HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E2000-021 - SABEY CORPORATION - PARKING LOT FOR EXODUS COMMUNICATIONSEXODUS
COMMUNICATIONS
NEW PARKING LOT
3355 S. 120T" PLACE
INTERNATIONAL
GATEWAY EAST
E2000 -021
•
• 110 94-,03
CITY OF TUKWILA
NOTICE OF DECISION — SEPA PLANNED ACTION ADDENDUM
To: Brian Ellingson, Applicant for Sabey Corporation
State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division
FILE NUMBER: E2000 -021 Planned Action
LOCATION: 3355 S. 120th Place, International Gateway East
LEAD AGENCY: City of Tukwila
Description of Original Proposal:
The previous application to construct a new 89 space parking lot for Exodus Communications
was designated as a planned action pursuant to TMC 21.04.156 in December of 2000. Included
in the scope was construction of an underground stormwater detention system, site lighting,
stairs, ramps and retaining walls. The plan required 3,200 cubic yards of cut and associated
structural fill.
Description of Addendum:
The original lot has not been constructed and revised plans have been submitted to the City of
Tukwila. The current plan involves regrading of a vacant site to construct a 74 space parking lot.
Included in the scope is construction of an open stormwater detention pond, site lighting, stairs
and landscaping. The plan requires 2,100 cubic yards of cut and 350 cubic yards of fill.
The City has determined that the addendum 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 the project scope and other
information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
The original decision was issued December 15, 2000. This addendum is adopted on October 17,
2003.
Steve Lancaster
City of Tukwila DCD Director
SEPA Responsible Official
•
Mall '.- 1111
-A. 73
, —11
-E, all
„
.::
,...
in. ••■• S
qttlart71
1 14 ,
I.".. -....... 1 1
-f(/
.nita .
...... .,
...„.. . k 1
s- /I tili(./ v • ran
„.•-
, '"--
--/ ., )
k...... N.
...,--...• NE/ I /
f ..., ;,,,. -- - •
t
.[.\ ' • IN u
- (-••■•:-.....-.7.q _.
.............„..1.1____ ., __ .........., P „,.,....„.../ ...
- . .. - .,....% , ... --------- - . -
1 .: ... ••• ---_t -.....„ . -N-, . ..N ..... `,.. '. ..., .. ..
.
. .. ...
.3., •
.•
____ ..............• „..-. ..-.....„,
. , --..- .,, • - -....
..,................z.: j„..., ,.... ........ -N....N. \ ''
N Z.■....... .. -. -"`" >n ...... ...-. ....„, s)L-■:,,__'_-■ N N \ ' il
--:.‘
w ••:,' . • ..,.7•E'' pp "1-1,„,,,. ,r- , ___ ----,= ,-
, „....-7.7„:7,-......
r -.... .
...
..._....."' ...... \„0,, - _ _
-■ , , ..e."!T•-••;;;-c.----". .,, 1 1,
4 ,„4,4,,,.• ._ J. .\ .... „
,
• 41
--- •- -__..
, .
-
. 1 ..... ..., , 1
1,-
° ,_,, ); 1 4 , •,. . , 4
\ , --
/'': -**. I- --1T. \ ' • , III
--..\ \
„s- .,,,--_____-....-- -,-,4 I '••■ I i i !' '
-... s.
\ t r''• .... ' ,, •
- \ ,
. -J: r,'".• -1.1i
1# ---- I ■
\ :; : ,._r 4 - I •40 •-1,,
4 11I
\
„
4v-”-
i ' g
I I!. /1.•
; 1 *
'.4.
i
,
I. i .1,,,•*,,I, ' • ; 1 g;1
1 .
0 i 1 el--------1, kth.
evil •
1 `:,,,
' 1 ! i
•
„ , ' t t , . •
1- t
t ; I • ;
0.. •; • •I I ! I
, : t
/ •
1179
n n n
*LS II 6' WALLS
CP
40.7 ALLS I
1
• ";°'''`
\
/ / / )( 11
/ / / /
1 Liff / j
/ / /\ //
1
-
/
'-,.
.'.- P/ / F! i
I k ----
g t
‚9
'-1 1 \ tO r■
;‘;i3N \'... st,t-----z-z-- .; or — ---' ..-- ----/— .77--'---
1 N.--, ---r.. P- 4.AD
—_—__ —
1 1 ,, .c.,,,,,,„...„,,,,:.•;--;;;LCT::::"3.--„,.;.).•-,:itl:,1\
s.. \ \ / \*p ,...-
I NN
N..\ \
\ "- - It
.._---- • - .-- • -
• 1 . •
. i .
\ I -'\—'.:(-----
\ ST, --- •
I ,..,!: -,;'---, .... : i • 1 ::; ! ;,',1
•• . .•
:1 }
' 1 • ' . ,.., • ';
• ....... -,4 '
\Nt 4
. •-•,
1 1 i
' .1-.1, \ il
*. ,rol,. ','■,,„", r ., ! L.: ,... s [*-.., '
il 1
, ! ' ' 1'. '',,_ . ..s...Aii ''' 1ff '
1 .. '. ' :'1 \ : 1 I . * '
1 ' ( . • , •,41:•
- \ N I .. , • 's ' I
N 1 1 1
; I 1 il .-2: —41 (r_
,
/ 1/1
.
•
\/ ifi*;</
p / ,
(-\':(:..<----:;" -- N
N... N....... ,.._ N N --, ..,
..... N.. '—`-; N.
-.... • ,
Ay 5
Mkti
en
•
, , i..,
I %.5 'i. _L. 11. 1 I i
, I ' ,;
3
.. , • 1 .
`,-,. •:', 0. . ', ' 1 ! i ?..;
-; -....- -n---- ' „- i ! t , . •
•-i , F. ; ' .. •:•.11 '
-r
"t
-/& /
/ A /
1
ig
c IQ
\
// X/ / // /1 //
/ / \/ / / A/ / /I /
1 1 .:+, U
• 4.,-
F, ‘, ; 1 t.,‘-:...!;:•'.; ..,..-
. -
••.4;
-1„,;;_ • 11"L'F"',
1 1 i
1 1
/ / / /I / , , I! ,
/ /1/ / V / / V /
/ / V / ,/\ / / /\ / /
r
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF DECISION
To: John Lang, Applicant for Sabey Corporation
State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division
December 15, 2000
This letter serves a notice of decision that the application to designate the construction of a new 89 space
parking lot for Exodus Communications as a planned action is issued pursuant to TMC 21.04.156.
FILE NUMBER: E2000 -021 Planned Action
APPLICANT: John Lang, Sabey Corporation
REQUEST: Determine that the construction activities fall under the Manufacturing/ Industrial
Center planned action criteria and therefore no additional SEPA review is required.
LOCATION: 3355 S. 120`h Place, International Gateway East
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Regrading of a vacant site to construct a new 89 space parking lot.
Included in the scope is construction of a stormwater detention system, site lighting, stairs, ramps and
retaining walls.
DETERMINATION: Project is designated as a planned action. The decision is final with no
administrative appeal.
ZONING /COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: MIC/H
Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are
;available for inspection at the Tukwila Department of Community Development; 6300 Southcenter
Boulevard; Suite 100; Tukwila, WA; from Monday through Friday, between 8:30 AM and 5:00 PM.
The project planner is Nora Gierloff who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for . further information.
