J1 _° .z • w w: 'U 0; • W W` LL H' Z; UN`. • 1 _' • i .2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROJECT SCOPE This project cannot be treated as merely a replacement of a existing fire station. It is in a new location and it is BIGGER. A fire station of this size (4 engines) significantly degrades the quality of life of area residents as well as reducing residential property values. The hours of operation of 7 days a week , 24 hours a day are not compatible with a residential neighborhood. The legislature recognizes that each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation of the environment. [1971 ex.s. c 109 2.] RCW: 43.21C.029 PROPERTY VALUE The property was appraised by a licensed real estate appraisal in 1992 at $250,000 including four small lots (useless) on the top of the hill. DVNPC gave $5,000 to the owners for an option on the property and spent several thousands more on required studies as well as countless hours. The City then refused to use any of these studies that had been done by licensed 7 f tSit1.811,9:^aS •dC!'+a�•'N4'S'lKrAt \� l�q+•.i•+. ^I.IYKtN •.. Skt.riN "W95 1 .2 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2t 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • professionals and paid for with taxpayers money, $4,000 directly from the City of Tukwila. The city bought this property for $125,000 and quoting Jim Gray the husband of one of the owners, "They stole it from us." King County charged them more the $2,900 in taxes in 1992 for the property. In 1990 the owners had a written offer of $340,000 with the condition that a street vacation be obtained. The residents of Allentown voiced a strong opinion against this proposal by presenting to the council over 260 signatures. SITE INSTABILITY This property and its access road's are on the. Osceloa Mud Flow which makes it a difficult site to build on because of the danger of liquefication in an earthquake. The Geo report says; "...we conclude that there is a moderate to high potential for liquefaction under a moderate to large earthquake." See exhibit B Todays technology may allow us to put buildings where none were possible before, but at what price? We cannot afford what Tukwila is expending to build in the wrong site. We can afford less the loss of human life, if in a natural disaster this costly fire station becomes landlocked. The geo technical report states; "the new 8 r ree 111 D: U oo' 00, w. N wo g.-J: co a Z F' 1- o Z.1- � 0, o co 0 1-; LI) u• i V. F-. • Z; Vco o z 1 -2 .,3 ,4 • 5 • 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2% 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 fire station is a critical structure that must remain functional during and following a moderate to large earthquake in the Puget'Sound Region." (more than 100 recorded) The cost of driving 50 foot piles, extra fill materials, and the high cost of labor, to make the site functional, could be spent on a better location. The geo tech. report advises that the station be located 50 feet from Poverty Hill because of the danger of a landslide. There is less than 50 feet between the . hillside and the river. See exhibit C TIDAL ACTION Tidal action plays a role in the stability of the bank of the river at the 90 degree bend where the fire station entrance is located. When the tide comes in, it slows the flow of the river, but the river water continues to move down the river channel. These two phenomena result in the rise of the river level. The NGVD of 1929 measures the river bottom at the location of 115th St. and 42 Ave. S., at 8 feet below sea level. High tide is 8.6 above sea level with gives at that point over 16' of water pressure against the coming river current. Then, when the tide goes out, the river channel is full of (a) "stacked up water and debris" caused by the incoming tide's slowing of the regular flow and (b) the 9 i (�i�.yAicuLL4vz Or, 11 �LiF'ELIRitLLiYY +/+Fk*fi�i+.y. �W "' " 1: "aVa.1w1' Ni.FUi mw U o; W 0' W = J H, ujO g Q; (O d �...• w z � 0 D o: o ff'. ▪ W; V. LL O wz U N O z 1 2 *6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -25 26 27 28 normal water volume present in the channel. Therefore, the river drains faster during the outgoing tide because it is dumping the extra load. This faster flow creates a stronger current that particularly impacts the 90- degree turn at the proposed fire station site. This makes the bank less stable and, over the long term, more likely to shift. See the difference in slope of historical photograph of the river bend. This puts an essential service, the fire protection operation, on a less dependable road than if the station was located in the normal commercial district, away from the river. See Exhibit C In addition, the presence of the weight of the fire trucks will hasten any change of the river bank at that point. If collapse is eminent in 10 years, the • presence of the trucks will make the collapse happen in less than 10 years. To the extent that banks become relatively soaked at high tide and /or during heavy river flow periods (as after rainy spells upstream,) then the banks will be more likely to subside (sink) under the weight of the fire trucks. River banks are not the place for heavy vehicles. It was not possible to measure the depth to ground water due to the use of drilling mud in the boring.(page2) Ground water was encountered at a depth of 12 feet in two borings drilled at the 10 f z • i- W.. • UO v� w J= F- . co w O; •g • • N cs I— _,. O: UO N Hi. w uJ • N; 1 z .2 3 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 • existing ing fire station in September 1992. The ground water level at the project site is expected to vary in response to the level of the Duwamish River and to seasonal variations in precipitation. Geo report page 3. BEST USE The best use for the property is single family. There is a total of one acre of dedicated but never built public streets and a total of 4 acres of which 3 acres are divided into more than 30 legal lots of record measuring in size 25'byj25'. Lots in Allentown are of similar dimensions and selling for an average of $23,000. With sewers coming into Allentown property values will be substantially higher. The City of Tukwila is in the great position of being able to sell a fourth of these lots, recuperate all it's investment and come up with a free park. A situation that most developers would find enviable. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION The city of Tukwila spent $50,000 on the commission of the book TUKWILA, Community at the Crossroads by local historian Kay F. Reinartz. I talked to Mrs. Reinartz, before she left for a long vacation in Europe and she said; "Those buildings are of 11 t 1 .2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .17 18 19 20 21 22 • 23 24 25 26 27 28 significant historical value to the community of Allentown and should be saved." She directed me to King County Historical Preservation Office so that I could inquire about nominating them as historical which action would stop the demolition of these homes. Because the property is within Tukwila and this City has failed to appoint a preservation board, I am unable to nominate it. The DNS statement; "There are no known historical buildings on the site" is ludicrous. They are not known because of our City's own negligence or lack of diligence in establishing a Historical Preservation Board. Because of the absence of a Historical . Preservation Board, we are also unable to receive any of the available federal and state funds to preserve our buildings while other cities are getting them. When a building has historical value it has to be judged in that context not it's state of disrepair. There are 5 buildings on this site; (1) possibly an Interurban railroad ticketing station, (2) a small bungalow, (3) what appeared to once be a mansion by the quality of the inside wood -work and now turned into a triplex, (4) behind the triplex covered with blackberries, there is a house so small that it appears to be a miniature two story play house. (.5) Then there is the home of Judge Frank Gooddale that lived in the 1920's in the Craftsman bungalow. Judge Gooddale had so 12 i z i1 Z. ° oc ; 00 cno, • J w N LL w0 g LL at. I-w _. o z� w wi Do' 0 ,. .O N; O Wtu, 1--V ~ • O Z` co w z L:. !4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 many people arriving on the Interurban train to get married,at his home that he was nicknamed "Marrying' Sam." After the judge's death his wife Mrs. Violet Gooddale continued as justice of the peace. You can read about that on page 159 of this book and also about how there was once "a red light district." See exhibit D. Most recently a documentary on Public TV called Street Wise (about a 14 year old prostitute who lived in the judge's house) was filmed on that site. The DNS statement is incorrect and exemplifies the problem with this City Administration's attitude. TUKWILA, Community at the Crossroads locates Judge Gooddale's house but the Tukwila Administration wants it destroyed. The DNS ignores the local history, then says the site has not known historical value and culture. They are using sloppy research as a basis for not knowing what they are destroying. Thus the City becomes a loose canon threatening community assets and not preserving them. INDIAN ARTIFACTS At this time, late 1995, construction of the new Tukwila community center up stream from this site and also in 42th Ave. S. has been stopped because of the presence of Native American artifacts there. Poverty 13 f 1 2 :3 ,4 • 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 • 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Hill that is the location of the Indian legend about the fight between the South and North winds, • inmediately west of the proposed fire station is an even more likely site for such archeological finds because; (1) it is only 1/2 mile from the location of . other artifacts, (2) it is sheltered by Poverty Hill, (3) it had a gentle slope into the river in early times. See old historical photograph in page 160 of the above mentioned book. (4) page 105 two maps (dates of 1899 and 1989) shows the Duwamish river before and after the course was changed. This 90 degree turn in the river has remained identical except for the bank eaten away from the force of the water runoff and the tides. See exhibit E. GEOLOGICAL VALUE On the very back of the property, blocking the unimproved 42th Ave. S. and in the path of the proposed bike trail, there is a rock formation of about 30' in height. This rock is made up of layers of rock that could be described as a flower bud. A low impact park on the site would allow both the preservation of this rock and its enjoyment. �uri`Snitvn���cf••lw. L`: �StlJ3Y :Ya4tlfYi-- .— _- _- �- '1.fitLliY � �HWaWw.ihp:tlnN /iik4e'+n`u[ 14 r z re o O' moo; W= u w o; � a; zf..; ;W w. V `a" • 1 2 •4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BIKE TRAIL The City of Tukwila on June 19, 1995 adopted the six year Washington Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and the unimproved right of way of 42th Avenue S. was designated as a bicycle route joining Interurban and Airport Way. For several years the Non - Motorized Transportation Committee, as well as the Duwamish Valley Neighborhood Preservation Coalition (DVNPC) has brought up the need for a connection through this property to Airport Way S. The designation of 42th Avenue S. as bike trail although nice, does not accomplish TIP's goals. TIP calls for cities to provide efficient and safe means of transportation to increase non - motorized traffic. Instead of 42th Ave. S, 115th St. should have been designated as bike trail since it is better suited Because the site has a class II wetland and the back of 42th Ave. S. has a steep terrain it is unsuitable for a bike trail. BIKE TRAIL GUIDELINES & SEPA The building plans call for the use of the unimproved 42th Ave as the driveway for the returning fire trucks to the station. k1.0'u'Je.'eSt :01491,9,444h .1.,;:a49 ✓r. 15 i 1 .2 3 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This bike trail cannot be used as a driveway for the 4 engine fire station returning trucks. First this is a public Street and as such all other vehicular traffic would have to be allowed use. Guide lines for dedicated bike trails in public streets call for a 5' space in both directions. Street's construction and • development are not exempt from SEPA regulations. This council knows of the existence of a Gigantic Sequoia tree, 20' from the toe of Poverty hill. The building permit proposes paving 15' of it to allow a 5' setback from the tree trunk. Arthur Lee Jacobson, the author of the book Trees of washin ton, has also written a letter to the Tukwila City Council. Mr. Jacobson points out the inadequate setback to protect the tree's growth and life because of the weight of the fire trucks and road fill. He says that this kind of tree can grow up to 30' diameter if left undisturbed. This proposed road comes too close to the tree. The written specks in the construction of the driveways for this project call for extra fill and compaction because of the wear and tear on the asphalt from the fire trucks turning and breaking. The tree roots may not survive this wear and tear. See EXHIBIT F. The safety of the people who will walk or ride in both directions in this route they have to share with the returning fire trucks is a concern. I am enclosing 16 l -2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a letter from the Non - Motorized Transportation Committee to the Tukwila City Council about the safety of this future trail and the historical trail along 115th St..and 42th Ave. S. along the Duwamish river. So the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as the adequacy of room for a proper trail, are both. concerns. During the Planning Commission hearing I brought up the lack of space for both the trail and truck traffic using 42th Ave. S. The Planning Commission was erroneously told by city staff that a retaining•wall could be build on the wetland because bike trails were exempt from SEPA. This is not so. A bike trail that is not in a public street needs 10 to 12 of width, a minimum of 8 feet paved surface plus 2' of clear space in either side. These kinds of trails cannot share space with motor vehicles. A retaining wall 'for a bike trail in a class II wetland would trigger a permit and SEPA review. The city cannot straddle the fence On this issue. Either they have a public road for all vehicles, or they have a bike trail. See exhibit G and H. HOUSING Five families lived in and have been displaced from their homes by this project. The DNS claim that 17 1 1 •2 .3 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 only three homes are involved is wrong because one of these homes has long been a triplex. There is a Federal law aimed to discourage cities from demolishing low income housing if federal funds are used in the purchase or later development of a property. These federal regulations are found in the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real property Acquisitions Act of 1978, as amended and Section 104d of the Housing and Community Act of 1974 as amended, which is commonly known as the Barney Frank Amendment. The uniform Act appears to have a maximum cap of $5,250 but this cap is removed by another section called Last Resort Housing.... states that the agency must pay whatever is necessary to provide replacement housing for . displaced persons for a period of 42 months, without regard to the cost." Patricia Peabody, King County Housing. Council member Joan Hernandez was right on when she said at the March 20, 1995 meeting about the federal law and the fact that Tukwila is not using those funds. The city of Seattle instead passed an ordinance by which they committed themselves to pay tenants living on real estate they buy, to the same compensation standards as if using federal funds. When the city of Tukwila using Open Space Bond and road funds displaced five families of their homes years 18 r 4. 2 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 back, no compensation was given to them. The residents of Seattle instead where given a sizeable amount. This funds are not given to the tenants to go and buy a car or big TV but are placed into an escrow account to help with the downpayment of a house or to make up the difference on the higher rent at the new location for several years. The DNS states that four families received $1,000 through the YMCA for relocation. These tenants got notices to vacate from their landlord and only after they came to the council asking for help, did the council act. The amount of 'help given to these low income Tukwila residents is a pittance compared to the federal compensation guidelines for displaced tenants. DEMOLITION COSTS When I asked the mayor and council to offer the previous homes that were scheduled for demolition to the public for moving, I received a warm response. But the 10 page legal document that people had to sign to bid on these homes made the whole process a sham while the City of Seattle's contract was only two pages. The City of Tukwila paid $16,000 to demolish the home at 130th St. while the City of Seattle received . $5,000 bid for two houses moved for a road improvement Igt.■ � Yilwtattn.k6ntR.f�tr�N�TVis�wY • .. 41.48 Mew 19 moZ : 2 JU 0 0: (no Wz: J H. w 0; a' =a' f- w. z1 111 uj U� ,O N; w. F- II 0 tll Z' U N, 0 I- o. z , 1 :? .3 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 project. The City of Tukwila is filling up the landfills and charging Tukwila taxpayers for it. SINGLE FAMILY HOMES Tukwila schools suffer from a very transient school population due to a shortage of single family homes that families can afford. We need every single home and be proactive on creating more home ownership opportunities. Tukwila history of demolishing needed housing is morally and fiscally irresponsible and as a taxpayer I strongly protest. There are state and federal monies available for TIP (bike /peds trails) but these tenants would have to be compensated first if the City does not want to forgo federal funds. This financial consideration alone can make the feasibility of a future bike trail impossible. RELIEF REQUESTED Based on the foregoing, the Appellants hereby request the following relief: A. That no demolition permit be given or alteration to the buildings take place until the City of Tukwila establishes a Preservation Board as mandated by the State Comprehensive Plan Guidelines. 20 .."' E( ri: i. M1k47;:. r .:i.YLfr£C..^�SiCALSY2rteY�Y:i ».ti tho.■ j. It s.�,»w�.... w... .wur .✓m uxav ___..,.: �. p ,. .. ... >.. U0 (/) 0 UJ U)W' -- 'J NIL;; W O u. =d W. I—O Z UJ Off' W w: 0 Z co: z 1 .2 .3 4 5 6 7 8 '9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 B. • A traffic study for the site and the two roads serving it addressing the following: Safety hazards associated with an•future increase in population and increases in regular residential traffic. Increase of fire truck trips when the station is working at full capacity (4 engines.) Compatibility of a 4 engine fire station with long existing bicycle route. Visibility of trucks leaving or returning to station. Turning radius required for the.coming and going of trucks to new station and if it can be accomplished without driving in the opposite traffic lane. Safety of bicyclists and pedestrians going to Airport Way S. and sharing narrow trail with returning fire trucks. C. A complete geo technical report of the behavior of the substructure that supports the roads leading to the proposed station during normal use and in a natural disaster. Possibilities that the existing house seating on top of poverty Hill and at the entrance to site, sliding and being damaged during construction of the fire station or during normal operations. 21 r ,4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Behavior of Poverty Hill and its effect on the roads and entrance to project site in an earthquake.' That a new threshold determination be required for a CUP for the subject site using the new information. Dated this 18th day of September, 1995. Appellant, Jackie L. Dempere 22 The houses know about riverside living. Even the modern weekend summertime places have learned. The old houses, the very old houses that were built of cedar shake and lodgepole by the first settlers at the turn of the eighteen- hundreds, were long ago jacked up and dragged back from the bank by borrowed teams of horses and logging oxen. Or, if they were too big to move, were abandoned to tip headlong into the water as the river sucked away the foundations. Many of the settlers' houses were lost this way. They had all wanted to build along the river's edge in those first years, for convenience's sake, to be close to their transportation, their "Highway of Water," as the river is referred to frequently in yellowed newspapers in the Wakonda Library. The settlers had hurried to claim bankside lots, not knowing at first that their highway had a habit of eating away its banks and all that those banks might hold. It took these settlers a while to learn about the river and its habits A while to learn about the river and to realize that they must plan their homesites with an acknowledged zone of respect for its steady appetite; surrender a hundred or so yards to its hungry future.• No laws were ever passed enforcing this. zone. None were needed. - -Ken Kesey in Sometimes a Great Notion 08:53:11 ` . • Y B(E�t�')�f ila • idli 5-T D1r� 3�epart°ment of Community Development John W. Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director reci' -0 -11 from Jackie Dempere on this project. She has requested .ceilings on all land use actions concerning this project. Her phone number is 33 -8539. AddressJackie Dempere 033 S. 128th St. 'ukwila, WA 98168 ould you be sure to send her information o,the coming BAR hearing. sandy a ca.td \„,9+ viAgl 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 R. 3 E. R. 4 E. • A recurrence of a lahar the size of the Osceola Mudflow would probably enter the Green River valley and flow to Puget ,unti through the Duwamish River valley because of modern nanges in flood-plain roughness. The Osceola Mudflow entered the marine Duwamish embayment of Puget Sound near Auburn. Submarine deposition of the flow occurred north of Auburn; de- put'.% were penetrated between 265 and 302 feet below sea level in well 22/4-35H2 (Luzier, 1969, p. 14)' . . te.t.'••••■ • ! • ft:a ham, Elt-C‘ vi- e) i t. • - . i ; . .. _ .344, entfk.... --- . ‘ . ; :Tv7v--. ...:•-■, It:. ..------ - - -.--r - . • . s.,.. i :. .. Ar-r-U-:+. -."."•..-;:f 5..Ahltrst • ' . • :: ' r.„14a3,:jf,f,c 1 .4 • - it f.,...., ...;„ ...._ ‘ -V-.- . -• - -- • / ......si ...• / • • • —.I i,,.. i .. • , • _. . . : •••.:::. : . ' ,..._....4; .....____I. .=.4. _... • .• • r i...÷ ‘ ..- '... '''. . ..s: I.1... C ... L.- . . " • 1 "'`'4....c: - onni:inch. Rirkt ...i; :_i ...;•..... :.,1 , . • • ••••• • P. or ••••• • .- PAN :•"„ .• • • (2 ", • •, • (AO*116• t" ••■■••1. • 1 tf*"?.....' • ...- • enith ;I- • ...,7 ,•".. • T----- 01 ... ..• .. :- Wood-nom: -- Beech Units of black, probably volcanic-mineral-rich sand were penetrated in wells drilled at sites shown downstream from the Puyallup-White River confluence. These pre-Electron units are either distal alluvial correlatives or lahar-runout flows from pyro- clastic flows and pyroclast-rich lahars. The age of a massive, vol- canic-mineral-rich sand seen in surface excavation at site X (in south Puyallup) is 2,320±120 radiocarbon years (Palmer and oth- ers, 1991). This date is remarkably close to the age of the pyro- clastic flow (2,350±250 radiocarbon years) described by Crandell (1971) in the south Puyallup River valley. Brow:3 Pr Point " \ - •-•••■•• _ • 7.; •■•,. • Z.; •••••••■ • • ." • • , •_ z z 00: 0: W 111; W X CD LL w 0' g 5 u.. x- z z ,D 0: :0 :0 1- 41 11,. 1- 0; 0: 1.-7. 0 I- Z _ .. • •r� i�. We recommend that a representative of our firm observe the placement and compaction of structural fill. A sufficient number of in-place density tests should be accomplished as the fill is compacted to provide a representative evaluation of whether or not the specified compaction criteria is being achieved. ' If shallow foundation support for the building is selected, we recommend that all footings be supported on a 2.5- foot -thick mat of compacted granular fill. The footing mat fill should consist of free - draining coarse (1 %- inch - minus) crushed rock or railroad ballast with a maximum size of 3 inches and containing less than 5 percent fines (percent by weight of soil passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus 3/4 -inch fraction). The crushed rock or railroad ballast should consist of sound rock and be free of debris and organic matter. The base of the rock mat should extend horizontally beyond the edges of the footings a distance of one -half the thickness of rock that will underlie the footing. Prior to placing the mat fill, the base of the footing trenches should be evaluated by hand probes only. Any disturbed zones indicated by the probing should be excavated to the depth recommended by a representative of our firm and replaced with footing mat fill. The mat fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in loose thickness. The initial lift should be compacted without vibratory effort to avoid pumping in the underlying soils. Each successive lift should be compacted to a firm, unyielding state as determined by visual observation using a vibratory roller or other suitable equipment. r�-7-SLOPE STABILITY The hillside above the west margin of the site has experienced some instability in the past. The instability is probably related to planes of weakness coinciding with the boundary between the bedrock known to underlie the hill and the overlying soil overburden. We believe that continued episodes of slope failure involving shallow slides will occur during the life of the project. If a minimum setback of 50 feet is maintained from the toe of the hillside to the nearest point on the building, the accumulated debris is unlikely to reach the building. FOUNDATION SUPPORT On a preliminary basis, we estimate that augercast concrete piles with diameters ranging from 12 to 16 inches and lengths of 40 to 50 feet could support downward loads of 30 to 70 tons. Pile penetrations must be such that all load- carrying capability is derived from the medium dense sand below the potentially liquefiable zone. As recommended previously, at least two borings should be drilled to sufficient depth to develop the necessary subsurface information for final design of the piles. If spread footings are used, we recommend that they be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for exterior footings. The bottom of interior footings should be at least 12 inches below finished floor grade. Individual spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Continuous strip footings should be at least 18 inches wide. Isolated and G e o E n g i n e e r s 6 File No. 0259 -030•R01 /021595 C •z 'a �z• 6U U- O. • N O' w =, J � Ili O` co �Q. t=.. w z �. 1--0: z� Do 0'A. • o f-' w w: Lt.o wz UN • .O z TUKWILA- -COMMUNITY AT THE CROSSROADS From before 1900 inw the 1920s large herds of cattle and sheep were regularly driven down the Duwamish Valley from Wenatchee ar.1 Ellensburg to the Frye Packing Company on Airport Way. The herdsmen traditionally stopped to water the animals at the bend of the ':1 in Duwamish near S. 116 St. At that time the riverbank sloped gently and the antntals safely walked to the water's edge to drink. Courtesy Mabel Nelson. the twentieth century. Early in the 1920s Frank Goodale, Justice of the Peace, made his home with his wife Violet down at the bend of the river. Many a young couple walked along the Duwamish River from the Interurban station to Goodale's house in their wedding finery and came back married for life. So many people carne from all over south King County to be married by Justice Goodale that he became known as "Marryin' Sam." Later, after Frank passed away, Violet Goodale took over as the Justice of the Peace and continued the family tradition of helping couples tie the knot. A community leader, Frank served as the Duwamish Fire District Ncr. 1 secretary for many years. As well as a place for happy events, the sharp bend in the river became the site of repeated tragedies over the years as many automobiles and trucks, traveling too fast for the road, landed in the river, with a number of the drivers drowning. 160 THE DUWAMISH IMPROVEMENT CLUB, 1915- 1916 --TO INCORPORATE OR TO NOT INCORPORATE A round 1915 the Duwamish Impro; ment Club•was formed. It immedt.trei; initiated action to incorporate the community as a fourth -class city. Through.iut the fall and winter. weekly mass meetings wet-, held discussing the pros and cons of incorp 'r.t tion under the chairmanship of Mr. Washtn- ton, with 0. H. Putnam keeping the minurc'• People from nearby communities carne to discuss incorporation. From Riverton came Morrison, Kaiser and Lewis. From Georgen came E. M. Harris, and Mayor Stevens came from Tukwila. Mr. Dobbs from Quarry provt.ie.1 expert information about the laws governtnt: fourth -class cities. The pro interests carried the November 11, 1915, vote with 28 for and 1 Z • W re i JU O 0 to W J I-' • u_ wO u- < D. _° w Z= H , I— O Z H. O -; C1 I- = U. I-- F- O Z w U -- O H- z OPENING THE VALLEY ELLIOTT HAS CHANGED SINCE 1599 FROM NOTE. THE SHAPE OF ELLIOTT OAY BAY DREDGING. TUKWILA CORPORATE -> LIMITS 1989 luurating the change in the course of the White and Green rivers. Original map by Patrick Brodin, drawn by Sharon Dibble. began to work its way up the Duwamish Valley. The disastrous flood of 1906 was used as one justification for straightening the Duwamish. Shortly after the flood the Port of Seattle issued the following statement: : is to be hoped that the lesson of the recent floods that have destroyed so much property and some life in the Duwamish and other valleys near Seattle will not be lost, bur that some earnest, aggressive and united action will be taken to prevent anything like that occurring again. The agitation for the straightening of the Duwamish that commenced some time back, and resulted in the appropriation of 105 •• . t• • 1• •Z 6 �F• . • JU cop • W • In u . • u. <i .= O: .Z i. S . ►- .Z W W�. :O • W W' I. 0 Z ,LLI co U—. Off" • ' .rthur Lee Jacobso��, 2215 East Howe Street Seattle, Washington 98112, USA (206) 323 -0179 RECEIVED SEP 5'95 CO1VNvwwi 1 Y DEVELOPMENT Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 1000 Tukwila, WA August 30, 1995 Re: The proposed Tukwila Fire Station No. 53, planned for the River Bend property at 42nd Ave S & S 115th Street. The large giant sequoia tree near 42nd Avenue will be sorely squeezed by, the construction of a combination return driveway / bicycle trail. Yes, the tree is able to endure such activity, but will be stunted. Right now it is about 80 inches in trunk diameter. The largest in Washington is 122 inches; the largest in.the British Isles 136 inches; the largest in New Zealand 168 ". These, of course, are planted specimens many hundreds of years younger than the titans in the wild Sierra ranges. Even if a 20 foot wide driveway has 5 feet of porous material near the tree, there will be injary to the roots, and not ultimately enough room for the trunk to grow as large as it might otherwise. I think the return driveway could be abandoned, by making the vehicles use the one main entrance, although they would need to turn around and back in slowly.4his loss of convenience would appear to be well offset by the station's 'other perfections. The eventual 42nd Avenue bicycle route, and the remarkable tree, would coexist peacefully. Thank you, ozAkL, c1744 fet,t412.v._ EX B .1-uj • 0;. i War (i) LL • J: IL Q. • _. • z 1-, w' �p . 0tn7 • `ui • z .'O~ z September 1, 1995 Mayor Wally Rants Council Members: Pam Carter Joe Duffle Jim Haggerton Joan Hernandez Allen Ekberg Dennis Robertson City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Mayor Rants and Members of the Tukwila City Council: We, the Non - Motorized Transportation, Advisory Committee for the City of Renton, continue to follow with interest the proposal to connect our neighboring cities to Seattle via a ped /bicycle trail along Airport Way. The trail route includes a section from Allentown to Airport Way, bypassing the dangerous Boeing Access Road. The trail would head north to Hanford Street /Martin Luther King, Jr. Way (the only level connection to Rainier Valley), and continue connecting to the proposed Chief. Sealth Trail, the 1 -90 ped /bicycle trail and into downtown Seattle. We understand a key piece of property along the route in north Allentown is under consideration to be used to locate a fire station. Community interests have brought to our attention.an alternative proposal for development of "Beaver Ben" park on the site in a manner more compatible with the proposed trail. The Renton Trails Committee requests you review the proposed land use in view of its compatibility with safe passage for ,pedestrians and cyclists along with your community values under historical,. shorelines and quality of life norms. Our goal is to achieve a Burke Gilman type trail providing safe passage for the children and adults who walk jog and cycle in and between our communities. Sincere) i John , Iler, Chairperson Renton Non - Motorized Transportation Committee cc: Phil Miller - King County Trails Transportation Stewart Goldsmith - Seattle Bicycle Coordinator Jackie Dempere City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 18, 1995 TO: Mayor Rants and Members of the City Council FROM: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director SUBJECT: Revised Staff Report for Fire Station Appeal Apparently some of the copies of the Revised Staff Report for the Fire Station Appeal, distributed on Thursday, September 14, were missing page 5. A copy of page 5 is attached. Please note there were no changes to page 5 from the original staff report circulated on Monday, September 11. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 vehicle access. The new fire station, at full capacity, will result in an increase of 16 trips being generated at this site. Emergency vehicle traffic is dependent on the number of emergency calls received. However, because the existing fire station will be eliminated and the present access is directed to S. 115th Street, the impact to the existing transportation system is negligible. These issues were discussed under CUP Criteria C. South 115th Street is not formally designated as a scenic drive or road. The proposed fire station will be improving S. 115th Street with a public sidewalk along a short distance between two proposed access drives. The project does not encroach on the right -of -way of S 115th Street. Concerns for sight distance from the driveway access points were also discussed and analyzed during review and again at the public hearing with the Planning Commission members. The applicant provided to planning staff, a photo montage of the sight view from the driveway location which demonstrated adequate sight distance for exiting trucks. Fire truck exiting was specifically located at the southeastern driveway which will have adequate sight distance to view traffic moving either direction along S. 115th Street, and allow safe entrance onto the street. This was discussed under Criteria 2 of the BAR report. On -site circulation was also addressed to insure that the pedestrian, auto and emergency vehicle traffic did not conflict. See Conclusions, Criteria C. of the CUP. 2.b. The location of a fire station in a site where the access may be cut off and equipment locked in the case of natural disaster. The proposed fire station site is not unusually susceptible to the potential effects of earthquake or other natural disaster. This site, and all of western Washington, is classified by chapter 16 -2 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), as Seismic zone 3 (with zone 4 being highest hazard) for earthquake hazard area. It is not located within a flood hazard area; nor is the access. Emergency buildings, such as fire stations are built to meet certain earthquake and other natural disaster standards to insure that the facility will function when it is needed most, during an emergency. The architect is designing the building, stormwater facilities and access routes to meet the standards for this type of emergency facility. 3. Inadequate application of the existing Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Plus cumulative adverse impacts on the wetland habitat from excessive noise and light. Compliance with the Tukwila Municipal Code was evaluated during the CUP and BAR review of the proposed fire station. The proposed project meets the requirements of the Tukwila Tree Ordinance (TMC 18.54) and Sensitive Areas Overlay (TMC 18:45). A tree permit has not yet been issued for this proposal and the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone will be specifically applied during the final building review process. 