HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E01-011 - FOSTER THOMAS - RYAN WAY 14-LOT SUBDIVISIONThis record contains information which is exempt from public disclosure
pursuant to the Washington State Public Records Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW
as identified on the Digital Records Exemption Log shown below.
E01 -011
Foster / Ryan Way 14 -Lot Subdivision
South 107th Street
RECORDS DIGITAL D- ) EXEMPTION LOG
THE ABOVE MENTIONED PERMIT FILE INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING REDACTED INFORMATION
F,age # Code
Exemption � � �� Brief Explsnatoty Description, Statute /Rule
The Privacy Act of 1974 evinces Congress'
intent that social security numbers are a private
concern. As such, individuals' social security
Personal Information —
numbers are redacted to protect those
Social Security Numbers
individuals' privacy pursuant to 5 U.S.C. sec.
5 U.S.C. sec.
DR1
Generally — 5 U.S.C. sec.
552(a), and are also exempt from disclosure
552(a); RCW
552(a); RCW
under section 42.56.070(1) of the Washington
42.56.070(1)
42.56.070(1)
State Public Records Act, which exempts under
the PRA records or information exempt or
prohibited from disclosure under any other
statute.
Redactions contain Credit card numbers, debit
card numbers, electronic check numbers, credit
Personal Information —
expiration dates, or bank or other financial
RCW
4
DR2
Financial Information —
account numbers, which are exempt from
42.56.230(5)
RCW 42.56.230(4 5)
disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56.230(5),
except when disclosure is expressly required by
or governed by other law.
CONTAI S
FILES T AT
E
1
E
E ACTION
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
SUBDIVIDE PROPERTY
INTO 14 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL SITES
4737 S. 107T" ST.
E01 -011
•
City of Tukwila
•
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
September 19, 2001
C. Thomas Foster
6450 Southcenter Boulevard #106
Seattle, Washington 98188
RE: Refund of Application Fees
Application for Subdivision Preliminary Plat (L01 -036)
Application for SEPA Determination (E01 -011)
Ryan Way Subdivision
4737 South 107th, Tukwila
Dear Mr. Foster:
We are enclosing a check in the amount of $1,450.00 which represents a partial refund of your application
fees. The refund is approximately 2 /3rd's of the original $2,175.00 you paid in application fees.
Sincerely,
Deborah Ritter
Associate Planner
cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager
LAND STYLE &l Nu.,
CITY OF TUKWILA
TREASURER'S CHECK
PH 206 - 433 -1800
6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD
TUKWILA, WA 98188
a j to tlir Sti u
""..' Yckr of
4^ u .1,i; (i,octi, -r a I-I Li.i I (.1'Lti2ci
embank.
1-800 -673 -3555
usbank.com
19- 10/1250 3322
Date
1$ 1 1 4 —
� 1 t)/ i GZ
Dollars f, ^°
CITY OF TUKWILA
F1rL 01-03(0 d -- -- -- - „2, ZVL -- -- _- -- -m
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665
•
City of Tukwiia
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Laurie Anderson
FROM: Jack Pace
DATE: September 11, 2001
RE: Refund of Application Fees
Ryan Way 14 -Lot Subdivision
4737 South 107th
L01 -036 (Subdivision)
E01 -011 (SEPA)
ASO Please refund $1,43 to the applicant. This represents a refund of 2 /3rd of the total
application fees of $2,175 ($1,850 for the Subdivision application and $325 for the
SEPA application). The applications expired without having been deemed complete.
One -third of the fees ($739.50) will be retained by the City of Tukwila to cover our work
on the file to -date.
The check should be payable to C. Thomas Foster. We have attached a copy of the
respective check receipts for your reference.
cc: Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner
n300 Souncc Boulevard. Suite - 100 • Tukwila, Washington Q8188 • Phone: 200-431 -3n70 • Fax: 200-- /31 -30o
1
1
•
City of Tukwila
•
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of f Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
September 11, 2001
C. Thomas Foster
6450 Southcenter Boulevard #106
Seattle, Washington 98188
VIA FAX 206 - 244 -1438
RE: Application for Subdivision Preliminary Plat (L01 -036)
Application for SEPA Determination (E01 -011)
Ryan Way Subdivision
4737 South 107th, Tukwila
Dear Mr. Foster:
Per our May 10th and August 14th letters to you, the above - referenced applications expired on August 22nd.
We have reviewed your August 21st letter requesting an extension of that expiration date. Per TMC
18.104.070(E), in order to obtain an extension of that expiration date you must clearly demonstrate that the
delay was due to circumstances beyond your control (such as the need for seasonal wetland data) or
unusual circumstances not typically faced by other applicants, and that a good faith effort was made to
provide the requested materials.
To our knowledge, no written or verbal communication regarding the status of the SEPA or Subdivision
applications was ever received from your or your agents between May 10th and August 21st. The sewer
connection work you describe is not related the requirements of the Subdivision or SEPA applications in
question.
Accordingly, your request for an extension has been denied and the above - referenced files have been
closed. We are currently processing a partial refund of your application fees in the amount of $1,435.50.
This refund (which represents 2 /3rds of the original $2,175.00), will be issued to you under separate cover
within the next 7 to 10 days.
If you wish to proceed with your proposal for a 12 -lot subdivision you will be required to re -apply for a SEPA
Determination and a Subdivision Preliminary Plat. We have enclosed application packets for your reference.
If you choose to reapply, you must re- submit all of the required checklist items in the quantities specified
(including 100% of the required application fees). Your proposal will also require an application to the Public
Works Department for the vacation of a portion of South 107th Street.
Sincerely,
14. k (AC—
Deborah Ritter
Associate Planner
cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager
Jill Mosqueda, Associate Engineer
n ;00 Sou;hr... .-: ,uitt. ;Id..Suire -100 • Tukwila, Washington 03188 • Phone: 20n --131 3h70 • Fix: 20o-43I-36o5
• •
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWILA
4J292i
PERMIT CENTER
August 21, 2001
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Attn. Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner
RE: Extension for Application for Subdivision Preliminary Plat (LO1 -036)
And Application for SEPA Determination (E01 -011), Ryan Way Subdivision.
To Whom It May Concern:
Per TMC 18.104.070(E), we request a 30 -45 day extension to submit the items
required completing our applications. Our engineers are currently working on all of
the requirements included in your letter dated May 22, 2001. However, we would
like to request the forms indicated that were attached but were not received in your
correspondence i.e. SEPA Application form, Endangered Species Act Screening
Checklist, and Growth Management Act information.
The delay is due to the unusual circumstances encountered in the sewer extension
across Ryan Way, which will serve the subject property in addition to the property
south of 47th Ave. South. The additional time required by our engineers to design
several different crossings, consumed their available time for this project. The
situation was unusual and very complicated but will be completed by the August 27,
2001. The original completion date was scheduled date was June 12, 2001.
We will be able to complete items required by the end of September 2001. Please
accept this request for an extension. If there are any questions, please call Thomas
Foster at 206 - 244 -0122. Thank you for your consideration to this matter.
Sincerely,
C. Thomas Foster
Managing Partner
August 14, 2001
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
C. Thomas Foster
6450 Southcenter Boulevard #106
Seattle, Washington 98188
RE: August 22, 2001 Expiration Date
Application for Subdivision Preliminary Plat (L01 -036)
Application for SEPA Determination (E01 -011)
Ryan Way Subdivision
4737 South 107th, Tukwila
Dear Mr. Foster:
Per our May 22, 2001 letter to you, your Subdivision and SEPA applications have been deemed to be
incomplete. If we do not receive all of the required items listed in that letter on or before August 22, 2001,
your Subdivision and SEPA applications will expire.
Per TMC 18.104.070(E), the Department of Community Development may extend this August 22, 2001
cancellation date up to 120 additional days (i.e., no later than December 22, 2001) if the applicant submits a
written request for an extension prior to this cancellation. However, the applicant's request must dearly
demonstrate that the delay is due to circumstances beyond the applicant's control (such as the need for
seasonal wetland data) or unusual circumstances not typically faced by other applicants, and that a good
faith effort has been made to provide the requested materials.
Sincerely,
Deborah Ritter
Associate Planner
cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager
6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
May 22, 2001
•
City of Tukwila
•
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
C. Thomas Foster
6450 Southcenter Boulevard #106
Seattle, Washington 98188
Re: Ryan Way Subdivision
at 4737 South 107th
L01 -036 (Subdivision Preliminary Plat)
E01 -011 (SEPA Determination)
Dear Mr. Foster:
We have received and reviewed your documentation for the above - referenced applications,
submitted to us on May 11, 2001. We have the following comments.
Your Subdivision Preliminary Plat and SEPA Determination applications have been found to be
incomplete. In order to continue processing your applications there are additional items that
must be submitted to the Department of Community Development. These items are listed
below. We are attaching a copy of Title 17, Subdivisions and Plats for your reference.
SEPA Application
1. Completed Application form (form attached).
2. Affidavit of Ownership signed by all property owners (forms attached). Per the title
report, title was vested (as of February 12, 2001) as follows:
a. Georgia Moore - Foster as Trustee of the Georgia Moore - Foster Revocable Trust
dated May 13, 1998, as to an undivided 25% interest.
b. C. Thomas Foster and Mary C. Foster, husband and wife and Thomas W.
Holliday and Kathleen M. F. Holliday, husband and wife, as to the remainder.
3. Completed Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist (form attached).
4. Assessor's map showing the 500 foot public notice area (as measured from all property
boundaries). The notice area was not shown on the map you submitted.
5. One additional set of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or
businesses) within 500 feet of the subdivision. Although you have submitted two sets to
date, three sets are required to satisfy notice provisions per TMC 17.14.020(B)(9).
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665
C. Thomas Foster
May 22, 2001
Page 2
• •
6. Verification that all mailing labels sets include all property owners of record, residents
and businesses within the 500 foot public notice area referenced above. If this is not the
case, please provide three correct sets of labels. Verification should include parcel
numbers for all property owners of record for cross - referencing to the Assessor's map.
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application
7. Completed Growth Management Act information (see form attached).
8. You have provided a title report from First American Title Insurance Company, Order No.
517219 -1, dated February 12, 2001. The title report must be dated within 45 days of
your May 11, 2001 application filing date (i.e., no later than March 28, 2001). Please
provide an update or supplemental to this title report.
9. Six copies of a survey, prepared to the standards identified in TMC 17.04.060 as follows:
a. The name of the plat, City of Tukwila file number, graphic scale and north arrow.
b. Existing features such as rivers, streets, railroads and structures.
c. The lines and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways, parks,
playgrounds, and easements adjacent to the subdivision, including municipal
boundaries, township lines and section lines.
d. In the even the plat constitutes a replat, the lots, blocks, streets, etc., of the
previous plat shall be shown by dotted lines in their proper positions in relation to
the new arrangement of the plat, the new plat being shown in solid lines so as to
avoid ambiguity.
e. Legal description of the subdivision boundaries.
f. A complete survey of the section or sections in which the plat or replat is located,
if necessary, including:
(i) All stakes, monuments or other evidence found on the ground and used
to determine the boundaries of the subdivision. Location and monuments
found or reset with respect to any established centerline of streets
adjacent to or within the proposed subdivision. All other monuments
found or established in making the survey of this subdivision or required
to be installed.
(ii) City or County boundary lines when crossing or adjacent to the
subdivision.
C. Thomas Foster
May 22, 2001
Page 3
g.
• •
(iii) The location and width of streets and easements intersecting the
boundary of the tract.
(iv) Tract, block and lot boundary lines and street rights -of -way and
centerlines, with dimensions, bearings, radii, arcs and central angles,
points of curvature and tangent bearings. Tract boundaries, lot
boundaries and street bearings shall be shown to the nearest second with
basis of bearings. All distances shall be shown to the nearest one -
hundredth foot.
(v) The width and location of existing and proposed easements and rights -of-
way.
Lot and block numbers beginning with the number one (1) and number
consecutively without omission or duplication.
h. Tracts to be dedicated to any public or private purpose shall be distinguished
from lots intended for general development with notes stating their purpose and
any limitations.
The plat shall contain the following statements:
(i)
A statement to be signed by the Public Works Director approving the
survey data, the layout of the streets, alleys and other rights -of -way,
design of bridges, sewage and water systems, drainage systems and
other structures.
(ii) A certificate bearing the printed names of all persons having an interest in
the subdivided land, signed by the persons and acknowledged by them
before a notary public, consenting to the subdivision of the land and
reciting a dedication by them of all land shown on the plat to be dedicated
for public uses, and a waiver by them and their successors of aH claims
for damages against any governmental authority arising from the
construction and maintenance of public facilities and public property
within the subdivision.
(iii) A certificate with the seal of and signature of the surveyor responsible for
the survey and final plat with the following statement:
"I, , registered as a land surveyor for the State of
Washington, certify that this plat 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 those monuments approved for setting at a later
date, have been set and lot corners staked on the ground as depicted on
the plat."
C. Thomas Foster
May 22, 2001
Page 4
• •
(iv) Certification from the King County Treasurer that all taxes and
assessments for which the property may be liable have been duly paid,
satisfied or discharged as of the date of certification.
(v) Certification of examination and approval by the County Assessor.
(vi) Recording Certificate for completion by the King County Department of
Records and Elections.
(vii) City of Tukwila Finance Director Certificate that states there are no
delinquent special assessments, and that all special assessments on any
of the property that is dedicated as streets, alleys or for other public use
are paid in full at the date of certification.
(viii) Certification by the Public Works Director that the subdivider has
complied with one of the following:
(a) All improvements have been installed in accordance with the
requirements of this title and with the preliminary plat approval,
and that original and reproducible mylar or electronic records in a
format approved by Public Works and meeting current Public
Works drawing standards for road, utility and drainage
construction plans certified by the designing engineer as being "as
constructed" have been submitted for city records.
(b) An agreement and bond or other financial security have been
executed in accordance with TMC 17.24.030 sufficient to assure
completion of requirement improvements and construction plans.
(ix) Certificate of dedication pursuant to TMC 17.04.050(C).
(x) A certificate of approval to be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk.
10. Six copies of the site plan, modified to include the following per TMC 17.14.020(B)(7):
a. The owners of the adjacent land and the names of any adjacent subdivisions.
b. Lines marking the boundaries of the existing lots. Any existing lot to be
eliminated should be a dashed line and so noted.
c. A retention /removal plan for the preservation of all significant trees and
vegetation located on slopes 20% or greater.
d. Expected location of new buildings, their driveways and finished floor elevations.
11. A high quality 8 -1/2" x 11" reduction of the survey and of each of the revised plan
sheets.
C. Thomas Foster
May 22, 2001
Page 5
• •
12. A written discussion of project consistency with the decision criteria (see form attached).
Additional Comments
As a courtesy we are providing you with additional information. Although this list is not
exhaustive and a response is not immediately required, you may wish to begin assembling the
requested information.
13. Your proposal requires the vacation of a portion of South 107th Street. City Council
approval will be required for both the street vacation and preliminary approval of your
subdivision. Accordingly, we will recommend that the hearings for both requests be
scheduled for the same date. A street vacation application should be submitted to the
Public Works Department as soon as possible (see attached). If you should have any
questions regarding the street vacation process, please contact Jill Mosqueda,
Associate Engineer at 206 - 433 - 0179.
14. Once you have been notified that your SEPA and Preliminary Plat applications are
deemed complete, you will be required to install a notice board within -14 days. The
board must be placed at a location on the property that will allow people to safely access
the posted information. Sign size and placement requirements are provided on the
attached Public Notice Materials sheets.
Items 1 through 12 above are to be submitted at one time. Upon receipt of these items, we will
continue to review your application to determine if it can be deemed "complete ". If the
application is complete, the City will be then be able to commence technical review. However,
the application will expire if we do not receive the requested items within 90 days of this letter's
date (August 22, 2001), unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.104.070(E) of the
Tukwila Municipal Code. If you should have any questions, please contact me at 206 - 431 -3663.
