Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E03-002 - PUGET SOUND ENERGY - STRANDER CAR CENTER SITE ROUGH GRADINGJASON HUBBEL/PSE STRANDER CAR CENTER 7400 S 158 STREET E03 -002 • r City of Tukwila. Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director To: Steve-Lancaster From: Brandon J. Miles Date: January 8, 2004 Re: MEMORANDUM E03 -002 (SEPA Determination) Puget Western Incorporated Strander Car Center site is located at the northwest corner of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard. The PSE South site is located to the east of West Valley, south of Strander Boulevard south of the existing PSE substation site. Project Description: Puget Western Incorporated, a subsidiary of Puget Sound Energy has filed a SEPA application for grading on two pieces of property, located to the east of West Valley Highway. One of the properties is directly north of Strander Boulevard (Strander Car Center) and the other is directly south (PSE South Site). Approximately 5,000 cubic yards of fill will be imported to the Strander Car Center site for sub - grade construction fill. About 2,000 cubic yards of fill will be excavated on site and used as fill on site. While not part of this proposal, the future plans for the Strander Car Center is to develop the site into a car sales facility and use an existing building on site as the sales office. Approximately 3,500 cubic yards of fill will be imported to the PSE South site to bring the site level to West Valley Highway. According to the SEPA checklist, there are no plans for the PSE south site. Yet, it is safe to say that bringing in fill and making the site even with West Valley Highway will allow the site to be developed for commercial or office uses in the future. Agencies with Jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 PSE Strander Car Center/PSE South Site L03 -021, E03 -002 Staff Report Other Required Permits: Land Altering/Grading/Preloads Permit Approvals City of Tukwila, Public Works SMA Permit for the PSE South Site City of Tukwila, Community Development Special Permission from the Director City of Tukwila, Public Works Summary of Primary Impacts: Earth The two sites are located within the Green River Valley. Like many river valleys, both of the sites are mainly flat. The soils on site are mapped as Newberg silt loam. A Geotechnical report was submitted to the City for both sites. The reports do not mention any indications of unstable soils or slopes. The Union Pacific Railroad runs along the Strander Car Center site. The railroad is raised which creates a slope of 25 percent along the east property line of the Strander Car Center site. The steepest grade on the PSE south site is 50 percent. This is located along West Valley Highway along the western edge of the property. The project has submitted and has an approved grading permit from Public Works. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has been submitted for the project. •Air Some emissions from construction vehicles will occur during the construction. period. Suspended particles from dust emissions will occur during construction activities. There will be no long -term impacts to air quality as a result of this project. The entrances to both sites will be rocked and dirt- driving surfaces will be watered to reduce dust in the air during construction. • Water There are no surface waters on or adjacent to the two properties. The sites are located outside of the 100 -year flood plain. • The PSE south site is within the 200 -feet of the Green River. The property does not • directly border the Green River. West Valley Highway lies between the PSE south site and the Green River. PSE Strander Car Center/PSE South Site 03.02.1....E03 -002 • • The Geotechnical report done for the Strander Car Center site notes that moderate to heavy groundwater seepage could be encountered in deep excavations extending to around eight or nine feet if the grading activities are done in the winter season (October through May). Stormwater on the Strander Car Center site will run to catch basins on the eastern property line near Strander Boulevard. The PSE south site has an existing drainage ditch along the western property line. There is an offsite wetland to the east of the subject property. This is a type I wetland, which requires a 100 -foot buffer. The 100 -foot buffer area extends on the PSE south property. The applicant has requested to reduce the buffer by 50 percent. TMC 18.45 does allow for a buffer to be reduced, but only with permission from the Community Development Director and the submittal and approval of an enhancement plan for the buffer. The applicant has submitted an enhancement plan which the City must approve prior to any grading activities occurring on the property. • Plants Vegetation on both the sites includes blackberry tickets, shrubs, and grass. A review of City aerial photos, from 1999, shows a large canopy of trees on the PSE south site. A subsequent review of the site during this project showed that all the trees have been removed. Approximately, 43 tree stumps of various tree species were located on the property. The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan for the PSE south site. Most of this landscaping will be located along West Valley Highway. • Animals The habitat quality of this area is currently quite poor. Some birds were observed on the sites during a walk through. The adjacent properties are mostly developed, thus this site is not part of any habitat corridors. Both of the sites are near the Green River. The Green River does have Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, and Cuthroat trout. These fish species have federal protection through the Endangered Species Act. It is very unlikely that this project will have any impact on the habitat area around the Green River. In addition, there are no opportunities for habitat restoration or enhancement. As noted, the PSE south site does not border the Green River, it is • • PSE Strander Car Center/PSE South Site L03 -021, E03 -002 Staff Report separated by West Valley Highway and vacant properties to the west of West Valley • Highway. • Energy/Natural Resources Construction activities will use gasoline and diesel internal combustion engines. As this project is for fill only, there will be no energy demand when the project is finished. • Environmental Health Noise generated by construction equipment will occur on a short-term basis. The site is located within a commercial area of the City. There are no residential dwellings that will be impacted from the activities taking place on the property. The construction activities will be located next to the Interurban Trail. Trail users may be exposed to a higher level of noise that is usually not associated with the use of the trail. This noise will only be for short period of time during the fill activity. • Land /Shoreline Use The current zoning on the properties is Tukwila Urban Center (TUC). Adjacent uses include restaurants, a motel, the Interurban Trail, and the Union Pacific Railroad. The Strander Car Center site is not within the area of shoreline jurisdiction. The PSE south site is located with 200 feet of the Green River and is required to obtain a Shoreline Permit for the proposed work. The shoreline environment is designated as urban. Housing No housing is proposed nor will any residential structures be removed. Aesthetics The project will involve the clearing and leveling of two properties. As noted, this proposal is limited to grading activities, no specific development plans are proposed at this time. The grading includes the clearing of all vegetation on the properties. The PSE south site will be required, under the City's shoreline regulations to re- vegetate the property. The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan that will be approved as part of the required Shoreline Permit. The landscaping plan includes the planting of Big Leaf Maple, Douglas Fir, and Western Red Cedar. These trees will be planted along the western property line near West Valley Highway. They will aid in offsetting any negative visual impacts from the project along West Valley Highway. • • • • PSE Strander Car Center/PSE South Site L03 -021, E03 -002 Staff Report • Light and Glare N/A • Recreation The site is within 1/4 mile of Bicentennial Park. Fort Dent Park is about a mile away. The Interurban Trail is located adjacent to both properties. The applicant has noted in the SEPA checklist that the trail will not be disturbed or impacted during construction. • Historic -and. Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks exist within the project area. During construction if any landmarks or evident of historical, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are found on the site, work will stop immediately and the contractor will notify the City of Tukwila, Washington State Office of Archeology, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. • Transportation The work will not have an impact on transportation elements in the area. As noted, the Strander Car Center may be developed for car sales in the future. Should this occur the applicant must coordinate with the City on the planned Strander Boulevard street extension. Public Services N/A Utilities The project is for fill only and will not require any utilities when completed. There are various utility easements on both of the properties. They include a PSE easement for the above transmission lines, a Metro Sewer line easement, and an easement to Olympic Pipeline for an underground gas line. State Law, requires the applicant to locate these utilities before construction. Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director February 3, 2004 Mr. Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 RE: Your letter dated January 27, 2004 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Thank you for providing comments regarding the SEPA DNS Notification for the Strander Car Center Site. Your letter has been copied to the City Engineer and has been included in the SEPA documents. If you have any questions, please call (206) 431 -3684 or send an email to bmiles ,ci.tukwila.wa. s. /ere • Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner cc. File E03 -002 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • l..LL Kathy Keolker- Wheeler, Mayor CITYSF RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator January 27, 2004 City of Tukwila Dept. of Community Development Attn: Steve Lancaster 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 SUBJECT: E03 -002 (STRANDER CAR CENTER SITE), NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE Dear Mr. Lancaster: Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing and commenting on this project proposal. Renton's Planning/Building /Public Works Department comment is as follows: 1. Should the Strander Car Center site be developed for car sales, or any other use in the future, the applicant must coordinate with the City of Tukwila regarding the planned Strander Boulevard Extension Project. As the alignment for the Strander Boulevard Extension has yet to be confirmed, there is the possibility that acquisition of property at the Strander Car Center site may be required. Sincerely, e l l '� Gregg Zimmerma , Administrator Planning/Building /Public Works Dept. cc: Neil Watts Jennifer Henning Lys Hornsby Sandra Meyer 1055 South Grady Way - ,Renton, Washington 98055 This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE DATE: TO: CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING /PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM January 22, 2004 Jim Gray/Fire Department Lys Hornsby/Utility Systems Sandra Meyer/Transportation Lesley_Betlach/Parks Director CC: Gregg Zimmerman; PB/PW Administrator FROM: Jennifer Henning; Development Planning SUBJECT: City of Tukwila Notice of Determination of Non - Significance E03 -002 (Strander Car Center Site) Enclosed is a copy of the subject Notice of Determination of Non -Significance. Comments must be submitted to the City of Tukwila by January 29, 2004. See the Enclosed Notice for Details. Please submit comments to Gregg's office in a timely manner, so as to meet this deadline. Enclosure 60M e-vt+- 5 koala -it. S4'1'a -Kde r tav Cevi,4 -e r srk be de vc lord -P.� cap s2fes a1 o' er uses -1'i4 a pp (r cadf 01444 - coced,Hale (A) 1K ate Cdy o‘Tukwt(a r V'e.9ava uq #tte p(�a: *NeI 3- 47aJef 9oG,(eveki Ezfe."si' q revec+; A '1 Ct 2..1t9NNteat+ - $ie .51.24.1er Bo Kleve Ex.+e&tvoo Li as ye be coo -irokei 1-tiefre es *tP posse bi (r 4y /40,4- 241,4(54001 a1 p eay a f die s47, eV Cyr CeM,4t st4t► Nl ay 6e vet k led. ea" 1174/kto /72.47/6 4- or) 04- Ditie A-W O- Alct 145/6t' CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: January 22, 2004 TO: Jim Gray/Fire Department Lys Hornsby/Utility Systems Sandra Meyer/Transportation Lesley Betlach/Parks Director CC: b gg Zimmerman; PB/PW Administrator FROM: Jenni Henning; Development Planning SUBJECT: City of Tu wily Notice of Det: mination of Non - Significance E03 -002 (Stran o r Car Center Site) CITY OF RENTON UTILITY SYSTcMS Enclosed is a copy of the subject Notice of Determin: tion of Non - Significance. Comments must be submitted to the City of Tukwila by January 29, 2004. -e the Enclosed Notice for Details. Please submit comments to Gregg's office in a timely mann• so as to meet this deadline. Enclosure (AkA)1/4 Wm' Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION o I, HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: E,03--(X), Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing: 1?/,,A,t,-,c)„,,, 6/44 Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this J7 d y ofJi` in the year 20611, P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Project Name_: ,J 41n 14thb ( -_ ,5-C), Project Number: E,03--(X), a Mailer's Signature: ( ,�?.- gycza/ c. Person requesting mailing: 1?/,,A,t,-,c)„,,, 6/44 P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PER ILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. ( ) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES FFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ()TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR () DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. ( ) DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION' OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL • SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC lSA K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY () RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY () QWEST () SEATTLE CITY LIGHT () PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES () KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE () POLICE () FINANCE ( ) PLANNING () BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE () K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES () FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ()HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT () RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT () WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR - LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT )ENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU () STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES XDUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY ( )SOUND TRANSIT DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION • SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER () PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE UCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM FISHERIES PROGRAM LDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P: \ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHKLIST.DOC ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW • PPLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERMITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology. Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed.to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross - sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan - Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:\ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \CHKLIST.DOC Cizj' of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 10, 2003 Mr. Jason Hubbell, PE Barghausen Engineers 18215 72 "d Ave. S Kent, WA 98032 RE: Wetland Determination Report PSE South Site, E03 -002 Dear Mr. Hubbell: The Department of Community Development received the wetland report for the PSE south site on September 5, 2003. The reported noted that there is no wetland on the subject site. It was also noted that there is an offsite wetland located approximately 50 feet east of the PSE south site. This wetland has been inventored and rated by the City as Type I. A Type I wetland has a buffer requirement of 100 feet. It appears that the required buffer extends onto the PSE south site. The buffer area can be reduced to 50 feet, per the criteria found in TMC 18.45.040.C.4. Enclosed with this letter you find an application to reduce the buffer and pertinent parts of the City Zoning Code. Updated drawings of the project site showing the buffer area need to be submitted. If you have any questions, you can call (206) 431 -3684 or by email at bmilesna,ci.tukwi►a.wa.us. Sincerel 1, Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner cc. File 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206- 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 July 11, 2003 Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 RE: PSE Shoreline Permit Dear Muckleshoot Indian Tribe: As requested you will find a SEPA checklist, site plan, and landscaping plan for the Puget Sound Energy site located within the Shoreline Area of the Green River. The City also has on file a Wetland Determination Report and a Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis. Copies of these are limited. These reports can be viewed at the Planning Department during business hours. If you have any questions, you can call me at (206) 431 -3684 or email me at bmiles ' ci.tukwila.wa Sincerel Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner cc. Files (E03 -002, L03 -021) 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 AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila T-OIS Ned l e/I (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on (D f to `D3 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section u8.1.04y.1 Yang 0 the appliycable guidelines were posted on the property located at • . ivo op- t}-Ni7t�2 3��vb so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number E 03 - LbZ . I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. Applicant or Project Manager's Signature On this day personally appeared before me j 2N 6.) to me known to be the individual who 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 therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this t t7 day of J U LE 1_1)03 EASY S. 0 1% ► � %SSIOijj ,F1/111 i �*0� r10Tq ',./....