Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E02-011 - KHAN RESIDENCE - 2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCESKHAN / AIA INTERNATIONAL 2 LOT DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCT 2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON 2 SEPARATE LOTS 13800 MACADAM ROAD E02 -011 August 30, 2002 OP cry of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Tor -Jan Ronhovde The Ronhovde Architects 6625 South 190th Street, Suite B -105 Kent, Washington 98032 VIA FAX 425 -656 -0501 RE: SEPA Application (E02 -011) 138XX Macadam Road, Tukwila Tax Parcel 152304 -9149 (Lot 149) Tax Parcel 322920 -0010 (Lot 1). Dear Tor -Jan: We have not received any of the required documentation listed in our May 31st letter to you. Accordingly, per our June 19th meeting with you and the Khans, as well as my follow -up phone call to you on August 9th, we, have closed the above - referenced SEPA file. If, at some future date, the Khans wish to proceed with their proposal they will be required to submit a new application for a SEPA Determination. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Senior Planner cc: Nora Gierloff, Planning Manager Joanna Spencer, Associate Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Deborah Ritter - Khan SEPA E02 -011 ^1 -345 age From: Deborah Ritter To: Joanna Spencer; Nora Gierloff Date: 8/9/02 2:34PM Subject: Khan SEPA E02 -011, D01 -345 I spoke with Tor-jan Ronhovde this afternoon. He says the Khans will not build on the lot with the deck encroachment (for the time being) and they don't intend to change the size of the three lots in question. Their current focus is to find an acceptable driveway location that will serve all three lots. They intend to construct a house on the middle and southernmost lots. I asked him to have the Khans get to work on the access issue right away and to contact Joanna for feedback. I also reminded Tor -Jan that the SEPA file will be closed at the end of August if they don't supply the required SEPA items. Tor -Jan felt it that the access issue will take some time. He indicated that since it will affect the SEPA application, it may be preferable for the SEPA file to be closed and to resubmit another application at a later date. Tor -Jan will try to keep us posted in the coming weeks. May 31, 2002 • Guy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department � p Cpmm nine DeVetp meat Tor -Jan Ronhovde The Ronhovde Architects 6625 South 190th Street #B -105 Kent, WA 98032 VIA FAX 425 - 656 -0501 Re: Khan SEPA (E02 -011) 138XX Macadam Road, Tukwila Tax Parcel 152304 -0149 (Lot 149) Tax Parcel 322920 -0010 (Lot 1) Dear Mr. Ronhovde: Steve Lancaster, Director We have completed a detailed review of your SEPA application, submitted on April 26, 2002. Certain additional information is needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to complete our review process. We have the following comments: SEPA Comments — Public Works: 1. The SEPA Checklist was not signed. Please submit two complete copies of the SEPA Checklist that have been signed and dated by the person who prepared it. 2. The Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist is to be revised per the attached redlined comments. Please make the necessary revisions, date the documents and resubmit two complete , copies. 3. The site map is to be revised to clearly indicate all required buffers per the Geotechnical Engineering Report by LSI ADAPT, Inc. dated May 25, 2001. Please provide three copies of the revised site plan. 4. Please verify the cut/fill quantities for Lots 1(Tax Parcel 322920 -0010) and Lot 149 (Tax Parcel 152304 -0149) with egress to Macadam Road South from Lot 149. You are to provide stationing for all sheets and cut/fill calculations with cross - sections to support your calculations. 5. The combined driveway exit for Lot 149 and Lot 1 shall be placed far enough south to provide adequate sight distance along Macadam Road South. The proposed exit to the northeast corner of Lot 1 is not permitted. A Sight Distance Study (which has been stamped, signed and dated by an engineer licensed in the State of Washington) will be required to document a safe location for the combined driveway exit. Please submit two copies of the study. Courtesy Comments: The following items are not required at this time. However, you may wish to review these items in anticipation of your Miscellaneous and Building permit applications. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 Tor -Jan Ronhovde May 31, 2002 Page 2 6. Lot 1 and Lot 149 appear to contain Class 2 and 3 slopes (moderate to high landslide potential with slopes between 20 and 40 percent). As part of your land altering permit application you shall submit a separate site plan clearly showing the location of all slopes that are 20% or greater using ink shading or black hatchmarks. Do not use highlighter pens as they will not reproduce. 7. A retention /removal plan for the preservation of significant trees (having a caliper over 4 inches) and located on slopes 20% or greater will be required. The planting plan shall include diameter, species name, spacing and location of trees to be retained or used to replace vegetation cleared (per TMC 18.54.080(2). Each existing significant tree removed shall be replaced with new tree(s), based on the size of the existing tree as shown in TMC 18.54.130(3)(b) attached. PLEASE NOTE: A tree clearing permit will be required prior to the issuance of any land altering permit and the clearing of any vegetation in sensitive areas. The tree permit will be subject to the conditions set forth in TMC Chapter 18.54 (attached). 8. Please provide a water certification from King County Water District #125 and sanitary sewer certificate from Val -Vue Sewer District.. 9. PLEASE NOTE: Your proposed project is to comply with all requirements of the Geotechnical Engineering Report by LSI ADAPT, Inc. dated May 25, 2001 and subsequent amendments. 10. The private storm system shall be per the King County Surface Water Design Manual. 11. A private ingress /egress and utility easement/agreement will be required. 12. Verification must be provided clarifying whether or not Tax Parcel 322920 -0005 (which is not part of this proposal) will require ingress and egress via the joint driveway located on Lot 1 and Lot 149. Please refer to Nora Gierloffs letter to you dated May 30, 2002 regarding access concerns for Lot 2 under Building Permit D01 -345. Next Step: Upon receipt of all of the documentation requested in Items 1 through 5 above, we will continue processing your SEPA application. If you have any questions regarding Public Works comments, please contact Dave McPherson, Associate Engineer at 206 -433 -0179. Sincerely, --1-e-Pcw-a CAM__ Deborah Ritter Senior Planner .1, • Tor -Jan Ronhovde May 31, 2002 Page 3 cc: Lt. Don Tomaso, Fire Prevention Officer Dave McPherson, Associate Engineer MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING DEPT. — Deborah Ritter, Senior Planner FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. — David McPherson, Associate Engineer DATE: May 15, 2002 SUBJECT: Khan — 2 Lot Short Plat 138xx — Macadam Road S. SEPA and Informational Comments SEPA — E02 -011 1. Project to comply with Geotechnical Engineering Report, by LSI ADAPT, Inc., dated May 25, 2001 and subsequent geotechnical reports. 2. The Environmental Checklist and the Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist should be revised per the redlined comments - attached. 3. Provide water certificate from K. C. Water District # 125. 4. Provide sanitary sewer certificate from Val -Vue Sewer District. 5. Show any required buffers on a site map per the Geotechnical Report. 6. Verify the cut/fill quantities for Lots 1 & 149, with egress to Macadam Road S. from Lot 149. Provide cut/fill calculations with cross - sections for clearer understanding. Your previously submitted cut/fill calculations did not show stationing for all sheets. Informational Comments 1. Private Storm System shall be per King County Surface Water Design Manual. 2. Private ingress /egress & utility easements /agreement will be required. 3. Provide sight distance study prior to preliminary short plat approval. 4. Combined driveway exit for Lot 149 and Lot 1 shall be placed far enough South along Macadam Road S., to provide adequate sight distance. Exit to the NE corner of Lot 1 is not permitted. 5. Verify if Lot 2 (not a part of this project) will seek egress from Lot 49 through joint driveway. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A) BACKGROUND: 1) Name of proposed project, if applicable: Khan / AIA International 2 Lot Development 2) Name of Applicant: Tor -Jan Ronhovde, Agent for Owner Thr Ronhovde Architects, LLC 6625 S. 190th Street, #B -105 Kent, WA 98032 3) Date Checklist Prepared: April 2002 4) Agency Requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 5) Proposed Timing or Schedule: Construction to begin upon obtaining building permits. Completion with in 12 months. 6) Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 7) List any environmental information that has been prepared, or will be prepared directly related to this proposal. Geotechnical Reports prepared by LSI Adapt 8) Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 9) List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Building permit, grade and fill, utility extensions, site alteration, retaining walls 1 Agency Comments RECEIVED crry OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 K t2 PERMIT CENTER RECEIVED APR 2 9 2002 TUKWILA PUBS iC WORKS • • 10) Give a brief 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. Construct 2 single family residences on 2 separate lots.. 11) Location of proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section township, and range, if known. If the proposal occurs over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 138XX Macadam Road, Tukwila Approx 100 ft East of the intersection of S. 138th St and Macadam Road S. on the south side of Macadam. Tax Parcel Numbers: Lot 1: 3229920 -0010 Lot 149: 125304 -9149 12) Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive land Use Policy Plan map as environmentally sensitive? No B) ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1) Earth: A) General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slope, mountainous, other: B) What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Up to 40 %. C) What are the types of soils 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. Sandy silts, and clayey silty overlain by 12" topsoil. See LSI Adapt soils report. D) Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No E) Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approx 2,200 Cu Yd cut. No fill anticipated. Cuts required for foundations and driveways. F) Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. engineered soils erosion and sedimentation plan will be submitted with the construction G) About what portion of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approx. 20 %. H) Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth. 2) Air: e:"4'5 ynloz I /BLSG ks" A) What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (ie: dust, automobile, odors, industrial, wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe. Dust and equipment exhaust during construction and auto exhaust after completion. Quantities are unknown. B) Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. May water site if dust is excessive during construction. 3) Water: A) Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate state what stream or river it flows into. 3 Ce .C5 1r.• earfe s' 54 714 etC'r. arr A- S c op F "Iwo o Pr- S . •rtr Sep, £4 bwr 1'1241-Ns poet /V et-,o3 TO (3:c Ok-pp(wz se►J I N cln vs. w• Cchi 'Trio� 44 4:11"x, e. sourik44-67 • 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. 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. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No Lo"PI Tt. I vp 6 na-d,- P/ .n4 fiat= 4--(4.0.11 044 tit— wAL„3 s -- T1l_6s -f-y N tTO_.% ,� A vorst7i Neer. n r vast i EVA. ` I. Pt re.K Ar- r-45 S' 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 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. Not appli 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. 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 any toxic chemicals; agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, such as the number of such systems, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve. Not applicable. 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 4 1 S rvv7— gCl.,. rs POY44 rftr O'.- ' NK4 o tn.. S l TV- dew !^r•_wl Out ! furor Pits vv was.? — 1 C/7"(/ , Fan-t_ a rs 60 (Ai /12 s eN4), ) known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff from impervious surfaces (roofs. Footings and paving areas) will be collected and conveyed to and on site storm collection system and conveyed to the storm system in the street. 2) Could waste materials enter the ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. D) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None in addition to those previously described. A 4) Plants: A) Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: : alder, maple, aspen, other. een tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. 'Deciduous tree' Ever Pasture: Crop or grain: Wet soils plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, 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? Site clearing will remove the surface grasses and shrubs. Trees will be removed and replaced per the tree replacement plan under separate submittal. C) List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None. D) Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on site, if any. Any new landscaping will make extensive use of native plant materials. 5) Animals: A) Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are knallulla.be on or near the site: (,) Birdottawrheron, eagle, 'songbirds, other: Mammals: deer, elk, beaver, of eh r: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: 5 AfeejO Sty bin wt /amp** a rs iv.✓ Re �r�it- - mac T12c't' ream''`.'' e , ny/ L•4n/b s c..Ap 1P • • B) List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. C) Is the site part of a migration route? /tvo•' i#41/1- > (444z7 N4 i644r0.17 %1W7F- ron, igot,fas D) Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6) Energy and Natural Resources: A) What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Natural gas or electric for heating and cooling, electric lighting. B) Would the 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 impacts, if any: The completed projects will exceed the requirements of the current Washington State Energy Code. 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 known. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: B) Noise: 6 • • 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic from adjacent roads. 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? Short-term construction noise, long -term vehicle noise generated by the users of the project. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any: None, the adjacent roadways generate more noise than is anticipated to be generated by the completed project. 8) Land and Shoreline Use: A) What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjoining properties are either vacant or residential. B) Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: No. C) Describe any structures on the site: None. D Will any structures be demolished? E) What is the current zoning of the site? LDR F) What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site. Residential. G) If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. H) Has any part of the site been classifies as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify: No. 7 S4lowy- eir-iSh belh6 Pa n er • • I) Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 2 single family residences. 6 - 8 residents. J) Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. K) Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. L) Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will comply with all current zoning requirements, no variances or special conditions approvals are anticipated. 9) Housing: A) Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? 2 Single family residences. B) Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Not applicable. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10) Aesthetics: A) What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The buildings are not anticipated to exceed 30 feet (two stories). The exterior building material is anticipated to be painted siding. B) What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. any: C) Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if • None. 11) Light and Glare: A) What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The users will require exterior building lighting. Nightime hours. B) Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere views? No. C) What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. 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? None. B) Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation, opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: 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 near 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: Not applicable. 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. Macadam Road is adjacent to the project. A shared driveway will provide acces to the site from the street. B) Is th; site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. Approx 1/ mile to nearest transit stop. C) How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How any would the project eliminate? Each residence will have 2 inside stalls and space for 2 cars in driveway. 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): No road improvements are anticipated. 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 the peak volumes would occur. Not applicable for single family residential. G) Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15) Public Services: 'refuse service' • • A) Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: No. B) Proposed measures to reduce or control impact on public services, if any: None anticipated. 16) Utilities: A) Circle utilities currently available at the site: 'sanitary sewer, septic system, other: 'telephone 'electricity' natural gas', water, 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: Natural Gas: PSE Sanitary Sewer:- Gity-of- Tukwila.. VAL -W £ Water: Gity- of-Tukwial- ILen2. ®ems. 8 L Electricity: PSE Telephone: Qwest Refuse: Unknown C. Signature: The above answers ar understand that t Owner / A e and complete to the best of my knowledge. I ead agency is relying on them to make its decision. nt Signature: Date Sub tted: NON - PROJECT ' ' i , 0 - • _ SUBURBA ' ► - P ONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). 