5 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development September 14, 1995 Mayor Rants and Members of the City Council Steve Lancaster, DCD Director John W Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director z �z w � J0 00 o0 J = H w w0 SUBJECT: Appeal of the decision of the Director of DCD to issue a DNS for proposed g Fire Station No 53 (File # E95- 0016). =a 1- w Z= F- 1- 0 ZF- w ui 0 u) 01- wW LI=0 wz U= 0 As stated in my memorandum dated September 18, 1995, the appeal of the Fire. Station No 53 Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) was not filed within the time period allowed for such appeals under the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC 21.04.280(b)). However, we have learned that recent amendments to the State Environmental Policy Act have revised state law regarding the timing of SEPA appeals. This change arguably . supersedes the appeal deadline requirements of the Tukwila Municipal Code, by providing_ that " Appeals of environmental determinations made (or lacking) under this chapter shall be commenced within the time required to appeal the governmental action which is subject to environmental review" (Section 204(2)(b), ESHB 1724). In other words, an appeal of a DNS now must be filed within the same time period as the related project decision; in this case the time period : allowed for appeal of the Conditional Use Permit and BAR Design approval. In light of this, and to ensure full Council consideration of all the issues relevant to this appeal, we are now recommending that the City Council not dismiss the appeal of the DCD Director's Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance. We are instead recommending that the City Council hear and consider the appeal, and deny the appeal based on the evidence. Attached is a REVISED version of my September 18, 1995 memo, incorporating an analysis of the DNS appeal. Changes to the original memo are shown by strike - throughs (deletions) and underlining (additions). Also attached is a new Attachment G, comprising the key environmental documents upon which the Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance was based. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 z CO UNCIL AGENDA Si NOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 9/18/95 S.L. ITEM NO. ';:',41;g4 rirnSII:1113rlypt.lr: ''. .:iWt;k:WA:,:.: ,.,,:p z.wmt,,, .niu;mss:44-,,wata:efe§0,In,1:,0p, ,.:.:;: :.::•';..,:::.VMAO., % .';;:1,60g6:katko:VIAMV:raga Maagt VA .f:0..t4:4•11tkg Md 0 0 t" . CAS Number: I Original Agenda Date Sept. 18, 1995 Agenda Item Title: Fire Station #53 appeal of the Design Review and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) decisions dated July 27, 1995, and the SEPA MDNS dated June 11, 1995. Original Sponsor: Council Admin. P.C., SEPA Official Timeline: City Council Public Hearing on Sept. 18, 1995. Sponsor's Summary: Appeal of SEPA MDNS, Shoreline Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Design Review approval for Tukwila Fire Station #53 at 4202 S. 115th Street. Recommendations: . Sponsor: Committee: • Administration: P.C., BAR and SEPA Official F. Memo from Steve Lancaster, June 15, 1995 Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): -,...-, ..f....,:s.:,...s.,..,•o•,....,,,W.<-0,,:w..,,P,<:.,,,,,:p%v-',,,,,,Ip:'.',.'',',,:,:•'',.' .,..?:?:::.§..iVf•.:.'WW,,,qW.K.::•::::p, tX10::..;ft.f...-...2:VV.V.V.P.:',MVZ::: .=;:s.ois,v.,•'.;:wK,4:p.,•,;::::•i. • ''...,, - - : 0,10.114:!;04.1iMko.,......1,-, ,;.r..v.z:::.,•,i,.. ''' - ,.:, :g?„444,:•APe.:k0;'..A4'..2,,1 -'0,:::•'": .•:''.4iM'M,,j4.,;;;:0;•.F$;.4.0.:e•:.;t: , ay.:4,1% '<;:..,.,o..2:,', 4 *.,.....'n04......,4,• . .. o. ..:,.s. ,..,,,,:—...,,...f.s, . Meeting Date Action 9/18/95 A. Revised memo to Mayor Rants from Steve Lancaster, September 14, 1995 B. Notice of Appeal, August 7, 1995 C. Summary of the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review minutes, July 27, 1995 D. Staff report to the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review dated July 27, 1995 E. Letter from Landscape Architect, Dale Dennis, to applicant, Randy Berg, June 30, 1995 F. Memo from Steve Lancaster, June 15, 1995 G. SEPA Environmental Review Documentation (Checklist, Evaluation, MDNS, etc.) *0.fr.-..W.v.;:,...w.„,,,,,A1 ", :.., j..W.4•Mft siWAIM,,,a: WA-c-in.:PMZU*5"Mteeks,;.$.4...k,'Zw;;f:, -.'"VeRVI_OZASMOMAPIACK,WAMPc AO .461-Ww,e0, .0..4...si,4py:^,m., 4. - ,:3:, ',•••,W,,,,,kw,p,' APPENDICES Wageir§.-Za.e.M;M`KftekkIN441WAIMM.W.WAidan0 Attachments Meeting Date 9/18/95 A. Revised memo to Mayor Rants from Steve Lancaster, September 14, 1995 B. Notice of Appeal, August 7, 1995 C. Summary of the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review minutes, July 27, 1995 D. Staff report to the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review dated July 27, 1995 E. Letter from Landscape Architect, Dale Dennis, to applicant, Randy Berg, June 30, 1995 F. Memo from Steve Lancaster, June 15, 1995 G. SEPA Environmental Review Documentation (Checklist, Evaluation, MDNS, etc.) • OISIDAWATIWORSOMIII0PNWPNAMOMMIOYM:11143"Zif*Nfvffigeizsa,0004..........n.**mmr...oftwfre.......e.noum...s.10,fethoufAtztvimf)1013,1Pmnt.ttrtviseratfrrzt•MnitintSr/Vera.MA.."Ig^'.10n,W&PAYWfrWV,IWIF,',711:01WIr z z re 0 (.) 0 CO CI! LU • —J wo u.; 2 a < E.0. • 1- La o ZI- 0—' ui '2 a :C3 'ILI f z: w Ii t) • o z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development REVISED MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Rants and Members of the City Council From: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Date: Scptember 18, 1995 September 14, 1995 Subject: Appeal of the;:decisions of the ;Planning Commission,. Board of Architectural! Review, and the Director of the Department of Community Development; Director, relating, to proposed Fire. Station No 53. Steve Lancaster, Director HEARING DATE: September 18, 1995 FILE NUMBER: #L95 -0046 APPELLANT: Jackie Dempere REQUEST: Appeal of SEPA Determination of Non - Significance File # E95 -0016 Appeal of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit File # L95 -0027 Appeal of BAR Design Approval File # L95 -0030 Appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031 LOCATION: 4202 South 115th Street STAFF: Steve Lancaster, Director of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 C.)'; of o: cnw W == 1-t wo mow;. Ho .Z �.. 'U o to ;w w' H V4 N. oF' z ;. FINDINGS Background ::On'June 11, 1995, the Director of Community Development issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the proposal to build a new fire station (Fire Station #53) at 4202 South 115th Street. This MDNS was issued under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and includes five;` (5) mitigating conditions, as follows: 1. In order to preserve and protect the existing 80" Sequoia giganteum /Giant Sequoia tree, a porous pavement system shall be included as part of the road on the west side of the existing 80" Sequoia tree to allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. The reinforced plastic product Geoblock shall be installed for a width of 5 feet and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. 2. Landscaping and development within the right -of -way of 42nd Avenue S. shall be designed so that future development of a bike path can be readily accommodated. 3. Best Management Practices (BMPs) , as defined in Tree Regulations [TMC 18.54.040(2)], shall be employed in protecting all existing trees to be retained. The delineated wetland and the buffer areas shall be protected with temporary fencing during all construction processes. The Fire Department will be required to pay a proportionate fair share of sewer improvements for the S. 116th/42nd Ave. S. 8 inch sewer line. Subsequently, on July 27, 1995 the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and the Board of Architectural Review( BAR) conditionally approved the project design for the proposed fire station. Conditions imposed by the BAR are as follows: 1. A bike rack shall be placed near the entrance to the fire station. 2. Relocate and screen the transformer shown in the front yard area. 3. The applicant shall contact the Tukwila Arts Commission requesting design and location recommendations for a commemorative sign of the "Battle of the North and South Wind ", a Duwamish Indian legend, and identifying the fire station as Beaver Bend. 2 4. The fire station sign shall be approved by the Board of Architectural Review. Review Process This is a quasi-judicial process. All information for the City Council's decision must be submitted at the public hearing. The City Council shall affirm, deny or modify the decision's being appealed. No information source carries more weight than another, whether it be the Planning Commission, BAR, applicant, appellant, or staff. Appeal On August :7, :1995,. Ms. Jackie Dempere filed an appeal of the issuance of the Determination of Non- Significance; of the issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit; of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and of the Design Review approval' for the proposed fire station. The appeal of the Determination of Non - Significance was not filed within the time period allowed for such appeals by the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). TMC 21.04.280(b) requires that all such appeals be filed within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the decision. In this case, the appeal was not filed until fifty -seven (57) days after the decision (MDNS) was issued. However, recent amendments to the State Environmental Policy Act provide that appeals such as this are to be commenced within the same time period required to appeal the related government decision (Sec. 204(2)(b), ESHB 1724). Arguably, this new provision supersedes the appeal period stated in TMC 21.04.280(b), and would allow the appeal of a DNS to be filed any time prior to the expiration of the CUP or BAR approval appeal period. In light of this, the City Council should hear and decide the appeal of the DNS for the fire station proposal. In doing so, the City Council must accord the determination of the City's SEPA Responsible Official (the DCD Director) "substantial weight" as required by state law (43.21C.075 RCW) and by City Code (TMC 21.04.280(d)). The appeal of the . Shoreline :Substantial Development Permit was not properly filed. Appeals of such permits must be filed with the Washington State Shorelines Hearing Board, RCW 90.58.140 (6). The City Council has no authority to; hear such appeals:. The appeals of both the Conditional Use Permit and the BAR design approval were filed within ten (10) days of the Planning Commission and BAR decisions. Under the provisions of TMC 18.90.020, the City Council must review and either affirm, deny (overturn) or modify these decisions. In doing so, the Council must consider the BAR and CUP decisions according to the criteria upon which those decisions must be based, as set forth by TMC 18.64.050 (CUP) and TMC 18.60.050 (BAR). The following provides a detailed analysis of the grounds for appeal as submitted by Ms. Dempere (see page 2 of the Notice of Appeal, Appendix B.). Specific grounds cited in the appeal are listed in italics, with an analysis of each point immediately following. 3 Analysis 1. The, inadequate "disclosure and lack of disclosure of the adverse impacts associated with the proposal. The potential for adverse environmental impacts was thoroughly disclosed and evaluated through preparation and critical review of the following documents (see appendix G). Environmental Checklist, dated May 31, 1995. ;; '' Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Fire Station No. 53, dated February 15, 1995. ;.: Report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated February 20, 1995. 41 . ::',` Fire Station No. 53 - Wetland Summary Report, dated March 15, 1995. Addendum to report, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Services, dated June 21, 1995. Environmental Checklist Review, dated June 30, 1995. ` . Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance, dated July 6, 1995. . Environmental documents were reviewed by the Planning and Building Divisions and by the Public Works, Parks and Recreation, and Fire Departments. The comments of these departments and divisions were reviewed prior to issuance of the Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance. Following issuance of the MDNS, public notice was published and copies of environmental documents were sent to the Department of Ecology. No negative comments were received. Sfigiett- 0)141.3 State law clearly requires that procedural determinations by the SEPA Responsible lefts P,A� P 111.) :Official, such as issuance of an MDNS, "shall be entitled to substantial weight" (43.21C.075(3)(d) RCW). Similarly, the Tukwila Municipal Code states that issuance of a MDNS or other procedural determination by the City's Responsible Official "shall carry substantial weight in any appeal proceeding" (TMC 21.04.280(d)). This means that an appellant carries a heavy, burden of proof. In this case, the appellant has offered no substantial evidence to support her assertion that the disclosure of adverse impacts was inadequate. On the contrary, the record shows a thorough disclosure and evaluation of impacts: 2. Inadequate conditions and lack of conditions imposed upon the project to mitigate adverse impacts, including but not limited to: a. The failure to require a traffic study where this project will encroach a Scenic Drive Road and protect the safety of Tukwila residents and non - residents who use the roadway for work or pleasure. Traffic issues were addressed during the SEPA review and review of the conditional use permit and design review. The new fire station will be replacing an existing fire station which is located a few blocks south and uses the same road for existing emergency 4 .z • c4 • U O, • o' w= J F-: w 0- J =a w • z �. zO •U c' ;0 ,w 0' Z. ui N: z • vehicle access. The new fire station, at full capacity, will result in an increase of 16 trips being generated at this site. Emergency vehicle traffic is dependent on the number of emergency calls received. However, because the existing fire station will be eliminated and the present access is directed to S. 115th Street, the impact to the existing transportation system is negligible. These issues were discussed under CUP Criteria C. South 115th Street is not formally designated as a scenic drive or road. The proposed fire station will be improving S. 115th Street with a public sidewalk along a short distance between two proposed access drives. The project does not encroach on the right -of -way of S 115th Street. Concerns for sight distance from the driveway access points were also discussed and analyzed during review and again at the public hearing with the Planning Commission members. The applicant provided to planning staff, a photo montage of the sight view from the driveway location which demonstrated adequate sight distance for exiting trucks. Fire truck exiting was specifically located at the southeastern driveway which will have adequate sight distance to view traffic moving either direction along S. 115th Street, and, allow safe entrance onto the street. This was discussed under Criteria 2 of the BAR report. On -site circulation was also addressed to insure that the pedestrian, auto and emergency vehicle traffic did not conflict. See Conclusions, Criteria C. of the CUP. z W ce UO: N p; rn w w =. w o' u. a:. cn E- w_. I- O: Z� w w. moo. 2:b.. The location of a fire station in a site where the access may be cut off and equipment .'o locked in the case of natural disaster. w w' I U, � O _Z w U=2 I I' z The proposed fire station site is not unusually susceptible to the potential effects of earthquake or other natural disaster. This site, and all of western Washington, is classified by chapter 16 -2 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), as Seismic zone 3 (with zone 4 being highest hazard) for earthquake hazard area. It is not located within a flood hazard area; nor is the access. Emergency buildings, such as fire stations are built to meet certain earthquake and other natural disaster standards to insure that the facility will function when it is needed most, during an emergency. The architect is designing the building, stormwater facilities and access routes' to meet ,the' standards ,for this type of emergency. facility. Inadequate application of the existing Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Plus cumulative adverse impacts on the wetland habitat from excessive noise and light. Compliance with the Tukwila Municipal Code was evaluated during the CUP and BAR review of the proposed fire station. The proposed project meets the requirements of the Tukwila' Tree Ordinance (TMC 18.54) and Sensitive. Areas Overlay (TMC 18.45). A tree permit has not yet been issued for this proposal and the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone will be specifically applied during the final building review process. 5 • Prior to the public hearing on the CUP and BAR, the Director of Community Development authorized use of the "20% canopy coverage method" of tree replacement, as permitted under TMC 18.54.120(b). (See Appendix F.) Factors supporting use of the 20% canopy method include the large number of trees on the site, and the fact that half of the existing significant trees are actually a hedge of overgrown ornamental holly trees. The landscape plan meets the 20% canopy replacement requirement as discussed in CUP Criteria B., by providing 38 replacement trees, 14 wetland enhancement trees and 22 trees which are required by shoreline regulations. The subject property was chosen for the Allentown fire station site partly because the existing Type 2 wetland would then be placed under public ownership. Wetland impacts were addressed in CUP Criteria B. No development is proposed within the delineated wetland boundary or buffer area. The Type 2 Wetland normally requires a 50 foot buffer and commercial structures are required to be setback from buffer areas a minimum of 15 feet. Wetland buffer may, however, be reduced if no adverse impact to the wetland will result, TMC 18.45.040(c)(4)(A). The Director permitted the applicant to reduce the buffer to 35 feet only in the area where the hose tower and condensing pads are located (see Appendix F). The result is still a 50 foot distance .between the wetland and the proposed structure because of the 15 foot building setback from the buffer. The buffer reductions reduces the buffer by only 600 square feet in area. In addition, the reduced buffer area, is enhanced with riparian vegetation as indicated in the landscape plan (Appendix D). With these mitigations, the impact of noise and light on wetland habitat will not be significant. 4 The loss of five low income housing units and inadequate compensation of its displaced low income tenants. The subject property has four, not five existing houses. Three of the four existing houses were occupied prior to the City purchase of the property. No specific criteria of the CUP or BAR require compensation to displaced tenants, and therefore this issue is not a valid point of appeal. However, to off-set the impact of displacement, the City provided these residents financial assistance for relocation through the YMCA. S ; Disregard for previous citizen input and of the recommendation for single family zoning of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizens Committee and Planning Commission for the property. The property is currently zoned CM, Commercial Manufacturing.: Land use applications such as those associated with the proposed fire station must be considered under the zoning in effect at the time of application and decision. Fire stations are allowed through a conditional use permit in the CM zoning district. For that matter, even if the property were zoned single family, a fire station could still be allowed as a conditional use [TMC 18.12.050(5)]. This issue does not apply to any of the decision making criteria for the BAR or CUP and therefore is not a valid point of appeal. 6. The lack of protection of architectural and historical significant buildings of a neighborhood as mandated by the Comprehensive Plan Guidelines. Four houses, a garage, a barn and four out - buildings exist on the property. These are proposed to be demolished to develop the proposed fire station. None of the structures have been named to an official list of architectural or historical significant structures. Therefore there is no requirement to preserve the buildings. 7. The impossibility of providing proper buffers of surrounding single family homes from a fire station activity. Fire stations are required to obtain a conditional use permit to locate within any zoning district, primarily due to the noise and transportation issues associated with such facilities. These-issues are looked at closely, especially when . a station is located close to single family residences. The subject site is 3 acres is size. The proposed building is setback from the street and located in the center of the property, lessening the noise impacts to both the street and neighboring properties. Many of the existing trees will be retained on the site and additional trees will be planted to provide adequate vegetative buffers on all sides of the property. Buffering issues are discussed under the BAR criteria (3). After considering these issues, the BAR required that the transformer proposed for the front yard be relocated and screened. Conclusion j The record of the environmental review conducted under SEPA File # E95 -0016 clearly demonstrates that the potential environmental impacts of proposed Fire Station No. 53 have been adequately disclosed and evaluated. 2.) The appeal of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit File # L95 -0027 cannot be heard and decided by the Tukwila City Council. Such appeals must: be filed with the :Washington Shoreline Hearing Board. 3.) The record of :BAR Design: Approval File # L95- 0030 clearly demonstrates that the BAR properly applied the decision criteria applicable to design approval for the proposed fire station. 4.) The appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031 was properly filed within the appropriate time period. 5.) The record of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031 clearly demonstrates that the BAR properly applied the decision criteria applicable to design approval for the proposed fire station. 7 z • • z,. • -I C.) o O; CO Nw. wI r H- LL; 0; 111, •• • w U ; O N; w 10 F- u-O • lil Z. U � O •z • Staff: Recoimendation 1.) , Support the Board of Architectural Review's decision and deny the appeal of the -BAR design' approval,' File • # L95 70030. 2.) Support the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95-0031 Support 'the DCD Director's issuance of the Mitigated: Determination of Non - Significance and deny'. the appeal of SEPA File # E95 -0016. r 544Y74:.:*d,:::1.1.' .ontrol No. Epic File No. err- 001 ip Fee: $325 Receipt No. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: New Fire Station 53 2. Name of applicant: City of Tukwila 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 433 -0179; Randy Berg • Date checklist prepared: May 12,1995 5. Agency requesting checklist City of Tukwila • Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction is planned to begin October 1,1995 and continue into June 1996. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Level one hazardous material site assessment, Level one asbestos survey, Wetland investigation and deliniation • Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHELrLIST 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Street Vacation, Lot Consolidation, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Board of Architectural Review Approval, Building and Construction Permits. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternates of your proposal and should not be summarized here. The proposal is to construct a new fire station to replace existing Station 53. The new station will be approximately 6200 square feet. Site improvements will include parking for 15 cars, and complete, landscaping around the staion. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located in the City of Tukwila, at the corner of 42nd Ave S. and S. 115th St. The address is 4202.S. 115th St.; all laying within Section 10, Township 23 Range 4, W.M., King County Washington. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? The Site is not designated as environmentally sensitive, but it does include an onsite wetland and adjoins a adesignated steep slope area, and is across 115th from the Duwamish River. ce 6R UO: Nw w =; J w 0' tea'- z Ic z a, gyp'. off'' w w. H F- 11. O; :V 0 z ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The Site is flat. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The maximum slope is approximately about 2% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The site soils are sandy silt common to the Duwamish Valley bottom land. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the imtnediate vicinity? If so, describe. No e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Between 700 and 1000 yards of structural fill will be required under floor slabs and driving surfaces. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction,or use? If so, generally describe. No About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? About 14.5% of the site will be covered with impervious surface. Page 3 41a z _Jot ' CO 0 Ww J CO I: w 0; g J. LL.Q.. a 1-; I-0 z� w! 0 Ni 01_1 111, v; z. ENVIRONMENTAL CHh� .LIST h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary erosion control will be employed . during construction as required. Following construction, the site will be either impervious or vegetated. . Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. There will be dust and exhaust emissions during construction. • Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Water trucks will be used as standard dust suppression during construction. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The Site contains about 1.5 acres of wetland and wetland buffer. The Duwamish River passes within 200 feet of the Site. z r4111 ui 00 10 Ur 1111 :. N U.; w0 1LQ d �w i F.; o z D • 0. 0O co; i0 W UJ' 1--. — z, 0 N z :i;aV1:U'�.H:i;tu;; ' .�Zir..rnirc' ari x:�.+dar .: aL.v:;.:c..i..✓.Sts „ uc.., _. .3'b rata u^°u�YZtiht+F:.d3S'- ('. M: licuihn »3�G�SSSFl•2:+�iBn:ItEdu ENVIRONMENTAL CHELL.LIST Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, some work will be within 200 feet of the Duwamish River, but no work is planned within 40 feet of the river bank. In addition work is planned just outside of the 50 foot wetland buffer. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. .. ..:zL'L......wG:1;4M}l;vroil��l iifi�y. L\ : MV.:. 7YJ: Go' 3 ✓ca'nMarifl£Yrs:J.:WC.'rue�:.•F .Y awe. riM S_�'m Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEF. _LIST b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so,- describe Storm Water will be gathered into catch basins, ran through an oil water separator and bio- filtration swale and discharged into the wetland, where it will eventually drain to the river. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: A storm -water drainage system that meets King County Design Standards is proposed. Page 6 _..�iY+;tCid c:tisiis Si:4:`vsi Lnn,. 'F:+I.�`.i:al�r14••°,.yytii:l`. ,• <*"`vn;.:L'.�L's .i .. •'t:r rt:fh.= uc:i..i u:,r ti. ^:,w • vs,.r ax.:G^J+,<,:�s:L.r•`�cu+.c ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen; other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Trees, brush and grass will be removed to accommodate contruction of builing and site improvements. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The Proposal seeks to preserve as many onsite trees as possible. Property restoration will include seeding and planting of trees and shrubs. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds:. hawk, songbirds, migratory water fowl, other: Mammals: raccoons, squirrels, small rodents, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: Other: List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, the nearby Duwamish River is the site of annual salmon migrations. Page 7 z re w -1 C.) U 0., W =. J LL w0 gag' z r- o' z�-: m D o -'1 111 w iii N, o� z.. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. 6. Energy and Natural Resources • . a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for ' heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The proposed building will be heavily insulated, and the furnace, airconditioner and appliances will be energy efficient. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. ) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. u " "riiL:'•'_ apt;: _ ..._ :1:+' :7iG`:a:i!'vw:xz- ta�cttid:i:t:�:3xctJ.:�t�:wwtt aaxi�' e... +.t - ENVIRONMENTAL CHE1/4....LIST • 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise generated by the construction equipment will occur on a short term basis. Fire engines and sirens will cause some level of increased noise when the project is completed. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Restrict hours of construction to comply with the City's noise ordinance. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site currently used as single family residences. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. The existing buildings on site include 4 houses, one of which is derilict, a garage, a barn and 4 sheds. ▪ Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all of the existing structures will be demolished. . What is the current zoning clas.:ification of the site? C -M.. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site ?_.. _ - - Light Industrial If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. • No. Page 9 �~z �.W • UO N0 WW. • W o' u. Q. = Wa , F-. .12 H- Z ►- 11J tju U 0'; • • wW. • • -o O~- z. ENVIRONMENTAL CHEL"LIST 1• k. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? About 12 fire fighters will work at the proposed station. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 3 residential units were occupied before the City purchased the subject site. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Each displaced household has been offered $1,000 in relocation assistance. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed design is residential in scale and detailing. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing? None c. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. four low income units will be eliminated. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 6 D, 00 0. CD J w g Q; fa 0, _° t- :.z Z 2 Ps o; ,o-1 = U LL o • Z, U (1)' 0 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what-is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The proposed hose tower will be approximately 42 feet tall. Exterior materials will be wood siding and metal roof. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 4;.1't471",W, OI`11,1i9= 1,:t.e. d+..« ttE%VSt Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL CHEL..LIST 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. Proposed measures to reduce or control Iight and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. c. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Duwamish Park and the. Green River Trail are within 1/4 mile of the Site. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. z; a: w 2; o o; co w 11,0i 2 g.J. F_w. Z o�. U.. ~f z, S... 0 :z ENVIRONMENTAL CHEL,LIST c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The proposal is a public street. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, the nearest bus stop is about 1 /8th mile away. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The project will include 15 parking spaces. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes, the project will include inprovements to unimproved 42nd Ave S to provide access to the site for a drive through apparatus bay. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Yes, the Burlington Northern rail yard is directly east of the subject site. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. . This_projec't.willgenerate 16 trips per day. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. g.' 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No increase is expected. Page 12 a • i re Lij J U . O; o': 'W w J_ w O: wa 1,1 z �. z0 w a . D: oN ,w W; �H V� 0 z. w co, :o'' z ; ENVIRONMENTAL CHEL._.LIST b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity from Seattle City Light Gas from Washington natural Gas Water and sewer from the City of Tukwila The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature( Date Submitted: 'PI AY.) 3) `f ?7V ` vals . .Yer:a..; i. ENVIRONMENTAL CHI. LIST D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the foregoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental information provided and the submitted plans, documents, supportive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objectives of the proposal? Replace the existing Fire Station 53 which will result in enhanced emergency service. z c42i ijj U: 0 O; CO 0 cnw WI . What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? co o w The existing station could be renovated and updated. 2 g. a D. v; w. z1- z�, Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use v Policy Plan? O N; o No = Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are z None. o I-{ z.... 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: Due to the cost of renovating the existing station it is more economical to replace it. The new station will also provide opportunity for future expansion. Page 14 • EXPLANATION: 1S ECOLOGY—USTED SITE 0 2000 Notes: 1. The locations of the sites shown are approximate. 2. Site identification numbers correspond to the site numbers discussed in the text. 4000 SCALE IN FEET Reference: USGS 7.5 topographic quadrangle maps Des Moines. Wash.' and 'Seattle South. Wash..' both photorevised 1973. Geo ,Engineers VICINITY MAP AND ECOLOGY—LISTED SITES •FIGURE 1 .; • 'f~.1000€,;11,M,It ..A1,2_,...S2,__''Atter,ry..-Prilr.,;vmensIvol...,..strrproclyymemereg2R-rmr4p.vim.Arrr.roor.msff4. inlorik,wrxrfAtow..,m4,...,01.,,,,,,,wor,:;qmrtrtrIttrMtettr..;;T•Ptret.;!!#!":4.4";;ItIr;,!Itf'.W%*".1.)?,flMIM ... .••• ••••••• rho a is• C,.1• 004. C.•• 42nd - Residential - .64 ) \ tv...«.......- 41) Aben ed Wedding Chapel I• I 4 41 \ \ 1-4 44▪ \ 44. 104•• 1 4 - - ., , , , . . , -, I , Rental ,11 C.66.16rp_ House ,....% \ t \ t w• \ \ ` , ‘1508 .. 10 T. -1 1.....3 (3, Ul V4),1( 1 \ i 1 ‘1 ., 11 \ Septic / TP-3 , t Drums 1 \\m Tank .,,s file ...i M.o./ • 'and Tires 11520 a r 21?;r13. -2 it, Riverside Interiors \ \ . 2 i':.■:.:%.% r ....• % . 1 1 (Carpet Sales) \ k ' .ir.I.:. • a ..*:r •.• 1 4 T. 1, ttrTnot \ f.... ' 0'. .•• .......-..4 • Drums erig (:)1\71:1:::.. ir. e• 11.66 kiv II 1.4 iv Debris , 1 •• C•104r0 ...‘ P/1 tr 0'0 • e Imo aos old 0.04 .1 Cr. 11/11/11 • /.4.7110•0./... Residential - I/1• • C 01 Cr. 4.4 11. Ft 35 C. LS/ 1/412 14! 44.140. Rental House 4200 11 C15. Ore/ 34.14.4 Rental House 4210 PK 10' % 1%0101 I Hillside 1 161 Co. 401 23. 40. 13 rz, • 1.11 I 4.1.4 0.30 f *I Cr 11•4• • • Reference: Drawing entitled 'Boundary & Topographic Survey of C.D. titiman's Meadow Gardens Addition .3, for the City of Tukwila; by kwin Engineering. dated 02/07/95. Note: Details of adiacent properties are not drawn to scale. 7.2 --•• .4 Ave • 330.41 •So.w.1.44 • • • • • 1146.664 3.*C•110. ..••• I 't Apartments ruck k Trotters', 3 lir 164.446.6) 1.4.6 1-66.• le •01 1 Abandoned House tem...04 V••• 0 0 141.11:44•••• • rad ., le • % Cowals C.14 14.1 114 0.00 0110 • / \ . \-.1.11•164.1.066.61 • 185• 161.46666.61 614. 011%411.64.1 . 7. • 1.6114344,, j 0 2 c‘,. • es .94.0./s2,... 11 .. %411464 • i4 Vet 0144:44.„ / 4 ./ 11%•11.6.D4C411.6.444. eM4146 \ 110 166.4444..6.61 1.,or Cos.44406not CI 8 203.11. 06111011.71 1610104 Os. .4000 .."111.1W Cyctono fence l“.1.12sosbOoo loft 1 I. IS. 11•41 101 1.41. 1 le IZ laeNtIve, OWL th 1•10 1 1• IS. 1.4.1.. 44.4 II. 40 4' CO. 10.4.• C.4.6. 44045.4 f• Cflpel 0•6111.• OM.. 0. A Ater/04 4. I•• /NI 0.04 1144.11.4 • W.I. 11 .9 444.4.. 44.4. N. 4. ItIng C..4I1 164•6164146. • 00CC1145 .1141 4.. 4.14444 4164 1.14: 44. 10040114 •11. Svuth 11414 110.4. 44• 101111101 6116 54616 1130 11..1. Ls, 61160 ..14 04e4 SCAM I*. SY EQTSiTTSZ■1 0 rs JO 40 EXPLANATION: TP-1*TEST PIT P o ••• ••• • CO3 ••,..4 Geo,,Engineers SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 • . • • ' . G e o E n g i n e e r s • RECEIVED FEB 211995 PUBLIC WORKS File No. 0259 -030- R04/021595 W 6 —s C.) U 0•. N 0 W =' SQ u w 0: gQ W ZO W LLI; U0 ,0 -; ,0 I—• W, tv 1— — W 0. Z. OI Z February 15, 1995 City of Tukwila Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Randy Berg Geotechnical, Geoenvironmental and Geologic Services GeoEngineers, Inc. is pleased to submit four copies of our "Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Proposed Fire Station No. 53, Tukwila, Washington." Our services were accomplished in general accordance with city of Tukwila Contract Number 95 -009 executed on January 6, 1995 for Project Number 93 -BG07. Preliminary results of our study have been discussed with Mr. Randy Berg of the city of Tukwila as information was developed. Our services have also included completion of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, the results of which are being submitted in a separate report. We appreciate the opportunity to serve you on this project. Please call if there are any questions regarding this report. HRP:JKT:vvl Document ID: 0259030.RGT File No. 0259 -030 -RO1 GeoEngineers, Inc. 8410 154th Avenue N.E. Redmond, WA 98052 Telephone (206) 861 -6000 Fax (206) 861 -6050 Yours ery truly, Geo �_y eers,.Inc. K. Tuttle, P.E. Principal INTRODUCTION SCOPE CONTENTS SITE CONDITIONS SITE DESCRIPTION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Page No. 1 1 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Regional Seismicity, Liquefaction Potential • SITE PREPARATION EARTHWORK SLOPE STABILITY FOUNDATION SUPPORT LATERAL RESISTANCE FLOOR SLABS PAVEMENTS PERMANENT DRAINAGE LIMITATIONS FIGURES Vicinity Map Site Plan APPENDICES Appendix A - Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing A -1 Field Explorations A -1 Laboratory Testing A -1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 Fiqure No. 2 Page No. Appendix A FIGURES Fiqure No. Soil Classification System A -1 Logs of Test Pits A -2 ... A -5 Moisture Content Data A -6 G e o E n g i n e e r s I File No. 0259 -030- RO1/021595 u6D, • 0 • N Wi. Nom;. u_Q ,0� d W, • Z ~; • :Z ;O • .WW . 