- •O .'.IrV llj NOTARY PUBLIC and f the State of Washington •° Ayp�1NI 0 residing at i PUBLIC N /'tI ...:9; 04 ••'.e.e • My commission expires on 1 lq 1 1 City of Tkc;w i(%1 Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director The following applications have been review and decision. APPLICANT: AGENT: LOCATION: OWNER OF THE PROPERTY: FILE NUMBERS: PROPOSAL: NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED June 9, 2003 submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for Puget Sound Energy Jason Hubbell, Barghausen Engineers 16420 West Valley Highway, Parcel #2523049050 Puget Sound Energy L03 -021, E03 -002 Requests a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and a SEPA determination for grading and removal of about 3,500 cubic yards of fill from the site. The site is located within the shoreline area of the Green River. The current classification of this river environment is urban. OTHER INFORMATION: The applicant has submitted the following information for review by the City of Tukwila: Wetland Determination Report Geotechnical Evaluation Traffic Impact Study Level 1 Off-Site Drainage Analysis Landscaping Plan OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Grading Permit and other relevant Public Works Permits (City of Tukwila) These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments regarding the Shoreline Permit in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on July 9, 2003. If you have,questions about this proposal contact Brandon J. Miles, Planner -in- charge of this file at (206) 431 -3670 or bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on, this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision by the City on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at (206)- 431 -3670. A Shoreline Permit can only be appealed to the State Shoreline Hearings Board. DATE OF APPLICATION: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: NOTICE OF APPLICATION POSTED: March 28, 2003 May 27, 2003 June 9, 2003 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 _ <r"•G ENGGN�'(v Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Puget Western Properties E03 -002 PW03 -002 Our Job Nos. 10431 and 10705 Dear Nora: CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES March 27, 2003 RECEIVED MAR 2 8 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT We have revised our application for rough grading and SEPA for the two sites located east of West Valley Highway and north and south of Strander Boulevard according to your January 24, 2003 comment letter. The following are responses to your requests. A. The Endangered Species Act screening checklist has been completed as requested. B. We have revised the SEPA checklist to remove reference to Appendix "A" on page 2 of the checklist. All documents referred to were included in the original submittal with the exception of an aerial photograph, which is not available. C. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the south lot has been provided as requested. D. The Parcel B shown for the north site on Sheet T1 has been revised to match the configuration on the Assessor's Map as requested. E. The notice radius map for the south lot and mailing labels associated with that have been provided as requested. F. Because the scope of work on the south lot only involves rough grading and erosion control work, a traffic impact study is not required. A geotechnical engineering study has been provided as requested. If you should have any further questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact me at this office. JH/dm/bd [10431c.003 .doc] enc: cc: Sincerely, a•� Jason Hubbell, P.E. Project Engineer As Noted Gust Erikson, Puget Western, Inc. Hal P. Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com City of 1 ukwzla A Screening Checklist City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Check FiEECEIVED Date: 3/20/03 MAR 2 8 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicant Name: Gust Erickson /Puget Western Street Address: 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 300 City, State, Zip: Bothell, WA 98011 Telephone: (425) 487 -6567 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 ii 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 YES Continue 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. NOS�- Continue to Question 3 -0 �.—"'l Continue 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. Continue 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 during construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue 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 response. NO Continue to Question 6 -0 YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 Part A (continued) • Ltty of l ukwtlai Screening Checklist 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. Checklist Complete YES — Checklist 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. NO Continue 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. Please circle appropriate response. Continue 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 Lzty of 'l ukwzla A Screenzng Checklist appropriate response. Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 1 -4 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. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue 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 watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) 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. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 iret 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. Continue 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 - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) CD- 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. • City of l ukwila1 Screening Checklist Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question_ 3 -0 (Page 2) 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 both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue 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 should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue 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 salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue 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 bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue 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 • City of 'l ukwtla Screening Checklist 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 should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 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 - Continue 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, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue 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 structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) Strander Car Center Tukwila, Washington Traffic Impact Study September 2002 Prepared for: Puget Western Inc. 