11 • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. Agency Comments 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emi ions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substanc , or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such incr : es are: 2. How would the proposal be lik= y to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed me -. sures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: G:\ APPHANU.ANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/I6/00 20 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural r ources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affe t environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under tudy) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild d scenic rivers, threatened. or endangered species habitats, historic or c al sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed meas o0pro - ct such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How woul• he proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether i ould allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing .lans? GA APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 21 Agency Comments • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impac are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase dem public service and utilities? ds on transportation or Proposed measures to reduce or re .und to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possibl-, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or r- • uirements for the protection of the environment. G: APPHANLLANDUSE.APP\.SEPAAPP.DOC. 06/16/00 22 • City of Tul4ESA Screening Checklist Date: City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 „ nn • PERMIT CENTER Applicant Name: %RJer,J ROM/401022E � AC-1E/Q i- t02 &IRAQ -WI4N) Street Address:o2S S . X90 7142 &"7". 8 /06' City, State, Zip: K � !N . Telephone: '...- - 05-00 DIRECTIONS This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. RECEIVED APR 2 9 2002 �UKWIL.A PUBLIC WORKS January 25, 2001 1 • City of Tuk.ESA Screening Checklist Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the . existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 ntinue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4112111r ontinue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the, presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06 Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response; Cu Ls/ f�Q4 NO - ' ontinue to Question 4 -0 } , f w 'v .-j �- ' .�//I,C- (44,041 • op• ue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 0� Amg w esl Fc.caMS -n, E. Say.; I il the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site du • , : construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO - •ntinue to Question 5 -0 YES - Continue to Question 5 -0 5 -0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate res 1 once. NO - •ntinue to Question 6 -0 - YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 January 25, 2001 • City of Tull" ESA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18- 13). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. NO — Checklist Complete (YE hecklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. ntinue to Question 1 -2 Cuwcx-c .. �� p` ��a�,rLw�wj ontinue to Question 1 -2 ould the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. circle appropriate response. Su3p� - Sot ontinue to Question 1 -3 ontinue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) (YES - Continue to Question 1 -4 January 25, 2001 3 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. O Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2 "41 A4140 Tv Be' -- ontinue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) 64/ — /1/6,v aeliF / • City of TukI ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) of t m pcv-.v, Sri ' I 1MC4.4rOE - 124:4: Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the .ro'ect involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a course +r the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3 -0 (Page .2) . • IA • _ Continue to Question 2 -2 :.- -'Pi, i 6.10 e, - o ,4161eL- 2-2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees withi 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast - height of 2' inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. circle appropriate response. NO—oonntinue to Question 2 -3 c... .,ntinue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in th all. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 2 -4 S - ontinue to Question 2 -4 2 -4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - ' ontinue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. •ntinue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001 4 SQ Diu rta rx • • City of Tukl ESA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish/Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes b• • temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - •ntinue to Question 3 -2 Olt-, , wry n.s 7,3-GL. ontinue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a atercourse etland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man-made or artificial structure that precludes fish access • • • answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - 'ontinue to Question 3 -3 ',Prig/ %M l, .,S - ontinue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of s. •• • ids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. i NO - - •ntinue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right ba , to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - 'ontinue to Question 3 -5 4 —T.S r,4„.... - Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity s • _ • answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - tinue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 January 25, 2001 5 • - City of Tu ESA Screening Checklist Part D (continued) 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 - 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, 'cularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete res, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. ntinue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) 744'7' " •,_ C Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001 April 29, 2002 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Tor -Jan Ronhovde The Ronhovde Architects 6625 South 190th Street #B -105 Kent, WA 98032 VIA FAX 425 -656 -0501 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Re: Khan SEPA (E02 -011) 138XX Macadam Road, Tukwila Tax Parcel 152304 -0149 Tax Parcel 322920 -0010 Dear Mr. Ronhovde: Your SEPA application has been found to be complete as of April 29, 2002 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. Essentially, this means that you have supplied the required items listed on the application checklist for this type of permits. We are about to commence our technical review process, which is the next phase in the processing of your SEPA application. Although your application has been found to be "complete ", the items you supplied may have to be revised or amended. The City may also require that you submit additional plans and information to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to finalize the review process. If you- have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206 -431 -3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Senior Planner cc: Lt. Don Tomaso, Fire Prevention Officer Joanna Spencer, Associate Engineer 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206- 431 -3665 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us • SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Kf./ 4N /A- IA /' ,TEoZlCh47t3/0— Doi E O l6= JT LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. /30)(x M4 CA,DAM /20,4,0 , 7'U /cw /G#} T PARCELS : /5'23o4 - 7/49 (REF: Lor /49) 022920 --GbIO (/Cc : 407" I> !S^ Township: 23 Range: 04 Quarter: Section: (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: 7-0,2 TAB A Oti, Hoy OCR Address: 6625 S. /got'' ST # B /aS /1670- Gu A- 9gC3 2 Phone:42s 56 -05'O I FAX: '2S- 6'* '05O/ Signatu /.L Date: GA APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 09/07 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA Planner: - 3 \ File Number: 1'- 001 - 01 1 Application Complete (Date: 11- .19- b_ Project File Number: pO I - 0, Q� O Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Kf./ 4N /A- IA /' ,TEoZlCh47t3/0— Doi E O l6= JT LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. /30)(x M4 CA,DAM /20,4,0 , 7'U /cw /G#} T PARCELS : /5'23o4 - 7/49 (REF: Lor /49) 022920 --GbIO (/Cc : 407" I> !S^ Township: 23 Range: 04 Quarter: Section: (This information may be found on your tax statement.) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: 7-0,2 TAB A Oti, Hoy OCR Address: 6625 S. /got'' ST # B /aS /1670- Gu A- 9gC3 2 Phone:42s 56 -05'O I FAX: '2S- 6'* '05O/ Signatu /.L Date: GA APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 09/07 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER Commonwealth LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Commitment For Title Insurance Title insurance since 1876 RECEIVED Cam'OFruKwLA APR 2 6 Z002 PERMIT CENTER • • COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE CO. 14450 N.E. 29TH PLACE BELLEVUE, WA 980073697 (425) 451 - 7301 /FAX (425) 646 -3517 WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE 3176 NE SUNSET BLVD RENTON, WA 98054 Attn: TERESA HANSEN 1/1 CLTIC NO.: H904087 Your No. . Regarding : CLARK /AIA VENTURES COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: JULY 28, 2000 at 8:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner Policy (10- 17 -92) GENERAL SCHEDULE Amount : $ 45000.00 Premium: $ 355.00 Tax : $ 30.53 Proposed Insured: AIA VENTURES, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION (b) ALTA Loan Policy (10- 17 -92) Proposed Insured: APPROPRIATE LENDER Amount : $ Premium: $ Tax : $ Amount : $ Premium: $ Tax : $ Amount : $ Premium: $ Tax : $ Premium: $ Tax : $ .00 .00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in the Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE TROY ST.GEORGE PHONE: (425) 646 -3515 CLTIC NO.: H904087 4. Title to the fee estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: DARRELL CLARK AND MABEL CLARK, husband and wife 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of King, State of Washington, and described as follows: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A -1" CLTIC NO.: H904087 EXHIBIT "A -1" ARCEL• A: (Lo7 if14'9 ) Beginning at the northwest corner of the southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; thence south 87 °48'32" east along the north line of said subdivision 270 feet; thence north 59 °49'22" east 250.35 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing north 59 °49'22" east 111.75 feet to the westerly margin of county road; thence south 40 °20'25" east along said westerly margin of county road, 60 feet; thence south 64 °46'25" west 113.03 feet; thence north 40 °20'25" west parallel to said westerly margin of county road, 50 feet to the true point of beginning; PARCEL B: (Lor 1 ) Beginning at the corner of Government Lot 1, Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; thence south 89 °56'42.5" east along the south line of said lot 270 feet; thence north 57 °41'12" east 362.11 feet to the southwesterly margin of the county road; thence northerly along said road margin 61.96 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south 54 °49'42" west 100.25 feet; thence north 31 °08'30" west 45 feet; thence northeasterly to a point on westerly margin of said county road which is 50 feet from true point of beginning; thence south 31 °08'30" east 50 feet to the true point of beginning; (BEING Lot 2, Block 1 of Hellwig's Addition to Foster, unrecorded); ALSO beginning at the southwest corner of Government Lot 1, Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; thence north 89 °56'42" east along the south line of said lot 270 feet; thence north 57 °41'12.5" east 362.11 feet to the southwesterly margin of the county road; thence northeasterly along said road margin 12.01 feet to the northwesterly margin of an alley and the true point of beginning; running thence south 57 °41'12.5" west 100.81 feet; thence north 31 °08'30" west 45 feet; CLTIC NO.: H904087 thence northeasterly 100.25 feet to a point on said margin of the county road 49.95 feet thereon northwesterly of the true point of beginning; thence southeasterly along said road margin 49.95 feet to the true point of beginning; TOGETHER WITH that portion of vacated alley adjacent which would attach by operation of law. END OF EXHIBIT "A -1" CLTIC NO.: H904087 SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 I. The following are the requirements to.be complied with: A. Instrument necessary to create the estate or interest to be insured must be properly executed, delivered and duly filed for record. SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 II. Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records, or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. B. Any policy issued pursuant hereto will contain the exclusions from coverage and, under Schedule B, the standard exceptions as set forth and identified as to the type of policy on the attached schedules of Exclusions and Exceptions. C. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid Balance 152304- 9149 -05 2000 (L'407- /4' Total amount due, not and penalty: Levy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: $318.72 including interest $159.36 $159.36 2413 $21,000.00 $ 0.00 AFFECTS: Parcel A $159.36 CLTIC NO.: H904087 2. GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES and SERVICE CHARGES, as follows, together with interest, penalty and statutory foreclosure costs, if any, after delinquency: (1st half delinquent, May 1; 2nd half delinquent, November 1) Tax Account No. Year Billed Paid Balance 322920 - 0005 -00 2000 $500.37 $250.19 $250.18 �LoT Total amount due, not including interest and penalty: $250.18 Levy Code: Assessed Value Land: Assessed Value Improvements: 2413 $33,000.00 $ 0.00 AFFECTS: Parcel B 3. Real Estate Excise Tax pursuant to the authority of RCW Chapter 82.45 and subsequent amendments thereto. As of the date herein, the tax rate for said property is .0178, City of Tukwila. 4. The land described in this commitment appears to be residential in nature and may be subject to the provisions of R.C.W. 6.13.060 provided the land is occupied as a homestead. If the land is occupied as a homestead, all instruments conveying or encumbering said land must be executed by each spouse, individually, or by an attorney -in -fact. 5. According to the application for title insurance, the proposed insured(s) is /are AIA VENTURES, a Washington corporation. We find no pertinent matters of record against the name(s) of said party (ies) . END OF EXCEPTIONS NOTE 1: WHEN SENDING DOCUMENTS FOR RECORDING VIA U.S. MAIL OR SPECIAL COURIER SERVICE, PLEASE SEND TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS, UNLESS SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH YOUR TITLE UNIT: Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company Suite 3700, Two Union Square Bldg. 601 Union St. Seattle, WA 98101 Attn: Recording Dept. COMMONWEALTH PRE - ADDRESSED ENVELOPES MAY STILL BE USED WHEN SENDING DOCUMENTS VIA TDS'(TITLE DEiLIVERY SERVICE) TO THE ADDRESS ON THE FACE OF THIS COMMITMENT OR TO THE ABOVE CLTIC NO.: H904087 ADDRESS. NOTE 2: The above captioned description may be incorrect, because the application for title insurance contained only an address and /or Parcel No. Prior to closing, all parties to the transaction must verify the legal description. If further changes are necessary, notify the Company well before closing so that those changes can be reviewed. Closing instructions must indicate that the legal description has been reviewed and approved by all parties. NOTE 3: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per amended RCW 65.04. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document. PTN OF SE 1/4 SE 1/4 STR 15 -23 -4 AND PTN OF GOV'T LOT 1 STR 15 -23 -4 FJG /cgg Copies have been sent to the following: LYNN M. SLATER CLTIC FEDERAL WAY 31620 23RD AVE. SO. #212 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Attn: 3/2 AMERICAN CANADIAN REAL ESTATE 24719 43RD AVE S KENT, WA 98032 Attn: SARAJ KHAN 1/1 END OF SCHEDULE B Investigation should be made to determine if there are any service, installation, maintenance, or construction charge for sewer, water or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. This company is a Pennsylvania Corporation and is in no way affiliated or connected with Commonwealth Title Insurance Company or Commonwealth Title Company of Pierce County, Washington. This sketch is provided, without charge, for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including, but not limited to, area, dimensions, easements, en- croachments, or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The Company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this COMPLETEAPPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact the Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived, or should be submitted in a later timely manner for use at the Public Hearing (e.g., revised colored renderings). Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED, TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH CITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206- 431-d�t of Community Development and 206 - 433 -0179 Department of Public Works. APR 2 6 2002 P/4 A)/,d_ COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST TABLE PERMIT CENTER Information Required. May be ivaived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public Works and Planning Information Waived Pb Wk / Ping Office Use Only Continents & Conditions. APPLICATION FORMS: A. Application Checklist: one (1) copy, indicating items submitted with application. --2: Four (4) copies of supporting studies with original signatures and license stamp as needed. �3. Complete Application Packet: 44.64copies of application form and full sized plans, one set of all plans reduced to 8.5" by 11" (High Quality Photo Reduction) and other materials and information as specifically listed in Project Description and Analysis, Site Plans, Landscape Plan and Elevations. r4. SEPA Environmental Checklist (6 copies) and fee ($325). PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: 5. King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the subject lot. SUBMIT ONLY IF UNDERLYING PERMIT REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE. 6. Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents and businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. See Public Notice Materials. Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings -e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks must be included). SUBMIT ONLY IF UNDERLYING PERMIT REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE. A 4' x 4' Public Notice Board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. PROPERTY INFORMATION --7. Vicinity Map with site location. 8. Surrounding Land Use Map for all existing land uses within a 1,000 foot radius from the lot's property lines. ,- 9. Title Report -- Clearly establish status as legal lot(s) of record, ownership, all known easements and encumbrances. '10. Lot lines for 300 ft. from the site's property lines including right -of -ways. Q/C) -AO. / G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP \SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 FEB 14 , '02 12 :44Pt'1 TUI'I•JIL .I' 'PH • CITY • OF TUKV9LA, ..7jepartment o/Contn+uni y Development :6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila. WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (106) 431 -3665 tukplsn(4ci.tu4cw)ls.waus • STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY u F.2 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKW1LA APR 2 6 ?NZ PERMIT CENTER The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows' 1- I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my ltnowledgcand consent. 