Property owners affected by this decision may request a change in valuation for their property tax
purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Steve Lancaster
City of Tukwila DCD Director
SEPA Responsible Official
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Nora Gierloff - Exodus III Parking Lot
From: Nora Gierloff
To: Internet:johnl @sabey.com
Date: 12/15/00 3:46PM
Subject: Exodus III Parking Lot G x2000 -02-1
Hi John,
Steve approved the planned action for the new parking lot and it should go out in the mail today. He
wanted to remind you that a landscape legend and erosion control plan will be required with the MI permit
submittal. He would also like to you explore the idea of an opaque fence along the south property line to
shield the Barnhardts from car headlights. Please follow up with me.
Nora Gierloff
(206) 433 -7141
•
Level Pool Routing
The following level pool table summary represents the results of routing the developed
area 2, 10, and 100 -year hydrographs through a theoretical detention structure. Please
note that in all cases the discharge rates are less than or equal to the allowable release
rates. Please refer to the Water Works outputs located in the Appendix.
THEORETICAL LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY
Description
Inflow
Storage
Discharge
P. Stage
Volume
Outflow
P. Time
[CFS]
ID
ID
[FT]
[CF]
[CFS]
[Min]
2- YROUTFLOW
1.71
STOR
CMB1
71.72
23125.85
0.069
1470
10 -YR OUTFLOW
2.98
STOR
CMB1
71.90
24032.48
0.640
780
100 -YR OUTFLOW
4.65
STOR
CMB1
72.00
24519.48
1.495
540
Live Storage
The theoretical volume of live storage required is 24,519 cubic -feet. In addition to the
27% volume correction factor required by the Department of Ecology and additional 3%
factor of safety was applied to the live storage volume to account for inaccuracies during
facility construction. Therefore, the actual volume of live storage required is 31,874
cubic feet (1.30 x 24,519 f?). The actual detention facility was designed to provide
31,987 cubic feet of live storage (68' x 96' x 4.9').
Dead Storage
The facility will be designed to provide "dead" storage in the amount equal to the volume
of the water quality storm event. The volume of the water quality hydrograph (64% of
the 2 year precipitation) was determined -to be 0.33 Ac -ft or 13,825 cubic -feet as stated
previously in the Developed Condition Hydrograph Summary. A 3 % factor of safety
was then applied to account for inaccuracies that may occur during facility construction.
The required volume of dead storage is therefore 14,240 cubic feet). The actual
detention facility was designed to provide 19,584 cubic feet of dead storage (68' x 96' x
3'). The detention facility will have a total depth of 7.9 feet.
PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE REPORT FOR TUKWILA - PAGE - 11
0017 OF TUKWILA 400.
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA. 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206)431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us
SEPA
PLANNED
ACTION
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: EXODUS CGMY\ILC'ATIONS PARJTrr; rriT
INTERGATE EAST
LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS.
3355 South 120th Place (See. attached ALTA Drawing dated 8/19/99)
Quarter: See below Section: q Township: "rINT Ranae: ,,t.
!This information may be found on tour tax statement.)
W 1/2 of SW. 1/4 of Section 10
E 1/2 of SE 1/4 of Section 9
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR:
The individual who:
• has decision malting authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff,
9 has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping deyeio=: -: -:f <-
standards, and
•
O is the primary contact X ith the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent.
Name: JOHN W. LANG, AIA
Address: 12201 Tukwila Fn, -h F . ,- e -a ++i
Phone:
Signature: Date:
091
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKwn A
/ff
C 1 2 2000 /
PERMIT CENTER
G:'APPHAMLANDUSE.APP'splan. doc.09 /10/99
FOR STAFF USE ONLY Sierra Type: P -PACT •
Planner:
File Number:
Application Complete
(Date:
)
Project File Number:
Application Incomplete
(Date:
)
MIC Planned Action EIS File Number: E96 -00
Other File Numbers
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: EXODUS CGMY\ILC'ATIONS PARJTrr; rriT
INTERGATE EAST
LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s),
subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS.
3355 South 120th Place (See. attached ALTA Drawing dated 8/19/99)
Quarter: See below Section: q Township: "rINT Ranae: ,,t.
!This information may be found on tour tax statement.)
W 1/2 of SW. 1/4 of Section 10
E 1/2 of SE 1/4 of Section 9
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR:
The individual who:
• has decision malting authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff,
9 has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping deyeio=: -: -:f <-
standards, and
•
O is the primary contact X ith the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent.
Name: JOHN W. LANG, AIA
Address: 12201 Tukwila Fn, -h F . ,- e -a ++i
Phone:
Signature: Date:
091
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKwn A
/ff
C 1 2 2000 /
PERMIT CENTER
G:'APPHAMLANDUSE.APP'splan. doc.09 /10/99
PLANNED ACTION INITIAL QUALIFICATIONS (TMC 21.04.152)
Please complete the following checklist to demonstrate that all significant adverse environmental impacts have been clearly
avoided or mitigated. Please respond on separate sheets as needed.
Applicant Responses:
A. BACKGROUND
1. Date Checklist prepared: October 4, 2000 Revised October 24, 2000, Revised
December 12, 2000
2. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction winter 2000.
3. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No
4. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No
5. List any govemment approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. SEPA
Planned Action Land Altering Permit, Building Permit.
6. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask
you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those
answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and
alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. Regrading of vacant
site for 89 surface parking spaces. Construction of detention system, site lighting, stairs,
ramps and required retaining walls.
7. 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. 3355 South 120th Place,
Tukwila WA (see attached drawing A0.1)
8. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use
Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes
- 1 -
Agency Comments:
RECEIVED
CITY OF TI J ',
DEC 1 2 2000
PERMIT CENTER
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, ollin• hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 45%
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. Combination of medium -dense sand /silt with dense silt
lens approximately 40 feet down.
Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If
so, describe. No
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 3200 cubic yards of native material
revmoved for final grading and ramp construction. Structural fill from approved site.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe. Temporary erosion control will be utilized throughout construction
process.
g.
About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 75 %.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any: Standard good practice of temporary erosion control to protect nearby stream
and catch basins.
2. 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.
Normal construction noise, dust and odors. When completed, parking for 89
vehicles to produce noise and emissions.
b. 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:
None
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. Riverton Creek immediately adjacent to
west. Flows into Duwamish River.
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. Project
will be dose to allowable setbacks by Riverton Creek.
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
4) 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
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...; agriculture; 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. N/A
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. Surface water runoff
from new impervious areas to be collected by catch basins, routed through
detention pipe and oil water separator into existing storm water system.
Designed to Kinq County Surface Water Design Manual standards.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally
describe. Potential oil from vehicles onto impervious surface.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts,
if any: Detention system to control flow. Applicant to design system that eliminates
sediment from entering Riverton Creek. Oil water separator to clean runoff of
vehicle oil. Designed to King County Surface Water Design Manual standards.
-3-
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
® Deciduous Tree: Ider u - •le, Aspen, Other
® Evergreen Tree: ir, edar ine, Other
❑ Shrubs
® Grass
❑ Pasture
❑ Crop Or Grain
® Wet Soil Plants: Cattail, '., Bullrush, Skunk Cabbage, Other
❑ Water Plants: Water Lily, e grass, Milfoil, Other
❑ Other Types Of Vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Removal of Poplar,
Alder, and Pine trees. Topsoil vegetation to be removed.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Salmon in
Riverton Creek.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Enhance buffer vegetation by Riverton Creek
with native plants. Remove scrub trees from parking area. Remove Pines with root
balls, cut into segments for relocation downstream in Riverton Creek if approved by
City.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site:
birds:
heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass, (almon) trout, herring, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Salmon
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. Lower Riverton Creek
(below site) stocked with salmon fry.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Enhanced buffer by
creek will attract more wildlife.