0: •wZ.. • • '!'04- '2. • 1 t• 1 REPORT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PROPOSED FIRE STATION NO. 53 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FOR CITY OF TUKWILA INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services for the proposed new fire station No. 53 to be located near the intersection of South 115th Street and 42nd Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. The project site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The site consists of several parcels which have a combined area of about 3 acres. Figure 2 shows the site in relation to existing site features. We understand that the city is considering purchasing the site. The fire station layout and the general design criteria have not yet been finalized. However, we expect that the design and performance aspects of the new fire station will be similar to that of the existing fire station No. 53, which is located about 1/4 mile south of the proposed site. The new building will likely be located close to the bend where South 115th Street turns south and becomes 42nd Avenue South. Minimal grade changes are planned for the site. Asphalt -paved driveways and parking areas will surround the building. We understand that the new fire station is considered a critical structure that must remain functional during and following a moderate to large earthquake in the Puget Sound region. SCOPE • The purpose of these services is to explore near - surface soil conditions at the site as a basis for developing geotechnical design recommendations for the new fire station. Our specific scope of services for this study includes the following tasks: 1. Excavate eight test pits around the proposed fire station building location and in surrounding planned pavement areas with a rubber -tired backhoe provided by the city of Tukwila. We also reviewed the logs of two borings accomplished by our firm for a nearby project. 2. Accomplish a limited laboratory testing program on samples obtained from the test pits. The tests we accomplished included moisture content determinations. 3. Develop geotechnical recommendations for site preparation and earthwork including stripping, removal and replacement of soft or unsuitable soils, reuse of on -site soils as fill, criteria for import fill, fill compaction, cut and fill slopes, and subgrade requirements for support of slab -on -grade floors. This includes evaluation of the effects of weather and construction traffic on exposed site soils. G e o Engineer s u5 :w Ctd r • ;, sas3 a rY 6 �iw�n x:< 14: 1 File No. 0259 -030- R01/021595 4z~ �w .0 N 0; WW: J U wO g Q. w' _. zI. 4— 0' :z r~, oF-: w, 1c�i w (. z 4. Provide recommendations for surface and subsurface drainage systems based on the ground water conditions encountered in the test pits. 5. Evaluate the liquefaction potential at the site and provide options for mitigating the effects of liquefaction, as appropriate. 6. Recommend the appropriate type and design criteria for foundations to support the building frame and floor slab, including estimates of foundation and floor slab settlement. 7. Develop recommendations for subgrade preparation and pavement sections for access driveways and parking areas. 8. Present the results of our study in a written report. SITE CONDITIONS SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed fire station No. 53 site is located in a residential area in Tukwila, Washington, near the intersection of South 115th Street and 42nd Avenue South (Figure 2). The ground surface at the site is relatively flat. The property is presently occupied by several residences and related outbuildings. A steep hillside underlain by sedimentary and volcanic rock is located immediately west of the site. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Near- surface soil conditions at the site were explored by excavating eight test pits at the approximate locations shown in Figure 2. In addition, we reviewed the logs of two borings drilled for a previous GeoEngineers project located at 12065 - 44th Place South, about 1/3 mile southeast of the site. Details of the field exploration and laboratory testing programs and the test pit logs are presented in Appendix A. Near- surface soil and ground water conditions at this site are relatively uniform, based on our findings from the eight test pits (TP -1 through TP -8) excavated in the proposed building and pavement areas. Soils encountered in the test pits consist of loose to medium dense and medium stiff alluvial soils overlain in places by a thin sod zone and a surficial layer of loose, silty fine sand and sand with organic matter. The sod zone, where present, is about 0.2 to 0.3 feet thick. A thin layer of loose silty sand with gravel that is probably fill was encountered below the sod in test pit TP -6. Alluvial soils encountered below the sod and surficial native and fill soil layers include loose to medium dense sand, sand with silt, silty sand, and medium stiff silt. These soils extend to the maximum depth explored, 9.0 feet. Caving was observed in several of the test pits at depths ranging from 2 to 6.5 feet. The logs of the borings drilled 1/3 mile to the southeast indicate that the loose to medium dense alluvial soils extend to depths of about 10 to 15 feet. Below this depth and extending to the maximum depth explored by the two borings (19 feet), the alluvial soils consist of medium dense sand. Similar soil conditions were encountered in two borings drilled by others to a depth of 30 feet each at the existing city fire station located about 1/4 mile south of the site. G e oE n g i n e e r s 2 File No. 0259 -030- R0I/021595 z w UO ww. 1 U w, w 0. u.< d, t=--=.. I— 0: z I- .0 w U: 'IL 16 O'. vi F-- Ground water seepage was observed at depths ranging from 4.5 to 7 feet in most of the test pits. Ground water levels were measured at depths of 4.5 and 6.5 feet in November 1984 in our two previous borings for the nearby site. Ground water was encountered at a depth of 12 feet in two borings drilled at the existing fire station in September 1992. The ground water level at the project site is expected to vary in response to the level of the Duwamish River and to seasonal variations in precipitation. HZ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL O: The proposed building can be satisfactorily supported on conventional spread footings with N ' co an on -grade floor slab under normal (static) loading conditions. However, there is a potential .J H U) u_ for liquefaction of the near - surface soils during a major earthquake. The following section of this w 0, report provides more detailed information about the potential for, and the possible consequences of, liquefaction. Various options can be used to mitigate potential liquefaction - related damage. w <` Nd �w SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ? E--0. Regional Seismicity Z The project site is located within a seismically active area in which more than 100 2 o earthquakes have been recorded. Of these, two were large events that resulted in significant ;p ur damage to structures. The first earthquake, which was centered in the Olympia area, occurred w u in 1949 and had a Richter magnitude of 7.1. The second earthquake, which occurred in 1965, = w; was centered between Seattle and Tacoma. It had a Richter magnitude of 6.5. On the basis of z+ past earthquake activity, the Puget Sound area is designated as Zone 3 in the UBC (Uniform U I= I Building Code) with respect to expected ground accelerations and velocities. For Seismic p Zone 3, a seismic zone factor of 0.30 is applicable based the UBC Table 23 -1. Based on the z results of our on -site and nearby explorations, it is our opinion that the soil profile may be characterized using site coefficient S3, based on UBC Table 16 -J. Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction refers to a condition where vibration or shaking of the ground, usually during earthquakes, results in development of high pore water pressures and subsequent loss of strength, or liquefaction, in a zone of soil. In general, soils that are susceptible to liquefaction include loose to medium dense clean to silty sand below the ground water level. Based on the regional seismicity of the site and on our recent and previous explorations in the vicinity, we conclude that there is a moderate to high potential for liquefaction under a moderate to large earthquake. This liquefaction could result in subsidence occurring between a depth of about 5 to 15 feet below the ground surface. Structures supported on shallow foundations bearing on or above soils that liquefy can experience significant differential settlement and structural damage. G e o Engineer s 3 File No. 0259 -030- R01/021595 Several options can be considered to address the liquefaction potential of the site. These options include the following: 1. Support the building on piles that transfer the foundation loads through the upper liquefiable soil into underlying soils that have a low potential for liquefaction. The soils at this site that are potentially liquefiable extend to a depth greater than that explored in our test pits. If pile support is selected, we recommend that at least two borings extending to depths of about 40 feet each be drilled within the building area to obtain detailed information for pile design. 2. Accomplish various types of soil improvement (e.g., vibroflotation, dynamic consolidation, etc.) to densify the liquefiable soil zones to the extent required to make these zones non - liquefiable. However, soil densification activities could induce unacceptable vibrations and possibly damaging settlements in adjacent buildings and could be more costly compared to other options. Therefore, we believe that this option is not feasible for this site. 3. Support the building on conventional shallow footings supported on a mat of compacted, free - draining crushed rock or ballast that is a minimum of 2.5 feet thick. The mat would help to bridge zones of liquefied soils and reduce differential movement of footings, as well as allow dissipation of excess pore water pressure from the underlying liquefiable soils. This option is a more cost - effective method than options 1 and 2, although it would not eliminate the risk of structural damage if liquefaction occurs. Some consideration could be given to supporting the building frame on piles and the floor slab -on- grade. However, some settlement of the floor slab significant enough to cause cracking could occur. SITE PREPARATION The surficial soils consist of moisture - sensitive silt and sand on which equipment operation will be difficult during wet weather. These soils will also become essentially impossible to compact if allowed to become wet. We recommend that site preparation and earthwork be accomplished during prolonged dry weather, if possible, when these soils will be less susceptible to disturbance and will provide better support for construction equipment. All vegetation and existing structures should be removed from new building and pavement areas where the existing grade is within 2 feet of finished grade. The depth of stripping can be expected to average about 2 to 4 inches, unless excessive disturbance is caused by demolition and clearing equipment, in which case the depth of stripping might be greater. Disturbance to a greater depth can be expected if site preparation is done in wet weather. Where finished grade in pavement areas will be 2 feet or more above existing grade, the sod layer can be left in place. In those areas, vegetation should be cut off as short as possible and the clippings removed prior to fill placement. Foundation elements and slabs for existing buildings should be removed since they could interfere with pile installation. Existing foundation elements and slabs in new pavement areas can generally be left in place; however, foundation walls or other elements that protrude to within G e o E n g i n e e r s 4 File No. 0259 -030 - 201/021595 2 feet of finished grade in new pavement areas should be removed. Any existing voids (i.e., manholes or vaults) or new depressions created or exposed during site preparation should be cleaned of loose soil or debris and backfilled with structural fill. We recommend that all building, slab and pavement subgrade areas be thoroughly proofrolled with heavily loaded, rubber -tired construction equipment if site preparation is done during extended dry weather conditions. Any areas that rut or weave during proofrolling should be excavated and replaced with compacted structural fill. If site preparation is done during wet weather, it will be preferable not to proofroll the exposed surface, as this activity could damage the subgrade. In this case, the subgrade soils should be examined by hand probing. Any areas of soft soils should be excavated and replaced with structural fill. A representative of our firm should observe proofrolling to advise on the extent and depth of any excavation and replacement of softened subgrade soils. Operation of construction equipment directly on the exposed subgrade soils should be avoided to the fullest extent possible. We recommend that critical surfaces such as subgrades in building areas and construction access roads be protected with ATB (asphalt treated base) or a layer of gravel or crushed rock to minimize disturbance to the subgrade. We recommend that all sod and soil stripped from the site either be wasted off site or used for landscaping. EARTHWORK Any new fill required to establish site and foundation grades and to replace unsuitable soil should be placed as structural fill. The suitability of soil for use as structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of fines (material passing No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. • If the fill is placed during wet weather, we recommend that the soil consist of well- graded, free - draining sand and gravel free of organic matter or debris. The maximum particle size should be 3 inches. The soil should contain no more than 5 percent fines relative to the fraction passing the 3/4 -inch sieve if earthwork is done in wet weather. If earthwork is done during generally dry weather conditions, the fines content can be increased slightly. Up to about 10 percent fines is usually acceptable for dry weather earthwork, provided that the fines are well mixed throughout the soil and are not present as lumps or balls. The on -site soils contain significantly more than 5 percent fines and should be used as structural fill only during periods of prolonged dry weather and only after proper moisture conditioning. Structural fill should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D -1557 in building areas and within 2 feet of final subgrade in pavement areas. Below this depth in pavement areas, the fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent. G e o E n g in e e r s 5 File No. 0259 -030 - 801/021595 z Wiz. w —J0 UO. CO o' cnw, J w LL _. z� 1-0 Z �. U + '0 co' 1- U.. 5: O: w z. U— H 0 z We recommend that a representative of our firm observe the placement and compaction of structural fill. A sufficient number of in -place density tests should be accomplished as the fill is compacted to provide a representative evaluation of whether or not the specified compaction criteria is being achieved. If shallow foundation support for the building is selected, we recommend that all footings be supported on a 2.5- foot -thick mat of compacted granular fill. The footing mat fill should consist of free - draining coarse (11A-inch-minus) crushed rock or railroad ballast with a maximum size of 3 inches and containing less than 5 percent fines (percent by weight of soil passing the No. 200 sieve, based on the minus 3/4 -inch fraction). The crushed rock or railroad ballast should consist of sound rock and be free of debris and organic matter. The base of the rock mat should extend horizontally beyond the edges of the footings a distance of one -half the thickness of rock that will underlie the footing. Prior to placing the mat fill, the base of the footing trenches should be evaluated by hand probes only. Any disturbed zones indicated by the probing should be excavated to the depth recommended by a representative of our firm and replaced with footing mat fill. The mat fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in loose thickness. The initial lift should be compacted without vibratory effort to avoid pumping in the underlying soils. Each successive lift should be compacted to a firm, unyielding state as determined by visual observation using a vibratory roller or other suitable equipment. SLOPE STABILITY The hillside above the west margin of the site has experienced some instability in the past. The instability is probably related to planes of weakness coinciding with the boundary between the bedrock known to underlie the hill and the overlying soil overburden. We believe that continued episodes of slope failure involving shallow slides will occur during the life of the project. If a minimum setback of 50 feet is maintained from the toe of the hillside to the nearest point on the building, the accumulated debris is unlikely to reach the building. FOUNDATION SUPPORT. On a preliminary basis, we estimate that augercast concrete piles with diameters ranging from 12 to 16 inches and lengths of 40 to 50 feet could support downward loads of 30 to 70 tons. Pile penetrations must be such that all load- carrying capability is derived from the medium dense sand below the potentially liquefiable zone. As recommended previously, at least two borings should be drilled to sufficient depth to develop the necessary subsurface information for final design of the piles. If spread footings are used, we reconunend that they be founded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for exterior footings. The bottom of interior footings should be at least 12 inches below finished floor grade. Individual spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Continuous strip footings should be at least 18 inches wide. Isolated and G e o E n g i n e e r s 6 File No. 0259 -030- R01/021595 z mow' aa 2 J O U0 CO W =. w w0 uQ a; H =? z f- Z 0 D O - of w w. IU 0' 0 continuous footings dimensioned as recommended above and bearing on a crushed rock or railroad ballast fill mat constructed as recommended can be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 psf (pounds per square foot), This bearing pressure applies to the sum of all dead plus long -term live loads, excluding the weight of the footing and any overlying backfill. This value may be increased by one -third when earthquake or wind loads are considered. We estimate that postconstruction settlements resulting from static loading for interior column and perimeter wall footings will be about 1/2 to 1 inch, depending on variations in subsurface soil conditions and structural loads. The maximum differential settlement between adjacent, comparably loaded column footings is expected to be 1/2 inch or less. Similarly, we expect that differential settlements along continuous wall footings should not exceed about 1/2 inch in 50 feet. Because of the granular nature of the soils underlying the site, we expect the major portion of foundation settlements to occur rapidly upon application of structural loads. Subsidence of several inches could result from liquefaction during a major seismic event. The settlement could be irregular in magnitude and extent. LATERAL RESISTANCE Lateral loads such as base shear forces transmitted to the building footings by wind or seismic events can be resisted by passive resistance on the sides of the footings or pile caps and by friction on the base of the footings and slab. Passive resistance can be evaluated using an equivalent fluid density of 250 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) provided foundation elements are surrounded by structural fill or compacted in -situ soil extending laterally a distance of at least twice the depth of the footing. The fill must be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM D- 1557). Passive pressure resistance should be calculated from the bottom of adjacent floor slabs or paving or below a depth of 1 foot if the adjacent area is unpaved. Frictional resistance of footings and the building slab may be evaluated using 0.4 for the coefficient of base friction. Frictional resistance along the base of pile caps should be ignored. The above values incorporate a factor of safety of about 1.5. FLOOR SLABS Floor slabs should be supported on a minimum of 18 inches of compacted, clean free - draining sand and gravel containing no more than 3 percent fines by weight to provide uniform support for the slab and adequate drainage. Vapor barriers may be placed between the slab and free - draining sand and gravel if it is desired to reduce moisture migration into the floor slab. It might be appropriate to place a 2- inch -thick cushion layer of clean sand over the vapor barrier to protect it during construction of the slab. A subgrade modulus of 200 pounds per cubic inch at the top of the 18 -inch structural fill pad may be used to design a reinforced concrete slab to support the planned fire truck loads. We recommend that a minimum slab thickness of 6 inches be used. G e o E n g i n e e r s 7 File No. 0259 -030- R01/021595 z z 6 U- 0' co W. J • LL,. wO ga u. Lo I— O' ZI- w, ;O co w U w. H: —▪ O Ii,i z z~ We estimate that settlement of floor slabs resulting from floor loads of 150 psf or less will be less than 1/2 inch. During a moderate to large earthquake, some differential settlement of the slab and related cracking could occur if the slab is supported on- grade. PAVEMENTS Pavement subgrade areas should be stripped and proofrolled or otherwise examined as recommended above. Assuming that proper subgrade preparation is accomplished and that pavement construction is done during a period of extended dry weather, we recommend that the pavement section in automobile parking areas consist of 2 inches of class B asphalt concrete, 4 inches of clean crushed rock base course containing no more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve, and a subbase consisting of at least 12 inches of compacted clean structural fill. The driveways will be subjected to frequent braking and turning action by fire trucks. We recommend that the pavement section in the driveways consist of 4 inches of asphalt concrete and 8 inches of crushed rock over the subbase. If pavements are constructed during wet weather or if the subgrade is wet and cannot be compacted satisfactorily, it will be necessary to excavate soft areas and to place an additional thickness of granular subbase to provide adequate pavement support. The thickness of additional sand and gravel fill required will depend on the firmness of the subgrade at specific locations and should be evaluated during construction. In soft subgrade areas, we recommend that consideration be given to placing a woven geotextile between the native soils and the granular fill to separate these materials and strengthen the pavement section. The crushed rock base course and granular fill should both be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM D -1557. It is very important to pavement performance that backfill in utility trenches also be compacted as recommended for structural fill. Drainage of the pavement base course is also very important. We recommend that holes be provided in the catch basins to permit drainage of the base course and underlying fill. . PERMANENT DRAINAGE We recommend that finished ground surfaces adjacent to the building be sloped so that surface runoff flows away from the structure. Footing drains might be appropriate along portions or all of the outside perimeter walls. These drains should consist of 4- inch - diameter perforated drainpipe embedded in a zone of sand and gravel containing less than 3 percent fines. This zone of sand and gravel should be at least 2 feet wide. Roof drains should be connected to a tightline that is independent from the footing drains and that discharges into the storm drain system. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by the city of Tukwila and their architects and engineers in design of a portion of this project. The data and report should be provided to G e o E n g i n e e r s 8 File No. 0259 -030- R01/021595 w : 6D • -1 U, UO W =; H; u w0 U. Q: 0. I— _. zF.., I-- 0 • wI— 0 Ni 0 H; • ill F- U li.l4' iL z I=mo: z prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. The design details are not known at the time of preparation of this report. As your design develops, we expect that additional consultation will be necessary to provide for modification or adaptation of our recommendations. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that we be retained to review the final design and specifications to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. 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 for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also that may occur with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be . included in the budget and schedule. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation by our firm should be provided during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. Within the Iimitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. The conclusions and recommendations in this report should be applied in their entirety. We are available to review the final design and specifications to see that our recommendations are properly interpreted. If there are any questions concerning this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Respectfully submitted, GeoEngineers, Inc. Herbert R. Pschunder, P.E. Senior Engineer HRP:LYC:JKT:vvl Document ID: 0259030.R G e o Engineer s Jack K. Tuttle, P.E. Principal 9 File No. 0259 -030 - 801/021595 OZS9.03 0.00 / a //RP• z3! / 05 /S5 t~ r :,\711411,31, R: w• . • •• 0 2000 4000 SCALE IN FEET Reference: USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle maps Des Moines, Wash.' and 'Seattle South, Wash.,' both photorevised 1973. Geo Engineers VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 Fd t /2' R & C, LS/ 19622 0.05 S and 0.04 E of Co. 12/26/94 22 �Q � • pin?: • nit • 7 Ed 1/2' R & C NE Car. Lot 21. elk 25. CJC. LS/ 19622 0.44 W of the RE Fd 10.061.36. NE . L5. eI4. 23 1.11 an30 C of Cor q6 2z 2+ �--- E Is OrA\..ay r rep of 4' Cona•1. / Pp.. E/••• 11.43' sHa 42nd Ave. 1 Ir 10 \ 1•, \\ 26' C.dor11 TP `4 \ \ 1 1 1 \ 1 11 \ ; \ \\ 1.• \ \ \ 1 \\ Cana.f. Parking Lot 2. \\ \\ \2 1 1 \ \1 \ `\ 1 \• % C 15' Cral+l Rood--".. ood ' \\ \ \ \ \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 J \..•1 ,ice., \ r I2 Ho6�•• t-611o6X 6 t1oA� 61114 1 '' —6 1 \ 1 10 TP 1 1 26 r.. 4).1 \ 1 \ \ 1 1 1 OW \ \\ 1 1 10' Tr.. \ j \ //��•��\ 11�, ( '\ / TP -3 . \ tali.* Ie'rr•.0 TP- 8J -Tr•O • 2 +•r0 GARAGE 530.44 .,i• 016'S.ga • lj'Ald.r .60' ,\ 6'Collon 1 1 \ **Alder �AL2 C)6•Co 1+'Alder' - 2'C/ 6'Ald•r (Ion C 10'Aldw 24'C Ion.00d\ / 24'Colfon.00' ' 1 1 • 1 t6'Coflon.00d • _ p' 1 •1 1 6 ,.3 TP -2 \ , • \� ...o oD" 1 1 .......„„,-• , ■ \ 1. \..� d\ / • \ 01 13 \ V. 0 20'rr., \ .. co \ / "-. 7 \ l• u 1 1 \1L / 1. L o 1\ r. to 1 \N tit le- '' �' gle -1-6' Tree Iton.00d 3 2+•CoUon.00d 21'Cofton•94 \ o Cottonwood \\ 'J•, \ i' 20 collmbood ) V l 1 I \ v-Eosf End of 16' Could Not find Outfoll„,, 1 1 1•1. ,,0 •0.00"' • fre •2.70' Encroachment —1.67• Encroachment .1 I4'Uagnollo Tree. 1 4 76'1.1ognollo roils 1 z \ 1 I/ \ t• \ 1 \-Ditch t f.tt' Enaoochm.nl - J.65' Enaoochm.nl Inc. •r• •, riw; i�;: w•.'. M" a: 3y`.:: ..,ii::"'W.s�:i; ":12n.rc`` 7:.`.::t . 4y:� , Sti 1v 3.65' Encroac\ \.nl- rrom r.nc. to , Plot Line v�, �; �'<";{, �;;^; R':',. t' t�Ni."�l�f�,L^t"�CsoY^"5.�5:3:t tl'?;i�''4??�. _'.a•,sa •,t,; f�i±xy`+f,'iSZIiM? . iN. 4iAtA or4o.'. x!�r4;J rod. tea 1. Geo., r k C, LS/ 19622 ■ 0.04 E of Coe. • .•Cellsnr.d Fd t /2' R & C NE Car. Let 21. Olk 25. cJG LS/ 19622 0.44 W of LNe ?2 ?4 0 r-� 1 IS' OrM.oy Fd J /4• IP NE Car. Lol 25, B1k. 25 1.11 5 end 0.30EofCoe Reference: Drawing entitled 'Boundary & Topographic Survey of C.D. Hillrnan's Meadow Gardens Addition #3, for the Cily of Tukwila,' by Irwin Engineering, dated 02/07/95. H 0633..36. E . 16 14-* _� 14 ��•` •�� *t6•S.qu.olp. ` lomder • .60• lon.bod '\ 6•Cefton d 1e J3A 1tSA:dee 14'Ald.r 6'Aldee 4_ ?nd aive . ti :o ::e •40.00 f�-� ` '6'Coltoneood --'--- _. ...12_Cottonwood 70•Ald.r Ifon.00d 24•Cotlon.00 \ \ ,\• ' 6.0.0 ° -- �\ u 1 0 1 1 1. u0 \ 1 \ .. \ .:. \ eed -\ • C' \ \\ • • ..o i I N F7r. Hydrant \ .. . . 1 ..r. •' % - •2.70' Encroachment t ' OP PO. •I • Polo re ?0 Coltorrood \ , / •t` 1� 10°�•. .)•'• .-0 Por•r Pd. with Trondarm.r 1 \ n - -1.67' Encroachment y'J'�• �, Anchor 1 \.r -feat End of se• ,t%•: • Merolla Trees 1/L�o ' \\ Cord Not Find 0ullop.- .;0�'• w Water Maier nolto` Jr•os \ 5 ML� 21•Colfon.00d 2•Cottonrood 11'�'� llonwood 6 d« 6•Collon.C2• �(•� 0 'Alder 24 Cot tli9o.d._ 14 / 1' 0 6 Colludwood 6• de 1Coflonroo� ' ' Cl Or 2TD0'12• R• 17166.74 L. 601.04 Cyclone Fence SCALF_,• r - 67'_ 0 15 JO 60 EXPLANATION: TP -1 --TEST PIT Molbox O Found Iron Pp. or Rod • Cap. •• n.I.d • Sol Rod k Cap OW Wol•rm.l. \ _• L•9alIaaatollon NLP Wetlands no \ • ' Catch Ba•N \ •\ 1 lots 1 fo t3, Inclusl.r, Block 26; er \ \ \ ,•J: ' Lola 1 lo 12, Inclusive. Block 27; • 1 / "-Ditch Lola 1 to 15, Inclusive. Block 26. All In C.O. Illllmon's Meador Soli Log \ Cord.na Addition to Ks City of Seattle. Ohi,ton No. 3, AccordNg 1 ML1/ J.fl' Encroachment lo Ihs Plat Thereof, Recorded In Volume 12 of Plots Pope 66, k, Troia \ tang County Washingfon, TOGETHER with the Cost halt of 42nd Avon,. South; Also TOGETHER with South t14fh Strait; Also TOCEIHER .1,i, South Win Street. ly/nq■IIhN said Plot. � ISO Geo a Engineers SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 i f.c,4•I%4+'•1'N,'•); Wl403 iVra t '+I01,Z Sik' tAlYirti' z'. iY;.si ;41.`.},k'.'g'i`uli+iliy' �• APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions at the project site were explored by excavating eight test pits at the . site at the locations shown in Figure 2. The test pits were excavated on January 3, 1995 using a tractor- mounted backhoe provided by the city of Tukwila to depths ranging from 5 to 9 feet below the existing ground surface. These test pits were backfilled immediately after they were logged. Test pit locations were selected in the field by a geologist from our firm using a preliminary site layout provided by the city. The test pit locations and surface elevations were surveyed by Irwin Engineering. These locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the methods used. The test pits were excavated under the full -time monitoring of a member of our staff who classified the . soils encountered, obtained representative samples of the various soil strata, observed ground water seepage conditions, and maintained a detailed log of each test pit. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the system described in Figure A -1. Logs of the test pits are presented in Figures A -2 through A -5. LABORATORY TESTING Soil samples obtained from the test pits were examined in our laboratory to confirm field classifications. Moisture contents were accomplished on representative samples. Results of these tests are presented in Figure A -6. G e o E n g i n e e r s A - 1 File No. 0259-030-R01/011895 1 GEI 85 -85 Rev. 05/93 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Retained on No. 200 Sieve GRAVEL More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Retained on No. 4 Sieve CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL - GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GP POORLY- GRADED GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Passes No. 4 Sieve CLEAN SAND SW WELL - GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY - GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND SC CLAYEY SAND FINE GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Passes No. 200 Sieve SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit Less Than 50 INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit 50 or More INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS:. • 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch in general accordance with ASTM D2488 -90. Moist - Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487 -90. Wet - Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from below water table 3. Descriptions of soil density or consistency are based on interpretation of blow count data, visual appearance of soils, and /or test data. $I.. Geoff Engineers SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FIGURE A -1 DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL LOG OF TEST PIT DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP -1 Approximate surface elevation: 16.9 feet 0.0 - 0.3 Sod zone, 3 inches thick 0.3 - 5.5 SP -SM Brown fine to medium sand with a trace of silt and organic matter (loose, moist) 5.5 - 6.8 ML Brown sandy silt (medium stiff, moist) 6.8 - 9.0 SM Brown silty fine sand (loose to medium dense, wet) Test pit completed at 9.0 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 6.5 feet Moderate caving observed at 6.5 feet . Disturbed soil samples obtained at 2.0 and 7.0 feet TEST NT TP -2 Approximate surface elevation: 15.4 feet 0.0 - 0.3 Sod zone, 3 inches thick 0.3 - 6.5 SM Brown silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter (loose, moist) Becomes wct at 5.0 feet 6.5 - 7.5 ML Light brown silt (medium stiff, wet) 7.5 - 8.0 SP Dark brown fine sand (loose, wet) Test pit completed at 8.0 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 4.5 feet Moderate to severe caving observed below 4.5 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 0.5, 1.0, 5.0, 6.5 and 8.0 feet THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0.5 FOOT. Geo 40 Engineers LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE A -2 :.:17£ K15' 3iikeP a: Ci;:fas'r:.9.h.,i;WY44AV.,,,M.: ay. DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL LOG OF TEST PIT DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP -3 Approximate surface elevation: 17.7 feet 0.0 - 0.3 Sod zone, 3 inches thick 0.3 - 2.5 SM Brown silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter (loose, moist) 2.5 - 6.0 SP Dark brown fine sand (loose, moist) . Becomes wet at 5.0 feet 6.0 - 8.5 ML Light brown sandy silt (medium stiff, wet) • Test pit completed at 8.5 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 5.0 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 1.5, 2.5, 5.0 and 6.0 feet TEST PIT TP-4 Approximate surface elevation: 19.3 feet 0.0 - 1.5 SP -SM Brown fine sand with silt and a trace of organic matter (loose, moist) 1.5 - 3.0 SM Brown silty fine sand with a trace of organic matter (loose, moist) 3.0 - 4.7 SP Brown fine sand (loose, moist) 4.7 - 7.5 ML Light brown and orange silt (medium stiff, moist) Test pit completed at 7.5 feet on 01/03/95 No ground water seepage observed during time test pit was open Disturbed soil samples obtained at 0.5, 3.0 and 5.0 feet THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0.5 FOOT. GeokleEngineers LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE A -3 • DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL LOG OF TEST PIT DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP -S Approximate surface elevation: 20.3 feet 0.0 - 0.2 Sod zone, 2 inches thick 0.2 - 1.0 SM Brown silty fine with organic matter (loose, moist) 1.0 - 5.0 SP Dark brown fine sand with wood fragments (loose, moist) 5.0 - 7.5 ML Light brown sandy silt with organic matter (medium stiff, wet) Test pit completed at 7.5 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 4.5 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 0.5, 1.0 and 5.0 feet TEST PIT TP-6 Approximate surface elevation: 19.1 feet 0.0 - 0.3 Sod zone, 3 inches thick 0.3 - 1.5 SM Brown silty fine sand witti organic matter and occasional gravel and cobbles (loose, moist) (fill ?) 1.5 - 2.5 SP -SM Brown fine sand with silt (loose, moist) 2.5 - 3.0 ML Light brown silt (medium stiff, wet) 3.0 - 5.5 SP Dark brown fine sand (loose, wet) 5.5 - 7.5 ML. Orange and brown sandy silt (medium stiff, wet) Test pit completed at 7.5 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 4.5 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 1.5, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.5 feet THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0.5 FOOT. Geo �se Engineers LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE A -4 DEPTH BELOW SOIL GROUP GROUND SURFACE CLASSIFICATION (FEET) SYMBOL 0.0-03 0.3 - 1.5 L5-5.0 SM •SP LOG OF TEST PIT DESCRIPTION TEST PIT TP -7 Approximate surface elevation: 19.5 feet Sod zone, 3 inches thick Brown silty fine sand with organic matter (loose, moist) Dark brown fine to medium sand (loose, wet) Test pit completed at 5.0 feet on 01/03/95 No ground water seepage observed during time test pit was open Severe caving observed below 2.0 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 1.5 and 2.0 feet TEST PIT TP -S Approximate surface elevation: 16.1 feet 0.0 - 0.3 Sod zone, 4 inches thick 0.4 - 5.0 SM Brown silty fine sand with organic matter (loose, moist) Becomes wet at 2.5 feet 5.0 - 7.5 ML Orange and brown silt (medium stiff, wet) Test pit completed at 7.5 feet on 01/03/95 Ground water seepage observed at 4:5 and 7.0 feet Disturbed soil samples obtained at 1.0, 2.5 and 5.0 feet THE DEPTHS ON THE TEST PIT LOGS, ALTHOUGH SHOWN TO 0.1 FOOT, ARE BASED ON AN AVERAGE OF MEASUREMENTS ACROSS THE TEST PIT AND SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE TO 0.5 FOOT. Geo�Engineers LOG OF TEST PIT FIGURE A -5 J U c30; W —1 F,. LL; W 0; gQ HW`. ZF i— 0 ZH .2 j. 0: 0 Ns .W W . IH Z,.. til N; U ;Z. MOISTURE CONTENT DATA Test Pit Number Depth of Sample (feet) Soil Classification Moisture Content ( %) TP -1 2 SP -SM 15 TP -1 7 SM 35 TP -2 1 SM 23 TP -3 1.5 SM 29 TP -4 3 SM 29 TP -5 1 SM 7 TP =5 5 ML 34 TP -6 1.5 SM 28 TP -7 2 . SP 29 TP -8 2.5 SM 30 Geoff Engineers MOISTURE CONTENT DATA FIGURE A -6 �. J U: w MU' wo u-Q` sy2 a: =-w Z'I t- O. • Z F- ;U N; JO W' = V ;W . ;. 