4. Owner grants the City. its employees, agvee�nts,. engin . con rs or other to tives dire right to enter upon Owner's real property. located at 13 �'%( %'` /'11 r c k G., Lcl • - for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring an the private' property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6, The City shall, et its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific regrcsts for items on the "Complete Appticapon Checklist" within ninety T90) days. 7. Non-responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. E)C CtJTED at V2 in (city), - It (state), on O 2 ' 1 (Print Name) (. 3rJ �•l�G� • �o . Z (174 (Address) '77 W4- R 3 , (Phone Number (S ice) before me /114 d tM-s !ze g ` )Zh.q 5 to me known to be the individual who On this dap personally. appeared. (� wl executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and,deed for. the uses and purposes mentioned thetiin.. '. • 9UPSCI13H1?niAND SWORN TOiBEFORE ME ON THIS 26 DAY OF c `fit a •r 2—, y . , t 9-t. �/ ' NOTARY PUBLIC in and f r S f we hington ' C „y residing at K ..rzv �� My Commission expires on /` '4i+ 2-0-3 c_a_ ir_•'�Y1 1 1 Vr✓JJLH LLL /f LN CITY: OF Tulavu,A Department of Conununtry Developrnenr :ego Sot,thcenter Boulevard Tukwila WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (706) 431 -3665 Email:. tukplap(4ci.tulcwjla.waus STATE OF WASH1NOTON COUNTY OF KING AI'P'1WAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY ra P.2/2 RECENED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER The undersigned being duty sworn and upon oath states as follow 1. I am the tuner owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and aro true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. • 4. Owner grunts the City, its cmpl eel, a ems, trngineers. co trpctors qr other r r sentatives the right to enter upon Ow er's real property, located at 3 8' 4 a d Lam -. * / V 5' for the purpose of application review, for e limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City hamiless for any loss or damage to peranns or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6, The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without ntfim.d offer if the applicant does not =Pond to spocifio requir= for items on the "Complete Apptication Checklist" wilbin ninety (90) days. 7. Non•respansiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or mots days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. // % • EXECUTED at 1(�tz tin, t (city). 1/1^� (state), on 0 Z/2 6 / °- (Print Name) C ?l (Addmss) 14 ut. 4,. t w1 g fa 3 b (Phone Number) 2S3— - 3 (Signature On 7 personally. before me Set �i i �'I , to me known to be the individual who ex this do nail appemed. t� the same as hither voluntary act and.desd rot. the uses and executed tare foregoing instrument and acknowledged th dshe signed purposes mentioned that-01. SUBSCRIBED ANDSWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 7 6 DAY OF E e- • r a Y f/ / 213-0-),� NOTARY PUB C in and for the kate oflw tngon residing at _ 9- My Commission expires on /"I [ a-S- l D KC Quarterly Parcel Report - January 2002 Major Minor AcctNbr TaxpayerName QSTR Lot Block PlatName House Dir Street St Type Dir 261000 0170 261000017002 NE 22 -23-4 FOSTER HEIGHTS 262304 9101 262304910108 1008 ANDOVER ASSOCIATES SE 26-23-4 1000 ANDOVER PARK E 022340 0042 022340004203 355 ASSOCIATES LLC NE 26 -23-4 4 ANDOVER INDUSTRIAL 355 TRECK DR 984440 0036 984440003601 51ST AVENUE L L C NW 23-23 7-8 YOUNGS HALF -ACRE T 15117 52ND AV S 984440 0037 984440003700 51ST AVENUE LLC NW 23 -23-4 7 -8 YOUNGS HALF -ACRE T 15150 51ST AV S 984440 0046 984440004609 51ST AVENUE LLC NW 23-23 -4 9-10 YOUNGS HALF -ACRE T 15150 51ST AV S 262304 9095 262304909506 790 ANDOVER LLC SE 28 -23.4 750 ANDOVER PARK E 537980 0424 537980042403 923049067WILLIAM 1 NE 27-23-4 25 5 MC MICKEN HEIGHTS D 16312 48TH PL S 814140 0880 814140088000 AARHUS VERN & GLENITA SE 23 -23-4 UNIT 2 I SUNWOOD PHASE I 15148 SUNWOOD BL 738060 0405 736060040507 ABAD PABLO M +ABAD LOLITA P SW 15 -23-4 2 7 ROBBINS VIEW TR ADD 4011 S 139TH ST 109990 0060 109990006008 ABAWI MIRIAM +AZIZ MARIA NW 23-23-4 6 BRIGADOON RIDGE 5633 S 150TH PL 814140 1210 814140121009 ABBOTT ANTONIA SE 23 -23-4 UNIT 1 DD SUNWOOD PHASE 1 15148 SUNWOOD BL 734780 0005 734760000509 ABBOTT CRAIG S +GOSS,SUSAN L SE 15 -23-4 1 -2 1 RIVERTON MACADAM R 13601 MACADAM RD S 032304 9111 032304911103 ABDOL KARIM SE 3-23-4 10308 BEACON AV S 017900 1400 017900140009 ABDULMALIK ABDULNASER M SE 10 -23-4 12 -13 7 ALLENTOWN ADD 334740 1420 334740142008 ABENDROTH PAMELA L SE 10 -23-4 18-19 6 HILLMANS CD MEADO 4820 S 122ND ST 170100 0310 170100031005 ABEYTA JOSEPHINE SW 15-23-4 UNIT 3 COLONY SQUARE THE 13550 37TH AV S 810880 0584 810860058405 ABN AMR() MORTGAGE GROUP INC SE 22 -23-4 84 SUNNYDALE GARDENS 4209 S . 158TH ST 814140 0190 814140019005 ABSHIRE GORDON E SE 23 -23-4 UNIT 3 A SUNWOOD PHASE I 15148 SUNWOOD BL 092304 9411 092304941104 ACE ELECTRIC SERVICE NE 9-23-4 11234 TUKWILA INTERNATI BL 142270 0080 142270008006 ACOB MAXIMO G & LUCILLE NW 22 -23-4 8 CASCADE HEIGHTS AD 4062 S 151ST ST 142270 0050 1 142270005002 ACOB MAXIMO G JR NW 22 -23-4 5 & 8 CASCADE HEIGHTS AD 4111 S 150TH ST 142270 0060 142270006000 ACOB MAXIMO G JR & LETICIA V TRUST NW 22 -23-4 8 CASCADE HEIGHTS AD 814140 0110 814140011002 ACUNA LYNN A SE 23 -23-4 UNIT 2 A SUNWOOD PHASE I 15148 SUNWOOD BL 334740 0400 334740040004 ADAIR RONALD & JUTTA SE 10 -23-4 74-75 2 HILLMANS CD MEADO 4310 S 122ND ST 222304 9095 222304909500 ADAM DESSALEGNE B SE 22 -23-4 4828 S 180TH ST 004000 0925 004000092504 ADAMS V EILEEN NW 22 -23-4 14 7 ADAMS HOME TRS 4031 S 146TH ST 004000 0930 004000093007 ADAMS V EILEEN NW 22 -23-4 14 • 7 ADAMS HOME TRS 4037 S 148TH ST 334740 0050 334740005007 ADDINGTON ARLENE TERRY NE 10 -23-4 10-11 1 HILLMANS CD MEADO 4230 S 116Th ST 336590 1210 336590121008 ADEYEMI KAYO NW 23-23-4 11 11 HILLMANS SEATTLE GA 14436 58TH AV S 886400 0755 886400075505 ADLER VERNON R SW 15-23-4 2 7 VAL -VUE ADD 13820 37TH AV S 870050 0120 870050012000 AGEBO FIKRESLASSIE +ZINASH A NW 26-23-4 12 TUKWILA TERRACE AD 5103 S 163RD PL 869850 0180 689850018005 AGOG ANGELA L +TURLA PAMFILO SW 23-23-4 UNIT B B PEAKS AT TUKWILA TH 15310 MACADAM RD S 547680 0283 547680026309 AHMADNIA NASSER SE 3 -23-4 28 MERRICKS ACRE TRAC 167040 0167 167040018708 AHUMADA PATRICIO R +LUENGOVERA ANITA SW 14 -23-4 5 2 COLEGROVES ACRE T 14038 53RD AV S 152304 9149 152304914905 AIA INTERNATIONAL VENTURED SE 15-23-4 322920 0010 322920001003 AIA INTERNATIONAL VENTURES SE 15-23-4 1 1 HELLWIGS ADD TO FOS 886400 0515 886400051508 AIKEN JONATHAN J SW 15-23-4 26 5 VAL -VUE ADD 13787 34TH AV S ' 338590 0591 336590059109 AINARDI ELEANOR I NW 23 -23-4 15-16 6 HILLMANS SEATTLE GA 5731 S 144TH ST 814140 1470 814140147004 AJAX SHARON SE 23-23-4 UNIT 1 HH SUNVVOOD PHASE 1 15148 SUNWOOD BL 217200 0185 217200018505 AKERS EDDIE L NW 14 -23-4 38 EAST RIVERTON GARD 13344 58TH AV S 885880 0030 885880003003 AKRE FORREST J NW 26-23-4 6 1 VALLEY VIEW HOMES A 16645 53RD AV S 735860 0280 735860028001 ALBANESE RALPH NW 15-23-4 17 4 ROBBINS ORCHARD AD 13335 37TH AV S 808880 0085 808860008503 ALBERDING FORREST M NW 23-23-4 17 SUMMIT VIEW ADD TO 5631 S 149TH ST 334740 0735 334740073500 ALBRECHT JEFFREY J +LEANNA M NE 10-23-4 2 -3 4 HILLMANS CD MEADO 11818 44TH PL S 537980 0340 537980034004 ALBRECHT LOUIS RICHARD NE 27 -23-4 21 5 MC MICKEN HEIGHTS D 18227 51ST AV S 017900 0160 017900016001 ALBRITTON JESSE C SR SE 10-23-4 31 -32 1 ALLENTOWN ADD 12241 43RD AV S 217200 0215 217200021509 ALBRITTON JONETH C NW 14 -23-4 42-43 EAST RIVERTON GARD 13312 56TH AV S 252304 9020 252304902007 ALCO INVESTMENT COMPANY SW 25 -23-4 17450 WEST VALLEY HW 252304 9033 252304903302 ALCO INVESTMENT COMPANY SW 25 -23-4 17500 WEST VALLEY HW Page 1 of 115 (ity of lukwila 6300 Southcenter BL, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206) 431 -3670 RECEIPT Parcel No.: 1523049149 Permit Number: E02 -01 1 Address: 13901 48 AV S TUKW Status: PENDING Suite No: Applied Date: 04/26/2002 Applicant: CLARK DARRELL D Issue Date: Receipt No.: R020000557 Payment Amount: 325.00 Initials: NG Payment Date: 04/26/2002 01:10 PM User ID: 1684 Balance: $0.00 Payee: AIA VENTURES TRANSACTION LIST: Amount Type Method Description Payment Check 1984 325.00 ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: Description Account Code Current Pmts SEPA 000/345.831 325.00 Total: 325.00 6214 04/29 9710 TOTAL 325.00 doc: Receipt Printed: 04 -26 -2002 City of Tuk*z ESA Screening Checklist Date: City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER Applicant Name: T R J c J JOW Nd ✓O , ► I fc2 Sr4/.AJ KH"4A.) Street Address: Cd02S s . MO g% • 8[06- City, State, Zip: Kam) (A).4- qe9n3 Telephone: I-2S— &GT:. — ©S'bo DIRECTIONS This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. January 25, 2001 1 City of TuSa ESA Screening Checklist Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 .ntinue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 ' ontinue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the, presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06 Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response. NO - ' ontinue to Question 4 -0 YES - Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 4 -0 Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site dui.' , • construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO - •ntinue to Question 5 -0 YES - Continue to Question 5 -0 5 -0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate res s onse. NO - •ntinue to Question 6 -0 - YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 January 25, 2001 City of Tuft ESA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18- 13). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. NO — Checklist Complete CYES hecklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 1 -3 YES - Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) CYESS Continue to Question 1 -4 January 25, 2001 3 City of Tu•a ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) ontinue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, . and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a w course or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self-supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast - height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. circle appropriate response. NO - ' ontinue to Question 2 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ' ontinue to Question 2 -4 YES - Continue to Question 2 -4 2 -4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - ontinue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) YES - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - •ntinue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001 4 City of Tulea ESA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes be • temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - •ntinue to Question 3 -2 YES - Continue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access • • • answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - 'ontinue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of s. •• •nids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. i NO - - • ntinue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right ba, , to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - ' ontinue to Question 3 -5 YES - Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity s .• . • answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - tinue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 January 25, 2001 5 City of Tuft ESA Screening Checklist Part D (continued) 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - 'ontinue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 - 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, au cularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. ontinue to Question 3 -8 YES. - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete res, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. ntinue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) January 25, 2001 6 • • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A) BACKGROUND: 1) Name of proposed project, if applicable: Khan / AIA International 2 Lot Development 2) Name of Applicant: Tor -Jan Ronhovde, Agent for Owner Thr Ronhovde Architects, LLC 6625 S. 190th Street, #B -105 Kent, WA 98032 Agency Comments RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER 3) Date Checklist Prepared: April 2002 4) Agency Requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 5) Proposed Timing or Schedule: Construction to begin upon obtaining building permits. Completion with in 12 months. 6) Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 7) List any environmental information that has been prepared, or will be prepared directly related to this proposal. Geotechnical Reports prepared by LSI Adapt 8) Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 9) List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Building permit, grade and fill, utility extensions, site alteration, retaining walls 1 • 10) Give a brief 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. Construct 2 single family residences on 2 separate lots.. 11) Location of proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section township, and range, if known. If the proposal occurs over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 138XX Macadam Road, Tukwila Approx 100 ft East of the intersection of S. 138th St and Macadam Road S. on the south side of Macadam. Tax Parcel Numbers: Lot 1: 3229920 -0010 Lot 149: 125304 -9149 12) Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive land Use Policy Plan map as environmentally sensitive? No B) ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1) Earth: A) [steep slopes slope)? General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, , mountainous, other: B) What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent Up to 40 %. C) What are the types of soils 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. Sandy silts, and clayey silty overlain by 12" topsoil. See LSI Adapt soils report. D) Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No • • E) Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approx 2,200 Cu Yd cut. No fill anticipated. Cuts required for foundations and driveways. F) Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. An engineered soils erosion and sedimentation plan will be submitted with the construction plans. G) About what portion of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approx. 20 %. H) Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth. See item "F' above. 2) Air: A) What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (ie: dust, automobile, odors, industrial, wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe. Dust and equipment exhaust during construction and auto exhaust after completion. Quantities are unknown. B) Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. May water site if dust is excessive during construction. 3) Water: A) Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate state what stream or river it flows into. 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. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 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. Not applicable. 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. 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 any toxic chemicals; agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, such as the number of such systems, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve. Not applicable. C) Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if • • known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff from impervious surfaces (roofs. Footings and paving areas) will be collected and conveyed to and on site storm collection system and conveyed to the storm system in the street. 2) Could waste materials enter the ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. D) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None in addition to those previously described. 4) Plants: A) Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: alder, maple, aspen, other. een tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. 'Deciduous tree Ever Pasture: Crop or grain: Wet soils plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, 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? Site clearing will remove the surface grasses and shrubs. Trees will be removed and replaced per the tree replacement plan under separate submittal. C) List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None. D) Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on site, if any. Any new landscaping will make extensive use of native plant materials. 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, songbird, other: Mammals: deer, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: • • B) List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. C) Is the site part of a migration route? No. D) Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6) Energy and Natural Resources: A) What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Natural gas or electric for heating and cooling, electric lighting. B) Would the 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 impacts, if any: The completed projects will exceed the requirements of the current Washington State Energy Code. 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 known. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: B) Noise: • • 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic from adjacent roads. 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? Short-term construction noise, long -term vehicle noise generated by the users of the project. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any: None, the adjacent roadways generate more noise than is anticipated to be generated by the completed project. 8) Land and Shoreline Use: A) What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjoining properties are either vacant or residential. B) Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: No. C) Describe any structures on the site: None. D) Will any structures be demolished? Not applicable. E) What is the current zoning of the site? LDR F) What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site. Residential. G) If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. H) Has any part of the site been classifies as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify: ' No. • • I) Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 2 single family residences. 6 — 8 residents. J) Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. K) Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. L) Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will comply with all current zoning requirements, no variances or special conditions approvals are anticipated. 9) Housing: A) Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? 2 Single family residences. B) Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Not applicable. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10) Aesthetics: A) What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The buildings are not anticipated to exceed 30 feet (two stories). The exterior building material is anticipated to be painted siding. B) What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: • • None. 11) Light and Glare: A) What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The users will require exterior building lighting. Nightime hours. B) Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere views? No. C) What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. 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? None. B) Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C) Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation, opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: 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 near 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: Not applicable. 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. Macadam Road is adjacent to the project. A shared driveway will provide acces to the site from the street. B) Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. Approx'.4 mile to nearest transit stop. C) How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How any would the project eliminate? Each residence will have 2 inside stalls and space for 2 cars in driveway. 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): No road improvements are anticipated. 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 the peak volumes would occur. Not applicable for single family residential. G) Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15) Public Services: • • A) Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: No. B) Proposed measures to reduce or control impact on public services, if any: None anticipated. 16) Utilities: A) Circle utilities currently available at the site: , (telephone, , septic system, other: refuse service sanitary sewer{ electricity natural gas water 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: Natural Gas: PSE Sanitary Sewer: City of Tukwila Water: City of Tukwial Electricity: PSE Telephone: Qwest Refuse: Unknown C. Signature: The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Owner / Agent Signature: Date Submitted: NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G. SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. Agency Comments 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emi ions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substanc: , or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such incr- : ses are: 2. How would the proposal be lik= y to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed me .. ures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: GAAPPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 20 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural r ources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affe- t environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild .. d scenic rivers, threatened. or endangered species habitats, historic or c al sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed meas o�pro ct such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How woul• he proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether i ould allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing .lans? G: WPPHANU.ANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 21 Agency Comments • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impac are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase de ds on transportation or public service and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or re .ond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possibl-, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or r • uirements for the protection of the environment. G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 06/16/00 22 print.txt User Name: msaleem Project: tukwilla Subproject: 5' behind drive, 007 ROADCALC DESIGN EARTHW ORK - RAW VOLUMES Date: 12 -24 -01 Time: 09:33:08 Page: 1 STATION MATERIAL CUT AREA (FTA2) CUT VOLUME FILL AREA (ydA3) (FTA2) FILL VOLUME (ydA3) 0 +00..00 0 +10.00 0 +20.00 0 +30.00 0 +40.00 0 +50.00 0 +60.00 0 +70.00 0 +80.00 0 +90.00 1 +00.00 1 +10.00 1 +20.00 1 +30.00 1 +40.00 orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total orig_Surface Total orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total orig_surface Total orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total 0.43 0.43 8.01 8.01 85.13 85.13 157.30 157.30 173.07 173.07 177.57 177.57 151.85 151.85 114.81 114.81 79.00 79.00 40.08 40.08 18.21 18.21 31.33 31.33 243.74 243.74 350.90 350.90 414.40 414.40 user Name: msaleem Project: tukwilla Subproject: 5' behind drive, 007 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.54 17.86 17.86 47.90 47.90 67.40 67.40 67.74 67.74 61.51 61.51 49.38 49.38 36.57 36.57 22.05 22.05 10.82 10.82 6.02 6.02 53.15 53.15 110.01 110.01 141.72 141.72 0.06 0.00 0.13 0.04 en,OFEllft KWj(,u 0.00 0.03 41+14 0.00 0.00 �PERAlirCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.95 0.92 9.72 2.71 0.00 2.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ROADCALC DESIGN EARTHWORK - RAW VOLUMES Page 1 Date: 12 -24 -01 Time: 09:33:08 Page: 2 evi,,RECr OF TukwILA APR 2 6 2002 PERnacENTER • print.txt CUT AREA CUT VOLUME FILL AREA FILL VOLUME MATERIAL (FTA2) (ydA3) (FTA2) (ydA3) Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total Orig_surface Total 441.12 441.12 20.44 20.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2507.39 2507.39 158.43 158.43 85.47 85.47 3.79 3.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 941.36 941.36 me: msaleem : tukwilla ect: middle lot drive for 5' behind, 008 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.86 6.32 ROADCALC DESIGN EARTHWORK - RAW VOLUMES Date: 12 -24 -01 Time: 09:33:43 Page: 1 CUT AREA CUT VOLUME FILL AREA FILL VOLUME MATERIAL (FTA2) (ydA3) (FTA2) (ydA3) orig_surface Total Orig_Surface Total orig_Surface Total orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total Orig_Surface Total Orig_surface Total 0.00 0.00 310.74 310.74 316.25 316.25 323.35 323.35 600.03 600.03 626.39 626.39 704.13 704.13 788.29 788.29 0.00 0.00 45.29 45.29 24.73 24.73 118.45 118.45 134.57 134.57 48.38 48.38 246.39 246.39 276.37 276.37 Page 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 +52.87 0 +60.00 Total orig_surface Total Orig_surface Total orig_surface Total 821.53 821.53 878.45 878.45 5369.16 5369.16 print.txt 85.56 85.56 224.46 224.46 1204.20 1204.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cup-{ v °lUYV�� �oy prod t 1204 t G41 = 2i4r5 c'. 1;111 P11 `}otuwNe__ 6,32 cl Page 3 cov rect • ADaPT CRY OFETUKW1Lq APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HELLWIG'S ADDITION LOTS NO. 1, 2 & 149 13821 Macadam Road Tukwila, Washington Submitted To: AIA International Development 306 North 1St Avenue Kent, Washington 98032 WA01- 6267 -0 May 2001 RECE!''E'J J.;i? 0 L'U I • ADaPT ay 2S, 2001 WA01- 6267 -0 AIA International Development 306 North 151 Avenue Kent, Washington 98032 Attention: Mr. Saraj Khan Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Hellwig's Addition Lots No. 1, 2 & 149 13821 Macadam Road Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Khan: LSI ADAPT (ADAPT) is pleased to submit this report summarizing our geotechnical engineering evaluation for the above - referenced project. The purpose of our evaluation was to derive design conclusions and recommendations concerning site preparation, excavations, foundations, floors, drainage, retaining walls, and structural fill. As outlined in our proposal letter dated July 27, 2000, our scope of work comprised a field exploration, geotechnical research, geotechnical analyses, and report preparation. We received your written authorization for our evaluation on April 18, 2001. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of AIA International Development, and their agents, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice and for the specific application to this project. Use or reliance upon this report by a third party is at their own risk. ADAPT does not make any representation or warranty, express or implied, to such other parties as to the accuracy or completeness of this report or the suitability of its use by such other parties for any purpose, whether known or unknown to ADAPT. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions concerning this report or need further assistance, please contact us at (206) 654 -7045. Respectfully Submitted, LSI ADAPT Rolf B. yllseth, P. Senior Geotechnical Engineer Distribution: AIA International Development (2) Attn: Mr. Saraj Khan Mohammad Saleem (2) 800 Maynard Avenue South Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 LSI ADAPT Tel (206) -654 -7045 Fax (206) 654 -7048 www.adaptengr.com • LSI ADAPT TABLE OF CONTENTS WA01- 6267 -0 1.0 SUMMARY 1 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 3.0 EXPLORATORY METHODS 3 3.1 Auger Boring Procedures 4 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS 4 4.1 Surface Conditions 5 4.2 Soil Conditions 5 4.3 Groundwater Conditions 5 4.4 Seismic Conditions 5 4.5 Environmentally Critical Area Conditions 6 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 5.1 Site Preparation 6 5.2 Spread Footings 8 5.3 Slab -on -Grade Floors 10 5.4 Backfilled Walls 10 5.5 Drainage Systems 13 5.6 Structural Fill 14 6.0 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES 16 7.0 CLOSURE 17 Figure 1 Figure 2 Location/Topographic Map Site & Exploration Plan Boring Logs B -1 through B -3 AIA International Development May 25, 2001 LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 Table of Contents • • LSI ADAPT 1.0 SUMMARY Based on our field explorations, research and analyses, the proposed construction appears feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, contingent on the implementation of the recommendations presented in this report. The following summary of project geotechnical considerations is presented for introductory purposes and, as such, should be used only in conjunction with the full text of this report. • • Project Description: Development plans call for constructing three new, 2 to 3 -story, residential houses with garage and basement levels. The specific type, size and location of these houses were not available at the time of this report. Exploratory Methods: We explored subsurface conditions by means of three borings advanced at strategic locations across the lot and anticipated house footprint areas, to depths ranging from about 14 to 19 feet below ground surface (bgs). Soil Conditions: Soils underlying the site generally consist of near - surface, weathered, tannish gray and gray with rusty mottling, medium stiff sandy silts and loose to medium dense silty sands, underlain by stiff to very stiff, blue -gray, clayey silts and silts. The site soils are mantled by approximately 6 to 12 inches of forest duff, grass, sod and topsoil. Groundwater Conditions: At the time of exploration (May 2001), perched groundwater was encountered within a sand layer at a depth of approximately 13 feet bgs (elevation 143 feet) in exploration B -2 in the western portion of Lot No. 1. This groundwater zone may be related to the groundwater seepage emanating along the existing cut slope at the western end of Lot No. 2. Surface Seepage Conditions: Groundwater seepage was observed emanating along an existing, apparent cut slope at the western end of Lot No. 2 during our site visit. We recommend that this seepage water be controlled with the use of a trench drain system to minimize risk of potential future erosion and slope instability. Environmentally Critical Area Considerations: The proposed site is located within an Area of Potential Geologic Instability identified on City of Tukwila Sensitive Area maps, with a moderate to high landslide potential and general slopes between 20 and 40 percent (Class 2 and Class 3 Area). Provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented, the project is considered feasible and is not anticipated to adversely affect the stability of the subject site or adjacent properties. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 1 • • LSI ADAPT Foundations: In our opinion, the proposed houses can be supported by conventional spread footings that bear on the native, medium dense sands /silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts. For properly prepared footing subgrades, these spread footings may be designed for an allowable, static bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) and a seismic bearing pressure of 2,660 psf. • Floors: Typical soil- supported, slab -on -grade floors are feasible at this site, contingent on proper subgrade preparation. • • Subsurface Walls: In our opinion, conventional backfilled, cast -in -place concrete walls will adequately support the proposed basement and site perimeter retaining wall system. These walls should be designed to withstand appropriate lateral pressures, as discussed in this report. Seismic Considerations: Based on our literature review and subsurface interpretations, we recommend that the project structural engineer use the following seismic parameters for design of buildings, retaining walls, and other site structures, as appropriate. Design Parameter Value Acceleration Coefficient 0.30 Risk Zone (1997 UBC) 3 Soil Profile Type (1997 UBC) SE Temporary Excavation Considerations: All temporary soil cuts associated with site regrading or excavations should be adequately sloped back to prevent sloughing and collapse. For the loose to medium dense sand and medium stiff sandy /clayey silt that will likely be encountered within the anticipated excavation depths, we tentatively recommend maximum, temporary cut slope inclinations of 1'/AH:1 V and 1 H:1 V, respectively. If groundwater seepage is encountered within the excavation slopes, the cut slope inclination should not exceed 1''H:1 V. 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at 13821 Macadam Road in Tukwila, Washington, as shown on the enclosed Location/Topographic Map (Figure 1). The site consists of three vacant building lots measuring approximately 50 by 100 feet, identified as Lots No. 1 & 2 within Block 1 and Lot No. 149 on the west side of Macadam Road on the lot plan provided for our review. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 2 • • LSI ADAPT Site boundaries are generally delineated by neighboring residential lots on the northwest and the southeast, by Macadam Road on the northeast, and by an adjacent wooded area on the southwest. The existing lots slope down towards the northeast (Macadam Road), with an overall topographical relief of about 40 feet across the site. A relatively level, roughly 40 -feet wide bench area is located at approximately elevation 148 feet (ground surface) in the center of Lots No. 1 and 2. An existing basement structure remains within this bench area in Lot No. 1, where a previously demolished house was situated. The enclosed Site & Exploration Plan (Figure 2) illustrates these site boundaries and adjacent existing features. It is our understanding that the lots will be developed for single- family residential dwellings. The proposed houses are to be constructed within an existing, relatively level bench area at approximately 148 feet in elevation (ground surface) within the center of Lots No. 1 and 2. The house on Lot No. 149 is expected to be located at the end of an existing asphalt driveway (roughly ground surface elevation of 135 feet). In order to limit driveway grades up from Macadam Road, we understand that the houses are expected to consist of a garage level and a basement level below ground surface (bgs), requiring site excavations up to 20 feet in depth bgs. Foundation support will consist of a system of shallow footings and basement retaining walls. We anticipate that the building walls and columns will impose relatively light foundation loads. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed location of one the houses (Lot No. 149). The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on our understanding of the currently proposed utilization of the project site, as derived from layout drawings, written information, and verbal information supplied to us. Consequently, if any changes are made in the currently proposed project, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations contained herein to reflect those changes. 3.0 EXPLORATORY METHODS We explored surface and subsurface conditions at the project site on May 9, 2001. Our exploration and testing program comprised the following elements: A visual surface reconnaissance of the site; 3 borings (designated B -1 through B -3) with Standard Penetration Tests, advanced at strategic locations across the proposed house footprint and general lot areas; A review of published geologic and seismologic maps and literature. The following text sections describe our procedures used for performing the auger borings. Figure 2 depicts their approximate relative locations. The specific number, locations, and depths of our explorations were selected in relation to the existing and proposed site features, under the constraints of surface access, underground utility conflicts, and budget considerations. We estimated the relative location of each exploration by measuring from existing features and scaling these measurements onto a layout plan supplied to us, then we estimated their elevations by interpolating between contour lines AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 3 • • LSI ADAPT shown on this same plan. Consequently, the locations depicted on Figure 2 should be considered accurate only to the degree permitted by our data sources and implied by our measuring methods. It should be realized that the explorations performed for this evaluation reveal subsurface conditions only at discrete locations across the project site and that actual conditions in other areas could vary. Furthermore, the nature and extent of any such variations would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities have commenced. If significant variations are observed at that time, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations contained in this report to reflect the actual site conditions. 3.1 Auger Boring Procedures Our exploratory borings were advanced with a portable hollow -stem auger and a trailer - mounted drill rig operated by an independent drilling firm working under subcontract to ADAPT. A geotechnical engineer from our firm continuously observed the borings, logged the subsurface conditions, and collected representative soil samples. All samples were stored in watertight containers and later transported to our laboratory for further visual examination and testing. After the borings were completed, the boreholes were backfilled with a mixture of bentonite chips and soil cuttings. Throughout the drilling operation, soil samples were obtained at 2'A- or 5 -foot depth intervals by means of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) per ASTM:D -1586. This testing and sampling procedure consists of driving a standard 2- inch - diameter steel split -spoon sampler 18 inches into the soil with a 140 -pound hammer free - falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through each 6 -inch interval is counted, and the total number of blows struck during the final 12 inches is recorded as the Standard Penetration Resistance, or "SPT blow count." If a total of 50 blows is struck within any 6 -inch interval, the driving is stopped and the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the actual penetration distance. The resulting Standard Penetration Resistance values indicate the relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of cohesive soils. The enclosed Boring Logs describe the vertical sequence of soils and materials encountered in the borings, based primarily on our field classifications and supported by our subsequent laboratory examination and testing. Where a soil contact was observed to be gradational, our logs indicate the average contact depth. Where a soil type changed between sample intervals, we inferred the contact depth. Our logs also graphically indicate the blow count, sample type, sample number, and approximate depth of each soil sample obtained from the borings. If any groundwater was encountered in a borehole, the approximate groundwater depth is depicted on the boring log.' Groundwater depth estimates are typically based on the moisture content of soil samples, the wetted height on the drilling rods, and the water level measured in the borehole after the auger has been extracted. 