Sincerely,
Dirct_k J'C-tr
Deborah Ritter
Associate Planner
Enclosures
.•.,.^,.^ ^. ,,A x** Agx'k x: r**** k* kN**** *k* * ** ***** *kk*** ***-* ***:M+
C1 !.Y OF f 1JKt l L A. WA •.
k• cr. *k **k * *'*kkk *'kk * *k *'kkk X': iskk. k. kk*'***k' k*: kkk *x'k'k''kkA''.ik *A *'k'kM *.ka
• 1•RANSMT1 Number•: R0100b 0 Amount.: J .E50.00 01., /11!01 11 : -;
J- 'aymc:nt, Method _- C;HF..C;H Notatiion: - II- I�JF•iAS FOSTE.R brit.: NU,
1vpe: F'- SUI-JP St BP .1 \Jl S 1 ON - FPf:F1
Pe r•m i t. No
PC: reel No: ; �,u, -0100
Add re : 47 j , 107 J.i
1_0(„3L or,: 5f- 3/;' /0'i.
i 1 ':1 1 1- . ,_:.: ; t_-:,..:..
-
rIr i.. i'a m, r;C. .1 , l . J\�1 I t.)1...;.1 i :,r. I pm t. .. 1 , .:'..;i' -;;r'
I3:? I :?r-ic.: :: 0O
k v k k 4 t'C t• * t :k . k 1. a �- t k r 4 c k a k .t k't *** 4 4 r t x .k t 4 •4 * .4 k i a t t * .t .t t .t a X t t k K a 4 r t
ACC; 00 P. Cod L-.! I )u
r iF,s_. ic;i, Amc;urh..
000/ _34S .810 / O N 1 NG/ ISI.J80.1 V I S.10f‘i 1,8..--)0,
kk***khkkkkkkk?Ork*k*kkk******kk******k**k**k*******kk*******kk*
CI" Y OF1LJKW2L.A. WA TRANSMIi
k ********1, A **** x **lc* kk -****** k*** k** kk *1( k kW* kkkkkk**A*
RANS111 1 Nwinber: W01 006 Amount, 37.5.00 0';; ; 11 /01 11: 4
Payment 14,2 thc:cl: .-;CHECK
- • • • • _ - • . • _ - • • • • • -
Notation: IM0NA.2: ) nit : NG
Verm1 t Ho: S)Ajf: E»1\/LP PPcil CI
Parce 1 No: 00
iL Add S /
:
I 1 :
rbi .32t.; . Of.
Codo r i i on
000/345.331
SEP4
BAIMA & HOLMBERG INC.
LEVEL 1 DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
FOR
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
April 12, 2001
Baima & Holmberg Job No. 1517 -003
Prepared For:
R.A.L. Development
6450 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 106
Seattle, WA 98188
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWri n
MAY 1 1 2001
PERMIT CENTER
100 FRONT STREET SOUTH • ISSAQUAH • WASHINGTON • 98027 -3817 • (425) 392 -0250 • (425) 391 -3055
(
SA
•
1I-UNIANtLIt
oi
,..
Y..) ▪
Q-
Q
11.if.
—
I....L) Y ..0 ....-
8600
- •--
›m cz
cc
pi S t.--. 8: Ix) --"---i' SEWAR2D--')PARK
2 ,..
..„
c,
';:-"7
• S Ay •
'-; ill° r 1 nvorma T1:, 3 ',%,,,., CO
s AY litiia --
4z.• , ! sgsly qt;,!>'‘-- - '-'' 6----
m.:-......:5,-.... I .i le)>-,
LLJ
.1,1\1
s AV H19/
S AY 113N21.07L
41,4
17,1 s :,-,,r7..->.--7---61)."------\T-s‘i-C.S.1
0 - ,.---,,
,,',
`....i. `Z7 _ ...) •
_ c\J
S Y
Ts -fr
... 4...3
.< In •
Id ONZI,
S AV
(-3 i.. +
ci-,)--1..r 0..1
..r
,,, * > 41:::: Ht, sivs9s c5,zjii,_ _7 _ 9 0 ,s, id Hiot
1.. •
10- -
S ii-lij,z9 §1t-.; "189-7i s) °-
, r ---- Id 1.-sTi
I• ' -c\i_______ s Ay 1.-1.1:11:14 ld 1S-116-Hr: c;
.-- .1.7.s...,
: 0 i Il tri): :0:0 AY Y ::99 17.'irj°i'e I-: ----\"";11-2\'''' : \''.- : 1 1:--‘::
4P'4'
/ .,■_"\: ,
c\°,,-
z.ziS___s .619E_Av__:, AV "1.14 Ell'L', 9 ___ _:\'9'.1,11r:s2.--"'
oozoi AV ..
—01111-9 4'2E1
t-,---___L______
0:9 ..,, ( " J.-
AV 0,
-a-k>-- ./‘'..1S I AV
---1,Ai VIII- L:41.11:1.E:l'z'69sS-</ ul):;11
s hy_...2.. \
AY H109 8
. S c>2.- (\I' Sil AV _r:Hi
AY 2 H1L:
...11 cl. •-±' W
LLI
CC I V)
(.7
=
=
S id-Avioni v") L--. ---S -
AV , c:
v)I-MICHS117S 1,70-1-A-;7-c--.-
HISS 0o6
1
▪ 1 s------1-5'Av ions C5-
7 co
:,,; _,!:,;,
0000! V) ;-:) 00i:0 1 c::! v) fil '-
• , 1..-f v) /
ISIS i u-,
__'..-.; _____
v),
V) rl I^ S AV
— i H10 S
1--
S AV 1116 VI • leff Lij
CC
Hill! – c)
–
.--L).... =1 006/ - 1 AV I HILI7 '7:: -1-..- =
,
c...u.,,- c) c) =
-a! 1 >-- u_I
. • S AV •___......._._._. __,---
--------•- --- L.ILIL____.1 , 0 H1917
' H19t71 '.....„.,!,.....I 1 S AV „- -7-- •
tni , V)
, --, • 41_, ,_ LAv H1SV ___3
;,,,,). v).
i 1 -- -5 I
v)
- 0 • '-' vi i i ld Hi -14 !
. ,-.., . IL/11
'•
00911
AV KA;,-,H1139
5'
S AV HIL9
S AV H199
H1.4
4-
AV I -Kit7-97.
(r)
AV-ONZ9-
H1-1-S0I99 (6S1.5S: AY H1d-0\911 c?) V)
(NJ
- v--I
S711 mi AV
S AY HRS.-
S V-75(179N
,11
- HISS
`k-'1 1
N ,
AV s WY' S
; DR
"' !is-
s I:, _AAR-To t...-_-6
--1....1T
A .
- A? . . . S Av Hig,
,-^1 L., ..Q.• ,,,
Mi9P -.‘-' ' t''' ' ( . L._ .1 ■ Pk,
Si(sC 1 ,11,7:,'• `,.,2,k4.-9-
/
kly
Ay6inA A), HIST',
i
'
MAR 1AYT"ER-1(auz7G7L1R—EMPIRE.YI S)
v)
cn :
41
.:14,- 11.7pts
5_ 1 S Ay., H11717
AY OM
Z 1
I
S_ AY < - • (WO Z r._
J. -■'i ---w,_'[
- .-1--
--1 L., ‘`Z1.- ••
,.-
•-
JJ
in r:. otz ii16r d
S ,
S
co
c>
AV
S AY 14165-
S H160 S I
ID!")
I-
S AY
I ;‘,.-1AV Hilt;
HILO
tr)
S AV H19V
S
AY 14105S
I-
5 AV H161, S
..... ■
1 , _ . . . :kit.% 4: k S AY
' S AV °NZ'? s' 4 S AV .1.511, ■,.;
I--
I AV
• ,
5
ld
, Vri-1
,■7 0
V.-
st)
...-
.-■
.1! s
\
.- 1--- ;
5 AY HAP FAY
s .R\ .=, I- A 1vY HH119L vs, s
s AY,-b....Li: sfH la tiVEV.14:vsy
' S AV 0 NZ
o■-•".(AVI:1Y.L.'1' •
....
AV
• •
Project Overview
This project involves the development of four parcels totaling 2.79 acres into 14 single -
family residences. The site is located south of the intersection between S 107th Street
and Ryan Way in the NE IA of SE 1/4 of Section 3 of Township 23 North, Range 4 East.
The overall topography of the site slopes to the west, or southwest, with the grade
varying from around 1% to approximately 38 %. The existing ground cover consists of
hard packed soil and gravel on the flat area in the west side of the site and the east side of
the site where the slopes are steeper consist of mainly pasture and grass around the
existing house.
Upstream Tributary Area
Approximately, 4 acres of upstream area drains onto the site from the adjacent residential
lots to the east. Most of the upstream runoff enters a 10" concrete culvert and bypasses .
the site. There are no apparent drainage problems associated with these upstream flows.
Level 1 Downstream Drainage Analysis
In the course of storm events the runoff sheet flows southwest across the site into the
existing ditch located 120' east of the southwest property corner (A). From this point the
runoff flows south approximately 200' via ditch and turns west and flows west
approximately 140'. Approximately 300' south of the southwest corner of the subject
property the runoff enters a 12" CMP pipe (B) and flows across 47th Ave. South into a
manhole located approximately 50' west on the west side of 47th Ave. South (C). From
this point the runoff flows approximately 150' and directly discharges into the stream
(D). The runoff flows uninterrupted via stream more than 1/4 mile downstream from the
project site. In walking the site I didn't witness any downstream drainage problems.
Summary
The proposed storm system consists of conveying runoff from the proposed road,
driveways, and roofs into a water quality vault and detention tank. The facilities will be
designed per the 1998 K.C.S.W.D.M. The runoff will discharge from the vault into the
existing ditch located approximately 120' east of the southwest property corner.
Upstream runoff will bypass the vault by entering a 6" perforated pipe and birdcage
placed along the east property line and discharge into the existing ditch located
approximately 120' east of the southwest property corner.
/55.05
a /0.0.9
/55.03
TA X! ASSESS D ,z 'S /LI A
•
11b(1: 1:
Ste. oc
qf•t/
/,4.99
a"?. 76
54.95 i09. 9
ooh
94.9c
. (7• 947
•
4-�
09 to
//5
60
S.
2 109
a
/,0 4.0
t4, 14 �.
15 ; t
o"Z 16 :
d
1�° 17'
05 18 :
19,
24:
010°
264,
,gl3 ,•
12 /kt
/4
/ I4,
11 0/1h°
14,°' °d
0
15
16;
10
X17
9
18
800
X30
1
/0
. 4
19
20`
21
22
�0Z40 , 23 :
3 1[x,0
GO')
)
24
2 00
1
1/7
25 ,
,9°l
// 7 26
60
R 3
12
AO
10,
11 o319 �t �coli
10 1 03'x)
9 t 0°
8 (71.9
16:
17:
18
19
C
3 021 e,
fp • N
2 br
L o>l 1vL
�g�ul /17 f
by
? p 24
25
1/7
vi
//
ID
,�
15
�?13;�
fi
, 3
red wetlands, except those with an
"b" designation are included in the
r:ounty Wetlands Ineentory The
is of wetlands designated "a" have
erified on the site by a variety of
. V/etlands designated "b" are maP-
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
21 Wetlands Ineentory, but their loca•
we not been field verified.
may be gaps in the numbering se.
within Individual drainage basins.
Wetlands
zh4c 5-rng 1.4old ruE
c(.7€ PArk
04 4,-treC) r5
A v,IErc
Live areas dis-
approximate.
'hat have not
nt on a level•
:re differences
rated on these
the actual pre-
of the sensitive
Sensitive Area
N.
*These coal mines have had additional min-
ing since the most recent map was filed with
the Washington Department of Natural Re-
sources. Any development that occurs
adjacent to these areas should be preceded
by a thorough study to confirm or deny the
existence of additional subsurface tunnels.
Coal Mine Hazard
Areas
Srr .
75 Nor N,1, AJ A ceA.L A -A= 1E 144z
•
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
L 0
Purpose of checklist:
The State Environmental Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C
RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts
of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS)
must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide
information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and
to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the
agency decide whether an EIS is required.
A. Background
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Property at South Ryan Way
2. Name of applicant:
Tom Foster
3. Address and phone number of applicants and contact person:
Applicant:
Tom Foster
Seattle Mortgage
6450 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 106
Seattle, WA 98188
(206) 439 -3671
Contact:
Shupe Holmberg
Baima & Holmberg, Inc.
100 Front Street South
Issaquah, WA 98027 -3817
(425) 392 -0250
4. Date checklist prepared:
November 22, 2000
5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Construct summer of 2001
7. Do ou have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes explain:
No
RECEIVED
CITY OF TI i'C'MI d
MAY 1 1 2001
PERY:T c=;JT
• •
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal:
A geotech report has been prepared by Brian Beman.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for government approvals of
other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes
Explain:
No.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for you
proposal, if known:
Approval of engineering plans by City of Tukwila.
DOE
METRO.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not
need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form
to include additional specific information on project description.)
This proposal is to subdivide approximately 2.76 acres in to 14 single
family residential sites.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including street
address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal
would occur over a range of area, provide the range of 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.
SE corner of the intersection of 47st Ave. S. & S. Ryan Way. SE 3 -23 -4
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. Environmental Elements
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one) Flat, rolling, hilly, steep, slopes,
mountainous. other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
38%
7
• •
c. What general types of soil 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:
AGC, Alderwood, Gravely Sandy Loam.
d. Are there surface indications of or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe:
No.
e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill:
Grading & filling to construct roads, earthwork will be balanced on site.
Approximate onsite grading is 2,000 cu yds. Select import will likely be
required for road base (1000 cu yd)
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally
describe:
Yes, some erosion will occur during construction, erosion will be
controlled.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
35%
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth,
if any:
An ESC plan will be prepared. Erosion control measures will be provided
per City Standards.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities
if known:
Exhaust from construction equipment during construction. Automobile
exhaust after construction.
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe:
None known
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if
any:
Construction equipment will meet current emission standards; dust control
will be provided during construction.
3
• •
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 and
wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what
stream or river it flows into:
No
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:
NA
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface waters or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material:
N/A
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description , purpose, and approximate quantities if known:
None
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the
site plan:
No.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge:
No.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known:
No.
2) Describe waste material 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:
N/A
4
• •
c. Water runoff (including storm water);
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will
this water flow into other waters? If so describe:
Storm drainage from the development will be collected in catch basins and
tighlined to a combined detention /water quality vault. The vault will
discharge to an existing storm outfall near the south property line of the
site.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally explain:
Small amounts of oil associated with normal automobile maintenance may
enter the surface water.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff water
impacts. If any:
Storm detention and water quality control will be provided per 1998 King
County SWM manual.
4. Plants
a. check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
_XXX_deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
_XXX_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
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
All vegetation will be removed in roadway areas and where new homes
are built.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site:
None known.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
N/A
5
• •
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,
other
b. List any threatened or endangered or endangered species known to near or on
the site:
None known.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain:
No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
N/A
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used
for heating, manufacturing, etc.:
Electricity and natural gas will be used for heating future homes.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe:
No.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if
any:
New home construction would conform to the most recent UBC and the
Washington State energy codes.
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:
No
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None.
6
• •
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
None.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project' (for
example: Traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
Traffic
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the
project on a short -term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction,
operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
Construction noises would exist during the building of the roads and
homes. These noises would occur generally between 7:30 am - 5:00 pm,
Monday through Saturday. Once construction is complete, then noise
would be generated by the normal course of action of a residential
subdivision.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
None.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The site is currently occupied by a single family home.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe:
No
c. Describe any structures on the site:
Single family home.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site:
LDR
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
LDR
g: If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
N/A
• •
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"
area? If so, specify:
Slopes on the easterly portion of the site are greater than 20 %.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
About 42 people will reside here
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
None.
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
Urban zoning permits single family development.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low- income housing:
13 new middle income homes.
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low- income housing:
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
None.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s). not including antennas:
what is the principle exterior building material(s) proposed?
Two story homes
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
None.
8
• •
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Light from windows of homes.
b. Could Tight or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views?
No
c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Light from windows of homes.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
None.
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate
vicinity?
N/A
b. Would the proposed project displace and existing recreational uses? If so,
describe:
No
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreational opportunities
to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
None
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or
local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally
describe:
No
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site:
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
None.
9
• •
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:
South Ryan Way accesses to Martin Luther King Jr. Way.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the nearest transit stop?
Not known.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate?
The completed project would create 2 parking spaces per new single
family dwelling.
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).
New onsite roads will be required to serve the development. All new
roads will be public.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
No
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur:
140 vehicular trips per day (Using a conservative estimate of 10 trips per
day per lot). Most of the tnps would occur during AM and PM commute
times.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Traffic mitigation fees will be paid by development, if required.