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. Electric - Site lighting.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If
so, generally describe. No
- 4 -
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:
None
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of
this proposal? If so, describe. None
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Standard
emergency services.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
None
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the
project on a short-term or a Tong -term basis (for example: traffic, construction,
operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
Construction traffic (short term), Tenant traffic (lonq term)
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise, impacts, if any: Construction
noise per City of Tukwila ordinance requirements.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Industrial, Research &
Development, Storage, and Residential.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Unknown
c. Describe any structures on the site. None
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? MIC /L
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? MIC /L, Processing
and industrial on MIC Implementation Plan.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
N/A
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If
so, specify. Yes. Riverton Creek nearby. See Attachment A, Wetland and Stream
Delineation Report by Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC..
- 5 -
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
190. Reference permit D2000 -208
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any: N/A
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low- income housing? N/A
Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low- income housing. N/A
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A
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? 14 foot retaining wall.
b. What 'views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur? Parking Lot lighting - night time.
b. 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
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control Tight and glare impacts, if any: Specified
lights will minimize glare and spillage.
12. Recreation
a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Walking trail by river 1/4 mile away.
Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No
• •
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Enhance creek buffer
with native vegetation.
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.
No
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific,
or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None
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. Portions of 35th Avenue
South in process being vacated. South 124th Street main access.
b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop? No. 800 feet to nearest transit stop.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate? 89 created. None eliminated.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? if so, generally describe (indicate whether
public or private). Modifications at vacated portion of 35th Avenue South.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe. No
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. Reference Attachment B,
Traffic Generation Analysis by Perteet Engineering, Inc.
g.
Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None
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
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 Electric: Seattle City Light; Water: Water District 125
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity
which might be needed. Electric: Seattle City Light.
C. Signature
The above answers are e and co, lete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the
lead agency is relying on dec. • n.
Signature:
Date Submitted:
/0 /D1
November 9, 2000
John Lang
Sabey Corporation
12201 Tukwila International Bl. 4th Floor
Tukwila, WA 98168
RE: Planned Action for New Parking Lot
E2000 -021
Dear John,
The City has completed a final review of your application documents. Please revise your site plan
and checklist per the attached redlines and resubmit 3 copies of each. In addition please submit an
81/2 by 11 reduction of the site plan for the file.
If you have any questions about these comments please call me at (206) 433 -7141.
Sincerely,
Nora Gierloff
Associate Planner
cc: Michael Cusick, Public Works
C: W ora' s_ FilesUntergate _East\ExdsParkingSEPARev.DOC
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION
October 25, 2000
John Lang
12201 Tukwila International B1. 4t Floor
Tukwila, WA 98168
RE: Planned Action for New Parking Lot
E2000 -021
Dear John,
Your application for a SEPA planned action covering the new parking lot for Exodus
Communications on the Intergate East Campus has been found to be complete on October 25, 2000
for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. This determination of complete
application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or
information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the
substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process.
After a preliminary review of your application City departments had the following comments:
Planning
• Please revise the plans to show the split rail fence we discussed between the edge of the parking
lot and the watercourse buffer.
Building
• The number and location of handicapped parking spaces still needs to be resolved.
Public Works
• You are required to provide erosion and sediment control that will prevent any solids from
reaching the west fork of Riverton Creek. This will be easier to achieve if construction is
delayed until a drier time of year, though you may propose methods of achieving this standard
for winter construction. Please amend your checklist to discuss this issue.
• The parking lot layout will need to be revised so that an unobstructed path at least the width of
the existing pavement is maintained along 35th Avenue to the south property line.
C: \Nora's_Files\Intergate_ East \ExdsParkingS EPAComplete. DOC
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
• •
If you have any questions about these comments please call me at (206) 433 -7141.
Sincerely,
Nora Gierloff
Associate Planner
cc: Michael Cusick, Public Works
Ken Nelsen, Building
C:UVora's_ Files 'Intergate_East\ExdsParkingS EPAComplete. DOC
FILE:
APPLICANT:
DATE:
PLAN REVIEWER:
City of Tukwila
Public Works Department
Review Comments
E2000 -021
Exodus Parking Lot at InterGate East
10/16/00
Contact Mike at (206) 433 -0179 if you have any
questions regarding the following comments.
1. The Public Works Department will require the proponent to provide erosion and
sediment control that will prevent any solids from reaching the west fork of
Riverton Creek. The erosion control measures will require the use of sediment
basins with chemical flocculents to prevent the release of solids and water
quality testing prior to any release of storm water runoffs from the site.
Z P r'ZU /-444- vE '�
��CY -'t fti t I7 P1
F/20r^ S /a z-r 77' TG so t4? e?'%.'1 V
/°&O /° a 5 e c ,#T i 0 3 5
�^ A • r• -rt9 l .N -Y (
Gary Schulz - Exodus Parking Lot at Intere East
Page 11
From: Gary Schulz
To: Nora Gierloff
Date: 10/16/00 11:19AM
Subject: Exodus Parking Lot at Intergate East
Re: # E2000 -021
Here are my comments of the current submittal for SEPA. The proposed parking lot allows a 35 -foot
standard buffer for the portion of Riverton Creek that is on the site.
1) My review of the watercourse rating for this segment of the Creek has documented that it is a Type 2.
This is my determination that was conveyed during the Pre - App /PRE00 -030.
2) The standard buffer of 35 feet is being shown on the submittal. Some enhancement is also proposed
but not required. We will require barrier /erosion control fencing along the edge of watercourse buffer prior
to construction.
3) There is a sediment pond and maintenance of it along this portion of the Creek. PW should comment
on the access to this pond.
Let me know if there are questions.
Gary Schulz
CC: Deborah Ritter
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development'
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA
98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplanaci.tukwila.wa.us
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS
PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
The undersigned being duly swom and upon oath states as follows:
I.I t is .the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application.
2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent.
4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real
property located at 3555 South 120th Place, Tukwila, WA.
for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose.
5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any Toss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the
City's entry upon the property unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City.
6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests
for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days.
7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without
refund of fees.
ss
EXECUTED at Seattle (city), WA (state), on September 28 , 2000
International Gateway East LLC, by Sabey Corporation, Manager
(Print Name)
12201 Tukwila International Blvd., 4th Floor
(Address) Seattle, WA 98168 -5121
206/281 -8700
(Phone Number)
(Signa
James N. Harmon, CFO of Sabey Corporation
On this day personally appeared before me James N. Har to me known to be the individual who executed
the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /sXe signed the same as his/hyi'r voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes
mentioned therein.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON
MARY A. HALL
STATE OF WASHINGTON
NOTARY - - - -- PUBLIC
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 12 -19 -01
28th D Y OF September , 2000
III' i 4•iargit�
NOTARY U : IC in an. . the State of Washington
residing at Seattle
My Commission expires on 12/19/01
INTERGATE CORPORATE CAMPUS EAST
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION REPORT
Table Of Contents
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY 1
3.0 RESULTS 2
4.0 WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES 5
5.0 WILDLIFE 6
6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS ON WETLANDS AND STREAMS 6
7.0 WETLAND AND STREAM MITIGATION 6
References
List of Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Data Sheets
List of Drawings
Drawing W1.0: Wetland and Stream Map (1 of 2)
Drawing W1.1: Wetland and Stream Map (2 of 2)
INTERGATE CORPORATE CAMPUS EAST
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
WETLAND AND STREAM DELINEATION REPORT
September 18, 2000
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of a wetland and stream delineation on the Intergate
Corporate Campus East site located at 12633 Tukwila International Blvd in the City
of Tukwila, Washington (Figure 1). The site is situated east of Tukwila International
Blvd. (SR 99) and north of S. 126th. Street.