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS The following sections of text present our observations, measurements, findings, and interpretations regarding surface, soil, groundwater, and seismic conditions at the project site. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 4 LSI ADAPT 4.1 Surface Conditions The subject site is vegetated by second - growth trees with a relatively thick growth of understory vegetation. We observed seepage water emanating along the face of what appears to be a cut slope at the west end of the existing driveway in Lot No. 2 (between roughly 140 and 150 feet elevation contours). The seepage was observed to collect at the top of the driveway and flow along the driveway to a drain system located at the bottom of the driveway. Filamentous vegetation was observed in the northwest corner of Lot No. 1, just to the south of this surface seepage area, indicating saturated, near - surface soil conditions. We did not observe surface seepage conditions elsewhere across the site. 4.2 Soil Conditions According to published geological maps, the general soil conditions at the site location consist of glaciofluvial sands and gravels overlying glacial drift. Our on -site explorations did not confirm the presence of glaciofluvial or glacial drift deposits; rather, the observed site soils correlated better with the Lacustrine Silt and Clay deposits mapped near -by the site. Our explorations revealed a fairly uniform subsurface stratigraphy across the site. Specifically, our borings revealed weathered, tannish gray to gray with rusty mottling, medium stiff sandy silts and loose to medium dense silty sands above an elevation ranging from about 135 feet in the southeastern portion to roughly 145 feet in the northwestern portion of the site. Below these near - surface, weathered soils, our borings disclosed stiff to very stiff, blue -gray, clayey silts and silts. The site soils are mantled by approximately 6 to 12 inches of forest duff, grass, sod and topsoil. 43 Groundwater Conditions At the time of drilling (May 2001), groundwater was observed at a depth of approximately 13 feet in boring B -2 at the western end of Lot No. 1, corresponding to an elevation of about 143 feet. This groundwater was encountered within a limited sand layer and is interpreted to be perched atop the underlying, relatively impermeable sandy silts or clayey silts. This groundwater zone may be related to the groundwater seepage emanating along the existing cut slope at the western end of Lot No. 2. Because our explorations were performed during an extended period of moderately wet weather, these observed groundwater conditions may closely represent the yearly average levels; somewhat higher levels probably occur during the winter and early spring months, while slightly lower levels may occur during the summer and early fall months. Throughout the year, groundwater levels would likely fluctuate in response to changing precipitation patterns, off -site construction activities, and changes in site utilization. 4.4 Seismic Conditions Based on our analysis of subsurface exploration logs and our review of published geologic maps, we interpret the on -site soil conditions to correspond to seismic soil profile type SE, as defined by Table 16 -J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code. This soil profile type is characterized by soft soils with an average blowcount less than 15 within the upper 100 feet bgs. Current (1996) National Seismic Hazard Maps prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey indicate that a peak bedrock site acceleration coefficient of about 0.30 is appropriate for an earthquake having a 10- percent probability of exceedance in 50 years AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 5 • • LSI ADAPT (corresponding to a return interval of 475 years). According to Figure 16 -2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code, the site lies within seismic risk zone 3. 4.5 Environmentally Critical Area Conditions The proposed site is located within an Area of Potential Geologic Instability identified on City of Tukwila Sensitive Area maps, with a moderate to high landslide potential and general slopes between 20 and 40 percent (Class 2 and Class 3 Area). Specifically, the topographic survey for the site indicates that Lot No. 2 and the eastern margin of Lots No. 1 and 149 slopes at an inclination 2H:1V (25 percent) downward towards the north- northeast, while the uphill area within the western portion of Lots No. 1 and 149 (above the level bench area) is inclined at approximately 4H:1V downward towards the northeast. The recommendations and conclusions of this geotechnical engineering report address the concerns related to the steep slope designation, in general accordance with the Sensitive Areas Overlay of the City of Tukwila building code. Provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented, the project is considered feasible and is not anticipated to adversely affect the stability of the subject site or adjacent properties. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Development plans call for the construction of new residential houses at the site. Based on our findings and the results of our analyses, the project is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented. The following text sections of this report present our specific geotechnical conclusions and recommendations concerning site preparation, spread footings, slab -on grade floors, backfilled walls, drainage systems, and structural fill. WSDOT Standard Specifications and Standard Plans cited herein refer to WSDOT publications M41 -10, 2000 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, and M21 -01, 2000 Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, respectively. 5.1 Site Preparation Preparation of the project site should involve temporary drainage, clearing, stripping, cutting, filling, excavations, dewatering, and subgrade compaction. The paragraphs below discuss our geotechnical comments and recommendations concerning site preparation. Temporary Drainage: We recommend intercepting and diverting any potential sources of surface or near- surface water within the construction zones before stripping begins. Because the selection of an appropriate drainage system will depend on the water quantity, season, weather conditions, construction sequence, and contractor's methods, final decisions regarding drainage systems are best made in the field at the time of construction. Nonetheless, we anticipate that curbs, berms, or ditches placed along the uphill side of the work areas will adequately intercept surface water runoff. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 6 • • LSI ADAPT Clearing and Stripping: After surface and near - surface water sources have been controlled, the construction areas should be cleared and stripped of all trees, bushes, sod, topsoil, debris, asphalt, and concrete. Our explorations indicate that an average thickness of about 6 to 12 inches of forest duff, sod, duff, and topsoil will be encountered across the site, but significant variations could exist, especially where tree root balls are encountered. Furthermore, it should be realized that if the stripping operation proceeds during wet weather, a generally greater stripping depth might be necessary to remove disturbed, surficial, moisture- sensitive soils; therefore, stripping is best performed during a period of dry weather. Demolition: As a part of the initial site preparation, any existing structures present within the construction areas should be demolished. Any associated underground structural elements or utilities, such as old footings, stemwalls, and drainpipes, should be exhumed as part of this demolition operation. Excavations: Site excavations ranging up to about 20 feet deep will be required to accommodate the proposed house garage and basement levels. Based on our explorations, we anticipate that these excavations will encounter medium stiff, sandy silts and loose to medium dense, silty sands, underlain by stiff to very stiff clayey silts and silts within the anticipated excavation. Some perched groundwater seepage zones may be encountered where isolated sand lenses are encountered within the silty soils. These soils can likely be cut with conventional earth working equipment such as small dozers and trackhoes. Temporary Cut Slopes: All temporary soil cuts associated with site regrading or excavations should be adequately sloped back to prevent sloughing and collapse. For the various soil layers that will likely be encountered in the excavation, we tentatively recommend the following maximum cut slope inclinations: Soil Type Maximum Inclination Loose to medium dense Sand 1'hH:1 V Medium dense Silty Sand 1H:1V Medium stiff Sandy /Clayey Silt 1H:1V If groundwater seepage is encountered within the excavation slopes, the cut slope inclination should not exceed 1 %AH:1 V. However, appropriate inclinations will ultimately depend on the actual soil and groundwater seepage conditions exposed in the cuts at the time of construction. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the excavation is properly sloped or braced for worker protection, in accordance with OSHA guidelines. In addition to proper sloping, the excavation cuts should be draped with plastic sheeting for the duration of the excavation to minimize surface erosion and ravelling. Dewatering: Our site surface and subsurface exploration reveled the presence of perched groundwater conditions within Lots No. 1 and 2. The proposed site excavations might encounter perched groundwater seepage, depending on the actual excavation depth and time of year. If groundwater is encountered, we AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 7 LSI ADAPT anticipate that an internal system of ditches, sump holes, and pumps will be adequate to temporarily dewater the excavation. Subgrade Compaction: Exposed subgrades for footings, floors, pavements, and other structures should be compacted to a firm, unyielding state, if warranted by soil moisture conditions. Any localized zones of loose granular soils observed within a subgrade should be compacted to a density commensurate with the surrounding soils. In contrast, any organic, soft, or pumping soils observed within a subgrade should be overexcavated and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. Permanent Slopes: All permanent cut slopes and fill slopes should be adequately inclined and revegetated to minimize long -term ravelling, sloughing, and erosion. We generally recommend that no permanent slopes be steeper than 2H:1 V. For all soil types, the use of flatter slopes (such as 2.5H:1 V) would further reduce long -term erosion and facilitate revegetation. It should be noted that the existing cut slope at the western end of Lot No. 2 appeared to be oversteepened and may need to be regraded to a more stable configuration, following installation of a subsurface trench drain system as described in the Drainage Systems section of this report. Alternatively, a concrete or segmental retaining wall may be constructed, . if required due to spacial constraints. ADAPT is' available to assist with additional geotechnical design criteria, should this become necessary. Slope Protection: We recommend that a permanent berm, Swale, or curb be constructed along the top edge of all permanent slopes to intercept surface flow. Also, a hardy vegetative groundcover should be established as soon as feasible, to further protect the slopes from runoff water erosion. Alternatively, if slopes are too steep for vegetation to take hold, permanent slopes could be armored with quarry spalls or a geosynthetic erosion mat. 5.2 Spread Footings In our opinion, conventional spread footings will provide adequate support for the proposed houses if the subgrades are properly prepared. We offer the following comments and recommendations for purposes of footing design and construction. Footing Depths and Widths: For frost and erosion protection, the bottoms of all exterior footings should penetrate at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent outside grades, whereas the bottoms of interior footings need penetrate only 12 inches below the surrounding slab surface level. All footings should bear within the native, medium dense sands /silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts. Continuous (wall) and isolated (column) footings should be at least 18 and 24 inches wide, respectively, to act as a true footing element providing the specified bearing capacity. Footing Surcharge Considerations: The current plan calls for basement retaining walls supported on spread footing elements. Some of these may be in close proximity of the adjacent structure north of Lot No. 2. Generally, we recommend that the base of an upper footing be placed below a 1H:1V plane extending upwards from the heel of any lower footing, in order to reduce the risk for surcharging the AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 8 • • LSI ADAPT backfilled footing stem walls or footing- supported retaining wall. Surcharge loads resulting from walls located closer than this may be evaluated by using elastic methods. ADAPT is available to assist with additional geotechnical design criteria, should this become necessary. Bearing Subgrades: The native, medium dense sands /silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts underlying the proposed house locations appear well- suited for supporting the proposed shallow spread footing system. Before concrete is placed, any localized zones of loose soils encountered in the footing subgrades should be compacted to a firm, unyielding condition. Subgrade Verification: All footing subgrades should consist of firm, unyielding, dense, undisturbed, native soils. Footings should never be cast atop loose, soft, or frozen soil, slough, debris, existing uncontrolled fill, or surfaces covered by standing water. We recommend that the condition of all subgrades be verified by an ADAPT representative before any concrete is placed. Bearing Capacities: Based on the bearing subgrade conditions described above, we recommend that all footings be designed for the following allowable bearing capacities for static and seismic loadings: Design Parameter Allowable Value Static Bearing Capacity Seismic Bearing Capacity 2,000 psf 2,660 psf Footing Settlements: We estimate that total post - construction settlements of properly designed footings bearing on properly prepared subgrades will not exceed 1 inch. Differential settlements could approach one -half of the actual total settlement between adjacent foundation elements. Footing and Stemwall Backfill: To provide erosion protection and lateral load resistance, we recommend that all footing excavations be backfilled on both sides of the footings and stemwalls after the concrete has cured. Either imported structural fill or non - organic on -site soils can be used for this purpose, contingent on a suitable moisture content at the time of placement. Regardless of soil type, all footing backfill soil should be compacted to a density of at least 90 percent (based on ASTM:D - 1557). Lateral Resistance: Footings and stemwalls that have been properly backfilled as described above will resist lateral movements by means of passive earth pressure and base friction. Passive pressure acts over the embedded front of the footing (neglecting the upper 1 foot for soil foreslopes) and varies with the foreslope inclination. For site - specific design purposes, we are providing recommended allowable passive pressure values for level and 2H:1 V foreslopes. The level foreslope condition may be assumed if the ground surface is level within a horizontal distance equal to two times the footing width. We recommend using the following design values, which incorporate a static safety factor of at least 1.5: AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 9 • • LSI ADAPT Allowable Design Values Design Parameter Level Foreslope (2H:1V) Foreslope Static Passive Pressure 250 pcf 125 pcf Seismic Passive Pressure 330 pcf 160 pcf Base Friction Coefficient 0.30 0.30 5.3 Slab -on -Grade Floors In our opinion, soil- supported slab -on -grade floors can be used for the proposed house if the subgrades are properly prepared. We offer the following comments and recommendations concerning slab -on -grade floors. Capillary Break: To retard the upward wicking of groundwater beneath the floor slab, we recommend that a capillary break be placed over the subgrade. Ideally, this capillary break would consist of a 4 -inch- thick layer of pea gravel or other clean, uniform, well- rounded gravel, such as "Gravel Backfill for Drains" per WSDOT Standard Specification 9- 03.12(4), but clean angular gravel can be used if it adequately prevents capillary wicking. Vapor Barrier: We recommend that a layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuff, Visqueen or Moistop) be placed directly between the capillary break and the floor slab to prevent ground moisture vapors from migrating upward through the slab. During subsequent casting of the concrete slab, the contractor should exercise care to avoid puncturing this vapor barrier. Vertical Deflections: Soil - supported slab -on -grade floors can deflect downward when vertical loads are applied, due to elastic compression of the subgrade. In our opinion, a subgrade reaction modulus of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used to estimate such deflections. Subgrade Verification: All slab -on -grade floors should bear on firm, unyielding native soils or on suitable structural fill soils. We recommend that the conditions of all subgrades and overlying layers be verified by an ADAPT representative before any concrete is placed. 