Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E01-009 - SARA DEVELOPMENT - 8 LOT SHORT PLATSARA DEVELOPMENT SHORT PLAT 13419 MACADAM RD. E01 -009 Proposed Sara Short Plat (Located South of the Y- Intersection of 43rd Avenue South /Macadam Road South and South 135th Street) SURFACE WATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT April 29, 2002 Revised June 20, 2002 EXPIRES 11/03/02 Prepared for: Behzat Choudary Prepared by: Kok -Wah Tung, P.E. Cr l --fei. *-3 RECEIVED JUM 2 5 2002 TUK6 ".ILA 'JBLIC WORKS mzo,!o 2 SECTION I Project Overview The Technical Information Report (TIR) provides an overall drainage review and includes all up- stream and downstream potential drainage impacts as well as on -site drainage analysis. The TIR also addresses design considerations and mitigation. This project proposed construction of 8 single - family residential homes and detention tract. The subject property is located south of the Y intersection of 43rd Avenue South /Macadam Road South and South 135`h Street, Tukwila, Washington. The property is located in the northwest quadrant of section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East. The site is triangular in shape and encompasses approximately 3.3 acres. All stormwater calculations and proposed water quality standards are based on King County Surface Water Design Manual 1998. Existing Site Conditions: The site was undeveloped, except for the proposed Lot No. 7 where an existing house (abandoned) is located, and proposed Lot 5 where an existing garage (abandoned) is located. The southern portion of the property is occupied by a natural drainage gulch and is designated as an open space buffer area. The proposed development will occupy the central, and northern portions of the site. On this portion of the site the slopes vary between 10 and 43 percent grade and slopes towards the northeast. The gulch is relatively steep. The soils underlying the site are relatively impermeable. The general soils classification is AmC Alderwood which is glacial till. Table 1 Impervious and Pervious Areas Description Area in Square Feet Existing Till Pasture Proposed Till Grass Impervious Lot 1 26100 23,900 2,200 Lot 2 14,000 10,800 3,200 Lot 3 8,200 6,400 1,800 Lot 4 7,600 5,600 2,000 Lot 5 6,400 4,800 1,600 Lot 6 5,400 4,000 1,400 Lot 7 7,100. 4,200 2,900 Lot 8 9,000 6,600 2,400 Macadam Sidewalks 5,800 - 5,800 43rd Sidewalks 7,200 - 7,200 Detention Tract 6,000 6,000 Total 103,100 66,600 36,500 3 Existing Drainage: The existing runoff from the site is collected by the onsite drainage gulch and catch - basins located on South 135th Street. The general direction of flow in the drainage system runs northward. Proposed Site Conditions The proposed site will be divided into 8 lots and detention Tract . Lots No. 1 and 2 abuts a Type 2 water course according to Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45. The code requires a 35 foot -wide buffer on each side of the water - course. Proposed Drainage: The geotechnical engineering investigation report recommended that roof runoffs and footing drain runoffs from proposed structures be tightlined into existing storm -drain system. The proposed drainage system will consist of catch - basins in the driveways of each lot and will be collected by the main conveyance system located at the eastern end of the site and discharged into the wet and dry vault at the north end. The vault will be located at the lowest section of the site. After treatment for quantity and quality, the runoff will be discharged into the nearest existing catch -basin No. 1. Stormwater Design: The City of Tukwila has adopted the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual as their standards for water quality/detention volumes. The 1998 standard requires using the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) modeling program to evaluate the stormwater control for the proposed development, and to analyze and design the required water quality /detention volume. All proposed projects must provide on -site flow control facilities to mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface run -off generated by the addition of impervious surfaces and related land cover conversion. The superintendent informed that the site is subject to flooding. However, the City Drainage Engineer recommended Level 1 flow control. Stormwater control requirements for this site are that the post - development peak run -offs matches peak runoffs of the 10 year pre - development peaks. Furthermore, the City of Tukwila preferred detention vaults to facilitate maintenance. Design Criteria Regional Scale Factors: 1.0 SEATAC KCRTS Soil Group: Till KCRTS Cover Group: Pasture/ Grass 4 Table 2 Description Area in Acres Existing Till Grass Proposed Till Grass Impervious Lot 1 0.60 0.55 0.05 Lot 2 0.33 0.26 0.07 Lot 3 0.19 0.15. 0.04 Lot 4 0.17 0.13 0.05 Lot 5 0.15 0.11 0.04 Lot 6 0.12 0.09 0.03 Lot 7 0.16 0.10 0.07 Lot 8 0.21 0.15 0.06 Macadam Sidewalks 0.13 - 0.13 43rd Sidewalks 0.17 - 0.17 Detention Tract 0.14 - 0.14 Total 2.37 1.53 0.84 Mitigation Measures The proposed development proposes a stormwater facility that will provide both detention and water quality treatment. The runoff from the roofs as well as the driveways will be collected by the catchbasins located each driveway. The catchbasins are then connected by the main conveyance system of 12 inch diameter pipes and then discharged into the wet pond /dry vault. Level 1 flow control will be implemented for this site. Stormwater control requirements for this site are that the discharges from the vault matches the 10 year predevelopment peak discharges. Results of the KCRTS run The peak discharge for both the predeveloped and developed are provided in Table 3. Using level 1 flow control the detention volumes determined is approximately 6900 cubic feet. Stormwater treatment guidelines call for providing a water quality treatment volume to three times the volume run -off from the annual storm (0.47 inch) over the area of development. Table 4 below provides the detention and water quality treatment volumes. Table 3 Flow Frequency Analysis - Peaks Rainfall Region - Sea Tac Period (Year). Undeveloped (CFS) 100 25 10 5 2 0.501 0.269 0.217 0.212 0.117 5 Table 3 Wet/Dry Vault Size Detention (Level 1 flow control) . : Waterquality volume. Total volume 5,600 cubic feet 5,200 cubic feet 10,800 cubic feet Construction of the Combined Wet/Dry Vault The proposed facility will consist of 2 cells vault. The length of the vault is 50 ft long by 30 ft wide and 10 ft deep. The outlet control device is a 18 -inch riser with 2 orifices. The top orifice is 1.75 inch diameter at elevation 64 ft. and the bottom orifice is 1.5 inch diameter set at elevation 63.0 ft. ty { _ s`t - �� ..� � Tan mom, rte^ .�� \ , snye-tin,. �,. Sy . % jn • \� \� \��� , ooh '� \� \� 1\ � .... - \11 - \ 11111M. ,1 \ 1 `' — t v_ Foot. Nk— idge ` t1, \ 1 tt \ „," . \ I`il \ \\,., ,� ' ' ;adios% . _ • ..\ ,., \ ., \,...s. _ , r PI :` �` i Earlingtori \ ,� 1 \:� 47 Park \ �^ ' ; ;�, : i ±i Par s "r 4 ") `. a► 1/ it. \ ',,. ii r .. - , \i i` / '''\`',:r seo t - r ,g. hri. 1- penalty: 'M �,: .• • 0 .A ; t•.. �'' Sl1h LOCATION \` .: `: � i 1 `,,, ycy '" ark`s •, ��� ^< 1 s" __Fig i • ". 1 .. _ �. l - ' • -"- Footbrid.: tin \ {� l I i . l lRai III tel �`� ',i .1.. High Sctl.�s \ \ 446 �wl to 1 o(+r '! \limp /` a 1� . ., .� -I 1 • iverton Ne + 1 I ai % 1It I ���� 21 �I iJ : , ,3 --, , 1 '''..111411_11111111- II InAirAirav i \\ t 4th Leta\ %Tote: Figure generated from Iv , ' J TOPO!®. _ , % / /,r —�� `tea.- 1 — T dr _ •e /oe - FIGURE 1 — VICINITY MAP Location: Tukwila, Washington Client: Sara Development Date: 2 -20 -01 P.O. 8 MI. 17'30" 1 640 000 FEET SEATTLE P.O. 9 M!. SHEET NO. 10 KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON (DES MOINES QUADRANGLE) 122°15' 47 °30' 180 000 FEET N O W ce Riyerton•H i 27'30" Figure Z Soi!s Map SECTION II Conditions and Requirements Summary This section addresses the requirements set forth by the King County Surface Water Design Manual Core and Special Requirements listed in Chapter 1 Based on the 26,000 square feet of new impervious surface added,a full drainage review is required. This necessitates addressing all eight Core Requirements in addition to five Special Requirements. See Table 1. KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL CORE REQUIREMENTS Core Requirement #1 - Discharge at the Natural Location (1.2.1) The 100 -year peak flow for the developed condition of the project site, 0.79 cfs, is greater than the threshold value of 0.5 cfs therefore, all surface and stonn water runoff from the proposed development will be routed and discharged to the detention vaault. Runoff from this site will not' create a significant adverse impact to downhill properties or to surrounding drainage systems. See Table 2. Core Requirement #2 - Offsite Analysis (1.2.2) The outlet of the dry/wet vault will be discharged into the City of Tukwila's stormwater system Adverse impacts on the downstream and/or upstream drainage system will be alleviated. The project does not change the rate, volume, duration or location of discharge to /from the project site. Core Requirement #3 - Flow Control (1.2.3) To mitigate the impacts of increased storm and surface water runoff generated by proposed development , level 1 flow control will be implemented. Also, because the additional new impervious area exceeds the 5,000 square foot threshold, water quality facilities have been provided. Core Requirement #4 - Conveyance System (1.2.4) All engineered conveyance system elements for the project were analyzed, designed, and will be constructed to provide a minimum level of protection against overtopping, flooding, erosion, and structural failure. Culverts and ditches were sized to allow for 25 -year peak flows in the developed condition. Core Requirement #5 - Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (1.2.5) The project will provide erosion and sediment controls to prevent, to the maximum extent possible, transport of sediment from the project site to downstream drainage facilities, water resources, and adjacent properties. To prevent sediment transport, both temporary and permanent Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) measures will be used. 9 Core Requirement #6 - Maintenance and Operations (1.2.6) Maintenance and operations of the drainage facilities on this project is the responsibility of the City of Tukwila. Drainage facilities will be maintained and operated in compliance with King County maintenance standards. Care will be taken to assure scheduling consistent with wildlife and fisheries concerns. Standard Maintenance: STANDARD MAINTENANCESTANDARD MAINTENANCE Facilities will be maintained by standards set forth in the King County Surface Water Design Manual. Special Maintenance: SPECIAL MAINTENANCESPECIAL MAINTENANCENone Core Requirement #7 - Financial Guarantees and Liability (1.2.7) The drainage facilities on this project are being constructed by the developer for the City of Tukwila. A 2 year maintenance bond will be required to comply with the financial guarantee requirements mandated in City of Tukwila Municipal Code Core Requirement #8 - Water Quality (1.2.8) The wet vault will be used to treat the runoff from the new impervious surfaces and pollution - generating pervious surfaces. KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Special Requirement #1 - Other Adopted Area - Specific Requirements (1.3.1) This project is not in a designed Critical Drainage Area (CDA), or in an area included in an adopted Master Drainage Plan (MDP), Basin Plan (BP), Lake Management Plan (LMP), or Shared Facility Drainage Plan (SFDP). Therefore, the drainage requirements associated with these adopted areas do not apply. Special Requirement #2 - Floodplain / Floodway Delineation (1.3.2) This project is not adjacent to a stream, lake, wetland, or closed depression. Also, there are no King County regulations requiring a study of flood hazards in this area. Therefore, delineation of the 100 -year floodplain boundaries does not apply. Special Requirement #3 - Flood Protection Facilities (1.3.3) This project does not contain or is adjacent to a Class 1 or 2 stream that has an existing flood protection facility (such as a levee, revetment, or berm). Also, this project does not propose to construct a new or to modify an existing flood protection facility. Therefore, there are no flood protection facilities that need to be analyzed and /or designed to conform to the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) regulations (44 CFR). SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS This project is adjacent to steep slope hazard areas as defined in City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance. 10 SECTION III Off Site Analysis The project lies within the Green/ Duwamish River. UPSTREAM ANALYSIS The offsite drainage from areas upstream of this site has been collected by the City of Tukwila drainage system. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS The stormwater will be discharged into the City of Tukwila drainage system. Appendix A Calculations Appendix A Calculations Retention /Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Vault Facility Length: 37.49 ft Facility Width: 37.49 ft Facility Area: 1405. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 4.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 100.00 ft Storage Volume: 5621. cu. ft Riser Head: 4.00 ft Riser Diameter: 18.00 inches Number of orifices: 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 1.72 0.160 2 3.00 1.45 0.057 4.0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage .Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 100.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.02 100.02 28. 0.001 0.011 0.00 0.04 100.04 56. 0.001 0.015 0.00 0.05 100.05 70. 0.002 0.019 0.00 0.07 100.07 98. 0.002 0.021 0.00 0.09 100.09 127. 0.003 0.024 0.00 0.11 100.11 155. 0.004 0.026 0.00 0.13 100.13 183. 0.004 0.028 0.00 0.14 100.14 197. 0.005 0.030 0.00 0.16 100.16 225. 0.005 0.032 0.00 0.26 100.26 365. 0.008 0.041 0.00 0.36 100.36 506. 0.012 0.048 0.00 0.46 100.46 646. 0.015 0.054 0.00 0.56 100.56 787. 0.018 0.060 0.00 0.66 100.66 928. 0.021 0.065 0.00 0.76 100.76 1068. 0.025 0.070 0.00 0.86 100.86 1209. 0.028 0.074 0.00 0.96 100.96 1349. 0.031 0.078 0.00 1.06 101.06 1490. 0.034 0.082 0.00 1.16 101.16 1630. 0.037 0.086 0.00 1.26 101.26 1771. 0.041 0.090 0.00 1.36 101.36 1911. 0.044 0.093 0.00 1.46 101.46 2052. 0.047 0.097 0.00 1.56 101.56 2192. 0.050 0.100 0.00 1.66 101.66 2333. 0.054 0.103 0.00 1.76 101.76 2473. 0.057 0.106 0.00 1.86 101.86 2614. 0.060 0.109 0.00 1.96 101.96 2754. 0.063 0.112 0.00 2.06 102.06 2895. 0.066 0.115 0.00 2.16 102.16 3035. 0.070 0.118 0.00 2.26 102.26 3176. 0.073 0.120 0.00 2.36 102.36 3317. 0.076 0.123 0.00 2.46 102.46 3457. 0.079 0.126 0.00 2.56 102.56 3598. 0.083 0.128 0.00 2.66 102.66 3738. 0.086 0.131 0.00 2.76 102.76 3879. 0.089 0.133 0.00 2.86 102.86 4019. 0.092 0.135 0.00 2.96 102.96 4160. 0.095 0.138 0.00 3.00 103.00 4216. 0.097 0.139 0.00 3.02 103.02 4244. 0.097 0.139 0.00 3.03 103.03 4258. 0.098 0.141 0.00 3.05 103.05 4286. 0.098 0.143 0.00 3.06 103.06 4300. 0.099 0.147 0.00 3.08 103.08 4328. 0.099 0.151 0.00 3.09 103.09 4342. 0.100 0.156 0.00 3.11 103.11 4370. 0.100 0.160 0.00 3.12 103.12 4385. 0.101 0.161 0.00 3.22 103.22 4525. 0.104 0.170 0.00 3.32 103.32 4666. 0.107 0.178 0.00 3.42 103.42 4806. 0.110 0.185 0.00 3.52 103.52 4947. 0.114 0.191 0.00 3.62 103.62 5087. 0.117 0.197 0.00 3.72 103.72 5228. 0.120 0.203 0.00 3.82 103.82 5368. 0.123 0.208 0.00 3.92 103.92 5509. 0.126 0.213 0.00 4.00 104.00 5621. 0.129 0.217 0.00 4.10 104.10 5762. 0.132 0.684 0.00 4.20 104.20 5902. 0.135 1.530 0.00 4.30 104.30 6043. 0.139 2.630 0.00 4.40 104.40 6183. 0.142 3.930 0.00 4.50 104.50 6324. 0.145 5.400 0.00 4.60 104.60 6464. 0.148 6.840 0.00 4.70 104.70 6605. 0.152 7.370 0.00 4.80 104.80 6745. 0.155 7.860 0.00 4.90 104.90 6886. 0.158 8.330 0.00 5.00 105.00 7026. 0.161 8.770 0.00 5.10 105.10 7167. 0.165 9.190 0.00 5.20 105.20 7308. 0.168 9.590 0.00 5.30 105.30 7448. 0.171 9.970 0.00 5.40 105.40 7589. 0.174 10.340 0.00 5.50 105.50 7729. 0.177 10.700 0.00 5.60 105.60 7870. 0.181 11.050 0.00 5.70 105.70 8010. 0.184 11.380 0.00 5.80 105.80 8151. 0.187 11.700 0.00 5.90 105.90 8291. 0.190 12.020 0.00 6.00 106.00 8432. 0.194 12.330 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 0.72 * * * * * ** 0.65 4.09 104.09 5750. 0.132 2 0.34 * * * * * ** 0.22 4.00 104.00 5621. 0.129 3 0.33 0.22 0.22 4.00 104.00 5618. 0.129 4 0.36 * * * * * ** 0.21 3.95 103.95 5549. 0.127 5 0.42 * * * * * ** 0.18 3.29 103.29 4626. 0.106 6 0.21 0.12 0.12 2.19 102.19 3079. 0.071 7 0.25 * * * * * ** 0.09 1.35 101.35 1894. 0.043 8 0.24 * * * * * ** 0.08 0.94 100.94 1316. . 0.030 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:prel.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates - -- Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.212 4 2/09/01 2:00 0.501 1 100.00 0.990 0.108 7 1/05/02 16:00 0.269 2 25.00 0.960 0.269 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.217 3 10.00 0.900 0.044 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.212 4 5.00 0.800 0.117 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.195 5 3.00 0.667 0.217 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.117 6 2.00 0.500 0.195 5 11/24/06 3:00 0.108 7 1.30 0.231 0.501 1 1/09/08 6:00 0.044 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.424 50.00 0.980 6.4.1 WETPONDS — BASIC AND LARGE — METHODS OF ANALYSIS FIGURE 6.4.1.A PRECIPITATION FOR MEAN ANNUAL STORM IN INCHES (FEET) ST 1.0 ST 1.0/ LA 1 0 LA 1.2 LA 0.8 LA. 0.9 0.54" (0.045') 0.47" (0.039') Z J Incorporated Area ,_.c=o River /Lake 0.47 " Major Road (0.039') 0.52" NOTE: Areas east of the eastemmost isopluviai should use 0.65 (0.043 ' u . 5 6 " inches unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest 24 The mean annual storm is a conceptual storm found by dividing the annual precipitation by the total number of storm events per year (0.047') result, generates large amounts of runoff. For this application, till soil types include Buckley and bedrock soils, and alluvial and outwash soils that have a seasonally high water table or are underlain at a shallow depth (less than 5 feet) by glacial till. U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) hydrologic soil groups that are classified as till soils include a few B, most C, and all D soils. See Chapter 3 for classification of specific SCS soil types. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 6 -69 9/1/98 Vr (O-9 AL: 0•25 0.10Atf -1-0-011N0) X RAZ R = rirjc.W frorn mean onnual Storm At; cirea of impervfou5 • 311-6-09 SgrfctCe (j) At9 Greg oS -till covered w(th orctss , • 52iG504) CO-47) )( CO-1)(309 +0.25 5Z-iCso) Jz z 1630 cA4brccct) lk)e± vault voicitne- = Volume factor)( Vr ) *30 x 3 = +890 c_mbicje,e:t 5arciDevetopMet Net Vault, 5131 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 3 - CLOSED DETENTION SYSTEMS (PIPES/TANKS) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Storage Area Manhole Catch Basins Plugged Air Vents One -half of the cross section of a vent is blocked at Vents free of debris and any point with debris and sediment sediment Debris and Sediment Joints Between Tank/Pipe Section Tank Pipe Bent Out of Shape Cover Not in Place Locking Mechanism Not Working Cover Difficult to Remove Ladder Rungs Unsafe Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10% of the diameter of the storage area for Yz length of storage vault or any point depth exceeds 15% of diameter. Example: 72 -inch storage tank would require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of 7 inches for more than Y length of tank. Any crack allowing material to be transported into facility Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape more than 10% of it's design shape Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open manhole requires maintenance. Mechanism cannot be opened by one maintenance person with proper, tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1 inch of thread (may not apply to self - locking lids.) One maintenance person cannot remove lid after applying 80Ibs of lift. Intent is to keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance: King County Safety Office and/or maintenance person judges that ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. See "Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 All sediment and debris removed from storage area. All joint between tank /pipe sections are sealed Tank/ pipe repaired or replaced to design. Manhole is closed. Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover can be removed and reinstalled by one maintenance person. Ladder meets design standards allows maintenance person safe access. See "Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A -3 ' APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 4 - CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Component General Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Cleanout Gate Orifice Plate Overflow Pipe Manhole Catch Basin Trash and Debris (Includes Sediment) Structural Damage Distance between debris build -up and bottom of orifice plate is less than 1 -1/2 feet. Structure is not securely attached to manhole wall and outlet pipe structure should support at least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upright position (allow up to 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and show signs of rust. Any holes —other than designed holes —in the structure. Damaged or Missing Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Damaged or Missing Obstructions Obstructions Gate cannot be moved up and down by one maintenance person. Chain leading to gate is missing or damaged. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Control device is not working properly due to missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation blocking the plate. Any trash or debris blocking (or having the potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. See "Closed Detention Systems" Standards No. 3 See °Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 All trash and debris removed. Structure securely attached to wall and outlet pipe. Structure in correct position. Connections to outlet pipe are water tight structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Structure has no holes other than designed holes. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate moves up and down easily and is watertight. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards.. Plate is in place and works'as designed. Plate is free of all obstructions and works as designed. Pipe is free of all obstructions and works as designed. See "Closed Detention Systems' Standards No. 3 See 'Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 9/1/98 .1998 Surface Water Design Manual A-4 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS Maintenance Component General Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed Trash & Debris (Includes Sediment) Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by more than 10% Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking more than 1/3 of its height Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume Structure Damage to Comer of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past Frame and/or Top Slab curb face into the street (If applicable). Cracks in Basin Walls/ Bottom Sediment/ Misalignment Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch (intent is to make sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/ outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. No Trash or debris located immediately in front of catch basin opening. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or debris. No dead animals or vegetation present within the catch basin. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Frame is even with curb. Top slab is free of holes and cracks. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. No cracks more than 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A -5 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS (CONTINUED) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed Fire Hazard Vegetation Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil and gasoline. Vegetation growing across and blocking more than 10% of the basin opening. Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints that is more than six inches tall and Tess than six inches apart. Pollution Nonflammable chemicals of more than 1/2 cubic foot per three feet of basin length. Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place' Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open catch basin requires maintenance. Ladder Metal Grates (If Applicable) Locking Mechanism Not Working Cover Difficult to Remove Ladder Rungs Unsafe Trash and Debris Damaged or Missing. Mechanism cannot be opened by on maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread. One maintenance person cannot remove lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. NO. 6 DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) No flammable chemicals present. No vegetation blocking opening to basin. No vegetation or root growth present. No pollution present other than surface film. Catch basin cover is closed Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover can be removed by one maintenance person. Ladder meets design standards and allows maintenance person safe access. Grate opening meets design standards. Grate free of trash and debris. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Maintenance Components General Metal Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When. Maintenance is Performed. Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20% of the openings in the barrier. Damaged/ Missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars. Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% deterioration to any part of barrier. Barrier clear to receive capacity flow. Bars in place with no bends more than 3/4 inch. Bars in place according to design. Repair or replace barrier to design standards. 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual A -6 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILTI IES NO. 8 - FENCING Maintenance Components General Wire Fences Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Missing or Broken Parts Erosion Damaged Parts Deteriorated Paint or Protective Coating Openings in Fabric NO. 9 - GATES Any defect in the fence that permits easy entry to a facility. Erosion more than 4 inches high and 12 -18 inches wide permitting an opening under a fence. Post out of plumb more than 6 inches. Top rails bent more than 6 inches. Any part of fence (including post, top rails, and fabric) more than 1 foot out of design alignment. Missing or loose tension wire. Missing or loose barbed wire that is sagging more than 2 -1/2 inches between posts. Extension arm missing, broken, or bent out of shape more than 1 1/2 inches. Part or parts that have a rusting or scaling condition that has affected structural adequacy. Openings in fabric are such that an 8 -inch- diameter ball could fit through. Parts in place to provide adequate security. No opening under the fence that exceeds 4 inches in height. Post plumb to within 1 -1/2 inches. Top rail free of bends greater than 1 inch. Fence is aligned and meets design standards. ' Tension wire in place and holding fabric. Barbed wire in place with Tess than 3/4 inch sag between post. Extension arm in place with no bends larger than 3/4 inch. Structurally adequate posts or parts with a uniform protective coating. No openings in fabric. Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Damaged or Missing Members Openings in Fabric Missing gate or locking devices. Broken or missing hinges such that gate cannot be easily opened and closed by a maintenance person. Gate is out of plumb more than 6 inches and more than 1 foot out of design alignment. Missing stretcher bar, stretcher bands, and ties. See "Fencing" Standard No. 8 Gates and Locking devices in place. Hinges intact and tubed. Gate is working freely. Gate is aligned and vertical. Stretcher bar, bands and ties in place. See "Fencing" Standard No. 8 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual A -8 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 10 - CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS (PIPES & DITCHES) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Pipes Open Ditches Catch Basins Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Rack) Sediment & Debris Vegetation Damaged Trash & Debris Sediment Vegetation Erosion Damage to Slopes Rock Lining Out of Place or Missing (If Applicable). Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through pipes. Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20 %. Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20 % of the - design depth. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Maintenance person can see native soil beneath the rock lining. See "Catch Basins: Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No.6 NO. 11 - GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Pipe cleaned of all sediment and debris. All vegetation removed so water flows freely through pipes. Pipe repaired or replaced. Pipe repaired or replaced. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Ditch cleaned/ flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Water flows freely through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Replace rocks to design standards. See "Catch Basins" Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No. 6 Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed General Weeds (Nonpoisonous) Safety Hazard Trash or Litter Trees and Shrubs Damaged Weeds growing in more than 20% of the landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous vegetation. Paper, cans, bottles, totaling more than 1 cubic foot within a landscaped area (trees and shrubs only) of 1,000 square feet. Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or broken which affect more than 25% of the total foliage of the tree or shrub. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or knocked over. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Weeds present in less than 5% of the landscaped area. No poisonous vegetation present in landscaped area. Area clear of litter. Trees and shrubs with Tess than 5% of total foliage with split or broken limbs. Tree or shrub in place free of injury. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; remove any dead or diseased trees. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A -9 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 13 - WATER QUALITY FACILITIES (CONTINUED) D.) Wetvaults Maintenance Defect Component Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed W etvault Trash/ Debris Accumulation Sediment Accumulation in Vault Damaged Pipes Access Cover Damaged/ Not Working Vault Structure Damaged Baffles Access Ladder Damage Trash and debris accumulated in vault, pipe or inlet/ outlet, (includes floatables and non - floatables). Sediment accumulation in vault bottom that exceeds the depth of the sediment zone plus 6- inches. Inlet/ outlet piping damaged or broken and in need of repair. Cover cannot be opened or removed, especially by one person. Vault Cracks wider than 1/2 -inch and any evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks, or maintenance/ inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Baffles corroding, cracking, warping and/ or showing signs of failure as determined by maintenance/ inspection staff. Ladder is corroded or deteriorated, not functioning properly, missing rungs, has cracks and/ or misaligned. Trash and debris removed from vault. Removal of sediment from vault. Pipe repaired and/ or replaced. Pipe repaired or replaced to proper working specifications. No cracks wider than 1 /4 -inch at the joint of the inlet/ outlet pipe. Vault is determined to be structurally sound. Repair or replace baffles to specifications. Ladder replaced or repaired to specifications, and is safe to use as determined by inspection personnel. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A -13 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF DECISION November 1, 2001 Behzad Chauhdry P.O. Box 5544 Kent, WA 98064 Project: Sara Development 8 lot short plat File Numbers:L01 -033 Short Plat E01 -009 SEPA Checklist Location: 13419 Macadam Road South Dear Mr. Chauhdry, The Short Subdivision Committee has completed review of your short plat application and determined that it complies with all applicable City code requirements. This letter serves as the Notice of Decision per TMC 18.104.170. Based on the latest project submittal, preliminary approval is granted subject to the conditions stated below. There are three basic steps in the short plat approval process: - 1. PRELIMINARY APPROVAL This letter constitutes your preliminary approval. The application was reviewed by the Tukwila Short Subdivision Committee and approved with conditions. The conditions imposed are to ensure the short plat is consistent with the Criteria for Preliminary Approval listed at TMC 17.12.020 C in the Tukwila Subdivision Code. Preliminary Approval Conditions Utilities a. The storm drainage system shall be constructed per the Surface Water Technical Information Report and approved civil drawings and shall meet City of Tukwila Surface Water Ordinance Requirements. Contact the Tukwila Public Works Department for permit submittal requirements. • 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #1.00 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Short Plat LO1 -033 Page 2 b. Since the stormwater system will become public the panhandle of Lot 8 that contains the stormwater detention pond shall be dedicated to the City with the recording of the short plat. c. Pursuant to the Tukwila "underground ordinance ", all utilities along your section of Macadam Road shall be placed underground. You may sign a waiver to undergrounding for the portion along 43`d Avenue South. d. Extension of the sewer and water lines to the lots shall be approved by the appropriate utility. You will need to obtain all required permits prior to beginning any construction. For water and sewer permits, contact the individual provider District. As -built plans shall be provided to the Tukwila Public Works Department. Access e. A 20 foot wide paved access road built to Public Works and Fire Department standards must be provided to any new structures. Driveway locations must be as shown on the civil drawings submitted September 21, 2001. Fire Protection f. Additional fire hydrants along both street frontages will be needed to meet City of Tukwila standards. Please contact Don Tomaso in the Tukwila Fire Department for spacing requirements. General g. All erosion control measures shown on the civil drawings and discussed in the Surface Water Technical Information Report shall be followed during construction. h. Plant the required number of replacement trees for the trees on slopes 20% or greater that will be removed during grading, construction of driveways and installation of utilities. Please submit a planting plan along with your application for a land altering permit. i. If the project site falls within the citrus longhorned beetle quarantine area set by the Washington State Department of Agriculture you must comply with all recommended insect control actions including on site chipping of all trees to be taken down. j. Install all required site improvements, including those proposed in the short plat application and those identified above as conditions of approval. k. Submit a set of recording documents in record of survey format that meet the King County Recorder's requirements and contain the following items: 1. A survey map as described in the application checklist that is consistent with all of the conditions of approval. The surveyor's original signature must be on the face of the plat. Short Plat L01 -033 Page 3 2. Existing and proposed legal descriptions for all lots. 3. Legal descriptions of all access, sensitive area and utility easements. Joint Maintenance Agreements for all common driveways and private utilities. Appeals This short plat approval decision is appealable to the Hearing Examiner. One administrative appeal of the decision on the short plat, excluding challenges to the DNS, is permitted. If no valid appeals are filed within the time limit the decision of the Department will be final. In order to appeal the decision a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 21 days of the issuance of the Notice of Decision (November 22, 2001). The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116. Appeal materials shall include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision. The Notice of Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; the harm suffered or anticipated by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. Any appeal shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. 2. FINAL APPROVAL The next step is to install the required site improvements, comply with the conditions of approval and submit the necessary short plat documents (survey, legal descriptions, and other required paper work). You may apply to delay installation of the site improvements up to six months beyond final approval subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. A financial guarantee must be provided to ensure installation. After the documents have been found to be in order, and the all of the requirements of the short plat have been met, the Chair of the Short Subdivision Committee signs your short plat which constitutes a grant of final approval. Short Plat L01 -033 Page 4 Expiration 1. The final approved short plat must be filed with the King County Department of Records by November 1, 2002, one year from the date of this preliminary approval or the application will expire. The City may grant a single one year extension if requested in writing prior to the expiration date. 3. RECORDING The signature of the Chairman of the Short Subdivision Committee certifies that your short plat application is ready for recording. It is your responsibility to record the City approved short plat documents with the King County Department of Records. You will need to pay the recording fees and submit your approved original short plat to King County, see the Recording Procedures handout. The short plat is not complete until the recording occurs and copies of the recorded documents are provided to the Department of Community Development. After recording, the County returns the recorded original to the City of Tukwila within 4 -6 weeks, at which time your short plat is considered complete. You can shorten this processing time by hand - delivering a copy of the recorded short plat to the project planner. In many circumstances, building permits on the short platted property may not be issued until a copy of the recorded short plat (or original) is returned to the Department of Community Development. If you have any questions about this notice please contact the project planner Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670. � -C Steve Lancaster Community Development Director Chair, Short Subdivision Committee cc: Dave McPherson, Public Works Don Tomaso, Fire Department Department of Ecology, SEPA Division Dennis & Barb Stensen Lee Loyd Joanne Konrad Poirier Pamela Riess Margaret Bratcher Cathy Bell Susan Hussey Georgina Kerr Brad & Leslie White Michelle Roedell Chris Mitchell Pat Nicolson Don Scanlon Kelli Turner City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director October 25, 2001 Michelle Roedell 13425 43rd Avenue South Tukwila, WA 98168 RE: Sara Development Short Plat Dear Ms. Roedell, This letter is in response to the questions in your letter of October 17, 2001. Item 1: No administrative appeal of the SEPA Determination of Non - Significance is permitted, although the City will accept and review written comments on the Determination for a period of 14 days (until 5:00 p.m.. October 31st). The Department of Community Development will issue a decision on the merits of the short plat itself after completing a review of the application and any comments received. One administrative appeal of the decision on the short plat, excluding challenges to the DNS, is permitted. In order to appeal the decision a written notice of appeal must be filed with the Department of Community Development within 21 days of the issuance of the Notice of Decision. The requirements for such appeals are set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code 18.116. Appeal materials shall include: 1. The name of the appealing party. 2. The address and phone number of the appealing party; and if the appealing party is a corporation, association or other group, the address and phone number of a contact person authorized to receive notices on the appealing party's behalf. 3. A statement identifying the decision being appealed and the alleged errors in the decision. The Notice of Appeal shall state specific errors of fact or errors in application of the law in the decision being appealed; the harm suffered or anticipated C: \Nova's Files \Sara \l0 12RSP.DOC 6300 Southcenter .oulevard, Suite #L00 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206-431 -3665 L01 -033 Page 2 by the appellant, and the relief sought. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to matters or issues raised in the Notice of Appeal. Any administrative appeal regarding the Permit shall be conducted as an open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal is the City's final decision. Any party wishing to challenge the Hearing Examiner's decision on the application must file an appeal in King County Superior Court within 21 days of the issuance of a Notice of Decision by the Hearing Examiner pursuant to the procedures set forth in RCW ch. 36.70C. If no appeal of the decision on the permit is properly filed in Superior Court within such time limit, the Decision on the permit will be final, and the City's approval of the DNS will be final for both the permit and any other pending permit applications for the development of the subject property. Item 2: In addition to professional visual observation conducted by the City's Fisheries Biologist, Ryan Partee, electroshocking surveys were also conducted in 1996, 1997, 1999 and 2000. These surveys were conducted to establish the accessible ranges for salmon and trout within the City watersheds. During these surveys that included this portion of Southgate Creek, no fish of any species were observed above its connection with the east fork of Southgate Creek located near the intersection of S. 133rd St. and S. 134th Pl. A follow up electroshocking survey was conducted on October 23, 2001. Consistent with the results from previous visual observation and electroshock surveys, no fish species were found within the stream that runs through the proposed development site. The proposed 80 foot buffer is much wider than the buffer distance of 35 feet required for Class 2 streams and is sufficient to protect the water quality and stream habitat of the drainage prior to the water reaching areas accessible to salmonids. Item 3: City staff reviewed the subject watercourse during the Fosterview project. Only small wetland areas are present within the "wetted perimeter" of the watercourse channel. These wet areas are confined in the ravine bottom and primarily located in the lower portion near Macadam Road. No slope wetlands (seeps) were observed in this watercourse ravine. Item 4: The City was reviewing the applicant's civil drawings and working with the applicant to resolve geotechnical, utility and civil engineering issues. Until the plans had been adjusted to meet code requirements the full impact of the project could not be determined. At the point when the code issues had been resolved a response letter and revised site plans were sent to the parties of record. Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I . 6,143(;k: HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Project Name: G_-J1_r__ -... B-2-0 eJ Lich Notice of Public Meeting Mailer's Signature: it ` .-..:.•` C Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this .1. ? day of Ca in the year 2001 u P:GINAWYNETTA /FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name: G_-J1_r__ -... B-2-0 eJ Lich Project Number: E (9 —0061 Mailer's Signature: it ` .-..:.•` C • Person requesting mailing: P 0-1-.6 j u P:GINAWYNETTA /FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM L01 -033 Page 3 Item 5: During the time between the end of the comment period and the City's response to the public comments staff was completing its internal review of the project. No approvals or decisions were issued. Item 6: A Determination of Non - significance was issued on October 17, 2001. Item 7: As a party of record you will receive all public notices related to this project, including the Notice of Decision for the short plat. Item 8: I have attached a copy of Tukwila's Zoning Code that contains the Sensitive Areas Overlay regulations (TMC 18.45). You had previously commented about a requirement for a survey to identify pileated woodpecker nesting sites during nesting season. There is no such requirement in either the Washington Administrative Code, the Revised Code of Washington or the Tukwila Municipal Code. According to the Habitat Requirements for Pileated Woodpeckers that I received from the Department of Fish and Wildlife these woodpeckers predominantly nest in large (> 27" dbh) coniferous tree snags. The tree survey of the developable area of the site shows that it contains only alder, apple, cherry and maple, with few dead trees or trees over 27" diameter. Therefore it is unlikely that any nesting sites would be found. The habitat report also mentions that "Protection of riparian habitats and the provisions of significant buffers along streams will provide foraging habitat for pileateds." Approximately one third of the site will be retained as a riparian buffer and therefore continue to serve as foraging habitat. There has been no decision on the recommended buffer area around the escape site of the citrus longhorned beetle. The Sara Development site is approximately half a mile from the release site. If we receive information from the State Department of Agriculture that the area of concern extends that far we will place a requirement on the land altering permit that all trees to be cut down must be chipped on site. If you have any additional questions or comments, please call me at (206) 431 -3670. O • Lot -033 Page 4 Nora Gierloff Associate Planner Enclosure CC: Mayor Mullet Councilwoman Linder Ryan Partee, Fisheries Biologist David McPherson, PW Associate Engineer Steve Lancaster, DCD Director October 17, 2001 Nora Gierloff, Dept. of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 • ligeEilIff) BEi13 -, RE: L01 -033 Sara Development Short Plat on Macadam Road & 43rd Avenue South Dear Ms. Gierloff: I have several comments and questions about the proposed development cited above. Comments: 1. I believe the concerns regarding protection of fish that I raised in my comment letter of August 17 were not adequately addressed. I do not see evidence that enough investigation has taken place to determine if the proposed development would cause harm to the anadromous fish that may exist in the stream. 2. I am in disagreement with the City of Tukwila's decision about this development. 3. I am concerned that Tukwila regulations seem to be lower than standards established by King County, Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, nearby cities, and other agencies and organizations. Questions or action requested: 1. Please inform me about the appeal process as I plan to appeal this decision. It is my understanding that I have the right for my appeal to be heard before the development proceeds. 2. The area directly below the stream in question has salmon species (as reported by Tukwila's Fisheries Biologist Ryan Partee in an e-mail communication). In addition, an eyewitness reported seeing fry in the stream at the proposed development site. When you state that Tukwila's Fisheries Biologist has not observed any fish species within the project area, are you reporting that an electroshock method of testing was employed? It is my understanding that a mere ocular assessment is not adequate. I would like additional information about how it was determined there are no fish in the stream, and how you guarantee that development in this area would not harm the known salmon habitat to which it is connected. 