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, WA 98011 Prepared by: Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Transportation Engineering/Operations • Impact Studies • Design Services • Transportation Planning/Forecasdng Eastside Office: 11410 NE 124th Street, #691 • Kirldand, WA 98034 • Office (425) 820 -1728 • Fax (425) 820- 5913 Seatde Office: PO Box 65254 • Seattle, WA 98155 • Office/Fax (206) 361 -7333 • Toll Free (888) 220 -7333 Project Manager = Jeff Schramm, Schramm @tenw.com rRECE ED I JAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E03 -oo2 Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study Table of Contents FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 Project Description 2 Project Approach 2 Primary Data and Information Sources 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 Road Network 6 Traffic Volumes 6 Levels of Service 6 DETERMINATION OF IMPACT 8 Project Trip Generation 8 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment 8 Traffic Volumes 10 Levels of Service 10 Site Access Analysis 12 Long Term Impacts 12 Parking Analysis 12 Appendix A — Existing Traffic Count — West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard Intersection Appendix B — Intersection LOS Results List of Figures and Tables Figure 1 Project Site Vicinity 4 Figure 2 Project Site Plan 5 Figure 3 Existing 2001 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 7 Figure 4 Project Trip Distribution & Assignment 9 Figure 5 2003 With — Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 11 Table 1 Strander Car Center Existing PM Peak Hour LOS Summary 6 Table 2 Strander Car Center Trip Generation Summary 8 • Table 3 Strander Car Center Study Intersection LOS Summaryt 10 rTransportation Engineering NorthWest i September 9, 2002 Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study FINDINGS a CONCLUSIONS Project Proposal. The proposed Strander Car Center would consist of a 9,000 square foot vehicle sales facility (located on the north end of the site). The site is located at the north side of Strander Boulevard alignment, east of the existing Interurban Trail, and west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line in the City of Tukwila (see Figure 1 — Site Vicinity). The development is located on approximately 3.3 acres and would include approximately 200 parking stalls. Trip Generation. The proposed car sales facility is anticipated to generate about 340 average weekday daily vehicle trips, of which 25 trips (10 entering, 15 exiting) would occur during the weekday PM peak hour. Site Access. Primary vehicular access into and out of the site is proposed at the eastern terminus of Strander Boulevard, just east of West Valley Highway. A secondary access would be provided via an access easement on the hotel site to the north. All turning movements at the driveway on Strander Boulevard are expected to operate at LOS .A during the weekday PM peak hour. Short Term Impacts. No significant impacts were identified at the intersection of West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard. Long Term Impacts. The site is located west of the existing UPRR track. If the track were to be moved to the west as part of the planned Strander Extension project, the site would no longer be useable. Parking. The City of Tukwila's Land Use Code (Title 18) identifies a minimum parking requirement of 4 stalls per 1,000 sf building area for retail sales, which results in a minimum parking requirement of 36 stalls for the proposed Strander Car Center. The development proposes approximately 200 parking stalls. Conclusion. Based on the information included in this report, the proposed Strander Car Center would have no significant adverse impacts on adjacent streets or the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection. The long -term viability of the site would be impacted by the planned Strander Extension project, if the UPRR line were moved to the west of its current alignment. Transportation Engineering NorthWest 1 September 9, 2002 Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study INTRODUCTION Project Description The proposed development includes a 9,000 square foot car sales facility and approximately 200 parking stalls. The site is located north of the Strander Boulevard alignment, east of the existing Interurban Trail, and west of the Union Pacific Railroad line in the City of Tukwila (see Figure 1). The development is located on approximately 3.3 acres and would have primary access on Strander Boulevard, with secondary access via an easement to the north, as shown in the Figure 2 Site Plan. Project Approach This report documents the evaluation of traffic and parking impacts and recommended mitigation measures. To analyze the traffic impacts of the Strander Car Center, the following tasks were undertaken: • Assessed existing conditions and reviewed existing planning documents; • Described and assessed existing transportation conditions in the area • Documented future without - project traffic forecasts and assumptions; • Estimated trip generation and documented distribution of project traffic; • Evaluated intersection operations (LOS) at the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection during the weekday PM peak hour; • Conducted LOS analysis at the site access driveway; • Identified measures to mitigate impacts to the adjacent street system; • Identified long -term planned improvements along the Strander alignment. Primary Data and Information Sources • Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, 1997. • Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board (TRB), Year 2000 Edition. • City of Tukwila Traffic Volumes; source: City of Tukwila, Robin Tishmak. ransportadon Engineering NorthWest 2 September 9, 2002 Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study • Washington State. Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Design Manual, August 1997. Transportadon Engineering NorthWest 3 September 9, 2002 SW 16th St Strander Blvd SW 27th St Project Site SW 34th St Minkler Blvd 41st St Triland Dr S 180th St SW 43rd St (SE 180th St) Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC 188th Figure 1 Project Site Vicinity Not to Scale Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study Note: Site plan provided by Barghausen engineers on 9/5/02. 0 c 0 Q 0 gc 0 0 D a _xN Not to Scale Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 2 Project Site Plan Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study EXISTING CONDITIONS Road Network The following paragraphs describe existing roadways that would be used as major routes to the site. Roadway characteristics are described in terms of facility type, number of lanes, and posted speed limits. Strander Boulevard is a principal arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 mph west of West Valley Highway. East of West Valley Highway, Strander has one travel lane in each direction and a center two -way left -turn lane, and no posted speed limit. Standard five -foot wide sidewalks exist on both sides of the road. West Valley Highway is a principal arterial with two /three travel lanes in each direction, along with a center two -way left -turn lane. In the vicinity of Strander Boulevard, the posted speed limit is 40 mph. Traffic Volumes Trafficount conducted an afternoon peak period (4:00 — 6:00 p.m.) manual turning movement count at the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection on December 18, 2001. The count is included as Appendix A. Figure 3 illustrates the existing weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes at that intersection. Levels of Service Existing PM peak hour level of service (LOS) was evaluated at the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection using methodologies published in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). The detailed LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix B. The existing PM peak hour LOS at the study intersection is summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Strander Car Center Existing PM Peak Hour LOS Summary Intersection LOS Delay V/C W Valley Hwy / Strander Blvd E 69.8 1.06 As shown in Table 1, the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection is currently operating at LOS E in the PM peak hour. Transportation Engineering NorthWest 6 September 9, 2002 Strander Blvd 408 10 —� 517 + r' 371 1,042 4 Minkler Blvd Triland Dr S 180th St Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 3 Existing 2001 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Not to Scale Strander Car Center Transportadon Impact Study Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study DETERMINATION OF IMPACT This section of the report :summarizes the traffic and parking impacts of the proposed car sales center, and describes the assumptions and methodology used to evaluate the impacts. Analyses of weekday PM peak hour conditions reflects the time period during a typical week when the cumulative effect of project and non- project traffic volumes would be greatest. Project Trip Generation The trip generation estimate for the proposed car sales facility is based on trip generation equations from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (6th Edition, 1997). Land Use category 841 (Car Sales) was used to estimate weekday daily and PM peak hour traffic generation. Table 2 summarizes the project trip generation. Table 2 Strander Car Center Trip Generation Summary ITE Land Building Average Daily Weekday PM Peak Hour Use Category Size Rate2 Trips Rate2 Total In Out Car Sales 9,000 gsf" 37.50 338 2.80 25 10 15 1. GFA is Gross Floor Area (square feet) 2. Calculations based on rates from LU 841 MITE Trip Generation, 6i° Edition, 1997. As shown in Table 2, the proposed Strander Car Center is estimated to generate a total of about 340 average daily trips, of which 25 trips would occur during the weekday PM peak hour (10 entering, 15 exiting). Project Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of project - generated traffic was estimated based on existing travel patterns in the area and the locations of primacy transportation facilities. Figure 4 illustrates the PM peak hour trip distribution and assignment of project- generated traffic during the PM peak hour. Transportation Engineering NorthWest 8 September 9, 2002 • P2 01 000 `�' .0 . 