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:
There will be a small, undetermined increased need for all of the above public
services due to the development.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if
any:
Traffic and school mitigation fees will be paid. Increased tax base from 13
new homes.
10
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water,
refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Cable
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.
Electricity, gas, water, telephone, sanitary sewer and cable TV
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.
understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make a decision.
Signature: 2��y1/l V
Date Submitted: d- (2 /0I
11
Christopher Brown Cf Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
The South Ryan Way Residential Development
a
TRAFFIC STUDY
for a
14 Unit Single Family Residential Development
in the
CITY OF TUKWILA
King County
July 3, 2000
Traffic Engineers Cf Transportation Planners
RECEIVED
CITY OF TUKWn.A
MAY 1 1 2001
PERMIT CENTER
The 84111 Ryan Way Residential Dellkopment
TRAFFIC STUDY
Table of Contents
Purpose
Location
Scope
Adjacent Land Uses
Street System
Transit
Project Phasing
Traffic Characteristics
Trip Generation
Horizon Year Traffic
Assignment
Year 2002 Traffic
Capacity Analysis
Level of Service
Mitigation for Safety
Identified Traffic Issues
Adverse Consequences
Conclusions
List of Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
List of Tables
Table I
Table II
Table III
Table IV
Appendix
Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Current Traffic Volumes
2002 Volumes without Project
Traffic Assignment
2002 Volumes with Project
Trip Generation
Trip Distribution
Levels of Service
Level of Service
Peak Hour Traffic - Field Data
ITE LUC 210 data Sheets
Level of Service Computer In /Out Data
ii
1.
4.
4.
4.
5.
5.
5.
6.
6.
8.
8.
10.
10.
14.
14.
15.
16.
16.
2.
3.
7.
9.
11.
12.
8.
10.
13.
14.
Christopher brown CS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
• •
The South Ryan Way Residential Development
a
TRAFFIC STUDY
for a
14 Unit Single Family Residential Development
in the
CITY OF TUKWILA
King County
Purpose
Briefly, the purpose of this study is to obtain current traffic
volume data on the adjacent arterial street system within the
City of City of Tukwila serving the proposed 14 -lot single
family residential development and to derive a forecast for
future (year 2002) traffic conditions so that an assessment of
potential traffic impacts can be made. For reference, the
location of the site is shown on Figure 1, the Vicinity Map.
The proposed internal lot and local access street layout is
shown on Figure 2, the Site Plan.
The study includes the gathering of local arterial street and
intersection traffic data on the network that is expected to be
impacted by 10 or more p.m. peak hour site generated traffic.
The analysis covers the p.m. peak hour traffic operation since
that contains the highest hourly traffic volumes of the average
day. It continues with an estimate of the trip distribution
and traffic assignment done in accordance with recommended
practices based on sample traffic data from the nearby adjacent
intersection lying at the plat entrance on NE 4th Street /SE
128th Street.
It may be noted that the highway and arterial street traffic
volume data over the p.m. peak hour is the typical design hour
for traffic impact assessments.
In addition, the study identifies the appropriate growth factor
for including background traffic growth up to the project year
of full occupancy, the year 2002, in accordance with the
recommended practice of the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, Traffic Access and Impact Studies for Site
Development, Transportation Engineering, August, 1988.
-1-
Christopher brown 65 Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) T22 -1909
••.! LIE !..(! su
\ -5
:t 106 14011 I 4
WaRTI,AND SI ik)(01-hl -141 "fi
----. ,.,..!• "._2ifril sl 1.1eSCA) (...") f.;.■
S? ICI2;_ sr. sfs L -,,,. ,...,,
ot krIA •
C.i 1 - ,!-- , 1
IT- ....11
fl,../iAnD
.gIZ
Fthk I .41 ,..4 - ••• 31:
>1,1
.; sr
4._._[ - - t m c_ 1 : I * <1 , ..., ,......,;
Th' ISTLE
I . I
I ' ..' ST
=1
., :.
ArL4Nric.
r..7.s i,---m, 4
.I!‘L I; ---ir-‘ .,1 1:i....L:... , I .....
PL ! .....-. 1 rzt..:...• -,-
/., 16.. 1
L7 _ :=•,1 cLg.yEREKLE_ .51 —1 G a' 'Zs ....0
PCAIRr..)
-0 < sr ,i •=1..! ''-'1
Q. RV ificTjt
34 i = i'..,-, - 40u,,- ,,,u,,u
4 - t . ..t..,-.
S ratiroti •
;.sr r „N.:
,- anEs.4-H• ..'''
•
..,-,. l_ ST
. Ln S 1 HENDERSON
1'
,. ,.., ..• It ,...„ i lvi ik
'.i--fikre.^ 'I '`
L,-) L..i,
I 0.
, 7-- I I Id ;'.
=
S BE .k!il ST ,..., .-..I RkItilER
.,.
.. -1. .
• 4 4::..00i .-31 -, . -.
-7' Li .cr 70
r" 4 it. '.:t.
t.' ....: i ..1.
1, /1 140 1 -.±
,,- `.11q L5—
s FL."'' :1- :'. -. ' S RAblIR
MISIUM "Fn., CY
i -
a Or
:
its, * I: S :61 i.'il71 I F 1
FL ICAir I .-■ , 4- .4'
0..14i.: :'.1 1 -' -1., ..
S. liFt'il A ST keiPt,1).'—'1 H. t. —
A ' /:$-
'
,A L, • -Vi„
4 .7.-. ; ,
-6
' 0 3
“...J:i.k i si
■,,s7'<ecc,
rn S iAiEt i t. Zi Si '...,
I, .r- ''' 5...330 8
..:,_;,,,, , ,
3 m Is...
: ! =,
-4k7I Lt■ - . ric.'ll 1 PL 4.',.. Ini
i . k i l l i . 1 , i , I 4. l ' ' l 1 I S ,•
.• x.• “-,
'.- -.. - --■..,
•
41.I kWh: tr
&IA FAMI,
I
S
1 1114 !.„
.. -
• • • • •
.,'
,-; :A :iNi ;,..,..r . rnu,
'...,.
„•-,
B°Ej iG .1
,..-• '1 ,yz
1 :AN( bi I i■ T T
--k i\: S I 1( 9.1t.iii
• .'.il 1
— .,
..._ : I
crt ..-1. 'L--= c43 I 2”
,‘ \c". ''''
S MTH 1St 1 .. '. :: • '..7 •
• 1. ; ,...:i
--- sr.-s‘
ir.srif i5 - '
-...','
4 l'. 1 PP
j‘ r '
• ',\
.\'''''P
- -. • 1.
s Ilitn '..1 r, s lier;tEtt
i 1,-7J
....::„ -:-,.
, (1 • - 1
_i...... _I, .2:.,.;.....\ '' \s.
'..
• ' ii;t A1415.,
1 ': '•'•\ 1 • ,.., -. fiK `‘ ` .
. lf.
ii;ti ST
F‘k
!•1'.1E.
FIGURE 1
Vicinity Map
—2—
10 •
L
PARK
NO
\\
\
ST
i 1,
• t■ iels irp
• 141t:/1:11 II i',L..
• ..) - fl oh ill
7.1
I - I
.i S i .3
• I ;Ti ST t I '''
r_.
S 12 . ''''l 7:-,•, •j, 1
. otiy,ti, ,i
.., ".ZI
:Jou -'; -41 ....,,.
• s' ls„ `"1..
'-,', ";"' 'eh' i1 ,.,
...r, ■• :.--.
-•-• c'
al. F■ 7, :Xi . '° 1
'z
Chriatopher brown 0 Amociatea
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118-5981
(206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909
- ^I
‘N•
0
U)
-=.
6.
Figure 2
Site Plan
-3-
41,
Christopher brown 0 Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 6.
Jj Seattle, WA 98118-5981
(206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909
• •
The study assigns future site generated traffic to the street
network and continues with an analysis of current levels of
service (LOS) on the arterial system and then completes the
study by identifying the future levels of service (LOS) given
the completion of the full development. The horizon year
traffic volumes are used to assess the project impacts.
Location
More particularly, the location of the proposed South Ryan Way
Residential Development is on the south side of S. Ryan Way
•opposite 47th Avenue S. in the recently annexed northern sector
of the City of Tukwila. The location of the site, as noted
earlier, is shown on Figure 1, the Vicinitv Map.
Scope
For the purpose of this study, the scope of work considers a 14
unit single family residential development on a parcel of land
presently occupied by one single family home. The home will
remain on what is designated initially as Parcel 11. In
addition, the project also includes the construction of a new
local access street at the present intersection of S. 107th
Street with S. Ryan Way. Further, although not a specific
element of this study, per se, S. 107th Street may be abandoned
since it is now terminated at the top of a steep hill and,
presently, provides access to only one home.
In this study the key intersections expected to be impacted by
the site's generated traffic, along S. Ryan Way, include 47th
Avenue S. and M.L.King Jr. Way S. lying to the west of the site.
Adjacent Land Uses
The adjacent, developed land uses in the immediate vicinity of
the site are all single family with significant parcels being
only lightly developed at the moment. Consequently, the
proposed site land use conforms with the current neighborhood.
In a traffic planning sense it is not a conflicting land use
insofar as the immediate neighborhood is concerned.
-4-
Christopher brown CS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.. \\
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 222 -1909
Street System
The adjacent arterial street serving the site, S. Ryan Way, is a
four lane facility with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Curbs,
gutters and sidewalks have been built along both its north and
south sides from the signalized intersection of M.L.King Way to
the three -way STOP controlled tee intersection of 51st Avenue S.
51st Avenue S. is also a 4 -lane facility with similar urban
amenities. However, parking is allowed on the curb faces so it
tends to function as a 2 -lane street. It has a posted speed
limit of 30 mph.
M.L.King Jr. Way South is, for the most part, a 4 -lane arterial
with gravel shoulders. It has a posted speed limit of 40 mph.
All of these arterial streets have overhead nighttime
illumination. Most of the minor intersecting streets have STOP
sign control.
At the project site, S. 107th Street is dead ended about half a
block to the east of its intersection with S. Ryan Way. It
provides access to a single dwelling located at the corner with
S. Ryan Way.
The traffic signal at M.L.King Way is an 8 -phase system that
operates independently from other signals in the area which are
some distance away. Street grades, lane geometrics and
pedestrian, bus and truck data are noted in the appended level
of service (LOS) computations.
Transit
Sound Transit has Route Number 42 running on 51st Avenue S. and
Route 39 on M.L.King Way S. with approximately half hour
headways. Due to the steep grade on S. Ryan Way there are no
hus stops located between these two arterials.
Proiect Phasing
The project will not be phased over a long period of time but is
to be a single and continuous effort. The anticipated date of
-5-
Christopher brown « Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
(Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
full occupancy for traffic planning purposes is taken at the
year 2002. .
Traffic Characteristics
Current (June, 2000) peak hour traffic volume data was obtained
in the field over the mid -week afternoon peak hour period.
Being collected in the late spring season when normal employment
patterns exist, it can be considered a normal typical p.m. peak
hour sample. Fortunately, no heavy rains or other adverse
conditions effected the traffic movements or otherwise skewed
the traffic data.
Since the p.m. peak hour contains both employment related trips
as well as shopping and some social- recreation travel, it is the
largest peak and is used as the "design hour" of the project.
Current p.m. peak hour data is shown on Figure 3, Current
Traffic Volumes. On this figure, the average weekday traffic
volume (A.W.D.T.) data was estimated.
Traffic observations did not indicate significant truck, bus or
pedestrian traffic along any of the observed streets. That data
is also noted in the appendix with truck data segregated by axle
count and bus data noted as either Metro or School Bus. All
peak hour bus and truck frequencies are noted in the Appendix as
a part of the computer input data along with road grades, number
and width of traffic lanes, geometric data and traffic control
devices, as described earlier.
Figure 3 and subsequent traffic volume figures are schematic and
do not show any scale other than that associated with the
respective traffic volumes.
Trip Generation
Trip generation for the plat is based on the Institute of
Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Land Use Code 210 for single
family dwellings. The expected trip production is noted in
Table I and is based on the published average rates for the 14
single family.homes. While data for the existing dwelling could
be deducted so that net new traffic for 13 units would result,
-6-
Christopher brown CAS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
cattic. WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
M.L.King Jr. Way S.
•
LEGEND
Average Weekday
Traffic Volume
77(x P.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volume
FIGURE 3
Current Traffic Volumes
-7-
47th Avenue S.
Christopher brown Cn A88ociate8
9688 12ainier Ave. 8.
Seattle, WA 981185981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
• •
this was not done in order to show a worst case. Note that the
average trip rates are used since the scale of the project is
relatively small in the context of the range of published trip
generation data.
Time Period
TABLE I
Trip Generation
Traffic Volumes
A.W.D.T.
A.M. inbound
A.M. outbound
P.M. inbound
P.M. outbound
134 Trips
3 v.p.h.
8 v.p.h.
9 v.p.h.
5 v.p.h.
Horizon Year Traffic
As noted earlier, the horizon year for this project is the year
2002. From the 1995 -98 four year interval published by WSDOT
for the count station located at MP 158.32, I -5 at the Boeing
Access Road, the annual compound rate of growth in traffic was
found to be 3.27 percent per year.
Since the 3.27 percent per year rate of growth is typical for
this area's street system, even though the neighborhood has not
seen much new development, it is considered appropriate for
estimating background traffic growth for a worst case
assessment.
Figure 4 shows the horizon year forecast without the project.
This two year forecast is based on the above rate of growth.
Assignment
The new traffic generated by this residential development will
be distributed onto the adjacent roadway system and then onto
-8-
Christopher Brown CS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
M.L.King Jr. Way S.
LEGEND
Average Weekday
Traffic Volume
7-"x P.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volume
FIGURE 4
Cg 4 7th Avenue S.
2002 Traffic Volumes
Without Project
-9-
Christopher brown ,15 Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8. `\
(Seattle, WA 9 &113 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
• •
the regional transportation system. The distribution used in
this study to assign project generated traffic is based on the
typical Analogy Method as described'in Transportation and Land
Development, Vergil G. Stover, 1988, published by the Institute
of Transportation Engineers.
In terms of the percentage distribution the following trip table
may be referenced.
TABLE II
Trip Distribution
System Percent
East to 51st Avenue S.
West and South to I -5
West and North to MLK
West over I -5 to the West
6 %
23 %
3 %
68 %
Figure 5, Assignment, shows site traffic distributed onto the
local arterial network.
Year 2002 Traffic
Figure 6, 2002 Volumes, Pro-iect Completed, is the forecast
demand. As described earlier, the p.m. peak hour data is used
for defining project related traffic impacts.
Capacity Analysis
Capacity analysis is in accordance with the recently published
(1994) Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by
the Transportation Research Board. The analysis was performed
—10—
Christopher brown 61 Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -190
M.L.King Jr. Way S.
O
•
LEGEND
Average Weekday
Traffic Volume
7-"x P.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volume
(7.047th Avenue S.
O
FIGURE 5
Traffic Assignment
-11-
Christopher brown 0 Associates
9688 I2ainier Ave. (S.
(Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
M.L.King Jr. Way S.
LEGEND
Average Weekday
Traffic Volume
P.M. Peak Hour
Traffic Volume
FIGURE 6
q 47th Avenue S.
0
2002 Traffic Volumes
With Project
-12-
gaaags
Christopher brown CAS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909)
with the computer programs SIGNAL 94 by Strong Systems and by
HCS produced by McTrans, University of Florida, all being used
under license to Christopher Brown, P.E. The results of the
analysis are noted in Table III, below.
Intersection
TABLE III
Levels of Service
2000 2002 2002
Without With
Project Project
Ryan Way S. /MLKing Way S. E E E
Vehicle delay 50.3 sec. 53.6 sec. 53.6 sec.
Ryan Way S. /47th Ave. S.
Worst Case, delay
A A F *
3.6 sec. 3.7 sec. 65.4 sec.
Notes
-13-
In the above LOS table for Ryan Way S. at 47th Avenue S.
only the worst case LOS is shown with an *. This is for
only the minor street's exiting left turn movement. The
overall intersection LOS, as used by City of Tukwila
from its Comprehensive Plan, remains at 'A' for the
horizon year with • project implementation.