Topography on the site has been severely altered through historic grading activities
and currently slopes down from Tukwila International Blvd to Riverton Creek, a
perennial stream that flows from south to north along the eastern edge of the project
site. Although most of the site is undeveloped, two existing paved parking areas are
located in the northern and eastern portions of the site, respectively. In addition,
several construction trailers and compact gravel parking areas are located along the
western portion of the site, adjacent to Tukwila International Blvd.
The project site is the proposed location of three office buildings and associated
parking areas. The purpose of this report is to: 1) describe the wetlands and
streams identified and delineated on the site, 2) identify impacts to these sensitive
areas from the proposed project, and 3) generally describe measures that will be
implemented to mitigate for wetland and stream impacts. Information in this report
will be utilized by the City of Tukwila to evaluate impacts to wetlands and streams
from the proposed project.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
A general reconnaissance was conducted on April 12, 2000 to gain an overall
impression of the existing environment. Observations were made of the general
plant communities, wildlife habitats, and the locations of potential wetlands, streams,
or drainages. Present and past land use practices were also noted, as were
significant geological and hydrological features. The identified features were then
delineated on April 17, 2000 using the procedures outlined in the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997) and the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual (1987).
Plant species were identified according to the taxonomy of Hitchcock and Cronquist
(1973), and the wetland status of plant species was assigned according to the List of
Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Reed 1988, 1993). Wetland classes were determined by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's system of wetland classification (Cowardin, et. al. 1979).
Vegetation was considered hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant
species had a wetland indicator status of facultative or wetter (i.e., facultative,
facultative wetland, or obligate wetland). Soil on the site was considered hydric if
one or more of the following characteristics were present:
Intergate Corporate Campus East
1
September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
ItA
rj
11
S 116TH ST
n <
Sr
n
54 S 12 TH 1ST
ST.
ARBOR LAKE I1 i
ARK
5 122.\0 ;
vr\ P11
I
S 126TH" ST
par
5 4
'CU
TH
T
00 51
F
T
A4
TH
i
' 1.1c11u, 1411 34
< 1 <i
J 5 104TH ST o
05∎P ST LJ
103RD
ST
I • .7...., \\ GLEN ACRES I
_:..^T' .r s
(S
;� • GOLF, a ` : 7-1 l lttl'• v/.
/
tJ H
:y °P ':COUNTRY .. �(
\', i1::rH `;CLUB »,
P . Si r-
S 112TH ST.' :_1g'i
N N of
F,
L a:,
r-
5 1`/07 zyFs
3110 5T
*ul 5
a
S 125T, \Pt-
5
114214 v
115TH 1ST
104254 ST
NI Ni8
io
S I06T11 5T
107TH
PAIN
COUNTR
N
0
�f
4.
ST
S
GOLF COURSE
a
CLUB I
`^ T
of
NI
5 113TH .5124
S 114T4 ST.. ,t
5 '115TH " ST •
il; H ' ST
�n� �/$�j�µ1 771'}'{'ii J'1TI �i 7i j 5 107754 'n r'
01 > s 4_ST s t1aT54 asr
RK
"' 120TH ST_� • 5 120TH 157 ti •I �I— / -•' ■ `'
1 SOUTHERN l^ ^CIg `
HEIGKTS cal rn ,n ,— T��IT
T;PARK I- LIB
Tr
o -. tol ,, hl °z H �t3 'P 122:10 ST ;s
... 124TH I Ni ' KII N '� 41 S 1:3f9; sr iii 4I
I
Ni I_
A
=j a �I
I FS I T HILLT P
S I 128TH ST ' 'I t < I PK
4eo w 4'.',.
zaca
an 5,,,,, 44 SI 129TH a ST <'/ .< 2 'y
N _ 130TH ST �% s I N' RI 9 20 HIGNLINE
172111 ST' N I30rH
'" < v, > <i ¢ >a I� a S 13CTH PI. S 130111 Pl �., COMMUNITY
S 231st In p < 11 HOSP
I -Ih n S MST 1.41215-1
1. 51- S 131ST Yv pI H <'
5 13210 ST S 112501 STH "' _.Y� Pi. 16 t`q Uri ,,, o0
NE
ST
5 124TH^i8 ST
OJEG
117154
0 .41911
;la J
i<
128TH 1,' -
S ST `., A 51
T
-1
N 126TH 5T S I
17
136TH
N
320
5 137244
5 118
1220 =
-•
134TH
S
S 137Th�it 1,e Pl,
P1. s 138TH ^LST I
PI
S 140TH ■
>�
ai441 <I S 142200 ST
it 5 02110
S 142ND
1 c i
PLS3?o
5 1144TH 071 S/
H
\c7;.% \ 11514
/c• <) __. L'.7.
sr
Sw "'i
111
14210 (ST
ST
jN
::SEA C < A
S 134 H STT
PAR N 01
136 H NI ST `_
180)
• COMUN!TY CENTER GI
S
=(
ti
144TH' ST 3,
C
13 RR
}
137TH ti I
ST =
138154 I gl
S 139TH ST
S 140TH ST
4-
s 142ND N ST
'ACM CT
2400
S
<I
0I / s
3400
S 136TH
gis 137154
RIVERTON
tr CREST
CEN =
4014
PA.
s
SOUTH. G4
' PARK
O
OP
IA
1°A
ALTMANN OINER ASSOCIATES L—L.0
BN ONb19�iAL RANK NG & UNDSUIPE ARCH RE
PO Dm SJE • Carnation, nation, MIA 98014
d,5op42S313•45 5 • fax425333.4509
FIGURE I: Vicinity Map
Intergate Corporate Campus East
Tukwlia, Washington
5abey Construction, Inc.
5
141ST
5 142ND
ST'
ST
14
0 5
LIB •
4000
Northtr ,
DRAIN I PROJECT
50 I61
SCALE
NTS
DATE
a/113/00
REVISED
▪ organic soils or soils with an organic surface layer,
• matrix chroma just below the A- horizon (or 10 inches, whichever is less) of 1 or
less in unmottled soils, or 2 or Tess if mottles were present, or
• gleying immediately below the A- horizon.
Indicators of wetland hydrology may include, but are not necessarily limited to:
drainage patterns, drift lines, sediment deposition, watermarks, historic records,
visual observation of saturated soils, and visual observation of inundation.
Appendix A contains data sheets prepared for representative locations in both the
uplands and wetlands. These data sheets document the vegetation, soils, and
hydrology information that aided in the wetland boundary determination. Wetland
boundaries were marked with flagging and surveyed.
3.0 RESULTS
Two wetlands (Wetlands A and E), four remnant swales (Swales 1 through 4), two
streams (Stream D and Riverton Creek ), and two artificial drainages (Drainages B
and C) were identified and delineated on the site (Drawings W1.0 and W1.1). Each of
these features is described below.