1 0 SW 27th St R- to 0 0 7 E— 3 2—� 0 0 1. o - 4 SW 43rd St (SE 180th St) Not to Scale Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 4 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study ri R- to 0 0 7 E— 3 2—� 0 0 1. o - 4 SW 43rd St (SE 180th St) Not to Scale Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 4 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study • Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study Traffic Volumes Future traffic volumes with and without the proposed Strander Car Center were estimated for weekday PM peak hour conditions in the year 2003. Future traffic volumes used for the LOS analyses at the study intersection were developed based on existing counts increased to account for both background growth and the addition of permit- pending projects in the area. The City of Tukwila identified an annual growth factor of one percent to account for anticipated future year traffic growth, which is consistent with recent annual growth on West Valley Highway. Adding the project - generated PM peak hour trips, shown in Figure 4, to the future without- project traffic volumes, results in future with- project traffic volumes, as shown in Figure 5. Levels of Service Detailed intersection LOS were conducted for weekday PM peak hour conditions with the Strander Car Center in year 2003. The intersection LOS analysis results are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 Strander Car Center Study Intersection LOS Summary' 2001 Existing 2003 With — Project Study Intersection LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C W Valley Hwy /Strander Blvd E 69.8 1.06 E 75.8 1.09 1. All LOS analyses are based on methodologies established in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. As shown in Table 3, the intersection of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard would maintain the same LOS (LOS E) with the addition of traffic generated by the proposed Car Center during the PM peak hour. The average delay at the intersection would increase by about six seconds with the addition of traffic generated in the PM peak hour. Detailed LOS analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix B. a9 Transportation Engineering NorthWest 10 September 9, 2002 Strander Blvd W Valley Hwv /Strander BIv il R.. 72 3166 1,002 27 20 /r + I�- 18 416 1 + 1 12 378 1,063 6 527 Minkler Blvd Triland Dr 5 180th St Not to Scale • Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 5 2003 With- Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study R.. 72 3166 1,002 27 20 /r + I�- 18 416 1 + 1 12 378 1,063 6 527 Minkler Blvd Triland Dr 5 180th St Not to Scale • Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Figure 5 2003 With- Project PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Strander Car Center Transportation Impact Study • • Strander Car Center Traffic Impact Study Site Access Analysis Primary vehicular access into and out of the site is proposed at the eastern terminus of Strander Boulevard, just east of West Valley Highway. A secondary access would be provided via an access easement on the hotel site located north of the proposed site. The proposed primary driveway on Strander Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS A during the weekday PM peak hour. Long Term Impacts Strander Extension Project. The City of Renton, in partnership with the City of Tukwila, is in the process of evaluating potential transportation improvements to upgrade and link the existing Strander Boulevard corridor east of West Valley Highway. The primary goal of this project is to improve east -west mobility across the Green River Valley. The first segment of the project, east of West Valley Highway, . would include roadway overpass or underpass structures to provide grade separated crossings of the Union Pacific (UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroads. Completion of this segment would involve providing access to the proposed Sound Transit Sounder Station and Park- and -Ride site. The Strander Extension project is in the early stages of Project Definition and Conceptual Engineering. No funding has been identified for either design or construction. Impact to the Proposed Strander Car Center. The proposed project site is located on the property just west of the existing UPRR line. As part of the preliminary planning for the Strander Extension project, consideration is being given to moving the UPRR line to the west. If the UPRR line were moved to the west of its current alignment, the proposed Strander Car Center use would no longer be useable and fair compensation would be justified. Parking Analysis Title 18 of the City of Tukwila Land Use Code (LUC) describes the parking requirements of new development projects. Figure 18 -7 of the LUC specifically lists the minimum parking requirement for a general retail sales facility as 4 stalls per 1,000 sf of building area. Based on the proposed 9,000 sf car sales building, the City's minimum parking requirement would be 36 stalls. The development is proposing approximately 200 parking stalls, which would meet minimum City code requirements. Transportation Engineering NorthWest 12 September 9, 2002 • Appendix A Existing Traffic Count • , WASHINGTON ELLEY HWY BRANDER BLVD JC# O1P TEN01351M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B -195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360- 491 -8116 File Name : TEN35201P Site Code : 00000001 Start Date : 12/18/2001 Page No :1 05.00 PM 05:15 PM 0530 PM 05:45 PM Total 75 250 98 234 70 248 82 207 325 937 11. 4 4 3 22 15 22 27 21 85 338 338 320 292 1284 Grand Total 686 1899 32 188 2617 Appr h % 26.2 72.6 1.2 Total % 9.7 26.8 0.5 36.9 3 8 3 0 3 7 3 6 5 1 2 . 5 7 19 20 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 14 8 46 13 32 38 2 83 15.7 38.6 45.8 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.2 3 4 0 1 8 10 0.4 0.1 283 231 205 134 853 1839 73.0 26.0 96 86 54 93 329 6 14 6 11 37 670 83 26.6 9.5 382 321 259 228 1190 2519 35.5 138 118 139 92 487 2 4 0 2 8 106 130 106 94 436 5 4 8 9 26 246 252 245 188 931 1001 21 845 56 1867 53.6 1.1 45.3 14.1 0.3 11.9 26.3 26 40 41 41 148 978 919 838 716 3451 1004 959 879 757 3599 329 7086 7415 4.4 95.6 Start Time eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1011 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 359 982 20 Percent 26.4 72.2 1.5 05:00 Volume 75 250 11 fir" Factor IM. 04:15 PM Volume 99 287 5 Peak Factor WEST VALLEY HWY From North Right 1 Dm I Left 1 App. Total eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1011 By Approach 04:15 PM Volume 359 982 20 Percent 26.4 72.2 1.5 High ht. 04:15 PM Volume 99 287 5 Peak Factor • 1361 336 391 0.870 1361 391 0.870 STRANDER BLVD From East Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total 6 15.4 3 17 43.6 8 16 41.0 3 39 14 04:15 PM 0 7 8 15 0.650 05:00 PM T 19 20 48 15.2 41.3 43.5 05:00 PM 3 8 3 14 0.821 WEST VALLEY HWY From South Right I Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total STRANDER BLVD From West Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Int. Total I 4 0.3 3 1042 73.5 283 371 26.2 96 05:00 PM 3 283 96 04 :15 PM 4 1042 0.3 73.5 26.2 05:00 PM 3 283 1417 382 382 0.927 371 1417 96 382 0.927 517 55.3 138 04:30 PM 144 04:30 PM 521 53.0 05:15 PM 118 10 1.1 2 408 43.8 106 246 935 0 107 251 0.931 10 452 983 1.0 46.0 4 130 252 0.975 3752 0.959 978 WEST VALLEY HWY From North VIuuwa STRANDER BLVD From East I I.. WEST VALLEY HWY. From South STRANDER BLVD From West Tlw Left Truck Right Thm left Truck Total Right Thru Left Tmdi Totat Right Thro Left Truck Total Fsdo. Total Wu. Total Int. Total Start Time Right Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 5 2 32 24 30 308 391 312 3 0 1 4 7 1 5 8 5 0 12 1 15 1 7 1 1 0 227 267 253 66 96 82 13 294 14 364 8 335 135 114 144 5 4 0 107 86 107 9 247 7 204 6 251 54 861 915 46 974 1020 45 905 950 04:OOPM 77 230 04:15 PM 99 287 04:30 PM 92 218 93 04:45 PM one 4A A2 10 103 1333 8 13 18 2 37 2 986 341 46 1329 514 13 409 30 936 181 3635 3816 05.00 PM 05:15 PM 0530 PM 05:45 PM Total 75 250 98 234 70 248 82 207 325 937 11. 4 4 3 22 15 22 27 21 85 338 338 320 292 1284 Grand Total 686 1899 32 188 2617 Appr h % 26.2 72.6 1.2 Total % 9.7 26.8 0.5 36.9 3 8 3 0 3 7 3 6 5 1 2 . 