3. How specifically did the City of Tukwila determine that wetlands associated with the stream do not exist at the proposed development site? 4. I am concerned about the amount of time that passed between the comment deadline and when I received the City's response (approximately 2 months). Why did it take so long for the city to respond? 5. In the two -month period between my comment letter and your response, did I miss any decisions, actions or other issues relating to this proposed development? 6. Has the City of Tukwila issued a SEPA determination regarding the proposed development? • • 7. I wish to be notified of every decision regarding this proposed development AND notified of every opportunity to comment. 8. Please send me a copy of Tukwila's land use regulations, including the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. As a related note of concern, the proposed development is near the area where the Citrus Longhorned Beetle escaped. At a public meeting last month, Washington State Department of Agriculture officials reported that disturbing trees during the assessment period is counterproductive to containing the beetles. Has the City Department of Community Development incorporated this very real large -scale threat from the Beetle into their short-term decision making process? I request a response to my questions within two weeks of receipt of this letter. Thank you. Michelle Roedell 13425 431d Avenue South Tukwila, WA 98168 (206) 244 -6394 pelfolios@worldnet.att.net cc: Mayor Steve Mullet Tony Oppermann, Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Ryan Partee, Tukwila Fisheries Biologist Councilwoman Pam Linder / ' CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: 8 LOT SHORT PLAT PROPONENT: BEHZAD CHAUHDRY `''` LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDINGE ANY ' - -'^ ADDRESS: 1 19 ADAM RD �` '`~~''^~~' - -- — -' PARCEL NO 261320-0150 SEC/TW0/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: ciry/.OF TUKWILAn��~` co�FILE`NO: EO1-[]9 '^ * .^ The City ined that the proposal does not have ^ probab,1 signifi cant /' adverse impaot on the env i ronment . An env ironm tm]~ impaot statement (EIS)`'is not req0i red° under RCW 43.21o.030 (2){ . lhis deoislor was made after v comp leted envi ronmenta l \� check 1 i st ard 'other i nformati on or'file' th the lead agency,. ' This i f tj' i` avai c tt+�- pub "n/ request n orma o� s�a a c�,�� ��" . . . *****w****4*****,** )ti�*/ *****��**wwA*** 4***��w*�� ***a***************.***+w* 2OO.1_. Steve Lancaster Rm ibl Official < City of Tukwila, (206) 431-3670 Tukwila, WA` x\�R188'�-- ,,, '- o~ '' ' i` Copies of the pr` ' for �EPA appeal s are aVai b the Department of Communtty Deve lopment.)./>-!,/ ,' • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Deve lo MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Pace, Planning Manager FROM: Nora Gierloff, Associate Planner RE: SEPA — Sara Development 8 lot short plat DATE: October 16, 2001 /9 ent Steve Lancaster, Director Project File No. E01 -009 Project Description: The project involves short platting a 3 acre parcel with a Type 2 watercourse and steep slopes into 8 single family lots. Agencies With Jurisdiction: Washington State Department of Ecology Comments to SEPA Checklist: General comment letters on the project were received, see attached staff response. Summary of Primary Impacts: 1. Earth — Grading will be required as shown on the attached plan to construct driveways to the lots and install frontage improvements. Additional grading will occur during house construction. Due to unstable soils further down the closed section of 43`d Avenue the two originally proposed southernmost lots have been combined into the new lot 1. 2. Air - There will be exhaust emissions from construction equipment during the project. Dust control measures in compliance with the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Authority will be used as needed. The project's air emissions when complete will be those typical of single family development. 3. Water — No construction activity will occur within 80 feet of the watercourse. An erosion control plan including a silt fence and check dams will be reviewed by the City as part of the land altering permit. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • • 4. Plants — Currently the site contains trees, shrubs and blackberries. A tree survey has been conducted and a tree replacement calculation shows that 48 new trees will be required to be planted to mitigate trees removed from regulated slopes. No vegetation will be cleared within 80 feet of the watercourse. 5. Animals — No threatened or endangered species have been observed on site by Tukwila's Fisheries Biologist. The watercourse buffer is expected to preserve the existing riparian habitat. 6. Energy and Natural Resources - The project will require energy for construction equipment and for vehicles coming to the site. Once completed energy use will be typical of that for single family development. 7. Environmental Health - No environmental health hazards are anticipated. Construction equipment operation will need to comply with Tukwila's noise ordinance. 8. Land and Shoreline Use - The project will maintain the existing use of the site as a residential lot. 9. Housing — An existing vacant house will be demolished and eight new houses will be constructed. 10. Aesthetics - The project is not subject to BAR requirements. 11. Light and Glare - The completed project will not generate light or glare. 12. Recreation - The proposal will not affect recreational facilities. 13. Historical and Cultural Preservation - The site is not known to have any historical or cultural significance. 14. Transportation — The proposal will add the number of trips typical of single family development. No traffic mitigation is required. Half street improvements including sidewalks will be constructed along both the Macadam and 43`d Avenue frontages. 15. Public Services - The project will result in an incremental increase in demand on public services. 16. Utilities - The project will result in an incremental increase in utility usage. Utilities will be undergrounded along Macadam. A waiver for undergrounding has been approved along 43rd Avenue along with an agreement for participation in a future undergrounding project. Recommended Threshold Determination: Determination of non - significance. • • Nora, In looking at the three response letters, I determined that only one of them would be appropriate for me to comment on. The following are my comments on the letter submitted by Michelle Roedell. Paragraph 3 • She states that the creek on the property is a class 3 with associated wetlands. I do not believe that there are any wetlands on the proposed project site. • She states that the presence of fish have been observed. I have not observe fish of any species within the project site area. I will visit the site again during the first part of September to confirm this. Paragraph 4 • The proposed development of the site is not likely to kill or harm listed species and therefore is not affected by the 4(d) rule, which protects only listed salmonids. • Class 3 streams in Tukwila require a 25 -foot setback. The geotech limitations on this proposal place the setback at 80 feet from the stream. This is 3 times the required stream classification setback. • Again, I do not believe that there are wetlands present on site. Paragraph 5 • Pileated woodpeckers (Dryocopus pileatus), while listed as a candidate species in Washington State are not listed as Threatened or Endangered. At this time they require no special examination. In addition, pileated woodpeckers(Dryocopus pileatus), are uncommon in Washington State (see http: / /www.i- bird.com/Species /PileatedWdpckr.htm ). I would not expect that the development in this area would result in any long -term disruption of Dryocopus pileatus behavior or potential use of the area. Especially since the stream and it's adjacent riparian area will not be disturbed. • Coopers hawk (Accipiter cooperii) is not listed in any capacity on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species List. I would not expect that the development in this area would result in any long -term disruption of Accipiter cooperii behavior or potential use of the area. • A Hydraulic Project Approval Permit (HPA) would only be required if the development involved work below the ordinary high water mark of the stream. If the extension of the sidewalks along Macadam is waived, there will not be any in water work, thus no HPA. • l am unaware of any WDFW requirement to conduct field surveys for pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) or coopers hawk (Accipiter cooperii) prior to construction. Paragraph 6 • As the City's Fisheries Biologist, I am unaware of any fish kills directly related to the nearby Foster development. It states in the letter that the fish kills were reported. Who made the report and what supporting empirical data does the report contain? In addition, who was it reported to and when? I understand the concerns raised by Michelle Roedell. However, the geotech setback and the development codes (City and County) will protect the non - developable sections of this parcel and conserve an existing stream corridor and riparian buffer. August 16, 2001 Nora Gierloff Department of Community Relations City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Project by Sara Development at 13419 Macadam Road South As property owners across the street from the proposed development, we would like to express our concerns about this project. We are still living with the daily negative impact of a larger, ongoing project, Fosterview Estates (now Pacific Heights), which has yet to be completed, in spite of construction having started almost 7 years ago. To be direct, we are totally burned out on construction: the noise, dirt, the vibration from the impact of heavy equipment, the stink of diesel exhaust, the list goes on. Considering the enormous disruption of this once - peaceful neighborhood by the current and ongoing, project, we are actually appalled that the city would turn right around and consider overlaying yet another construction -site nightmare on this same little street. The following points ... We would like assurance that we will retain access to our property (driveway) at all times, and the mail delivery and waste pickup will be unimpeded. In the recent past our driveway has been blocked by potential buyers of the (Sara Development) property as well as by utility vehicles servicing the Pacific Heights development. With the many people who work and monitor a construction site, there will be many vehicles needing to park, and since our property is currently at the end of the dead end road (43`d Ave. S.), the area outside our driveway is quite likely to be considered prime parking turf. Can the (currently) blocked road have the barricade moved to the south to allow for some of the parking? Will the city provide No Parking signs for the area in front of our property for the duration of this proposed piece of work? Serious effort on the part of the city of Tukwila must be applied to keep some of the larger trees standing — while they may seem an obstruction to construction, the trees would also be an attraction to the new homeowners. The Tukwila City Code specifically protects large trees, although this was totally dishonored in the Fosterview project. Following that outrage, the number of trees promised to be planted have never been planted, and certainly very few of any appreciable size. It would be better to replant with fewer, larger trees than with small, ornamental specimens, non - native and unlikely to survive. The negative effect on the air quality which accompanies the loss of large trees is not to be denied. • 1 We would assume that the large, beautiful native maple tree across from our driveway would be left standing. If not, what will be done to mitigate the destruction of our view? (The sight of such a lovely, venerable old tree is a view to be prized over any freeway view, quite obviously) How high will the houses be? Will there be fences installed, large trees or shrubs planted? Will street lighting on 43`d Ave. S. be improved at the end of the road? Right now it is quite dark and the city has refused to add street lighting. We have had a large number of criminal activities occur at this dead end and would like to see more safety measures provided. Noise is always a concern as heavy equipment impacts our quality of life. Just try to have a day off at your own home — or rest in bed when ill- during a prolonged construction project. It's as though we don't even own our home. We pay taxes and mortgage, but can only use our home in the evenings — and even then only if the construction workers will ever go away. Currently the finish work inside and out on the 8 or 9 houses ranged along our property line (350') of the Pacific Heights project involves work seven days a week. We can only be grateful ( ?) that they start late (8 a.m.) on the weekends and that the noise is not as bad as when heavy equipment was used. In summation, there is nothing good or positive that comes to mind around this proposal, other than removal of the derelict buildings currently on the site. As usual, the design for cramped, dense placement of structures is repugnant, even on paper. The Pacific Heights project has developed into something far more hideous even than was represented on paper, with grotesque barracks -like buildings completely covering the tiny lots, with virtually no `yards' and actually no access to the little scraps of turf clinging to the steep bits of land at the bases of these things. Here is where the token trees and token grass is planted, doomed to die because they cannot be tended properly by anyone who may actually choose to live in of the places. Our negative view of this proposed project is based on seven years of solid, first -hand experience living in our home next to an as- yet - uncompleted construction site. Very Sincerely, Lee M. Loyd Pamela S. Riess 13531 43`d Ave. S. Tukwila 98168 State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplanRci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) 1 1H24b C (/(.FNLY (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on 2 - 0 1 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the other ,applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at .o so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. Applicant or Project Manager's Signature On this day personally appeared before me !3e-H eA D Cha UHCitit to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowle ged that he /she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 02nd day of 7°ffit(jILT tea/ i Q .10 NOTARY p: NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington `, • -' ken-f e/gD32 • i residing at 1 PUBUC /� �•••... ' 7.9.03 i 03 IIk '1Z •., .. • '' My commission expires on 4%‘ FWAS, — Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director October 11, 2001 RE: L01 -033 Sara Development Short Plat E01 -009 SEPA Checklist Dear Neighbors, The City has prepared a consolidated response to the issues raised iri the comment letters regarding the Sara Development short plat. We hope that you are satisfied with the actions taken. Concern: The shared driveways may not allow drivers to turn around on their property, and therefore residents may back out onto the street. Response: It is common throughout the City for residents to back out of their driveways onto the street. The City Engineer has reviewed this and determined that no traffic hazard would be created by the driveway onto Macadam Road. Concern: Visibility is poor for cars turning onto Macadam from 43rd Avenue. Response: The developer has submitted a sight distance study establishing that safe turning conditions can be created at that intersection. As part of the drainage improvements the grades will be altered at that spot and the brush will be removed. Concern: The lot seems too small for nine homes, the development seems too dense for the neighborhood. Response: The site is just about 3 acres in size. After setting aside the watercourse and steep slopes the buildable area is about 2 acres. Based on the geotechnical engineer's recommendations the developer has decided to combine lots 1 and 2 to reduce the total number of lots to 8. This results in a density of 4 units per net acre (2.6 units per gross acre), while the Low Density Residential Zoning District allows up to 6.7 units per acre. Concern: The stream on site is a Class III with associated wetlands and fish habitat. Response: Tukwila's Fisheries Biologist has reviewed the letter and visited the site and finds that there are no associated wetlands on the project site. He has not observed any fish species within the project area. Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance classifies the stream as a Type 2 watercourse (different classification system than the letter writer was referring to). Type 2 C: \Nora's Files \Sara \NH Commcnts.DOC 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 L96 -0002 Page 2 watercourses are required to have a 35 foot buffer plus a 10 foot building setback on each side. For this site there is also a geotechnical buffer of 80 feet on each side of the watercourse. Therefore all buildings must be kept at least 80 feet to the west of the stream and no development will be allowed on the east side of the stream. Concern: Any development on this site falls under the 4(d) Rule of the National Marine Fisheries Service. Response: The proposed development is not likely to kill or harm listed species and therefore is not affected by the 4(d) rule, which protects only listed salmonids. Concern: Pileated woodpeckers, Coopers hawks, owls and other migratory species have been observed on the property. Pileated woodpeckers are a species of concern as defined by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Their presence requires a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) and a survey for nesting sites during the spring nesting season. Response: Coopers hawk (Accipitcr cooperii) is not listed in any capacity on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species List. Pileated woodpeckers (Dryocopus pileatzts), while listed as a candidate species in Washington State are not listed as Threatened or Endangered. At this time their presence does not require any special examination and since the stream and its adjacent riparian area will remain undeveloped no long term habitat disruption is anticipated. An HPA would only be required if the development involved work below the ordinary high water mark of the stream. The grading and utility plans do not show any work within the stream bed. The existing culvert under Macadam will not be disturbed by the road improvements. Concern: The project is located near the Fosterview Subdivision. That development caused maximum environmental impact and resulted in fish kills. The Sara Development should be required to perform an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) because of the habitat value of the site and its connection to the larger wetland/river system. Response: The City's Fisheries Biologist is unaware of any fish kills directly related to the Fosterview Subdivision. Were these kills reported to the City? The Sara Development project is complying with all applicable regulations including Tukwila's Sensitive Area Ordinance and the King County Surface Water Design Manual. About an acre of stream corridor and riparian buffer will be preserved on site and protected from future development. Concern: Will construction vehicles be allowed to block access to driveways along 43rd Avenue? L96 -0002 Page 2 Response: Staff has discussed this concern with the developers and they have agreed to speak to their contractors and consultants about the need to park with care. If there are problems during construction the City Engineer will be consulted about no parking signs. Concern: Serious effort should be made to keep the larger trees on site. The Fosterview Subdivision did not retain their trees and replacement trees were not correctly planted. Replanting with fewer, larger trees is preferable to small, ornamental, non - native species. Response: The developer has submitted a tree permit showing the locations of the trees to be removed and retained and will meet the requirements of Tukwila's Tree Ordinance. Concern: Will the large maple tree on lot 3 be retained? How high will the houses be? Will any fences or landscaping be installed'? Response: The maple tree is shown as being retained on the plans. The houses will meet the LDR height limit of 30 feet as defined in the Uniform Building Code. Installation of fences or landscaping will be up to the individual homeowner. The Sara Development is a short plat, not a subdivision or planned residential development so there are no specific landscaping, fencing or other design standards for the houses or site. Concern: Will street lighting on 43'd Avenue be improved? Response: This issue has not been resolved. We will review the details of the street improvement plans at the time of permit. The next step in the process is for the City to issue a preliminary approval letter that states all of the improvements required and conditions of approval. This allows the developer to apply for permits and construct the road. driveway and utility improvements. Once these have been accepted by the City the developer can record the short plat and sell or build on the lots. If you have any additional questions or comments, please call me at (206) 431 -3670. Sincerely, Nora Gierloff Associate Planner CC: David McPherson. Public Works Behzad Chaudrv. Applicant 5- EROSION AND GRADING PLAN SHORT PLAT BEHZAT CHOUDARY r— • Remove • ..777:131, •-- _ SF- '• • .••• : • '.• . • • /II , . - , --'••- - • - -- • • • • . – . • _ – – • , •• 5 , • • • .• ' "' – • r . . . . . •. • __. . . • • . . . _ . • . , • • • • 0 0 0 •5 0 7 111•\. • .5 0 0 0 DV) "5, • • 0 0,) 3 0 ", "0 '/' ;b. -• 0 ,5 0 0 ) 0 7 I \ 2 .1 . • — - • , 28) . Removerrrcz X • Lc/LAT:CAI. • • /// _ • 7.1 3/ , I , 5t. 57 • ) • Remove Tfte7-7.--•••• .• • . \ • (-7-7- - s . ----- PROPOSED DRIVEWAY PROPOSED DPP/EWA y/ . • .7•74.0 . \\voter—I .'0e oc:.-oro,-1.3 to W01:5 —• ";•f) 0/1./ 53; 033500)3300051 ;;nrL.:749?..-2 :CO "",,,INC `---PROPOSID 4%9?..•EWAY/FiRef '',..[C"5'03"70 c05r33c0-o 0 RUCK rJRN AROUND 337" ( S3:ZONE.Nt MAP ;21/03304 :Au 1F2) •;:oson. -1 G EDGE C" -: ✓c!i_.vr —C \ N.. \ ll 1 I !! .,. . '1 ! I, 1 , 1 • 1 7, I l l 1 I I iI 1 ! I I - , °.^ ?=i_ _ . '-• _ .. 8 I/.!lJ u!I! I :i I•1I i 1 1 X1 -' 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I .1 1 I I ';101.' 1 I-i '.I Ili \I \I ' . ' 1 I : 1 : 1 1 ! iI l 1 I I 1 : (1 ' :I 1 1 I ! l i f I \S ( • li1 1 ( ; ! 1 . 1 ' : 1 1 1 ! I i I . (i ! i_ . I I r ; I f 1 I , i i l t l 1 7 I, I I I I it 1!1.t !! 1 1 II I;: I ! i l ; 1 1 1 I: 11 : f i 1,11 f ! II l 1.111' i•I i l l l I I 1 • I; 1 1 1- '� I I i 1 1. i I II I1 J11 I l! l i I (..‘1,..1:1:1:i.:11:.'1, �Ir1'�*GN�'IRUt;TI�lnl ACTPV[TY [11 i l7FFE'R fi'RE�Y • 1 1 ■ 1 1 1 o :y:r?: •I J.:;,.-!......., ' i•,• !•1 I ! �.�1 r�1:iJ • 4c',. I. (t,.0 %tl; bLif /,�, !t.111111 (Ill :IIL!II1 •II ','tI ,v'I1!111 I, 1!I.' •-1.1' I I• fit); 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,' I 1 1 1 1 1 ' I! ` � 1 1 I I 1. 1 1' 1 1 l • 1 1 1 1! 1 1 1) 'I� ' I i I I 1 1 I 11 1 1 1 1 I .I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t I I I 1 1 ) 1 1 ICI I 1 I I 1 1; 11 I I ` 1 1 1 1; 1 1 1 I I I ,1 I 1 !111 1.I 111' 1!I :I 11 11 II bc0(a c'i7nicol uuiic•i- � — I r .t:u r -Lin r, ocCOHJinJ ;o c / �' r >RE /dG'LE E ISTING 3 , • STRUCTURE —i F c> •._ S,"C:C OF\SI_�t ✓.:Lh'�1.- \ 1.