The LOS 'F' for the future year at Ryan Way S. and 47th
Avenue S. is due to the heavy left turn movement from
the site onto Ryan Way S. when it has to cross over the
large eastbound through movement. In the prior years,
since the access did not east, per se, its LOS was not
computable. The prior year LOS values applied only to
the 47th Avenue S. intersection lying on the north side
of Ryan Way S.
The southbound movement from 47th Avenue S. remains
unchanged and continues at LOS 'A' for all years.
At M.L. King Jr. Way S., as a signalized intersection,
the overall LOS is reported in this table.
Christopher Drown fS Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) T22 -19091
Level of Service
The Level of Service (LOS) describes the quality of traffic
flow. This ranges from the best or highest level, 'A', usually
denoted by an ability to select ones' own speed or the ability
to change lanes or overtake at will, down to the lowest of worst
level 'F'. This LOS is the lowest possible level and is one
where traffic is severely constrained. It is usually denoted by
"jam" conditions and attendant long traffic delays.
The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan (TCP) in the Chapter entitled
Transportation, notes the adopted LOS values as follows.
TABLE IV
Level of Service
Intersection Volume /Capacity
Avg. Delay Ratio
LOS A <7.5 seconds up to 0.6
LOS B 7.5 - 15 seconds 0.6 - 0.7
LOS C 15.1 - 25 seconds 0.7 - 0.8
LOS D 25.1 - 40 seconds 0.8 - 0.9
LOS E 40.1 - 60 seconds 0.9 - 1.0
LOS F >60 seconds greater than 1.0
The TCP sets LOS 'E' for the Pacific Highway and East Marginal
Way corridor but does not address either M.L. King Jr. Way S.
nor the Boeing Access Road. Most likely, with the above two as
thresholds for the overall area it will also be set at LOS 'E'.
For minor and collector arterials it is set at LOS D for
residential areas. Ryan Way S. is in a residential area.
Mitigation for Safety
The Tukwila Municipal Code, at 9.48.080, requires that if a
safety hazard is considered to exist traffic mitigation shall be
required regardless of the LOS status.
-14-
Christopher brown Cn Associates
9688 12ainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) T22 -1901
• •
Absent current historical accident data along this section of
arterial - from M.L. King Jr. Way S. to 51st Avenue S. - an
assessment of hazard is not possible.
Identified Traffic Issues
The only traffic issue identified in this study is the low LOS
at the site's access onto Ryan Way S. since the signalized
intersection of M.L. King Jr.' Way S. at Ryan Way S. meets the
adopted threshold. While the overall intersection LOS at 47th
Avenue S. and Ryan Way S. meets the TCP standard, the low LOS on
the south leg, the access to the site, does indicate an LOS 'F'
for the outbound left turn movement. In turn, it is possible
that an increase in hazard may ensue. Conversely, with adequate
sight distance, it may not. No historical accident data has
been made available at this time to verify what level of hazard
currently exists, if any exist at all. Consequently, whether or
not there is any hazard at this location remains unexplored.
For traffic mitigation at the site's access, signal warrants are
not worth considering. First, it is highly unlikely that for
the lowest hour, of the 8 highest hours of the day, this access
street will ever produce 75 outbound vehicles per hour. It does
not even reach that volume in the highest hour of the day. The
LOS 'F' on this leg of the intersection should be considered an
unmitigated adverse consequence. That is permissible under SEPA
since vehicle queuing is on site - not on the street - so no
arterial street traffic will be adversely effected.
Second, the usefulness or efficacy of a traffic signal on the
steep grade at this access is disputable. Accordingly, with an
overall LOS that meets the TCP, even if one movement on one leg
is at 'F', a signal is not recommended.
It may be noted that the TMC, at page 9 -21, under sub- section E
states, "... 5 or more additional peak hour trips ... the
Director ... shall require ... one of the following for
mitigation .. " and continues under §1 with a requirement to
pay a mitigation payment ... improvements necessary to
restore the access streets ... level of service that would exist
at the time the project is completed, but without the project."
The payment of some kind of mitigation fee appears to be the
only reasonable outcome. The amount of such a fee will nee to
be determined by the city engineer.
-15-
Christopher brown Cn Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
• •
Adverse Consequences
With the proposed South Rvan Wav Residential Development
completed there will be only one adversely impacted movement at
the key intersection serving the site on Ryan Way S. Elsewhere
there are no other adverse traffic related consequences
associated with the project.
As a STOP controlled intersection there is no easy remediation
possible without arterial street widening. This is likely not
economically feasible with such a small development.
Conclusions
For the South Rvan Wav Residential Development the following
conclusions may be drawn.
1. The development will include 14 single family homes,
including one home presently on site.
2. It will take access from a new road to be built at an
existing driveway opposite 47th Avenue S.
3. The existing S. 107th Street located on the east side of
the plat, which is dead ended half a block to the east,
serves one home. It will be eliminated as a street.
4. The project will generate some 134 vehicular trips per
day with 11 of these taking place in the morning and 14
in the evening peak hour.
5. There is a single Sound Transit route on both M. L. King
Jr. Way S. and on 51st Avenue S. They both have
approximately half hour headways in the peak hour.
6. The 4 -year annual compound rate of growth in traffic is
about 3.27 percent per year on I -5 at the Boeing Access
Road. Although this is higher than the comparable rate
on SR 99 at MP 23.29 to the west, where the rate is 2.41
percent per year, it is used for the worst case.
7. The current and future levels of service at the
signalized intersections of Ryan Way S. and M.L. King
Jr. Way S. are 'E' which are within the city's adopted
Comprehensive Plan standard.
- 1 6-
Christopher brown Cf Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
Seattic, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1910
8. The LOS at the STOP controlled intersection at the
site's access street to Ryan Way S. are overall within
the adopted standard being at LOS 'A' with 0.4 seconds
of overall average delay.
9. The analysis shows that on completion of the project the
outbound left turn from the site's access street in the
p.m. peak hour onto Ryan Way S. will be at LOS 'F'.
10. No accident data is presently available for an analysis
of hazard at this location on Ryan Way S.
11. It is not possible to suggest at this time that the
accident hazard will be increased due to the low LOS at
this time.
12. The Tukwila Municipal Code gives the authority to the
Director of Public Works to establish a mitigation fee
schedule to offset possible impacts caused by 5 or more
additional peak hour trips.
-17-
Christopher brown e Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. 8.
(Seattle, WA 98118-5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1910
The Southlyan Way Residential Devellent
TRAFFIC STUDY
Appendix
Peak Hour Traffic - Field Data
Ryan Way S. /MLKing Way S.
Ryan Way S. /47th Ave. S.
ITE LUC 210
Discription
Weekday Trips
Morning Peak Hour of the Arterial
Afternon Peak Hour of the Arterial
LOS Computations
Current Operations
1. Ryan Way S. /MLKing Way S. SRW -C1P
4. Ryan Way S. /47th Ave. S. SRW- C2P.HCO
Horizon Year (2002) Operations Without Project
7. Ryan Way S. /MLKing Way S. SRW -H1P
10. Ryan Way S. /47th Ave. S. SRW- H2P.HC0
Horizon Year (2002) Operations With Project
13. Ryan Way S. /MLKing Way S. SRW -P1P
16. Ryan Way S. /47th Ave. S. SRW- P2P.HC0
Christopher brown « Associates
9688 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98118 -5981
(206) 722 -1910 Fax (206) 722 -1909
INTFRSECTICN C F : 7 > r L ! v G AND ✓ “71
•
TIME 11t1) TC , -7 P= PSU HCUR
T 1 M E
14 G� 4/
%L;
� �,
/9/4-''l A JAY
vv
J /
j-/7 f 1, 1
/ r"
I
7(
1 4 . 1 � - 9/,' I G 1 /S" 1//
1 0 1 0
1 1 o
1 o
1.2.
2/K- 4/1 1 o 1 i3e 1 /2-
$ 6 7.-1-1 o
I I o
10
--� I S
° ^ yys O. 1 tlO I 7
! 0 Y3 1
1 ,
I4
yyT- s')
o
16L 1
o 11-1 /
o
c
T
- $/(
o
20 /-6
o - 2
o
r
.
5/5- _ $9°
0
2i. /6
0 / .0.5"
/
0
i
0 v -f`1S
0 203I to o
/6)
d
d
I
1
44/C- sz / 7S t` 0
r
. 0 ii/ N
1
1
[
10c'%'D 2 I
2-
I
I t
Vs
o I
/
1
,4c
t
-z 1
/
1
144;41 /70-
0 I 1 /
1
1
1.
I
I 1
1 _____!_
'
.—i
I
1
1
1
1
1 1
�
1
1
1
1
1 1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
707ALS
I
1
1
I
A 04 'TOTA L I 1 I i i
I 11 I I i I 1 I
r'7'. C-.2 CAI E
INTERSE T ICN CF: ,'V''/ 'i<
T 1 JIA E
'CC
, /i7 ( 6 � L � 0 A `r
A 4-7
J
P= PSAK HCVR
J
::,,-,./D '- /C'/ 12'2 .4.L. $J /lC 11 ::? .. 2/L) II / �PJ S/ ,
9 -S,5 /''1 (2 7- ;Y .fig 2 It 2 4;-° T It 22. y-i? ,' ; T
c/s - SI / 15-2 l 73 / 52'2-1 sS / 91 /2 /c1-1 1/3 11_/ :F( - -1/2 /
c t-' - s" - /Si /W- /17I 22-I 3° t I i c-7— -'_ 9 11 40 /P // l I /2- 2S/ / ii
1 1 11 I
/fie iii 1 1 I! 11 • L
1-ch-is 7/ 1 / / E? 1 2 Z 0 11 f- 3 11 / -- It
1 1 11 I 1-
gi- -.S'yi 15-?/-1 G' I olll7Gl 257 /1 Iligq 7/-Y 1? II ! _G 1.30' V 2 / 1
a�� ,7-L1 I ‘ 5-f .17 I : ?� • , P�r , S - II _ i' • 5 '— .' —11 ` 6P • -r > L/
/4 1 2 11/ / n 11 ? 11 I o J
I I 1 11 II
I I 1 ii, 11
I I 11 11 11
I I I II 11 1
• 1 11 11 1
I 1 11 11 II 1,
I I 11 11 11 $,
I I 1 11 11
TOTALS 1 1 1 11 II 1.
;$Of TOT AO 1 1 i 1 11 1 1 li 1 1
TIM= I
I n
n^
L I
I S I R L
L S
S I R
R I L I
I S L R I
I L I 5
5 R
R i`
ycr(-, — `-/ /5 1 .t± I /v rl SS /.. 5
5 I 2— 1 2 S /
/p, $
$ I if _
_I' j
_;1,1 1
/ ( 1 . 4/._? I .7= I iiT? I /
/ 6 ( '
'/ 15 II 3/ /
/s 5
5? I "7 r
r ,9•7 $
$ ;' I s.
..--i3-' - y < I /0-"-1--1 / - 1 2 y �
� / ‘
‘ 3 I / I I -- 3 :
: c) , z
z-5 I / - 2
22L s
s- � 1/52=
Land Use: 210
Single - Family Detached Housing
Description
Single- family detached housing includes all single - family detached homes on individual lots. A
typical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision.
Additional Data
The peak hour of the generator typically coincides with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic.
The sites were surveyed from the late 1960s to the mid -1990s throughout the United States and
Canada.
The number of vehicles and the number of residents have a high correlation with average
weekday vehicle trip ends. The use of these variables is limited, however, because the number of
vehicles and residents is often difficult to obtain or predict. The number of dwelling units is
generally used as the independent variable of choice because it is usually readily available, easy
to project, and has a high correlation with average weekday vehicle trip ends.
This land use includes data from a wide variety of units with different sizes. price ranges,
locations, and ages. Consequently, there is a wide variation in trips generated within this
category. As expected, dwelling units that were larger in size, more expensive, or farther away
from the central business district (CBD) had a higher rate of trip generation per unit than those
smaller in size, Tess expensive, or closer to the CBD. Other factors, such as geographic location
and type of adjacent and nearby development, may also have had an effect on the site trip
generation.
Single- family detached units have the highest trip generation rate per dwelling unit of all
residential uses, because they are the largest units in size and have more residents and more
vehicles per unit than other residential land uses: they are generally located farther away from
shopping centers, employment areas, and other trip attractors than are other residential land
uses; and they generally have fewer alternate modes of transportation available, because they are
typically not as concentrated as other residential land uses.
Source Numbers
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, E , 11, 12, 13, 14. 16, 19, 20, 21, 26, 34, 35, 36. 38, 40, 71, 72, 84, 91, 98. 100, 105,
108, 110, 114, 117, 119, 157, 167, 177, 187, 192. 207, 211, 246, 275, 283, 293. 300. 319, 320,
357, 384, 435
Trip Generation, 6th Edition
262 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Sin- Family Detached HAsing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday
Number of Studies: 348
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 198
Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate
Range of Rates
Standard Deviation
9.57
4.31 - 21.85
3.69
Data Plot and Equation
T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
X
X
x
X
x
X Actual Data Points
1000 2000 3000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Fitted Curve Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.920 Ln(X) + 2.707 R2 = 0.96
Trip Generation, 6th Edition
263 Institute of Transportation Engineers
•Single- Family Detaced Housing
(210)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Number of Studies: 271
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 202
Directional Distribution: 25% entering, 75% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate
Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.75 0.33 - 2.27 0.90
Data Plot and Equation
T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends
3.000
0
X Actual Data Points
1000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.700(X) + 9.477
2000
Average Rate
R2 = 0.89
3000
Trip Generation, 6th Edition
264 Institute of Transportation Engine,
Single-Family Detached Housing
(210)
Amesage Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 294
Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 216
Directional Distribution: 64% entering, 36% exiting
Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate
Range of Rates
Standard Deviation
1.01
0.42 - 2.98
Data Plot and Equation
1.05
T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends
3,000
2.000
1,000
X
X/
4$.