5_4 Backfilled Walls In our opinion, backfilled concrete retaining walls can be used around the below -grade portions and to support interior shear walls of the houses. Our wall design recommendations and comments are presented below. Footing Depths: For frost and erosion protection, all perimeter and basement retaining wall footings should penetrate at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface, whereas the bottoms of AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 10 • • LSI ADAPT interior wall footings need only penetrate 12 inches below the surrounding slab surface level. All footings should bear within the native, medium dense sands /silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts. Curtain Drains: To preclude hydrostatic pressure development behind the perimeter retaining walls, we recommend that a curtain drain be placed behind the entire wall along the perimeter of the houses. This curtain drain should consist of pea gravel, washed rock, or some other clean, uniform, well- rounded gravel, extending outward a minimum of 2 feet from the wall and extending from the footing drain upward to within about 12 inches of the ground surface. We also recommend that a 4- inch - diameter perforated drain pipe be installed behind the heel of the wall, as described for Perimeter Drains in the Drainage Systems section of this report. Backfill Soil: The on -site granular soils could be used as backfill placed behind the curtain drain, if they are near the optimum moisture content. Alternatively, the wall backfill would consist of clean, free - draining, granular material, such as "Gravel Backfill for Walls" per WSDOT Standard Specification 9- 03.12(2). Backfill Compaction: Because soil compactors may induce significant lateral pressures on retaining walls, we recommend that only small, hand- operated compaction equipment be used within 3 feet of a completed wall. Also, all backfill should be compacted to approximately 90 percent of the maximum dry density (based on ASTM:D- 1557); a greater degree of compaction closely behind the wall would increase the lateral earth pressure, whereas a lesser degree of compaction might lead to excessive post - construction settlements. Grading and Capping: To retard the infiltration of surface water into the backfill soils, the backfill surface of exterior walls should be adequately sloped to drain away from the wall. We also recommend that the backfill surface directly behind the wall be capped with asphalt, concrete, or 12 inches of low - permeability (silty) soils. Applied Loads: Overturning and sliding loads applied to retaining walls can be classified as static pressures, surcharge pressures, seismic pressures, and hydrostatic pressures. We offer the following specific values for design purposes. Static Pressures: Yielding (cantilever) retaining walls should be designed to withstand an appropriate active lateral earth pressure, whereas non - yielding (restrained) walls should be designed to withstand an appropriate at -rest lateral earth pressure. The criteria for yielding walls may be applied where the top of the wall is allowed to translate or rotate a distance equal to 0.001 to 0.002 times the wall height. These pressures act over the entire back of the wall and vary with the backslope inclination. For various backslope angles, we recommend using the following active and at -rest pressures (given as equivalent fluid unit weights): AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 11 • • LSI ADAPT Backslope Active At -Rest Angle Pressure Pressure Level 35 pcf 55 pcf 4H:1V 44 pcf 62 pcf 2H:1V 53 pcf 75 pcf Surcharge Pressures: Static lateral earth pressures acting on a retaining wall should be increased to account for any surcharge loadings from traffic, construction equipment, material stockpiles, or structures. We have assumed that the retaining walls supporting the proposed basement and perimeter walls will be placed far enough apart so as not to exert surcharge pressure on the lower walls. This requires that the base of an upper wall footing is placed below a 1H:1V plane extending upwards from the heel of any lower wall. Seismic Pressures: Static lateral earth pressures acting on a retaining wall should be increased to account for seismic loadings. These pressures act over the entire back of the wall and vary with the backslope inclination, the seismic acceleration, and the wall height. Based on a design acceleration coefficient of 0.25 to 0.30 and a wall height of "H" feet, we recommend that these seismic loadings be modeled as the following uniform horizontal pressures for various backslope angles: Backslope Active At -Rest Angle Pressure Pressure Level 4H psf 12H psf 3H:1 V 6H psf 18H psf 4H:1V 8H psf 24H psf Hydrostatic Pressures: If groundwater is allowed to saturate the backfill soils, hydrostatic pressures will act against a retaining wall. If an adequate drainage and discharge system is installed behind the retaining wall, we do not expect that hydrostatic pressures will develop. Resisting Forces: Static pressures, surcharge pressures, seismic pressures, and hydrostatic pressures are resisted by a combination of passive lateral earth pressure, base friction, and subgrade bearing capacity. Passive pressure acts over the embedded front of the footing (neglecting the upper 1 foot for soil foreslopes) and varies with the foreslope inclination, whereas the base friction and bearing capacity act along the bottom of the footings. For site - specific design purposes, we are providing recommended allowable passive pressure values for level foreslopes. The level foreslope condition may be assumed if AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 12 • • LSI ADAPT the ground surface is level within a horizontal distance equal to two times the footing width. We recommend using the following design values, which incorporate a static safety factor of at least 1.5: Design Parameter Allowable Design Values Level Foreslope (2H:1V) Foreslope Static Passive Pressure 250 pcf 125 pcf Seismic Passive Pressure 330 pcf 160 pcf Base Friction Coefficient 0.30 0.30 Static Bearing Capacity 2,000 2,000 Seismic Bearing Capacity 2,660 2,660 5.5 Drainage Systems In our opinion, the houses should be provided with permanent drainage systems to minimize the risk of future moisture problems. We offer the following recommendations and comments for drainage design and construction purposes. Perimeter Drains: We recommend that the houses be encircled with a perimeter drain system to collect seepage water. This drain should consist of a perforated pipe within an envelope of pea gravel or washed rock, extending at least 6 inches on all sides of the pipe, and the gravel envelope should be wrapped with filter fabric to reduce the migration of fines from the surrounding soils. The drain invert should be installed no more than 8 inches above or below the base of the perimeter footings. All perimeter drains should discharge to a municipal storm drain, sewer system, or other suitable location by gravity flow. Runoff Water: Roof - runoff and surface - runoff water should not discharge into the perimeter drain system. Instead, these sources should discharge into separate tight line pipes and be routed away from the house to a storm drain or other appropriate location. Grading and Capping: Final site grades should slope downward away from the house so that runoff water will flow by gravity to suitable collection points, rather than ponding near the house. Ideally, the area surrounding the house would be capped with concrete, asphalt, or low- permeability (silty) soils to reduce surface -water infiltration. Subsurface Trench Drain: Groundwater seepage was observed to be emanating along the apparent cut face in the western end of Lot No. 2. We recommend that this seepage be controlled prior to site development by constructing a permanent subsurface trench drain system at the base of the slope, directly connected via tightline to a municipal storm drain, sewer system, or other suitable location by gravity AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 13 • • LSI ADAPT flow. This subsurface trench drain should consist of a main drain line parallel to the base of the slope, connected to "finger drains" excavated perpendicular to and into the slope face. The purpose of the finger drains would be to draw down the perched groundwater seepage from the slope face and divert it into the main trench drain system, to minimize slope surface erosion due to soil /groundwater piping. The main trench drain and the finger drains should consist of a 4 -inch diameter, perforated PVC pipe within an envelope of pea gravel or washed rock, extending at least 6 inches on all sides of the pipe and upwards to within 12 inches of the ground surface. The gravel drain rock should be wrapped with filter fabric (same as footing drains) to reduce the migration of fines from the surrounding soils. The trench drain should be capped with silty on -site soils or topsoil, to minimize infiltration of surface runoff water and reduce the long -term risk of clogging due to siltation. Clean-outs should be provided at both ends of the perforated drain pipe. 5.6 Structural Fill The term "structural fill" refers to any placed under foundations, retaining walls, slab -on -grade floors, sidewalks, pavements, and other such features. Our comments, conclusions, and recommendations concerning structural fill are presented in the following paragraphs. Materials: Typical structural fill materials include clean sand, granulithic gravel, pea gravel, washed rock, crushed rock, quarry spalls, controlled - density fill (CDF), lean-mix concrete, well - graded mixtures of sand and gravel (commonly called "gravel borrow" or "pit- run "), and miscellaneous mixtures of silt, sand, and gravel. Recycled asphalt, concrete, and glass, which are derived from pulverizing the parent materials, are also potentially useful as structural fill in certain applications. Soils used for structural fill should not contain any organic matter or debris, nor any individual particles greater than about 6 inches in diameter. Fill Placement: Generally, pea gravel, washed rock, quarry spalls, CDF, and lean -mix concrete do not require special placement and compaction procedures. In contrast, clean sand, granulithic gravel, crushed rock, soil mixtures, and recycled materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and each lift should be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor. On -Site Soils: Because relatively large cuts are planned for the project, we expect that large quantities of on -site soils will be generated during earthwork activities. We anticipate that fill will be needed to backfill footings and retaining walls at the site. Given that the site soils are predominantly fine- grained and, as such highly moisture- sensitive, we recommend that the construction planning includes a contingency for importing "clean ", granular fill, in the event that adequate soil aeration is not feasible within the construction time -frame due to unfavorable site conditions. As such, we offer the following evaluation of these on -site soils in relation to potential use as structural fill. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA0I- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 14 LSSAPT iff, topsoil, and organic -rich soils mantling most of ctural fill under any circumstances, due to their high :se materials can be used only for non - structural d or sandy silt units underlying the surficial organic eir optimum moisture condition. We anticipate that id recompacted, given favorable weather conditions heir moisture content. However, these soils would :r, due to their moderately high silt content. y silt units underlying the surficial organic soils do is structural fill at their . present moisture contents. citable for reuse during a period of dry weather if oisture content. It should be noted that these fine - sensitive and are not likely to be suitable for use as Is. est (ASTM:D -1557) as a standard, we recommend be compacted to the following minimum densities: Minimum Compaction 90 percent 90 percent 90 percent 95 percent 90 percent 90 percent standard for construction work within right -of -way :d Proctor test (ASTM:D -698). This requirement is using the more stringent Modified Proctor criteria gardless of material or location, all structural fill irepared in accordance with the Site Preparation s should be verified by an ADAPT representative )mpaction should be verified by means of in -place May 25, 2001 Page 15 LSI ADAPT that adequacy of soil compaction efforts may be ils used for structural fill depends primarily on their they are placed. As the "fines" content (that soil soils become more sensitive to small changes in t 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently moisture content is more than 2 percentage points wet- weather site work, we recommend using "clean" of 5 percent or Less (by weight) based on the soil iecified in terms of its compressive strength, which a strength of 50 psi (7200 psf) provides adequate readily excavated with hand shovels. A strength of for special applications but greatly increases the ving a strength greater than about 100 psi requires lot be used where future hand - excavation might be :CES tructural elements will depend largely on proper site i procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced ;ral part of the construction process. Consequently, e following post - report services: specifications to verify that our design criteria perly integrated into the design; w comments (if required by City of Tukwila); e with the design team and contractor to discuss truction issues; r completion of stripping and overexcavation to have been reached and to determine appropriate 11 fill and test the compaction of structural fill soils )nstruction specifications; May 25, 2001 Page 16 • • LSI ADAPT • Check all completed .subgrades for footings and slab -on -grade floors before concrete is poured, in order to verify their bearing capacity; • • Observe the installation of all perimeter drains, wall drains, and capillary break layers to verify their conformance with the construction plans; • Prepare a post - construction letter summarizing all field observations, inspections, and test results (if required by City of Tukwila). Upon request, we could submit a proposal for providing some or all of these construction monitoring, inspection, and testing services. Such a proposal is best prepared after the project plans and specifications have been approved for construction. 7.0 CLOSURE The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the explorations that we performed for this study; therefore, if variations in the subgrade conditions are observed at a later time, we may need to modify this report to reflect those changes. Also, because the future performance and integrity of the project elements depend largely on proper initial site preparation, drainage, and construction procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report or any aspects of the project, please feel free to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, LSI ADAPT Rolf B. yllsetfi, P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer K. w, P. E nior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Reviewer AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 Page 17 IS 1.87' SW PROP CORNER LEGEND: B -1 $ BORING NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION NOTE: SITE PLAN IS BASED ON LOT SURVEY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY CRONES & ASSOCIATES (DATED DECEMBER, 2000) LSI ADAPT ,68'9LI "1373 )I1 WWION38 7Yryo7 800 Maynard Avenue S., Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 Ph : 206.654.7045 Fax : 206.654.7048 0 30 60 SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2 - Site & Exploration Plan 1Proiect : Hellwig's Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 "Location : 13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 'Client : AIA International Development Date : 05/23/01 Job # :S— WA -01- 6267 -0 4^.°25'47' N, 12 "16a "'A' S;O=SS4 IOCO MT 0 i707 MO o ® ® ® t� Print& Ina TAFAI ItCY 009 Wirllnw>r Fni,rtiar: (ws ' LSI ADAPT 800 Maynard Avenue S. Seattle, Washington Ph : 206.654.7045 Fax : , Suite 403 98134 206.654.7048 FIGURE 1 - Location /Topographic Map Project : HelIwig's Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 Location : 13821 Macadam Rood South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Client : AIA International Development Date : 05/23/01 Job # :S— WA -01- 6267 -0 �o rL Start Date : BORING /MONIT(ING WELL LOG dB LSIADAPT 800 Maynard Avenue South, Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 TEL: 206.654.7045 FAX: 206.654.7048 PROJECT : Heliwig's Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 LOCATION : 13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Job Number : WAO1- 6267 -0 Boring No.: B -1 Monitoring Well No.: g Ground Surface Elevation : 139' Casing Elevation : N/A Elevation Reference : City of Tukwila Page ' 01 of 1 SOIL DESCRIPTION a ai z m § 41 a¢ oS AS -BUILT WELL DESIGN LABORATORY _ 0 Stiff to very stiff, moist, blue -gray, clayey SILT /SILT with some clay - - - 4 Isi 7 10 - -5- s 1S-2 7 6 Becoming very stiff 5 9 T _L 12 - —10- - - - 8 TS-4 8 12 Boring terminated at 14.0 feet. -15- No groundwater seepage observed. - - - NOTE: Surface soils were observed to be saturated from surface seepage. - - - - - -20- - - - -25- - - - -30- LEGEND Alin Grain She Analysts 2.lncb O. D. Spilt -Spoon Sample Sample not Recovered _L Static water Level at DAN DATE Type of Analytical Testlnp Perlartrred Iii: Ines shown) 9 1M .. bah O.D. Dames & Moore Sample Static water taw Grab Sample (Sop Cuttings) DATE NR NR No Fiecway Shelby Tube Semple Perched Groundwater 200 Wash 11 At Tone of Drilling (% lines shown) 05/09/01 Completion Date : 05/09/01 Logged By: R.B.H. BORING /MONITORING WELL LOG LSI ADAPT B00 Maynard Avenue South, Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 TEL: 206.654.7045 FAX: 206.654.7048 PROJECT : Hellwig's Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 Job Number : WA01- 6267 -0 Boring No.: B -2 LOCATION : 13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Monitoring Well No.: Ground Surface Elevation : 156' Casing Elevation : N/A Elevation Reference : City of Tukwila Page' 01 of 1 1 SOIL DESCRIPTION g z g m o a¢ o, 03 AS -BUILT WELL DESIGN LABORATORY TESTNG 0 Forest duff, sod and topsoil Medium stiff, moist to wet, tan -gray with rusty mottling, sandy SILT with thin sand lenses - - S-1 S2 5-3 s-4 S-5 3 3 4 3 a 3 a 3 3 a 5 - - - _ - - - — -5- Medium stiff, moist to wet, blue -gray and tannish gray with rusty and dark brown spots, intermixed sandy SILT and fine SAND with scattered fine rootlets (Disturbed ?) Medium stiff, moist, gray with some rust spots, fine sandy SILT with some clay Medium stiff, moist to wet, blue -gray, clayey SILT - with occasional thin, fine sand lenses Medium dense, saturated, blue - gray, fine to medium SAND T - - — -10- - — _ - - - - - - ---\ -15- Boring terminated at 14.0 feet. - Groundwater observed at 12.5 feet. NOTE: SPT sample from 12.5 to 14.0 feet - contained indications of saturated sand _ lens, however, no recovery due to missing catcher in sampling tube. - Cuttings sample (S -5) collected from _ auger lead section after withdrawal. - - — -20- -25- -30- LEGEND (% tines de mi I 2-Inch 0. D. SpIA Spoon Sample X Sample not Recovered Static Water Level at Ming DATE —'Z Typo of Analytical Testing Pe o,med :FA nto 31/4 • Inch O.D. Dames A Moore Sample ././ 0 Static Water Level Tube Sample NR No oraD Sample (Shc Cuts gs) DATE Recovery Perched Groundaaler ATD Wisner of Ming (% Ones shorn) IIShelby Start Date : 05/09/01 Completion Date : 05/09/01 Logged By: R.B.H. BORING /MONITORING WELL LOG LSI ADAPT 0 Maynard Avenue South, Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 TEL: 206.654.7045 FAX: 206.654.7048 PROJECT : Hellwigs Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 Job Number : WA01- 6267 -0 LOCATION : 13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Boring No.: B -3 Monitoring Well No.: Ground Surface Elevation : 148' Casing Elevation : N/A Elevation Reference : City of Tukwila Page 01 of 1 gi —0 SOIL DESCRIPTION r�i z m 0 a¢ 3 AS -BUILT WELL DESIGN ORATORY TESTING Medium dense, moist, tannish gray with some rusty mottling, gravelly, silty SAND - - I[S1' s2 S4 5 5 7 3 4 3 4 4 - - - - - — -5- Medium stiff, moist to wet, tannish gray with rusty mottling, fine sandy SILT Medium stiff, moist to wet, tan -gray with some -\ ` rusty mottling, clayey SILT _/ Loose, moist to wet, tan -gray with some rusty — -10- mottling, fine SAND - - - - Loose to medium dense, wet to saturated, gray, silty, fine SAND Stiff, moist, blue -gray, clay � — -15- - - -20- Boring terminated at 19.