(..a 1 o)7fO E EXIST ING STRUC P,URc- I PI F• \� EXISTING :EDGE )F PAVEME ' PROPG EXISTING EDGE OF P4LEI.ENT ROPOSED DRI VEWA Y/FIRE TRUCK TURN AROUND CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION Sara Development has filed applications for development of a nine lot short plat to be located at 13419 Macadam Road South. Permits applied for include: L01 -033 Short Plat E01 -009 SEPA Environmental Checklist Other known-required-permits-include:- Tree Permit Administrative Planned Residential Development Waiver Studies required with the applications include: Geotechnical Soil Report Sight Distance Study FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., August 17th, 2001. You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Nora Gierloff at (206) 431 -3670 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: 4/25/2001 Notice of Completeness Issued: 7/26/2001 Notice of Application Issued: 8/3/01 .• . \ct c \ x_c• . 7 • ••• - _ c cENTL-7".",-"LfNi5 - Cj 9 Fr 20 / • 41—et. • .•i• : ' 41110$' •• , • / • •". - / o 4 I VICRESTE , • • ; cki FOUND PEAR; 4/, 'c C ;6. ) • " • ••••• •• .0 s .• , ,. • , ,,,At • k•tA ••.. ' _ (1) 1 •'■ •. '; j • • --------------- ----------- A t • • : •• • E/P= • ‘-% \'';"" ‘.1r ! "*"...""" • 77: \ ' \ ! P/V.1 \ STCP SIGN — —7= E-51.• - 3RD At z, A1.4 CA nA m -PROPOSED DRIVEWAY V _ - 7P7?7,POSED—DRIVEWAY --------- _ _ _ ---- / \ .I�razan & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION August 9, 2001 KA Project No. 092 -01004 Mr. Behzad Chaudry Sara Development, Inc. Post Office Box 5544 Tukwila, Washington 98064 RE: Geotechnical Peer Review Sara Short Plat Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Chaudry, In accordance with your request, we have reviewed the Shannon & Wilson, Inc Geotechnical Peer Review Letter Dated July 25, 2001, and the City of Tukwila Notice of Complete Application letter Dated July 26, 2001, for the referenced project. The Shannon & Wilson Peer Review Letter indicates that the proposed lot lines, for the residential development, have been revised and we have reviewed these modifications. We understand that the lot lines have been reconfigured to permit house construction and installation of the proposed stormwater detention system on Lot 9. The location for the proposed stormwater detention system on Lot -9 was determined after our geotechnical engineering investigation. Since the nearest exploratory test pit, TP -5, is approximately 140 feet south of the proposed location, we recommend that additional subsurface exploration be performed to verify soil type and groundwater conditions for design and construction recommendations. The Shannon & Wilson letter states that, in their opinion, the explorations, analyses and recommendations for Lots 2 through 8 are generally appropriate. However, it is their opinion, that the lot line revisions may indicate a greater influence of the landslide areas on the proposed Lot 1 and Lot 9 construction, than was anticipated in our original Geotechnical Investigation Report, dated February 20, 2001. Based on our review of the original lot lines and the information obtained during our initial investigation, it is our opinion that the recommended slope setbacks, for the proposed construction, are generally adequate. It should be noted that an extensive subsurface exploration program (with relatively deep drilling and sampling) and a detailed slope stability analysis were not included in the scope of our original work. Based on the initial lot layout and our understanding of the planned construction, it was our opinion that such an extensive study was not warranted and would not be cost - effective, even after observing the slide area. Based on our field observations, it is our opinion that the observed slide is not as extensive as indicated by the Shannon & Wilson letter. The revised lot configuration may indicate a greater than expected landslide influence on Lot 1 and/or Lot 9. Should the City of Tukwila require a detailed study of the existi ElvED CITY OF TUKWILA Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 19501 144`h Ave. NE #F300 •Woodinville, Washington 98072 • (425) 485 -5519 • Fax: (425) 485 -6837 PERMIT CENTER KA No. 092 -01004 August 9, 2001 Page No. 2 landslide, we have provided a separate cost proposal to perform the study in conjunction with the recommended subsurface exploration work for the detention pond located on Lot 9. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. '--- Chris Behrens Senior Engineering Geologist Pacific Northwest Division CB /TGB Timothy G. Be erle, P.E. Engineering Manager Pacific Northwest Division EXPIRES: 11 /10 / D Z- Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of Applicant: Atoka- rYu41 a di- 3. Date checklist prepared: 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Sung ZOO 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. /11 ova s- - -r-k,; Agency Comments 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared,.directly related to this proposal. Tine✓2 i S vto cdd r F %o,At! nvl'rDrvvtet'kl �h lorrvw *HD j' howevtY- a Gto'feckKicq( Rtpor+ has boe to prepared Q ro( 134f-ol d 4- 90 feet Fri tAe wa ter Cauni w +I (. a S -erg(. Mere wl'I) die ✓D CotAsfYkc1/Dv► ac��'vll� w,'�fi 7d tis b kfFer • 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. /Von G: APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 1 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Ova (oprreInt (firvv∎i.t7 ewe,/ Waifr Pc. 0%0 7 e /0r1, CI-Yea; FQYw.� i 10. 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. Tine 3, n6 P<re pf 4 3rd A/C-' S A i5h04-t P ki- 4 Pvacj /ceS will be_ Agency Comments lot i 5 100.-tol\ ©f fk y- i v\rttrSecli.3v\ triA4 cAaa Rid S , w aski 111oh 9 101-s i S PraPoSeri qt tIM'S s /fie , 8 est ma �a ,jer"„1- c((oweci 4dvaVSe ilvPkcfs acvevvo-A • 11. 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, the tax lot number, and section, township, and range. 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. `ice s,k aadveSS a .l24l9 m4CSdCC A viCi ;NI ty y alovko, t, 1\ paO,Y4PNic ( 4 i5 61- foc.ked .car t uy JeJ,e1..3 k 4c1 s ft L2 ,54( die$CYt1(Y /o1A 12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? They¢.. j S A . -ripe_ 2. wo-tty Cot.%YS-2. 1OCaterk ova So cAtIA Side of tt2 this site . Vovulti -EkYe. 4V/t Step ,$ lopes ©p, rinls Srt12; k 9a role -ttsr,'t tilde. aft II he (o tYuC 7'OV . :4C+I1V1't1 i'h 71e se v\ s; +1 i)'e greet G :W'PHANLLANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 2 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, steep slopes, Agency Comments mountainous, other: . Tvere core_ s.CeP s(opeS o+i 5o0-1,‘ 5/14 (1-f fk. ProPev-tij howevei tfte rest o-F -fie_ pPeeilb IS syi%bie -Gr +v v, , b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? o1PP"7CiV'w1-cl) 2 % mv, SQ f-t-■ slot4 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. S'il .I'Ile_ ngvxi ui i f1, tea ri4 bk gY✓1ouv1IS Of 4vel, roofs 4inck 0vp,1r'cs, A 3ed- erktc4 Ye i+ iS afigc1.4 FAY- jou'Y' review , d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Tiave (I s•9�S o-f , ks fc(b(e soils ,'v. ?`fie v. e3 ot'f-t ,Plea s See 9eo-f-cekh, repo . e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. c.(egvi a✓4rL'oa Ae_rvvt, w1 /I vc,d %v\g ws' I I resM(± -eyDw\ s . (rxe 1/YIP(fCpcf . 7■ y— YSec_`�10 ") driVewc,ug iloutQ ssi) tirCe' ✓1 'rovdeL y i'rvipove_wtecnt \ APPHANNLANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. �!►^eYe YiNn 62 eyo Sit o,n O CCU /1 vl d u e. to C.o v' si rqc. oir∎ gc--(Vit). oak u d h CieQ';y1 d- roti+nq ) I PfeJev■ti'e Invcc6tote S a.re ev g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? A P P ro ono to l 8% o -F ©f -ttr�-e. 3 6 Acvc s C1 rS 44-7 s�) ©� tin,.. PtoPe✓1l w; (( hecpme imperV;DuS ,S c.4v 'kc.e h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A41 EYogiov\ Clv<1va\ pto cv1 devetope(it to cavC1'voI c�ra�ifl� . S1qt cm( 1' a (I be i:n _s-15 rkfi ' Pro p -ev1-3 I,'yle bu,ffeY (&ec12 da,,.s wi (( bQ_ eo . vKC.i'ecA at to Y F to L4.) /kt(' � S, , S io e.�? 2 Cs� v� S 'it V uC' l o v\ E volc � ce u,..); (I to se._ c� gAsty ed • B ,VP's p rod -i'Cxg 1 f l , he Ht tA) ( • 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. iV// Ec..a�� b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. G:\APPHANILAND USE. APPS EP AAP P. DOC. 06/16/00 4 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: AqA Agency Comments 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. Tvleve )3 0. fi (6Pe 2 w0cV c-ouYSQ ov.. t Souj'k sr o 2_ p ymoz ` j 2. 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. 1 eve ()Jilt,' i3e wo w,'-Li/1.i zoo -tke, LUltpv (L VSe, Plc se �P q 1fo r ken( Pk" ,c'o ( 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. /VfoNe Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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. /qo G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 6 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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: Novve 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? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. - rkte'f e; S -r-p&. 2 w at Y cc ,kr.Se o ,... f k s? dip o$ 4te- EsL,r,,akA c'1ek et �� ek ��c ,& � nr CLe tqi v\kc1 [Lt m tcf al'C 0.. C.oi�Lf ""Dec( 4-4-6. - / Po kJ-) 4'(4' boX. etAlt/e17€ ova (*IL Seat. lg. 44 ft� 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? -If so, generally describe. w ev ntvl el fra1N1 suvfoLE spree± w;lI -t 1ow 1 vkto of 4-,►o„\ 3w\ iocq ted o situ d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Wei ev yti> yowl Pr°p) seat t ✓►qe Y ✓roLtS s u✓ ce W �! be_ -1-c5K+ 1 ✓\Qd, /At q govt t/eyq vl c& _ � rtenn at.vid tile o q Y. / /'Hq ci u .,le kv\'I`i o h -tacJt t� • ff wafieY f read en"i ci ��t w; (( d citY) be. insf'qI(4 G: APPHANILANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC. 06/16/00 7 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. - Applicant Responses: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other b. Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other Shrubs Grass Pasture Crop or grain Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Other types of vegetation What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? tie - e.g.-164 .see. - ffa --T-t be. ¥O 1 ;t. 1.4)11)v. revkDVet i of blAC 1e +yr V 11its s f 4 q i©Ss I ( ve 0,0 VE re 5 P s th'A 4, mte tY) ...HI t 4 /Ace c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the N/A Agency Comments V\.) C'DrStV4C'flavk ��i��r Gc� ✓i� Ye mo VQ ��. ,...e„,v 1 site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A .81— a ► va V • 1 ., A �(qt■ wi PqY St' 1/1?___ ,.." oou e101 emr0 I¢F A PP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 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, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals Fish Other Deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. NA- Agency Comments d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: MC re. w i I ( be ✓ta c p , +vH c*-10 v &, c'(-Wt -6u 644-f.t v 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. EIEr_tr1� qv \ ► v4( 6-0 IQ.- LAps w; 11 be proq lad )3, 'lit T' , u3'1 w r' a 10-e_ if ii -C . f i vt i GAAPPHAN \LANDUSE.APP'SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 9 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. N// 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: Nr- 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. lV, 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. /VA Agency Comments 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: , G :WPPHAMLANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 10 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 1V/21- 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. l h e i f _ Got' not b2 S i °► YV '0 (4 + c o +^St V cAc f i rw\ ck vi Aor'S2 cyc4 by /if PYa)Cc& • .mss c% /ov\ �UV4�rnut , i for tArtQ w\o■t'f , Agency Comments 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Co to S f1'�l Ll r' w o r % UM'' ! f 4 n ! b -€ 400(.044 oA t4Y: vs� tkP, c4 / heYe (Ai r I( ovk stvucti0 v o!,Lky1v\ t hin/1 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? "This sffi_ /S CgYrevt V4r gvC1-• T►1, S c,yrc_Lkv\d; hq o yec Is u Sed a S reSidPV)1.4 q 1 G� Ye. d b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /VA- G:\APPHA1 LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 11 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: c. Describe any structures on the site. T Agency Comments 0.v\• d2�GCk2• c Q1/c5-c. . d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? "Ike h d ttck00( 30.7 -e e,WJ 1( i1• oLe , e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? euy✓2vt ZOh� �S Lb 6c° °S� f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? AM— g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? LID _ h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Tilt. soutA, slote o f t I S s,'a(e f's C (4 s s% /edt 4 ,geviS /4-(ve c v.Q& ciUQ 7 s 7 e/0 3/o, S ct+1o( f ?,/e Z uJgty coa vse 12 r. eEmuenni AwnilSF _APPISEPAAPP.DOC.06/16/00 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? J• 'TA eY� be n IA 3/ - bl • w; e 1.., s± fw Agency Comments 9\ lath x 4 p cop J+? pt v b-1- Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? ,There Ill .11o± b k P-' toff o1,'.sOIgc( qs o� 1*,.\ proae ct- k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: ti4- 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? -Mt re_ w 11 bse c uvl't—S tYl CO ,M e G:\AP PHAN\LANDU S E. APP\SEP AAP P. DOC. 06/16/00 13 r 114A. Arl 0 rzot,t. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. no tom. Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: ✓�wItek p i AroV e w)IJ be dnwP 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? 7- '74 / /esf sfvur1ur-e_ w;I i . feet b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? MT re w 1 11 ✓1-0 alri fe v'4 soh ©{L v / e,w S c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Fro vI1ck52 /141 p 1/00644 P t Qwlsc /'y ,141Prplle ► e nos w // t b-e_ 4,\,14 r /41)0 q eS -1- ti'e±Ics o - % S s/ �, 14 r.%A oou event a nlni IcF APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? 'v4- b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? NA— c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? /V� d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/ 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 6,0 oy.✓✓► c." i theye qve 401- 941{ nII"i mac, i/nY edfict (.. �iCiIv111 (� -�"K' `I�1 gift S Q s'r1 4 W4 Ye ° 7 Ot ) 4-(a:`.S G: APP}1ANLLANDUSE.APMSEPAAPP.DOC. 06/16/00 15 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: 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. NA- b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NA- G: WPPHANU.ANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 16 Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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. Serve fh6 srfie, ✓ Ccaa m Rocka S 3,�& eve- S , b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to tnnhee earest transit stop? /VA c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Tne. .project L004 fd add rvye - g ✓le w {fit l■Y, sPgce S O-. vsCit An ells- vN), S pc( ce3 wotit 14 b-e. e /i w, r' vAcrted 1 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). This Nod ea w /// , eylp 'Yb tie v\ 4 3 ✓A ✓-e IA aPOroac sr'��t tiytt MA( a_ Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes.would occur. NA ATNA, 4/.S per- g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: NA 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. /Jo b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N71- 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: , natural gas, refuse service, to system other: , sani sew, septic G: W PPHANU_ANDUS E.APP\SEPAAPP. DOC. 06/16/00 18 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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. 5e LAAY , wQt c Naf ut Ya �.Q S c.o1 I be {� ra V� o(eo! f y an k1's -c-)ro(Y\ (16e Set-0211 , Wcif-ev Vsjr►ct l2C PSE C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge: I understand that the lead agency is relyin: on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: 24/0l (NON- PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). G: \APPHANV,ANDUSE.APRSEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 19 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? no Ad Ve e ' es' , Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 4/ Agency Comments 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? N� cd fer., e fs dtcgNS- c!sf /q .6 9 ff e v Z-ov Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: G: APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC. 06/16/00 20 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? • No gdveYS( c'Ffe.cts, Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: N 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitats, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? No ad Vm2 e- o * o ue t /4v (09-C -fe Agency Comments Zoy�. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: N - 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? 4% got Ver -L e-(s G: WPPHANILANDUSE.APPISEPAAPP.DOC, 06/I6/00 21 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Agency Comments 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? -reeve_ w►(1 be °r /� s;\ le 4"`; h"S1 pro VIN th Yt_4YQ (d('�L(Lr 1 j hook _up.s ( .I( Pravlo(ed . Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Ail L (, Sid at res reptJaf-r1arlS will .h-e cot (0 uJRd . • GAAPPHANNLANDUSE .APP1SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 22 • CITY OF TUKWILA SEPA �, EVIRONMENTAL Department of Community Development vN E f 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 REVIEW Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 APR 2 5 2001 E -mail: tukplan(7a ci.tukwila.wa.us COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. �3L(f� MAY' rr ft( 1-14- Quarter: Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: M ol1-q -mnv4D 5ALEEM t Address: 2/505 (2' t �^ /NE t,t/ Li A 6 Boa, oL73 Phone: 425 - 931 - 6863 FAX: 42 5 - '/ 2 -8141. Signature: G :WPPHAMLANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Date: 3/i 240( FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA Planner: . File Number: vl —vv_ Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: peiz 9e3 — L74/7 Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. �3L(f� MAY' rr ft( 1-14- Quarter: Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: M ol1-q -mnv4D 5ALEEM t Address: 2/505 (2' t �^ /NE t,t/ Li A 6 Boa, oL73 Phone: 425 - 931 - 6863 FAX: 42 5 - '/ 2 -8141. Signature: G :WPPHAMLANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 Date: 3/i 240( STATE OF WASHINGTON • COUNTY OF KING CITY OF TUKWILA 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 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO. ENTER PROPERTY The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at /3 iti l `'1 !Y) 4G- A hA M jeo r►-tj J i tC LJit>t for the purpose of application review, for the limited time nece sary to confplete 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. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on L # 249,b /-444 (Print Name) (Address) (Phone Number) , oX SSCj - lL6-n(2 1J472D6e,. GG '/ (Signature) /�� JN h%�� On this day .personally appeared before me /6 c.. /7 V 1'Tl f' / J/k `j to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged-that he/she signed the same as his er voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED#4f1 BWAR4`1 TO BEFORE ME ON THIS +,S g�ON Eye e: • u ,tOTAAY u ', �••. 40k • Q�q�.• �,, i� 9 '. twaen • itlw- NOTARY residing at DAY OF • PUB• in and for the tale of ington �>e , 2Oo My Commission expires on VICINITY MAP RECEWED APR 2 5 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIGHT DISTANCE STUDY CITY OF TUKWILA April 10, 2001. David McPherson City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Sight Distance Study li c� APR 2 5 COPALtUAZTY DEVELop3 T As per your pre - application comments dated December 9, 1999, I have provided you with a Sight Distance study. I have attached supporting calculations for your review. A photograph of the site is also attached you're your reference. The AASHTO manual version 1990 was used to determine the sight distance. As can be seen from the attached calculation a sight distance of 300 feet was determined to be appropriate. The existing measured sight distance from the proposed driveways is approximately 390 feet looking south and 305 feet looking north, as measured from 10 feet behind the proposed edge of traveled way. However, as a result of this project the north side of this lot will be regraded to street level to allow increased sight distance. The sight distance will then increase to more than 600 feet looking north. The existing measured sight distance at the intersection of 43`d Ave. S and Macadam Road are as following: Very poor visibility for vehicles on 43`d Ave. S looking south of this intersection due to the berm located on the north side of the lot. However, the visibility is excellent for vehicles on 43`d Ave. S looking north of this intersection. As referenced previously, the sight distance calculation according to the AASHTO manual 1990 version will be 300 feet. As a result of this project, the berm on the north side of the lot will be regraded to make significant improvements to the sight distance to the south of the intersection. The sight distance will exceed 350 feet to the north and south of this intersection. If there are any questions that I arise or you need further clarification please don't hesitate to contact me at 425- 931 -6863. thank you, EXPIRES 11/3/o Prepared by Mohammad Saleem, EIT Checked by Kok -Wah Tung, PE iclai The 1990 AASHTO Manual was used to perform the calculations. Calculations: RECEVED APR 252001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Using Case IIIB- Turning Left into a Major Highway (this case exceeds Case IIIC- turning right into a Major Highway) Design speed = posted speed + 5mph = 25 mph + 5 mph = 30 mph 85% of design speed = 0.85 X 30 mph = 25.5 mph • (see figure IX -36 p.756) P = Distance traveled by vehicle A, from point 3 to point 6 P = (from fig. IX -34) + (vehicle length) + (lane width) + (setback distance from edge of traveled way) P = 135 feet + 20 feet + 11 feet + 10 feet = 176 feet From table IX -7 p.'764 determine ta = 8.3 sec(from interpolation) J + ta = 2 sec + 8.3 sec = 10.3 sec Q= (J +ta)x 1.47 x (85% of 30 mph) Q = 10.3 sec x 1.47 x 25.5 mph = 386 feet h =P— 16 —(1.9x 85% of 30 mph) — 20 h = 176 — 16 — 48.45 — 20 = 91.55 feet Sight distance = Q - h = 386 feet — 91.55 feet = 294.45 feet - 300 feet Comparing this result to Figure IX -40 p. 762 yields consistant results. Therefore, a sight distance of 300 feet will meet 1990 AASHTO requirements. APR 2 5 200.1 .�Y lab JiI LI/N QI dV Y DEVELOPMENT J LENT 'tiex° Lei 100 200 1". 200 feet 300 Feet 85% ■Pli 25.5rnP►^ At -Grade Intersections REACHED M.P.H. 70 60 50 40 30 O w d 20 to APR 2 5 2001 0 CCKS "UMTY QtLVEL,CPMENT SPEED REACHED M.P.H. 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 749 ■�■■.•60 MEW •1.•115 W:=7- 5O� ,n WI �■.■■ masa ■■■ ■■�� 11 • 4 °A/���� 1 ■������n� WiR• .E,E r/ �'" P Novo liar- ' ■ ACCELERATION OF • AA �-° 5Q ■■■ PASSENGER CARS LEVEL CONDITIONS (SOURCE - DEVELOPED FROM REF. 16) ' ■.■■■ A 7� ' P �� �■■� �■■ .� r 5 , r( ' 40 MP'H 1 30 f'.-- �j i 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 PASSENGER CARS - DISTANCE TRAVELED - FEET 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 TRUCKS - DISTANCE TRAVELED - FEET Figure IX -34. Acceleration curves. 11 1 it 5 , 40 MP'H 30 f'.-- �j i p ACCELERATION OF TRUCKS LEVEL CONDITIONS (SOURCE - REF.]) 300 LB. /HP. � 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 TRUCKS - DISTANCE TRAVELED - FEET Figure IX -34. Acceleration curves. #5 " • 'LLJ L—Z,L1 APR 2 5 2001 CaMTJUN2TY OnVELOPCOENT 5C44Li- GU);\ACHOR BUS STOP SIGN GUY POLE t ----- o .----BACK OF SIDEWAL •••,7s.• 5. TUSP 79-26--SS 8004240503 FOUND REBAR; LS# 16650 DRAIN CULVERT 24" CONCRETE FOUND REBAR; 7 NO CAP R/W X WIDENING 7 - -0S-OR A GARDE\ VOL 9, PAGE L V°E R T T ; 12 CONCRL 1-E FOUND REBAR; LS# 19583 FOUND 3/4" IRON PIPE BACK OF SIDEWALK WIDENING NEW EOP CULVERT IN; 4' X 4' CONCRETE, / AO" Z-4 --Cf770 / 0 2 Y ‘ .. :c : I : • ', `, tN■ '': ,' . -i‘ ,,,s : .' . 4*,.. , 7 , ,. s4 :,,: ,.: . • • L . , .!,,.,:: " " :C . . . : :1 O) c: .'1 i , i o \• . • ',11 :: ' ", , 'U, . . , .. .