0
X Actual Data Points
1000 2000 3000
X = Number of Dwelling Units
Fitted Curve Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.901 Ln(X) + 0.527 R2 = 0.91
Trip Generation, 6th Edition
265
Institute of Transportation Engineers
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Current Volumes, P.M. Peak Hour File SRW -C1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Summary of Parameter Values
Intersection Parameters
METROAREA
LOSTTIME
LEVELOFSERVICE
NODELOCATION
NONCBD
3.0
C S
0 0
Approach Parameters
APPLABELS
GRADES
PEDLEVELS
PARKINGSIDES
PARKVOLUMES
BUSVOLUMES
RIGHTTURNONREDS
Movement Parameters
MOVLABELS
VOLUMES
WIDTHS
LANES
UTILIZATIONS
TRUCKPERCENTS
PEAKHOURFACTORS
ARRIVALTYPES
ACTUATIONS
REQCLEARANCES
MINIMUMS
IDEALSATFLOWS
FACTORS
DELAYFACTORS
NSTOPFACTORS
GROUPTYPES
SATURATIONFLOWS
N
.0
0
NONE
0
0
50
RT TH LT
221 1308 60
12.0 33.0 12.0
1 3 1
.00 .00 .00
3.0 .0 1.0
.64 .95 .95
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
1568 5510 1787
Phasing Parameters
SEQUENCES
PERMISSIVES
OVERLAPS
CYCLES
GREENTIMES
YELLOWTIMES
CRITICALS
EXCESS
E
-3.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
RT TH LT
11 298 233
.0 24.0 12.0
0 2 1
.00 .00 .00
.0 1.0 1.0
.92 .92 .98
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
0 3784 1814
S
.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
RT TH LT
188 848 148
.0 24.0 12.0
0 2 1
.00 .00 .00
2.0 1.0 3.0
.95 .95 .95
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
0 3639 1752
67 ALL
NO NO NO NO
YES YES YES YES
110 140 10
6.18 3.14 35.25 16.30 59.13
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
10 10 2 6 10
0
LEADLAGS
OFFSET
PEDTIME
06/21/ **
09:56:05
W
.0
0
NONE
0
0
300
RT TH LT
1170 990 584
12.0 24.0 12.0
1 2 1
.00 .00 .00
2.0 .0 2.0
.94 .94 .92
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
1583 3800 1770
NONE NONE
.00 1
.0 0
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Current Volumes, P.M. Peak Hour File SRW -C1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance
Sq 67 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5
* * / **
/ \
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
v +
A
<+ + +>
* * ** + + +
v + + +
A
A
+ + ++
+ + + +>
* * **
v
G /C= .044
G= 6.2"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .022
G= 3.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.3%
G /C= .252
G= 35.2"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.4%
G /C= .116
G= 16.3"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.4%
G /C= .422
G= 59.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.9%
06/21/ **
09:55:28
C =140 sec G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
MVMT TOTALS N Approach
Param:Units RT TH LT
AdjVol: vph
Wid /Ln:ft /#
g/C Rqd @C:%
g/C Used: %
SV @E: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
Max Que:veh
Max Que: ft
E Approach S Approach W Approach Int
RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
267 1515 63 13 340 238 208 938 156 926 1106 635 6405
12/1 33/3 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 12/1 24/2 12/1
33 38 27 0 29 31 0 41 29 63 39 45
26 26 5 0 12 12 0 31 10 55 43 43
393 1427 69 0 443 197 0 1128 152 876 1632 760 7077
D F E
.66 1.06 .69
50.0 82.3 86.5
56 519 23
60 378 15
E+ F
.00 .75 1.06
.0 63.5110.8
0 93 110
0 85 59
E F F C D+ E
.00 1.02 .87 1.06 .68 .84 .92
.0 69.4110.8 65.0 33.0 42.5 64.5
0 332 72 251 152 112 1720
0 286 38 231 223 141 1516
15 104 5
392 869 117
APPR TOTALS
Param:Units N Approach
AdjVol: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
Max Que:veh
Max Que: ft
0 24 19
0 303 472
E Approach
0 65 11 43 49 28 363
0 819 277 1086 613 713 1086
Int
S Approach W Approach Total
1845 591 1302 2667 6405
F F E D
.99 .88 1.00 .85
77.8 82.5 74.4 46.4
598 203 404 515
453 144 324 595
E
.92
64.5
1720
1516
124 43 76 120
869 472 819 1086
363
1086
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Current Volumes, P.M. Peak Hour File SRW -C1P
06/21/ **
09:54:26
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Capacity Analysis Summary
Intersection Averages:
Degree of Saturation (v /c) .92 Vehicle Delay 50.3@ Level of Service E
@ expect more delay due to extreme v /c's (see EVALUATE)
Sq 67 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 Phase 4 1 Phase 5
* * / **
/ \
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
V +
<+ + +>
* * ** + + +
v + + +
A
v
+ + ++
+ + + +>
* * **
v
G /C= .044
G= 6.2"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .022
G= 3.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.3%
G /C= .252
G= 35.2"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.4%
G /C= .116
G= 16.3"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.4%
G /C= .422
G= 59.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.9%
C =140 sec
G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
lLane (Width /l g/C I Service Rate Adj l HCM L 190% Max
Group Lanes Reqd Used @C (vph) @E Volume v/c Delay S Queue
N Approach
61.4@ F
RT
TH
LT
12/1
33/3
12/1
. 333
.379
.270
.259
. 259
. 051
11
37
1
393
1427
69
267
1515
63
.658
1.062
.685
32.6 D
66.7@ *F
54.5 E
392 ft
728 ft
117 ft .407
S Approach
56.6 E
LT 12/1 l .292 l .102 l 481 l 1152 l 1156 11.872 l 63.5 l F E 774 277 ftl
E Approach
62.8@ F
LT 12/1 l .311 l .124 l 1 l 197 l 238 11.063 92.01 @l *F +) 408 ft)
W Approach
36.7
RT
TH
LT
12/1
24/2
12/1
. 631
.392
. 452
. 553
.429
.429
772
1331
579
876
1632
760
926
1106
635
1.057
.678
.836
60.3
21.6
28.6
D
*F
C
D+
814 ft
613 ft
713 ft
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
File Name SRW- C2P.HC0
Streets: (N -S) 47th Avenue S.
Major Street DirectionEW
Length of Time Analyzed60 (min)
Analyst C. V. Brown
Date of Analysis 6/20/0
Other Information Current PM Volumes
Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection
(E -W) Ryan Way
No. Lanes
Stop /Yield
Volumes
PHF
Grade
MC's ( %)
SU /RV's ( %)
CV's ( %)
PCE's
Eastbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
42 1176 0
.95 .95 .95
4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
1.7 1.2 1.7
Westbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
0 488 4
.95 .95 .95
-4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 2 0
.9 .8 .9
Northbound
L T R
0> 1< 0
0 0 0
.95 .95 .95
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1.1 1.1 1.1
Southbound
L T R
0> 1< 0
0 0 41
.95 .95 .95
-3
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 1 1
Adjustment Factors
Vehicle Critical Follow -up
Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf)
Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10
Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60
Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30
Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection
Step 1: RT from Minor Street
NB SB
Conflicting Flows: (vph) 588 246
Potential Capacity: (pcph) 697 1039
Movement Capacity: (pcph) 697 1039
Prob. of Queue -free State: 1.00 0.96
Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue -free State:
TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
Major LT Shared Lane Prob.
of Queue -free State:
1176
401
401
1.00
3800
1900
1.00
492
933
933
0.92
3800
1900
0.87
Step 3: TH from Minor Street
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue -free State:
Step 4: LT from Minor Street
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Major LT, Minor TH
Impedance Factor:
Adjusted Impedance Factor:
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements
Movement Ca)acity: (pcph)
NB SB
1710 1708
109 109
0.87 0.87
95 95
1.00 1.00
NB SB
1706 1708
86 86
0.87 0.87
0.90 0.90
0.86 0.90
74 77
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Intersection Performance Summary
FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay
Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App
SB R 43 1039 > 1039 > 3.6 > A
EB L 75 933 4.2 A 0.1
Intersection Delay = 0.2
6
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
File Name SRW- H2P.HC0
Streets: {N -S) 47th Avenue S. (E -W) Ryan Way
Major Street DirectionEW
Length of Time Analyzed60 (min)
Analyst C. V. Brown
Date of Analysis 6/20/0
Other Information 2002 Volumes without Project
Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection
No. Lanes
Stop /Yield
Volumes
PHF
Grade
MC's ( %)
SU /RV's ( %)
CV's ( %)
PCE's
Eastbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
45 1254 0
.95 .95 .95
4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
1.7 1.2 1.7
Westbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
0 520 4
.95 .95 .95
-4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 2 0
.9 .8 .9
Northbound
L T R
0> 1< 0
Southbound
L T R
0> 1< 0
0 0 0 0 0 44
.95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95
0 -3
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1
Adjustment Factors
Vehicle Critical Follow -up
Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf)
Left Turn Mayor Road 5.50 2.10
Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60
Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30
Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection
Step 1: RT from Minor Street
NB SB
Conflicting Flows: (vph) 627 262
Potential Capacity: (pcph) 666 1020
Movement Capacity: (pcph) 666 1020
Prob. of Queue -free State: 1.00 0.95
Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue -free State:
TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
Major LT Shared Lane Prob.
of Queue -free State:
1254
364
364
1.00
3800
1900
1.00
524
897
897
0.91
3800
1900
0.85
Step 3: TH from Minor Street
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue -free State:
Step 4: LT from Minor Street
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Major LT, Minor TH
Impedance Factor:
Adjusted Impedance Factor:
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
NB SB
1823 1821
94 94
0.85 0.85
80 80
1.00 1.00
NB SB
1819 1821
73 73
0.85 0.85
0.88 0.88
0.84 0.88
62 64
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Intersection Performance Summary
FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay
Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App
SB R 46 1020 > 1020 > 3.7 > A
EB L 80 897 4.4 A 0.2
Intersection Delay = 0.2
9
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes without Project File SRW -H1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Summary of Parameter Values
Intersection Parameters
METROAREA
LOSTTIME
LEVELOFSERVICE
NODELOCATION
NONCBD
3.0
C S
0 0
Approach Parameters
APPLABELS
GRADES
PEDLEVELS
PARKINGSIDES
PARKVOLUMES
BUSVOLUMES
RIGHTTURNONREDS
Movement Parameters
MOVLABELS
VOLUMES
WIDTHS
LANES
UTILIZATIONS
TRUCKPERCENTS
PEAKHOURFACTORS
ARRIVALTYPES
ACTUATIONS
REQCLEARANCES
MINIMUMS
IDEALSATFLOWS
FACTORS
DELAYFACTORS
NSTOPFACTORS
GROUPTYPES
SATURATIONFLOWS
N
.0
0
NONE
0
0
55
RT TH LT
236 1395 64
12.0 33.0 12.0
1 3 1
.00 .00 .00
3.0 .0 1.0
.64 .95 .95
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
1568 5510 1787
Phasing Parameters
SEQUENCES
PERMISSIVES
OVERLAPS
CYCLES
GREENTIMES
YELLOWTIMES
CRITICALS
EXCESS
E
-3.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
S
.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
06/30/ **
17:50:51
W
.0
0
NONE
0
0
300
RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT
12 318 248 200 904 158 1248 1056 623
.0 24.0 12.0 .0 24.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 12.0
0 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 1
.00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 .0 2.0
.92 .92 .98 .95 .95 .95 .94 .94 .92
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM
0 3784 1814 0 3639 1752 1583 3800 1770
67 ALL
NO NO NO NO
YES YES YES YES
110 140 10
5.80 3.83 34.68 15.98 59.72
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
10 10 2 6 10
0
LEADLAGS
OFFSET
PEDTIME
NONE
.00
.0
NONE
1
0
ID
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes without Project File SRW -H1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance
Sq 67 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5
* * / **
/ \
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
v +
A
<+ + +>
* * ** + + +
v + + +
A
G /C= .041
G= 5.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .027
G= 3.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.0%
G /C= .248
G= 34.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.6%
G /C= .114
G= 16.0"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.2%
G /C= .427
G= 59.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.5%
06/30/ **
17:50:24
C =140 sec G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
MVMT TOTALS N Approach
Param:Units RT TH LT
AdjVol: vph
Wid /Ln:ft /#
g/C Rqd @C:%
g/C Used: %
SV @E: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
E Approach S Approach W Approach Int
RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
283 1615 67 14 363 253
12/1 33/3 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1
34 39 27 0 30 32
25 25 5 0 12 12
387 1404 64 0 434 193
222 999 166 1009 1179 677 6847
0/0 24/2 12/1 12/1 24/2 12/1
0 42 29 67 40 47
0 31 10 56 43 43
0 1131 156 886 1648 767 7070
D F F E+ F
.71 1.15 .77 .00 .82 1.15
52.4107.6108.4 .0 69.0129.0
62 724 30 0 108 136
64 403 17 0 92 63
F F F C D+
.00 1.08 .91 1.14 .71 .88
.0 85.2137.5 87.6 33.5 47.9
0 433 95 368 165 135
0 305 41 252 242 155
E
.99
79.1
2256
1634
Max Que:veh 16 134 5
Max Que: ft 417 1118 125
APPR TOTALS
Param:Units N Approach
AdjVol: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
Max Que:veh
Max Que: ft
0 26 23
0 324 586
0 83 12 61 52 30 442
0 1046 294 1546 649 754 1546
E Approach
Int
S Approach W Approach Total
1965 630 1387 2865 6847
F
1.07
99.7
816
484
F
.95
93.1
244
155
F D
1.06 .90
91.5 56.0
528 668
346 649
E
.99
79.1
2256
1634
155 49 95 143
1118 586 1046 1546
442
1546
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes without Project File SRW-H1P
06/30/ **
17:50:19
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Capacity Analysis Summary
Intersection Averages:
Degree of Saturation (v /c) .99 Vehicle Delay 53.6@ Level of Service E
@ expect more delay due to extreme v /c's (see EVALUATE)
Sq 67 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5
* * / **
/ \
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
v +
<+ + +>
* * ** + + +
v + + +
A
A
G /C= .041
G= 5.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .027
G= 3.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.0%
G /C= .248
G= 34.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.6%
G /C= .114
G= 16.0"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.2%
G /C= .427
G= 59.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.5%
C =140 sec
G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
1 Lane (Width /1 g/C I Service Rate Adj l HCM L 190% Max
Group Lanes Reqd Used @C (vph) @E Volume v/c Delay S Queue
N Approach
62.3@ F
RT
TH
LT
12/1
33/3
12/1
.338
. 389
.271
.255
.255
.049
1
1
1
387
1404
64
283
1615
67
.707
1.150
.770
34.5
67.1@
64.2
D
*F
F
417 ft
780 ft
125 ft
S Approach
67.0@ F
LT 12/1 .294 1 .105 1 491 1 1131
156 1221 11.08 1 69.0 @1 F 1 294 ft
E Approach
65.1@ F
LT 12/1 1 .315 l .121 l 1 1 193 l 253 11.150 92.6 @l *F +l 435 ft)
W Approach
RT 12/1
TH 24/2
LT 12/1
. 674
.404
.470
.560
.434
.434
785
1355
589
886
1648
767
1009
1179
677
1.139
.715
.883
38.6@ D
62.3@ *F
22.1 C
31.9 D+
874 ft
649 ft
754 ft
�v
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes with Project File SRW -P1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Summary of Parameter Values
Intersection Parameters
METROAREA
LOSTTIME
LEVELOFSERVICE
NODELOCATION
NONCBD
3.0
C S
0 0
Approach Parameters
APPLABELS
GRADES
PEDLEVELS
PARKINGSIDES
PARKVOLUMES
BUSVOLUMES
RIGHTTURNONREDS
Movement Parameters
MOVLABELS
VOLUMES
WIDTHS
LANES
UTILIZATIONS
TRUCKPERCENTS
PEAKHOURFACTORS
ARRIVALTYPES
ACTUATIONS
REQCLEARANCES
MINIMUMS
IDEALSATFLOWS
FACTORS
DELAYFACTORS
NSTOPFACTORS
GROUPTYPES
SATURATIONFLOWS
N
.0
0
NONE
0
0
55
RT TH LT
236 1395 64
12.0 33.0 12.0
1 3 1
.00 .00 .00
3.0 .0 1.0
.64 .95 .95
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
1568 5510 1787
Phasing Parameters
SEQUENCES
PERMISSIVES
OVERLAPS
CYCLES
GREENTIMES
YELLOWTIMES
CRITICALS
EXCESS
67
NO
YES
110
5.79
4.00
10
0
E
-3.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
RT TH LT
12 321 250
.0 24.0 12.0
0 2 1
.00 .00 .00
.0 1.0 1.0
.92 .92 .98
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
0 3784 1814
S
.0
0
NONE
0
2
0
RT TH LT
202 904 158
.0 24.0 12.0
0 2 1
.00 .00 .00
2.0 1.0 3.0
.95 .95 .95
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
0 3638 1752
ALL
NO NO NO
YES YES YES
140 10
3.83 34.64 16.09 59.65
4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
10 2 6 10
LEADLAGS
OFFSET
PEDTIME
06/30/ **
17:54:01
W
.0
0
NONE
0
0
300
RT TH LT
1248 1062 623
12.0 24.0 12.0
1 2 1
.00 .00 .00
2.0 .0 2.0
.94 .94 .92
3 3 3
YES YES YES
4.0 4.0 4.0
5.0 5.0 5.0
1900 1900 1900
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
NORM NORM NORM
1583 3800 1770
NONE NONE
.00 1
.0 , 0
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes with Project File SRW -P1P
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance
Sq 67 Phase 1 Phase 2 I Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5
* * / **
/ \
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
v +
A
<+ + +>
* * ** + + +
V + + +
A
A
A
G /C= .041
G= 5.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .027
G= 3.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.0%
G /C= .247
G= 34.6"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.6%
G /C= .115
G= 16.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.2%
G /C= .426
G= 59.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.5%
C =140 sec
MVMT TOTALS
Param:Units
AdjVol: vph
Wid /Ln:ft /#
g/C Rqd @C:%
g/C Used: %
SV @E: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
Max Que:veh
Max Que: ft
06/30/ **
17:53:23
G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int
RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
283 1615 67
12/1 33/3 12/1
34 39 27
25 25 5
386 1403 64
14 366 255
0/0 24/2 12/1
0 30 32
0 12 12
0 437 194
224 999 166 1009 1186 677 6861
0/0 24/2 12/1 12/1 24/2 12/1
0 42 29 67 41 47
0 31 10 56 43 43
0 1129 156 885 1646 767 7067
D F F
.71 1.15 .77
52.5107.8108.4
62 725 30
64 403 17
E+ F
.00 .82 1.15
.0 69.0129.9
0 109 138
0 93 63
F F F C D+ E
.00 1.08 .91 1.14 .72 .88 .99
.0 86.2137.5 88.0 33.7 47.9 79.4
0 440 95 370 167 135 2271
0 305 41 252 244 155 1637
16 134 5
418 1120 125
APPR TOTALS
Param:Units N Approach
AdjVol: vph
Svc Lvl:LOS
Deg Sat:v /c
Avg Del:s /v
Tot Del:min
# Stops:veh
Max Que:veh
Max Que: ft
0 26 24
0 326 593
E Approach
0 84 12 61 52 30 444
0 1058 294 1552 654 755 1552
Int
S Approach W Approach Total
1965 635 1389 2872 6861
F
1.07
99.9
817
484
F
.96
93.5
247
156
F D
1.06 .91
92.3 56.1
535 672
346 651
E
.99
79.4
2271
1637
155 50 96 143
1120 593 1058 1552
444
1552
• •
South Ryan Way
M. L. King way @ S. Ryan /Boeing Access Road
Year 2002 Volumes with Project File SRW -P1P
06/30/ **
17:53:16
SIGNAL94 /TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Capacity Analysis Summary
Intersection Averages:
Degree of Saturation (v /c) .99 Vehicle Delay 53.6@ Level of Service E
@ expect more delay due to extreme v /c's (see EVALUATE)
Sq 67 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 Phase 4' Phase 5
* * / **
North
+>
<+
* * ** +
v +
<+ + +>
* * ** + + -I-
+ + +
<+ *
v
A
G /C= .041
G= 5.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= .0%
G /C= .027
G= 3.8"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF= 7.0%
G /C= .247
G= 34.6"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =12.6%
G /C= .115
G= 16.1"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =40.2%
G /C= .426
G= 59.7"
Y +R= 4.0"
OFF =54.5%
C =140 sec G =120.0 sec = 85.7% Y =20.0 sec = 14.3% Ped= .0 sec = .0%
1 Lane (Width /1 g/C 1 Service Rate' Adj 1 HCM L 190% Max
Group Lanes Reqd Used @C (vph) @E Volume v/c Delay S Queue
N Approach 62.3@ F
RT
TH
LT
12/1
33/3
12/1
.338
.389
. 271
.255
.255
.049
1
1
1
386
1403
64
283
1615
67
.709
1.151
.770
34.6
67.1@
64.2
D 418 ft
*F 780 ft
F 125 ft
S Approach 67.0@ F
1 LT +RT1 12/1 1 .:.94 .104 1 488 1 1129
156 1 1223
166 11.083 .907 1 69.11 @1 F 1 294 ft1 1
E Approach 65.0@ F
437 LT 12/1 1 .316 1 .122 1 1 1 194 1 255 11.154 92.5 @1 *F +1 438 ft)
W Approach 38.6@ D
RT
TH
LT
12/1
24/2
12/1
. 674
.405
.470
.559
.433
.433
784
1352
588
885
1646
767
1009
1186
677
1.140
.721
.883
62.3@
22.2
31.9
*F
C
D+
875 ft
654 ft
755 ft
l4,
• •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
File Name SRW- P2P.HC0
Streets: (N -S) 47th Avenue S. (E -W) Ryan Way
Major Street DirectionEW
Length of Time Analyzed60 (min)
Analyst C. V. Brown
Date of Analysis 6/20/0
Other Information 2002 Volumes with Project
Two -way Stop - controlled Intersection
No. Lanes
Stop /Yield
Volumes
PHF
Grade
MC's ( %)
SU /RV's ( %)
CV's ( %)
PCE's
Eastbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
45 1254 8
.95 .95 .95
4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
1.7 1.2 1.7
Westbound
L T R
0> 2< 0
N
0 520 4
.95 .95 .95
-4
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 2 0
.9 .8 .9
Northbound Southbound
L T R L T R
- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - --
0> 1< 0 0> 1< 0
5 0 0 0 0 44
.95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95
0 -3
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1.1 1.1 1.1 1 1 1
Adjustment Factors
Vehicle Critical Follow -up
Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf)
Left Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10
Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60
Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30
Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40
1 •
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection
Step 1: RT from Minor Street
NB SB
Conflicting Flows: (vph) 631 262
Potential Capacity: (pcph) 663 1020
Movement Capacity: (pcph) 663 1020
Prob. of Queue -free State: 1.00 0.95
Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB
Conflicting Flows: (vph)
Potential Capacity: (pcph)
Movement Capacity: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue -free State:
TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl)
Major LT Shared Lane Prob.