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. - - - - - - -25- -30- LEGEND Z I il • 2-Inch O. D. S•::• gtlSpoon Sample X Sample not Recovered 3 1/4. Inch O.D. Dames A Moore Sample Static Water Laval at Mina Static Water Loyd Perched L3rotmdwamr Type of Analytical Tasting Performed No Recovery At Time of Drppnp ■ ■ ■■ s Grain Slut Analysts shown) 200 Wash (X fines shown) ^'jr D ATE K NR AID / Shelby Tube Semple // Grab Sample (Sop Cuttings) DATE Start Date : 05/09/01 Completion Date : 05/09/01 L ged By : R.B.H. 9 ADaPT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT HELLWIG'S ADDITION LOTS NO. 1, 2 & 149 13821 Macadam Road Tukwila, Washington Submitted To: AIA International Development 306 North 1st Avenue Kent, Washington 98032 WA01- 6267 -0 May 2001. TABLE OF CONTENTS WA01 -6267-0 LSI ADAPT 1.0 • SUMMARY 1 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2' 3.0 EXPLORATORY METHODS 3 3.1 Auger. Boring Procedures 4 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS 4 4.1 Surface Conditions 5 4.2 Soil Conditions 5 4.3 Groundwater Conditions 5 4.4 Seismic Conditions 5 4.5 Environmentally Critical Area Conditions 6 5.0 . CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 5.1 . Site Preparation 6 5.2 Spread Footings 8 5.3 Slab -on -Grade Floors 10 5.4 Backfilled Walls 10 5.5 Drainage Systems 13 5.6 Structural Fill 14 6.0 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES 16 7.0 CLOSURE 17 Figure 1 Location/Topographic Map Figure 2 Site & Exploration Plan Boring Logs B -1 through B -3 AIA International Development May 25, 2001 ISI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 Table of Contests • LSI ADAPT Foundations: In our opinion, the proposed houses can be supported by conventional spread footings that bear on the native, medium dense sands/silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts. For properly prepared footing subgrades, these spread footings may be designed for an allowable, static bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) and a seismic bearing pressure of 2,660 psf. • Floors: Typical soil - supported, slab -on -grade floors are feasible at this site, contingent on proper subgrade preparation. • Subsurface Walls: In our opinion, conventional backfilled, cast -in -place concrete walls will adequately support the proposed basement and site perimeter retaining wall system. These walls should be designed to withstand appropriate lateral pressures, as discussed in this report_ Seismic Considerations: Based on our literature review and subsurface interpretations, we recommend that the project structural engineer use the following seismic parameters for design of buildings, retaining walls, and other site structures, as appropriate. Design Parameter Value Acceleration Coefficient 030 Risk Zone (1997 UBC) 3 Soil Profile Type (1997 UBC) SE Temporary Excavation Considerations: All temporary soil cuts associated with site regrading or excavations should be adequately sloped back to prevent sloughing and collapse. For the loose to medium dense sand and medium stiff sandy /clayey silt that will likely be encountered within the anticipated excavation depths, we tentatively recommend maximum, temporary cut slope inclinations of 11/2H:1V and 1H:1V, respectively. If groundwater seepage is encountered within the excavation slopes, the cut slope inclination should not exceed 1 %2H:1 V. 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at 13821 Macadam Road in Tukwila, Washington, as shown on the enclosed Location/Topographic Map (Figure 1). The site consists of three vacant building lots measuring approximately 50 by 100 feet, identified as Lots No. 1 & 2 within Block 1 and Lot No. 149 on the west side of Macadam Road on the lot plan provided for our review. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 2 • • LSI ADAPT shown on this same plan. Consequently, the locations depicted on Figure 2 should be considered accurate only to the degree permitted by our data sources and implied by our measuring methods. It should be realized that the explorations performed for this evaluation reveal subsurface conditions only at discrete locations across the project site and that actual conditions in other areas could vary. Furthermore, the nature and extent of any such variations would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities have commenced. If significant variations are observed at that time, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations contained in this report to reflect the actual site conditions. 3.1 Auger Boring Procedures Our exploratory borings were advanced with a portable hollow -stem auger and a trailer- mounted drill rig operated by an independent drilling firm working under subcontract to ADAPT. A geotechnical engineer from our firm continuously observed the borings, logged the subsurface conditions, and collected representative soil samples. All samples were stored in watertight containers and later transported to our laboratory for further visual examination and testing. After the borings were completed, the boreholes were backfilled with a mixture of bentonite chips and soil cuttings. Throughout the drilling operation, soil samples were obtained at 21/2- or 5 -foot depth intervals by means of the Standard Penetration. Test (SPT) per ASTM:D -1586. This testing and sampling procedure consists of driving a standard 2- inch - diameter steel split - spoon sampler 18 inches into the soil with a 140 -pound hammer free - falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through each 6 -inch interval is counted; and the total number of blows struck during the final 12 inches is recorded as the Standard Penetration Resistance, or "SPT blow count." If a total of 50 blows is struck within any 6 -inch interval, the driving is stopped and the blow count is recorded as 50 blows for the actual penetration distance. The resulting Standard Penetration Resistance values indicate the relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of cohesive soils. The enclosed Boring Logs describe the vertical sequence of soils and materials encountered in the borings, based primarily on our field classifications and supported by our subsequent laboratory examination and testing. Where a soil contact was observed to be gradational, our logs indicate the average contact depth. Where a soil type changed between sample intervals, we inferred the contact depth. Our logs also graphically indicate the blow count, sample type, sample number, and approximate depth of each soil sample obtained from the borings. If any groundwater was encountered in a borehole, the approximate groundwater depth is depicted on the boring log. Groundwater depth estimates are typically based on the moisture content of soil samples, the wetted height on the drilling rods, and the water level measured in the borehole after the auger has been extracted. 4.0 SITE CONDITIONS The following sections of text present our observations, measurements, findings, and interpretations regarding surface, soil, groundwater, and seismic conditions at the project site. AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project Na WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 4 LSI ADAPT (corresponding to a return interval of 475 years). According to Figure 16-2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code, the site lies within seismic risk zone 3. 4.5 Environmentally Critical Area Conditions The proposed site is located within an Area of Potential Geologic Instability identified on City of mkwila Sensitive Area maps, with a moderate to high landslide potential and general slopes between 20 and 40 percent (Class 2 and Class 3 Area). Specifically, the topographic survey for the site indicates that Lot No. 2 and the eastern margin of Lots No. 1 and 149 slopes at an inclination 2H:1 V (25 percent) downward towards the north - northeast, while the uphill area within the western portion of Lots No. 1 and 149 (above the level bench area) is inclined at approximately 4H:1V downward towards the northeast. The recommendations and conclusions of this geotechnical engineering report address the concems related to the steep slope designation, in general accordance with the Sensitive Areas Overlay of the City of Tukwila building code. Provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented, the project is considered feasible and is not anticipated to adversely affect the stability of the subject site or adjacent properties. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Development plans call for the construction of new residential houses at the site. Based on our findings and the results of our analyses, the project is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the recommendations of this report are implemented. The following text sections of this report present our specific geotechnical conclusions and recommendations concerning site preparation, spread footings, slab -on grade floors, backfilled walls, drainage systems, and structural fill. WSDOT Standard Specifications and "Standard Plans cited herein refer to WSDOT publications M41 -10, 2000 Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, and M21 -01, 2000 Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, respectively. 5.1 Site Preparation Preparation of the project site should involve temporary drainage, clearing, stripping, cutting, filling, excavations, dewatering, and subgrade compaction. The paragraphs below discuss our geotechnical comments and recommendations concerning site preparation. Temporary Drainage: We recommend intercepting and diverting any potential sources of surface or near- surface water within the construction zones before stripping begins. Because the selection of an appropriate drainage system will depend on the water quantity, season, weather conditions, construction sequence, and contractor's methods, final decisions regarding drainage systems are best made in the field at the time of construction. Nonetheless, we anticipate that curbs, berms, or ditches placed along the uphill side of the work areas will adequately intercept surface water,runoff. AIA International Development 1SI ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 6 LSI ADAPT anticipate that an internal system of ditches, sump holes, and pumps will be adequate to temporarily dewater the excavation. Subgrade Compaction: Exposed subgrades for footings, floors, pavements, and other structures should be compacted to a firm, unyielding state, if warranted by soil moisture conditions. Any localized zones of loose granular soils observed within a subgrade should be compacted to a density commensurate with the surrounding soils. In contrast, any organic, soft, or pumping soils observed within a subgrade should be overexcavated and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. Permanent Slopes: All permanent cut slopes and fill slopes should be adequately inclined and revegetated to minimize long -term ravelling, sloughing, and erosion. We generally recommend that no permanent slopes be steeper than 2H:1 V. For all soil types, the use of flatter slopes (such as 2.5H:1 V) would further reduce long -term erosion and facilitate revegetation. It should be noted that the existing cut slope at the western end of Lot No. 2 appeared to be oversteepened and may need to be regraded to a more stable configuration, following installation of a subsurface trench drain system as described in the Drainage Systems section of this report. Altematively, a concrete or segmental retaining wall may be constructed,. if required due to spacial constraints. ADAPT is available to assist with additional geotechnical design criteria, should this become necessary. Slope Protection: We recommend that a permanent berm, swale, or curb be constructed along the to edge of all permanent slopes to intercept surface flow. Also, a hardy vegetative groundcover should be established as soon as feasible, to further protect the slopes from runoff water erosion. Alternatively, if slopes are too steep'for vegetation to take hold, permanent slopes could be armored with quarry spalls or a geosynthetic erosion mat. 52 Spread FootinEs In our opinion, conventional spread footings will provide adequate support for the proposed houses if the subgrades are properly prepared. We offer the following comments and recommendations for purposes of footing design and construction. Footing Depths and Widths: For frost and erosion protection, the bottoms of all exterior footings should penetrate at least 18 inches below Iowest adjacent outside grades, whereas the bottoms of interior footings need penetrate only 12 inches below the surrounding slab surface level. All footings should bear within the native, medium dense sands/silty sands or medium stiff sandy /clayey silts. Continuous (wall) and isolated (column) footings should be at least 18 and 24 inches wide, respectively, to act as a true footing element providing the specified bearing capacity. Footing Surcharge Considerations: The current plan calls for basement retaining walls supported on spread footing elements. Some of these may be in close proximity of the adjacent structure north of Lot No. 2. Generally, we recommend that the base of an upper footing be placed below a 1 H:1 V plane extending upwards from the heel of any lower footing, in order to reduce the risk for surcharging the AIA International Development ISI ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 8 LSI ADAPT Design Parameter Allowable Design Values Level Foreslope (2H:1V) Foreslope Static Passive Pressure 250 pcf 125 pcf Seismic Passive Pressure 330 pcf 160 pcf Base Friction Coefficient 0.30 0.30 5.3 Slab -on -Grade Floors In our opinion, soil- supported slab -on -grade floors can be used for the proposed house if the subgrades are properly prepared. We offer the following comments and recommendations conceming slab -on -grade floors. Capillary Break: To retard the upward wicking of groundwater beneath the floor slab, we recommend that a capillary break be placed over the subgrade. Ideally, this capillary break would consist of a 4 -inch- thick layer of pea gravel or other clean, uniform, well - rounded gravel, such as "Gravel Backfill for Drains" per WSDOT Standard Specification 9- 03.12(4), but clean angular gravel can be used if it adequately prevents capillary wicking. Vapor Barrier We recommend that a layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuff, Visqueen or Moistop) be placed directly (zetween the capillary break and the floor slab to prevent ground moisture vapors from migrating upward through the slab. During subsequent casting of the concrete slab, the contractor should exercise care to avoid puncturing this vapor barrier. Vertical Deflections: Soil - supported slab -on -grade floors can deflect downward when vertical loads are applied, due to elastic compression of the subgrade. In our opinion, a subgrade reaction modulus of 100 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used to estimate such deflections. Subgrade Verification: All slab -on -grade floors should bear on firm, unyielding native soils or on suitable structural fill soils. We recommend that the conditions of all subgrades and overlying layers be verified by an ADAPT representative before any concrete is placed. 5.4 Backfilled Walls In our opinion, backfilled concrete retaining walls can be used around the below -grade portions and to support interior shear walls of the houses. Our wall design recommendations and comments are presented below. Footing Depths: For frost and erosion protection, all perimeter and basement retaining wall footings should penetrate at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface, whereas the bottoms of AIA International Development ISI ADAPT Project No. WA0I- 6267 -0 May 25, 2001 . Page 10 LSI ADAPT Backslope Active At-Rest Angle . Pressure Pressure Level " 35 pcf 55 pcf { 4H:1 V 44 pcf 62 pcf 2H:1V 53 pcf 75 pcf • Surcharge Pressures: Static lateral earth pressures acting on a retaining wall should be increased to account for any surcharge loadings from traffic, construction equipment, material stockpiles, or structures. We have assumed that the retaining walls supporting the proposed basement and perimeter walls will be placed far enough apart so as not to exert surcharge pressure on the lower walls. This requires that the base of an upper wall footing is placed below a.1H:1V plane extending upwards from the heel of any lower wall. Seismic Pressures: Static lateral earth pressures acting on a retaining wall should be increased to account for seismic loadings. These pressures act over the entire back of the wall and vary with the backslope inclination, the seismic acceleration, and the wall height. Based on a design acceleration coefficient of 0.25 to 0.30 and a wall height of "H" feet, we recommend that these seismic loadings be modeled as the following uniform horizontal pressures for various backslope angles: Backslope Active At-Rest Angle Pressure Pressure Level 4H psf 12H psf 3H:1 V 6H psf 18H psf 4H:1 V 8H psf 24H psf Hydrostatic Pressures: If groundwater is allowed to saturate the backfill soils, hydrostatic pressures will act against a retaining wall. If an adequate drainage and discharge system is installed behind the retaining wall, we do not expect that hydrostatic pressures will develop. Resisting Forces: Static pressures, surcharge pressures, seismic pressures, and hydrostatic pressures are resisted by a combination of passive lateral earth pressure, base friction, and subgrade bearing capacity. Passive pressure acts over the embedded front of the footing (r glecting the upper 1 foot for soil foreslopes) and varies with the foreslope inclination, whereas the base, friction and bearing capacity act along the bottom of the footings. For site - specific design purposes, we are providing recommended allowable passive pressure values for level foreslopes. The level foreslope condition may be assumed if AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 12 • • LSI ADAPT flow. This subsurface trench drain should consist of a main drain line parallel to the base of the slope, connected to "forger drains" excavated perpendicular to and into the slope face. The purpose of the finger drains would be to draw down the perched groundwater seepage from the slope face and divert it into the main trench drain system, to minimize slope surface erosion due to soil/grotmdwater piping. The main trench drain and the finger drains should consist of a 4 -inch diameter, perforated. PVC pipe within an envelope of pea gravel or washed rock, extending at least 6 inches on all sides of the pipe and upwards to within 12 inches of the ground surface. The gravel drain rock should be wrapped