Wetland A and Swales 1 through 4
Wetland A is located adjacent to the existing parking lot in the northern portion of the
site. Although only a small portion of the wetland is located on the project site, it
appears to be part of a larger wetland that extends off -site to the west within the
right -of -way for SR 99. The wetland is associated with a small drainage that flows
into a culvert along the wetland's east edge. Runoff from this culvert then drains into
two open swales (Swales 1 and 2) within the existing parking lot before draining into
Riverton Creek. Two additional remnant open swales (Swales 3 and 4) are located
in the northern portion of the north parking lot. These swales are day - lighted
portions of culvert under the parking lot that conveys runoff from the right -of -way into.
Riverton Creek.
Vegetation within the on -site portion of Wetland A consists primarily of reed
canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), while the off -site portion of the wetland
contained a mixture of palustrine forested and scrub -shrub vegetation dominated by
young red alder (Alnus rubra), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), field horsetail
(Equisetum arvense), and reed canarygrass at the time of the April 2000 site visits.
Vegetation within the off -site portion of the wetland has recently been cleared as part
of the construction of a temporary access road within the SR 99 right -of -way. Soils
within the wetland at the time of the April 2000 field investigations were generally
saturated to the surface.
The buffers of Wetland A have been heavily disturbed through historic clearing and
grading activities, and much of the buffer consists of the existing parking lot.
Vegetation within the unpaved portion of the buffer consists largely of monotypic
Himalayan blackberry, most of which has been recently mowed.
Intergate Corporate Campus East
2
September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
Wetland A has been classified as a Type 2 wetland by the City of Tukwila since the
off -site portion of the wetland appeared to contain a forested wetland class that
comprised greater than 20% of the total surface area of the wetland (TMC
18.45.020.C.2.c). Type 2 wetlands generally require a standard 50 -foot buffer that
can, with approval of the Planning Director, be reduced by up to 50% with
implementation of a buffer enhancement plan.
Drainages B and C
Area B consists of a small drainage that enters the project site along the central
portion of the west property boundary. The drainage appears to consist entirely of
collected runoff within the SR 99 right -of -way. Runoff within Area B enters a culvert
that apparently discharges approximately 150 feet downslope into Drainage C.
Vegetation within Area B at the time of the April 2000 site visits consisted primarily of
young red alder and red -osier dogwood (Corpus sericea). At the time of the field
investigations, the drainage contained a very low flow and soils were generally
saturated to the surface.
Drainage C consists of a small (average two- to three -foot wide) channel within a
deeply incised ravine comprised of what appears to be fill material. Although no
culvert was located at the upper end of the drainage (possibly crushed), it appears
likely that Drainage C receives discharge from Area B. Runoff within Drainage C
then enters a culvert beneath the existing parking lot to the east. Vegetation along
the channel of Drainage C was dominated by young red alder, Indian plum (Oemleria
cerasiformis), Himalayan blackberry, and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) at the time of
the April 2000 site investigations.
Drainages B and C are not regulated by the City of Tukwila since they appear to be
artificial stormwater runoff channels that do not meet the definition of a watercourse
as defined in TMC 18.06.920.
Stream D
Stream D is located in the south - central portion of the site and consists of an
approximately four -foot wide channel that is a tributary to Riverton Creek. The
stream conveys runoff from the SR 99 right -of -way but also appears to include
groundwater discharges from areas located to the west of the highway. The upper
portion of the drainage is located within a forested ravine that at the time of the April
2000 field investigations was dominated by big -leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red
alder, Indian plum, hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), English ivy (Hedera helix), bleeding
heart (Dicentra Formosa), large- leaved avens (Geum macrophyllum), sword fern
(Polystichum munitum), and Pacific waterleaf (Hydrophyllum tenuipes). Runoff within
the stream then enters a small artificially created pool that diverts water toward a
concrete spillway that enters Riverton Creek. Vegetation along this lower portion of
the stream was dominated by Himalayan blackberry and stinging nettle.
Stream D is considered a Type 2 watercourse by the City. Type 2 watercourses
generally require a 35 -foot standard buffer.
Intergate Corporate Campus East
3
September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
Wetland E
Wetland E is located in the southern portion of the site, adjacent to Riverton Creek.
The eastern portion of the wetland is located within the riparian corridor of the creek,
while the western portion of the wetland appears to be hydrologically supported by
runoff from the adjacent fill slope to the west. Vegetation within the wetland at the
time of the April 2000 field investigations was dominated by Himalayan blackberry
and stinging nettle, but did include scattered red alder, black cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa), willow (Salix sp.), Indian plum, red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa),
and skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum).
At the time of the field investigations, portions of the wetland contained soils that
were saturated near the surface, while the hydrology in other areas was assumed
based on the presence of hydric soils and scattered obligates such as skunk
cabbage.
Wetland E meets the criteria for a Type 3 wetland in the City of Tukwila since it is
less than one acre with a canopy cover of trees rooted in the wetland that is less
than 20 %. Type 3 wetlands generally require a standard 25 -foot buffer.
The canopy coverage within the wetland was determined to be 18.5% based on a
50% canopy coverage throughout 35% of the wetland (e.g. the western portion of
the wetland adjacent Riverton Creek) and a 5% canopy coverage in the remaining
65% of the wetland (e.g., the eastern blackberry portion of the wetland).
Riverton Creek
Riverton Creek generally flows from south to north along the eastern portion of the
site. The creek has been historically channelized and is the location of an ongoing
salmonid restoration and supplementation program conducted by the City of Tukwila.
The stream enters the site in its southeast corner and flows north for approximately
150 feet where it drains over a concrete spillway before turning to the west and
flowing along the fire lane of Building 21 -05.
Buffer vegetation along the upper portion of the creek above the spillway has been
heavily disturbed through historic clearing and grading, especially along the east
bank. Vegetation along the east bank in this area was dominated by low weeds and
grasses interspersed with invasive shrubs at the time of the April 2000 site visits.
Plant species observed included creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), dock
(Rumex sp.), Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum), and Himalayan
blackberry. In addition, one westem red cedar (Thuja plicata) and several red alder
and black cottonwood trees were located in this area, along with several black
twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) that appear to have been recently planted.
Vegetation along the west bank of the creek in this upper area was dominated by red
alder, vine maple (Acer circinatum), and Himalayan blackberry.
Riverton Creek below the concrete spillway is largely constrained within.a rockery
lined channel. In addition, an approximately 300 -foot section of the south - central
Intergate Corporate Campus East
4
September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
portion of the creek is located within a culvert. Vegetation along the creek edge was
dominated by naturalizing small trees and shrubs as well as supplemental plantings.
In those areas along the creek where there is little shade, primarily where soil
conditions are poor and vegetation is difficult to establish, vegetation within the creek
channel was dominated by reed canarygrass, watercress (Rorippa nasturtium -
aquaticum), and climbing nightshade (Solanum dulcamara). These invasive species
are apparently removed by the City on an annual basis to facilitate movement of
salmonids within the channel.
Riverton Creek (Watercourse #10 -2) is identified as a Type 3 watercourse in the
City's sensitive area inventory. It is our understanding that the City has upgraded
the stream classification to a Type 2 watercourse above the spillway, and would
require a standard 35 -foot buffer setback from the OHWM in this area. It is also our
understanding that Riverton Creek below the spillway will be upgraded in its rating
(as determined by the DCD Director). If this portion of the stream is determined to
be a Type 1 watercourse, then it will likely require a standard 70 -foot buffer.