114J • O ,Z 1 • :.Report of • • v Phase 'I Environmental Site Assessment Proposed Fire Station No. 53 Tukwila, Washington ti February2O, .1995, For City of Tukwila G.e•oEng':ineer.s., RECEIVED . FEB 221995 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 February 20, 1995 City of Tukwila Department of Public Works 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98118 Attention: Mr. Randy Berg Geotechnical, Geoenvironmental and Geologic Services GeoEngineers, Inc. is pleased to submit four copies of our "Report . of . Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Proposed Fire Station No.-53, Tukwila, Washington." Our services were accomplished in general accordance with our revised proposal dated December 5, 1994. Our services were accomplished in general accordance with the city of Tukwila Contract Number 95 -009 executed on January 6, 1995 for Project Number 93 -BG07. We appreciate the opportunity to serve you on this project. Please call if there are any questions regarding this report. TMK:LYC:JKT:cros Document ID: 0259030.R File No. 0259 -030 -R01. GeoEngineers, Inc. 8410 154th Avenue N.E. Redmond, WA 98052 Telephone (206) 861 -6000 Fax (206) 861 -6050 • •• •- '' Printed on recycled paper. Yours very truly, GeoEngineers, Inc. K. Tuttle rincipal Z • 1—Z!. • W: :J U v o• • vow; J • w 0. • —J: w Q = d Hw I. O. wW;. • • ;0 ill •W'. IV • ;1L g1 ui z' Ni: ; ~ ::z CONTENTS Pacle No. INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 3 SITE 3 ADJACENT PROPERTIES 4 HISTORICAL CONDITIONS 4 PREVIOUS REPORTS 4 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 4 CITY DIRECTORIES 5 HISTORICAL MAPS 6 CHAIN -OF -TITLE DOCUMENT 6 INTERVIEWS 6 Tenant 6 Owner 7 Adjacent Property Owners 7 City of Tukwila 8 Fire Department 8 REGULATORY REVIEW 8 EPA LISTS 8 • ECOLOGY AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT LISTS 9 • ECOLOGY FILES 10 CONCLUSIONS 10 LIMITATIONS FIGURES Vicinity Map and Ecology- listed Sites Site Plan APPENDICES Appendix A Chain -of -Title Documents G e o Engine e r s 1 10 Figure No. File No. 0259- 303- R01/022095 ., L'YCh."i a.u:s.�. .., l.e.i....i�...n •..., • 7tS •;x•• , sw'.` 1bl +S.KdJY.Ww�1,:.:^.:�.":�u; ti�';?'i�`.:i`... T�: ?::.• .'ricr>ji;ry�.. REPORT OF PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT PROPOSED FIRE STATION NO. 53 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON FOR CITY OF TUKWILA INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Phase I ESA (environmental site assessment) of an approximately 3 -acre triangular shaped property (referred to herein as the site) located immediately northeast of the intersection between South 115th Street and 42nd Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. We understand that Mr. Pat Dillon currently owns the site. We further understand that the city of Tukwila is considering purchasing the site for construction of proposed fire station No. 53. The site location is shown relative to surrounding physical features on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. A general site plan is presented in Figure 2. SCOPE The purpose of our services is to conduct a Phase I ESA to identify the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances, including petroleum products, that may have resulted or could result in a release of hazardous substances into site structures or into the site surface or subsurface. Our scope of services is in general accordance with the Phase I ESA scope of services identified in ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) Standard E 1527-93, Standard Practice for Phase I ESAs. Our specific scope of services for this study includes the following tasks. 1;. Review available geotechnical and environmental reports for the subject site and adjacent properties. 2. Review federal, state and local environmental databases for listings of known or suspected environmental problems at the subject site or nearby properties. The specific databases and minimum search distances we reviewed are as follows: EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) Lists Minimum Search Distance NPL (National Priorities List) 1 mile CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System) 0.5 mile RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) List TSD (treatment, storage and disposal) Facilities 1 mile RCRA List, Generators and Transporters Site and Adjoining Properties ERNS (Emergency Response Notification System) List Site G e o E n g i n e e r s 1 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z �z IC 2, 0O cn w;. CO •w • 11-Q Nom. • = d: • 1 w, zE.. 1— 0:. • z �. •D o U ww = — U- 0 _ z. • • z... { Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology) and Local Health Department Lists Toxics Cleanup Program Confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites List and MTCA Site Registers Registered UST (underground storage tank) Sites Leaking UST Sites List Active and Abandoned Landfills or Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Minimum Search Distance 1 mile Site and Adjoining Properties 0.5 mile 0.5 mile 3. Review selected regulatory agency files regarding listed sites of potential environmental concern relative to the subject site. 4. Interview a representative of the local fire department, health department and /or Ecology regarding the history of the subject site and surrounding properties relative to the likely presence of hazardous substances. 5. Review historical aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, USGS (United States Geological Survey) maps and city directories, as available and appropriate, to identify past development history on and adjacent to the site relative to the possible use, generation, storage, release or disposal of hazardous substances. 6. Review a property history report (chain -of- title documents) and interview current and past property owners or others familiar with past and present uses of the site and its vicinity. 7. Review current USGS topographic map(s) to identify the physical setting of the property. 8. Identify the source(s) of potable water for the site and the type and age of the sewage disposal system(s) and the type and age of heating systems used at the site. 9. Conduct a visual reconnaissance of the site and adjacent properties to identify any visible signs of possible past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances. Our scope of services did not include an environmental compliance audit, an asbestos survey, an evaluation of lead -based paint, urea formaldehyde insulation or an evaluation of potential radon gas in site structures. Specific contamination evaluation procedures, such as soil or groundwater sampling and chemical analysis, also were not included in our scope of services. SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed fire station No. 53 site is located in a primarily residential area in Tukwila, Washington. The ground surface at the site is relatively flat and is at an elevation of approximately 18 feet above mean sea level based on the city of Tukwila property survey. Site topography is shown on Figure 2. The closest surface water body to the site, other than a wetland located in the northern and eastern portions of the site, is the Duwamish River, located approximately 30 feet southwest of the site. G e o E n g i n e e r s 2 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 Soil beneath the site consists of fill and Holocene alluvium. The fill consists of loose silty sand with gravel. The fill likely was placed on the site during area development in the early 1900s. The alluvium primarily consists of fine to silty fine sands and fine sandy silts. Ground water seepage was observed at depths of 4.5 to 7.0 feet in our test pits. We estimate that the general direction of shallow ground water flow is southwest toward the Duwamish River, based on local topography. Ground water levels will vary in response to river levels and seasonal precipitation. SITE RECONNAISSANCE SITE A geologist from GeoEngineers performed a visual reconnaissance of the site and surrounding properties on January 3 and February 6, 1995. Our representative walked through accessible portions of the site and observed adjacent properties from the site and public rights -of- way. Dense vegetation limited visual observation of the surface of the eastern portion of the site. Additionally, we did not have access to the interior of two residential structures'on the site. The site contains three houses currently occupied by renters, one abandoned wedding chapel and one abandoned house. Additionally the site contains two storage sheds, a barn, two garages and at least four septic tanks. We observed various vehicle maintenance and domestic items in the sheds, garages and barn including a gasoline can (less than 5 gallons), a grill, an engine and other car parts, electrical wire, lube canisters, fans, sinks, bathtub, fluorescent lights and ballast, sealed paint cans, tools, tires and wood building material. Abandoned tires and wooden pallets were observed in portions of the site. The three rental houses currently are heated with gas. Our interview with the current site owner indicates that heating oil may have used in the past. . We did not observe any evidence of the possible past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on the subject site during our reconnaissance with the following exceptions. • Two unlabelled, empty, 55- gallon drums located in the central portion of the site. • Three unlabelled 55- gallon drums located in the southern portion of the site. Two of these drums had lids and were empty and one appeared to be filled with rain water. However, a petroleum odor was noted in the water. A thin film, possibly oil, was observed on the surface of the rain water. • Possible oil use and storage associated with the previously mentioned car parts. We did not observe stains on the ground surface in the vicinity of the drums or the car parts on site. The tenants on site indicated that they serviced their personal vehicles on site. The car parts are associated with this service. They also indicated that they use a recycling service to remove oil or other petroleum products generated during vehicle maintenance at the site. GeoEngineers recently completed a geotechnical study of the site (report dated February 15, G e o E n g i n e e r s 3 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z r-- w re J0 CO CI CO w: w= J i- w0 g Q' = a. w. z zo w 0 U O • 1 — O' w z: N_ • z 1995) that included the excavation of eight test pits to depths of approximately 5 to 9 feet below ground surface. We did not detect any physical evidence, such as sheen on the ground water, soil staining or incidental odors, of contamination by hazardous substances at the test pit locations. The test pit locations, as surveyed by Irwin Engineering, are shown in Figure 2. ADJACENT PROPERTIES The property immediately north of the site is undeveloped. A hill borders the western site boundary and contains several residences. The Duwamish River is located southwest of the site, across South 115th Street. The properties immediately south of the site contain a retail carpet store (Riverside Interiors) and two commercial truck trailers, two sheds used to store carpet, vinyl flooring and blinds, an apartment complex, and two houses. Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and scattered storage of commercial truck trailers along the tracks are located immediately east of the site. It appears that all the unit structures located south of the site are currently heated with gas. We did not observe any evidence of the possible past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on immediately adjacent properties. HISTORICAL CONDITIONS PREVIOUS REPORTS We understand that the city of Tukwila is unaware of any previous environmental or geotechnical reports pertaining to the site. No past environmental or geotechnical reports pertaining to the site were discovered during our study. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Historical aerial photographs of the site and surrounding area dated 1936, 1946, 1956, 1960; 1969, 1974, 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1992 were reviewed by a GeoEngineers geologist at the office of Walker & Associates of Tukwila, Washington. Development on the site appears limited to approximately five houses, three sheds and a barn in the western portion of the site in the 1936 photograph. The houses observed include the two existing house in the southwest corner of the site. Properties to the north and east of the site appear undeveloped with the exception of the railroad tracks located east of the property. Several houses and the structure currently used by Riverside Interiors are located south and southeast of the site. Additional residential development is apparent on the hill west of the site. One additional structure is apparent north of South 115th Street in the 1946 photograph. Additionally, an elongated rectangular structure is located in the southeastern portion of the site in the 1946 through 1974 photographs. No additional site development or other changes are apparent in the 1956, 1960, 1969 and 1974 photographs. Additional residential development is apparent on nearby properties in the 1946 through 1974 photographs. An addition to the Riverside Interiors building was observed in the 1960 photograph. G e o E n g i n e e r s 4 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z 1 1- W 2 6 JU 00: Np: cn w w =: F. w 0, g Q. L'a' ▪ Z. z� 0. z� � o 0 -. w to IU 0 lil Z; 0- O z The site appears similar to the present -day layout except that South 115th Street extends further to the east than it does today in the 1980 , 1985, 1990 and 1992 photographs. The semi- trailers used at the carpet store were first observed in the 1985 photograph. The wetlands located in the northern and eastern portions of the site are apparent in the 1980 through 1992 photographs. No evidence of historical commercial development of the site and immediately adjacent properties was observed in the aerial photographs we reviewed with the exception of the structure used as a carpet store located south of the site, the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and the commercial truck trailer storage area located east of the property. CITY DIRECTORIES We reviewed Cole city directories for the site area dated 1969, 1974, 1979, 1985 -86, 1991 -92. These directories indicate that land use at the site and in its site vicinity appears to have been residential with the exception of structures located at 11520 (currently Riverside Interiors) and 11602 42nd Avenue South located immediately south of the site and approximately 40 feet south of the site respectively. Businesses that have occupied these adjacent sites and the years of occupancy are as follows: Business Name Address Directory Years Listed Draper Decker & Assoc. 11520 42nd Ave. S. 1969 ACS Air Cargo Sr 11520 42nd Ave. S. 1979 Imperial Air Freight ' 11520 42nd Ave. S. 1979 Profit By Air Inc. 11520 42nd Ave. S. 1979 Dean Decker & Assoc. 11520 42nd Ave. S. 1985 -86, 1991 -92 Riverside Interior • 11520 '42nd Ave. S. 1985 -86, 1991 -92 N.T.I.A. 11602 42nd Ave. S. 1969 Based on interviews with the property owner and observations, Riverside Interiors is a retail carpet store that also sells vinyl flooring and window blinds. The Riverside Interiors building was used for a grocery store beginning in the 1940s according to an adjacent property owner. We were unable to identify the type of' businesses that were identified as operating the 11520 42nd Avenue South address between 1969 and 1979 with one exception. Dean Decker & Assoc. logo was used prior to 1989 for the same business as Riverside Interiors which was legally transferred to this current logo in 1989, according to the secretary of Riverside Interiors. The buildings located at these addresses do not appear to have been used for past industrial purposes. G e o E n g i n e e r s 5 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z f- w e a= • GC u65' VO w= J am`. CO u„, w o; ga' :. u_Q co d H w 1— 0 z i.... 11J uj. 20 ,0 —.• w W: IL I- = V? ui Z. U N�. '0 • HISTORICAL MAPS We attempted to review Sanborn fire insurance maps for the subject site. However, Sanborn fire insurance maps are not available for the city of Tukwila. We reviewed historical Kroll maps covering the site area dated 1950, 1972 and 1987. The layout of the streets in the site vicinity in the 1950 map appears similar to the present -day layout. Houses are present on the subject site and on properties adjacent to the west, northwest, and south of the site in the 1950 map. The only nonresidential structures in the site vicinity appear to be two grocery stores at the intersection of 42nd Avenue South and South 116th Street and the railroad tracks to the east of the site. The street layout in the 1972 Kroll map appears similar to that shown in the 1950 map. Some of the structures present in the 1950 map have been replaced by different structures. The two grocery stores that appear in the 1950 map do not appear in the 1972 map. Land use in the site vicinity remains primarily residential. Features in the 1987 Kroll map appear similar to those in the 1972 map. No evidence of historical commercial development of the site and immediately adjacent properties was apparent on the Kroll maps we reviewed with the exception of the structure used as a carpet store located south of the site and the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and commercial truck trailer storage area located east of the property. CHAIN -OF -TITLE DOCUMENT We reviewed a property history report (chain-of-title document) prepared by Chicago Title Insurance Company and provided by the city of Tukwila. The document provides ownership information for the period from 1945 through 1988. Portions of the property have been deeded to various private individuals since 1945. There were no indications that the site or any portions thereof have been used for commercial purposes, based on the names listed in the chain -of- title. document. The chain -of -title document is presented in Appendix A. INTERVIEWS Tenant We interviewed Mr. Gary Mooney, a five -year tenant of the rental house located at 11508 115th Street, regarding the history of the site and surrounding properties. He stated that the house in which he lives may have been built as early as 1908, but he is not certain of the age of the structure or surrounding structures. It is Mr. Mooney's understanding that several years ago, barracks or bungalows were located in the southeastern portion of the site. The area described coincides with the elongated rectangular structure observed in the 1946 through 1974 aerial photographs. The structures did not exist when he moved onto the site. Mr. Mooney indicated that the rental houses on site are heated by gas and previously may have been heated with a G e o E n g i n e e r s ;_K:Y:.•aPZIA cS.11a,:4020;,44'z31kiiVit Jt ST3®+'laWfied4: le, .I[:atitll'.Y: 6 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z mow; 6D U0 WI J Qu co uj gQ a 1- z� HO z� uj off-, wuj O_ • 1.11 Z' U N, 0 heating oil furnace. Mr. Mooney indicated that he is unaware of any past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on the subject site with the exception of possible historical heating oil storage. Owner We interviewed Mr. Pat Dillon, owner of the site on February 6, 1995. According to Mr. Dillon, the wetlands were previously used as a horse pasture. Mr. Dillon indicated that before gas heating was installed on the property approximately 20 years ago, heating oil may have been used. Mr. Dillon indicated that heating oil from previous heating systems may have been placed in the 55- gallon drums located in the southeast corner of the site. Mr. Dillon claimed that the tenants used this oil for other purposes and that it was probably never moved from the site. Mr. Dillon was not aware of any dumping of hazardous substances, petroleum or other products into the septic tanks on site. The two drums located at the end of South 115th Street are located on city property according to Mr. Dillon. -He did not know what previously was stored in the drums. Mr. Dillon indicated that the tenants located at 1408 South 115th Street collect scrap metal for recycling. He stated that they recycle everything they can. Mr. Dillon also stated that police have reported drug use by previous renters on the property. However, there are no reports of drug production on the site. The barracks/bungalow structure that was located in the southeast portion of the site was a four -plex housing structure according to Mr. Dillon. Mr. Dillon indicated that he is unaware of any possible past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on the site with the exception of the possible past use and storage of heating oil. Adjacent Property Owners We interviewed Mrs. Helen Dingle, owner of an adjacent home located west of the site on Poverty Hill. Mrs. Dingle indicated that she has lived on the hill since 1942. She stated that a grocery store previously occupied the Riverside Interiors building. She did not remember when the store changed to a different business. Mrs. Dingle is unaware of any past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on her property or the subject site. We interviewed the secretary at Riverside Interiors on February 6, 1995 regarding their property. She indicated that the store sells carpet, vinyl flooring and window blinds. No cleaning of carpets or other materials take place on the property according to the secretary. The two semi - trailers and the two sheds located east and north of the building, respectively, store a backstock of flooring materials and blinds. The structure is heated by gas. She stated that the structure used to be a grocery store but was unaware of previous businesses other than the store. The secretary indicated that she is unaware of any past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on her property or the subject site. G e o E n g i n e e r s. 7 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 City of Tukwila We interviewed Mr. Randy Berg, Project Manager, of the city of Tukwila regarding the history of the site. Mr. Berg has familiarized himself with the site through the property owner and some research of his own. Mr. Berg indicated that in the late 1800s hops were raised in the area. When the hops business declined the area was called "Poverty Hill." Mr. Berg indicated that most of the structures on the site probably were built in the 1920s or earlier. Mr. Berg indicated that the tenants in the house located at 4208 South 115th Street on the property used drugs years ago and were arrested by the police. No production of drugs was reported according to Mr. Berg. The new renters repair personal cars and store their engines, batteries, car parts and other mechanical devices in the sheds north of their house. Mr. Berg indicated that he is unaware of any past or present use, storage, generation, release or disposal of hazardous substances on the site or immediately adjacent properties. The city of Tukwila conducted a septic tank search on the property, according to Mr. Berg. Mr. Berg indicated that the drainfield for septic tanks on site probably drains toward the east, in the direction of the wetlands. Mr. Berg stated that potable drinking water at the site is supplied by the city of Seattle. Fire Department We interviewed Ms. Norita Deckard, secretary of records for the Tukwila Fire Department, regarding incidents of hazardous substance releases on the site or adjacent properties. Ms. Deckard stated that they do not keep records for residential properties and if an occurrence did arise, the information would be referenced by the date of occurrence. REGULATORY REVIEW EPA LISTS We reviewed EPA lists for information on properties with environmental concerns located within the minimum search distances identified in the "Scope of Services" section of this report. The following is a summary of the lists reviewed and their contents. • NPL list dated August 22, 1994. This list includes sites that have been officially designated as priority cleanup sites. No NPL sites are located within 1 mile of the subject site based on the list of review. • . CERCLIS list dated December 1, 1994. This list includes sites where hazardous substances are known or suspected to have been released and where assessment and remediation under EPA's CERCLA program may be in progress. No CERCLIS sites are located within a 1/2 mile of the subject site based on the list we reviewed. • RCRA notification system dated December 7, 1994. This list identifies facilities that are classified by the EPA as hazardous waste generators or transporters or as TSD (treatment, storage, or disposal) facilities. A facility appearing on this list does not imply that releases of hazardous materials have occurred at the facility. No RCRA TSD facilities are located G e o E n g i n e e r s 8 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 • within 1 mile of the subject site based on the list we reviewed. One listed RCRA generator may be adjacent present in site vicinity. We were unable to locate the site on a map because a specific address was not given: WDOE NRO Tukwila Oil Waste N. side S. 115th St. Conditionally exempt generator • ERNS (Emergency Response Notification System) database dated October 1990 through • April 1994. The ERNS database contains a listing of releases of oil and hazardous substances reported to various federal agencies since October 1990. The site address is not listed in the ERNS database. ECOLOGY AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT LISTS We reviewed Ecology and Health Department lists for information on properties with environmental concerns located within the minimum search distances identified in the "Scope of Services" section of this report. The following is a summary of the lists reviewed and their contents. The approximate location of listed sites within the specified search distances are shown in Figure 1. • Toxics Cleanup Program C &SCS (Confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites) List dated November 7, 1994. The C &SCS list identifies potentially contaminated sites for which Ecology has conducted an initial investigation. If the investigation showed that further action is needed, the site appears on this list. Four C &SCS listed sites are located within 1 mile of the subject site: Metro South Base (identified as site 1 in Figure 1) 11911 E. Marginal Way South, Approximately 1/8 mile southwest from the subject site. Yellow Freight Terminal /Tkwil (identified as site 2 in Figure 1) 11231 E. Marginal Way South. Approximately 1/2 mile west from the subject site. Duwamish Fill Site - -DOT (identified as site 3 in Figure 1) S. 124th St. and SR 99. Approximately 3/4 mile southwest from the subject site. Northwest Auto Wrecking (identified as site 4 in Figure 1) 10230 E. Marginal Way S. Approximately 1 mile northeast from the subject site. • MTCA Site Registers dated October 25 through December 20, 1994. The Site Register also identifies potentially contaminated sites recently brought to the attention of Ecology. No sites listed in the MTCA Site Registers we reviewed are located within 1 mile of the subject site. Registered UST Sites List dated March 21, 1994 of USTs registered with Ecology. The subject site is not listed on the UST list; no sites with registered USTs are located adjacent to the subject site based on the list we reviewed. G e o E n g i n e e r s 9 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 z ~Z W QQ� JU 00 N w W: Wi J 1— w0 ga (.2 a zt-: 1- 0 z ILI a' n p: U 0- OI- ll! tu F= — 0; tii z z .. Leaking UST Sites List dated October 3, 1994 of leaking USTs reported to Ecology. No leaking UST sites are located within 1/2 mile of the subject site based on the list we reviewed. • The Northwest Environmental Compliance Report Quick Reference Guide date April 1993 and Abandoned Landfill Study in King County dated April 30, 1985. No active or abandoned landfills are located within 1/2 mile of the subject site based on the records we reviewed. ECOLOGY FILES The listed sites identified within the designated search distances are not considered an environmental threat to the subject site based on our experience. Therefore, we did not review EPA or Ecology files for the listed sites identified. CONCLUSIONS - The results of our Phase I ESA indicate that the risk of contamination by hazardous substances on. the subject site is low with one exception. There is a risk of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination associated with the possible previous storage and use of heating oil on the site near the existing structures and the 55- gallon drums located on the southern property boundary. Further evaluation of potential contamination from this source on the subject site would require soil and /or ground water sampling and chemical analysis. It is our opinion that the sites identified during our regulatory list search do not represent potential sources for contamination by hazardous materials on the subject site because of the significant distance between the listed sites and the subject site. LIMITATIONS This Phase I ESA report has been prepared for use by the city of Tukwila. This report may be made available to the site owner, prospective lenders and to regulatory agencies. However, the report is not intended for use or reliance by others and the information contained herein is not applicable to other sites. The information presented in this report is based on the above - described research and two recent site visits. GeoEngineers has relied upon information provided by others in our description of historical conditions. The available data do not provide definitive information with regard to all past uses, operations or incidents at the site. There is always a potential that areas with contamination that were not identified during this Phase I ESA exist at the site. Further evaluation of such potential would require subsurface exploration, sampling and testing. Our interpretation of shallow ground water flow direction is based solely on surface topography. The G e o E n g i n e e r s 10 File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 • z :.� w' J U: UO N 0, LU J w 0:. ga li¢: a. • _, z ~; t- 0 zI w w Do 0 -; 0 I-- wLU wz;. �+ 0 z actual direction of ground water flow may be different from the direction discussed in this report. Ground water monitoring would be required to evaluate the actual direction of ground water flow at the site. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices for ESAs in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood. w' moo. 0 0 N0. to w w 0" g u. Q. N v w ?p F—U zo' ��G w w. M0: , I0 NI 0 H ,i w" W Z U)` 0 z Respectfully submitted, GeoEngineers, Inc. Tina M. King Geologist ttle G e oE n g i n e e r s 11. File No. 0259 -030- R01/022095 :�fxs : ts;:: r..: i+ s} sr..: Mi• Ska. S3a3i ±Gr�:.:'v_r."eir:.�t:N�L�?' :?S_�:t:.n�'a?r: ,��i »%.t neek9rtr;:'�.tel.! 023,• 030•X / /,; EXPLANATION: 1 • ECOLOGY— LISTED SITE 0 2000 Notes: 1. The locations of the sites shown are approximate. 2. Site identification numbers correspond to the site numbers discussed in the text. 4000 SCALE IN FEET Reference: USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle maps 'Des Moines, Wash.' and 'Seattle South, Wash.,' both photorevised 1973. Geo ,,,O Engineers VICINITY MAP AND ECOLOGY — LISTED SITES FIGURE 1 'PA s'.X3A'Y:ri. ... ..... ... _.. . vr�s«_.. ay.,. wasmr .m- .-- "....,..- ....,».... -.... ._.�. i22��td� Ed ,/2' R k C. LS/ 19622 0.O5S and O.04 E of Cor. 12/26/94 r•fop of 46' Concr.t. / PO* CS.v. 11.4.1• • 4 PIA. 1� i•,.i Abandoned `4 `\ Wedding to r,X4 9 Pond /Chapel 114 to al!l TP -5 . o �• - Residential - Ed I/2• R t c NE Co,. Lot 21. I11k 25 C.C, LS/ 19622 0.44 W of LHe Hillside / ( rd 3/4'•1P HE Car. Lot 25. 91k. 25 1.11 Sond0..30telCo fi'��`�--- --24•. \ ,• — — I�•rrryc. _ ...:r_n.: — f — — _ N 063J:16' (• `� — — — — — SJ0.44 - 'Celleneve4 Rental House 4200 9A tI 12 14'Ald.rl 6•Ald✓ 6'Collon : d .1 1 15 A/d.r c 24•Colton., 24.Cotlon■ 24'rr.. 42nd Ave. Rental House 4210 tton.00d 24.Cotlon. 11520 Riverside Interiors (Carpet Sales) 4208 \ \Shed Apartments 4210 20 Collonbood x-•2.70' Enaooi .67' Enoraochment - Residential - House House \-011th \ -111' Encroachment • 3.65' fncroo hm.nl C lon. enc. k�SSo'iaf4 .''4W24k.J`Gtiirid%ita' 1 65' Encreoch�.n) from r.nc. to Plot Line ertJiik? F.G4' "..i4t@a:x`diu". i£G,Ti..� 4'4.6 .1mA Geo C. LS/ 19622 04 E of Cox, I - Residential - rd 1/2• R k C NE Cr. lot 21. BM. 23 CJC. LS/ 19622 0.44 W of LM. Hillside zrd. /C•P 7 NE Cr. Lot 25. Blk. 25 241..5 ond 0.30 E of Co l ?' `*•••----- 24 • • tat - -_� Reference: Drawing entitled 'Boundary & Topographic Survey of C.D. Hillman's Meadow Gardens Adr 'n a3, for the City of Tukwila,' by Irwin Engineerir dated 02/07/95. Note: Details of adjacent propertias are not drawn to scale. • 16 L IS• 0 .ay I6Yr..� t , TP -8 NA 1 J7•..,c-) 1 26 rope 1 \ 1 1 \ ‘.,a1 '-- Drums* • •• -and Tires 16'Cettonwood 1, 1 pTP -2 "t\ 0 a o11 1 .tr. O: 20-T in / t. •.• 1 M 1 ti:1 t0 Cottod.00d tom. 4 .o0" fro \ 1\. -East End of 16' \ - • t Conad. Pipe naib rr... 1 Could Not find ua6 / 1 111. 0 1 Ou t 1 1 roes 1 11 NL Encroachment \ -3.11' Encrooment 'T 5444 • 5,10.44 �"•�- -•` 'o. _ 'ra1'.� =0�: -r • � �' - -____ nd rive — — . . ; v t ed' •40.00 - h • \ • 12'Aldr O6'Collonrood _ •- _ .. _. j _ 12'Colfon =ood 2'Coltonwood .- 14 �1.� _ -. !CAW., 6'Aldr �16"Colton 6 Addr� O • ( j_ 6'Colt 'Alder d.Ald /` . 10'Aldr 24'Cot 6npeod... 14 24•Colten.00d t6 Coll...twood 6''__'r 60• It 6•Cotton 1 1 .1 1 IS Aldr 1 24'Collon.00d 10 Aldr llonwood wood% s 24 •C.tlonw • .1.65' Encroachment - 1.70' Encroachment •,1t" • CI An 200.12• R.17188.74 L- 601.04 1.67' Enaoochment L.9444_.Q,tutrR11 Lois 1 to 18, 'adagio. Block 26: Lots 1 to IZ Inclusive. Block 27; Lots ! to 15. Inclusive. Block 26. All M C.O. hhman'. H.oder Cordons Addition to the City of Seattle. Dl.4sf.rn No. J, According to the Plot thereof. Recorded h Vdum• 12 of Plots. Page 66. M King County Washington. TOGETHER with the Cost hail of 42nd Avenue South; Also rOCEfHfR with South 114th Street Also TOGETHER with South 115th Street. Ll4ng within sold Plot. •24 .20 - Cyclone Fence SCALE: 1' _ tt7,. 0 15 .30 60 EXPLANATION: TP -1-{41 -TEST PIT P Hotbox O round Yon P4. or Rod k Cap. . noted • S.1RodkCap t OW Wolrm.let 17nf fY. Hydront -OP Power Pole ▪ Poor Pole with Tranefrntr Anchor Hofer Meter MLA Wetland* nog as Colas aeon Et Sot Log 0 Trees Geo,, Engineers SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 i wN,,,.,.. „,,,„,',';tx+ il.i ;;..;isr� ?._S' -te ^ s :' /,i'fLd?:.`i^ri`,tCYN',el,^.,: 'W,S *?!A.,.•n, #` {'?;:s'th” 54c:e •++id'1' `ac3et�r.4 6 i'�anviT6i' '.' 4 4..i.oM'ik•o.`4Yii'I ii=i*4*4w� :1 :1Yi�: tit i' e+}si�iCFii. :zYWSri1-1A Unit No.: 06 Phone No.: 628 -5610 Fax No.: 628 -9717 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COCA- -• 1800 COLUMBIA CENTER, 701 5. 2AVi. SEATTLE, WA 98104 Our No.: 425453 Your No.: CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A MISSOURI CORPORATION, HEREIN CALLED THE COMPANY GUARANTEES the Assured named in Schedule A, against actual loss not exceeding the liability stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect, or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth above. CHICAGO INS CE COMPANY � A • AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY • PLEASE NOTE CAREFULLY THE LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS AND THE SPECIFIC ASSURANCES AFFORDED BY THIS GUARANTEE. IF YOU WISH ADDITIONAL LIABILITY, OR ASSURANCES OTHER THAN AS CONTAINED HEREIN, PLEASE CONTACT THE COMPANY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AS TO THE AVAILABILITY AND COST. Your Property History Guarantee is enclosed 6D VO co NW PRPHGUAI•11 /26/961:LC ' ATCAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM'M. • 1800 COLUMBIA CENTER, 701 5TH AVE SEATTLE, WA 98104 PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Total Liability Limited to $25,000.00 Fee: $270.00,. PLUS $22.14 SALES TAX Guarantee Date: DECEMBER 27, 1994 Order Number: 425453 A. ASSURED: CITY OF TUKWILA B. THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THIS GUARANTEE IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: LOTS .1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26; LOTS 1 TO 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27; LOTS 1 TO 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28, ALL IN C.D. ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION NO. THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE WASHINGTON. HILLMAN'S MEADOW GARDENS 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT 86, IN KING COUNTY, C. AT YOUR REQUEST, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A MISSOURI CORPORATION, HAS SEARCHED THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH BY LAW IMPART CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE, FOR THE DOCUMENTS SHOWN BELOW (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE INSTRUMENTS "): DEEDS (EXCLUDING MONETARY ENCUMBRANCES), REAL ESTATE CONTRACTS AND LEASES D. AT YOUR REQUEST, THE PERIOD OF TIME SEARCHED IS AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING DATE:. DECEMBER 1, 1944 at 8:00 A.M. •. ENDING DATE: DECEMBER 20, 1994 at 8:00 A.M. CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PRPHGUA•11 /26/97-NLC CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM*�,- PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: 425453 THE FOLLOWING MATTERS ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE SEARCH PROVIDED BY THIS GUARANTEE: 1. UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, AND PATENTS 2. WATER RIGHTS, OR CLAIMS THEREOF 3. INSTRUMENTS, PROCEEDINGS OR OTHER MATTERS WHICH DO NOT SPECIFICALLI DESCRIBE SAID LAND. THIS GUARANTEE IS RESTRICTED TO THE USE OF THE ASSURED. THIS GUARANTEE IS NO1 A COMMITMENT NOR AN OBLIGATION BY THE COMPANY TO ISSUE ANY POLICY OR POLICI' OF TITLE INSURANCE INSURING SAID LAND, AND IS NOT TO BE USED AS A BASIS FOR CLOS] ANY TRANSACTION AFFECTING TITLE TO SAID PROPERTY. F. THE INSTRUMENTS AS DEFINED IN PARAGRAPH "C" RECORDED DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME SEARCHED ARE: 1. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: • 2. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 3. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: •- SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 4. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: QUIT CLAIM DEED MARCH 30, 1945 3459467 BERNARD D. ALLEN CLARISSIA JANE ALLEN LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 WARRANTY DEED NOVEMBER 19, 1945 3518062 BERNARD SCHWARTZ AND DONNA SCHWARTZ, HUSBAND AND WIFE JOSEPH A. KRENMAYR AND JANICE M. KRENMAYR, HUSBAND AND. WIFE LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED DECEMBER 4,1945 3522071 F. W. GOODALE VIOLET M. GOODALE LOTS 9 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28 QUIT CLAIM DEED DECEMBER 4, 1945 3522072 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY rR?HGUA2.11 /26/CO NLC %.. HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO) . • PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: . 425453 FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 5. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: . DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: *AFFECTS: . DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING. DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 8. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING. DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: INSTRUMENTS (continued) • F. W. GOODALE VIOLET M. GOODALE LOTS 1 THROUGH 4, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27 WARRANTY DEED JANUARY 9, 1946 3530404 JAMES W. LUPINACCI AND ALICE M. LUPINACCI, HUSBAND AND WIFE ROY R. JULIAN, A SINGLE MAN LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 WARRANTY DEED JANUARY 9, 1946 3530405 VELMA M. SAUNDERS, A MARRIED WOMAN, r( AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE CLARISSIA JANE ALLEN, A MARRIED WOMAN, AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 WARRANTY DEED JANUARY 9, 1946 3530406 CLARISSIA JANE ALLEN, A.MARRIED WOMAN, AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE JAMES W. LUPINACCI AND ALICE H. LUPINACCI, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 REAL ESTATE CONTRACT FEBRUARY 1, 1946 3537087 LAURA E. ALLEN, AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE JOHN W. WENTZ AND BESSIE E. WENTZ LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Z Z • v 0' u) o' WW W• 0 co o. H Wi ▪ O'. Z F-` 2 ,o 1_• W W H U'. • Z;, 0H. Z CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COP/a.. PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number. 425453 9. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 10. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: .RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 11. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST 'PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 12. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 13. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: INSTRUMENTS (continued) ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT FEBRUARY 1, 1946 3537088 LAURA E. ALLEN, AS HER SEPARATE ESTATE W. R. HAMILTON LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED FEBRUARY 1, 1946 3537089 LAURA E. ALLEN W. R. HAMILTON LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED JANUARY 4, 1947 3644333 VIOLET M. GOODALE LOREN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 9 THROUGH 15, BLOCK, 28 QUIT CLAIM DEED JANUARY 4, 1947 3644334 VIOLET M. GOODALE LROEN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 1 THROUGH 4, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED JANUARY 4, 1947 3644335 VIOLET M. GOODALE LOREN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 26 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 07" .'`,'...HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: 425453 14. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 15. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 1V‘. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 17. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 18. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST.PARTY: SECOND PARTY: INSTRUMENTS (continued) QUIT CLAIM DEED OCTOBER 11, 1948 3845069 LOREN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE VIOLET M. GOODALE LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 26 QUIT CLAIM DEED OCTOBER 11, 1948 3845070 LOREN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE VIOLET M. GOODALE LOTS 1 THROUGH 4, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27 ( QUIT CLAIM DEED OCTOBER 11, 1948 3845071 LOREN FRANCIS COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE • VIOLET M. GOODALE LOTS 9 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28 WARRANTY DEED OCTOBER 11, 1948 3845142 MAUDE A. HILLS LAUREN F. COLEMAN LOTS 3 THROUGH 9, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT AND DEED MARCH 3, 1949 3881306 JOHN W. WENTZ AND BESSIE F. WENTZ, HUSBAND AND WIFE ALBERT C. DYER AND EVEYLN L. DYER, HUSBAND AND WIFE CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY •�--� CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COTS?A - PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: 425453 AFFECTS: 19. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 20. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST : PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 21. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER:. FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 22. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING I!A'.'E:. RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: INSTRUMENTS (continued) LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 TAX DEED JANUARY 16, 1951 4099847 A. A. TREMPER, TREASURER KING COUNTY K.C. SHYVERS LOT 1, BLOCK 28 REAL ESTATE CONTRACT JUNE '19, 1953 4355582 ROY R. JULIAN AND LOUISE JULIAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA H. COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 QUIT CLAIH DEED JANUARY 14, 1954 4411604 J. F. POWERS, ELIZABETH JANE POWERS, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, . HUSBAND AND WIFE LOT 5 AND THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT BLOCK.28; LOTS-? THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED JANUARY 20, 1954 4412977 J. F. POWERS AND ELIZABETH JANE POWERS, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 6 AND ALL OF LOTS 7 AND 8, BLOCK 28 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY • ' :{ICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM'`r . PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: 425453 23. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 24. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 25. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY': AFFECTS: 26. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NOMFER: FIRST PART:: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 27. DOCUMENT 7'f.:T.: RECORDING L':►`1'E: INSTRUMENTS (continued) TREASURER'S TAX DEED JANUARY 20, 1954 4412978 RALPH S. STACY, TREASURER OF KING COUNTY ELIZABETH JANE POWERS THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 6 AND ALL OF LOT 7, BLOCK 28 WARRANTY DEED MAY 28, 1957 4801872 JOHN E. BERGESON AND LOLA ALICE BERGESON, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. J. ABRAHAM AND THELMA P. ABRAHAM, HUSBAND AND WIFE .LOTS 2 THROUGH.4, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 2P- WARRANTY DEED JULY 2, 1957 4811154 L. J. ABRAHAM AND THELMA P. ABRAHAM, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA A. COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 2 THROUGH 4, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28 QUIT CLAIM DEED DECEMBER 26, 1959 4979957 CLARA A. COLEMAN, A WIDOW F. W. GOODALE AND VIOLET M. GOODALE, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 3 THROUGH 9, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26; LOTS 7 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27; ALSO LOT 2 THROUGH 8, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28 QUIT CLAIM DEED FEBRUARY 16, 1959 CHI CAGO TrI7 E INSURANCE COMPANY et W C.) O ' CO W.. W =; N LL W 011 ' Z D p` ;O N; :OH W W; O' Z` Ili co, 0 I- Z • .-:HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMP, Al- • PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number: 425453 RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 26. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY : AFFECTS: 29. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING GATE: RECORDING T.UHBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND Pi:FT.Y•: AFFECTS: ?O. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PART:`: SECOND P7,.r 1? : ! F.FECTS : :i1. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: :RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: INSTRUMENTS (continued) 4997890 L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA H. COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE F. W. GOODALE AND VIOLET M. GOODALE, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 10 THROUGH.15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED JULY 9, 1959 5054021 ROY R. JULIAN AND LOUISE JULIAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE L. F. COLEMAN AND CLARA M. COLEMAN, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 10 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED JUNE 29, 1960 5176315 JOSEPH A. KRENMAYR AND JANICE M. KRENMAYR, HIS WIFE LAURA E. ALLEN LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED JUNE 29, 1960 5176316 ALBERT C. DYER AND EVELYN L. DYER, HIS WIFE F. W. GOODALE AND VIOLET M. GOODALE, HUSBAND AND WIFE LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 27 QUIT CLAIM DEED JULY 29, 1960 5176788 W. R. HAMILTON AND AURAL A. HAMILTON, HIS WIFE ALBERT C. DYER AND EVELYN L. DYER, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY HICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO? PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE OrderNunann 425453 AFFECTS: 32. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS:, 33. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 34. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORD INC RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PAPTT: P.FFECTS : 35. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DLTE: RECORDING NUMBER: YIRST PARTY: 1101111,1111•1.1■1•1■1■1•■■■1111•1■ ms twErrns (continued) HIS WIFE LOTS 5 AND 6, 'BLOCK 27 TREASURER'S TAX DEED DECEMBER 4, 1962 5514833 A. A. TREMPER, TREASURER OF KING COUNTY F. W. GOODALE LOT 1, BLOCK 28 REAL ESTATE CONTRACT SEPTEMBER 14, 1964 5785971 F. W. GOODALE AND VIOLET M. GOODALE, HUSBAND AND WIFE OSCAR L. HELLSTROM AND RALPH L. DILLON 7 LOTS 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26; LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27; AND LOTS 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28; AND OTHER PROPERTY STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED. ZANUARY 10, 1978 7801100961 F. W. GOODALE AND VIOLET M. GOODALE, HUSBAND AND WIFE 0:;CAR L. HELLSTROM AND RALPH L. V/LLON LOTS 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 2G; LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27; AND LOT 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28; AND OTHER PROPERTY FTATUTORY WARRANTY DEED • YEBRUARY 23, 1978 02230820 ADA DUNN, DELLA RUSSELL AND PEARL CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Zh+415.110MIMUFttte.*:tai. R-ViOgatilWafterailiV114,11.,014i.44..WAN,I*50.44. 4..1'40446' '44,lo• CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO2., /kAi- •' i. PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE Order Number. 425453 SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: 36. DOCUMENT TYPE: RECORDING DATE: RECORDING NUMBER: FIRST PARTY: SECOND PARTY: AFFECTS: INSTRUMENTS (continued) GREEN OSCAR L. HELLSTROM AND RALPH L. DILLON LOTS 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 26; LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 27; AND LOTS 1 THROUGH 15, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28; AND OTHER PROPERTY QUIT CLAIM DEED JUNE 3, 1988 8806030348 HILDUR HELLSTROM OSCAR L. HELLSTROM LOTS 1 THROUGH 12, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 274 :LOTS 1 THROUGH 15,;INCLUSIVE, .BLOCK 28; AND OTHER.PROPERTY NOTE: TIIS PROPERTY HISTORY GUARANTEE DOES NOT INCLUDE :.ANY UNRECORDED DEEDS, REAL ESTATE CONTRACTS OR LEASES WHICH•MAY BE DISCLOSED BY OTHER DOCUM!?NTS OF. RECORD. • END OF REPORT • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY _.. �i.' 5�3::.:.' 3; 3.:.....,.__,:. i.:, e% il.:>".: ��..; S�Si�. tG�.: C•. Y'. E:. iti: ise�. Ni6KLK� {ays`Alo;Pi::.S«t,nA_...;eU'slt �:3 W* J; ,r,'�'. n'; �>: xm.�.rchii��C :.(Din °vsYeibtr••..- ,••�,• ,.c�..cuonfe n:. •:smve..e:i CHICAGO TIT-7) 1NSURA.NCE COMFAN' N 1800 COLUMBIA CENTER, 7LI1 5TH AVE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 93104 IMPORTANT: This is not a Survey. It is furnished as a convenience to locate the land indicated hereon with ,' reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon. C • D. '-k , ,; V,,► av1 S !v1 C ow Go.r 1,.v1 s a C:. •\-.I Q .c S e Vkt 0.0. •3 ;:sWi ,.'tae, A. z i re 2 00 ` cn uj J I: CO O W } - d. W: 20 11.1 uj UO� W W U: O:. z Mil OAS t YZ O h. z City of Tukwila Department of Community Development MEMORANDUM TO: Randy Berg, Project Manager Steve Lancaster, DCD Director FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: March 15, 1995 RE: Fire Station #53 - Wetland Summary Report This memo pertains to sensitive area review of the City of Tukwila Fire Station #53 project site The standards and regulations in Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC Chapter 18.45) will be applied to site design and sensitive area use. The Fire Station Project site plan is preliminary with one building that includes offices, apparatus bays, and sleeping quarters. John W. Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director One wetland has been identified on the site. Wetland area impacts will be avoided through site design features. Most of the upland portion of the site will be occupied by the apparatus bays, a drive-through loop road, and associated parking. A wetland buffer will remain with the potential to be enhanced with native trees and slu-ubs. Project Site Description The 2.5-acre site is located at 4202 S. 115th Street near the Allentown area of Tukwila. The Duwamish River is situated directly south of the site as it turns west in a river location referred to as "Beaver Bend". Currently there are four, occupied residences existing on the southwest portion of the subject property. Three public street rights-of-way exist on the property and will be vacated during the development process. The land area is relatively flat and extends from a steep slope on the west to the Burlington Northern Intermodal Truck Yard directly east. The eastern side of the property is about four feet lower and is affected by runoff, and possibly the interception of a shallow groundwater table. Small lawn areas with ornamental and native trees and shrubs comprise vegetative cover across most of the site's southern area. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431•3670 • Fax (206) 431,166S Fire Station #53 Memo March 15, 1995 Page 2 Wetland Determination/Description On 1/3/95 a wetland area was delineated on the subject property. The wetland occupies the lowland area on the north and east portions adjacent to the Intermodal Truck Yard. The wetland boundary was determined in accordance with the Federal Manual for Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (FICWD 1989). This boundary was marked using pink plastic flagging. The wetland boundary was professionally surveyed by Irwin Engineering. Two wetland data plots were installed to characterize vegetation, soil, and hydrology conditions. • The collected data is attached to this memo. The wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) with willow (Salix sp.), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) shrubs along the western edge. Scattered cover of red alder (Alnus rubra) saplings and several small groves of mature red alder and black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) also occur in the wetland. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification system, the wetland habitat is classified as palustrine, emergent, forested, and seasonally flooded. Because the wetland is greater than one acre in size, and also has a forested class that is at least 20 percent cover, it is rated a Type 2 by Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (# 1599). Type 2 wetlands have a standard buffer setback distance of 50 feet. TMC 18.45.080 (b)(2) allows use in wetlands or their buffers for the construction of new essential streets, roads, rights -of -way, and utilities. However, mitigation measures are required and subject to the standards of the Ordinance. The preliminary site plan shows a portion of the wetland buffer to be reduced to 25 feet for the location of the loop road through the fire station. The SAO allows this type of buffer reduction if enhancement is appropriate and an approved wetland buffer enhancement plan is provided as part of the project proposal. Native plant material should be planted in the reduced setback areas to improve wetland buffer functions. In summary, a Type 2 wetland has been identified on the fire station site and wetland impacts will be avoided through site design. Stormwater runoff should be detained and filtrated before discharge into the onsite wetland. Final review and approval can be conducted after the complete plans and mitigation details are submitted. Please feel free to contact me regarding the contents of this memo. Addendum to Report Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Services Proposed Fire Station No. 53 Tukwila, Washington City of Tukwila P.O. No. 38790 June 21, 1995 For. City of Tukwila GcoEnginecrs File No. 0259-037401 1 _'gyp.. - Geo ,;OEngineers City of Tukwila. Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Randy Berg June 21, 1995 Consulting Engineers and Geoscientists Offices in Washington, Oregon, and Alaska Addendum to Report Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Services Proposed Fire Station No. 53 Tukwila, Washington City of Tukwila P.O. No. 38790 File No. 0259 -037 -RO1 INTRODUCTION The results of our supplemental geotechnical engineering services for the proposed Fire Station No. 53 are presented in this addendum to our report dated February 15, 1995. The project site is located near the intersection of South 115th Street and 42nd Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. The project site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the site in relation to existing site features. Our services were accomplished under city of Tukwila Purchase Order No. 38790 and were authorized by Mr. Randy Berg on. June 5, 1995. The scope of our services is described in our proposal dated May 23, 1995 and in an addendum to the proposal dated June 6, 1995. These supplemental services represent a continuation of our design phase geotechnical study summarized in our report dated February 15, 1995. We understand that design of the fire station is in progress. Augercast pile foundation support of the building frame and floor slabs is planned because of the potential for liquefaction of loose sands encountered in our previous test pits. The piles will be 16 inches in diameter and will support design downward loads of up to 45 kips. Uplift loads on the piles will be minor. Maximum lateral loads on the piles will be about 7 kips. GeoEngineers, Inc. 8410 154th Avenue N.E. Redmond, WA 98052 Telephone (206) 861 -6000 Fax (206) 861-6050 Printed on recycled paper. vo coo W =, H LL u O; .J: u_ Q tna'. �_ !Z 0, w W: ON 0 H: w w. wz UN's z i 1 1 City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 2 SCOPE The purpose of our supplemental services is to explore deeper subsurface conditions at the fire station site as a basis for developing geotechnical design information for pile foundation support. Our specific scope of services includes the following tasks: 1. Drill, sample and log one boring to a depth of 48 feet to identify the presence of competent supporting soils for the piles. 2. Accomplish a limited geotechnical laboratory testing program on soil samples obtained from the boring to evaluate pertinent physical characteristics including moisture - density and direct shear tests. 3. Provide recommendations for augercast pile foundation support of the planned fire station including capacity - penetration relationships for downward and uplift loading, settlement estimates, lateral pile capacities and installation criteria. _ 4. Estimate the effects of liquefaction on piles and on -grade elements of the fire station, as appropriate. 5. Provide recommendations for the coefficient of friction and passive soil resistance which will act on grade beams, floor slabs and other building elements. 6. Prepare an addendum to our February 15, 1995 report, presenting the new data developed and our conclusions and recommendations for the scope items listed above. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Deep subsurface conditions at the site were explored by drilling one boring at the location shown in Figure 2. The boring was drilled to a depth of 48 feet using truck - mounted, mud rotary drilling equipment. The mud rotary equipment was necessary because of the potential for heave of loose sand during drilling and sampling. An engineering geologist from our staff observed the drilling operations, assisted in obtaining samples of the subsurface soils, classified the soils encountered, and prepared a detailed log of the boring. It was not possible to measure the depth.o_ground water due to the use of drilling mud in the boring. The soils encountered were classified in general accordance with the system described in Figure 3. A key to the boring log is included as Figure 4. The log of the boring is presented in Figure 5. The boring location was determined by taping from existing structures. The approximate ground surface elevation at the boring location was determined by interpolation from a site plan developed by Irwin Engineering dated February 7, 1995. Soil samples were obtained using a heavy -duty, split - barrel sampler with an inside diameter of 2.5 inches. The sampler was .driven with a 300 -pound hammer falling a distance of approximately 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches or other specified distance is indicated above the sample notations in the boring log. The boring G e o E n g i n e e r s ItetaSEMEMEEMPWAVAMMIMMRIMMIWATOMPI.Vgif v..C'as+nktsmv7k.Rl. .ts:esaatro ap000nxmrxm.arrnr traw File No. 0259- 037 -R01 z Z, o w 6 -.I C.) o O' N 0 1 w gQ —d: I-w ?� I- O Z I-:. LL) La O o w w`. H V .z co z i 1 City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 3 log is based on our interpretation of field and laboratory data and indicate the various types of soils encountered. They also indicate the depth at which the soils or their characteristics change, although the change may actually be gradual. Each of the soil samples obtained from the boring was reexamined in our laboratory. Moisture and dry density tests were accomplished on representative samples. Results of the moisture and dry density determinations are included on the boring log. Direct shear tests were accomplished on selected samples. The results of the direct shear tests are summarized in Figure 6. The soils encountered in boring B -1 consist of a surficial layer of fill for a driveway overlying loose sand and soft silt, medium dense sand and dense silty sand. The fill consists of about cinches of medium dense silty gravel with sand. A layer of loose silty sand was encountered below the fill and extends to a depth of about 8 feet: Below this depth, a unit of soft silt extending down to a depth of about 17 feet was encountered. The silt is underlain by a layer of loose silted_ A unit of medium dense fine to medium sand was encountered between depths of 22 and 35 feet. This sand unit will provide support for the augercast piles. Below a depth of 35 feet, a unit of hard sandy silt (siltstone bedrock) extending to the bottom of the boring was encountered. .No ground water information was obtained from the boring due to the drilling method used. Based on our previous test pits, the ground water level at the site was at about 4.5 to 7 feet below the ground surface in winter of 1995. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOUNDATION SUPPORT • The proposed building can be satisfactorily supported on augercast piles as planned. The piles will need to extend through the upper loose sand and soft s> t avers info�lt 1e underlying medium dense sand that has a low potential for liquefaction. Based on our recent boring, the medium dense sand begins at a depth of abo t 22 feet elow the existing ground surface. The depth to this supporting layer and to ,the un 'rig bedrock may vary across the building location, depending on the configuration of the older geologic strata which extend beneath the site from the hillside immediately to the west. Based on our discussions with the structural engineer, we understand that column loads will be such that downward capacities of 45 kips per pile will be required. The piles will be 16 -inch- diameter augercast concrete piles. We recommend that the piles extend a minimum of 5 feet into the medium dense sand unit encountered at a depth of 22 feet in our boring to achieve the design downward capacity. This capacity is based on a factor of safety of about 2.5 on soil strength parameters. The capacity G e o E n g i n e e r s File No. 0259- 037 -R01 f 1 City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 4 applies to single piles; if piles within groups are spaced at least three pile diameters on- center no reduction for pile group action need be made. The above capacity is for the total of dead and long -term live loads and may be increased by one -third when considering live loads of short 1 duration such as wind or seismic forces. Pile downdrag forces resulting from liquefaction should be considered, as discussed in a I subsequent section. The structural characteristics of pile materials and structural connections might impose limitations on pile capacities and should be evaluated by your structural engineer. For example, steel reinforcing will be needed for augercast piles subjected to uplift, as appropriate. We recommend that a single reinforcing bar be installed the entire length of the augercast pile to develop uplift capacity. There is some risk associated with supporting structural elements on single piles. Therefore, we recommend that all major structural elements be supported on pile 1 groups consisting of two or .more piles. Provisions should be made in the project contract documents and budget to adjust pile lengths as variations in the depth of the supporting medium dense sand layer are likely within the 1 limits of the building. Pile settlements are expected to be essentially elastic in nature and occur as loads are applied. Total settlement of piles constructed as recommended is not expected to exceed 1/2 inch, while differential settlements between comparably loaded pile groups are not expected to exceed about 50 percent of this value. 1 Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces can be resisted by uplift or lateral loading on the piles. The manner in which these loads are transferred into the piles will be a function of the 1 design of the foundation system. An wable uplift capacity_of 10 kips for a 16- inch - diameter augercast pile may be used provided that a single reinforcin bar is installed the entire length of 1 the augercast pile. This bar should be centered in the pile. The allowable lateral load for 16- inch - diameter augercast piles may be taken as 7 kips, assuming a center -to- center pile spacing of at least three pile diameters, adequate steel 1 reinforcement and pile -head fixity against rotation. This capacity is based on a maximum pile - head deflection of about 1/2 inch at the ground surface. We recommend that reinforcing be j installed to a minimum depth of 18 feet in the piles to resist bending moments associated with j lateral loading. 1Fesistance to lateral loads can also be developed by passive pressure on the face of pile 1 caps, grade beams, tie beams and other buried foundation elements. Allowable passive resistance values are presented below under "Lateral Resistance." Sliding friction on the base of pile- ; supported foundation elements should be ignored. 1 G e o E n g i n e e r s File No. 0259- 037 -RO1 z M; U O, W =, � w.. w 0: gQ = a. I_w • z�. 1-0 • zF- O. Ni .'ua w` O uiz; — • O z • City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 5 PILE INSTALLATION - Augercast (cast -in- place) concrete piles should be installed to the recommended penetration using a continuous - flight, hollow -stem auger. As is common practice, the pile grout is pumped under pressure through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. Reinforcing steel for bending and uplift is placed in the fresh grout column immediately after withdrawal of the auger. We recommend that the augercast piles be installed by a contractor experienced in their placement and using suitable equipment. Grout pumps should be fitted with a volume - measuring device and pressure gauge so that the volume of grout placed in each pile and the pressure head can be easily determined. While grouting, the rate of auger withdrawal should be uniform and controlled such that the volume of grout pumped is equivalent to at least 115 percent of the theoretical hole volume. A minimum grout line pressure of 100 psi should be maintained while grouting, and a minimum grout head of 10 feet (depth of auge>_in ground when grout return is observed) should also be maintained. We recommend that there be a waiting period of at least eight hours between installation of piles spaced closer than 10 feet center -to- center in order to avoid disturbance of concrete undergoing curing in a previously cast pile. There may be unexpected variations in the depth to and characteristics of the supporting soils across the site. In addition, no direct information regarding the capacity of augercast piles (e.g., driving resistance data) is obtained while this type of pile is being installed. Accordingly, we strongly recommend that we be retained to monitor drilling operations, record indicated penetrations into supporting soils, monitor grout injection pressures, record the volume of grout placed in each pile relative to the calculated volume of the hole, and evaluate the adequacy of each pile installation. LATERAL RESISTANCE . The soil resistance available to resist lateral foundation loads is a function of the frictional resistance which can develop on the base and the passive resistance which can develop on the face of the below -grade elements of the structure as they tend to move into the soil. The allowable passive resistance on the face of embedded foundation elements can be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot (triangular distribution) provided foundation elements are surrounded by structural fill or compacted in -situ soil extending laterally a distance of at least twice the depth of the element. This passive equivalent value includes a factor of safety of about 1.5. Sliding friction on the base of pile - supported foundation elements should be ignored, as noted above. G e o E n g i nee r s V:�x:K'bLa�'L•LJe `t: « : - 2kuAi . `: d3f saY+IDmFi{4fxl*>+r."aG ' ' S .kip 2.tv w�a. wic44tac :•� File No. 0259- 037 -R01 1 re J U UO U o' co w; w =, J1~-, CO LL w O' u. Q • a` 1--w z_� f- O Z LLI Do co ;O — 0 I- w w: -O uiz U U— O 1 1 1 1 1 •ccAtv:,:!72,1 City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 6 LIQUEFACTION EFFECTS Based on the results of our boring and previous test pits, we conclude that there is a moderate to high potential for liquefaction under a moderate to large earthquake in the loose sand layers encountered between the ground water level (about 4.5 to 7 feet in the test pits) and a depth of about 22 feet. This liquefaction might result in about 2 to 4 inches of settlement. This settlement could induce downdrag loads on the piles. We estimate that the downdrag loads under such circumstances might range up to about 24 kips. The additional load on the piles could result in additional settlements of up to 1/4 inch. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by the city of Tukwila, AHBL, Inc. and other members of the project team for use in the design of a portion of the project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for bidding or estimating purposes; but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface cond itions. If there are any changes in the loads, grades, locations, configurations or types of facilities to be constructed, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report might not be fully applicable. If such changes are made, we should be given the opportunity to review our conclusions and recommendations and to provide written modification or verification of these recommendations. When the design is finalized, we recommend that we be given the opportunity to review those portions of the specifications and drawings which relate to geotechnical considera- tions our recommendations have been inte rry eted andimlplemented as intended. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the locations of the explorations and also with time. Some contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the project budget and schedule. Wer commend that our firm be retained to rovide sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendation J for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with the contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. G e o E n g in e e r s .o► File No. 0259 -037 -ROl z w 00 ca cnw w =; wO g J: u- I— w. Z �. �o z� ww 2 D p: D 0 O ti) z. UN O z City of Tukwila June 21, 1995 Page 7 It has been our pleasure to be of service to you on this project. If there are any questions concerning the report or if we can provide additional services, please contact us. HRP:JKT:wd Document ID: 0259037.R Attachments Two copies submitted cc: AHBL, Inc. 2215 North 30th Street, Ste. 210 Tacoma, . Washington 98403 Attn: Mr. Mark Heinzig G e o E n g i n e e r s Respectfully submitted, GeoEngineers, Inc. Herbert R. Pschunder, P.E. Senior Engineer Jack K. Tuttle, P.E. Principal • •,• «r.�..r Lr�. z, r. �� :;*.,as.UV:s_u;:::nks�s:wW.l ^.taut. :M: ;5vucaus�t;n > ^,k « . . ^.F' n- 5.,::!tr.. tie., "ig • File No. 0259- 037 -R01 1 l 1 1 1. Ith 0 1 .i ✓..� .rt. <� �T. \' ..\ • NIN . • 1/) Subst .• • (59^ Alb 11.111:1; ■ t' \i r 4 ;! Paring s• Area • . Tower 0 1 .r a • •20 jj .. \VI • • :•■ • /4.; 7 me /•'� �� Hillbr Sch • • Dr'Ne•In` hitater• 7, / ,1,,�1 I t 1J in_ _I • • w l , ni 1. 1 1 1 1 i 1 GEI 85 -85 Rev. 05/93 Z W. V 00• co 0 W: W X I- f/) LL; W O. g J. LL Q: N d = H W = Z f. O' Z uj U0 0 W ut S V w Z Z SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE GRAINED SOILS, More Than 50% Retained on No. 200 Sieve GRAVEL More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Retained on No. 4 Sieve CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL- GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GP POORLY- GRADED GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL • SAND More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Passes No. 4 Sieve CLEAN SAND SW WELL - GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP ' POORLY - GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM _ SILTY SAND SC CLAYEY SAND FINE GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Passes No. 200 Sieve SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit Less Than 50 INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit 50 or More INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOISTURE MODIFIERS: 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch in general accordance with ASTM D2488 -90. Moist - Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487 -90. Wet - Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from below water table 3. Descriptions of soil density or consistency are based on interpretation of blow count data, visual appearance of soils, and /or test data. {1�' Geo En ' eers \/� SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FIGURE 3 Z W. V 00• co 0 W: W X I- f/) LL; W O. g J. LL Q: N d = H W = Z f. O' Z uj U0 0 W ut S V w Z Z er .s;«v!