of Queue -free State:
1262
360
360
1.00
3800
1900
1.00
524
897
897
0.91
3800
1900
0.85
Step 3: TH from Minor Street NB SB
Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1827 1829
Potential Capacity: (pcph) 93 93
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements 0.85 0.85
Movement Capacity: (pcph) 79 79
Prob. of Queue -free State: 1.00 1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB
Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1823 1821
Potential Capacity: (pcph) 72 73
Major LT, Minor TH
Impedance Factor: 0.85 0.85
Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.88 0.88
Capacity Adjustment Factor
due to Impeding Movements 0.84 0.88
Movement Capacity: (pcph) 61 64
r�
•
Center For Microcomputers In Transportation
HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3
********************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Intersection Performance Summary
FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay
Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App
NB L 6 61 > 61 > 65.4 > F
SB R 46 1020 > 1020 > 3.7 > A
EB L 80 897 4.4 A 0.2
Intersection Delay = 0.4
1j
• •
I C E
Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.
Geotechnical, Geologic and Environmental Services
Tom Foster
RAL Development and Venture Company
1420 NW Gilman Boulevard, Suite 2206
Issaquah, Washington 98027
November 18, 1999
Letter Report
Geotechnical Consultation
Fill Evaluation
4737 South 107th Street
Tukwila, Washington
Seattle, Washington
File No. 0133 -007
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our geotechnical consultation regarding an evaluation of fill on
the western portion of a property located at 4737 South 107`h Street in Tukwila, Washington. Our
services were requested by Tom Foster of RAL Development and Venture Company (RAL) on November
3, 1999 and were authorized by Mr. Foster on November 4, 1999 The general location of the property is
shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Based on our discussions with Mr. Foster, RAL has an option to purchase the property with plans
to construct twelve or thirteen single- family houses on the site.
We understand that fill has been placed in the western portion of the property. Prior to this study,
the condition and distribution of the fill was not known. Frank Bill, the property owner, has indicated that
the surface fill is comprised of asphalt rubble.
SCOPE
The purpose of our services was to evaluate the distribution and thickness of the fill and to
provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for foundation support. Specifically, our scope of
services included:
1. Observe the distribution and thickness of the fill by excavating six test pits across the western portion
of the property.
2. Based on our site observations, provide a preliminary evaluation of the fill as it relates to planned site
development.
RECEIVED
CITY OF TL1 C%:" l
Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc., Meadow Creek Professional Center, 22525 SE 64th Place, Suite 202, Issaquah, Washington 98071 2001
Telephone: (425) 557 -4368 Fax: (425) 557 -4369
PERMIT CENTER
Tom Foster • •
RAL Development and Venture Company
November 18, 1999
Page 2
SITE CONDITIONS
GENERAL
Kathy Killman and Robert Ross of ICE conducted site visits on November 4 and 5, 1999 to
perform a geologic reconnaissance and observe the excavation of six test pits.
SURFACE CONDITIONS
The subject property is comprised of approximately 3 acres at 4737 South 107th Street in Tukwila,
Washington. The property is undeveloped with the exception of an existing house located in the north -
central portion. The western portion of the property where fill was reported to have been placed is the
subject of this study. This portion of the property is cleared and nearly level. The ground surface in this
area is generally covered with asphalt rubble. One area along the western property boundary is covered
with tall grass. Deciduous and evergreen trees are present around the perimeter of the fill area.
The property is bordered to the north by South Ryan Way and South 170`h Street, to the east and
south by developed residential properties and to the west by 47`h Avenue South.
We observed siltstone bedrock at the ground surface along the western property boundary. We
also observed bedrock in the cut slope along 47th Avenue South (west of the western property boundary).
We did not observe any surface water on the western portion of the property. However, we did observe a
12 -inch ductile iron pipe that daylights out of the fill on the south property boundary about 200 feet east
of the southwest property corner. Water was flowing out of the pipe (less than 10 gallons per minute) at
the time of our site visits. Based on our discussions with Mr. Bill, the pipe was installed to divert surface
water that was causing erosion in the eastern portion of the property.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The subsurface conditions on the western portion of the site were explored by conducting a
geologic reconnaissance and by excavating six test pits to depths ranging from 2 to 10.5 feet on
November 4 and 5, 1999 using a small trackhoe and a rubber -tired backhoe. The approximate locations
of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2.
The test pit excavations were continuously monitored by a geotechnical engineer or geologist
from our firm who examined and classified the soils encountered, observed ground water conditions and
prepared a detailed log of the test pit. Soils were classified in general accordance with the classification
system described in Figure 3. The log of the test pits are presented in Figure 4. The log indicates the
various types of soils encountered and the depths at which the soils or their characteristics change.
Observations of the ground water conditions were made as the test pits were excavated.
The subsurface conditions encountered in Test Pits TP -1 through TP -3 and TP -5 and TP -6
consisted of about 5.5 to 7 feet of fill. The fill generally consisted of a surface layer (0.3 to 1 feet thick)
of asphalt rubble, crushed rock and gravel overlying loose to medium dense sand with variable amounts
of silt and trace amounts of asphalt rubble, cobbles, gravel, newspaper, bricks, wire and old rags. The fill
in Test Pit TP -5 consisted mostly of asphalt rubble.
Underlying the fill in Test Pits TP -1, TP -2, TP -3 and TP -6 native soils were encountered
consisting of 0.5 to 1 feet of loose to medium dense silty sand with abundant fine roots (buried topsoil)
underlain by medium dense sand to the completion depths of 8 to 10.5 feet.
Underlying the fill in Test Pit TP -5, we encountered medium dense sand to the completion depth
of 8 feet.
Icicle Creek Engineers 0133007/111899
Tom Foster • •
RAL Development and Venture Company
November 18, 1999
Page 3
Test Pit TP -4 was excavated near the west property boundary where the fill terminates. Soils
encountered in Test Pit TP -4 consisted of 1.5 feet of loose silty sand with abundant fine roots (topsoil)
underlain by slightly weathered siltstone (bedrock) to the completion depth of 2 feet.
Ground water seepage was not observed in the test pits.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
Based on our observations of the test pits, it is our opinion that the fill is suitable for support of
lightly loaded residential structures, provided that certain geotechnical issues are addressed during final
design and construction.
Our explorations in the western portion of the property, excluding Test Pit TP -4, encountered 5.5
to 7 feet of fill underlain by native soil. In general, the fill appears to be in a loose to medium dense
condition and is generally suitable for foundation support of pavements and light building loads provided
that the foundation subgrade is replaced with a pad of structural fill. A typical scenario for foundation
construction on the fill would consist of placing the footings on a pad of structural fill at least one foot
thick. Prior to placement of the structural fill, the surface of the excavated area should be compacted with
heavy mechanical compaction equipment to a firm and unyielding condition.
It may be possible to use the existing fill as structural fill. Use of this material as structural fill is
based on several factors such as weather and particle size distribution.
We recommend that a representative from our firm be present to observe earthwork activities
related to foundation subgrade to evaluate the condition of the existing fill and observe placement of
structural fill.
USE OF THIS REPORT
We have prepared this letter report for use by RAL Development and Venture Company and their
architect and engineers for their use in design of a portion of this project. The data and report should be
provided to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions
and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions.
If there are changes in the grades, locations, configurations or types of the facilities planned, the
conclusions and recommendations presented in this report may not be applicable. If design changes are
made, we request that we be given the opportunity to review our conclusions and recommendations and to
provide a written modification or verification. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that
the final design and specifications be reviewed by our firm to see that our recommendations have been
interpreted and implemented as intended.
There are possible variations in subsurface conditions between the explorations and also with
time. A contingency for unexpected conditions should be included in the budget and schedule.
Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation by our firm should be provided during construction to
confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to
provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ
from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities
comply with contract plans and specifications.
Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in
accordance with generally accepted practices in this area at the time the report was prepared. No
warranties or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood.
Icicle Creek Engineers 0133007/111899
Tom Foster • •
RAL Development and Venture Company
November 18, 1999
Page 4
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
We trust this information meets your present needs. If you have any questions or if we can be of
further assistance, please call.
Document
ID: 0133007.LET
Two copies submitted
Yours very truly,
Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc.
Robert A. Ross, E.I.T.
Staff Geotechnical Engineer
Brian R. Beaman, P.G., P.E.
Principal Engineer /Geologist
Icicle Creek Engineers 0133007/111899
Job No. 0133 -007
"tiVIMM at•V's,,
rAgeth.f4A
rifitaV,
Wr NIN
agleatk\
th-/Vrairseent.4
i Project Site ��a�`����
-14W4Y4MNII
aviabl;:"Aggli
.mr ENE
0
Pmrted from TOPOI 031997 Wildflower Productions (www.topo.com)
2,000
4,000
Scale in Feet
Icicle Creek Engineers
N
Vicinity Map - Figure 1
Job No. 0133-007
RAR: 11/12/99
1/
' V r
/ / /7 i ;
s i\ • • \
) i I , . ./
\ I \ / / i 1 „ 1 N I .
, , ' ) , „ i
-_i , 1 1
Li
I
- - i.. -- - V - \ 7.., .,, :1/4,;:',..::',7 - , L ' ' •,,-,,!
s , \
. _i it k ' 1 ■ 1
” . AS TIC/
RTINOC4E! ' I
Illi
• 1
11
•
Unified Soil Classification System
•
MAJOR DIVISIONS
Soil Classification and
Generalized Group
Description
Coarse-
Grained
Soils
More than 50%
retained on the
No. 200 sieve
GRAVEL
More than 50%
of coarse fraction
retained on the
No. 4 sieve
CLEAN GRAVEL
GW
Well- graded gravels
GP
Poorly- graded gravels
GRAVEL WITH
FINES
GM
Gravel and silt mixtures
GC
Gravel and clay mixtures
SAND
More than 50%
of coarse fraction
passes the
No. 4 sieve
CLEAN SAND
SW
Well- graded sand
SP
Poorly- graded sand
SAND WITH
FINES
SM
Sand and silt mixtures
SC
Sand and clay mixtures
Fine
Grained
Soils
More than 50%
passing the
No. 200 sieve
SILT AND CLAY
Liquid Limit
less than 50
SILT AND CLAY
Liquid Limit
greater than 50
INORGANIC
ML
Low - plasticity silts
CL
Low - plasticity clays
ORGANIC
INORGANIC
OL
MH
Low plasicity organic s11.—
and organic clays
High - plasticity silts
CH
High - plasticity clays
ORGANIC
OH
High - plasticity organic silts
and organic clays
Highly Organic Soils
Primarily organic matter with organic odor
PT
Peat
Notes: I) Soil classification based on visual classification of soil in general accordance with ASTM D2488 -90.
2) Soil classification using laboratory tests is based on ASTM D2487 -90.
3) Description of soil density or consistency is based on interpretation of blow count data and/or test data.