4.0 WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES
Wetlands, in general, provide many valuable ecological and social functions,
including stormwater storage, water quality protection, groundwater recharge
and discharge, and wildlife habitat. The wetlands on the project site (i.e.,
Wetlands A and E and the four remnant swales) generally have a low to
moderate value for most of these functions due to their relatively small size.
However, the value of these wetlands is increased due to their association
with an anadromous fish- bearing water (i.e., Riverton Creek). The wetlands
provide some stormwater storage area that reduces downstream flooding,
while trapping sediments. The trapping of sediments and other pollutants
within the wetlands maintains water quality in downstream areas and aids in
the prevention of fish habitat degradation by limiting silt accumulation within
spawning areas. The wetlands also provide further benefit to fish and other
wildlife by releasing water slowly during the dry summer months, thereby
contributing to the base flow of the stream.
In addition to their hydrologic functions, the wetlands also .provide some biological
functions. As components of the riparian corridor of Riverton Creek, the wetlands
provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Another important biologic function of
the wetlands is the transport of nutrients (via Riverton Creek) to downstream areas.
Nutrients transported to downstream areas provide biological support for fish and
other aquatic wildlife.
Although privately owned, the on -site wetlands do provide some cultural
wetland functions as part of the overall open space associated with the
Riverton Creek riparian corridor. The wetlands contain some passive
recreational opportunities such as wildlife viewing, and have the potential to
provide educational opportunities through interpretive signage and wetland
system monitoring.
Intergate Corporate Campus East
5
September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
5.0 WILDLIFE
Although an extensive wildlife study was not performed, observation of wildlife usage
was recorded during the field investigations. In general, with the exception of
Riverton Creek, the site does not appear to contain significant wildlife habitat due to
its high degree of disturbance and isolation from larger habitat corridors. Wildlife
observations on the site included the American crow, song sparrow, American robin
(nesting), Bewicks wren, red tailed hawk, and cottontail rabbit. The number of wildlife
species that utilize the site, however, is likely higher than the number actually
observed during our limited field investigation due to the seasonality and secretive
nature of most wildlife species. No endangered or threatened wildlife species or
habitats were identified during the field investigations.
6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS ON WETLANDS AND STREAMS
The proposed project has been designed to minimize and enhance the value of
Riverton Creek, the most important sensitive area on the site (Drawings W1.0 and
W1.1). Wetland and stream impacts are limited to:
1) piping remnant Swales 1 (-170 s.f.), 2 (-100 s.f.), 3 (— 450 s.f.), and 4 ( -385 s.f.)
located in the existing north parking lot for a total impact of about 1,105 s.f.,
2) 3,000 s.f. of buffer encroachment adjacent to Stream D, and
3) construction of a new 40 -foot box culvert across the northern portion of Riverton
Creek.
In addition, the heavily degraded buffer adjacent Wetland A would be reduced by up
to 50% with enhancement. The wetland will be provided with a minimum 25 -foot
buffer, and that portion of the existing parking lot located within 25 feet of the
wetland would be removed and restored.
7.0 WETLAND AND STREAM MITIGATION
Mitigation for the impacts to remnant Swales 1 through 4, buffer encroachment
adjacent Stream D, and new box culvert across Riverton Creek will occur through
the on -site enhancement of Riverton Creek. A mitigation plan will be prepared and
submitted for review prior to any wetland or stream impacts. The mitigation plan will
be in accordance with the requirements of TMC 18.45 and will include:
• planting native trees and shrubs along the channel to maximize shade to the
stream, thereby controlling invasive plants within the channel.
• cutting back and removing the existing long culvert. Once the culvert is
removed the stream corridor would be stabilized and the area planted with
native trees and shrubs.
• re- structuring the northern portion of the stream channel to enhance salmonid
rearing habitat.
Intergate Corporate Campus East 6 September 18, 2000
1673wet1.rpt
References
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Department of the Interior. FWSOBS- 70/31.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University
of Washington Press. 730 pp.
Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp.,
Baltimore, Maryland.
Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands:
Northwest (Region 9). USF &WS Biol. Report 88.
Reed, P.B. Jr. 1993. Supplement to: National List of Plant Species that Occur in
Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). USF &WS Biol. Report 88.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual.
APPENDIX A
DATA SHEETS
P - 1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field InvestigatorLs,,• Ai -TV"{P
Date. H- � I L1'+
- O e
ProjecUSite' V, Cc E: T�j L4.-+�A State: WA County- 14-1 Applicant/Owner• S p+ac--
Plant Community t:/Name•
Note: H a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes )G No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No X (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant Species
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1. I?kc.1RCi S M4 \).,na.Cct:, t=ic 11
2. 12
3. 13..
4. 14
5. 15
6. 16
7. 17.
8. 18
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL,'FACW, and/or FAC 1 O O C,
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No
Rationale:
0ic ('AC- OtZ LA TT k
Series/phase:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes
Matrix Color: 1bYR Vit
SOILS
Subgroup•2
Yes No Undetermined
No ( Histic epipedon present? Yes No ?C
No X Gleyed? Yes No /C
Mottle Colors:
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes )C No
Rationale:
Lail ctiRomA
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes
Is the soil saturated? Yes X No
Depth to free - standing water in pit/soil probe hole. $o,4r'A -E-
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
HYDROLOGY
No 1( Surface water depth:
Is the wetland hydrolo¢y criterion met? Yes ')( No
Rationale: °gS1CtZvATtc,J F St.`. Sane -A of-1
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes )( No
Rationale forjurisdictional decision:
AL. L '3 C •i€4-1 A vA
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
,iz
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Investiaator(s): A A ^s °`i • Date. y ` f °G
Projecl/Site• I.CCE T■mK4...).( -A State: WA County: K,r4(.7
Applicant/Owner SAE -`( Plant Community #/Name• 'TP 14- -2—
Note: tf a.more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes )( No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes X No (If yes, explain on back) — c .tpAC•ti f - 1?Eatc, « i
r-1 itWE��
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
1. Ptieslacts •:.r.,cinaree, NhLJ tk 11.
2. E �� stew. wr�c..se � _ I' 12.
3. �Jb,rs 2-i3cotor (Ac.) 5 13.
4. 14.
5. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17.
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. - 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No
Rationale'
So% PAC_ cR w+S7 rcF
re
Series/phase:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes
Matrix Color: Co''
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric sail criterion met?
Rationale:
cCAIAMcT
Yes
No X•
No
SOILS
Subgroup•2
No Undetermined
Histic epipedon present? Yes No Z( _
Gleyed? Yes No
Monte Colors'
Yes
No _X_
F
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No %( Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No )(
Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole•
List other fietd evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
IJu ti5a2- 4Act143* %4 f_Vll>)i:NCE 4r SOIL SAT∎/(2- .Ito.•!
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
No
c.:•11)% rJ L
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Nd' .
Rationale for jurisdictional decision•
5o1L-5 tl i i? : -6r CP- 1764-tt& Nv'� �'�e r-
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy."
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETER AINATION METHOD1
Field Invest ator(s)• ALI'0-1 Ar Date• " t - 0 0
Project/Site• 1CCk 7uKwll.i� State: OA County: KivJ
Applicant/Owner SA( Plant Community #/Name• TP 3
Note: tf a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes X No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant Species
VEGETATION
Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
Indicator
Status Stratum
1. Ac.ec IM4tcoo��_ FP.C.J •1- 11
2. COCyIJS Corn.A 4 f `�v 1-1S 12.
3, Ocv^ltrick reCCsikc.M15. !r/..C.1 ____S— 13.