��:�atiti:raiu:�:i::arts: cuw:d:s.ww:� xsrworc.;�;.wcs ..K:�r .iiwdst,ac�,a : .Y KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS FIGURE 4 1- re w; •0O' ,0 0 ' rnw w =. J 1. wO = d w. z � Z�;. UJ .) ' 0 1- = w' O: YZ . Z; z :KAP:CMS 0/20/95 0 A eo 0 0) It) 10- 15— 1 w W - LL z - x• a p 20— 25 — 30 - 35 — 40—• TEST DATA Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group Lab Tests ( %) (pct) Count Samples Symbol SM 43 MD 43 78 MD 41 78 MD 29 91 MD, 21 106 DS SM 25 MD, DS 102 MD 15 113 27 29 33 40 ■ BORING B -1 DESCRIPTION Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0 p (GM Brownish gray silty fine to coarse gravel with sand (medium SM dense, moist) (fill) Dark brown silty fine sand with occasional organic matter (loose, moist to wet) • • • • • • • • • • • • ML Gray sandy silt (soft, wet) SM Dark gray silty fine to medium sand with occasional organic matter (loose, wet) SP . Dark gray fine to medium sand (medium dense to dense, wet) ML Gray sandy silt (hard, moist) (bedrock) J Note: See Figure 4 for explanation of symbols -5 -10 —15 - 20 — 25 - 30 — 35 — 40 Geo s Engineers LOG OF BORING FIGURE 5 TEST DATA Moisture Dry Content Density Blow Group • 40 —Lab Tens (%) (pet) Count Samples Symbol 45— 50 — 0 I - • 80— SM MD 23 104 50/5.5' 50/4.5' BORING B -1 (Continued) DESCRIPTION Note: See Figure 4 for explanation of symbols Boring completed at 48.0 feet on 06/14/95 No ground water observed due to use of drilling mud 40 — 45 — 50 — 55 — 60 — 65 770 — 75. — 80 Geo \O En ineers LOG OF BORING FIGURE 5 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA Boring Sample Depth Sample . Moisture Content Dry . Density Normal Pressure Yield Strength* Number (feet) Description ( %) (pcf) (pcf) Jpcf) 1 23 SP 21 106 3,000 2,200 1 • 33 SP 23 102 6,000 4,200 *Samples sheared at a strain rate of 0.04 inches /minute Geo Engineers Document ID: 25937DS.WK1 DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA FIGURE 6 i...:F.;ivwY.n JC..k..ea:.ui" tAe.`.:iL "r.i 1-Y .���wr/•�41/.j +- . -w „wn^ r , 4.t,ruJvl:�:w�.:i:F.:... ,':6': 42nd Ave. _ H r3ra'aa_r Ml. rick of 4E Concrete / P4. ED.v. 11.43' i � v to c! A u \� \ d PS 22 1 TP -5 26' Gear\ TP -4 \ \ \ \Concrete Parking Lot \ 2 pry y 15' Craw+l Rood -•- \\ ilk \,,•1 kik 111 ? :T., \ \ \ \ rd I/2' R k C. LS/ 19622 0.05 S and 0.04 E of Cor. 12/211/94 Fd1/2'RkC NC C. Lot 21. elk C. LS/ 19622 0.44 W of L.M. 'C.tl.n...d V \ \\ \\ Pond F7rt `\ \ X11 4= \\ te'rro.° B -1 TAP- 8-"°"0 ° any \ lr \ \ ` \ \ 26 \ 2i ro. `#4417' ; \ 10 Tr*. \ it \ \ TP -3 \ fa-rr.. 120' owl Rood l6'Cottonrood o 7.... 1 tr le s4.0 —r s1Ek GARAGE .1 11'ir.o. �6' Tr.. 2 6'Trooe \Se CO *TP -2 \ \ 1 . 0% 'l C 20'Trot #rP1 1:0* 24 "Cott. <'_:/ \ C 3 ttonwood \ • l'" 4 \ \ 20 Cottonwood l \�a0.p0-. fr l \ 3 teklognotto Tr2lio /`\ t/0 4 6'Uognollo r... 1 z \ v ` L. \ • \ V o• \ C on. once .� 3.65' EncreoGrrlt \)••. From F.nc. to ' Plot LMe ‘ti.• 1.,-Cost End of 1 • Conoof. Pip. Could Not Film \ -3.11' Er - •..65' Encroochm.nt ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW FILE: #E95-0016 DATE: June 30, 1995 PROPOSAL: Fire Station #53 APPLICANT: City of Tukwila, Fire Department GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project includes the construction of 6,200 square foot fire station, a 15 stall parking area, and landscaping. The fire station will be sited on a 3 acre site, located at the southeast comer of 42nd Avenue S. and S. 115th Street. The property is zoned C -M, Industrial Park, and contains an environmentally sensitive area, Type 2 wetland. The proposed building includes two apparatus bays with doors on two sides, a 28 foot tall hose tower, an office, kitchen, day room, exercise room, and sleeping quarters for 8 fire fighters. A number of permit applications are required to develop this project. A public hearing for a street vacation request to vacate a the portion of S. 114th Street and S. 115th Street, which run through the site, was conducted by the City Council June 19, 1995. The street vacation is pending adoption of an approved ordinance by the City Council. Applications for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Board of Architectural approval are also pending. The following is an environmental analysis based on the environmental checklist and additional information provided. Earth The site is relatively flat with existing soils composed of sandy silt. According to the Environmental Checklist, construction of the building at this site will require approximately 700 -1,000 yards of structural fill material. A geotechnical report was conducted for the property ('Addendum to Report, Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Services, Fire Station No. 53' by GeoEngineers, June 21, 1995). The report is an addendum to the 'Phase I Environmental Site Assessment' report by GeoEngineers, February 20, 1995. According to the geotechnical report the existing soils consist of an 8 inch layer of medium density silty gravel and sand fill over an approximate 8 foot layer of loose sand and soft silt. Below that is an approximate 17 foot layer of soft silt, with a layer of loose sandy silt under this. At 22 feet to 35 feet the is a layer of medium dense fine to medium sand, supported by a layer of hard sandy silt (siltstone bedrock). According to the geotechnical report the layer of medium dense fine to medium sand can support the proposed augercast pile foundation system proposed for the fire station. The geotechnical report recommends that the piles extend a minimum of 5 feet into the medium dense sand unit and that structural elements of the building be supported on pile groups consisting of two or more piles. In addition, it is recommended that the piles be reinforced with a single reinforcing bar, installed the entire length of the augercast pile. ..... . ........ n; rri- abv�tir � : %v >i� %� %•ir:5in'i..wtiC�iri:V! Erosion control measures will be employed during construction to prevent soils from reaching the river or the on -site wetland. Re- vegetation of all disturbed areas will be completed after construction. AIR Development of subject property is resulting in the demolition of a number os structures existing on the property. Removal of any existing asbestos is required prior to demolition of these structures per Washington State Department of Air Quality standards, No significant adverse impacts to air quality are expected as a result of this development. WATER A 1.5 acre, Class 2 wetland is located on the property. The wetland has been delineated by the City Urban Environmentalist. This wetland is regulated by the Sensitive Areas Overlay zone of the Zoning Code (TMC 18.45). All development is proposed to be setback a minimum of 50 feet from the delineated wetland. The 50 foot buffer will be reduced at the northeast end of the building where the hose tower is located. The buffer will be reduced to 35 feet in width and enhancement vegetation will be provided in this area of the buffer. No development will occur within the wetland or buffer areas. Water runoff and Stormwater Approximately 14% of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces upon completion of the development. This has a potential to increase storm water runoff. Runoff from the driveways, parking areas and walkways will be directed to oil/water separators and then directed to either a settlement pond or bio- filtration swale before it is release to the existing on -site wetland. Detention of storm water will be required to insure that the storm water run -off is released off site at the same rate as previously occurred prior to site development. No increase in the volume of storm water to the wetland will be permitted, per the regulation of the Sensitive Ares Overlay Zone. The proposed storm water drainage system is will meet the standards of the IGng County Storm Water Design Manual. PLANTS The project includes removal of trees, shrubs, and ground cover to construct the new fire station. A number of significant trees exist on the site. Approximately 29 of these trees will be removed (20 of which are resulting from an overgrown holly hedge). Tree replacement is required per the Tree Regulations and Requirements (TMC 18.54). The applicant will be using the 20% canopy coverage method (TMC 18.54.140(b), which will require approximately 30 replacement trees to be planted on the property. Trees to be retained shall be protected during the construction process as required under TMC 18.54.130 (2), with protective fencing. Of particular concern is the retention and protection of the existing 80' Sequoia giganteum /Giant Sequoia tree, located near the norther access driveway. A 20 foot wide paved driveway located between this tree and the toe of the slope to the north, would adversely impact this significant tree. The driveway should be reduced and /or alternative methods of vehicular support ( such as 'grass crete'') should be employed to allow moisture and air to reach the soil in the root zone of this tree. Compaction of the soil in the root zone can also have an adverse effect on the tree. Measures to assure that this tree is not adversely effected by development of the site should be proposed by the landscape architect and implemented during the development and construction phases of the project. Extensive landscaping, consisting of trees, shrubs and ground cover is proposed at the property boundaries and around the parking and building. ANIMALS Much of the site will remain undeveloped. Existing wetlands, trees and shrubs will continue to provide wildlife habitat for the number of birds and small animals that currently use the site. .T. z • i~ Et U; U OQ cn w w i■ W LL; w O: 2 u. Q: co a. I- W. Z �. 1- 6 D o O.tni w w‘: ;� -- •- =t O • roc ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES The proposed structure will meet the Washington State Energy code, and energy efficient appliances will be used. No adverse impact to energy and natural resources is expected. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH /NOISE The fires station is proposed to be build to earthquake standards for a structure of this type, resulting in the ability of the emergency vehicles being able to function during such a disaster. Noise from the fire trucks and sirens will increase the noise level of the area slightly, but not be significant. LAND AND SHORELINE USE The property is zoned CM, Industrial Park. Fire stations require a conditional use permit within this zoning district. Design Review is also required for development of this project. Because the project is commercial in nature, and the development lies within property located within a designated shoreline area, the project is subject to the review guidelines of the Board of Architectural Review (TMC 18.60). This application, along with the Conditional Use permit application, are set for a public hearing on July 27, 1995. The property lies within the 200 foot shoreline of the Green/Duwamish River, which is designated a shoreline of statewide significance through the State of Washington Shoreline Management Act. Development of the fire station requires a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Although the property is located within the City of Tukwila, the site lies within a shoreline area regulated by the King County Shoreline Program. The City of Tukwila administers the King County regulations in recently annexed areas until the City of Tukwila Shoreline Program is amended to include these annexed areas. An administrative shoreline permit will be processed for this project. HOUSING Four existing houses, a garage, a barn and four out- buildings will be demolished to develop the proposed fire station. Three of the structures were occupied prior to the City purchase of the property. To off -set the impact of displacement, these residents were offered financial assistance for relocation. AESTHETICS The proposed structure will have a maximum height of 38 feet for the hose tower, located at the rear of the building. Building material will consist of wood or wood -like siding with a metal roof. No views will be obstructed with development of the site. Further review of the aesthetics of the structure will be analyzed through the Design Review application which goes before the Board of Architectural Review. LIGHT AND GLARE On -site lighting is proposed to be located along the walkways and driveways, and within the parking area for safety purposes. The light standards will be approximately 12 feet tall for the pedestrian areas, and 16 feet tall for the vehicular areas. Measures to insure that the lighting is directed toward the subject site will eliminate any off-site impacts resulting from the proposed lighting. The material of the building are intended to be non - reflective, therefore no adverse impacts are expected. RECREATION The site is located across the road from the Duwamish /Green River, which provides passive recreational opportunities. The Green River Trail and Duwamish Park are within 1/4 mile from the site. The unimproved right -of -way for 42nd Avenue S. is designated as a bicycle route, in the adopted Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), which was adopted by the City of Tukwila Council on June 19, 1995. Future development of this bike path should be considered when developing the 42nd Avenue S. right -of -way, to insure that the bike path can be accommodated in the future. ci .4!kaiAY: ., u. :r& us v, �.i::'..; '.i r vs . z z -J V :00 cnw' wI J H! N LL: w 0: . u- N = 0 w Z F- 0, 'Z �. N+ 0 H ,w U. H V`, O; ui z: UN 167 I z HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION There is no evidence that the site is of cultural or historic significance. None of the structures existing on the site are listed as being of historic significance. No significant adverse impacts are expected as a result of demolition of these structures. TRANSPORTATION The property fronts on two public streets, S. 115th Street, which is paved, and unimproved 42nd z Avenue S. Primary access will be by way of S. 115th Street. A secondary access, used by fire trucks to return to the station, will be located within the right -of -way of unimproved 42nd Avenue S. z • mow: 003 (00 :. cn Lu Proposed improvements to the existing public streets include the construction of a sidewalk along a w =. short distance of S. 115th Street, between the two access driveways. Proposed improvements to co 42nd Avenue S. are limited to paving a 20 wide driveway. o. To insure that the significant Sequoia tree is retained as discussed earlier, and to insure that the g5 future bicycle path can be accommodated, the secondary driveway access proposed for the right -of- u. way of 42nd Avenue S. should be reduced from 20 feet in width to 12 feet in width, providing one -way = d access for the retuming fire trucks. Reducing this access still leaves the other 24 foot access _ driveway available for parking and exiting fire trucks. z H- O. zF ww Do. O co 0 w ui` LL — O: Z w H z Parking for a total of 15 vehicles is proposed. Approximately 16 trips per day will be generated by the completed fire station proposal. PUBLIC SERVICES The proposal will increase fire suppression service for the service area Two apparatus bays will be initially provided, with the future potential for four. No adverse impacts to public services is expected. UTIUTIES Connection to a new 16 inch water main located in S. 115th Street is required. The property is currently served by public services for water. To provide adequate sewer service, the construction of an 8 inch sewer line to S 116th Sheet/44th Avenue S., with five (5) manholes is needed. The applicant is required to participate in their share of the cost, $30,000. The applicant will also required to show the existing 18 inch storm drain on the plans to avoid future conflicts with site development. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis in this report, it is recommended that this project be issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) with the following conditions: 1. In order to preserve and protect the existing 80' Sequoia aiaanteum /Giant Sequoia tree, a porous pavement system shall be included as part of the road on the north side of the existing 80' Sequoia tree to allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. The reinforced plastic product Geoblock shall be installed for a width of 5 feet and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. 2. Landscaping and development within the right -of -way of 42nd Avenue S. shall be designed so that future development of a bike path can be readily accommodated. Best Management Practices (BMPs) , as defined in Tree Regulations [TMC 18.54.040(2)], shall be employed in protecting all existing trees to be retained. 4. The delineated wetland and the buffer areas shall be protected with temporary fencing during all construction processes. 5. The City Public Works Department with Fire Station #53 will be required to pay a proportionate fair share of sewer improvements for the S. 116th/44th Avenue S. 8 inch sewer line and five (5) manhole design and construction costs. The fair share will be - $30,000.00. • .`" - 114-12, , , CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATE )ETERMINATION OF NONSIGNI( ANCE (MDNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF A 6,200 SO. FT. FIRE STATION. PROJECT INCLUDES STREET VACATION OF TWO PUBLIC STREETS S 114 AND S 115, CONDITIONAL USE, BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, LOT CONSOLIDATION, AND BUILDING PERMITS. PROPONENT: CITY OF TUKWILA,-FIRE DEPARTMENT-;-, LOCATION LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET; ADDRESS; IF` ANY ADDRESS: PARCEL NO:. SEC /TWN /RNG:,: LEAD AGENCY: 4202'S 415 ST 335140 -1005 • SEC 10,T23,R4E, WM. CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E95 -0016 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact'on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after•review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file'with the'iead agency. This information is available to the public on request..' The conditions to this SEPA Determination are attached:" This DNS is issued u der.�•197 -11- 340(2 Comments must be submitted by _s _.)1Tg The l eadi agency• wi 11., not act on this i s osal ► or.: 15 days from the date be ;low. —, {: i �� l Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Date City of Tukwila, (206) 431 -3680 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 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 signature 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 Department of Community Development. N,�.d4ii�7� +s11Y tg.t 1 &f?:d:V.' ::5Vs 1444,114W1 w.a..51A .4425itit-. li4 . " Aie:b:ttiei'C' [:LbiiiK': - ..,• . - .. .. ... .. ... .. • n� . +• . r .� .. • .• ' ..• • Address: Applicant: Permit No: Type: Location: SEC 10,T23,R4E, WM. Parcel #: 335140-1005 4202 S 115 ST CITY OF TUKWILA, E95-0016 P-SEPA CITY TUKWILA CONDITIONS FIRE DEPARTMENT Status: PENDING Applied: 05/31/1995 DNSC Approved: Zoning: CM *************************************************************************** 1. In order to preserve and protect the existing 80" Sequoia giganteum/Giant Sequoia tree, a porous pAyement system shall be included as part of the road on the nagft side of the existing 80" Sequoia tree to allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. The reinforced plastic product Geoblock shall be installed for a width of 5 feet and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. 2. Landscaping and development within the right-of-way of 42nd Avenue S. shall be designed so that future development of a bike path can be readily accommodated. 3. Best Management Practices (BMPs), as defined in Tree Reg- ulations [TMC 18.54.040(2)], shall be employed in protecting all existing trees to be retained. 4. The delineated wetland and the buffer areas shall be protected with temporary fencing during all construction processes. 5. The Fire Department will be required to pay a proportionate fair share of sewer improvements for the S.116th/42nd Ave.S. 8 inch sewer line. Co UNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 9/18/95 L.H. ITEM NO. « •*Kr .:..,.:: <� n:v,;.M� "' � ^'gay r < ... .: ,.. <.:. ,. .. .v.:. r.:. ..,.�.:. , k zy ?i�a wso, sy x: i .,: w ?:,.. s?' � i.. ''`a,.. ...;E., a y . >j.:,e4.. 'a.; . 3., ..i . v.c� yy. ! . ..3 �.s.. : <:kE� ie• ?.k <:: ).r. #'.. 3?s „. S. 2 ,:.3.,. .:S.Y : :x �. s :[c� a:. orb. y ra> f ::...i s'iF',' X : .,<x..� . ?. R .: :': .. . :. .,r ... • s ” Sg,x<, k;:r.:. .u..:. .s„ 3 '�' rs .'F ., k'.. :may < >r :.:.v,..,s? >. o� � 3 ' iE: . i .,.... .. .;x..{ {x..�ay ..: ,: .,.> .. > <.. , � ��' w3!. ::.y�,xyy .s : +.:`.:% "` x.?� ..lG .. [ x �{a. ,kS tar Sr � ...�.: ... kii 3x > Y'? .. �� , . :.. � �.. : _ .�. �.. �r :)'r ` .LT :.:? �RMAxIaN >. � R.. x : � �" �, : 5.. z , , .'�t� >~^ .r . ftr... .. .. :. .. . > < ..< :...,.c. ,... . ,,. .:....... ..... ... .b...: Y':• .>,... .zE:y <. <:..:.. s'�:� : }:`t: <, 3�Et <s6s cs ,.. a, . ,.r.«z. . 24a:.:: ��, asd ^�., ^a>.,..,f.�<?'s:r;�„)`r!: ..r•...?er.�.k:Tksa.,...,..r .<. ,. o: ......... ..... , , .. „ . <:...: . CAS Number: Original Agenda Date Sept. 18, 1995 Agenda Item Title: Fire Station #53 appeal of the Design Review and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) decisions dated July 27, 1995. Original Sponsor: Council Admin. P.C., SEPA Official Timeline: City Council Public Hearing on Sept. 18, 1995. Sponsor's Summary: Appeal of SEPA MDNS, Shoreline Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Design Review approval for Tukwila Fire Station #53 at 4202 S. 115th Street. Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: P.C., BAR and SEPA Official C. Summary of the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review minutes, July 27, 1995 Cost Impact (if known): D. Staff report to the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review dated July 27, 1995 Fund Source (if known): ...v. . ..:, r .. . u .. .. . . .., • /H. F.. ... rR .. . ',....'',...s....., . ^..: ... .:: .. .;,.... r.+.v!n,xrr' /i.+,::rE ?' ^:kk . ,. .. .'Ear . r. :. :r. 3',4, :.. ..E.< 3x .. .Lk AS .. E. Y< k .. r :.,y . �`':, ... <. .... 2..., ;, i:,';x5s'z >s` :r »xi i:s %1'I?%n. s ::S,'.`�. }• "° 'i''''''C' xfiR..p�.f ?.. ,'"s'.iy:k.. E,, <¢Efi. w �'., .. j. .,F �'` W,3 .C`�xrv` , ^3• i jY .�.�`. ^?`i ,:i.,:) >.;)2. ax/ .Y. ,Z: .y.: "Y/,`: J,.f„ R�'�::Ff ,G,. :ter . R'S iS ... :u, '>': vg.'Sf:2 " s:2.�:rn3.; ..., .Y u.::.:: ;E, :.fi:`.< ,fit . .. ,� . • 3" 's 2k.. 1 zik. ' s�.u��p� :,,,k „; :„ . �'J„ . , • $, , 0.'.[ uDk q� y T .� n £. x ?xv? =Y 7... :;ill .t.,;r : • ...:. ., : w.:..,>.?,.1�' •a3f. :. ,.LPL/, �!"t ' .: s: ;::r1xY:y:s ��� °.;Y�'ib�ss >r 3m�Y,.ob�irr �.:::..a�:k';�?yk <s3 . ..: .,:,.. ,: :. .... .�.. .gym.. ... .: :.. ... ...... •rc.: ....:Um:,i 7.2..... r' , ,.. %aid3 :i<xr'.'Ei:£: ?,1.:.. ,s+5..... , Meeting Date Action 9/18/95 Attachments 9/18/95 A. Memo to Mayor Rants from Steve Lancaster, September 18, 1995 B. Notice of Appeal, August 7, 1995 C. Summary of the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review minutes, July 27, 1995 D. Staff report to the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review dated July 27, 1995 ( x%i.F Qs Y S :tt~M .`ry, vn'^ {i .'.'6.'s'..s .,. +�.v`..ay ..p,. fa , a. r i`. ., r . : �3a. R . '8> < F .,...c, .,. , . r: :FY ,.r�r•.,'i .4>._ 4 .. ,.:. ??<<.Fy� 2» w ?.,:S;ne:�s7r:c£.'?. C6..cefYS:x,<.,.5. ,:(' -+...., -' . ,} 3 S:S,:: i p. ySl+.{ ,Y ) ' h u!, : 3/. s ii :rk {..:5.'y. .S. oSr ) .,3 .,f ..,., ,ss. f.FS�[ <r� lX;. ,:�i.' `r,. f<..¢i� .2V,' :. a~ 5' 2E<.? 3: yi;r <'): .. J />, >. Xa' H. ?Y.L3<�' �C .: kr. 3z ^ 3'sy "; `j� :.Si. :s�`.",x, x s!s ^u E "i£� :,� ...3 "i�k...>.j! .kK z Y , ,L... 3i :., ,.. ..<k:. R % `>i, ,i ; <,. r " { .,,�., ,..2 {a,..,.:: :. •F ..:H:.. E xssr' ki�. rt . . :., .,< ^. ,:,r,'. ^* ,s..,2 � { >:r< ,. >,3's,2 >d' <y< .. i2.w.,., :.< ... »per ^r, <.< u : :. , v 2.. .a ". x�� <i3. . r<:.,. . %ao<X2' ". s9r >�. .. ;.44`.-:-.-.;,,- . a C: .:.,.� »C."` fji . .. /rv< ... i.:C ... .,fat,''2:r : >: <:.?:3^..k^.<<' %T,, , {,2s"�Sa,'b„..,.,w.[ k.s . & { %: ..., ...... , ,:,. <... :. � f, 1• . Meeting Date Attachments 9/18/95 A. Memo to Mayor Rants from Steve Lancaster, September 18, 1995 B. Notice of Appeal, August 7, 1995 C. Summary of the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review minutes, July 27, 1995 D. Staff report to the Planning Commission & Board of Architectural Review dated July 27, 1995 E. Letter from Landscape Architect, Dale Dennis, to applicant, Randy Berg, June 30, 1995 F. Memo from Steve Lancaster, June 15, 1995 1 Z • Z: C4 w 6D JU U 0' U 0' w= wO u_ Q �w z� i-0. • :z �- w . '2 D. U� co; w U' O. .Z .w N; 0 H 0 z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Rants and Members of the City Council From: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Date: September 18, 1995 Subject: Appeal of the decisions of the Planning Commission, Board of Architectural Review, and the Director of the Department of Community Development Director, relating to proposed Fire Station No. 53. • HEARING. DATE: September 18, 1995 FILE NUMBER: #L95-0046 APPELLANT: Jackie Dempere REQUEST: Appeal of SEPA Determination of Non-Significance File # E95-0016 Appeal of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit File # L95-0027 Appeal of BAR Design Approval File # L95-0030 Appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95-0031 LOCATION: 4202 South 115th Street STAFF: ,Steve Lancaster, Director of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Z FINDINGS Background On June 11, 1995, the Director of Community Development issued a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the proposal to build a new fire station (Fire Station #53) at 4202 South 115th Street. This MDNS was issued under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and includes five (5) mitigating conditions, as follows: 1. In order to preserve and protect the existing 80" Sequoia giganteum /Giant Sequoia tree, a porous pavement system shall be included as part of the road on the west side of the existing 80" Sequoia tree to allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. The reinforced plastic product Geoblock shall be installed for a width of 5 feet and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. Landscaping and development within the right-of-way of 42nd Avenue S. shall be designed so that future development of a bike path can be readily accommodated. Best Management Practices (BMPs) , as defined in Tree Regulations [TMC 18.54.040(2)], shall be employed in protecting all existing trees to be retained. 4. The delineated wetland and the buffer areas shall be protected with temporary fencing during all construction processes. 5. The Fire Department will be required to pay a proportionate fair share of sewer improvements for the S. 116th /42nd Ave. S. 8 inch sewer line. Subsequently, on July 27, 1995 the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and the Board of Architectural Review(BAR) conditionally approved the project design for the proposed fire station. Conditions imposed by the BAR, are as follows: 1. A bike rack shall be placed near the entrance to the fire station. 2. Relocate and screen the transformer shown in the front yard area. 3. The applicant shall contact the Tukwila Arts Commission requesting design and location recommendations for a commemorative sign of the "Battle of the North and South Wind ", a Duwamish Indian . legend, and identifying the fire station as Beaver Bend. 2 Ceaa • J U O. • u) 0 W =. Jam! LL: wo Li. Q' D = a,. I- T. .z z 1-; U �! oco 1:3 U. 1 o. .z, off:. `z.:. 4. The fire station sign shall be approved by the Board of Architectural Review. Review Process This is a quasi-judicial process. All information for the City Council's decision must be submitted at the public hearing. The City Council shall affirm, deny or modify the decision's being appealed. No information source carries more weight than another, whether it be the Planning Commission, BAR, applicant, appellant, or staff. Appeal On August 7, 1995, Ms. Jackie Dempere filed an appeal of the issuance of the Determination of Non - Significance; of the issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit; of the approval of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and of the Design Review approval for the proposed fire station. The appeal of the Determination of Non - Significance was not filed within the time period allowed for such appeals by the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC). TMC 21.04.280(b) requires that all such appeals be filed within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the decision. In this case, the appeal was not filed until fifty-seven (57) days after the decision (MDNS) was issued. The appeal of the Determination of Non - Significance must therefore be dismissed. The appeal of the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit was not properly filed. Appeals of such permits must be filed with the Washington State Shorelines Hearing Board, RCW 90.58.140 (6). The City Council has no authority to hear such appeals. The appeals of both the Conditional Use Permit and the BAR design approval were filed within ten (10) days of the Planning Commission and BAR decisions. Under the provisions of TMC 18.90.020, the City Council must review and either affirm, deny (overturn) or modify these decisions. In doing so, the Council must consider the BAR and CUP decisions according to the criteria upon which those decisions must be based, as set forth by TMC 18.64.050 (CUP) and TMC 18.60.050 (BAR). The following provides a detailed analysis of the grounds for appeal as submitted by Ms. Dempere. (see page 2 of the Notice of Appeal, Appendix B.). Specific grounds cited in the appeal are listed in italics, with an analysis of each point immediately following. Analysis 1. The inadequate disclosure and lack of disclosure of the adverse impacts associated with the proposal. As noted above, this issue is related directly to the SEPA determination and no legal standing exists to challenge the environmental determination. 3 z • •w 65 .0 O. co o • W •J 1- • N LL` WO. • LL Q ._: F- O` z� n 0: OH• • WuJ ,H U' uiz U -' O ~S. • .z 2. Inadequate conditions and lack of conditions imposed upon the project to mitigate adverse impacts, including but not limited to: a. The failure to require a traffic study where this project will encroach a Scenic Drive Road and protect the safety of Tukwila residents and non - residents who use the roadway for work or pleasure. Traffic issues were addressed during the SEPA review and review of the conditional use permit and design review. The new fire station will be replacing an existing fire station which is located a few blocks south and uses the same road for existing emergency vehicle access. The new fire station, at full capacity, will result in an increase of 16 trips being generated at this site. Emergency vehicle traffic is dependent on the number of emergency calls received. However, because the existing fire station will be eliminated and the present access is directed to S. 115th Street, the impact to the existing transportation system is negligible. These issues were discussed under CUP Criteria C. South 115th Street is not formally designated as a scenic drive or road. The proposed fire station will be improving S. 115th Street with a public sidewalk along a short distance between two . proposed access drives. The project does not encroach on the right -of -way of S 115th Street. Concerns for sight distance from the driveway access points were also discussed and analyzed during review and again at the public hearing with the Planning Commission members. The applicant provided to planning staff, a photo montage of the sight view from the driveway location which demonstrated adequate sight distance for exiting trucks. Fire truck exiting was specifically located at the southeastern driveway which will have adequate sight distance to view traffic moving either direction along S. 115th Street, and allow safe entrance onto the street. This was discussed under Criteria 2 of the BAR report. On -site circulation was also addressed to insure that the pedestrian, auto and emergency vehicle traffic did not conflict. See Conclusions, Criteria C. of the CUP. 2.b. The location of a fire station in a site where the access may be cut off and equipment locked in the case of natural disaster. The proposed fire station site is not unusually susceptible to the potential effects of earthquake or other natural disaster. This site, and all of western Washington, is classified by chapter 16 -2 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (UBC), as Seismic zone 3 (with zone 4 being highest hazard) for earthquake hazard area. It is not located within a flood hazard area; nor is the access. Emergency building, such as fire stations are built to meet certain earthquake and other natural disaster standards to insure that the facility will function when it is needed most, during an emergency. The architect is designing the building, stormwater facilities and access routes to meet the standards for this type of emergency facility. 4 z w no ac 0. UO coo Unw w =. CO o w ga' IL <: U D id I- w z 11■• : �o Z ~. o F-. H w V: o LLiz, N;, o 3. Inadequate application of the existing Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Plus cumulative adverse impacts on the wetland habitat from excessive noise and light. Compliance with the Tukwila Municipal Code was evaluated during the CUP and BAR review of the proposed fire station. The proposed project meets the requirements of the Tukwila Tree Ordinance (TMC 18.54) and Sensitive Areas Overlay (TMC 18.45). A tree permit has not yet been issued for this proposal and the requirements of the Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone will be specifically applied during the final building review process. Prior to the public hearing on the CUP and BAR, the Director of Community Development authorized use of the "20% canopy coverage method" of tree replacement, as permitted under TMC 18.54.120(b). (See Appendix D.) Factors supporting use of the 20% canopy method include the large number of trees on the site, and the fact that half of the existing significant trees are actually a hedge of overgrown ornamental holly trees. The landscape plan meets the 20% canopy replacement requirement as discussed in CUP Criteria B., by providing 38 replacement trees, 14 wetland enhancement trees and 22 trees which are required by shoreline regulations. The subject property was chosen for the Allentown fire station site partly because the existing Type 2 wetland would then be placed under public ownership. Wetland impacts were addressed in CUP Criteria B. No development is proposed within the delineated wetland boundary or buffer area. The Type 2 Wetland normally requires a 50 foot buffer and commercial structures are required to be setback from buffer areas a minimum of 15 feet. Wetland buffer may, however, be reduced if no adverse impact to the wetland will result, TMC 18.45.040(c)(4)(A). The Director permitted the applicant to reduce the buffer to 35 feet only in the area where the hose tower and condensing pads are located (see Appendix D.). The result is still a 50 foot distance between the wetland and the proposed structure because of the 15 foot building setback from the buffer. The buffer reductions reduces the buffer by only 600 square feet in area. In addition, the reduced buffer area, is enhanced with riparian vegetation as indicated in the landscape plan (Appendix D.) With these mitigations, the impact of noise and light on wetland habitat will not be significant. 4. The loss of five low income housing units and inadequate compensation of its displaced low income tenants. The subject property has four, not five existing houses. Three of the four existing houses were occupied prior to the City purchase of the property. No specific criteria of the CUP or BAR require compensation to displaced tenants, and therefore this issue is not a valid point of appeal. However, to off -set the impact of displacement, the City provided these residents financial assistance for relocation through the YMCA. S. Disregard for previous citizen input and of the recommendation for single family zoning of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizens Committee and Planning Commission for the property. 5 z • • ��-- z: • rew • w • • W =: J 1- • • u.. w 0' w • a. (v =w z�; F- O z �. U� lit LW P. - o, • wz .z � The property is currently zoned CM, Commercial Manufacturing. Land use applications such as those associated with the proposed fire station must be considered under the zoning in effect at the time of application and decision. Fire stations are allowed through a conditional use permit in the CM zoning district. For that matter, even if the property were zoned single family, a fire station could still be allowed as a conditional use [TMC 18.12.050(5)]. This issue does not apply to any of the decision making criteria for the zz BAR or CUP and therefore is not a valid point of appeal. : _ w; 6. The lack of protection of architectural and historical significant buildings of a re 2 neighborhood as mandated by the. Comprehensive Plan Guidelines. v 0 y0. Four houses, a garage, a barn and four out - buildings exist on the property. These are w i proposed to be demolished to develop the proposed fire station. None of the structures -1 1-: have been named to an official list of architectural or historical significant structures. w 0 Therefore there is no requirement to preserve the buildings. 