with filter fabric (same as footing drains) to reduce the migration of fines from the surrounding soils. The trench drain should be capped with silty on -site soils or topsoil, to minimize infiltration of surface runoff water and reduce the long -term risk of clogging due to siltation. Clean-outs should be provided at both ends of the perforated drain pipe. 5.6 Structural Fill The term "structural fill" refers to any placed under foundations, retaining walls, slab -on -grade floors, sidewalks, pavements, and other such features. Our comments, conclusions, and recommendations concerning structural fill are presented in the following paragraphs. Materials: Typical structural fill materials include clean sand, granulithic gravel, pea gravel, washed rock, crushed rock, quarry spalls, controlled - density fill (CDF), lean -mix concrete, well - graded mixtures of sand and gravel (commonly called "gravel borrow" or "pit - run "), and miscellaneous mixtures of silt, sand, and gravel. Recycled asphalt, concrete, and glass, which are derived from pulverizing the parent materials, are also potentially useful as structural fill in certain applications. Soils used for structural fill should not contain tny, organic matter or debris, nor any individual particles greater than about 6 inches in diameter. Fill Placement: Generally, pea gravel, washed rock, quarry spalls, CDF, and lean-mix concrete do not require special placement and compaction procedures. In contrast, clean sand, granulithic gravel, crushed rock, soil mixtures, and recycled materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness, and each lift should be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor. On -Site Soils: Because relatively large cuts are planned for the project, we expect that large quantities of on -site soils will be generated during earthwork activities. We anticipate that fill will be needed to backfill footings and retaining walls at the site. Given that the site soils are predominantly fine - grained and, as such highly moisture- sensitive, we recommend that the construction planning includes a contingency for importing "clean", granular fill, in the event that adequate soil aeration is not feasible within the construction time -frame due to unfavorable site conditions. As such, we offer the following evaluation of these on -site soils in relation to potential use as structural1 fill. AIA International Development 1S1 ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 14 • • LSI ADAPT density tests performed during fill placement so that adequacy of soil compaction efforts may be evaluated as earthwork progresses. Soil Moisture Considerations: The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on their grain -size distribution and moisture content when they are placed. As the "fines" content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soils become more sensitive to small changes in moisture content. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. For fill placement during wet - weather site work, we recommend using "clean" fill, which refers to soils that have a fines content of 5 percent or less (by weight) based on the soil fraction passing the U.S. No: 4 Sieve. CDF Strength Considerations: CDF is normally specified in terms of its compressive strength, which typically ranges from 50 to 200 psi. CDF having a strength of 50 psi (7200 psf) provides adequate support for most structural applications and can be readily excavated with hand shovels. A strength of 100 psi (14,400 psf) provides additional support for special applications but greatly increases the difficulty of hand - excavation. In general, CDF having a strength greater than about 100 psi requires power equipment to excavate and, as such, should not be used where future hand - excavation might be needed. 6.0 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES Because the future performance and integrity of the structural elements will depend largely on proper site preparation, drainage, fill placement, and construction procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. Consequently, we recommend that ADAPT be retained to provide the following post -report services: • Review all construction plans and specifications to verify that our design criteria presented in this report have been properly integrated into the design; • Prepare a letter summarizing all review comments (if required by City of Tukwila); • Attend a pre - construction conference with the design team and contractor to discuss important geotechnically related construction issues; Observe all exposed subgrades after completion of stripping and overexcavation to confirm that suitable soil conditions have been reached and to determine appropriate subgrade compaction methods; • Monitor the placement of all structural fill and test the compaction of structural fill soils to verify their conformance with the construction specifications; AIA Intonational Dcvelopmcnt LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01 -6267-0 May 25, 2001 Page 16 ICCO « T :ctOn O = = O PT uta,'iron TCSOS 0'099 W9ie8nvx Frenrsirme Imcv arr LS ADAPT 800 Maynard Avenue S. Seattle, Washington Ph : 206.654.7045 Fax : , Suite 403 98134 206.654.7048 FIGURE 1 - Location /Topographic Map Project : Hellwig's Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 Location : 13821 Macadam Rood South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Client : AIA International Development Date : 05/23/01 Job # :s— WA -01- 6267 -0 EORIN / M NIT IN G WELL LOG • StAnA • � 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 • TEL 206.654.7045 FAX: 208.654.7048 PROJECT : Hellwig s Addition Lots 1, .2 & 149 Job Number : WA01- 6267 -0 Boring No.: 13-1 :LOCATION :13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Monitoring Well No.: Ground Surface Elevation : 139' casing Elevation : WA Elevation Reference : City of Tukwila 01 of 1 Page : 11 0 SOIL DESCRIPTION r 1 11 g i - AS -BUILT WELL DESIGN LABORATORY Stiff to very stiff, moist, blue -gray, clayey SILT/SILT with some clay Becoming very. stiff — - 4 8 7 6 5 12 6 8 12 - - - - . • - - S-1 S,2 • • -10- — - — - — - - - - S-4 -15- ._.L_ Boring terminated at 14.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE: Surface soils were observed to be saturated from surface seepage. — _ — -20- r-- -25- -30- LEGEND Andy* L-MMO.DADD.OpmmS.np1. X SrrobnotKmrnd Booms. LMr0i nuj lypdMaybrrTwdp :: . u LSI ADAPT BORING /MONITV ING WELL LOG 800 Maynard Avenue South, Sub) 403 Seattle, Washington 88134 TEL 206.654.7045 FAX: 206.654.7048 PROJECT : Hellwigs Addition Lots 1, 2 & 149 Job Number : WA01- 6267 -0 LOCATION : 13821 Macadam Road South Tukwila, Washington 98168 Boring No.: B-3 Monitoring Well No.: 9 Ground Surface Elevation : 14r Casing Elevation :. WA Elevation Reference : City of Tukwila 01 oi 1 1 SOIL DESCRIPTION . I I I? AS -BUILT WELL DESIGN LABORATORY Tram 0 Medium dense, moist, tannish gray with some rusty mottling, gravelly, silty SAND Medium stiff, moist to wet, tannish gray with rusty - - J&1l5 5 7 — -5- mottling, fine sandy SILT s2 y • 3 4 4 _ 3 Medium stiff, moist to wet, tan -gray with some a `rusty mottling, clayey SILT .-- Loose, moist to wet, tan -gray with some rusty mottling, fine SAND - 4 — -10- Loose to medium dense, wet to saturated, gray, silty, fine SAND - - - — S-4 4 5 Stiff, moist, blue -gray, clay 4 . -15- - Boring terminated at 19.0 feet. -20- No groundwater seepage observed. - - - . -•- - • - -25- • 1 LEGEND �+ $ aid�ao.apall�oons�Y sr�ruornKww.e amoWONWWao� , heel 7ypdNrylkdT Psi usd ■ %V for `yaw "'"'�`' fa dAmi X 714- bdhO.D.Drtialroo�p► San Stre NNW rw�d NR w°n`°'�r ca.es.nq.tSacv�W Dania T� JL � Td�binpb �_ PwdndOwdar.r ATD, b7Wrd0iiq Irr` --' I� .I _ 8110.4 Start Date : 05/09/01 Completion Date : 05/09/01 Logged By : R.sx • November 2, 2001 HWA Project No. 2001186 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 -2599 Attention: Subject: Ms. Joanna Spencer GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW KHAN RESIDENCE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Spencer, u win HWAGEOSCIENCES INC. 19730 -64TH AVE. W., SUITE 200 LYNNWOOD, WA 98036 -5957 TEL. 425-774-0106 FAX. 425-774-2714 www.hwageosciences.com •� 'Tt,i'^K..s As requested, we have prepared a peer review of a geotechnical report for a proposed residential development located at a current address of 13821 Macadam Road in Tukwila, Washington. Our work was conducted in general accordance with our proposal P -4482 dated September 26, 2001, and consisted of a site reconnaissance, review of project documents submitted to us by the City of Tukwila, and review of relevant sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The project involves development of three residential properties situated on three separate building lots west of and adjacent to Macadam Road and southwest of S 138th Street in Tukwila, Washington. The proposed development will consist of site grading, and construction of driveways, retaining walls, and three residential houses. The site is located entirely within Class 2 and Class 3 Sensitive Areas as classified and mapped by the City of Tukwila. PROJECT DOCUMENTS We received the following project- related documents from the City of Tukwila: • Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated May 25, 2001, by LSI ADAPT; • Geotechnical Supplement No. 1- On -Site Storm Water Infiltration, dated July 2, 2001, by LSI ADAPT; •, Geotechnical Supplement No. 2 — Retaining Wall Design, dated August 16, 2001, by LSI ADAPT; • Set of plans consisting of: site, grading, erosion control, and tree plans, and wall profiles, prepared by the developer and stamped by the Tukwila Public Works on August 20, GEOLOGY GEOENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HYDROGEOLOGY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING TESTING & INSPECTION • November 2, 2001 HWA Project No. 2001186 2001; and • Copies of relevant parts of the 1990 Tukwila Sensitive Area Maps and Legend. SITE RECONNAISSANCE We visited the site on November 1, 2001, and our observations are in general agreement with those provided by LSI ADAPT in their geotechnical engineering report and supplements. However, the report states the maximum slope inclination on the site to be 2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical). We noted that the existing slope in the northwestern part of Lot No. 2 possibly exceeded this listed maximum inclination. Our observations were confirmed by the topographic information on the site plans which indicates an inclination as high as 4H:3V. PROJECT PLANS AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS We conceptually reviewed the geotechnical engineering report and its two supplements prepared by LSI ADAPT, and the project site plans prepared by the developer. The report contains descriptions of the project site, proposed development, and geotechnical investigation conducted. It also provides conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the site preparation, foundation design and construction, temporary and permanent drainage, below -grade backfill walls, and structural fill. The geotechnical supplements 1 and 2 address the on -site storm water infiltration and retaining wall design, respectively. The site plans show the proposed locations of the residential structures, driveways, and retaining walls, as well as the proposed site grading, erosion control, and tree removal plans, and the proposed retaining wall profiles. Upon the review, we are in general agreement with the project document findings, conclusions and recommendations; however, we found the following deficiencies: • As mentioned in the Site Reconnaissance section, the geotechnical report fails to acknowledge the existing slopes exceeding 2H:1V as noted during our site visit and confirmed by the topographic survey data. Furthermore, page 6 of the report erroneously equates the inclination of 2H:1 V with the 25 percent grade change, whereas that inclination corresponds to a grade change of 50 %. The survey information indicates the maximum slope gradient reaching 4H:3V, or 75 %. • The geotechnical report recommends all permanent cut slopes be not steeper than 2H:1 V. However, the site grading plan shows the toe of the steep slope in the northwestern part of Lot No. 2 being altered to an inclination as high as 1 H:1 V (100 %) because of close proximity of the proposed house location. In our opinion, such alteration of the sensitive area slope could potentially compromise stability of the slope and trigger slope failure. Furthermore, this is in violation of the Tukwila Municipal Code (Ordinance 1758 § 1(part), 1995). To conform to the Code requirements, the location of the house should 2001 I86PeerReview 2 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. • November 2, 2001 HWA Project No. 2001186 be moved such that the slope does not require cuts or, alternatively, a retaining structure should be constructed at the toe of the cut slope. • The setback of the proposed house foot print location from the Class 3 Sensitive Area slope on Lot No.2 as shown on the plans also violates the minimum setback requirement of the Code. Consequently, the proposed location of the house or the house dimensions should be adjusted to meet the Code requirement. Alternatively, the geotechnical report should demonstrate that the currently proposed setback could be exempt from the code requirement. • As noted by the Tukwila Public Works, the proposed location of the driveway parallel to Macadam Rd S and the Segmental Retaining Wall supporting it has to be adjusted to meet the setback from property line requirement. • The on site soils are predominantly fine- grained with high fines content. These soils are highly moisture- sensitive. The report fails to address earthwork in wet weather conditions. We are of the opinion that wet weather earthwork should be avoided on this site when possible. Specific recommendations pertaining to drainage, erosion control, and materials handling should be provided for times when work in wet weather cannot be avoided. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our assessment, we conclude that the lots are suitable for the planned development and slope stability on the subject and adjacent lots will not be detrimentally influenced by the development, provided the project documents satisfactorily address the above - listed deficiencies and that recommendations given in the revised geotechnical report are followed. Our review was conceptual in nature only and we recommend an additional review when design of the residential structures and retaining wall is finalized. 0.0 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us. 2001186PeerReview 3 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. •.. • • November 2, 2001 HWA Project No. 2001186 Sincerely, HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. Les C. Bana§, P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer LCB:RNB:lcb 2001186PeerReview 4 e 3 • Thomas C. Kinney, P.E. Vice President HWA GEOSCIENCES INC. e ADaPT July 2, 2001 LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 ALA International Development 306 North 1' Avenue Kent, Washington 98032` Attention: Mr. Saraj Khan Subject: Geotechnical Supplement No. 1 — On -Site Storm Water Infiltration Hellwig's Addition Lots No. 1, 2 & 149 13821 Macadam Road Tukwila, Washington Dear Saraj: RECEIVED CITY CF TUKWILA PERMIT CENTER As requested, LSI ADAPT, Inc. (ADAPT) are pleased to submit this letter addressing the suitability of on -site storm water infiltration on the project site referenced above. The additional engineering review and letter was requested by Mr. Mohammad Saleem on June 22, 2001. This letter supplements the conclusions and recommendations presented in our Geotechnical Engineering Report for the subject project dated May 25, 2001. We understand that the City of Tukwila requires on -site infiltration of storm water if favorable site soil infiltration conditions exist at the site. The borings advanced as a part of our geotechnical study revealed the site soil conditions to generally consist of surficial, medium stiff sandy silts and silty fine sands overlying stiff to very stiff silt and clayey silt. Based on the observed soil conditions and generally accepted infiltration characteristics of fine - grained soils (sandy silts, clayey silts, etc), it is our opinion that the site surface and subsurface conditions are not favorable for the use of on -site infiltration systems, primarily for the following reasons: • Based on the soil classification performed as a part of our geotechnical report, the fine - grained site soils would be classified as Hydrologic Soil Type C or D (Silt Loarn or Clay Loam, based on the USDA Soil Texture Class). These soil types are typically associated with infiltration rates of 60 miniinch, or less. Such low infiltration rates are generally not considered favorable for infiltration systems. 800 Maynard Avenue South Suite 403 Seattle, Washington 98134 LSI ADAPT, Inc. Tel (206) -654 -7045 Fax (206) 654 -7048 www.adaptengr.com • • LSI ADAPT • The proposed building sites are located near the top of existing steep slopes (Class 2 and Class 3 Areas). Soil infiltration systems are generally avoided close to the top of slopes to minimize the risk of adversely affecting the stability of the slope area. In fact, we typically recommend to minimize surface infiltration into the subsoils near the top of slopes by channelling surface water flow and providing good surface drainage. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service on this project. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, or if we can assist you further, please contact us at 206 -654 -7045. Respectfully submitted, LSI ADAPT, Inc. Rolf B. yllseth, P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer FEXPtRES 6 / 5 0 Distribution: AIA International Development (1) Attn: Mr. Saraj Khan Mohammad Saleem (2) AIA International Development LSI ADAPT Project No. WA01- 6267 -0 July 2, 2001 Page 2 Z' tp 0 Pc" #3 58/5°0 ,}04' /8 0 / \ / 8 8 - 2 7 - 5 7 K/ t0 I 1 0 N \I a \. ilk ...<2)- .,..N L — Fi <I�. w 1 8 c ; I 9 0 /50 Af40 47 /4-v \l 9' 95 r . Ai 57..s�( s7 iL w c: 0 , it tx 9y• (»O c\ 12 Q.G- A K 5•E'. b s 7,72. (5P) _ 84- 88-06c Lot 1 2-19 97 0 0 (5) 256 / 77 ��•3r J 2. SI 6 jlr STEPHEN FOSTER D.L.C. NO. 38 000300° 6 4 ti o ' o0b 3 0015 (1-, -. o rte. n o U1 n � y lh y Z ite (---t4 .J z. ' 0 0 88o7p. 01.40 o. 29 4 3 Q S2' 29. �I w 1. V Qr 143 C3 6 ,50 Print Map Page Parcel Map and Data Parcel Incorporated Area Zoning Labels Zoning ■A -10 • Agriwltura1. ono DU per 10 earns ■A-35 - Agriculture. ono DU per 35 acres ■ F • Forest L- ■ M - Minaret RA -28 - Rural Aran ono 041 per 5 acres RA-5 - Rural Arm. ono 041 par 5 aerm RA -10 - Rural Aran, one 0U per 10 acres UR • Urban Rescrva, ono 041 par 5 acres R-1 - Reside:die/, ores DU per acre R.4 - Residential. 4OU per ram R4 - RasidmntL4 0 DU pas acre R4 - RosIdential, a OU Fe acao R -12 - RasidanliM.12 O 1.1 per acro R -12 - Rosidmnia1.15 DU per acre R•24 • Rasidcrtial. 24 DU par aora R-48 - Rasidm 1 1.48 041 per aoo NB • Neighborhood Business CB - Commun 1y BUS/MSS Bus• iness o • Office 1- hubatria0 Ohre Parcel Data Parcel Number. _ 1523049149 _ Address 13901 MACADAM RD S Zipcode Taxpayer KHAN SAJJAD A Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 2002 PERMIT CENTER http: / /www5. metrokc. gov/ webrnaps /parcelviewer/Print_Process.asp 4/26/2002