4. tAe dec.:. het ;x mi.- V 14.
S. GC.) On. wWwcCO?c.ytl..nn fFGw+ 14 15.
6 J fit'..,.p�ylL,,n 4tn4gcS �� �— 16.
7. b, co,.,lr.. 4.2,r ACii N 17.
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OEL, FACW, and/or FAG '' (4 IC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No .. _
Rationale'
i.,1 t, T "" j "o "rc. Fic.. c (— WE- TT[(i
SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup•2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No Histic epipedon present? Yes No )
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes______ No Gieyed? Yes No X Matrix Color: (oi ! Mcrtle Colors'
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No Y_
Rationale:
C- +& •--A G - 2 "./ el f— orr t-'-t; 5
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No ).. Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No X
Depth to free - standing water in pit/soil probe hole•
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No X
Rationale:
Alto %(L%/AT l4.).•-i G.. t bCeJC.E cc= Self. S.�i..l2Ati 4 c...
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No X
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
TP L�
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Investigator(s): /Nc-tf^- fr.r1,.1 Date: 4-1/.'6
Project/Site: t C C E- T�y_ J "- A State: 1,4J' County: {c L9
Applicant/Owner SA Plant Community 1:fName: T P `1
Note: tf a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes X. No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No (If yes, explain, on back)
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum Dominant Pant Species Status Stratum
1. PeNWS 4ri cLoce..€?s (Ac 1- 11.
2. Se..■ix S. w f T'5 12.
3. (4,-42.../S d i scykor CAtW 5 13
4. Ur 4:c... c),,otcc., fAct 1{ 14.
5. Awl .yr; w f. -C, 1; x - -ce,,, ; .. , GAc._ A 15.
6. Lyaictw:4_...' ca.y;.�,..' elk. N 16.
7. 17
8. 18
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OEL, FACW, and/or FAC "'$3'o
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No
Rationale:
7 Co °ro (-4% C- c:t yif,-- t -Ir:-
SOILS
Series/phase: Subgroup.2
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes No Undetermined
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes No X Histic epipedon present? Yes No X
Is the soil: Mottled? Y s x No Cloyed? Yes No )C
Matrix Color: 1e ill 412- Mottle Colors' vA.2-1 0.J5
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes_ No
Pationale:
Cm(4.0eAA oC eL L..f :I' rt 0.".....7c -1 .-c S
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No X Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No C
Depth to free - standing water in pi/soil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes A No
Rationale:
A�S:i+Mf 6PScp 0,4 •ii bit lc- .5£:11.5 v Pty StnlcE Cz,.tGDT
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes X No
RationaLe for'jurisdictional decision:
t3Ase 5c e 6f i dt 1 1014 CR 1g-1�
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
T?
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Fie d Investigator(s): Date• y —( 1 o O
Project/Site : -1L - State: W!'* County • �� L
Applicant/Owner: SAGE Y Plant Community #/Name: P
Note: tf a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes X No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No %C _ (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant Species
1. 1410lvs -4T-; c..\noC c. r ?c
2. All. -6 C.A ∎rc,
if a- A',scofor
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Indicator
Status
FAC_
*SAC J
VEGETATION
Indicator
Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum
T 11.
12.
—_5__ 13.
5 14.
15.
16.
17
18.
19.
20.
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACY /, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No C
Rationale:
/Vo'r ssa 1.0 c- Gtz (J-f T T i it--
SOILS
Series/phase'
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Ye
Matrix Color: Ic)1 .
�'t-
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
C (;%+r^ A off- L. " f o k a; -r c 5
Yes
No
No
Subgroup•2
No Undetermined
Histic epipedon present? Yes No )X
Gleyed? Yes No )(
Mottle Colors•
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No ) Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No
Depth to free- standing water in pit/soil probe hole.
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
IVO 0gS4- r1-Vq•j) 1 Dt [„t bC,+C-
No�_
c►' G.�-
5 � nA-1( „aJ
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
NO CO 11 e.g. lto —ET
No
('far -kat4 F'
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
T P
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHODI
Field Invostigator(s) ALA tAni+'
Project/Site:-.1c-C. -Tv ∎ LA
Applicant/Owner• SAeE•
Date: LI - 11- o
State: We` County' 1` r N V
Plant Community 4/Name: IP (
Note: It a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes XC No (I( no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No )C (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant Species
VEGETATION
Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species
1. A1n..+ s cobre. S 11.
2. R.ki»s o%i Scctor 12.
3. Oew.1u-1� CCC .s r� c"w-ic ACV' _5_ 13.
4.
Ur +ICS J;o;cc Ftc* Et- 14
5. 01■41^,1r; .,.-. -C' d; r --C'e r.,.; r,, j-AC N 15
6. Eq•- 15tA..w C,rvc"Se VAC K 16
7. Li s ICS\- 4Y,..,. c..,...... ctlL IA 17.
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. 20
NkC
S
Indicator
Status Stratum
Percent of dominant species that are OEL, FACW, and/or PAC 1 I °t {�
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes $ No
Rationale:
'> $o ge, GAc C w Ez Td(L
SOILS
Series/phase:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Yes
Matrix Color: IOU- Z/
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric soil criterion met?
Rationale:
Low c.. v A
Subgroup:2
Yes No Undetermined
No X Histic epipedon present? Yes No
No X Gleyed? Yes No K
Mottle Colors'
Yes X' No
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes
Is the soil saturated? Yes )C No
Depth to free - standing water in pit/soil probe hole'
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
HYDROLOGY
No X Surface water depth:
..i
-1-10
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes )C No
Rationale:
03SI (LvAt'i 10).) yr
re c A i r2 A '►l v
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes 7( No
Rationale `or jurisdictional decision:
L. 3 C(2rZr12rrr DUI
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
DATA FORM
ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD1
Field Investigator(s)• &-- Tri`•'`A^► r`> Date• 1 ' t-1 - •'
Project/Site' l E TLW- W LA- State: wA County• V- rVJC"
Applicant/Owner• Sri GE r Plant Community a*/Name• 1? 1
Note: if a more detailed site description is necessary, use the back of data form or a field notebook.
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community?
Yes )C No (If no, explain on back)
Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed?
Yes No X (If yes, explain on back)
Dominant Plant Species
VEGETATION
Indicator Indicator
Status Stratum Dominant Plant Species Status Stratum •
1. Aln,-)s t- .)b:cl (4•C_ T 11.
2. 12J1o:IS c)i Sc c r >FACs —5___ 12.
3. OewAter■c. CeC- :S'Sc'7," iS iMJ $ 13
4- Z'tz?[ 5c ,;-.Ci.4 u•,.n kJ S 14.
5. 15.
6. 16.
7. 17
8. 18.
9. 19.
10. 20.
Percent of dominant species that are OEL, FACW, and/or FAC
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes No
Rationale•
tJBT > SGS•a FAC CR WETT E-R
2C
SOILS
Series/phase:
Is the soil on the hydric soils list?
Is the soil a Histosol? Yes
Is the soil: Mottled? Ye
Matrix Color: toYR 413
Other hydric soil indicators:
Is the hydric sail criterion met?
Rationale:
1116 N
Subgrcup•2
Yes No Undetermined
No X Histic epipedon present? Yes No X
No X Gleyed? Yes No X
Motile Colors'
Yes
No
c. RA, A
HYDROLOGY
Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No 1C Surface water depth:
Is the soil saturated? Yes No )C
Depth to free - standing water in piVsoil probe hole:
List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation.