2 7. The impossibility of providing proper buffers of surrounding single family homes from N D a fire station activity. i w _- Fire, stations are required to obtain a conditional use permit to locate within any zoning i- p, district, primarily due to the noise and transportation issues associated with such facilities. w These issues are looked at closely, especially when a station is located close to single . 2D • family residences. The subject site is 3 acres is size. The proposed building is setback o w' from the street and located in the center of the property, lessening the noise impacts to o �: both the street and neighboring properties. Many of the existing trees will be retained t'"' ;w w on the site and additional trees will be planted to provide adequate vegetative buffers on � F' all sides of the property. Buffering issues are discussed under the BAR criteria (3). "-- o After considering these issues, the BAR required that the transformer proposed for the iii �'. front yard be relocated and screened. v P. = O ~' Conclusion 1.) The appeal of Determination of Non- Significance File # E95 -0016 was not filed within the time period required under TMC 21.04.280(b). 2.) The appeal of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit File # L95 -0027 cannot be heard and decided by the Tukwila City Council. Such appeals must be filed with . the Washington Shoreline Hearing Board. 3.) . The record of BAR Design Approval File # L95 -0030 clearly demonstrates that the BAR properly applied the decision criteria applicable to design approval for the proposed fire station. 4.) • The appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031 was properly filed within the appropriate time period. 6 f 5.) The record of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031 clearly demonstrates that the BAR properly applied the decision criteria applicable to design approval for the proposed fire station. Staff Recommendation 1.) Support the Board of Architectural Review's decision and deny the appeal of the BAR design approval, File # L95 -0030. Support the Planning Commission's decision and deny the appeal of Conditional Use Permit File # L95 -0031. °` ‘)/7‘' BEFORE THE COUNCIL, CITY OF TUKWILA RECEIVED AUG ' 1995 IN THE MATTER OF: ) ,.I I Y OF TUKwu CITY CLERK THE APPEAL OF JACKIE DEMPERE ) OF THE DECISION OF THE ) DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT ) Case No. L95 -0027, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ) L95- 0031,L95- 0030, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON A ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ) APPLICATION, ) NOTICE OF APPEAL Appellant. ) ) TO: THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL; AND TO: STEVE LANCASTER, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Pursuant to TUKWILA'S MUNICIPAL CODES (TMC), SEPA and the KING COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM and other Laws, appellant, Jackie Dempere, hereby appeals the Analysis and Decision of the Director of the Department of Community Development and the Planning Commission Case No. L95-0027, L95 -0031, L95 -0030. The decision consists of the issuance of a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS), approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Design Review approval by the Planning Commission, for the construction of a new fire station at the Northeast corner of 4202 S 115th Street, and on the East side of the Duwamish river, Tukwila, Washington. 1. Appellant.* ant . Jackie L. Dempere 4033 S.128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Phone:(206) 433 -8539 NOTICE OF APPEAL 1 Grounds for Appeal The issuance of a Determination of Non- Significance and the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, including Design Review; The inadequate disclosure and lack of disclosure u� of the adverse impacts associated with the proposal; c.)0 0 ; co iw uw O' . J The failure to require a traffic study where this N �, project will encroach.a Scenic Drive Road and protect = W the safety of Tukwila residents and non - residents who z use roadway for work or pleasure. 1-0 z F-. moo: O co i The inadequate application of the - w :E D, u. Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Plus cumulative adverse tiiz, impacts on the Wetland Habitat from Excessive Noise and V Light. z 0. The inadequate conditions and lack of conditions imposed upon the project to mitigate adverse impacts, including but not limited to: The location of a Fire station in a site where the access may be cut off and equipment locked in the case of natural disaster. The loss of five low income housing units and inadequate compensation of its displaced low income tenants. Disregard for previous citizen in put and of the recommendation for Single Family zoning of the Tukwila Tomorrow Citizens Committee and Planning Commission for the property. The lack of protection of architectural and historical significant buildings of a neighborhood as mandate by the Comprehensive Plan Guidelines. The impossibility of providing proper buffers of surrounding Single Family homes from a fire station activity. NOTICE OF APPEAL - Relief Requested Appellant respectfully requests that the Director's DCD decision'and Determination of Non- Significance be reversed and that the applicant be required to prepare an. EIS and a Traffic Study. Appellant further request that the Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval be rescinded. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 7 day of August, 1995. Jackie L. Demp re Appellant NOTICE OF APPEAL -3 _3 ':. '_[ts�5:aa�:ti:t'J3Jr:u: 'I + .w::T�'��R..`viiNtisu]":' .Ga4L.,... [iLiM.".,'• [J1G^1ffi� PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 27,1995 Commissioner Stetson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Members present were Commissioners Stetson, Malina, Flesher, Meryhew, Livermore, and Marvin. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Libby Hudson, and Sylvia Schnug. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 15,1995 MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MR. FLESHER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. FLESHER MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 22, 1995 MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MR. MARVIN SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Citizens' comments: Jackie Dempere, 4033 S. 128 St. Ms. Dempere discussed the proposal to reduce the minimum lot size in R -1 zoning in the Draft Development Regulations. Ms. Stetson indicated there would be an open house and a public hearing on the matter. L95 -0030: Design Review L95 -0031: Conditional Use Permit Tukwila Fire Station #53 z E-- w 6 • 0 U. co W= N w 0 u. a: N a. • • I- _ Z 0 W V 0 0 -! „. • CU z :0 N. • O z.` Libby Hudson presented the staff report. She noted that the site is approximately 3 acres. Half of the site is a Class II wetland. The project requires a number of permits including Shoreline and SEPA. There approximately 66 trees existing on the site and half of them will be retained. All of the trees within the wetland and buffer areas will not be disturbed. The project meets all five of the Conditional Use Permit Criteria. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit as submitted. The building is set back 50 feet from the wetland. The wetland buffer will be enhanced with additional trees. The Craftsman design of the building fits in with the surrounding residences. The removed trees will be replaced. There are 33 proposed new trees. The mechanical equipment is under the roof and not visible. The project meets all five Design Review criteria, therefore staff recommends approval of the design review as submitted. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 27, 1995 Mr. Malina expressed his desire for bicycle racks to be placed at the front of the fire station, and a patio area for the fire fighters. Mr. Livermore asked what the statement in the staff report, "The project will provide ' improved emergency services" means. z =z Ms. Hudson stated that it means that the fire station can handle more hardware and r equipment. a 0O` N 0 Mr. Livermore asked if 15 parking spaces is going to be adequate. ' w = N u_ Ms. Hudson said there will only be eight fire fighters on duty at one time and the uj O parking seemed adequate. = Mr. Livermore asked if there is some flat space between the toe of the hill and the access = wa, w: road.. _, z1.- Ms. Hudson said that the road won't cut into the toe of the hill at all. She also stated z 1-. 11J uj that a geotechnical study has been completed. 2 o' Mr. Livermore asked if the concrete slab is adequate to handle the weight of the fire of- _ : w la Ms. Hudson deferred that question to the applicant. w Z 0 N' 1--H Mr. Livermore asked if any recreation areas, such as basketball courts, will be provided. Z trucks. Ms. Hudson said she spoke to the applicant about possible recreation areas and was told that too many fire fighters have experienced disabilities playing basketball. Randy Berg, City of Tukwila Project Manager: He stated that City policy precludes basketball courts due to injuries. There is a patio area proposed, which will be piped for a gas barbecue. Due to budget constraints, they are not able to provide 16 parking spaces for 8 fire fighters. There will be 3 parking stalls for visitors. He added that they received input for the design from the fire fighters themselves. A geotechnical study was completed for the project, and they do not see any problems with the hillside. The access road is within one foot of the toe of the slope. Mr. Berg added they would support putting in bicycle racks for visitors. Mr. Marvin asked where the traffic warning lights will be located. Mr. Berg stated there will be no warning lights. A traffic analysis conducted by the Public Works Department indicated that no warning light was needed at this location. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 27, 1995 Mr. Meryhew asked if the community has been involved with this project. Mr. Berg stated they held an open house and approximately three citizens attended. The design was available at that time. Ron Thomas, Merritt-Pardini, 1701 Commerce Street, Tacoma, WA: The geo -block is designed to withstand the weight of the fire trucks. This station is being designed as a stand -alone station, with the capacity to have a medical aid vehicle on site. He added they could do something tastefully with bicycle racks. The condensing units, generator and trash area will be located on the east side and screened. Mr. Livermore asked if additional parking could be added in the future. Mr. Thomas indicated they could add parking in the future. Dale Dennis, 300 E. Pike Street, Seattle: He stated that they would do everything possible to preserve the existing trees, including the large Sequoia tree. There is a wide diversity of plant materials. Mr. Marvin asked if the transformer will be screened. Mr. Dennis said three shrubs will be screening it. He suggested moving the transformer ten feet to the north. Mr. Thomas agreed with that suggestion. Mr. Malina asked where a woman's accommodations would be located. Mr. Thomas stated that the facility is large enough to modify in the future. He reviewed the colors of the building and some revisions to the window patterns to make them look more craftsman. Jackie Dempere, 4033 S. 128, Tukwila: Ms. Dempere stated that the site is actually four acres and not three. This includes four lots on the top of the hill. She wanted the City to preserve this hill site as a view point. On the back of the property is a rock formation, which is where the bike trail is proposed. This is within feet of an archeological site. There were no signs on the site that it was owned by the City or permit were pending. She added that she wants the opportunity to comment on the SEPA, and if she is not allowed the opportunity to comment, she would challenge the SEPA. Ms. Dempere continued by expressing her concern regarding the large fire trucks on these residential streets, and how they will have to take up two lanes when turning. She asked how are pedestrians going to be aware of fire trucks with no signal. Tukwila has O F' z Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 July 27, 1995 the largest fire truck and she asked how the riverbank is going to be protected from the truck's weight. Another issue is the disposal of hazardous waste. Will hazardous waste be kept at this fire station in a residential area? The proposed pilings will not be sufficient in an earthquake. Tukwila has no historical sites program or funding. Ms. Dempere added that there is a federal law that requires cities to compensate dislocated tenants. She was not aware of the open house for the fire station and this meeting. She is afraid that other property owners are unaware of this proposal as well. She said that she thinks the property would be better utilized as owner - occupied, single - family residences. Nadine Morgan, 5190 S. 166 St, Tukwila: Ms. Morgan said the proposed fire station is very nice. This particular site is of historical significance. This site should be tied in with a seven -acre site owned by King County, which is going to be along the trail because it is the location of the Battle of the North and South Winds, which is a very important legend to the Duwamish Indians. She added that she would like to encourage some recognition of that legend (Beaver Bend) incorporated into the fire station site, as well as a place to sit. This could possibly be coordinated with the Arts Commission. Ms. Morgan continued by saying that Poverty Hill is a significant geological site. The Renton, Boeing and Cascade Bicycle Clubs have expressed an interest of having a bicycle trail extend from 42nd Ave. S., through this property, along the base of the hill or wherever the trail might fit within the wetland, around the edge of the hill to Airport Way. She also mentioned restoring wildlife habitat at the back portion of the property with John Beele's assistance. The old fire station to the south, should be rezoned R -1 and converted to single- family homes, because there is a net decrease of five homes with this fire station. Mr. Berg stated that they would be supportive of any artwork, benches,or plaque that would denote the history of the site. The applicant explored the federal law requiring relocation assistance and the City Attorney indicated they did not have any relocation requirements, but the City did offer each of the tenants $1,000 in relocation assistance. An extensive geotechnical study has been completed for the site. The depth of the pilings will be 30 - 50 feet, and the building is required to be designed to withstand a major earthquake. The preservation of the sequoia tree has been a high priority. There are no current plans to add apparatus to this new fire station, but it is being designed with the intent to grow in the future. This station will not have a hazardous waste team. The hazardous waste team will operate out of Station 51. Ms. Stetson asked if the property had been posted for the SEPA. Jack Pace stated that posting the property for SEPA is not required, but staff did mail a notice of this meeting to adjacent property owners, and advertised in the Seattle Times. tu re 2 uI . U O' CO CI J =. CO u_ w0 g aI HO wI- uj D Cy U co O N 0 1. w w: ui z =- z Planning Commission MitLutes July 27, 1995 Page 5 Ms. Stetson closed the public hearing and called for a ten minute break. Mr. Livermore reiterated his desire to have an expert (geotech) look at the road being that close to the toe of the hill. Mr. Meryhew stated he didn't feel that would be necessary, and that had already been looked at adequately. Mr. Flesher said he thought the geotech would have looked at the whole site and not just the footprint of the building. Mr. Berg said that no borings or soil samples were taken from the hill. The geotech was asked if he thought the hill would need to be examined and went on his recommendation. Mr. Livermore asked if the geotech specifically addressed that point? Mr. Berg said yes. Mr. Livermore asked if the geotech felt it would be safe. Mr. Berg said yes. Mr. Livermore said he didn't have any objections then. MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE L95 -0031, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE FIRE STATION, BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. MR. LIVERMORE SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE L95 -0030, THE DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE FIRE STATION, BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) WITH REGARD TO CONCLUSION #5, ADD A CONDITION REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO PLACE A BICYCLE RACK AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE FIRE STATION. 2) WITH REGARD TO CONCLUSION #3, RELOCATE AND SCREEN THE TRANSFORMER. 3) ADDITIONAL HISTORICAL SIGNAGE IDENTIFYING BEAVER BEND, BE FORWARDED TO THE ARTS COMMISSION FOR DESIGN AND LOCATION. 4) THE SIGNAGE PORTION OF THE FIRE STATION SHALL BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FINAL APPROVAL. z H Z' w Uo; U O UJ UJ J H.. N u'. w o:. g D a; _. z� �o z F- ui U0 ON.. CI I; • w�. ▪ V;. Ili ..z o I-i. z i Planning Commission Minutes July 27, 1995 i Page 6 MR. MERYHEW SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Pace noted that there is a ten -day appeal period. Ms. Stetson adjourned the meeting Prepared By, Sylvia Schnug .... K�v.. wl: w.: t:.'L' G1nti�: J:: J.+.:vffk'+isi'l *'•�.?'ii11:3'o' iii. i` 1:: rir iiSiJ. lL:;t l:''.: vL' ti?• J.. G: isJi': IU: c.^ n: isSw`"... ki!:' SF^ w:{ x' flMr.,::;': 9: XlrA: tYat? iP: C: t,�:i: "'.'L>.h4Y.4Yirt:lxt': +4i �i+tFa Z::: i:; ie.;- jain`• ;.isti:.;,..;::r'Srv..aa..�'d::: City of Tukwila Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT TO to the PLANNING COMMISSION and to the BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW HEARING DATE:: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ZONE DESIGNATION: DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: Prepared July 19, 1995 July 27, 1995 L95 -0031 and L95 -0030, Fire Station #53 City of Tukwila - Fire Department John W. Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director I. Conditional Use Permit Approval to locate a fire station in the CM, Industrial Park Zoning District II. Design approval to construct a 6,000 square foot fire station with a 15 stall parking area 4202 S 115th Street CM, industrial Park Mitigated Determination of Non- significance, issued. July 11, 1995 Libby Hudson, Associate Planner A. Site Sketch B. Site Plan C. Landscape Plan D. Building Elevations /Floor Plan E. Building Sections F. Floor Plan G. Lighting Details H. Mechanical Site Plan I. Electrical Site Plan J. Conditional Use Permit Application K. Design Review Application L. Color Board, submitted at hearing M. Grading and Drainage Plan 6300SouthcenterBoulevard Suite #100 • Tukwila Wash! - oR 818 -� e� �a... �� _. . .. YOJ: ad�tl4iuYJf iwe.': 4src .!W+�u...i.iwYi�(YiWwnwiiYYi •. i .. � .. : "1 •: � ��. •.•� �� •. � } Fire *Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 2 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 PROJECT DESCRIPTION FINDINGS The project includes the construction of 6,000 square foot fire station, a 15 stall parking area, and landscaping. The fire station will be situated on a 3 acre site, located at the southeast corner of 42nd Avenue S. and S. 115th Street, in the Allentown neighborhood. The property is zoned C -M, industrial Park, and contains an environmentally sensitive area, Type 2 wetland. The proposed building includes two - four apparatus bays with entry on two sides, a 37 foot tall hose tower, an office, kitchen, day room, exercise room, and sleeping quarters for 8 fire fighters. VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION 1. Existing Site Conditions: The 3 acre site is improved with four existing houses, a garage, a barn and four out- buildings which will be demolished to develop the proposed fire station. A .1.5 acre, Class 2, wooded wetland, is located at the northern end of the property. The wetland has been delineated by the City Urban Environmentalist. This wetland is regulated by the Sensitive Areas Overlay Zone of the Zoning Code (TMC 18.45). Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning: North: Burlington Northern rail yard C -2 South: S. 115th Street and the Green River CM East: Commercial use and single family CM West: Single family CM Terrain: The site is relatively flat. Vegetation: The site is vegetated with 73 significant trees, primarily located near the existing houses. A native stand of alder and cottonwood trees are scattered through the northern end of the site, primarily in the wetland area. Soils: The soils are composed of sandy silt. Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 3 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 6. Access and Parking: The subject site has direct access to S. 115th Street and unimproved 42nd Avenue S. Two access points are proposed for the fire station. The western access will located within the right -of -way of 42nd Ave. S. and is intended as the return access point for fire trucks. The southeastern access is intended to provide ingress /egress for the parking area and exiting of fire trucks on emergency call. Total on -site parking proposed is 15. Parking for three (3) visitor's is proposed near the building entry. The remaining parking is intended for employee's only and is located southeast of the building, across from the apparatus bays. 7. Utilities: The property is currently served by public services for sewer, water and electricity. 8. Public Facilities: A connection to the river bicycle trail is planned for the unimproved right-of-way of 42nd Avenue S. The applicant is required, through SEPA conditions, to accommodate the future bicycle path within the development plans for the fire station. BACKGROUND A number of permit applications are required to develop this project. A street vacation request was approved by the City Council June 19, 1995 to vacate a portion of S. 114th Street and S. 115th Street which run through the subject site. A Shoreline. Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit Approval, Board of Architectural Review approval, and compliance with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance and Tree Regulations is also required for this proposal. The property lies within the 200 foot shoreline of the Green /Duwamish River, which is designated a shoreline of statewide significance through the State of Washington Shoreline Management Act. Although the property is located within the City of Tukwila, the site lies within a shoreline area regulated by the King County Shoreline Program. The City of Tukwila administers the King County regulations in recently annexed areas until the City of Tukwila Shoreline Program is amended to include these annexed areas. An administrative shoreline permit will be processed for this project. A Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance was issued for the proposal with five (5) conditions to mitigate potentially significant adverse impacts. The conditions are: z i~ - z. „, w , 2 6 J U; ., N O' CO w: W I •J H. w o. � u. a; id w. F- _ z1_: 1::::: . • = o �. z Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 Page 4 In order to preserve and protect the existing 80 inch Sequoia giganteum /Giant Sequoia tree, a porous pavement system shall be included as part of the road : on the . west side of the existing 80 inch Sequoia tree to re 2 allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. The -J o reinforced plastic product, Geoblock, shall be installed for a width of 5 feet o , and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. w w Landscaping and . development within the right -of -way of 42nd Avenue S. w o shall be designed so that future development of a bike path can be readily 1 2 accommodated. g a. Best Management Practices (BMPs), as defined in Tree Regulations [TMC w; 18.54.040(2)], shall be employed in protecting all existing trees to be 3 , retained. 1- z i-; Ill w. The delineated wetland and the buffer areas shall be protected with temporary fencing during all construction processes. o N! 131-, w ll!c The Fire Department will be required to pay a proportionate fair share of ' x w o: z fu 0 This report is divided into two parts, Section I, Conditional Use and Section II., o i, Design Review. Approval of each of these. applications is required in order to z construct the proposed fire station. The Conditional Use permit application is heard by the Planning. Commission, while the. Design Review application is heard by the Board of Architectural Review. There are established criteria which must be met in order for the Planning Commission or. Board of Architectural Review to approve the applications. sewer improvements for the S. 116th /42nd Ave. S. 8 inch sewer line. . . Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 5 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, #L95 -0031 FINDINGS DECISION. CRITERIA The Planning Commission is guided by the following decision criteria for the Conditional Use Permit for a fire station. Conditional Use Criteria are shown below in bold, along with a staff discussion of relevant facts. The applicant's response to the criteria is contained in Attachment J. (A) The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or In the district in which the subject property is situated. The project will provide improved emergency services to the neighboring area. The size of the site and scale of the building allows the fire station to be located a considerable distance from all neighboring properties, thus providing buffering from all neighboring properties. (8) The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district ft will occupy; The project meets and exceeds all performance standards of the CM Zoning District in which it is located. BUILDING SETBACK AND HEIGHT The proposed structure conforms to the height and setback requirements of the CM zone. The building is setback 'a minimum of 55 feet from the front property line, which is the property line located along. S. 115th Street. The minimum required front yard setback for the CM Zoning District is 50 feet. The height of the proposed hose tower is 37 feet. Maximum building height for the CM Zoning District is 45 feet. LANDSCAPING The Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) requires five feet of landscape area along side property lines and fifteen feet along the front. The proposed landscaping along the front property line measures from 20 to 55 feet in depth and consists of trees shrubs and lawn. Side yard landscaping is required along the west and east property lines. Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 6 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 Proposed landscaping between the east property line and the proposed parking area averages 15 feet in width with the narrowest point being 5 feet in width. A substantial screen of trees, shrubs, and groundcover is proposed for this landscape area. The west property line fronts along the proposed western driveway. Landscaping along this driveway is 30 feet at the minimum point and incorporates existing trees with additional trees, shrubs and groundcover. PARKING Parking standards for fire stations are determined by the Planning Commission. The proposed 15 stalls appears to be adequate to serve the station's 12 employees. SENSITIVE AREAS OVERLAY A 1.5 acre, Class 2, wooded wetland is located on the property. All development is proposed to be setback a minimum of 50 feet from the delineated wetland. A 50 foot buffer and 15 foot commercial building setback is required for this wetland per TMC 1 8.45.040(c) (1) (B) and (c) (3) (A). The 50 foot buffer will be reduced'at the northeast end of the building where the hose tower is located per TMC 18.45.040(c) (4). The buffer will be reduced to 35 feet in width and enhancement vegetation is provided in this reduced buffer area. No development will occur within the wetland or buffer areas. TREE REGULATION The project includes removal of trees, shrubs, and groundcover to construct the new fire station. 73 significant trees exist on the site. Approximately 29 of these trees will be removed (20 of which are a result of an overgrown holly hedge). Tree replacement is required per the Tree Regulations and Requirements (TMC 18.54). The applicant will be using the 20% canopy coverage method (TMC 18.54.140(b), which will require approximately 30 replacement trees to be planted on the property. These trees are noted on the Landscape Plan, Attachment C. Trees to be retained are required to be protected during the construction process with protective fencing as a condition of SEPA and as required under TMC 18.54.130 (2). (C) The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses In terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. Development of the fire station will result in a small increase in traffic from z • 6_' U .0 o • w, .W='. J H: N LL„ w a. • • =d • 1- W; Z 1-, LIJ o; • = V`: o • 'CU N. Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 7 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 approximately 12 fire fighters working in the building, generating 16 trips per day. Emergency calls will also generate traffic.` A sidewalk is proposed along the street frontage between the two proposed driveways. On -site vehicular circulation has been separated from pedestrian circulation. Emergency vehicles will exit from the southeastern driveway where the drivers will have better sight distance along the curve of S. 115th Street. . The building and parking lot area are setback a minimum of 85 feet from the street. The scale of the building is similar to the neighboring single story houses and adjacent commercial building. (D). The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. The Comprehensive Plan Map identifies the site as Light Industrial. The following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land use Policy Plan are applicable: Natural Environment Policy 2: plans. Policy 3: Encourage the use of live vegetation in development landscape Discourage disturbance of vegetation when not in conjunction with actual development of the property. Open Space Policy 1: Strive to preserve steep hillsides and wooded areas in a scenic condition. Encourage replanting and revegetation of denuded areas not in the process of development Protection of existing trees and existing wetlands and separation of vehicular and pedestrian circulation have been incorporated in the project proposal. The new fire station will provide improved emergency services while retaining much of the existing vegetation and preserving existing wooded wetlands. (E) All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. Environmental review was completed for the proposed fire station and a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance was issued. The conditions are listed under the • z • J U; • N o, • w `J H; w0 LL a w • z . . oo; • .w W. °w w` Z U IA' 0 • z Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 8 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 "background" section of this report. A number of significant trees exist on the site, of which 44 will be retained. Trees to be retained must be protected during construction with temporary fencing [as a condition of SEPA and as required under TMC 18.54.130 (2)]. Of particular concern is the retention and protection of the existing 80 inch Sequoia giganteum /Giant Sequoia tree, located near the western access driveway. A.20 foot wide paved driveway located between this tree and the toe of the slope to the west would adversely impact this significant tree. The driveway has been reduced to 15 feet of pavement with five (5) feet of a reinforced plastic Geoblock support system, as a condition of SEPA. This support system will allow moisture and air to reach the critical root zone of the tree and preserve the health of the Sequoia tree. Compaction of the soil in the root zone could also have an adverse effect on the tree. To ensure that all trees to be retained are not adversely affected by site construction operations, Best. Management Practices (BMP's) as defined in the Tree Regulations [TMC 18.54.040 (2)] are to be employed per the SEPA conditions. Protection of the on -site, Class 2 wetland and buffer areas will be provided through temporary fencing during construction, as conditioned by SEPA. Adequate buffer enhancement has been provided within the reduced buffer area near the hose tower. To provide adequate sewer service, the construction of an 8 inch sewer line to S 116th Sheet/44th Avenue S. is required. The applicant is required to participate in their share of the cost, $30,000, per SEPA conditions. Review Criteria CONCLUSION (A) The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare... The use is compatible with the neighboring commercial and industrial uses. Building setbacks and extensive landscape screening buffer the fire station from the neighboring residential uses. �_f �• .v, ,^',',,°:.'r6�:atia�,;;�,v.,, ',� im Y.:Lt�'- '1:.45SfYk3:;iSr.^ ft °itis?ti i'a"ai;Yi C3`tZi�ar}�1L�i. i1�?i "4f:.e:4 Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 9 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 (B) The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required In the district it will occupy. The project meets setback and height requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposal meets requirements for buffering the Class 2 wetland located on the site and retention of as many existing trees as possible is being proposed. (C) ; The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. The proposed structure and parking area are compatible with the surrounding land uses. The traffic generated by the use includes employees and emergency vehicles. The number of emergency calls will dictate the actual trips produced by the emergency vehicles, but the number is likely to be similar to that of the existing station located in the same general neighborhood. Non - emergency traffic generated by the station is expected to be approximately 16 trips, thus having minimal impact on vehicular and pedestrian circulation in the vicinity. (D) The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. The Comprehensive Policy Plan addresses specific development aspects such as landscaping and building and site design safety which are addressed in responding to the Conditional Use Permit decision criteria. (E) All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. The SEPA review was completed on July 11, 1995. Impacts to the existing trees, wetland and public sewer system were identified and measures to mitigate these impacts were imposed through SEPA conditions. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Conditional Use Permit as proposed. Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 II. DESIGN REVIEW, L95 -0030 FINDINGS DISCUSSION Page 10 This project is subject to Board of Architectural Review approval due to its location within the 200 foot shoreline area of the Green /Duwamish River, as required under TMC 18.60.030 (2) (ii). Board review criteria are shown below in bold, along with a staff discussion of relevant facts. REVIEW CRITERIA (1) Relationship of Structure to Site. a. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with streetscape and to provide for adequate landscaping and pedestrian movements b: Parking and service areas should be located, designed and screened to moderate the visual impact of large paved areas. c. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to the site. The site is configured in such a way that little of the property actually fronts on the main access road, S. 115th Street. The building is setback considerably from the street. A sidewalk, separated from the street with a planting area, is proposed along S. 115th Street between two proposed vehicular access drives. A pedestrian walkway leading from the public sidewalk to the building is also proposed. This walkway is flanked by a large lawn area with trees on the west and a planting bed with trees on the east. A variety of landscaping enhances the two vehicular access drives. Four existing trees are incorporated into the landscaping along the proposed western access, (located within the right -of -way of 42nd Avenue). Trees, shrubs, and groundcover, screen the southeastern access drive, which leads to the parking area. Parking areas are located to the southeast of the building and significantly screened from the street and neighboring properties with landscaping. ..d• 2' WD :-►` U.O: ..0 o. 'W w; w0,. _' 112 a F- us z � . F—'o zF ww QN ,111 rci tiJ + Z' Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 11 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 The building steps up in height, away from the public street, so that the greatest height is located in the interior of the site. The office entry area located closest to the street will be approximately 10 feet in height, while the main building mass of the living area will stand approximately 15 feet high. The apparatus bay area is proposed to be approximately 24 feet in height and the tallest point, that of the hose tower, is proposed to stand at approximately 37 feet high. This stepping of the building, reduces the mass and adds visual interest to the building's prominent roof. (2) Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. a. Harmony in texture, lines and masses is encouraged. b. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. c. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. d. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. e. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. Due to the pie shaped site, the building has a considerable setback from the street. The height also steps up, toward the interior of the site, with the greater mass of the hose tower located farthest from the street. Materials used for the exterior of the building includes cedar shakes and board and batten siding. The shakes add texture to the design, while the board and batten add an element of rhythm. The prominent roof anchors the building, setting it firmly within the site. The architectural style with the prominent roof and the exterior siding material, lend a residential character to the structure, fitting the building in comfortably in the surrounding residential neighborhood. Extensive landscaping is being proposed at the street frontage and along the south property line where the closest neighbor is located. Existing trees on the property are being retained and incorporated into the design where possible. The existing trees, with additional trees, shrubs, and groundcover, will provide significant screening between the project and neighboring properties. Pedestrians are lead from the new sidewalk along S. 115th Street to the main entrance of the fire station. Pedestrian circulation is separated from vehicular access. The southeastern driveway provides access for employee and visitor parking and also exiting for the emergency vehicles. Due to the significant curve of S. 115th Street along the subject property frontage, this driveway has better Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 Page 12 sight visibility at the street edge. Therefore the western driveway (located within unimproved 42nd Avenue S.) is proposed as entry access only for emergency vehicles returning to the station. Separating the entrance and exit points for the emergency vehicles and providing separate pedestrian access, makes on and off -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation more efficient. (3) Landscaping and Site Treatment a. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized, preserved and enhanced. b. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces and other paved areas should promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. c. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. d. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, mitigating steps should be taken. e. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encouraged. f. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accomplished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combination. g. In areas where general planting will not prosper, other materials such as fences, walls and pavings of wood, brick, stone or gravel may be used. h. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance the building design and the adjoining landscape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and she compatible with the building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. The landscape plan incorporates 44 existing trees, 33 replacement trees (replacing significant trees removed for development), trees required by shoreline regulations, trees required for enhancement of the reduced buffer, and trees within the required landscape areas. See the Landscape Plan, Attachment C. Flowering pear trees planted in a bed of ivy line the east side of the pedestrian walkway leading to the main entry of the building. On the other side is a lawn area with two groupings of birch trees. The lawn lends a residential character to the landscaped entry. Shrubs are used to add an additional layer of landscaping closer to the building. A buffer of trees and shrubs line the western access drive between the apparatus bays and the wetland buffer. A screen of trees shrubs and groundcover screen the parking area along the east property line. Three pedestrian scale light standards line the east side of the walk, while five taller standards light the parking area and the two driveways. The light standards will z • • HZ: •rew:. QQ� J U, U O' • WI J H LL, W O: • z F-. z 1- . 0 O N. S V. • — O, =; z. Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 Page 13 be . approximately 12 feet tall for the pedestrian areas, and 16 feet tall for the vehicular areas. The lighting is screened from neighboring properties by the landscape buffer along the east property line. The light fixtures are proposed to be shielded, with down - casting light. The lighting design fixtures consists of a white pole with a clear acrylic inverted cone, housing a louvered lamp enclosure. The design is compatible with the craftsman style of the architecture. (4) Building Design a. • Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project should be based on quality of its design and relationship to its surroundings. b. Buildings should be to appropriate scale and in harmony with permanent neighboring developments. c. Building components- such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets should have good proportions and relationship to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure, d. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. e. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from .view. f. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design. g. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of detail, form and siting should be used to provide visual interest. The craftsman style architecture of the proposed building is evident in the prominent roof and broad overhanging eaves. This style of architecture lends a rustic feel to the fire station. The roof overhangs help anchor the building to the ground and the site. Details, such as the angle support braces and shingled siding, continue the craftsman theme. The architectural style is harmonious with neighboring residential structures built in a similar, simple style. Vinyl clad windows are located just under the eave line and repeated along the length of the building on the north and south elevation. The windows provide a horizontal element to the building, contrasting with the texture of the shingled siding found below the window line and the vertical rhythm of the board and batten siding. The main entry door is recessed within the south elevation. Windows flanking the main door and pedestrian sidewalks leading to the entry help to mark it as an access point. Exterior colors are intended to be earth tones with darker shades for the trim color. The metal roof will be a grey tone. Color samples will be presented at the public hearing. 0A4,10.2,Z'U'• •r- fl§.aleAPAco.V.51 5,, ' 4:161X1X139: �z ce O 0 CO• W: W z: w o' J in_ a I- w _. zO w w;. 0 -: CI I; LL/ uj O - 01 z Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 14 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 Mechanical equipment will be fully enclosed, located within the roof. Louvers for the ventilation system have been incorporated into the design by punctuating the arch at the gabled end. See the elevations in Attachment D. Exterior lighting is proposed for the driveways, parking and pedestrian walkway. Wall lighting will be situated along the south elevation, under the eaves (see attachment G. for lighting detail). Four Tight standards will be located along the perimeters of the driveways and parking areas •(see Attachment B., site plan). A pedestrian scale light of the same design will be located along the walkway leading to the main entry. The lighting design, as discussed previously, is composed of an inverted cone which are simple in design and compatible with the craftsman style. The craftsman style building design and staggered roof line lend visual interest to the proposed fire station. The prominent metal roof and detailing at the east and west elevation adds variety in texture and color by using shingled siding on the lower portion, and board and batten on the upper portion. The arch detail separating the board and batten siding from an upper shingled area is repeated in the angle braces supporting the eaves. This adds a twist to the craftsman style by juxtaposing the triangles of the roof pitches with the graceful curve of the arch detailing. Miscellaneous Structures and Street. Furniture a. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architectural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale; b. Lighting In connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. As stated earlier, the lighting fixture design is in keeping with the architectural style of the proposed building. Earth tone colors are proposed for the exterior. This is in keeping with the rustic look of the architecture and the building site. No outdoor seating areas are proposed. a ta4,oftw.°.�2'f4R:7:4'A1C6• CSis? Y.GC$:Ni.WJlifab'14har`�•,a5. 1Yayu41W)l,H�i"1 iuttAkA tiNi,i +Jc ' .Z■tiCuis Fire Station #53 Conditional Use and BAR Page 15 L95 -0031 & L95 -0030 CONCLUSIONS 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. The proposed building is setback significantly from the street. Landscaping and a pedestrian walkway create a welcoming transition from the public street to the building. Parking areas are sufficiently screened from the neighboring properties. The building's scale and mass fits comfortably within the interior of the three (3) acre site. 2. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area. The architectural style with the prominent roof and the exterior siding material lend a residential character to the structure, fitting the building comfortably in the surrounding residential neighborhood. Proposed landscaping works effectively to incorporate the existing trees, maintaining the pedestrian and residential scale to the site. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation are separated and emergency vehicular exiting is restricted to the southeastern driveway for safe entry on to the public street. 3. Landscaping and Site Treatment. The landscape design protects many existing significant trees, incorporating them into the plan. Additional landscaping is used through out the site to accentuate pedestrian walkways, screen parking and driveways, and enhance the building architecture and wetland buffer area. The design leaves the wetland area in a natural state, while using ornamental vegetation around the developed area of the site to complement the building. The proposed lighting will adequately light the pedestrian and parking areas. 4. Building Desicin The simple craftsman style of the building lends a rustic quality to the proposed fire station which works well with the site and neighboring residential area. The design details including prominent roofs with broad overhanging eaves and curved angle supports, coupled with the exterior material of the shake and board and batten siding and metal roof, tie the design together in a comprehensive composition. 5. Miscellaneous Structures. The lighting fixtures are simple in design and compatible with the craftsman style of building architecture. RECOMMENDATIONS The Department of Community Development recommends approval of the project as proposed. •z i • 6 J0 00 N0'. W w o 5.2 a z o_ z ec U �. w': o • Z 0 rm z Yw.e?'...Ai iYt,err- voret` 2,V. ,J : iy�•tiy:.•'!r.•. a,F# ATTACHMENT A TMKWD LA FORE MMQIDA NO. 53 CITY OF TUKVVILA, WASHINGTON .._..,. u.....-.: ::.J.:.,i�aCs:"r >:?:.v�i:cr�F: �::: t? yi: d..' Sitstxs' rE::' G�S<. r .�:t•h:k+:.a:st^sstiti'«',y;.'.- - - .::•e�.s� . • Merritt+Perdu TUKWILA FIRE STATION NO.53 1U IA WAr.arw • SITE SKETCH JV co CV :U O AOW:,. _; W.o a Z4711' • ■0—; ;WWI• U; U W • • • 3U' 25 ..- ?7 . • .//,..„N X1 f 500.. I 4 � 4A._°� 51.E o _ _ ; r -m.i _'_ -!- _ - -/6- ■ r1V16 "Sroua+a - - _ 1 ....7 ...r: !'hoer 06- Cotton*oad }441der( 42"Coltenesed 14 �� 10 "COItenecea �� Ironwood 5 ".older I 9 "order 6 "Cotloneoad '`�f..,�Q' 6tottonaood •9•ard "rr ' °-alder I re 24 "Colfanncad_ 14 0 ' °6 "ardo• I (f`r� 1� 15-ardrr } ii. :i 'Co ttanaoed '��Cullon wood 6 "alder er •'`4'arerr,1r^�1�'� . , '.`,..?- 4 :0stloneoad • .0 "Tree \417 • 41. . MIMI COMM 14.x0 `15 / .� i.0 mm.4 a 0 { . Gla 24 "Colton* j ♦ ' • .dt.6 15 . 6' m \ tem\ \ ;e ta- \ r.% 3 Colloneoo• r_l \ 2 n allonwo00 • t6 . • • J 1•1C4.4nolio Trees \ rt1`• \ 4 76 "I0agnolin \ides 3 • b `+ 411 ti rir,5 \i,\\ Oi.1/.4 SITE PLAN sow / ru W ATTACHMENT B ' u) Mi ttt +Pardir =C. I LL • :Sp_ SITE LEGEND * 0 +1 ♦e IMMO 11133- WOW/0 .IM 1A lm 10 IOD{D laaOM loe>K. - st1. 111.5 MSG 100001 -tQ Ott ..t 001111 11..1e ...m RR 11.....,.1.1. !Moms MID TUKWILA STATION ✓ NO.53 TAMA VINDINSTON r •�p SIT��E� rW. •• • �L�tL �3T t r r. Eurefi • A1.1 • • • • • ATTACHMENT C Merritt-Werth, LAMOICA ►I AICMITICTI • PLANT SCHEDULE • ::rtitl:lvS'A1F:n1`suSOi LEGEND ,At, ' • 5tk��� 0 �0� _ . vi6 +;fsa'Y6idlsNUiliita%'r'.N'i�e 121 131 NOTE 05516 104 �0 MO 144(1401 IOST0C TM TO IC IDIOM s1A00t car Qom I r vow R10MID 2044' AIO fOp1C 0•010021 PI 5G 11111 0 ows11OlTIIO1IT�204 L ILL 20 /AV& MO IMO NO MOO MIS ILL RIOT[ All OIOATC 1116.141 4411E • MOOTS 1002 4 DTIC WM / 7 ! STL161 M� STU 4 " OCTOa x201 .0 r max. s ► uluatistrotrismoii r GO MM r CAPUT. III U• SS 311 511r 0'41.114 PM,ILI r CAM W 3 S ISC0fO1 / • OQCUS /111OO[SI/ • CMG 331111 PlIftff '1140 r 04/OL IM 0222 S CALO 24 CaMT11■6 / •I 1Rw 011011(4 ►A0K IMI MIITL/ C 74 NM D 2 004 SAMOA cCM NT w• HIC1rt.IN 30 10101417 .I Q I4f *1[IOI'/ 24•I(047. MI 47 TAIIC Q/10AT •rri S CALM • 5 04401 4 WRS O0.< J31 it / ]0. 1(OIT. w 410/0 CO91 MKT AM1OS 041871/ 204101010. O.C. IMMIX M2001LI A 110015/ 141101 24. p.c. 000IA 110.1* 0041001 it DATUM 147a61.10101ART MOPC • 1CK100I4. O.C. • • • TUKWILA FIRE NATION NO. 13 Mti MESON • • .• 1. •• ®SOUTH ELEVATION Imp vIr 1111111E111111 IER 11111 I. DA I. IL Wax nem a Ka IWO ; • 4111.16-trat--- 1 '9 SWIM Lai Mat icor, M. awe • Nom Mk omit Kat. M. L --Kal.a3. I WI 11•111•11 I MINIM 11 11111111.11TRI lay/ 31_, ®NORTH ELEVATION sots• r-e 110LIAIL M. 0 0 9001 Kul M. lJ nes 11.1 • ' C.) C.) 0 U) ATTACHMENT C 2 L01:5' • Merdtt+Pardin ; Wu) cll. I— al 'AM :iiui • .11 .1 1; . 1..at sac. T. ®SOUTH DETAIL ELEVATION tam lie • v-e. 1, int Man inat.47 allatatto WOW LOW 04 ct /2\ WEST DETAIL ELEVATION IL 1/( . If TUKWILA FIRE STATION NO. 53 L. EAST ELEVATION vr r-e • • • L 0 WEST ELEVATION Mak • • ' • 4 • A-4 wt 004,444 Lei • *MUM YI © EAST—WEST BUILDING SECTION • • it O BUILDINGS SECTION 0 LOBBY • O BUILDING 'SECTION 0 LT. OFFICE 6.&L IN • 4,4 • • OBUILDING SECTION 0 APP. BAY aL IM - IV • • • CUL 111 WI. J.0 U O; UG;. to W: ATTACHMENT 1 ; co r g • Mirrftt +Pm l u' <, • N �. ~ p'; r'W W; u. 0. U N, 0, WI& NMI.1 — MILT I,M■■ O BUILDING SECTION 0 HOSE TOWER ono or. IrsVa TUKWILA FIRE STATION • NO.53 • O1 BUILDING SECTION 0 KITCHEN "■"''- N.L,'V ,V lUOVIA WAINIPOSTON A b 1444, .- •BUILDING 8ECTlON.S 'szT= 'sc�s�r .' u DI A3.2 mom P.m to mum se D-- I�, % ° ❑ n r ❑ Kral • OMECHANICAL LOFT .a•nIK.Y -f WO/ la WC. .7 wl .0 ff[Illllllll1 OQQC 2 • m': • ilA W; ATTACHMENT F I! • CD u.; w0 :• -: g • J� Merritt +Per h U. Q;.. IrI Ui tea,, foN, W O.. .Ill.N1. 1UKWILA FIRE STATION NO.53 e.awA wwiow Al i •11 r FLOOR • d • r V' MAIN FLOOR PLAN sods 1K . 1v A2.1 Pole top luminaires for garden, park and pedestrian area lighting applications. Luminaires and poles are matched for proportion and cohesive design. Choice of compact fluorescent or H.I.D. Tight sources and luminaire styles. Z • W W JU O 0 U)0 • W J= I- L1 WO - ILL < • d H Z = H H O Z W • W U 0- O I-- W w 2 H - a_ O Z W to U— F- O ~ z A Lamp t Pole top luminaires with shielded Tight sources. Die cast aluminum construction with louvered lamp enclosure. Clear acrylic cone. Slip fits 3 inch O.D. pole top. Color Black or white. Lumen A B 9189P 9898MH 9898S 906 2 18W PLC 1 100W ED•17 MH' 1 70W E•17 HPS 2500 8500 6000 271/2 133/4 27'/2 133/4 27112 133/4 Pole 5 "e x 12' high with tenon. - See page 153 9389P 9183MH 9183S 906 li. C�V. ..t►. ...a. MOM Z..�.t►.t ,wsmw M • 2.1 . 2 N 923 2SW '.�i.iam n•. MM ' •110,11111•••11 ME • m 2 4 3 3 10 2.P 1 1111 ......iS#MIN .I..tto wi 2 4 3 3 20 IMM•111\I ......... A Lamp 2 18W PLC 1 100W ED•17 MH 1 70W E•17 HPS .M��..�4.. ....t1�.'41 ,wsmw M • 2.1 m: 2 N 923 2SW '.�i.iam n•. M.-t.t ®. IMAM ' •110,11111•••11 I .QOM WM • m 2 4 3 3 10 2.P 1 1111 ......iS#MIN .I..tto wi 2 4 3 3 20 IMM•111\I ...1M t. \..�\.1\ , .,,..,.. •t.•••••••• © Pole top luminaires with white acrylic diffuser. Die cast aluminum construction. Slip fits 3 inch O.D. pole top. Color: Black or white. Lumen A 2500 8500 6000 B 271/2 133/4 271/2 133/4 271/2 133/4 Pole 513x 12' high with tenon. - See page 153 Warfi 114 ,wsmw M • 2.1 m: ' uitn►w .� '.�i.iam n•. M.-t.t ®. IMAM ' •110,11111•••11 I .QOM WM •••••••••• m 2 4 3 3 10 2.P 1 1111 .t......... wi 2 4 3 3 20 n' w ,o ' 2 H gro' ' uitn►w .� '.�i.iam n•. M.-t.t ®. IMAM ' •110,11111•••11 •••••••••• m 2 4 3 3 10 . • " ." •' • , , 1 • • .. • ;•;-k• • ' • ATTACHMENT H Merritt+Pordini ==. TUIONILA FIRE 'STATION NO.53 SITE • PLAN MECHANICAL MIST= WS. M1.1 PAD IW4 EO TRNKFORNCR • RGAs tOCAt10N / r OW ituivoNt N41D110LE \%•J• \•. • SITE ,PLAN SCALE: I -20• • mummy GENERATOR SEE SLEET E3.1 • • ELECTRICAL LEGEND LIGHTING FIXTURES FIXTURE 1140 - SEE SPEOFICADONS O DEIMG DOuNTED rGRIIIIC b rut MOWED mac 214• RECESSED nUORESCENT arm p 212 RECESSED FUORESCENT FIXTURE 1•.4 RECESSED nuDRESCCNT maim • POLE UOUM(D tuMWRIE • B ON CI J CTBox (ADM CEILING) • JurcnoM e0x ON BALL) Q DUPLEX RECEPTACLE qp ooueLE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE • DUPLEX RECEPTACLE - MOUNTED MOVE COURIER Arm DuKtx REC(PUar - GROUND EMJLT I T(RRWTRG 9 201v RECEPTACLE ® POWER PDIE • COIIPMENT CONNECTOR O Tara COMEC ON CP S scoNN(6T SNITCH PMtLeoMo - 208Y/120v r . PANELKIARD - 4eOY /277V • GROUND Roo CD TRANSFORMER COMMUNICATIONS • TELEPHONE OUTLET ✓ DATA OUTLET • TUMOR OUTLET OS Pueuc ass SPENCER (CEILING uouwicD) .(9 PUBIC ADDRESS SPENL(R (NHL MOUNTED) FIRE ALARM ® rIRE NMM comma PANEL p MAMML rwS ALARM PULL 5TATON (sir NF) DI TRK MAIM HORN "TIN STROBE LIGHT (410' NT) MUSS NOTED OTNUWSC ap ICAI MIMIC*, RATE Or RISE TYPE. 135 DECKER rm[D OKATION TIME WOKE DETECTOR (DP PIOIDEIECTRC SMOKE DETECTOR OA WOKE DETECTOR. AMC CEILING (TYPE AS SPECIFIED) rtOu DETECTOR/MN TAPER DETECTOR/WIN DOCII HOLDER CONDUIT -+ RACE•MY WORK UP RACEWAY TUMANG DORM RACEWAY CONCEALED IN MALL OR NINE • CLUdC, EXPOSED 61 WfNS1[D AREAS - - -- IUCEWAY CONCEAUD IN 011 BELOW HOOK • VO.. ATTACHMENT I in o ;co lW OY Ysx:2.1..v.. .+xcurt=, ^.txzaysti,,L. _ &,,yassu jVrlCai+SWatrxix1*i t' -'�.iYk"F.:4�s'ti'i:fiY. ii'kiv "a: :t'�� TUKWILA RE STATION • NO.53 TIROWA WASHINGTON SITE • M N E1.1 ATTACHMENT J Ec . CONDITk NAL USE ,. ; APPLICATION CITY OF TUKWILA COW. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPP, 17ELL" rrw`rr�.'i:ic►e 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: - JGTR U GTI D0 ©F A- I-� M U1-1- i Gk PAL F 1 01-4- 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and sub- division; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) I I ITT Quarter: Section: 10 Township: • 23 Range: 4- (This information may be found on your tax statement) APPLICANT:* Name: RA-1-1D-r. L. g Address: C 3 oc, Phone: ' - 0 7 el Signatures - Date: AA A- ) � in q 9 * The applican the person om the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 4. PROPERTY Name: OF- - ?.),<- %i L-rk-- OWNER Address: 62.„ > �.cPJTi--iG�i -t iR 5L -v 0 Phone: I /WE,[signature(s)) swear that I /we are the o ier(s) or contract p •f aser(s) of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: M i8, 11 q5 z Z:. W UO N W= CO u W Q'. g Q; �W. z zoo wW moo` ,o u'. W W' . H U: z we z CONDITIONAL USE APPL ATION Page 2 5. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY: VT 1 > D 1 p I -hi AAc-L 6. PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTED (from list in TMC 18.64.020): 19,64.2.0 - 7 C 1Irv' POLIG� off' 7. ADJACENT North: 11-1 D U -rR1 FRLt GrTC 4 EJ1 L •i�i2p LAND USES South: RPA-t71 /t ( i. RI V-1z.. East: C4 1-ei hit E�112� h-L `� �t I-IA 1,15 1 L`( R1 1751 -V- West: '1 Pei 1,0" FA- H L•( I-05 8. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE (for example, describe the manufactur- ing processes used, wholesale/retail/warehouse functions, outside storage of goods or equipment or other information which will facilitate understanding of the activities you proposed to develop on this site):. 1 IL- 74 4.._ fI i s . i ' 4, 161 .et-e'Ibt7A' T !QN S role 0 VGI-1 1E--1--E5/ P1't-RKI 0 15 M tit- V0141 6--Le1 r? l i E.i r U— ou-rps 5, Will the conditional use be in operation and /or a building to house the use be started within a year of issuance of the permit? 10. Describe the manner in which you believe that your request for a Conditional Use Permit will satisfy each of the following criteria as specified in TMC 18.64.030 (attach additional sheets, if necessary). A. The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated. RESPONSE: B. The proposed use shall meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district it will occupy. RESPONSE: z Z • 00 co D •to W: • W o i d, ,-W z�: ••z� no Ni o� • • = U` U co _: • o� • Z., CONDITIONAL USE APPI, ATION Page 3 10. (continued) (T C. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. RESPONSE: D. The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. RESPONSE: All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. RESPONSE: ■ 10. A. The use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the proposed use or in the district in which the subject property is situated. The proposed Fire Station 53 is intended to improve emergency response in the community, and so should improve public welfare. The Allentown neighborhood where the proposed site is located is an aging residential neighborhood. Several aging structures will be demolished and removed from the site. This project should be beneficial to the neighborhood and may help revitalize the area. B. The proposed use should meet or exceed the performance standards that are required in the district it will occupy. The project will be subject to the requirements of the Board of Architectural Review, which should insure a high standard of design. It is a goal of the project is to create a facility which the neighborhood can take pride M. C. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design. No traffic impact is anticipated as a result of this project. The proposed fire station replaces a station in the same neighborhood, and so will not result in any increased traffic on the local streets. The traffic impact of the project will be subject to review in the SEPA process, which will require traffic mitigation as appropriate. The Subject site is over 3 acres which allows for very large setbacks, and the proposed • station will be of a scale compatible with surrounding residential and commercial uses. D. The proposed use shall be in keeping with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. The proposed Fire Station 53 development includes preservation of a on site wetland of approximately 1.5 acres, and so supports the Comp. Plan land use element: NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, Goals 2 and 3, and OPEN SPACE, Goal 1. The construction of a new fire station supports TRANSPORTATION/ UTILITIES Goal 3. E. All measures have been taken to minimize possible adverse impacts which the proposed use may have on the area in which it is located. The design will be subject to review by the Board of Architectural Review. The community has been asked to participate in the planning and design of the proposed fire station center through public meetings. This project is seen as an asset to the neighborhood in which it is located, and should help to revitalize a neighborhood which needs an economic boost. . g's akaidaE' CSV d•'.i(a ?L4 "AClk7iaWaKB 21if�i. Beaver Bend Property Legal Description Before Consolidation Lots 1 and 2, of Block 26; Lots 3 through 9, of Block 26; and lots 10 through 15 of Block 26 of C.D. Hillmans Meadow Gardens Addition to the City of Seattle Division # 3. Lots 1 through 6 of Block 27; and Lots 7 through 12 of Block 27 of C.D. Hillmans Meadow Gardens Addition to the City of Seattle Division # 3. Lots 1 through 4 of Block 28; Lots 5, 6 and 7 of Block 28, Lot 8 of Block 28; and Lots 9 through 15 of Block 28 of C.D. Hillmans Addition to the City of Seattle Division #3; All as according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 86, records of King County, Washington. Beaver Bend Property Legal Description after Lot Consolidation Blocks 26, 27 and 28 of C.D. Hillmans Meadow Gardens Addition to the City of. Seattle Division # 3, according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 86. records of King County; together with unimproved and vacated South 114th Street, and South 115th Street within said plat (vacations pending). �.;, ::.i;.R m.; .:.. .:iYr, 1•w, °v,�"'.•r.K:�i;: i.•Asoti+it: w5 ∎ttaut BOARD OF ARCr "" �CTURAL REVIEW RECEIVED DESIGN R EVIEW ATTACHMENT K • ,rjii : 199F APPLICATION • i' CITY OF TUKWILA COMMuI' Y 61F.VEl..OPMENT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3680 FORS7.AFF US :ONL <<1 I. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: A 4, Z4vc7 sp. P7 ..674/44.6 rmey ,rvarneri. (Z) ,4 M' aif MX') .(4 - /.v4 .pl'oelAe7"41-r 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and sub- division; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) _jZ02 j w S"- .rr. siat4'44, R.1,4 Mee; Quarter: 3. APPLICANT :* Section: Township: • Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement) Name: i 77/ -r/ /.4. /iNc /"L A. a -ss• ��P,�iT!"�- ,�A /iv/ ING. /.70/ C'cryrre. reG,E a rr¢ ec'1 3 -8cz7 Signature: ea i�Pi Date: , y /,S'" ' /99.5— * The a plicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to w om all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFI DA V1 T OF OWNERSHIP 4. PROPERTY . Name: ('./TY ©r 7VKwr at OWNER • Address: & WO�1ovrNce�[i�R3LvD `i15!$S Phone: (GoNr,iw R 40- 73c eCii C26�G� 133 a17 I /WE,[signature(s)] swear that I /we are the ner(s) or cci`titract purchaser(s) of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the • best of my /our knowledge and belief. Date: _�. • a 2. JU 0 0; J H W O; 2 J` u. =. �d w •zi- I- O; Z I: 0(Lo w W: O: Z U 'A:. Z -r V •.• ►. ►r v► 1.'1► ►V. . ►.rV ►■ 1•M.1.•‘....111 DESIGN REVIEW APPLI Th ION Page 2 CRITERIA The following criteria will be used by the BAR in its decision - making on your proposed project. Please carefully review the criteria, respond to e. criterion (if appropriate), and describe how your plans and elevations meet the critel If t.... space provided for response is insufficient, attach additional.response to this form. a _1. 1. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE TO SITE . A. The site should be planned to accomplish a desirable transition with the streetscape and to c�i provide for adequate landscaping,.and pedestrian movement. o co °o'. B. Parking and service areas should be located, designed, and screened to moderate the visual . co w impact of large paved areas. co ti: C. The height and scale of each building should be considered in relation to it site. W o 2 RESPONSE: . 1 a l xte /r 20, 4' &Ate. //v 6 4Y /N4 ev r Tt}ic: .1/7 f02 1 W a/ 77)s- .r .Q/v.%v( 'it7.vi1Y f{�t/.d 7ht" , Ae-ei/T42Tz.4v f z t- wf/ /G.E "X02/40/444 _a/5g Aevp D// G//erGdw4nm✓ A47,-70., 2 p. W' .■47 fieF //!*/%7zef ,4°,14;‹,4-771. A, 477/ -e, J 7* 1'f ya4.E� __,atevii : p N'.. veGic v ffi4t / �ivd �F�.S7X/Arvf" ° ~`. 1-h/ W W 77,"k 4/Ir A0.4,0 .rcr4? e" rale in,/ wtq l ez..1.,E.f /1 1- �: �r/,�ovrErvYvv4- lc�.w ,f ,.rav771✓r ffiG/c y /.Ew•�s� o; z Lir 2.. RELATIONSHIP OF STRUCTURE AND SITE TO ADJOINING AREA • �_, 0I- A. Harmony in texture, lines, and masses is encouraged.. z B. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties should be provided. C. Public buildings and structures should be consistent with the established neighborhood character. D. Compatibility of vehicular pedestrian circulation patterns and loading facilities in terms of safety, efficiency and convenience should be encouraged. E. Compatibility of on -site vehicular circulation with street circulation should be encouraged. • RESPONSE: j "fA /A/4 a1=* 77/ "a/GO/Aid /.r .e6.7%T 7 r4 I iA 7, Aw rc 7T 71.7 eve 44-70r7" Ax; '7 f/434 ' o 9A,E • AG;Go arst?7,v4 14 1L �f?J/Pis1,Eiv - •,•A p , fz' 23) f/t/ #' J A7 7-0 ,_ 7 . ,yn A4c14✓72 M' r , w /7t,1 .sz //w/ivl ea. W /Ty. ""eG -7 - r te✓ exez 14.�/GN . %QvY /J40 i eis' 7?f" i x fry-AvA: g As-257:. /va i h'1 /7 /'a/c f€4. "Aa'>r✓4 .ro - zAc,e 1-,€13:›1 0.0eZeer0er Arx ow/ r- c /oJf/,14.E • 44' cvT ,�A7,4'( 19-E i4 .1.4cvr ✓ VrS•&.. V. MI 1Va11 $ V. • NL 11 1C.1v DESIGN REVIEW APPLIC 'ION Page 3 3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT A. Where existing topographic patterns contribute to beauty and utility of a development, they should be recognized and preserved and enhanced. B. Grades of walks, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas should•promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. C. Landscape treatment should enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas and important axis, and provide shade. , 1 W ve D. In locations where plants will be susceptible to injury by pedestrian or motor traffic, D mitigating steps should be taken. • -J V 0o. E. Where building sites limit planting, the placement of trees or shrubs in paved areas is encour- ; co 0 aged. F. Screening of service yards, and other places which tend to be unsightly, should be accom- w o LL plished by use of walls, fencing, planting or combinations of these. Screening should be effective in winter and summer. L G. In areas where general planting will not prosper; other materials such as fences, walls, and _ v pavings of wood, brick, stone, or gravel may be used. _: z� H. Exterior lighting, when used, should enhance' the building design and the adjoining land- z o; scape. Lighting standards and fixtures should be of a design and size compatible with the w building and adjacent area. Lighting should be shielded, and restrained in design. Excessive o; brightness and brilliant colors should be avoided. • o N; RESPONSE: ~ 0; t6ea. A erhi v /F /c*4NT /S/!/�/lER o� iii ,6".r w �C LL p' w%"i �•I V .'.• • r v• .'1\•V • • •• w.. •v . • I. ••.. ••w V •t.■•• • DESIGN REVIEW APPLI( ION Page 4 C. Building components - such as windows, doors, eaves, and parapets - should have good pro- portions and relationshili to one another. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with anticipated life of the structure. D. Colors should be harmonious, with bright or brilliant colors used only for accent. E. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings should be screened from view. F. Exterior lighting should be part of the architectural concept. Fixtures, standards and all ex- posed accessories should be harmonious with building design. G. Monotony of design in single or multiple buildings projects should be avoided. Variety of . detail, form, and siting should be used to provide visualinteres:. RESPONSE: /57:4-4l /N! /f Lv7*/ 19:42.0,4/1 ).d r,E 44zfL6 ,emir's ,1/4,/777, ,A16 /4r/ tow ,41 € f /Gf4Tr k dF_ ram /�c..c YaLa.frte 0= 7711£ Fr4c /L /7y #v/?J'f ?fie _CAO4'zz E/2 f, ead ome± tfr 47404Z /A'l /.f //►it'•ec, .f..v .¢7 y e. ,�i /Z Y/ tic Ae-e- /r/o� V/ //7 4Je y 77,3E" 10/0 0?/N.t0:/.✓4 J//J Atizec / M !/ c '' _ lJ•. 17 7-f yeleari•Ps. "27/d Lcyv4 Tf. -ded$1 ogle/for/e../TX C O l � G J Q I L y / L G , 1 iy7'T r G 7 W o ' I !71/77 7 E .01" aUfL.d /// gerZsg',t'd .r-e-777v1 /4_ (/44'y ,444 . eEe./14N /c,Ai , / /i°;t* V7 '014 .eC o??' O'= X204 /c dcw0.✓.r /N.4 dam/ /72' sv /L. QE reveas,e. EO f'ec0-r j'i /e v/.6-G✓. 5. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES AND STREET FURNITURE A. Miscellaneous structures and street furniture should be designed to be part of the architec- tural concept of design and landscape. Materials should be compatible with buildings, scale should be appropriate, colors should be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and proportions should be to scale.. B. Lighting in connection with miscellaneous structures and street furniture should meet the guidelines applicable to site, landscape and buildings. RESPONSE: .4 /-.46/ 7Y ✓ ' .r, za,4LG ,tee. ,44.r/g4 z ry _i/d46.t,€S W /LI /ji/7 4/¢A'7.,e /71/1,/ f //iLe„ //t/OM /'7g ,7 -/Aet/ .re iyi72'4 M'/-'- yt ss/c ?t}1f .4e 4• ■i.44 w /hip /r�4L wi�G A�ry d..i />y T 9 /410c4. .sti1.4Lt- ' GV,P477 7Z f /.1/ /L - % 4. l0 2 V 4We6 _77f1 r f fi E14 • z• �-- w. 00 u) fn w • J LL: wo gQ -o _. Z �.. �O Z� D. o - Ww O: w z: .0 N. H 0 _ Z re W UO ATTACHMENT t w °W -... ._ t if. E. _. i.;F 4znd:Ave_ S I55 v • t>b \ ... _ . ... • CONSTRUCTION TABLE 111EOZMINNIIIMI IEDENIIIIILumm. wand •1. •1.1••••IL•I21j):t:•1•lUI •1J1•Ml• ILaI•IIIj:a'LUI ••lII•••1.•1LLAs1:Ut/1Ul •i1• MR It.I31.Et ELUI N1>_ =11.f1 flI1-U:11UI •�/•E tL 1D411ttaN v 1..1..1.• V.LQ1111111U■ wr. • ,.4..- •.r_.• •••.•• ••••••• ••••• • • ...Is • • •••••• .• ••••.••■• • .74 /. LEGEND 04 11310 PROPOSED JIFSCRIPILQf • /' • Set Rod & Cop .,• .Y. E Wetlands Flay . .:t kilometer Y Eke Hydrant ' N Cal .-Valr. °�� �• ,Water M.Ir 'S •— Wal.r LN. Gas Lin. - Phone Line C c4•: �:t �. - fi:: F'r,: .... F .y,•' -` _ Power Pd. � J. Power Pole with Transformer /,. .. Guy Wire \%• Storm Lino • -}•' • Storm Drain Colts eosin ■► .. /• .,.....:.K...2.:..:: • • Stan Drain Manhole I: .<. 4 ! !^ _ _ _ - 5.1.1: /,14 :: • Di -Wotr Separator —I— S...* LI.. • Son Serer Manhole - ■ —I —IO- Chain Link Pence Trees — BIOS WALE Llenitt+Fbrdini 1 UK'.ILA FIRE STATION NO.53 SU01BA It11t�Mp1 s1 ra ••1 ammat SITE PLAN DRAINAGE! GRADING SYMO N DS ®® C1.1 '`NAKANO ®DENNI; LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 30 June 1995 Mr, Randy Berg City of Tukwila 6300 South Center Blvd. • Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Tukwila Fire Station /Sequoia Tree Dear .Randy: We recommend that a porous pavement system be included as part of the road on the north side of the existing 80" Sequoia tree to allow moisture and air penetration to the feeder roots of the tree. We suggest the reinforced plastic product Geoblock be installed for a width of 5 feet and a length of 35 feet under the canopy of the tree. The tree appears to be healthy and has received years of vehicular traffic and soil compaction on the north side. The addition of Geoblock should help the longevity of the tree. RECEIVED JUN301995 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Sincerely, .nfryrtsa Dale A. Dennis cc: Ron Thomas, Merritt+Pardinl Post -It" brand fax transmittal memo 7871 le of pwaa ■ / '' °,Qt,.l�y /°x'124 ►% G, I/S Car/'.rY VP 7.11041/4/i40,- Cory , 17nwft Dept. phone N Fell x43;/ "S Crcr5. Fe :N 300 East Pike Seattle WA 98122 -3610 • phone 206.292.9392 fax 206 - 292.9640 '20Va 0396Z6Z 90Z *'4,t :msr. „aATi trLtai9r„F?X11 gmhn"Y E::±Yge rrs.;\�,.iSieiK�4:'�' -e5 tt'3��S+` ":Ea%i!sa i'dtk %x6ai$' sINNZa *oNV)VN 9Z 91 tIH3) 56 . 0fi 'WIC `'u s1:0,4171∎3.Ktitt'v /... .6\3:iY,Afa.'fF.1thVinV6:14YNe.�Y.i' Atht! 3:+∎ -iPte} 4, .".iJ+n;rtnP37.fri,.t�rv,441.4.414,r ,,•.:: •� Ron, Here is how the area between the large sequoia and the bank measures out. I doubt if we can cut into the bank without some kind of retaining system. The 5 feet between the existing driveway and the tree is where it may be appropriate to use reinforced grass. Call if I can provide any further information. MEMORANDUM DATE: JUNE 15, 1995 TO: RANDY BERG FROM: STEVE LANCASTER RE: FIRE STATION #53 TREE CLEARING, STORM DFIA1NAGE, AND WETLAND BUFFER This memo is in response to your June 9 memo regarding application of the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone and Tree Regulations to the Fire Station #53 project. TREE REPLACEMENT Due to the large number of trees on the site and the fact that half of the significant trees are a result of an overgrown holly hedge, the tree replacement requirement may be calculated using the 20% canopy coverage method, as outlined in TMC 18.54.140(b). In addition, the replacement trees may be used in landscaping anywhere on the property, but must be in addition to those trees specifically required by the zoning code for street trees or required buffer areas, or trees required for wetland enhancement. STORM DRAINAGE A review of the site plan and proposed preliminary storm water management plan indicates that directing the storm water to the wetland after being treated is possible without adversely impacting the wetland and maintaining pre-development rate of flow through detention. A hydrology study is needed to determine the storm event flows. This can be accomplished at a later date when the project is in final design. Stormwater may be directed to the wetland per TMC 18.45.080(b)(3), with the following condition, which will be applied through SEPA: 1. All stormwater collected from impervious surfaces and directed to the existing Class 2 Wetland shall be first treated through an oiVwater separator and either a bio-swale or wet pond, capable of meeting Washington State clean water standards (RCW 90.48 and WAC 173.200-201). The storm water shall be detained if necessary, and released to the wetland at the pre-developed rate of flow. WETLAND BUFFER AND SETBACK The Type 2 wetland requires a 50' buffer and a 15' setback from the buffer edge for the foundation of the fire station. I realize that the 15' setback cannot be met in one small area, where the condensing equipment and the hose tower are located. Because the condensing equipment pad requires some disturbance within the 50' buffer, I cannot waive the 15' setback requirement. Discussing the matter with Gary Schulz, it is apparent that the wetland will not be adversely impacted by reducing the buffer area where the hose tower and condensing pads are located. Therefore, per TMC 18.45.040(c)(4)(A), I grant a waiver from the 50' buffer in this area only, and allow the buffer to be reduced to 35 feet in width, with the condition that buffer enhancement is required within the reduced buffer area. Mg5Milnatin, • ,