5 7 19 20 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 14 8 46 13 32 38 2 83 15.7 38.6 45.8 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.2 3 4 0 1 8 10 0.4 0.1 283 231 205 134 853 1839 73.0 26.0 96 86 54 93 329 6 14 6 11 37 670 83 26.6 9.5 382 321 259 228 1190 2519 35.5 138 118 139 92 487 2 4 0 2 8 106 130 106 94 436 5 4 8 9 26 246 252 245 188 931 1001 21 845 56 1867 53.6 1.1 45.3 14.1 0.3 11.9 26.3 26 40 41 41 148 978 919 838 716 3451 1004 959 879 757 3599 329 7086 7415 4.4 95.6 Start Time eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1011 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 359 982 20 Percent 26.4 72.2 1.5 05:00 Volume 75 250 11 fir" Factor IM. 04:15 PM Volume 99 287 5 Peak Factor WEST VALLEY HWY From North Right 1 Dm I Left 1 App. Total eak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1011 By Approach 04:15 PM Volume 359 982 20 Percent 26.4 72.2 1.5 High ht. 04:15 PM Volume 99 287 5 Peak Factor • 1361 336 391 0.870 1361 391 0.870 STRANDER BLVD From East Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total 6 15.4 3 17 43.6 8 16 41.0 3 39 14 04:15 PM 0 7 8 15 0.650 05:00 PM T 19 20 48 15.2 41.3 43.5 05:00 PM 3 8 3 14 0.821 WEST VALLEY HWY From South Right I Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total STRANDER BLVD From West Right I Thru I Left I App.Total Int. Total I 4 0.3 3 1042 73.5 283 371 26.2 96 05:00 PM 3 283 96 04 :15 PM 4 1042 0.3 73.5 26.2 05:00 PM 3 283 1417 382 382 0.927 371 1417 96 382 0.927 517 55.3 138 04:30 PM 144 04:30 PM 521 53.0 05:15 PM 118 10 1.1 2 408 43.8 106 246 935 0 107 251 0.931 10 452 983 1.0 46.0 4 130 252 0.975 3752 0.959 978 IKWILA, WASHINGTON Art HWYLVD )C# 01P TEN01351M TRAFFICOUNT, INC. 4820 YELM HWY B -195 LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 360- 491 -8116 StartTime ak Hour Fmm 04:00 PM to05:45 PM - Peak 1011 Intersection 04:15 PM Volume 359 982 Percent 26.4 72.2 05:00 Volume 75 250 Peak Factor High Int. 04:15 PM Volume 99 287 Peak Factor WEST VALLEY HWY From North Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total 20 1.5 11 1361 336 391 0.870 STRANDER BLVD From East Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total WEST VALLEY HWY From South File Name : TEN35201P Site Code : 00000001 Start Date : 12/18/ 2001 Page No : 2 STRANDER BLVD From West Right 1 Thru I Left 1 App. Total Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 App. Total IntTotal 1 6 17 18 39 15.4 43.6 41.0 3 8 3 14 04:15 PM 0 7 8 15 0.650 4 03 3 1042 73.5 283 05:00 PM 3 283 371 26.2 96 1417 382 96 382 0.927 517 55.3 138 10 408 1.1 43.6 2 106 935 246 04:30 PM 144 0 107 251 0.931 12/18/01 4:15:00 PM 12/18/01 5:00:00 PM 3752 0.959 978 Appendix B Intersection LOS Results HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Strander Blvd & W Valley Hwy Movement t Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frpb, ped /bikes Flpb, ped /bikes Fri Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles ( %) Turn Type Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated g/C Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio Uniform Delay, d1 Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d2 Delay (s) Level of Service Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS EBL EBT EBR .:`WBL 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1752 0.95 1752 408 0.96 425 425 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1845 1.00 1845 10 0.96 10 10 1900 4.0 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.85 1.00 1347 1.00 1347 517 0.96 539 539 50 3% 3% 3% Prot Perm 7 4 40.9 40.9 0.29 4.0 3.0 511 c0.24 0.83 46.4 1.00 11.1 57.5 E Int&Sedion`Sumrrla(y >' HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization c Critical Lane Group 52.9 52.9 0.38 4.0 3.0 696 0.01. 0.01 27.3 1.00 0.0 27.3 C 81.1 F 4 52.9 52.9 0.38 4.0 3.0 508 c0.40 1.06 43.6 1.00 57.1 100.7 F 1900 4.0 1:00. 1'.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1719 0.95 1719 16 0.96 17 17 9/9/2002 WBT WBR NBL t 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.95 1422 1752 1.00 .0.95 1422 1752 17 61 371 0.96 0.96 0.96 18 64 386 82 0 386 50 5% 5% Prot 3 8 1.6 1.6 0.01 4.0 3.0 20 0.01 0.85 69.2 1.00 131.5 200.7 F 5% 13.6 13.6 0.10 4.0 3.0 138 0.06 0.59 60.7 1.00 6.7 67.4 E 90.3 F 3% Prot 5 t P ' • 4/ NBT.= •NBR SBL SBT: '::SBR +to e 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3500 1703 3406 1524 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3500 1703 3406 1524 1042 4 20 982 359 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 1085 4 21 1023. 374 1089 0 21 1023 374 50 50 3% 6% 6% 6% Prot Prot 2 1 6 6 3% 28.0 28.0 0.20 4.0 3.0 350 c0.22 1.10 56.1 1.00 78.7 134.8 F 66.2 66.2 0.47 4.0 3.0 1653 0.31 0.66 28.3 1.00 1.0 29.3 C 56.9 E 3.5 41.7 3.5 41.7 0.02 0.30 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 43 1013 0.01 c0.30 0.49 67.5 1.00 8.5 75.9 E 1.01 49.2 1.00 30.7 80.0 E 74.0 E 41.7 41.7 0.30 4.0 3.0 453 0.25 0.83 45.9 1.00 11.7 57.5 E 69.8 1.06. 140.2 89.9% HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service E 16.0 D Tukwila Car Center 4:30 pm Existing PM Peak Hour TENW LLC transpkirk -st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Strander Blvd & W Valley Hwy f Movement': EBIL Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped /bikes 1.00 Flpb, ped /bikes 1.00 Frt 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 Flt Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 Volume (vph) 416 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph) 433 Lane Group Flow (vph) 433 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles ( %) 3% Tum Type Prot Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 36.5 Effective Green, g (s) 36.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 457 v/s Ratio Prot c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm v/c Ratio 0.95 Uniform Delay, di 50.8 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 28.9 Delay (s) 79.7 Level of Service E Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS IntersectlQfl Summary HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization c Critical Lane Group 8/7/2002 EBT EBR. WBL WBT ..WBR NBL' �. - I. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1845 1347 1719 1422 1752 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1845 1347 1719 1422 1752 12 527 18 20 72 378 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 12 549 19 21 75 394 12 . 549 19 96 0 394 50 50 3% 3% 5% 5% 5% 3% Perm Prot Prot 4 3 8 5 52.0 52.0 0.37 4.0 3.0 685 0.01 0.02 27.8 1.00 0.0 27.8 C 97.8 F 4 52.0 52.0 0.37 4.0 3.0 500 c0.41 1.10 44.0 1.00 69.6 113.6 F 2.3 2.3 0.02 4.0 3.0 28 0.01 0.68 68.5 1.00 49.7 118.2 F 17.8 17.8 0.13 4.0 3.0 181 0.07 0.53 57.2 1.00 3.0 60.2 E 69.7 E 28.0 28.0 0.20 4.0 3.0 350 c0.22 1.13 56.0 1.00 86.6 142.6 F NBT NBR SBL SBT::. SBR fi ++ r 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3498. 1703 3406 1524 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 3498 1703 3406 1524 1063 6 27 1002 366 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 1107 6 28 1044 381 1113 0 28 1044 381 50 50 3% 6% 6% 6% Prot Prot 2 1 6 6 3% 66.2 66.2 0.47 4.0 3.0 1654 0.32 0.67 28.5 1.00 1.1 29.6 C . 59.2 E 3.5 3.5 0.02 4.0 3.0 43 0.02 0.65 67.6 1.00 30.2 97.8 F 41.7 41.7 0.30 4.0 3.0 1015 c0.31 1.03 49.2 1.00 35.8 84.9 F 78.3 E 41.7 41.7 0.30 4.0 3.0 454 0.25 0.84 46.0 1.00 12.8 58.8 E 75.8 1.09 140.0 91.3% HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service E 16.0 E Tukwila Car Center 4:30 pm 8/7/2002 2003 With Project PM Peak Hour TENW LLC transpkirk -st51 Synchro 5 Report Page 1 Earth Consultants, Inc. tkvAc tiu)ic atl 1 ]it inc crs. Gcxtkr);ists & Scientists Cnt)siructicn)'r(stitig R K] x) / WAR() I tsirctkN1 Services Established 1975 - October 7, 2002 E -10323 Puget Western, Inc. 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, Washington 98011 Attention: Mr. Gust Erikson Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Study Puget Western Parking Lot and Stormwater Pond Strander Boulevard Near West Valley Highway (State Route 161) Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Erikson: As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter presenting the results of our subsurface exploration, selective laboratory tests, and engineering analysis for the proposed parking lot and stormwater control pond to be constructed east of the intersection of Strander Boulevard and West Valley Highway (State Route 181) in Tukwila. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Plate 1. The purpose of ECI's work was to observe the existing site conditions and to provide recommendations pertaining to construction of the parking lot and pond. Project Description ECI understand it is planned to develop a portion of the approximately 3.2 -acre site with a new parking lot and stormwater retention pond. The proposed parking lot will occupy the majority of the site and will be accessible from Strander Boulevard on the south side of the lot and along a shared access easement on the north side of the site. Stormwater runoff from the parking lot will be collected, and controlled using a stormwater pond located in the immediate southwestern corner of the site. If the above design criteria are incorrect or change, we should be consulteRwiViowthe recommendations contained in this report. 