Soil Moisture Modifiers
Soil Moisture
Description
Dry
Moist
Wet
Absence of moisture
Damp, but no visible water
Visible water
Soil Particle Size Definitions
Component
Size Range
Boulders
Greater than 12 inch
Cobbles
3 inch to 12 inch
Gravel
3 inch to No. 4 (4.78 mm)
Coarse
3 inch to 3/4 inch
Fine
3/4 inch to No. 4 (4.78 mm)
Sand
No. 4 (4.78 mm) to No. 200
(0.074mm)
Coarse
No. 4 (4.78 mm) to No. 10
(2.0 mm)
Medium
No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40
(0.42 mm)
Fine
No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200
(0.074 mm)
Silt and Clay
Less than No. 200 (0.074 mm)
Icicle Creek Engineers Soil Classification System - Figure 3
Depth
(feet) (1)
Soil Group
Symbol (2)
Test Pit Description (3)
Test Pit TP -1
0.0 - 0.5
Asphalt rubble and crushed rock fill
0.5 - 2.5
SP -SM
Gray fine to medium SAND with silt, and occasional gravel, cobbles, bricks and asphalt
rubble up to 12- inches in diameter (loose to medium dense, moist) (fill)
2.5 - 3.5
SM
Brown silty fine to medium SAND with occasional roots (loose to medium dense, moist) (fill)
3.5 - 4.5
SM
Light gray silty fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist) (fill)
4.5 - 6.5
SM
Gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel and occasional wood (medium dense, moist) (fill)
6.5 - 7.5
SM
Dark brown silty fine SAND with abundant fine roots (medium dense, moist) (buried topsoil)
7.5 - 10.5
SP
Brown fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist)
Test pit completed at 10.5 feet on 11/05/99
Disturbed soil samples obtained at 4.0, 7.0 and 8.5 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Test Pit TP -2
0.0 - 0.3
Asphalt rubble and crushed rock fill
0.3 - 3.0
SP -SM
Dark brown fine to medium SAND with silt, and occasional gravel, bricks, wood and asphalt
rubble (medium dense, moist) (fill)
3.0 - 4.5
SP -SM
Mottled orange and brown fine to medium SAND with occasional gravel
(loose to medium dense, moist) (fill)
4.5 - 6.5
SM
Light gray silty fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist) (fill)
6.5 - 7.5
SM
Dark brown silty fine SAND with abundant fine roots (medium dense, moist) (buried topsoil)
7.5 - 10.0
SP
Brown fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist)
Test pit completed at 10.0 feet on 11/05/99
Disturbed soil samples obtained at 2.0, 6.0 and 9.0 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Test Pit TP -3
0.0 - 0.5
Asphalt rubble and crushed rock fill
0.5 - 1.5
SP -SM
Dark brown fine to medium SAND with silt and occasional gravel (medium dense, moist)
(fill)
1.5 - 6.5
SM
Light gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel and occasional cobbles, and trace amounts
of wire (loose to medium dense, moist) (fill)
6.5 - 7.0
SM
Dark brown silty fine SAND with abundant fine roots (medium dense, moist) (buried topsoil)
7.0 - 9.0
SP
Grayish -brown fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist)
Test pit completed at 9.0 feet on 11/05/99
Disturbed soil sample obtained at 4.0 feet
Moderate caving of test pit walls observed from 2 to 6 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Test Pit TP -4
0.0 - 1.5
SM
Dark brown silty fine to medium SAND with abundant fine roots (loose, moist) (topsoil)
1.5 - 2.0
Rock
Brown SILTSTONE (bedrock)
Test pit completed at 2.0 feet on 11/05/99 because of practical refusal on bedrock
Disturbed soil sample obtained at 2.0 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Sec notes on next page.
Icicle Creek Engineers
Test Pit Logs - Figure 4
Depth
(feet) (1)
Soil Group
Symbol (2)
Test Pit Description (3)
Test Pit TP -5
0.0 - 1.0
GP
Dark brown fine to coarse GRAVEL with sand and asphalt rubble (dense, moist) (fill)
1.0 - 2.0
SP
Brown fine to medium SAND with abundant fine roots (loose, moist) (fill)
2.0 - 7.0
ASPHALT rubble with sand and gravel (medium dense to dense, moist) (fill)
7.0 - 8.0
SP
Brown fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist)
Test pit completed at 8.0 feet on 11/05/99
Disturbed soil sample obtained at 7.5 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Test Pit TP -6
0.0 - 0.5
GP
Brown fine GRAVEL and asphalt rubble (medium dense, moist) (fill)
0.5 - 5.5
SM
Gray silty fine to medium SAND with gravel and occasional cobbles
(loose, moist) (fill)
Grades to medium dense at 4.0 feet
5.5 - 6.0
SM
Dark brown silty fine SAND with abundant fine roots (medium dense, moist) (topsoil)
6.0 - 8.0
SP
Brown fine to medium SAND (medium dense, moist)
Test pit completed at 8.0 feet on 11/05/99
Disturbed soil samples obtained at 4.5 and 7.5 feet
No ground water seepage observed
Notes:
(1) The depths on the test pit logs are shown in 0.1 foot increments, however these depths are based on approximate measurements
across the length of the test pit and should be considered accurate to 0.5 foot. The depths are relative to the adjacent ground
surface.
(2) The soil group symbols are based on the soil classification system described in Figure 3.
(3) The approximate test pit locations are shown in Figure 2.
133007tp.wb2/111799
Icicle Creek Engineers Test Pit Logs - Figure 4 (continued)
Co M.
(iergl■
R111.71.40.
LEGAL DESCRIPGOR
4/0 WPM. 10 AIM rs CM:NM AS COLLOM
sm. lo TIVE001 IA mem, A= TRACI'S OnASICN NO. 2
ACCATIoN 70 OIL CITY Or SOME_ ACOMM0 ro Put PtCoRaco
vol. 12 Or stfirs ...cm) os.”.
vommoICN: Do, M 0.0101 10 TILT TKOLOr CORAtsLO TO
KNO osultr MR AO. Or CCM Kart= MEM MOMS r0.2
22■2113, crazy/ scit to Mt Cr MO TRACT la
McCrCO 70 laN0 0:0007 rot 4.77..tmE ,szpi orp.„,
PICMOCO A.CCR MOTORS ME No
PPM. Or TRACTS 10 MO 11 AS COSMO. mc cop./
3,..77AoR Ccull MUST MAIM 213002. rco swat
:H MARK
coi st cont. a' 2310.0oNC. OAR COR Krug om • m
coma s. tzo • srsl r s 'WM 1SM TICS0 220tx
I 2.0.1 FA. cc
Oxv. nom
--- ...........
9.
I
co
/ \
/ I
S. 107TH ST- .
7939
▪ LOP
•
14
9.582 sp.11.
7041
-------- J___
2.02
la.
.4. 6.931 sq.11
1
2
6,931 sc1.8.
78.29'
30
123.30'
70.04
70 01'
L,
95.01.
L-49.19. kir
9,005 sp
8,176 sq.n.
6.567 sq.11.
655 yr
--------- J
62.04'
67 655
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 ,
6.519 tz lfl '0 ,
— 7
10. CONC CULVERT
LINS,123S.
7 .107.00
1.1 IL ITCCISE
. .
, 18
, •
a
1
1
• g
- I
2
0.
R.A.L. DEVELOPEMENT
vuaau�
PROPERTY AT S. RYAN WAY
SITE PLAN
MIT 0/13/00
AN MI 1517 003
DR9VDO3 1411517-377
REET
1 CI 1
•
SS
SS
SS
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
•
of, 463 —1hr.
Er.:78
- 50 RANT OF RAY
TO BE VAC-A.
iTirfri ST.
1 I 3 7L. ^ 2 2
87-15,58" L. 7.. • - i
4‘. '
\\ \ \?
1,1111111_1
1-4-11741-14-11--t1\
:3 2
ess1.--5S.
24
I
449.95'
P4,872
\\ 4,
\ I \ I 5 \ •
.® roa
\ I 4 \ \ I '''
4, \ ,
\k I \ \I 1
1 zj \ 0 1
INDEX
I COVER SHEET/NORIZCNTAL CONTROL
2 GRADING / DRAINAGE PLAN
3 PROFILES
4 NOTES & DETAILS
5 SEWER PLAN
6 SEWER PROFILES
7 WATER PLAN
a T.E.S.C. PLAN
9 SLOPE AND MEC PLAN
OWNER
Tgili.o.TZONWNT
ROO S. CP. KA.. SUITT
LEGAL DESCRIPTP3N
LANO RSIERREO TO 14EPER4 °CSC... FOLLORT
TRACTS 10 04■40001 11 WERIVACS A011E 111ACTS CORSON TA A0011104 TO
OK OTT OF s[Anu. AMMO. TO PLAT RECORIXO R1 PLUME 42 CS MATS
AT 46016) 01. IN KRA COUNT, WASIACTON: EXCEPT 44 MORIN 10 RAT
WRAC! GPM/. TO MC COUNTY FOR RO. BY CUD RECC410414 UNDER
ATATTC4F5 nu NO. 29.551.1 4.10 EXCITT TR SCSI 10 FEET OF SAO TRACT
10 001A.ETED TO ONO COUNT. fop 47IN WA. SOU. BY OEM RECCP003
UNDER AUCACR'S MI NO. 301158, NA E•MPT MAT PCRIION Cr TRACTS
10 ANO 11 AS COMDR. INFRA COUNTY SINIRAR COAT CAUSE NLArt.
413089. FOR STREET.
TAX PARCEL NUMBERS
547680 0060
WHO 00:00
=80 CO"„0
BENCH MARK
=PARE 01 SE CLOMP 3X3 CONC. RASE me must BOX • SW
00.ER OF S LEO ST. • 51S7 AVE. S MATTA (NOR FIELD NOM 23.114 PACE 21.
CLEV 44 35610
ISSTPUMENTAIICS1
non SURVEY 0311TROL RAS 114 CLOSED 1WAKITSE
Call
before you
1-800-424-5555
141040144440 SCRWE MA)
AKA CLIMB U140EROROUND
untsn, WES Irs COST,
NOTE:
COSMIC 0/41114CCATIOn 910.01 MORON ART N4PROXYAR ONL■
17 S.. TIT TNT 074TR.TORS RESPONSRUTY 10 OSITANNE 114E
CAC, wrincs NOWFONTAL LCCADO1 CF ERMA UNCCR-
ARV. 1.1114110 PR= TO C0.4040140 CONSTRUCT.. NO
RONWSWATS01 YAM MAT AAA MONO USURER 94011N
.1 ZORN OR unarms 4.51 940:N MON PPCIZI LECITIOr
CNA TAM VOLI 1-acco-o•-as.
8-
8
04
R.A.L DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
5
0
0
0
1—
z
0
0
(T)
LX
0
0016 0/10.400
MEI NO 1117-4013
DRASINC NO.LUZ=ZA
SKIT
1 Or 9
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ss
ss
M';� `/M.1*mi'METM
05 0 ^4/
DM. Ull17. la RE I u11114170:31',
— 8. 187TH S —
s ^ A x- r -g_
lil
\
\';
\\\,.\\ 304
\ )` \ \ \ \ F-r \'.\\ \ \\\\\ YI
`19'1vIv \v \ \vyvh vvvvA!
I\ II II 1 \, 11 v \I \I \ \ \i i \I \ i h I/ i ),
%/"1.1`17
-se-
•
4
-O e., ORA:<
Nwn� M1.td Moro)
I I I I I I
IiI I I I / /1 )
I l �l l li� i\ l
1 f T-\
\,.1,\'\\,,,.‘\.\\\\`'\;:i
�•.'�'.+��w�a 7��. {wl 7 O>•.:•
e,rt, I \g \ 1`_\'I x Sit a. ®�'i
\-\ \ \ \\ \v
1 9 P / :..
I \\"\1\
1,- , \ \\l \I \\
_
0 \1
\ \ \I
\\ \1
11. SAcaum
aL o.,
CaII
before you
1- 800 - 424 -5555
AVM CUITINC 1010007•01.1.
MIL,17 u
NOTE
Mt (SW WALL RE Ad x-17 OR [CURL
NOTE:
eaS7110C LOCAMIS 910•01 MOOR 411, MARRO= di.
REPRESERIAIION WOE NAT ALL [43.0 UdrirAlC 910101
ir 910.1 OR MHO MOT SMoot IIMR MAR LOWS,.
01701E MI 1-1M- 424-55.11
E
0
x
ea
a�9
=1a
xe9
R.A.L DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
DATE 0/10/00
JOB NO 1307-003
ONNN1NO N0.1517-22.5
9
2 cr 9
•
'3N 3H1 JO NO112JOd
s
Oran
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
PRAECT
• RYAN WAY PROPERTY
PREPARED BY
Balma & Holmberg Inc.
CNOIN1BRB h SURYBYOBB
RH -RS.. Da.RO� umom.
Out .. I.es >w -m
SHEET CONTENT •
• ROAD PROFILES
DESIGNED BY [DRAWN BY
T.1R. N.D.O.
ICHECKED BY
E.u+
Jmom vm /m
REV. N04
DESCRIPTION
BY
010
DATE
,
f3.I1
?6.
.
s¢
us
i
MEW :
1
It
4111111 : x
wimplim
_
D`x4
gr
.;
..v,
luo
Xy �
ey
I
r
31171,12
,
/ (
-jr.
� 9 t •
ax
nisi
iM
!ill;
!j_
ya
404 sag. ,
s
NiC
1117
99
•
I§ Y
5`
f : rro iwBRHVrxn
a,e�
. r
Mwd
.RSUn
I
,.„
1/
'3N 3H1 JO NO112JOd
s
Oran
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
PRAECT
• RYAN WAY PROPERTY
PREPARED BY
Balma & Holmberg Inc.
CNOIN1BRB h SURYBYOBB
RH -RS.. Da.RO� umom.
Out .. I.es >w -m
SHEET CONTENT •
• ROAD PROFILES
DESIGNED BY [DRAWN BY
T.1R. N.D.O.
ICHECKED BY
E.u+
Jmom vm /m
REV. N04
DESCRIPTION
BY
010
DATE
,
f3.I1
?6.
MEW :
1
It
4111111 : x
wimplim
le
'3N 3H1 JO NO112JOd
s
Oran
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
PRAECT
• RYAN WAY PROPERTY
PREPARED BY
Balma & Holmberg Inc.
CNOIN1BRB h SURYBYOBB
RH -RS.. Da.RO� umom.
Out .. I.es >w -m
SHEET CONTENT •
• ROAD PROFILES
DESIGNED BY [DRAWN BY
T.1R. N.D.O.
ICHECKED BY
E.u+
Jmom vm /m
REV. N04
DESCRIPTION
BY
010
DATE
I. ALL ND 005/A.14 51N0AR9 SP DDCAITORT LEST SPEOICATONS
ED,.
2 POOR TO MT wooATTEND PRE- CONSTRCUCTwoo,. 6uE NO ATTEND ,. IN CITY
OP .9. CONSTRUCTION NSPECNPI PERSCONEL
1 A COPY Or MET APPROVED PLANS ROT MON 50(1
ONSTRUOTION IS P4 PROGRESS
PLANS ANT MOTION FRON
TIES[ PAM NEL REQUIRE RNNO W 014.. . LNOGER
AT PUNT MOT.
117 iRALL BR TM SCLE RESPONSNILITY Or TM CONTRACTOR 7D
0137AN STREET USE MO ANY OMER MATED PERRIS PRIOR TO ANY
0. ALL LOwRNE GE EE5r.0 UTRRS SRIN TcR[OII RAN
7TH arAe Dar MIMEO: [ YSSGR wL OXI AA, r
OF TIT CONTRACTOR TO 9wOEixnY VERIFY DLLiT wIRTR". CY Or
owDOrs .DAN N ° m TTIRT w "17.,1
ArT2C7170 BY TIT 11APSENENTATION TMS PLAN. ME CONTRACTOR
STOLL CONTACT RwS R'O r% �(I T AT LEAST 44 HOUR PRIOR n Tiw na
0.9 OR NIS IREPRESENTATVE . OPEC. 9/4L BE
ANT STORM
STALLL DE O [GE O STRUCTURES. 77FOLLC NT «04140 N TE
ALL A. TARO ET IRA. nSSmRD PLANS 0-01. y
SSOOATED SAND AM/ a INLET
C. -C CATCH EQUAL - ASSOCIATED SAND AND GRAVEL w -IS. OR Ewu.
0, MITE 1-0 CATCH DAM - ASSCOATEll WO NT ORA. 02-1
01 EOUAL
L TYPE 1-20 NON CATOI BASH - (ITN WTRRI N NOES OUP SNAP
MOW 500R0 ASSOOAT[ SAM NO O AV9 w -49. OR COPAL
wltN MSM a EGUASSODATE I SAND(IRAw GRAVEL ]A NOES PRECAST
(TM
wrt} .RSDOAEp SANG AND ORA. 773 5104 PRECAST CATCH
1991, OR EOUAL
N. SM./ CA701 BASINS CR MANAGE STRUCTURES MALL BE AS
DE7A71.10 IN RIESE PLANS
NOTE ALL UNIT COVERS STALL OE P. CIO TR.�w"IR� zs0na
OF MIT a AND Ec,04170,
9 ALL SCUD SMALL A NON
OR DUCTILE IIR. A a TD
INANE AND GRATE - OL.NPC rCI,NRY CO. NO 9180 0/1 ON
B. SELF-LOOPING VANED CRAM - CLYINTO TOMMY CO. NO. 9.150-SL OP
EQUAL
RECTANGULAR COVER - OLYMPIC FOUNDRY CO No. MRCS
D/T GR E
D. SOOT LOC D ROUND CO COVER MM CO. NO .30 0/8. r RESPECTIVELY 0*
EBE w ° "P
NOTE 91. OBOES 91.11. NO POLLUTANTS: ALL 9OTO COL SMALL TN STRRONDING
CURB OR PA,E,E„T 10 MM. ADEQUATE a .