■ I .„:: : f" . ` \2 ■ —: : '1c , 1 ::i ■ I : 1 ‘ - N.L( .,\1 .1'., .1 :• .•' :.:1\:c ' ,' $ :••'7• •,.•. . :i 4c , , ' ;t.•'.• i . „ \.',- j!\2.: 7'*.s c,'.7,' c'•,• ( :c : ' ,'• " ,,,:I . '.• .• ' .-'X:\ "'• :\q : ,, 4!..- _7 .4 '7I,1 ' 44'. -7 .- ; : i ., ): ( i _,.'.4 . 4t •s " . .!r - .'.• - 4, : ) -4 1-'. 1f. t1'.0- .i- .7-:1,': , ;;,. -• :,'.':: 7,,.,„:. '•', 5.- -s .7', 1, ,...7( z.i,. o'• H!: ' , ,..,,"k::7..,1•. ..• .'q;F.7-:1, ' ...7 ...-70 - ' 1 :: ,:: .1-0-: „• :H"2t.''-:: 2 7.-; '''. ; •I...4;. ., ..S;_ 7•. :, 7•-. - 7 . - ..' • t , ' 1 . ; / / ' r 7 a • . e 1•:2-77 t ' " s • / - 1 . 1 . " • C ' < , „X s N ■ \s• • • • s s s s •) ; 7 ; , • i ; t ; . ' • ' I t• 7 _, v \ • 1. t , 4 f * 7 • A l • 4 . '• • : L\OT d 2 ) (;C\ :Is :4• " \ \ \ - C A s p\ . . . • IV \ ( • , 1 s \ - < (', / ; <* I ,0, . . 6 " : '•-' 1 ' i• I ' r ---- \ I • \ / v- _•� -- , r / • 4 ‘4 - _ • I .. ,_ vt i4 ' X , I • 1 5 : : s T \ 4 7. \ ,'i. - c ( 3 ..) c. „4. , j ' ,-\ . •..\ ..',\•.•:. ..• 1 .•. : , \ t1 .' 7' .-..7Th- z - .4-,N' •-c,2t„;:, c .' .' ,--7- -.: '‘-..:.r t .' .c- 1 rI 1 -.. )7 1=,0• "- L • \ 4 4 , - A 0 - ) 4 OF SIDEWACK` \ ' . 1 e lAIEW S \ \ vc c000,e0 o..o0o.o-,o ojo a oo0 t t1:73 u ( goo 00 p 300/o0000 O0046v00-Dc000 0000400000000000 oaoatoo0o000000000 1 Irt %0P "9976 ;g a07000%044400 o o oxo200100oo0707_0 000000000000 0000000 \L\ • A1 ‚7; • -REMO EXISTW .6 ,Rt4t EXISTING __2„. '1- "=.4 .` • • __„iv / /1 • 111 754 AASHTO— Geometric Design of Highways and Streets The Case IIIA distances required for highways of high design speed (espe- cially the multilane type) are large, and the average driver's keenness of per- ception may be inadequate for proper use of such distances. Drivers may be able to cross the openings in the through- traffic stream that are less than the Case IIIA distances. To cross such openings, either the crossing driver must accelerate at a higher rate or the through driver must be traveling at a lower speed or must slow down to permit the crossing. Because these operations may be hazardous, it is desirable to use the indicated Case IIIA sight distance for the control -type vehicle. Case IIIB — Turning Left into a Major Highway Figures IX -35 and IX -36, Case IIIB, illustrate a P vehicle entering a cross road from a stopped position by clearing vehicles approaching from the left and then by turning left and entering the traffic stream approaching from the right. For a vehicle to safely complete this maneuver it is necessary for the driver to have sufficient sight distance to the left to cross the near lane(s) without interfering with oncoming traffic in this lane. The stopped vehicle must also have sufficient sight distance to the right to allow the operator of the vehicle to turn left and accelerate to a speed where he does not significantly interfere with the vehicles coming from the right. The sight distance to the left may be calculated from the equation. d = 1.47V(J +ta) 4:7 (`5l( 4 4. ) where d = sight distance to the left along the major highway from the intersection, ft, V = design speed on the major highway, mph; J = 2 sec. to = time required to accelerate and traverse the distance to clear the traffic in the lane approaching from the left. This dis- tance is the sum of the ten foot setback to the stop line, the length of the vehicle, and the distance travelled to cross the opposing lane(s) (approximately 1.5 X lane width). The necessary sight distance to the right to make a left turn from a stop sign is calculated making the assumption that the mainline vehicle will slow down to a speed 85 percent of the design speed and will always be at least 1.9 x speed in feet away from the turning vehicle. Figure IX -36 should be referred to when calculating the necessary sight distance to the right on a two lane highway with no median. To calculate the At -Grade Intersections 755 necessary sight distance first determine from Figure IX -34 the distance required for the turning vehicle to reach a speed of 85 percent of the mainline design speed —this is P Next determine the time required to travel this dis- tance from Table IX -7. To this time, add J (2 sec.). Multiply this time by 1.47 x (85 percent of the mainline design speed). This will give Q; see Figure IX -36. The letter h is equal to P -16- (1.9 x 85 percent of the mainline design speed)- vehicle length. Subtracting h from Q gives the necessary stopping sight distance. In the case of undivided highways or divided highways with narrow medi- ans (the median width is less than the length of the design vehicle), both clear- ances are performed simultaneously as one operation. For divided highways with wide medians (the median is wider than the length of the design vehicle), the maneuvers are performed as two operations. The stopped vehicle must first have a proper sight distance to depart from a stopped position and cross traffic approaching from the left. The crossing vehicle may then stop and store in the median prior to performing the second operation. This operation requires the necessary sight distance for vehicles approaching on the right to allow the crossing vehicle to depart from the median, to turn left into the cross road and to accelerate without being overtaken by vehicles approaching from the right. As is shown in Figure IX -37 Case IIIB multilane, adding additional lanes or a median results in the accelerating left turning vehicle achieving average running speed closer to the intersection. The distance that n and h are decreased by is the width of the extra lanes from the left plus the width of the median. The necessary sight distance is therefore decreased by the same dis- tance. This distance is minor when compared with the required sight distance, especially at higher speeds. In the case of undivided highways or divided highways with narrow medians (median width less than the length of the design vehicle), the driver of the entering vehicle will check for adequate sight distance for vehicles approaching from both the left and right before entering the major highway in one maneuver. For divided highways with wide medians (median wider than the length of the design vehicle), the maneuver is performed as two- operations. The stopped vehicle must first have proper sight distance to depart from a stopped position and cross traffic approaching from the left. The crossing vehicle may then stop and store in the median prior to performing the second operation. This operation requires the necessary sight distance for vehicles approaching from the right to allow the crossing vehicle to depart for the median, turn left into the major highway and then accelerate without being overtaken by main- line vehicles approaching from the right. Figure IX -40 contains data for a P design vehicle turning left into a cross highway. Curve B -1 indicates the sight distances required for the turning 7J 412`L7 L7J\J Jc,? APR 2 5 2001 GOME:UNIITY DEVELOPMENT v.c VELOCITY OF VEH. A at 0= 0 VELOCITY OF VEH. B at D.S. VELOCITY OF VEH. A at ©. Va VELOCITY OF VEH. B at Q= Vo VEHICLE A AND B ARE 19' IN LENGTH LEVEL CONDITIONS n = P -16' = P- 16 -7.G-L 12' -I I-- 12' v -T vetiB 1 VEHICLE A OF 03-04 DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE BYVEHICLE A IN COMPLETING THE LEFT TURN. TTR /2 =44' © -06 DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE A IN ACCELERATING TO SPEED Va VEHICLE B Q POSITION OF VEHICLE B TRAVELING AT DESIGN SPEED 2 SECONDS BEFORE VEHICLE A STARTS HIS DEPARTURE MOVEMENT. 0-0 DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE B WHILE REDUCING TO SPEED Vo AND BY NOT ENCROACHING CLOSER THAN V.G. TO VF CLE A WHEN VEHICLE A HAS REACHED POINT (6) Z S 2.5 Sd V.G. = VEHICLE GAP DI TANCE BETWEEN VEHICLES A AND B AT POINTS (6 AND RESPECTIVELY. 2 SEC. X 1.47 VEHICLE SPEED MPH Sd = SIGHT DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR VEHICLE A TO DEPART FROM A STOP POSITION, COMPLETE A LEFT TURN AND ACCELERATE TO SPEED Vo WITHOUT BEING OVERTAKEN BY VEHICLE B TRAVELING AT DESIGN SPEED AND REDUCING TO SPEED Vo. . P = DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE A, OR ©TO 0 = DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE B, OR01 TO05 0 =Sd +h Sd = 0 -h Figure IX -36. Case IIIB, stopped vehicle turning left onto two -lane major highway. 0-0 0 -© 0 o-0 19' VG -3 VELOCITY OF VEH. A at 03 = 0 VELOCITY OF VEH. B at I& D.S. VELOCITY OF VEH. A at ©= Va VELOCITY OF VEH. B at 0 = Va VEHICLE A AND B ARE 19' IN LENGTH LEVEL CONDITIONS 20' 12' 12' VEHICLE A POSITION OF STOPPED VEHICLE A DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE A IN COMPLETING THE LEFT TURN.UR /2 +32 =76' DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE A IN ACCELERATING TO SPEED Va VEHICLE B POSITION OF VEHICLE 8 TRAVELING AT DESIGN SPEED 2 SECONDS BEFORE VEHICLE A STARTS HIS DEPARTURE MOVEMENT. DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE B WHILE REDUCING TO SPEED Va AND BY NOT ENCROACHING CLOSER THAN VG TO VE LE A WHEN VEHICLE A HAS REACHED POINT 6) v.i.A Sd V.h.B V.G. = VEHICLE GAP DISTANCE BETWEEN VEHICLES A AND B AT POINTS AND RESPECTIVELY. 2 SEC. X 1.47 XX (VEHICLE SPEED MPH) Sd = SIGHT DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR VEHICLE A TO DEPART FROM A STOP POSITION, COMPLETE A LEFT TURN AND ACCELERATE TO SPEED Va WITHOUT BEING OVERTAKEN BY VEHICLE 8 TRAVELING AT DESIGN SPEED AND REDUCING TO SPEED Va. P = DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE A, °ROT° © 0 = DISTANCE TRAVELED BY VEHICLE B, OR DTO05 0 =Sd +h Sd = 0 -h Figure IX -37. Case IIIB, stopped vehicle turning left onto multilane highway. AASHTO— Geometric Design of Highways and Streets . suopaas.iatu j apna0 -t y 758 AASHTO— Geometric Design of Highways and Streets maneuver with respect to vehicles approaching on the left. Curve B -2b indi= cates the sight distance required to perform the left turn maneuver and to accelerate to 85 percent of the design speed of the major road before being overtaken by vehicles that are approaching the intersection from the right and reducing their speed from the design speed to 85 percent of the design speed. Curve B -2a indicates the sight distance required to perform the left turn maneuver and to accelerate to the design speed of the major road before being overtaken by vehicles that are approaching from the right and maintaining design speed throughout the turning maneuvers. The last condition requires the longest sight distance. Where the grades of the intersection legs are other than flat, corrections should be made to the sight distances as outlined in Chapter III, section under "Effects of Grades." Required sight distances for trucks making left turns into a cross road will be substantially longer than for passenger cars. These relationships for trucks can be derived using appropriate assumptions for vehicle acceleration rates and turning paths. Required sight distance for a stopped vehicle turning left from a major, ' (' f i J • J highway into a minor highway (or entrance) may be computed from the for-, mula D = 1.47V (J + ta) = the time required to accelerate and traverse the 2 5 ZOO 1 distance to clear traffic in the approaching lane. ta may be obtained directly APR from Figure IX -33. rnf(�� 72f n NIT Case IIIC— Trning Right into a Major Highway Figures IX -35 and IX -38, Case IIIC, illustrate a vehicle departing from a stopped position, turning right and merging with traffic from the left. Figure IX -38 illustrates the detail of the criteria used in establishing the stopping sight distances shown in Figure IX -40. The right- turning vehicle must have sufficient sight distance for vehicles approaching from the left to complete its right turn and to accelerate to a predetermined speed relating to the major cross road before being overtaken by traffic approaching the intersection from the left and traveling at the same predetermined speed. The sight dis- tance requirement for the right turn maneuver is only one to three feet less than that required for the left turn maneuver as outlined in Case IIIB. On Fig- ure IX -40 curve Cb is the safe stopping distance for a passenger vehicle to turn right into a major roadway and accelerate to 85 percent of the design speed of the major road before being overtaken by vehicles that are approach- ing the intersection from the left and are reducing their speed from the design speed to 85 percent of the design speed. Required intersection sight distance for trucks will be considerably longer than that for the passenger vehicle. Corrections must be made where the inter- At -Grade Intersections vi o o > (x -x Ii V v o v m m w w Z w z > > > W J w 0 O O Z >- >- r 1- (.) cJ w o O a J J < w w > > m Z 00 o z= 0> ao n a 0 W (") J +• 4- U w ✓ v => LLI < a > J w W W w 0 0 >r 00 w >. > J T rn i -J CL I > Cry d L O V) 0 N w J U_ 2 w 0J 04 CC CO a r O CU ~' J V) a m d 0 o > O U w 0 z a w w a a J V) • W = O W U W - w • } z w >,�i mr- > y n a m N OW W Ow 0 J J a 0 W CC„ • W K > U o > z 0 a V) ¢ D ~ 0 (y a r- d z O a 0 z U z 0 1- a cc a I- v) r- w I- ) 0 N = N 0 a 0 r 0 d og L CO W J U x W O Q ¢ Z = CJ r J U W W 1 Z V) a 0 > CD r- O V) K J O Z LU 0 h- 3 (, = V) Z_ a - < co = U a w w ¢ U --) J O ? U U a J U_ W x W Z = > > > w > a Cr w • m O 0 CD OW 0 Z i w W> w y J m 0 w m Z U V)0 >o< r w Z W• 0 Q > O a 1- � (J O 0 wwI- o >94_ w O V) a = Z N a W 0 u Ua 0 w Z w W w 17--- C3 ¢awCC ill 0 a = O ¢ Q-v, or_ w >x 0 o a 0 0 tDQ 0 X o ¢w W W o O z U ¢0 >V) �O ¢ N 0 H Z Z OI'S ¢ N XI a(.7 C7 LJJ a ZN W X CL L. �m0 F- s lit! d ~ r- r- W f . O r O a a 0 J 010 wW W ¢ H Z J J > 1- w S3J UU 1- Z_ w O = = U J¢ W W W O S • W > .10N a > W 0~ w m m W O Q 11 a w m a 0 lr a V) Qa 0 O�JO J -)W7±::: W W o0U!- wW!:: U U ZH w1 = r o> g 0 > VOa(t)OW O D a J Z a Z 1 F) 0 H a w W ¢ 5 O U O¢ V) C L- w (7 v, a¢ Z N V) a N Vr¢ra0 o aoa N II 11 I1 11 ❑ II 0 L C U V) > V) > 759 Figure IX -38. Case IIIC, stopped vehicle turning right onto two -lane major highway. DESIGN SPEED (MPH) 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1900 1600 SIGHT DISTANCE (FEET) A- SIGHT DISTANCE FOR P VEHICLE CROSSING 2 -LANE HIGHWAY FROM STOP. (SEE DIAGRAM) B-I- SIGHT DISTANCE FOR P VEHICLE TURNING LEFT INTO 2 -LANE HIGHWAY ACCROSS P VEHICLE APPROACHING FROM LEFT.(SEE DIAGRAM) B- I- 4Lane +medlon SIGHT DISTANCE FOR P VEHICLE TURNING LEFT INTO 4 -LANE HIGHWAY ACCROSS P VEHICLE APPROACHING FROM LEFT.(SEE DIAGRAM) B -2b- SIGHT DISTANCE FOR P VEHICLE TO TURN LEFT INTO 2 -LANE HIGHWAY AND ATTAIN 85% OF DESIGN SPEED WITHOUT. BEING OVERTAKEN BY A VEHICLE APPROACHING FROM THE RIGHT REDUCING SPEED FROM DESIGN SPEED TO 85% OF DESIGN SPEED. (SEE DIAGRAM) Cb- SIGHT DISTANCE FOR P VEHICLE TO TURN RIGHT INTO 2 -LANE HIGHWAY AND ATTAIN 85% OF DESIGN SPEED WITHOUT BEING OVERTAKEN BY A VEHICLE APPROACHING FROM THE LEFT AND REDUCING FROM DESIGN SPEED TO 85X OF DESIGN SPEED. Figure IX -40. Intersection sight distance at at -grade intersection (Case IIIB and Case IIIC). AASHTO— Geometric Design of Highways and Streets suoudasJatu/ apVJD -ty Figure IX -41. Sight distance at intersections, effect of skew. 764 AASHTO- Geometric Design of Highways and Streets For an obtuse -angle quadrant the angle between the sight lane A -B and the path of either vehicle is small, and vehicle operators can look across the full sight triangle area with but a little side glance from the vehicle path: For an acute -angle quadrant, sight line B -C, operators are required to turn their heads considerably to see across the whole of the sight triangle area. The dif- ficulty of looking for approaching traffic makes it undesirable to treat the intersection under the assumptions of Case I, even where traffic on both roads is light. Treatment by Case II or Case III, whichever is larger, should be used at oblique -angle intersections. In Case III the S distance is larger for oblique -angle than for right -angle intersections. The pavement width on the path of the crossing vehicle, W, is the actual pavement width divided by the side of the intersection angle. The d distance along the highway in such a case cannot be read directly from Figure IX -39, but can be computed by the equation d = 1.47V (J + ta) by reading ta directly from Figure IX -33. Table IX -7 shows the values for acceleration rates for passenger vehicles. Speed (MPH) 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Distance (FT) 50 90 140 7b 215 305 420 570 760 1000 1315 1735 2320 T. (Sec.) 4.5 6.1 7.3 8• 3 9.4 11.3 13.5 15.9 18.6 21.7 25.4 30.0 35.9 9�w ► °x��td� Table IX -7. Acceleration rates for passenger vehicles. At -Grade Intersections Effect of Vertical Profiles 765 The evaluation of sight distance at intersections in Case II is based on the safe stopping distance of a vehicle traveling at a stated speed on level high- ways. One or more of the roads approaching the intersection may not be level. A vehicle descending a grade requires a somewhat greater distance to stop than does one on a level grade; also, a vehicle ascending a grade requires less distance in which to stop. The differences in stopping distances on various grades at intersections are the same as those given in Chapter III. The differences indicate that grades up to 3 percent have little effect on stopping sight distances. Grades on an intersection leg should be limited to 3 percent unless the sight distances are greater than the lower limits or stopping on a level grade, in which case the grades should not be greater than 6 percent. In the Case III derivation, the time required to cross the major highway is materially affected by the grade of crossing on the minor road. Normally, the grade across an intersection is so small that it need not be considered, but when curvature on the major road requires the use of superelevation, the grade across it may be significant, in which case the sight distance along the major road should be increased. The effect of grade on acceleration can be expressed as a multiplicand to be used with the time, ta , as determined for level conditions for a given dis- tance. The approximate ratios of the accelerating time on the grade to that on the level, for the likely range of crossing distances, are given in Table IX -8. Ratio, accelerating time on grade to accelerating time on level section Crossroad Grade (percent) Design Vehicle -4 -2 0 +2 +4 P SU WB -50 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.7 Table IX -8. Effect of gradient on accelerating time at intersec- tions. 1114.= ,Wi ;///I Ab t X4.1 \\ iiiir-ervrll \ ....111111 Iulnr ill... 71I1,/ll• l\llll► 1111 ;111/11bw11 IMI11111\1 I11\ /I1IIr" 10 \WM% AuluI1I.m". ' meatlawul/IY/ ,APR 2.5 2001 InEVIELOPMEAT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SARA DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PROJECT No. 092 -01004 FEBRUARY 20, 2001 Prepared for: MR. BEHZAD CHAUHDRY SARA DEVELOPMENT, INC. POST OFFICE Box 5544 TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98064 Prepared by: KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 19501 144TH AVENUE NE, #F -300 WOODINVILLE, WASHINGTON 98072 (425) 485 -5519 NEM. 1=1111M•41 IKra2ari & ASSOCIATES, INC. SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS I(raZar1 85 ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 20, 2001 KA Project No. 092 -01004 Mr. Behzad Chauhdry Sara Development, Inc. Post Office Box 5544 Kent, Washington 98064 RE: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report Proposed Sara Development Tukwila, Washington • Dear Mr. Chauhdry: In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the referenced site. The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. CB /cb Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN AND S, INC. Chris Behrens Senior Engineering Geologist Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 19501 144th Ave. NE #F -300• Woodinville, Washington 98072 • (425) 485 -5519 • Fax: (425) 485-6837 092- 00024-tuanic Point.doc _K MM. Ma Mara azaZ & ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION 2 GEOLOGIC SETTING 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3 SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 GROUNDWATER 4 SEISMIC CONDITIONS 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Erosion and Sediment Control 7 Site Preparation 8 Groundwater Influence on Structures /Construction 9 Structural fill 10 Drainage and Landscaping Utility Trench Backfill 10 10 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork Lateral Earth Pressures for Permanent Structures 11 11 Foundations 13 Testing and Inspection LIMITATIONS 13 VICINITY MAP Figure 1 SITE PLAN Figure 2 CROSS SECTIONS Figure 3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Appendix A EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS Appendix B Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 19501 144th Ave. NE •Woodinville, Washington 98072 • (425) 485 -5519 • Fax: (425) 485- 68z-7o1ooa Sara ne.elopt.a« .IKrazan & ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 20, 2001 KA Project No. 092 -01004 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SARA DEVELOPMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed Sara Development to be located south of the Y- intersection of 43`d Avenue South and Macadam Road South, in Tukwila, Washington. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, temporary shoring, structural fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork, and retaining wall/basement wall design parameters. A site plan showing the approximate exploratory test pit locations is presented following the text of this report. A description of the field investigation, exploratory test pit logs, and the exploratory test pit log legend are presented in Appendix A. Appendix A also contains a description of laboratory testing phase of this study; along with laboratory test results. Appendices B and C contain guides to aid in the development of earthwork and pavement specifications. When conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This investigation was conducted to evaluate the soil, slope, and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and structural fill construction. Our scope of services was performed in accordance with our proposal dated November 22, 2000 (KA Proposal No. P00 -361A) and included the following: • A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. • A field investigation consisting of excavating eight exploratory test pits on the subject site. The test pits ranged in depth from 10 to 13 feet to evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the project site. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 19501 144th Ave. NE #F -300 • Woodinville, Washington 98072 • (425) 485 -5519 • Fax: (425) 0982-01004 83 Sara Development .aoc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 2 • Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. • Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of construction specifications. • Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions, recommendations, and findings of our investigation. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that design of the proposed single family residential development is currently underway; structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are unavailable. On a preliminary basis, it is understood that the development will consist of construction of 9 single - family residences. The residences will be one- to two -story structures with slab -on -grade foundation systems. Footing loads are anticipated to be light to moderate. In the event the structural or grading information detailed in this report are inconsistent with the final design, the Geotechnical engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located south of the Y- intersection of 43`d Avenue South and Macadam Road South, Tukwila, Washington. According to the U.S. Geologic, Survey, 7.5— minute Des Moines topographic quadrangle map, the property is located in the northwest quadrant of section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East. The site is triangular in shape and encompasses approximately 3 acres. The site is bordered on the west by 43`d Avenue South, residential properties, and Southgate Park, to the east by Macadam Road, and to the south by residential properties. At the time of our investigation, the site was forested and undeveloped, except for the proposed Lot 8 where an existing house (abandoned) is located, and proposed Lot 7 where an existing garage (abandoned) is located. The southern portion of the property is occupied by a natural drainage gulch and is designated as an open space buffer area. The side slopes of the drainage gulch dip between approximately 18 and 33 degrees (33 to 65 percent grade). The gradient of the stream channel in the drainage gulch is approximately 5.6 (18 percent grade). The proposed development will occupy the central, and northern portions of the site. On this portion of the site the slopes vary between 5 and 23 degrees (10 to 43 percent grade) and slopes towards the northeast. Mature deciduous trees and blackberry bushes occupy a majority of the property. GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject site lies within the central Puget Lowland. The lowland is part of a regional north -south trending trough that extends from southwestern British Columbia to near Eugene, Oregon. North of Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 3 Olympia, Washington, this lowland is glacially carved, with a depositional and erosional history including at least four separate glacial advance /retreats. The Puget Lowland is bounded on the west by the Olympic Mountains and on the east by the Cascade Range. The lowland is filled with glacial and nonglacial sediments consisting of interbedded gravel, sand, silt, till, and peat lenses. The United States Department of Interior USGS Des Moines, Washington Geology Map and the Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and Vicinity, Washington indicates that the property is located within the contacts of Kame - Terrace deposits (Late to Middle Pleistocene) and pre - Vashon drift or Transitional Beds (Middle Pleistocene). The Kame - Terrace deposits consist of a complex of poorly to well -sorted and stratified gravel and sand with variable amounts of silt and clay deposited against or close to the glacial ice. The Transitional Beds underlie the Kame - Terrace deposits and consists mostly of massive to thinly bedded clay, silt and fine sand, with peaty sand and gravel occurring in the lower part. These fine sediments were mostly deposited . in lake (Glaciolacustrian) environments, and in fluvial systems prior to the advance of the glacier. The Transitional Beds appear firm in outcrops, but due to a high moisture content and jointing in the beds they can become unstable on steep slopes, and numerous landslides have occurred where exposed on bluffs and slopes. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS A field investigation consisting of excavating eight exploratory test pits ranging in depths of approximately 10 to 13 feet below existing site grade, using a Case 580 4X4 backhoe, was performed to evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the project site. The test pit excavation was performed on January 23, 2001 utilizing Northwest Excavating & Trucking, Inc., as a subcontractor. Due to heavy vegetation and slopes the exploratory test pit locations were dependent on accessibility. The exploratory test pits were placed in or near the footprint of the proposed single family residence locations where possible. Figure 2 shows the approximate locations of the exploratory test pits. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Classification System. Soil samples were retained for laboratory testing. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, and gradation of the materials encountered. Details of the laboratory test program and results of the laboratory tests are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final exploratory test pit logs in Appendix A. SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appeared to be typical of those found in the geologic region of the site. Our exploratory test pits revealed that the proposed lots and building sites to be generally underlain by approximately 1 to 2 feet of loose, silty fine sand with variable amounts of gravel, roots, and organics (topsoil). In the exploratory test pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -3, TP-4, TP- Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092-01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 4 5, and TP -6 the above soils are underlain by 2 to 10 feet of loose to dense, fine to medium sand with variable amounts of silt and gravel (Kame - Terrace Deposits). The above soils were encountered in TP- 1, TP -3, and TP-4 to their termination depths. In the exploratory test pits TP -2, TP-4, TP -6, and TP -7 the Kame - Terrace deposits are underlain by approximately '4 to 9 feet of medium dense to dense silt with variable amounts of fine sand to stiff to very stiff lean clay (Transitional Beds) to their termination depths. In exploratory test pit TP -8 the topsoil is underlain by approximately 4 feet of loose, fine to medium sandy silt with variable amounts of gravel, asphalt, brick and floor tile rubble (Fill). The above fill is underlain by approximately 2 feet of loose, fine to medium sandy silt (Relic Topsoil). The relic topsoil is underlain by approximately 6 feet of stiff to very stiff lean clay (Transitional Beds) to TP -8 termination depth. Moisture contents of the sampled soil ranged from approximately 9 percent to 33 percent. For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of the borings in Appendix A. SLOPE CHARACTERISTICS The southern portion of the property is occupied by a natural drainage gulch and is designated as an open space buffer area. The side slopes of the drainage gulch dip between approximately 18 and 33 degrees (33 to 65 percent grade). The slopes of the drainage gulch are heavily vegetated, and covered with forest duff limiting the exposure of soil to the creek cut. Besides the recent alluvial deposits (reworked glacial soils) along the creek channel, it appears that the creek channel is cut into the older weathered transitional beds. No apparent soil structures were observed (bedding dips, joints, or other contacts) due to erosion along the creek channel. However, trees along the drainage gulch slopes are tipped down slope, and or have curving trunks indicating soil creep over time. At the time of our visit the slopes appeared to be relatively stable, but recent rotational slide activity was observed along 43`h Avenue South, just south of proposed Lot -1. The recent slide scarp extends from approximately the intersection of South 137th Street and 43rd Avenue South for approximately 300 feet north. The toe of the slide was not observed due to heavy vegetation along the creek bed, but the slip plane most likely daylights along the creek at the base of the slope. A portion of the slope grades in the drainage gulch exceed 22 degrees (40 percent grade) shallow slides or soil slips involving the upper soil layers typically form on these slopes. They are typically caused by prolong rainfall and commonly produce debris flows. No recent shallow slides were observed, but the geomorphology of the drainage gulch indicates older shallow slide scars that have been overgrown. GROUNDWATER The exploratory test pit locations were checked for the presence of groundwater' during and immediately following the excavation operations. Groundwater was encountered in exploratory test pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -3, and TP -6 between 2 and 9 feet below the existing ground surface. It should be recognized that water table elevations might fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions, as well as other factors. Therefore, water level Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 5 observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. SEISMIC CONDITIONS According to the Seismic Zone Map of the United States contained in the 1997 Uniform Building Code, the project site lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3. The soils encountered exploratory test pits were loose to dense. The overall soil profile generally corresponds to seismic soil profiles SD as defined by Tale 16 -J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Soil profile SD applies to a profile consisting of medium dense to dense soils within the upper 100 feet of the profile. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions, and recommendations. After completion of the recommended site preparations, the parcel should be suitable for the proposed developments. General The subject site is designated as a sensitive area, therefore falls under the Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45. Because of the variable topography over the site and the impact of the watercourse on the south portion of the site each proposed lot will be discussed individually below: Lot -1 Located on the south - southwest portion of the site. Lot -1 abuts a Type 2 watercourse according to Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 in the code it states that a Type 2 watercourse requires a 35- foot -wide buffer on each side of the watercourse. This buffer is shown on the proposed 9 -lot short plat schematic layout, and also on the subject sites topographic map. Lot -1 also falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of slope areas greater than 40 percent, and existing mappable landslide that closed 43rd Avenue South, portions of Lot -1 is defined as a Class 4 area. Since portions of the lot can be classified as Class 4 the proposed structure location shown on Lot -1 should in addition to its shown 35 foot offset from the required 35 foot buffer, have an additional set back of 20 feet. This is a total of approximately 90 feet from the creek and the base of the slope. However, it is a common practice for property owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Lot -2 Located on the southern portion of the site. Lot -2 abuts a Type 2 watercourse according to Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 in the code it states that a Type 2 watercourse requires a 35- foot -wide buffer on each side of the watercourse. This buffer is shown on the proposed 9 -lot short plat schematic layout, and also on the subject sites Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092-01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 6 topographic map. Lot -2 also falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of slope areas between 20 and 40 percent exist on the central and southeastern portions of Lot -2. Since the lot is underlain by relatively impermeable soils the lot should be classified as Class 3. The proposed structure locatio own on Lot -2 should have an additional 20 -foot set back. This is a total of approximately 125 eet from the creek and the base of the slope. However, it is a common practice for p erty owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Lot -3 Located in the central portion of the site. Lot -3 southeast corner abuts a Type 2 watercourse according to Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 in the code it states that a Type 2 watercourse requires a 35- foot -wide buffer on each side of the watercourse. is buffer is shown on the proposed 9 -lot short plat schematic layout, and also on the subject "sites topographic map. Lot -3 also falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of slope areas between 20 and 40 percent exist on the central portions of Lot -3. Since the lot is underlain by relatively impermeable soils the lot should be classified as Class 3. The proposed structure location shown on Lot -3 is located near the central portion of an approximately 35 percent slope. It is our opinion that the construction of the proposed structure will not significantly affect the stability of the slope at the site. However, it is a common practice for property owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Lot -4 Located on the west - central portion of the site. Lot-4 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of slope areas between 20 and 40 percent exist on the central and western portions of Lot-4. Since the lot is underlain by relatively impermeable soils the lot should be classified as Class 3. The proposed structure location shown on Lot-4 is located near the toe of an approximately 30 percent slope. It -is our opinion that the construction of the proposed structure will not significantly affect the stability of the slope at the site. However, it is a common practice for property owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Lot -5 Located on the east - central portion of the site. Lot -5 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of the short plat location. Lot -5 slopes generally to the northeast at 10 percent or less. Since the lot slopes at 10 percent or less, in accordance with the Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45, the lot should be classified as Class 1. Lot -6 Located on the east - central portion of the site. Lot -6 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of the short plat location. Lot -6 slopes generally to the northeast at 8 percent Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092-01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 7 or less. Since the lot slopes at 8 percent or less, in accordance with the Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 the lot should be classified as Class 1. Lot -7 Located on the northwestern portion of the site. Lot -7 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of slope areas between 20 and 40 percent exist on the central and western portions of Lot -7. Since the lot is underlain by relatively permeable soils the lot should be classified as Class 2. The proposed structure location shown on Lot -7 is located near the toe of an approximately 28 percent slope. It is our opinion that the construction of the proposed structure will not significantly affect the stability of the slope at the site. However, it is a common practice for property owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Lot -8 Located on the north portion of the site. Lot -8 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because of the short plat location. Lot -8 slopes generally to the northeast at 20 percent or less. Since the lot slopes at 20 percent or less, in accordance with the Sensitive Area Ordinance Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.45 the lot should be classified as Class 1. Lot -9 Located on the north portion of the site. Lot -9 falls under areas of potential geologic instability because the lot slopes between 20 and 40 percent to the northeast. Since the lot is underlain by relatively permeable soils the lot should be classified as Class 2. The proposed structure location shown on Lot -9 is located on the upper portion of an approximately 25 percent slope. It is our opinion that the construction of the proposed structure will not significantly affect the stability of the slope at the site. However, it is a common practice for property owners with slopes of this nature to perform long -term observation of the slopes. It is recommended that slope areas be monitored and periodically examined to provide early recognition of slope changes and identify areas of potential concern. In addition it is recommended that the roof runoff, and footing drains from the proposed structure be tightlined into the existing storm drain system. Erosion and Sediment Control Erosion and sediment control (ESC) is used to minimize the transportation of sediment to wet lands, streams, lakes, drainage systems, and adjacent properties. Regulations to control erosion are contained in the City of Tukwila Municipal Code and in other codes and ordinances of the city. Since the southern portion of the subject site is part of an existing watercourse, the ESC will need to be site specific. This may require more conservative Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the control of erosion and entrained sediment. This may include limiting the soil and foundation work to the dry season, and more stringent cover requirements, in order to maintain and protect surface water quality. As a minimum, the following basic recommendations should be incorporated in the design of the erosion and sediment control features of the site: Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 8 1) Phase the soil, foundation, utility work, and other work requiring excavation or the disturbance of the site soils during the dry season (generally May through September). 2) All site work should be completed and stabilized as quickly as possible. 3) Additional perimeter erosion and sediment control features may be required to reduce the possibility of sediment entering the surface water. This may include additional silt fences, silt fences with a higher Apparent Opening Size (AOS), construction of a berm, or other filtration systems. 4) Any runoff generated by dewatering discharge should be treated through construction of a sediment trap if there is sufficient space. If space is limited other filtration methods will need to be incorporated. Site Preparation We understand that design of the proposed single family residential development is currently underway; final grades pertaining to the structures are unavailable. General site clearing should include removal of existing pavements, vegetation; trees and associated root systems; wood; existing utilities; structures including foundations, basement walls and floors; rubble; and rubbish. Site stripping should extend to a minimum depth of 12 to 24 inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed. Deeper stripping may be required in localized areas due to the presence of loose soils, and fill soils. These materials will not be suitable for use as structural fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non - structural areas. The exploratory test pits encountered loose soils to a depth of 3 to 6 feet throughout the site. This material should be overexcavated to the level of medium dense soils.. The resulting excavations can be filled with Geotechnical engineer approved on site native soil; or imported structural fill to footing subgrade. This fill material should be within ± 2 percent of optimum moisture, and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. In addition, fat clay was encountered in test pit TP-4. Fat clay has a high shrink/swell potential and may cause differential movement of floor slabs and shallow foundations. The fat clay should be removed to a level where a minimum of 2 feet of non - expansive fill (approved native or imported structural fill) can be provided beneath floor slabs and foundation elements During wet weather conditions, typically October through May, subgrade stability problems and grading difficulties may develop due to excess moisture conditions, disturbance sensitive soils and/or the presence of perched groundwater. Construction during the extended wet weather periods could create the need to overexcavate exposed soils if they become disturbed and cannot be recompacted due to elevated moisture content and or weather conditions. If overexcavation is necessary, it should be Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 9 confirmed through continuous monitoring and testing by a qualified geotechnical engineer or senior geologist. Soils that have become unstable may require drying and recompaction. Selective drying may be accomplished by scarifying or windrowing surficial material during extended periods of dry warm weather. If the soils cannot be dried back to a workable moisture condition, remedial measures may be required. General project site winterization should consist of placement of aggregate base and protection of exposed soils during the construction phase. • Any buried structures encountered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below planned finish subgrade level should be cleaned to firm undisturbed soil, and backfilled with structural fill. In general, any septic tanks, underground storage tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should. be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Geotechnical engineer. The resulting excavations should be backfilled with stnictural fill. A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Geotechnical engineer may reject any material that does. not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork construction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Structural fill section. Groundwater Influence on Structures /Construction Groundwater was encountered in exploratory test pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -3, and TP -6 between 2 and 9 feet below the existing ground surface. The groundwater elevations are most likely caused by hillslope hydrology this is the process of groundwater flowing down gradient to a low point in this case the watercourse on the south portion of the site, and the Duwamish River valley. The Kame - Terrace deposits deposited on the site slopes can be considered to be relatively permeable. The Kame - Terrace deposit sands overlie the relatively impermeable Transitional Beds, resulting in horizontal migration of the groundwater within the overlying permeable soils. The gradient of the groundwater at the site is anticipated to roughly match the topography of the site. The use of a temporary dewatering system should be anticipated during excavation work for the proposed residential structures. Design of temporary dewatering system to remove groundwater should be the responsibility of the contractor. Structural Fill A portion of the existing soils may be suitable for reuse as non - expansive structural fill provided it is relatively free from organic material. We recommend that a representative of Krazan & Associates be on -site during excavation to determine which soils are suitable for structural fill. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 10 Imported structural fill material should consist of well graded gravel or a sand and gravel mixture with a maximum grain size of 1 1/2 inches and less than 5 percent fines. All Structural fill material should be submitted for approval to the Geotechnical Engineer at least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, moisture- conditioned as necessary, (moisture content of soil shall not vary by more than ±2 percent of optimum moisture) and compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density based on ASTM .Test Method D1557. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Drainage and Landscaping The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Roof drains should be tightlined away from foundations. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off -site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration adjacent to trench walls should be minimized; cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of precipitation. Sandy soil conditions were encountered in the upper soils at the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Silts and lean clay soils were also encountered at the site. Even though these soils are considered cohesive, due to bedding and joint (fracture) planes in the soil they will also cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these soils. All utility trench backfill should consist of structural fill. Utility trench backfill.placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. The upper 2 feet of utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Below 2 feet, utility trench backfill in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Pipe bedding should be in accordance with pipe manufacturer's recommendations. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 11 The contractor is responsible for removing all water- sensitive soils from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork Since groundwater is anticipated to be at the proposed subgrade elevation, we recommend that concrete slabs -on -grade floors should be underlain by a water vapor retarder system. The water vapor retarder system should be installed in accordance with ASTM Specification E164 -94 and Standard Specifications E1745 -97. According to ASTM Guidelines, the water vapor retarder should consist of a vapor retarder sheeting underlain by a minimum of 4- inches of compacted clean, open - graded coarse rock of 3/4 -inch maximum size. The vapor retarded sheeting should be protected from puncture damage with a minimum of 2- inches of sand. The sand should be well moistened prior to placement of the concrete slab. Lateral Earth Pressures for Retaining Wa1UBasement Wall Design Parameters • We have developed criteria for design of permanent subgrade walls and other permanent retaining structures. Walls may be designed as a "restrained" retaining wall based on "at- rest" earth pressures, plus any surcharge on top of the wall as described below, if the wall is attached to the building and/or movement is not acceptable. The wall could also be designed based on "active" earth pressure, if the wall is not part of the building and some movement of the retaining wall is acceptable. Acceptable lateral movement could equal at least 0.2 percent of the wall height would be required to use "active" earth pressure values for design. The following table Wall Design Criteria presents the recommended soil related design parameters for retaining walls with level backfill behind the wall. Contact Krazan & Associates, Inc. if an alternate retaining wall system is used. Krazan & Associates, Inc. should also be contacted for alternate recommendations if sloped backfill surfaces are planned. Design of the wall should incorporate an adequate factor -of- safety against both overturning (FS =2.0 and sliding (FS =1.5). Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 12 "At- rest" Conditions "Active" Conditions Passive Earth Pressure on Soil- Footing Coefficient (allowable) The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of hydrostatic water pressures generated by water accumulation behind the retaining walls; seismic loads; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. To minimize the lateral earth pressure and prevent buildup of water pressure against the walls, continuous footing drains (with cleanouts) should be provided at the base of the walls. The footing drains should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed down and enveloped by 6 inches of pea gravel in all directions and filter fabric to prevent migrations of fines. The backfill adjacent to and extending a lateral distance behind the walls a minimum of 2 feet should consist of free - draining granular material. All free draining backfill should contain less than 3 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve) based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. It should be realized that the primary purpose of the free - draining material is reduction of hydrostatic pressure. Some potential for the moisture to contact the back face of the wall may exist, even with treatment, which may require that more extensive waterproofing be specified for walls which require interior moisture sensitive finishes. Compaction of the backfill is recommended to achieve a level of compaction to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Soil compactors place transient surcharges on the backfill. Consequently, only light hand operated equipment is recommended within 3 feet of walls so that excessive stress is not imposed on the walls. Foundations The proposed residential structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Continuous wall or column footings may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) dead plus live load. A 1/3 increase in the above values may be used for short duration, wind, and seismic loads. Structural fill placed on bearing native subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Westem United States 092-01004 Sara Developmnt.doc Wall Design Criteria 65 psf /foot of depth 45 psf/foot of depth Low Side of Wall Neglect upper 2 feet; then 300 psf /linear foot of depth. ,f Sliding Friction 0.30 The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of hydrostatic water pressures generated by water accumulation behind the retaining walls; seismic loads; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. To minimize the lateral earth pressure and prevent buildup of water pressure against the walls, continuous footing drains (with cleanouts) should be provided at the base of the walls. The footing drains should consist of perforated pipe, sloped to drain, with perforations placed down and enveloped by 6 inches of pea gravel in all directions and filter fabric to prevent migrations of fines. The backfill adjacent to and extending a lateral distance behind the walls a minimum of 2 feet should consist of free - draining granular material. All free draining backfill should contain less than 3 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve) based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve with at least 30 percent retained on the U.S. No. 4 sieve. It should be realized that the primary purpose of the free - draining material is reduction of hydrostatic pressure. Some potential for the moisture to contact the back face of the wall may exist, even with treatment, which may require that more extensive waterproofing be specified for walls which require interior moisture sensitive finishes. Compaction of the backfill is recommended to achieve a level of compaction to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Soil compactors place transient surcharges on the backfill. Consequently, only light hand operated equipment is recommended within 3 feet of walls so that excessive stress is not imposed on the walls. Foundations The proposed residential structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill. Continuous wall or column footings may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) dead plus live load. A 1/3 increase in the above values may be used for short duration, wind, and seismic loads. Structural fill placed on bearing native subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Westem United States 092-01004 Sara Developmnt.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 13 Exterior footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Interior footings should have a minimum depth of 12 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, which ever is lower. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches regardless of load. If constructed as recommended. The total settlement is not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlement, along a 20 -foot exterior wall footing, or between adjoining column footings, should be less than 1/2 inch, producing an angular distortion of 0.002. Most settlement is expected to occur during construction, as the loads are applied. However, additional post - construction settlement may occur if the foundation soils are flooded or saturated or if a strong seismic event results in liquefaction of the supporting granular soils. Seasonal rainfall, water run -off, or normal watering practice of trees and landscaping areas around the proposed buildings, should not flood and/or saturate footings. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.30 acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 300 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A 1/3 increase in the above value may be used for short duration, wind, or seismic loads. Testing and Inspection, A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory fieldwork. This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc. will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. LIMITATIONS Geotechnical engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improves. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Geotechnical engineering, physical changes in the site either due to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after the time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 14 without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report. Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Geotechnical engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Geotechnical engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. This report is a geotechnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or atmosphere, or the presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposed and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment. The geotechnical information presented herein is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such information and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc KA No. 092 -01004 February 20, 2001 Page No. 15 If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (425) 485 -5519. CB/TGB: Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOC T S, INC. Chris Behrens Senior Engineering Geologist T Timothy G. B er1e, P.E. Engineering Manager [EXPIRES: 11 /10 / a 2.. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc Ren 414—kk 1 Sh htklek winiaavia. van 152111,161011111111 � iweiwir: V Tote: Figure generated from TOPO! ®. KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES 19501 144th Ave. NE #F -300 Woodinville, WA 98072 425 -485 -5519 FIGURE 1 — VICINITY MAP Location: Tukwila, Washington Job No. : 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Date: 2 -20 -01 I r v. LEGEND Test Pit Location Existing Structures Proposed New Construction Proposed Setback (Krazan) Topography Line (2 foot Intervals) Cross - section Line Creek Alignment TP -1 L _ J , t1 43rd Avenue South 0 30 60 120 (In Feet) Contour Interval 2 feet Note: Site Plan Developed From Drawing Provided By Sarah Development , Inc. Site Plan Sarah Development Figure 2 Scale: 1 in = 60 feet Job Number: 092 - 01004 Date: February 15, 2001 I<.r'azari & ASSOCIATES, INC. Drawn By: WRJ Reviewed By: C.B./T.G.B Drawing Number: 2 Drawing Type: Site Plan r CROSS SECTION B' -B 140 A CROSSSECTIONA-A' A' 150 Elevation (ft) 140 130 150 140 130 Surface Profile —y 140 130 120 110 Surface P 'Ole ------NA 130 120 100 Creek Proposed Bull ding Location 100 90 120 110 ,90 0 50 110 100 Surface I 100 Profile 90 90 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 (ft) CROSS SECTION B' -B 140 Elevation (ft) Proposed Building Location 140 130 130 120 120 110 Surface P 'Ole ------NA 110 100 Creek Alignment 100 90 ,90 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 (ft) Note: Site Plan Developed From Drawing Provided By Sarah Development , Inc. Finish Floor elevations have not been established at this time. The structures shown on slope areas reflect proposed placement . Cross Sections Sarah Development Figure 3 Job Number: 092 - 01004 I Drawn By: WRJ Reviewed By: C.BJT.G.B Drawing Number: 2 Date: February 15, 2001 �� G111 & ASSOCIATES, INC. Drawing Type: Site Plan Logs of Test Pits Laboratory Testing V XIUNaddV Appendix A Page A.1 APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investigation The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Eight exploratory test pits were excavated. The exploratory test pit locations are shown on the site plan. Elevations shown on the boring logs were interpolated from topographic information provided by others. The depths are from the existing ground surface at the time the borings were drilled. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Soil samples were obtained from the exploratory test pit sidewalls or from the bottom of the exploratory test pit. All samples were returned to our Woodinville laboratory for evaluation. Laboratory Investigation The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered. In situ moisture contents, sieve analysis tests, and Atterberg Limit test were determined for the samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. The logs of the exploratory test pits and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 1 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -1 Location: Tukwila, WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water 2.0 feet, very heavy flow SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 1 1 1 1 Remarks . tu 0 N Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 .. — — 5- 10 .:.• Ground Surface 0— _ SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, black berry roots, loose, wet. 1Topsoia • .:.•.. :: .', WELL GRADED SAND WITH GRAVEL (SW) Dark yellowish brown, fine to coarse grained sand, loose to medium dense grading to dense, wet - (Kame - Terrace Deposit) Groundwater flow at 2 feet appears to come from an old stream channel. G-1 5— G -2 10— • — — 15— 20— End of Test Pit Massive caving from surface 15— 20 Method: Caterpillar 416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1123101 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: 092 -01004 Log of Test Pit 2 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Residential Development Figure: A -1 Location: Sara Development Logged By: ALH Depth to Water 5.5 feet, light seepage SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth 0 I Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 Ground Surface • �'Yry J 'l ' berry - SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, black roots, loose, wet. / croesoil J POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP -SM) _ - 1 1 5-=�`� _ 10— ,.... �' Light yellowish brown, fine to medium grained sand, trace gravel, moist. CWeathered Kame - Terrace Deposit POORLY GRADED SAND W/SILT AND GRAVEL (SP -SM) G-1 5- • ' G -2 Light gray, fine to medium grained sand, loose to medium dense grading to dense, very moist. LKame- Terrace Deposit SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Grayish brown, fine to medium grained sand, occasional cobbles and boulders and decomposed granite stones, // very moist: Glacial till J SILT WITH SAND (ML) Light gray, very fine grained sand, moist. (Transitional Beds) _ G-3 10 • I � G-4 G-5 r-I 15- 20- End of Test Pit 15- i 20 i Method: Caterpillar416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor. Northwest Excavating Suite 106 ' Auburn,•Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 3 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -3 Location: Tukwila, WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water 2.0 feet, light flow SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content (%) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth _ 2 N Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 Ground Surface 0 5 10 SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, wet. STopsoil) j i f SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Grayish brown, fine to medium grained sand, moist to wet (Glacial till -like below 5 feet). (Kame- Terrace Deposit) 5- I r- 10- I 15 20 End of Test Pit 1 15— 20 Method: Caterpillar 416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor. Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 4 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A-4 Location: Tukwila, WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water Not Observed SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth Symbol I Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 Ground Surface _ 0 a ' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, wet. LTopsoilL I POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT (SP -SM) - - 5 — 10 /moist. / � 4 Yellowish brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, Tame- Terrace Deposia J FAT CLAY CH Grayish brown, minor fracturing, stiff to very stiff moist. Zn 9, ry , (T ransitional Beds) -- - -- G -1 10— 15— 20— End of Test Pit • 15— 20 Method: Caterpillar 416C Kratan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 5 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -5 Location: Tukwila WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water Not Observed SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 1 1 1 1 Remarks Depth 2 N Description Sample Number Depth (ft) Ground Surface ' 0 5 10 15 20 ' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, wet. STopsoil) J SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL Yellowish brown, fine to coarse grained sand. Small lenses/layers of silt and clean sand and occasional cobbles, loose to medium dense, moist. (Somewhat glacial till -like in appearance.) (Kame- Terrace Deposit) - 5r 'L 10 End of Test Pit 15- 20— Method: Caterpillar 416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 . Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 6 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -6 Location: Tukwila WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water 9.0 feet very light seepage SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth 0 Description Sample Number Depth (ft) Ground Surface 0 5—�/ •1/ 107/ 15— 20— II 1 li 1 • IIGrayish _ SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained, loose, wet. I ;MCP) oi I . SILTY SAND brown, fine grained sand, loose, moist. iKame- Terrace Deposit 1 LEAN CLAY (CL) - /� i / 4 Gray, some fracturing and minor slickensides, very stiff, moist. (Transitional Beds) 5- = G -1 r 10 _ End of Test Pit 15— 20 Method: Caterpillar 416C Krazan and Associates 1501 -15th Street NW Excavation Date: 1/23/01 Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002. Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 7 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -7 Location: Tukwila, WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water Not Observed SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth 0 Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 10 Ground Surface 0 - ee i111�I ��LEA � /// 7/A SILTY SAND (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, i wet. , Topsoin SANDY SILT (ML) Grayish brown, fine grained sand, medium dense, moist. iTransitional Bedsl CLAY (CL) Gray, N stringers and lenses/layers of fine sand and occasional drop stone, stiff to very stiff, moist. - - 1 5— - 10 10 - 15— 20— End of Test Pit 15— 20-- Method: Caterpillar416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Project: Residential Development Log of Test Pit 8 Project No: 092 -01004 Client: Sara Development Figure: A -8 Location: Tukwila, WA Logged By: ALH Depth to Water Not Observed SUBSURFACE PROFILE SAMPLE Moisture Content ( %) 20 40 60 80 Remarks Depth Symbol Description Sample Number Depth (ft) 0 Ground Surface ll:lilii SILTY SAND (SM) Very dark brown, fine to medium grained sand, loose, wet. goesoi) SANDY SILT (ML) Grayish brown, fine to medium grained sand, concrete and asphalt rubble, broken brick, floor tile, and gravel, soft/loose, moist to very moist. 0111 SANDY SILT Dark brown, fine to medium grained, soft, moist. (Old topsoil) — _ - - - - 10 //� I // LEAN CLAY (CL) Grayish brown, stiff to very stiff, moist to wet. (Transitional Beds) _L_____ 10 15 20 End of Test Pit 15— . 20— Method: Caterpillar 416C Krazan and Associates Excavation Date: 1/23/01 1501 -15th Street NW Contractor: Northwest Excavating Suite 106 Auburn, Washington 98002 Sheet: 1 of 1 Particle Size Distribution Report Project: Sara Development Client: Sara Development, Inc. Project No.: 09201004 Sample No: 7104(1) Location: TP -1 G2 100 90 80 70 60 W 20 10 0 Source of Sample: Date: 2 -9 -01 Elev./Depth: s 5 5= S. A i till i L,. 0 {l H 1i % SAND PASS? (X ■NO) % FINES 100.0 CRS. • CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT 88.8 1 CLAY 0.0 . _ 0.0 22.6 8.5 17.8 46.6 4.5 #4 77.4 #10 68.9 #20 61.5 i I #30 57.8 #40 i 1 i. #60 36.5 #100 19.8 #200 4.5 t • 1-.-+ • ' .. J ✓ J i J • �!. ___,. ,L ,L_ J a. J 1. • . .i .y i ..a. -... • • A..-, ,., t, • .a.. J A a•■ - ` _ - -- 500 100 10 1 01 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm % COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND PASS? (X ■NO) % FINES 100.0 CRS. FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT 88.8 1 CLAY 0.0 . _ 0.0 22.6 8.5 17.8 46.6 4.5 #4 77.4 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC. PERCENT PASS? (X ■NO) .75 in. 100.0 .625 in. 93.1 .5 in. 88.8 .375 in. 85.7 .25 in. 80.6 #4 77.4 #10 68.9 #20 61.5 #30 57.8 #40 51.1 #50 43.1 #60 36.5 #100 19.8 #200 4.5 (no specification Soil Description Light brown, well graded SAND with gravel PL= DSS= 8.97 D30= 0.209 Cu= 7.24 USCS= SW Atterbera Limits, LL= PI= Coefficients D60= 0.717 D50= 0.402 D1 5= 0.124 D1 0= 0.0989 Cc= 0.61 Classification AASHTC. Remarks Sample 7104(1) Location: TP -1 G2 F.M.= 2.16 Plate A -9 LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT PLASTICITY INDEX + N a V Dashed line indicates the approximate for / /. / upper limit boundary natural soils / / / — / / p / / / /. / / / / — / / / / --O G >. — ML r OL MH or OH �11E7 1r _ 10 30 50 70 90 110 UQUID uMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %040 %<0200 USCS • Yellowish gray SILT with sand 33 24 9 Project No. 09201004 Client: Sara Development, Inc. Project: Sara Development • Location: TP -2 G5 Remartts: • Sample 7104(2) location: TP -2 05 Plate A-10 LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT PLASTICITY INDEX N v 8r N w O O C 0 0 Dashed line indicates the approximate / / / upper limit boundary for natural soils / / / //. / / `0 �O G — / / / / / / / / / / ' • / // / / Ot i G/ O • • — , i ML r OL MH or OH / / //e/ 17 / _ 10 30 50 70 90 _110 UQUID UMIT MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %x#40 %x#200 USCS • Yellowish gray fat clay 56 27 29 CH Project No. 09201004 Client: Sara Development, Inc. Project: Sara Development • Location: TP-4 S1 Remarks:. • Sample 7104(3) Location: TP-4 S1 LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Plate„ Earthwork Specifications g XIUN2IddV Appendix B Page B.1 APPENDIX B EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL When the text of the report conflicts with the general specifications in this appendix, the recommendations in the report have precedence. SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans, and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative of Krazan and Associates, Inc., hereinafter known as the Geotechnical engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Geotechnical engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Geotechnical engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Geotechnical engineer, Civil Engineer or project Architect. No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Geotechnical engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Geotechnical engineer at least 2 working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork. The Contractor agrees that he shall assume sole and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this - requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the sole negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to a density not less that 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557, as specified in the technical portion of the Geotechnical Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined by the Geotechnical engineer.. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which the Geotechnical engineer will judge satisfactory completion of work. SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc Appendix B Page B.2 The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or off -site if caused by the Contractor's operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including Court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill. CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and Ishall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the Geotechnical engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet and to such an extent which would permit removal of all roots larger than 1 inch. Tree root removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper 1'/2 feet of the ground surface. Backfill or tree root excavation should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Geotechnical engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas, which are to receive fill materials, shall not be permitted. 092 -01004 Sara Development. doc Appendix B Page B.3 constructing site fills shall be free from vegetation or other deleterious matter as determined by the Geotechnical engineer. PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Geotechnical engineer. Both cut and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical engineer prior to final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Geotechnical engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified. Both cut and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical engineer prior to final acceptance. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Eleven Offices Serving The Western United States 092 -01004 Sara Development.doc ,City of Tuktuila SHORT PLAT NO. L01-033 501'28'091V SE COR. OF " • : -.. -VOL 9; :PAPE • r: ORDINARY 14 IGH TRACT H' FOUND 3/4" „ , IRON PIPE , WATER' MARK OPEN SPACE • ' • -.•' •• •, • , • . . •TUSP 79-26—SS 8004240503 ,915,2b9 77RA CI 19 40s Z- NO1724.541V FOUND REBARL NO.5.53,781- 250.20'. 207rp 193.80' 618.55' 5O178'09 IV 43RD AVENUE S. S0128'0914' 513.29' rt,v- A.19. el 7'0_1 ■•-•1 Q' SL_ \_ _20' BS& - 7707' 44.04' _ C5 4.\ -1 1; t Sfr T3' N88.20 521V-R 10.200.027 L=61.53' D.. 173734" R " .51 150 ta% GRAPHIC SCALE' FOUND CONC. MON.' IN CASE W/NAIL (PER PLAT OF FOSTERV1EW ESTATES) - la SET 5/8" REBAR, LS i1 295J/ CURVE TABLE NO. RADIUS LENGTH DELTA C 1 470.97'. 37.14' 4•31.05' C2 256.48' 36.93' 81 5'02" C3 256.48' 60.29' 13'28'07' C4 256.48' 65.11' 14'32'36" C5 256.48 31.54' 702'47' LINE TABLE LI 109'02'40T 18.53' L2 N05'53.18T 14.73' BUILDING' SETBACKS: 20' FRONT YARD SETBACK TYP/C4L 70' REAR YARD SETBACK TYPICAL 5' SIDE YARD SE7134CK TYPICAL LOT ADDRESSES: MACT "A" - 13441 MACADAM ROAD, TUKWILA, W4 98168 LOT 1 - 13542 43R0 AVE, SOUTH, TUKWILA, WA 98168 LOT 2 - 13532 43R0 .AVE, SOUTH, TUKWILA WA 98168 LOT J - 13522 43170 AVE., SOUTH, TUKWILA WA 98168 LOT 4 - 134.35 MCADAM ROAD, TUKWILA, WA 98168 LOT 5 - 13512 43R0 AVE, SOUTH, TUKWILA WA 98168 LOT 6 - 13425 MAC ADAM ROAD, 1UKWILA WA 98168 LOT 7 - 13434 43F0 AVE., SOUTH, TUKWILA WA 98168 LOT 8 - 13428 43RD AVE, SOUTH, TUKINLA, WA 98168 DET. TRACT - 13405 43RD AVE, SOUTH, TUKIVILA WA 98168 diwz-zrzzm% REVISED 11/14/03 SHORT: PLAT FOR SARA DEVELOPMENT' q2azz=z15 23806, 190TH AVE SE KENT, WA 98042 (425) 432-5930 DATE : : AUGUST. 2000 SCALE 1=60' SHEET 3 OF' 3 City . of Tukwila SHORT .PLAT NO. L01 -033 'DECLARATION • KNOW ALL PEOPLE BY .THESE PRESENTS,: THAT WE THE UNDERSIGNED, OWNER(S) IN FEE SIMPLE OF' THE LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED DO HEREBY: 'MAKE .4 SHORT SUBDMSION THEREOF PURSUANT TO RCW 58.17.060 AND ACLNOWLEDC£ 774AT SAID SUBDMSION SHALL NOT BE FURTHER DIVIDED IN -ANY MANNER -WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS FROM 0.47E OF RECORD, : WITHOUT. 714E RUNG OF A FNAL PUT. THE UNDERSIGNED FURTHER • DECLARE THIS SHORT PLAT TO BE THE GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF 774E SAID SHORT SUBDMSION AND THE SAME IS MADE' W1774 774E FREE - CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH 774E DESIRE OF THE OWNER(S). • KNOW ALL PEOPLE BY 7HESE-PRESENTS THAT "WE "THE UNDERSIGNED,,:.' OWNER(S) IN-FEE SIMPLE" AND LIEN HOLDER(S) OF THE LAND HEREBY .- PLATTED, HEREBY DECLARE DEDICATE AND CONVEY • TO THE CITY OF - - TUKWILA FOR THE USE OF THE PUBLIC FOREVER .ALL STREETS, STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS :LOCATED ON EASEMENTS TRACTS AND . RIGHTS- OF-WAY SHOWN THEREON AND THE USE - THEREOF FOR ALL ":,. -_; PUBLIC PURPOSES. NOT INCONSISTENT 14177 THE USE .THEREOF .FOR PUBLIC ROADWAY AND UTILITY PURPOSES; . ALSO THE RIGHT .70 MAKE ALL - .NECESSARY SLOPES FOR. CUTS AND FILLS- UPON THE LOTS AND - TRACTS -. SHOWN ON THIS PLAT IN ME. ORIGINAL REASONABLE' GRADING OF 5410 : • STREETS SHOWN THEREON. 774E WATER. LINES ARE OWNED BY WATER DISTRICT ..125 -AND THE SEWER UNES ARE. OWNED BY -'VAL VUE:SEWER . DISTRICT - 7H/S.DEDICATION OF THE PROPOSED ROADWAYS AND'U7ILI11ES I5 SUBJECT TO THEIR 'COMPLE170N _BY ,THE DEVELOPER AND THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL BY 714E PUBLIC - WORKS DIRECTOR TWAT THEY HAVE BEEN COMPLETED - 70.CITY STANDARDS. WE AND ALL OF OUR SUCCESSORS ' WANE ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES AGAINST ANY GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY - ARISING FROM. THE CONSTRUCTION AND .MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PUBLIC PROPERTY WITHIN ,THE SUBDMSION. (17.04.060.:, 774£- DETENTION TRACT 15 DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA - UPON.:.. ; RECORDING OF THIS SUBDMSION. ` - . • ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF W£ HAVE SET - OUR ' -HANDS AND SEALS THIS -3 DAY OF �:-•'-' 2004 BEN2A-6 If4LyWNer (Print Name) (Print Nome) (Signature) .._ City' of Tukwila; .Approvals.: CITY TREASURER'S'•:CERTIFICATE- There are no delinquent special assessments, and all . special assessments on any of the - property that is dedicated as streets, alleys or for other -. public use ore paid in full. - _ • : Examine ; approved by the City of Tukwilo un n Deportment • this ' d dov. of i � 4 - .. Finance. Director PLANNING-&:DE- VELOPMENT- 'APPROVAL DEPARTMENT OF: PLANNING 7AND_COMMUNITY EVELOPMENT Examined and. approved this' UO�_ doy of FEBRNMb/ 2004 w1. LEGAL 'DESCRIPTION :: . TAX LOT N0. 261320-0150z THAT PORTION OF 7R4CT 19, FOSTORM- GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING 70 THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS, PAGE(S) 95. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, ;WASHINGTON, LYING. EASTERLY OF F.J. FOLKEND4HL -ROAD (43RD AVENUE 501/771. AS CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE N0. 241626). - BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE 84515 OF BEARINGS. FIDE THIS MAP IS .PER "PUT OF FOSTERVIEW ESTATES, VOL • 194. PG. 64, BETWEEN 714£ TWO FOUND NONS. ALONG 774E CENTERLINE OF.S:137774 STREET AS SHOWN. _ - CROSS REFERENCE•• RECORDING NO. VOL /PAGE - REFERENCE 15. MADE 70 THE FOLLOWING SURVEYS FOR ' SECTION SUBDMSION AND TIE INFORMATION: .774E 'PLAT OF FOSIERWEW ESTATES :VOL. 194, PG. - 64. 714E PLAT OF FOSTORM• GARDEN TRACTS. VOL 9,: PG. 95. :RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 73; PAGE 14. .. - RECORDS OF- KING 'COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Choir. Short Subdivision: Committee • SURVEYORS NOTES: ' 1. FLLD .MEASUREMENTS FOR WS SURVEY PERFORMED WITH'A 2' TOPCON G15 38 INSTRUMENT, BY TRAVERSE ME714005, AND MEET OR EXCEED ACCURACY STANDARDS OF 1:20,000. . 2. ' COPYRIGHT BY CRONES '& ASSOCIATES UITILITY EASF.MF,NTS PROVISIONS: AN EASEMENT /5 HEREBY RESERVED FOR AND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA SEATTLE CITY LIGHT OWEST TELEPHONE COMPANY, . AT &T CABLE TV AND OTHER U111171E5 AND THEIR RE•S,'£CTIVE SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS UNDER AND UPON 774E EXTERIOR: 7EN FEET OF AU LOTS AND TRACTS, PARALLEL 117171 AND ADJOINING EXISTING OR . PROPOSED ACCESS RIGHTS OF WAY AND TRACT.' (8077. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC), AS WELL AS AN EASEMENT WITHIN ALL PRIVATE ROADS, TRACTS AND DRIVES, IN WHICH TO INSTALL. LAY CONSTRUCT, RENEW, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN UNDERGROUND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS WITH NECESSARY. FACILITIES AND 0774ER EQUIPMENT ITN 771E PURPOSE OF SERVING THIS SUBDMSION AND OTHER PROPERTY HEREIN STATED. NO ONES OR WIRES FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRIC CURRENT OR FOR TELEPHONE USE GABLE TELEVISION. FIRE OR POLICE SIGNALS OR FOR OTHER PURPOSES SHAU BE PLACED UPON ANY LOT UNLESS THE SAME SH411 BE UNDERGROUND OR 11,1 CONDUIT' ATTACHED TO A . BUILDING. - LAND SURVEYORS. VERTICAL DATUM: '.BENCHMARK USED FOR VERTICAL DATUM IS THE WEST RIM OF 771E 34N/TARY SEWER MANHOLE LW „SOUTH 134TH STREET NEAR THE 'SOUTHERLY. CORNER. OF TRACT. 6, IN FOSTORM :GARDEN TRACTS VOL 9/95; 54/0 MANHOLE BEING 77ED TO ARMY CORPS -BENCH PPGD 6.834 IN 1985 BY DAVID EVANS-& ASSOC. ELEVATION - 15.09 FEET MEAN SEA LEVEL (MSL) .•(Signature) STATE OF WASHINGTON County of King On this doy personalty appeared before .. me 5 - 0. O� L ka K�o( to me known to be the dividual who excuted the fo oing instrument and ocknowledged that to 'she signed the some as r 5F voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned - therein. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this 30'�' day of '310i ec. r 3. SAk7' 0 Q•P`.••N tihl : Signature:V • Ll 5 : B. cirt 4 Tt'`�gZc on � Q,? OSARY �e�pf eommiss�onedr rb N OA-CA f1 V � .. _ i. Title: r i ltib �:G /rltl dj . My appointment expires. 3 a9 -0 .lo th. 9TFOF./4 SUBDIVISON - NOTES: .• 1.• ALL DOSING STRUCTURES . ON. SliE ARE: 'TO. BE RESTRICTION' ESTRICTIONS: NO LOT .OR PORTION OF A LOT IN THIS PLAT :HALL BE' DMDED AND _. • SOLD OR RESOLD OR OWNERSHIP CHANGED OR TRANSFERRED. WHEREY•• THE OWNERSHIP OR ANY, PORTION OF THIS PLAT 51141.1. BE LESS .THAN ' • THE AREA. REQUIRED FOR THE USE DISTRICT 1N WHICH LOCATED. . - . RECORDING OF 174I5- SUBDMSION - • REMOVED BEFORE 2. ALL BUILDINGS 'DOWNSPOUTS, - FOOTING - DRAINS, AND DRAINS FROM ALL IMPERVIOUS .SURFACES SUCH AS PATIOS AND DRIVEWAY S.SHALL BE : CONNECTED, 70 THE PERMANENT STORM DRAIN OUTLET AS SHOWN .ON. ;- .•<TIC APPROVED - CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ON ALE WITH THE CITY OF • TUKWILA PUBLIC .WORKS DEPARTMENT.. 174IS -PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED. - WITH THE APPUC A77ON FUR <NY- BUILDING. PERMIT. • J. • THE "OWNERSHIP, OPERAi!ON AND MAINTENANCE OF TRACT SHALL BE THE SARA . SHORT • PLAT HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION' 4. THE. DETENTION TRACT I5 DEDICATED 7V. THE CITY OF TUKWILA -.WAH. .714E RECORDING OF 774/5 SUBDMSION. • • • 5. THIS: SUBDMSION SHALL COMPLY •WITH GEO ECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORTS BY. •KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES • INC. DA7ED • FEBRUARY 20, 2007 ••AND AUGUST" 9, 2002.AND SUBSEQUENT GEOTECHNICAL. REPORTS. . • 6.' NO' RUNOFF. /1401.0/0/140 DOWNSPOUTS, 'SHALL BE INF7LTR4TED'INTO .THE GROUND - THROUGH "DRY WELLS' OR PERFORATED INRLTRA770N PIPES AND.TRENCHES. .. . 7.'INDMDU4L HOUSE •FOUND471ONS AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS SHALL' PROVIDE -A SPECIFIC GEOIEC.'INICAL ASSESSMENT, WITH -FINAL DESIGN `STATE OF. WASHINGTON County of King:. - KING: COUNTY TREASURER'S CERTIFICATE 1 certify that all property taxes are paid and thot a deposit has been mode in sufficient amount to pay the taxes for the following year that there are no delinquent special assessments certified to this office for collection;. and that all special assessments on any _ proper?, dedicated - as streets, olleys, of -for- other "public use ore paid Examined and approved . this day of .. - On this day, personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who excuted the foregoing instrument and ocknowledged that he /she signed the some as his /her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of Signature: -Nome of commissioned:' Title:. My appointment expires: RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE filed for, record this day of 20 at M in book of at page at the request of Deputy _ King County Treasurer King County Treasurer 8: INSTALLATION OF RESIDENTIAL •RE SPRINKLER 'SYSTEMS WILL BE • .- REQUIRED -IN .771E HOMES -TO BE BUILT ON LOTS 4.AN0 6, PER :CITY S. 130114 ST ST1 'KING `COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF'-ASSESSMENTS•.-. .Examined and approved this - .day .of - 20 Assessor LOT. AREAS.: TOTAL PLAT: :' 132,794 'S0.': FT. ±. 3.05 ACRES± TRACT A• 42,751 S0. FT.t, 0.98 ACRES± ' -:LOT 1: 26,070 S0. FT.t,..0.60 ACRES± LOT 2: 14,326 SO..PT.±, 0.33 ACRES± LOT .3: 7,481 SO.. F7±, 0.17 ACRES± LOT .4.7,072 SO. /7 ±, 0.16 ACRES±''. LOT 5: 6,530 SO. FT.±. -0.15 ACRES± LOT 6: 6,515 S0. FT ±, 0.15 ACRES± . LOT 7: 7,080 S0.' at, - 0.16 ACRES± "-.LOT 8: 9,003 S0. -FT ±, 0.21 ACRES± DETEN170N. TRACT: 5,967 SO FT.t, 0.14 ACRES± MEAN LOT WIDTHS: LOT -1 - 166.9'. LOT 2 - 56.4' LOT 3 - 56.9' LOT -4 - 58.4' LOT S - 65.8' LOT 6 - 66.1'' LOT .7 - 46.43' LOT .B'- 95.7' Deputy Assessor Account Number • - - -- - - `LAND' 'SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, JAMES 0. CRONES. REGISTERED AS A LAND SURVEYOR BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, - CERTIFY THAT THIS PUT IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL SURVEY.. OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN, CONDUCTED BY ME OR UNDER -MY SUPERVISION; THAT THE DISTANCES COURSES, AND ANGLES ARE SHOWN._ THEREON CORRECTLY; AND THAT MONUMENTS - OTHER- THAN 7I4OSE MONUMENTS APPROVED FOR. SETTING AT A LATER DATE HAVE BEEN SET AND LOT CORNERS STAKED. ON THE GROUNO AS DEPICTED ON THE PLAT. Mgr. Supt. of Records CRONES & ASSOC. LAND SURVEYORS Certificate No 29.5.3.7.:... - Date: ....,: 23806 1907H AVE. ;S.E KENT, WA 98042:(425).432 -5930 L"-FFf F FFFFFFFFFFFFFf DWN. BY MLS /KMB /GR4 CHKD. BY EMW /BGW JOB NO. S4RAD -1A2 SHORT PIAT.DWG SHEET 1. City of ' Tukwila . SHORT PLAT NO :. L01 -033 .. . A PORTION OF TRACT 19, FOSTORIA GARDEN.TR4CTS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS,. PAGE 95, RECORDS. OF KING COUNTY, .WASHINGTON; DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS • BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SA10 TRACT 19; THENCE 50128'091V ALONG 774E AST UNE OF-SAID TRACT. 291.40 FEET .70 THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 19: ... • ..THENCE N88'32'49W ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID TRACT 19, 151.48 FEET; THENCE N0746 59 156.21 FEET; THENCE N00'24 5414;. 91.99- FEET; THENCE. N24'52'09't 93.05 FEET TO 774E SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH .135114 STREET. THENCE S66' 14 24'E ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, 108.47 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. . • A PORTION OF TRACT •IR, FOSTORIA GAROEN•TRACTS 'ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF -. RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PUTS. PAGE 95, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON: DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 5.4/0 .TRACT- 19: THENCE 50128091?: ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT, 291.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 19; THENCE N88'32'49'W ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID TRACT 19, 151.48 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N0746'59"E 156.21 FELT; THENCE N0024 541V• 91.99 FEET, THENCE. S75'57531V,: 54:96 FEET,•. THENCE S5518'551,4 152.89 FEET 70 THE NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN: OF "43RD AVENUE SOUTH AND TO A POINT ON A. NON- TANGENT CURVE. 771E RADIUS OF WHICH. BEARS N56'24 39t THENCE ON A. 256.48 FOOT RADIAL'. -CURVE 70 THE LEFT ALONG 34/D NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 8'15'02' AN-ARC LENGTH OF 36.93 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY,; THENCE S41'50 23"E ALONG SAID - NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN 1.17.78 FEET TO A- POINT OF CURVE• - THENCE ON A 470.97 FOOT RADIAL CURVE 70 THE RIGHT ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN, THROUGH A CEMRAL ANGLE OF 4'31'05' AN ARC LENGTH OF 37.14 FEET' TO THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID - TRACT 19; THENCE S88'32'19 "E ALONG SAID SOUTH UNE. 33.76 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SUBJECT 70. UTILITY AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENTS. . A PORTION OF TRACT 19, : FOSTORIA GARDEN TRACTS 'ACCORDING TO THE PUT THEREOF . RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 (F PLATS PAGE' 95, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY,' WASHINGTON; - DESCRIBED AS- FOLLOWS:.' COMMENC /NG. AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SUD TRACT 19 THENCE N64714'241? ALONG - THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN. Or SOUTH 13577 STREET 108.47 FEET 70 THE POINT OF BEGINNING; . THENCE S24'52'091W, 93.05 FEET, THENCE 37517531V, 54.96 FEET; THENCE 55578'55'W: 152.89 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY MARLIN OF 43RD AVENUE SOUTH AND TO .4 POINT ON A NON-TANG/NT CURVE THE RADIUS OF WHICH BEARS N56"24'39'& THENCE ON A. 256.48 FOOT RADA. CLRVE: TO THE RIGHT ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARG /N, THROUGH .4 CENTRAL NGLE OF 13:1107' AN ARC LENGTH OF 60.29 FEET, THENCE N56'38 06t " :139.87 FEET.•. THENCE N6708'41'?; 139.47 FEET. TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT 70 . UTILITY AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENTS'... - .. REVISED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: SON OF TRACT 19, FOSTORIA GARDE+, TRACTS ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME. 9 OF PUTS, PAGE 95, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON; DESCRIBED AS. FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SA/0 TRACT 19; THENCE N6614'24 W ALONG 774E . SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH•135714 STREET 108.47 FEET.' THENCE S6708'411V, 139.47: FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N32'05'091V, 53.01 FEET THENCE 560'2456'W 118.55 FEET 70 . " THE EASTERLY MARGIN• OF 4JRD AVENUE; SOUTH AND 70 A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE THE • RADIUS OF WHICH BEARS N8475'22Z THENCE ON .A 256.48:FOOT RADIAL CURVE 70 THE LEFT ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGIN, THROUGH•A CENTRAL' ANGLE OF 14'3236' AN ARC LENGTH ; OF 65.11 FEET,•, THENCE N56'38'06t 139.87 FEET ;TO -THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT- TO . UTIUIY•AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENTS • - . A PORTION OF TRACT. 19, FOSTORIA CARDEN 7R4C7S.ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PUTS PAGE 95, RECORDS OF KING. COUNTY, WASHINGTON;;:. DESCRIBED AS: -. FOLLOWS: . - - . • COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST. CORNER • OF SAID TRACT 19; THENCE N66'14 241V ALONG THE • _ SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH 135-01 STREET, 108.47 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE 567'08'41X 139.47 FEET, THENCE 102'05'09'g 53.01 FEET; THENCE N60'26 49'E. 106.70 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH' 7357H:S7REET,• _THENCE 545'42'591: ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, 39.80 FEET; THENCE S667424"E ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN 38.65 FEET 10 THE POINT OF BEGINNING SUBJECT TO U71LITY AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENTS:- A PORTION OF TRACT 19, FOSTORIA GARDEN TRACTS ACCORDING 10 THE PLAT THEREOF' RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF PLATS. PAGE 95, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY,'. WASHINGTON ; ;. DESCRIBED A5.. COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER'OF SAID TRACT 19; THENCE N661424'W,ALONG'17-IE•• SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH 135774 STREET, 108.47 FEET; THENCE 56708'411 139.47 FEET; . THENCE N32'05'091V, 53.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE S60'24'561V• 1Ia55 FEET ' TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 43RD AVENUE;. SOUTH' AND 70 A•PO /NT ON-A NON - TANGENT CURVE ' THE RADIUS OF WHICH BEARS N847522'E THENCE ON''A: 256.48 FOOT RADIAL CURVE TO' THE _ = RIGHT ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY MARGN,. THROUGH. A "CENTRAL ANGLE OF 702'47' AN ARC • 'LENGTH ; OF 31.54 FEET 70•A POINT OF TANGENCY; ' THENCE N01'28'09"E ALONG THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF SAID 43RD AVENUE SOUTH. 44.04 FEET: THENCE N60' 14' 19Z ` 65.98. FEET;; THENCE 532'05'09-E 65.98 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT 70 .4 . PRIVATE SERVICE EASEMENT A PORTION OF TRACT 19, FOSTORL4 GARDEN ;TRACTS ACCORDING TO THE PUT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 0/' PLATS, PAGE 95,- RECORDS. OF.-KINC COUNTY, WASHINGTON ;.DESCR /BED-AS COMMENCING AT. THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID. TRACT 19;' THENCE N66' 14 241V ALONG 7745 . • SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH 135TH' STREET, 147.12 FEET, THENCE. N45'42'591? ALONG. SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, 39.80 FEET 70 THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTINUING THENCE N4S42591W ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MAARGIN, 68.97 FEET; THENCE S6014'191V' 90.41 FEET; THENCE 332'05'09X; 65.98 FEET; THENCE N60•26.49Z• 106.70 FEET 70 THE POINT OF BEGINNING. - SUBJECT TO UTILITY AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAY EASEMENTS.' RECORDING NO. VOL. /PAGE PORTION: OF 5.E -_1 /4. of NI. /4, S._15 _ T._23N R._4E__W.M: LOLL• 'A• PORTION"OF 1RACT.19, FOSTORIA GARDEN" 7RACTS ACCORDING" TO THE PLAT- THEREOF. RECORDED-IN . • VOLUME 9 OF- PLATS PAGE 99 RECORDS OF KING. COUNTY, WASHINGTON; DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS _ COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 5410 •TRACT. 19; THENCE N66'74'24'W ALONG THE _ • SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTH 135TH STREET, - 147.12 FEET THENCE N4542591Y ALONG SAID 'SOUTHERLY MARGIN, 108.77 FEET 70.774E POINT OF BEGINNING ;; 'CONTINUING THENCE N4542 59'W ALONG - 54D: SOUTHERLY MARGIN. 28.78 FELT;' THENCE 57745'221A; 126.84 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF• 43RD AVENUE:" SOUTH; THENCE 50128'091V ALONG SUD EASTERLY'AMR(,IN, -77.01 MT; THENCE . , • N60'l4'19Z 168.80. FEET 70 THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SUBJECT 10 A DRAINAGE EASEMENT • .APORI/ON OF TRACT i9,' FOSTORIA GARDEN TRACTS ACCORDING TO•1HE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 9 OF .PLATS, PAGE 95. RECORDS OF KING• COUNTY, WASHINGTON: DESCRIBED 'AS FOLLOWS: . - COMMENCING AT 774E NORTHEAST CORNER -OF SAID TRACT 19; THENCE N66'14'24"A' ALONG THE . SOUTHERLY•M4RGIN'OF SOUTH 135TH - STREET, 147.12 FEET; THENCE N45'42'591V ALONG. SAID • - SOUTHERLY. MARGIN: 137.55 137.55 FEET TO 771E POINT OF BEGINNING.; THENCE 577'45'22'W. 126.84' FEET 70 THE EASTERLY. MARGIN OF 4312D AVENUE, SOUTH; THENCE N0r28'09T ALONG SAID EASTERLY MIARGIN,. • 142.04 FEET; ,THENCE N89'02'40'E.18.53 FEET TO' 7115 WESTERLY,•MARCN4•OF SOUTH •135TH STREET;;.'. THENCE 505'S3'na'W ALONG. SUD WESTERLY MARGIN.- 14:73- FEET: THENCE 545'42'59 -E ALONG -THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID SOL1774- 135TH' STREET 144.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.: SUBJECT . 70• A' PRIVATE DRIVEAAY EASEMENT. • " • ' Pf7TNOON TRACT (PUBLIC);:.. .: .. - . :A PORTION'.OF TRACT 19, FOSTORIA GARDEN TRACTS ACCORDING 70 THE. PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN:" • VOLUME 9 OF PLATS,. PAGE 95, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; . DESCRIBED AS-FOLLOWS:. " COMMENCING: AT THE NORTHEAST. CORNER OF SUD 'TRACT 19: THENCE N66.14 2414' ALONG THE. .SOUTHERLY. MARGIN OF SOUTH 135774 STREET .147.12 PEER, THENCE "N45'42'591? ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, 281.85. FEET; THENCE N05'53'18 " .ALONG SAID WESTERLY MARGIN,' 14.73 FEET 70 THE POINT OF BEGINNING; • CONTIN/NG THENCE NOS-53'18T ALONG-SAID EASTERLY MARGIN, 193.80 FEET • ' .7 0, THE .SOUTHWESTERLY MMARG /N, OF 42ND AVENUE • SOUTH:- THENCE N2717'271,1 ALONG. SAID - • ' • SOUTHWESTERLY MARGIN, 65.40-FEET 1O•THE.EASTERLY MARGIN OF 43RD AVENUE SOUTH ;.THENCE '50178'09'W ALONG. 5410 EASTERLY MARGIN'.:250.20.FEET,• THENCE N89'02401~•.18.53- FEET TO THE . POINT OF- BEGINNING. .. EASEMENT UNE TABLE ®® BEARING !ME•lil S61'25'05'W 11111=L1 r*r1 S22.07'38'E MINI__ ]Gil N66•02'17'E ilEIIII S23'57'43'E iii1I -1 A 566'02'17'W MIIIIIIII1rIIMIIP I N22•07'38'W ENMEREIMME tI S55'54'59'W ■E[7i1 N55'54'59'E MEINER1A.i N21'49'58'W ■neMIKM N60•26'49'E !♦Ail N • S21.49'SB'E .Fa N53'57'16'E IIIMIllfl S36-02'44'E fl( i1 553'57'16'W SEMPWWI S21'49'58'E MI=ICj I1 "" N61.25'05'E NIMMii7 I1 528.34'55'E IN=IWF7 7I SO3'25'08'W 11■11VIIIII 1T'_ S14•38'42'E �Zd RF1 S77'45'22'W X31 1RN • N14.38'42'W N01'28'09'E II 502'13'05'W � ZlMM -RYa S86.34'52'E IIMIIIIIMINIIIILIM S36.31'51'W MMENWIIIIIIMEM N51'08'18'W IMME1F4MENTBWI N36'31'51'E III *MiI 545'42'59'E ■I4I i 7 N60•26'49•E IIIN 6141 S77'45'22'W Ilii S45'42'59'E Fl 4.N 562'55'36'W S. . DET.sNTIONTRACT (PUBLIC)' SUBDIVISION EASEMENT DETAIL: • Orift) 24' WIDE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT yt1 VIO L27 TRACT °A OPEN SPACE. 10' DRAINAGE EASEMENT ' eJO LA. . LOT 1 • 13542 X LOT 8. . H L18 LI- LZ� L22 ' 43RD AVENUE S. 24' WIDE DRIVEWAY EASEMENT 70' PRIVATE - EASEMENT . FOR SERVICE - ,: TO LOT 6 1,' 24' WIDE DRIVEWAY 70' PRIVATE' EASEMENT FOR _ SERVICE TO LOT 4 CRONES & ASSOC. LAND' SURVEYORS GRAPHIC SCALE 120. ( IN FEET ) .. 1- inch = 60 ft -. 23806 790TH AVE 'SE. KENT, WA 98042'(425) 432 -5930 • REVISED 1/26/04 :•.SHORT.: PLAT. FOR SARA' DEVELOPMENT DWN. BY MLS /KMB /GRA ' CHKD: BY: EMW /BGW " DATE. AUGUST, 2000 SCALE 1_60' O JOB . NO. SARAD -1A2 SHORT PLAT..DWG SHEET 2.. OF