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes
Rationale:
NJ O3SERyA1i0 I c ENCE CI:- So:L. Striva--07r I O!Z P4 ,41.)1 n!G
No ?_
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes No _X_
Rationale for jurisdictional decision:
to G c.o. vi- E(L, A
1 This data form can be used for the Hydric Soil Assessment Procedure and the Plant Community
Assessment Procedure.
2 Classification according to 'Soil Taxonomy.'
•
as.
Co
•
1 cxomc w.'re*
a(a •
WETLAND $ STREAM MAP. ,..
I NTERSATE CORPORATE CAMPUS EAST
TUI<WILA, WASHINGTON
SABEY CONSTRUCTION, INCORPORATED
ALTMANN OLIVER ASSOCIATES LLC
ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHf1ECTURE
Po Box 576 . Cunatlo4 W on 9801+
okka.{253334535 • fax 4253313509 • akoMeNeartNtrknac
Perteet Engine iig, Inc.
ATTACHMENT B
May 1, 2000
Mr. Jim Morrow, P.E.
Director, Public Works Department
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
RE: East Marginal Way Corporate Park / Intergate Technology Campus East
Traffic Generation Comparisons
Dear Mr. Morrow:
Sabey Corporation has requested that we submit a letter summarizing the permitted site
generated.trips for the East Marginal Way Corporate Park and compare the permitted trips to the
trips generated by the conversion of the site to the Intergate Technology Campus East Data
Center.
The site is the former Boeing Military Aircraft's industrial/office complex located adjacent to,
and west of, East Marginal Way South between South 120th Place and South 126th Street.
Attached is the Historic Use Plan site drawing by Lance Mueller & Associates
This letter documents our review of permitted site generated traffic and the resultant generated
Data Center traffic based on the proposed land use designation for Intergate Technology Campus
East. The existing development consists of six buildings. A summary of the permitted land use
for each building, including gross building floor area by square foot for each use is as follows:
Building Permitted Use Building Square Footage
#1 • General Light Manufacturing 93,948
Office 4.616
Sub -total 98,564 gsf
n2
r3
r�
Warehouse 107,489
Sub -total 107,489 gsf
General Light Manufacturing
Office
General Light Manufacturing
Office
163,963
73.810
Sub-total 237,773 gsf
109,657
11.070
Sub -total 120,727 gsf
10209 Bridgeport Way S.W.. Suite C -1. Lakewood. WA 98499 • 253- 984.7138 • Fax 253 - 589 -0399 • www.prrte.°:
Mr. Jim Morrow
East Marginal Way Corporate Park
Page 2
#5 General Light Manufacturing 178,511
Office 19,422
Warehouse 9.711
Sub -total 207.644 gsf
#6 General Light Manufacturing
5.352
Sub -total 5.352 gsf
TOTAL 775,549 gsf
Building Use Summary:
General Light Manufacturing 551,431 gsf
Office 108,918 gsf
Warehouse 117.200 gsf
TOTAL 775,549 gsf
Permitted trip generation for the site, based on ITE Trip Generation, 6th Edition, results in the
following site generated traffic based on the designated land use codes:
Average Daily Traffic
General Light Manufacturing (110) 6.97/1,000 gsf 3,850 ADT
Single Tenant Office Building (715) 11.57/1,000 gsf 1,260 ADT
Warehousing (150) 4.96/1000 gsf 580 ADT
TOTAL 5,690 ADT
The proposed Intergate Technology Campus East facility will convert the existing
manufacturing /office /warehousing buildings to a Data Center. The gross square footage of each
of the buildings will be the same except for Building #5 which will increase by 356,356 gsf to a
total floor area of 564,000 gsf. As a result, the proposed site use conversion to Data Center will
total 1,131,905 gsf of floor area. The ITE Trip Generation Manual does not include a land use
designation for Data Center due to the limited time these developments have been in existence.
Warehousing (Land Use Code 150) has been a comparable land use for calculating site generated
traffic for Data Centers. Using this land use designation for the converted site results in a site
generated traffic level of 5,614 ADT based on the ITE rate of 4.96/1,000 gross square foot
factor.
Peak hour rates are included in the following summary. However it is our understanding the
Data Center workday hours are not consistent with street peak traffic hours.
Mr. Jim Morrow
East Marginal Way Corporate Park
Page 3
Peak Hour Rates
A.M. Peak Hour
General Light Manufacturing (110) 1.01 /1,000 gsf
Single Tenant Office Building (715) 1.78/1,000 gsf
Warehousing (150) 0.57/1,000 gsf
These rates result in the following peak hour trip comparison:
P.M. Peak Hour
1.08/1,000 gsf
1.72/1,000 gsf
0.61/1,000 gsf
Peak Hour Trips
Permitted Trips. Data Center Trips
AM PM AM PM
General Light Manufacturing (110) 560 595 -0- -0-
Single Tenant Office Building (715) 195 190 -0- -0 -.
Warehousing (150) 70 70 645 690
Peak Hour Trip Totals 825 855 645 690
This review indicates the comparison between the permitted trip generation and the proposed trip
generation for the site conversion results in 76 fewer weekday trips than the 5,690 ADT
previously permitted and 180/165 fewer AM/PM peak hour trips. In summary, the
conversion of the East Marginal Way Corporate Park to the Intergate Technology Campus East
Data Center will not result in an increase in average daily traffic or peak hour traffic over the
trips previously permitted. It is recommended that "Data Center As Built" counts be collected
for a comparison basis and to help establish a better model for predicting Data Center trip
generation rates.
We request that this trip generation analysis, based on the selected ITE Land Use codes, be
reviewed and approved by the City of Tukwila at your Department's earliest convenience. We
are available to provide any assistance, answer questions or provide additional information at
your request.
Very truly
411 er r
eorge i . Reynolds
Office Manager
South Puget Sound Office
Enclosure
cc: David Sabey, Sabey Corporation
Eileen DeArmon, Sabey Corporation
Robert Fadden, Lance Mueller & Associates
1I II 1 + i' a ®�' 11�1cllll�t Rlll�� 117'ii�i11� �11 /s� ���' - =� =' >L1 ; l 1 j�l iimiv it +till {obi �rti,I l i �V ��R\Vy.�rat a i�rnn �� tal ruiti.,�.rwr ,711tista �` t u+i1111UInlawin fil �1��+ ti�l�i 1Ij���' +Iti1�k i,r;l �il!+III�, + {I III f �; 'ottrf 1� { 1 i�,ll
�� :'i ill I {� �'� }. �I�,;i'�I I {�I II +
'•I .I1. {''rl�ll,till�trlI _ j
I� y I l l i' i DETENTION PIPE
Ise . a1�JER REVISION 19/11/00
l NUMBER OF. PARKING
ADA RAMP AND 'STAIRWAY 10 24/00
RR1 ./
irl�(I 1kI !I('j ") 114L_ _ —i 5 f1 5 fy
ID; 1_\��M� U:l1 }��1V.�1 k. I kl�lrtrl.,tii0ilj110. ,���i +���il i�r Jt1'1�11._�, +�il ltli�fl)yl. +�} 1lillllililtlrl'ii
110, 111
DRANK BY Csll
a4E171ED'6Y: - Jul
APPROVED B
FULL SIZE 0 8.55X19.00
COMPACT 0 8.00X19.00. .
HANDICAPPED