MNFRN NOT.
I. ALL TOM AND TNES SHALL B[ IN ACCORDANCE IRM I E
LATEST AND S I /4PTGE. STANDARD 0E21CATIONS. ice T EDQON RCIIS.
_ 1 `
OULE TOY. ATTEND A CarsTwCITON INSPECTION ION CSCCONTRACTOR
ML. a PM 0
ON Prnsa«R.
LOCATIONS AM APPROVED PL. SET 54.1 BE ON ITT 508 STE
CONSTRUCTION TS IN MOORE..
4. ALL VT RORK NPROYEATENTS STALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN
ACCORDANCE NM APPROVED PLANS. ANY MM... FROM APPRO.
REAM DILL MOINE POOR APPRO. FRCP ME OP.. MEM.
MO APPROPRIATE PUNT ACENCIES.
117 91ALL BE DT SOILE IRESPONSIMET Or ME CONTRACTOR 70
OBTAIN SIRE. USE AHO MY OTILER RELATED PERRIS PRIM TO ANY
CONSTRUCTOR ACTIVITY
11. ALL 04GDCEAA
KEN
[TMIU D BY ADDSwNYCR OBTAINED IRON AVAILABLE
RECORDS NT SNOULD IMPLY-ORE BE COMORE° APPROPMATE ONLY
AND ROT NECESSARILY COAPLETT /7 IS TM SOLE RESPONSOUTT
OF TM CONTRACTOR TO INDEPEMENTLY TREY DT AO:URA. OF
ALL MUM LOCATORS
..1.�DBUNTIS NOT 910.10 HEREON . LISCOVER
01 CONTRACTOR MAY BE
AVM ANY g5 (I_
STOLL Svs) AT LEAST IRA MOORS PRIOR LOCATION
CO%T10104 nE
72.07 OR NTS REPRESENTAITT AND ITIE ENE.. 9491 BE
CONTACTED NAIEDIATTLY CORTICES
, N RANT.
HEREON A
.SHALL BE MOD GET BY TM MRWYORP R R MOOED
OR A NSA M TI SST VAa E. REMORA.
COPACTION. 11115 TOST540 ROAD SNAIL BE REPLACED NTH AT
Row
EEC. E 000 UPON ALL OL REPLACEMENT R IOMEN ADAOx,H[ TOP CORM
MENG SECTION
I. OL.PC FOND. SOE-LOOT VANED GRAIL 9■5050
ACCEPTANCE ALTON.. STALECT TO APPROVAL DY E1.1129.
IR`D (NP4N (/9 (4 DAOOCS AXTT,5 r
SPE.. NOT ROT Of7N1..
G. •OUTALL TO STREAM DRIP NO NALUTANTS �AY BE LOCA.
OCNOER ARM
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
11. 9L SPORN DRAN PIPE MAYBE CONSTIOCIED TOLL.. MATERIALS MUMS tMA RTE SPA o N DT PLANS AM RUST BE .17 ALL PPE .NTS ROT BE DASREIED WA. ME SAME MAITIOAL AS INT NET. ALL PM NWT A W..
COW, AS OECD. µ SHALL SE AVE OTECTE D
(30 - CaRER R04 2 HRw EflUD)CNs
A. DUCTILE PON - HOT TATOU. 14 MN NATTIER PPE
MALL BE CLASS 50 AND 18 NOT .0001 24 NO4 PPE
*4.I LT BE 1-- SS)50. 0911 .1 ACCORDANCE .RSV -w . AM[ ALL IR
w RANGED Or TN. COVER).
El CONCRETE - NON TROL. le NON
TER 9rT SHALL B
E
RON-REINKREED. 1501 0� THR01.101 38 5/04
D TOOT ETV
CONFORM. TO ASIA. 0491ETER PPE. RCMP). C
sRET STALL BE CON 50 5n 1 -n. (4 MI N
TRW MOH PIPE MP STLL T R ®D nINTERIOR TENTOT STALL BE OR EXTHE REOOMMENTS CEED
> C..P33 OR P34. CLASS C
FTR ASTM 0124. SI MOTOR TIT PPE AIR SIRTNC55 REOUPOR51S v AAST0 1094. (ADDS 8-42 OR EWALT CL
TEL ALL PPE BECONG STALL BE 5A TIN r 77GR 2589
PPE (IL PV0 SAP w ADS). ALL Rim 0710110 FIT GE 0T10E
IRON OR IR
CO. EATER AN 35 C
hn r
CRUSHED ROOT ONLY 7704 ALL NM EXCEPT 7704 BE NCR
II. AU. TRENCH IMO,. IN AREAS OF MT. LEAST 95 ..
OF PROCTOR) LL` DRY SNAIL E STALL E COMPACCTED TO 90 PERCENT
12 CORSOLICTION Or ,[R00 (ITUNDWAT NTTE�PT ) SPECIFICATIONS. SECTION 51-302.
SYSTEMS 900 BE N ACCORDANCE NTT THE APRA
1 THE CONTACTOR STALL
TN. BY PEEPINC. WASHING MESE STREETS VALL NOT BE ALLOWED
TWAT PRIOR OM OF 717101. APPROVAL
14. PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE CIT CONSTRUCTION AND/OR ISSUANCE DRAY.. MUST BE PREPARED v ALL STAN MONTE AWTIES
AO R/0 FACTURES TALL BE INSTALLED D N OPERATOR
PRIOR TO OR IN CONAN.. N.L CONSTRUCTION ACIMITY
UNLESS MAT ACTIVITY MODS TIT WATT, AND WENT Or TT
O92T/SEENENTATR MINTROL (Awltt 04 UNLESS OTHER59
APPROVED BY DT OM.
ELBOW DETAIL
2ETENTION/WATER QUALITY VAULT
STN.. SOLO LOOM MANHOLE RTC 710 MARKED
DEEP SR CUTOUT
1TE PTA
RISER WEIR DETAIL
ION x9_54 -ION R
4
900R Ell, SEIPAENT
H 2275
ELEVATION VIEW
MEM
2. MILT 900 BE CC.. AND SOAPED A MOTO. - - Br`'�E, SST[MOND DNS PRE-NST
u DR..
OE 01.09. RESSONT.
SECTION
CURB 011rtER
5. -AI1 O OA. 4OPPACI140 0°T OUR.
n (OTS0
Co CooMO o+ RU M FILL AS APPRO.. MO
Cell
before you
Dtg.
1- 800 - 424 -5555
wwwwww vulva LINTY 9x9. Irs Qd1M°CwE )
BOBORAM ETCTOIN
NOTE:
CUCT MOM ma, HOPIINTAL 0.11011 OF ALA MT. RPER-
CIACON AT. TO 0.4134910. cortsrkucmc NO
FOROOTTATON 1140E TOT 00 073.2 ml.719 RE .0.
5
to-
8
8
5
R.A.L DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
8 b
w
NOTES / DETAILS
PATE 0102/00
JOB N0(517-003
DRATEN0 1.1045llraOT-
01EET
4 a 9
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
SIM Y.^ .�.
r SS SS
1
8. 107TH 87. — — —
__
_ _ ? n g i 9 ' -__I __o
NN
__
\
\ \ `\ \y \ 11 \ 1\\ t7r ,\
1 ICI 1111
I3
•
4
\
ittl
11111//I�
I 1
`�I:` / I I
1 11111'1 \ \1 \\ \\I
� � I i 7 i 11 a.�.- \ \�
r�
a \ \ \ \I
k \ \,\ \\
L - 4 \ 1\\\
\ 1 \ \ ■
—� --
CaII
before you
Djg.
1- 800 - 424 -5555
NOTE:
0
El:
.9
Eli
Y4!
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
DATE 0/10/00
.U9 No 1317 -003
DRAWING NO.L1.12 $yt
SHEET
5 or 9
•
a
NlY
i
-zimisiii
V
f +9
nit
imminintrm
11111111111110
odIIIIIIIIIII
06.t3 1 z 01
1
11111111111,
.
!
)
I
a ;g..,. g
a
8:4
.a, I..r
1
(A
S
,
°
_
—I
LL
�
,'
,.,,
/
In
i
-zimisiii
nit
imminintrm
11111111111110
odIIIIIIIIIII
11111111111,
.
0
0
z
O
m
2
m
z
m
X�
zo
o
^m
l /
om
/mom
Z V)
m
1 DO
m
z
281
Om
OW
z
z
m
rn
E0
OYMER
R.A.L DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
PREPARED BY
Baima & Holmberg Inc.
ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS
WO ®.w f .n) at - o.
SNNEET CONTENT
SANITARY SEWER PROFILES
OESGNED BY I ORA. BY I CHECKED BY
T.1R. 8.0.0. T.J.R.
REV. N0
DESCRIPTION
BY
CH[
DATE
•
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
SCALE 30
Cell
before you
Dtg.
1 -800- 424-5585
umparowo 0100
UTTLITY WEI 1113 COW,
ROTE:
MAO 410.101 MARA 0100111•0001 PAA00011 OILY
IT WA • 10/1 00011101411. MAMMON 10 ern•ww se[
WA AMA. NOW011/4. 110,7011 0, ALL ow.* YAP-
AMA 111111TES A= TO 11001101010 110115110.100311. A
AM. NI CAN= AA. 11101101111.10 MT YARD
AT 9ADT 0011103 MT SAW III AM 010101 =ADA
UM PIA Al TA 1-0011-04-3531
ova
"8
N F
8
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
z
a
DAR D/10/1M
a H0151T -06]
OR••we 11D.1,1T —^41
SHEET
7 or 9
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
....................... . - - --
... ... --
__I�I t 1t
•
TEMPORARY BEOMENT TRAP OUTLET
F C 0.; '"`"
, - r
• TEMPORARY BEOMENT TRAP
\
TB.FO W Y SWALE
\D/
20002 RAS
FENCING
CaII
b.for. you
Dj g.
1- 800 - 424.5555
01.0201.00 MA)
u,Un 0.1 ors COSILY
000. 3/00.20
'AV wroi
COnnetelle0 720.0.
[0410.7 ■0012 ANo en. MC NC AYR
Woo ITC re 0/.0t0C UM 00.
S. mom itle 001, .127 00 et
NOTE:
casrma our. mutest 9.0I MOO. NO 2.002.11
0 SM. 07011.70e3 PLIPC.OUTI ID WON. 0r0
WOO 1.171020 000,1 70 COROLNO. cornmucvm
1001.1.0031 .0( .7 MSC. 1172201. Mt SHOW
10,400 0.1{ 0.400,1 0.0.1 0,03•00.LIT2 OT1111713
.1 WO. 00021201 .7 0.2111 0101 MK, isurcni
9
gS
R.A.L DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
T.E.S.C. PLAN
DATE E/10/01
JOB N0151T -003
DRAWN° 110.1117-311.15
SHEET
8 a 9 -
PORTION OF THE NE. 1/4, OF THE SE. 1/4 OF SEC. 3 TWN. 23 N., RNG 4 E., WM
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
•
SS
9
/
/
SO. RSCHT Or OA,
TO OE VACARD
107114 ST.
ari9.5e• 1
CB. .00 TOSE
Call
before you
DI9•
1- 800 - 424 -5555
oQ0
NOTE:
010170 101t11. 147101 CPAIDO*2 1.41111.10.,
N O▪ 7 LO Una. NOT SNOW 01 114011 1.0.1111.
R.A.L. DEVELOPMENT
RYAN WAY PROPERTY
5
a
w
w
0
w
0
0010 0/10/00
J00 M01317 -00]
FWfl,9. Mo.121, -14.0
SHEET
9 aE 9
•
di
L
23,eati --- 1
.. • _
3 Let:ar;i0 – , –
,
• . -
1
.• •
••
-::•• • -••
.• • •■ • • ••• •.••-• ■ • .• •••••
,„, ■••• •
„..
• "
,
- - 6
• , , ;,■• - y;;-;
NI•a•4
• .
In.t$4,■•
, •• • _
tr; ,
03
`kg!
Z' ..... . -
\y
i, ...- . " . -:•.)i... • s, A
Nss ,. el
4.,..0.;-
4( d 1 61e ...„ .',
\ i 1 1 •ct .
\ „ 4kii;:.,
V- ' ■,,,v
ett
,
, \
, ,
i \I 1/
1 ag 7°
-,,..., •)' 1
- KITAVVSIZ:t.MZ'i
I.L\ 1•A .
ts-'•
ti
til\ZeMliON,§1
t:t. • r$
:•
CO •
/ .
' -
3 '3AV HID, I. \tl•-.41'f4-'''.4-'''''-'-...
— —,,,,•
4. . \‘„,-
' ..,/,,, , . _ .„
—1 ;•;., . ,
.
1 , . v• , . ,
- ;• - .- . . ; ‘,-; -
\
, •
1311t1I j
;8 •
•
• ov.IN
-DitAT /.1A
11/4-4 A P •
-R014 og T
A eAto 5
30' ! t i; %
i .
t
I t.
t.
I i
1•'
BV.4.cid i % 1
i r
i
A
•
DRI%EWAY APPROACH
1X 03
Wr13110
CONNECT TO
NEW • COST. 4DEWAU(
CBS > / /
Cr. w
Raw b21
CC CO
tit -I1C,10
EJ1ST. UT1U TIES TO BE
RELOCATED AS NEEDED (TYP.)
25' ACCESS &
UTILITY EASEMENT
50' RIGHT OF WAY
TO BE VACATED
S 107TH • ST.
SAWLVT & MATCH DC
OJRB/OUTIER, SDEWAUC
& PAVING - REMOVE DL
CURB/GUTTER & SDEWAUC
9.
8719'58' W--4r 218.41:_..
•
es
Js
y 15
?C ° 28' -12'50
• 1.00%
STA 1 +20
CB/ TYPE I
R1 d- 114.31
NV- 111.00
STA 1 +20
CB/ TYPE 1
R1Y■114.31
NV- 111.28
•
•
CB/ TYPE I
RIF=
NV -93.47
23' -12-50
e Dam:
Cs/ TYPE I
RIM -
NV+96.35
6' P. SUtDRAN ,
-SEE OCTAL
26' -12'50 •
00.50%
6011 R/t' ,
INV -97.65
55d' RP
RAP PAD
PT - 3.0338
STA 3+24
CB/ TYPE I
R11=109.74 •
NV- 107.25 -
• 171' -12'50
10' CO C. CVlVORT
00/.97.65 f r
REPLACE Ex
W/35' -12'50 • 0.50L
CB/ TYPE L 48'
W/LOCIOIG VANED GRATE
RI•104.0t(MATCH GROUND)
INV -97.53
113' -12'93
• 7.23%
STA 3+24
C13# TYPE I
RI - 106.74
INV- 107.11
10' PUBUC J
DRAINAGE ESMT
STA 3+29. 22.1.7
GB/ TYPE L 48-
RIM-113.5t(11ATCx1 GROUID)
INVV•106.00
10' PUBUC DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
1 i.
CB/ TYPE L 48';
W/BitDCAGE OVERFLOW
STRUCTURE
R11- 142.01{MATCH GROUP ) 1
NV -140.00
18' -12'53
0 0.50%
CB/ TYPE % 48'
W/90LD LA0010 LE
8111- 140.0i{MATCH OtOUND)
NV -139.91
1f =Soy
ooPCsiTD
KING COUNTY
j * QEPT OF , ASSESSMENTS
KC 1892
1(22220 CRY
NE- 3 -23 -4
sQII�7 8
Yp
SEA TILE 22
•
* 8 Fellow SCALE I " =1001 OR . UMI...
. N.O...
•�at��{.Wrt Sw'�iV [ter...
0,4.77
107TH
1518.71
• 108TH St
S. 111114
194
CITY
to
•
M 57-9 -42 •
NE '10- .23 -4:
1515.599
. 1...1...7.
Y u•n..n. .