1JAN ()° DEVELOP:L'i . dT Earth Consultants, Inc. Eo3cvZ 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue (425) 643 -3780 FAX (425) 746 -0860 Toll Free (888) 739 -6670 Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 Surface E -10323 Page 2 The subject property consists of an approximately 3.25 -acre, irregular shaped site located approximately two hundred (200) feet east of the intersection of Strander Boulevard and West Valley Highway (State Route 181) in Tukwila. The site extends approximately 1,200 feet in a north -south direction from an undeveloped easement for Strander Boulevard along the south side of the site to an existing parking lot to the north. The site extends approximately one hundred (100) to two hundred (200) . feet in an east -west direction from the east side of a section of the Interurban Trail along the western property line to a spur of the Union Pacific Railroad. The site contains an existing office building that is to remain. At the time our study was performed, the existing building, proposed parking lot and pond, and our exploration locations were approximately as shown on the Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 2. The site is essentially flat with a maximum elevation change of around eight feet within the limits of the site. The site is bordered to the east by a five (5) to twelve (12) foot high west - facing slope that extends up to a level railroad bed at a gradient of around 20 percent. The site is vegetated with tall grass, and localized growths of dense blackberry brambles. Subsurface Conditions Subsurface conditions for the proposed site improvements were evaluated by excavating seven test pits to a maximum depth of eleven (11) feet below existing grade within the proposed parking lot and stormwater pond. Please refer Table I for a more detailed description of the subsurface conditions encountered at each location explored. The following is a brief description of the conditions encountered at our test pit locations. At our test pit locations, we encountered a surficial layer of grass and brush over topsoil. The topsoil and vegetation layer was typically two to three inches thick. The topsoil was characterized by its dark brown color, loose consistency, and the presence of abundant roots. Underlying the topsoil and vegetative layer we encountered one to three feet of loose to medium dense fill comprised of silty sand with gravel (Unified Soil Classification, SM), silty gravel (GM), and silt with varying amounts of sand (ML). The fill was characterized by its disturbed appearance, and the presence of angular gravel and localized zones of concrete, metal and plastic debris. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 E -10323 Page 3 Underlying the topsoil at our test pit locations, we encountered two and one half to eight feet of medium dense silt (ML) over loose to medium dense poorly graded sand with silt (SP -SM) to the maximum exploration depth of eleven (11) feet below existing grade. In Test Pit TP -1, we encountered a two and one half foot thick layer of medium dense silty fine sand (SM) from five to seven and one half feet below existing grade. Groundwater No groundwater seepage was encountered at our test pit locations to the maximum exploration depth of eleven (11) feet below grade. However, increased soil moisture, iron oxide staining, and mottling were encountered at widely varying depths. The increased soil moisture, iron oxide staining, and mottled soils were most commonly encountered at around seven to nine feet below existing grade. The observed mottling and iron oxide staining may be indicative of the seasonal high groundwater table in the area. Based on observed soil and groundwater conditions, in our opinion, moderate to heavy groundwater seepage could be encountered in deep excavations extending to around eight or nine feet below existing grade if the grading is conducted during the winter season. The contractor should be aware that groundwater levels are not static. There will likely be fluctuations in the groundwater level depending on the season, amount of rainfall, surface water runoff, and other factors. Generally, the water level is higher and seepage rates are greater in the wetter winter months (typically October through May). Laboratory Testing Moisture content tests were conducted on representative soil samples at various depths throughout the site. The moisture contents of the representative samples are provided on the individual test pit logs provided in Table I. The classifications shown on the accompanying logs are based on visual field classifications at the time of our subsurface exploration. It is important to note that these test results may not accurately represent the overall in -situ soil conditions. Our geotechnical recommendations are based on our interpretation of these test results and their use in guiding our engineering judgment. ECI cannot be responsible for the interpretation of these data by others. In accordance with our Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions, the soil samples for this project will be discarded after a period of fifteen days following completion of this report unless we are otherwise directed in writing. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS E -10323 Page 4 General Based on the results of our study, it is our opinion the proposed parking lot, and the stormwater pond can be constructed generally as planned. Site pavements should be supported on existing competent native soil or on a minimum of twelve (12) inches of newly placed structural fill. Depending on the condition of the soil exposed at the pavement subgrade elevations, compacting the exposed soil in -place to the requirements of structural fill may be possible, provided the recommendations contained in our study are followed. Detailed recommendations pertaining to preparation of the pavement subgrade are contained in the Site Preparation . and General Earthwork and Pavement Areas sections of this study. At our test pit locations we encountered up to three feet of loose to medium dense fill. If loose fill or native .soil is encountered at the pavement subgrade elevations it should either be compacted in -place to the requirements of structural fill or overexcavated and replaced with a minimum of twelve (12) inches of structural fill. The fill also contained trace amounts of miscellaneous concrete, plastic, and metal debris. If debris laden fill is encountered at pavement subgrade elevations, it should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill. Site Preparation and General Earthwork The proposed parking and drive areas should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation, organic matter, and other deleterious material. Based on the thickness of the topsoil and grass layers observed at the site, we estimate a stripping depth of two to four inches will be needed. Stripped materials should not be mixed with materials to be used as structural fill. If loose soil or debris laden fill is encountered at pavement subgrade elevations, it should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill. Following the stripping operation and excavations necessary to achieve pavement subgrade elevations, the ground surface where structural fill or pavements are to be placed should be observed by a representative of ECI. Soil in loose or soft areas, if recompacted and still yielding, should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill to a depth that will provide a stable base beneath the general structural fill. The optional use of a geotextile fabric placed directly on the overexcavated surface may help to bridge unstable areas. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc.: October 7, 2002 E -10323 Page 5 Structural fill is defined as compacted. fill ..placed under foundations, roadways, slabs, pavements, or other load- bearing areas. Fill under pavements and walks should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to 90 percent of maximum dry density except for the top twelve (12) inches which should be compacted to 95 percent of maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D- 1557 -91 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near their optimum moisture content. During dry weather, most soils that are compactable and non - organic can be used as structural fill. Based on the results of our laboratory tests, most of the site soils appeared to be near their optimum moisture content and should be suitable . for use in their present condition as structural fill, provided the grading operations are conducted during dry weather. However, the site is underlain by moisture sensitive soils that will degrade if exposed to excessive moisture, and compaction and grading will be difficult if the soil moisture increases significantly above its optimum condition. If the site soils are exposed to moisture and cannot be adequately compacted then it may be necessary to import a soil that can be compacted. During dry weather, any non - organic compactable soil with a maximum grain size of six inches can be used. Fill for use during wet weather should consist of a fairly well graded granular material having a maximum grain size of four inches and no more than 5 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve based on the minus 3/4 -inch fraction. A contingency in the earthwork budget should be included for this possibility. Pavement Areas The adequacy of paved parking and driveway areas will be related in part to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To provide a properly prepared subgrade for pavements, the subgrade should be treated and prepared as described in the Site Preparation and General Earthwork section of this report. This means at least the top twelve (12) . inches of the subgrade should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (per ASTM D- 1557 -91) and should be unyielding under a proof roll. It is possible that some localized areas of soft, wet or unstable subgrade may still exist after this process. Overexcavation and replacement with structural fill or crushed rock may be needed to stabilize these localized areas. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 The following pavement section for lightly - loaded areas can be used: E -10323 Page 6 • Two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) material, or • Two inches of AC over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB) material, Heavier truck - traffic areas will require thicker sections depending upon site usage, pavement life and site traffic.- In our opinion, the following pavement sections can be used for truck - trafficked areas: • Three inches of AC over six inches of CRB, or • Three inches of AC over four and one -half inches of ATB, Pavement materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. A Class B asphalt mix should be used. Utility Trench Backfill The native and fill soils should generally provide adequate support for underground utilities. However, the loose condition of some of the soils may require remedial measures such as over excavating soft soils or compacting the soils exposed in the trench bottom. In addition, caving of trench walls in the granular soils should be anticipated. Utility trench backfill is a major concern in reducing the potential for settlement along utility alignments, particularly in pavement areas. Therefore, it is important that each section of utility line be adequately supported in the bedding material. The material should be hand tamped to ensure support is provided around the pipe haunches. Fill should be carefully placed and hand tamped to about twelve (12) inches above the crown of the pipe before heavy compaction equipment is brought into use. The remainder of the .trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than twelve (12) inches. A typical trench backfill section and compaction requirements for load supporting and non -load supporting areas is presented on Plate 3. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 Stormwater Pond E -10323 Page 7 The proposed development will also include construction of a stormwater control. pond. The pond will be located in the immediate northwestern portion of the site. Based on our subsurface exploration, construction of the stormwater control pond as shown on the preliminary site plan provided by the project civil engineer should be feasible. The permanent slopes around the perimeter of the pond should be should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1V Excavations and Slopes The following information is provided solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should this information be interpreted to mean that ECI is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the Contractor's activities, such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state (WISHA), and Federal (OSHA) safety regulations. Based on the information obtained from the subsurface exploration, the loose to medium dense fill and native soils encountered at our test pit locations would be classified as Type C by OSHA /WISHA. Temporary cuts greater than four feet in height in Type C soils should be sloped at an inclination of 1.5H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical). If slopes of this inclination, or flatter, cannot be constructed, temporary shoring may be necessary. Shoring will help protect against slope or excavation collapse, and will provide protection to workers in the excavation. If temporary shoring is required, we will be available to provide shoring design criteria. Permanent cut and fill slopes should be inclined no steeper than 2H:1V. Cut slopes should be observed by ECI during excavation to verify that conditions are as anticipated. Supplementary recommendations can then be developed, if needed, to improve stability, including flattening of slopes or installation of surface or subsurface drains. Permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 Site Drainage E -10323 Page 8 No groundwater seepage was encountered at our test pit locations to the maximum exploration depth of eleven (11) feet below grade. However, increased soil moisture, iron oxide staining, and mottling were encountered at widely varying depths. The observed mottling and iron oxide staining may be indicative of the seasonal high groundwater table in the area. In our opinion, moderate to heavy groundwater seepage could be encountered in deep excavations of around eight feet below grade. If seepage is encountered, the bottom of the excavation should be sloped to one or more shallow sump pits. The collected water can then be pumped from these pits to a positive and permanent discharge. Depending on the magnitude of such seepage, it may also be necessary to connect the sump pits by a system of connector trenches. The appropriate locations of subsurface drains, if needed, should be established during grading operations by ECI's representative at which time the seepage . areas, if present, may be more clearly defined. During construction, the site must be graded such that surface water is directed away from proposed fill areas. Water must not be allowed to stand in areas where pavements are to be constructed. Loose surfaces should be sealed by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. LIMITATIONS This study has been prepared for the use of Puget Western, Inc., Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., and their representatives for use in evaluating this site. Our interpretations and conclusions should not be construed as a warranty of the surface or subsurface. conditions. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on observations of the existing site conditions, our subsurface exploration, review of pertinent data, information provided us, and our experience and engineering judgment. The conclusions presented are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. Earth Consultants, Inc. Puget Western, Inc. October 7, 2002 E -10323 Page 9 We trust this information meets your current needs. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. And( Pae A. 11704.4A-044- Mitchell G. McGinnis, CEG Project Geologist timmzie -1* Kristina M. W /0/7/0 2- ProjeciEMBl3 nD2 -03-03 J MGM /KRC /jme cc: Barghausen Consulting Engineers Attention: Mr. Jason Hubell, P.E. Attachments: Table I Test Pit Logs Plate 1 - Vicinity Map Plate 2 - Test Pit Location Plan Plate 3 - Typical Utility Trench Backfill Earth Consultants, Inc. Test Pit TP -1 Approximate Depth USCS TEST PIT LOGS E -10323 Surface Elevation - 26 feet. Description Topsoil and duff 0.0 - 0.25 0.25 - 1.0 1.0 - 5.0 5.0. - 7.5 7.5 - 9.5 SM Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) ML Brown, sandy SILT, medium dense, moist - 12 percent soil moisture at 2.0 feet SM Brown, silty fine SAND, medium dense; moist ML Mottled. brown, SILT with sand, medium dense,. moist - becomes moist to wet at 9.0 feet Test Pit TP -2 Approximate Surface Elevation - 22 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 - 0.25 Topsoil and duff 0.25 - 1.0 1.0 - 5.5 5.5 - 11.0 SM Brown silty Sandwich gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) ML Mottled brown, SILT with sand, medium dense, moist - 15.5 percent soil moisture at 1.5 feet SP -SM Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist - becomes dark gray to black at 9.0 Test Pit TP -3 Approximate Surface Elevation - 22 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 - 0.25 0.25 - 1.0 Topsoil and duff GM Brown silty GRAVEL, medium dense, moist (Fill) - 7.2 percent soil moisture at 0.5 feet Brown, SILT with sand, medium dense, moist (Fill) Brown silty GRAVEL with sand, medium dense, moist (Fill) 8.3 percent soil moisture at 3.0 feet 1.0 -2.0 ML 2.0 - 3.5 GM - contains iron oxide staining 3.5 — 6.0 ML Mottled brown, SILT, medium dense, moist to wet 6.0.— 8.5 SP -SM Gray, poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist Test Pit TP -4 Approximate Surface Elevation — 20 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 — 0.25 Topsoil and duff 0.25 — 2.0 SM Brown silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) - large concrete debris 2.0 — 3.0 ML Reddish brown, sandy SILT, medium dense, moist to wet (Possible Fill) - trace gravel 3.0 — 7.5 ML Brown, SILT, medium dense, moist - increase in moisture and mottling at 7.5 feet 7.5 — 11.0 SP -SM Brownish gray, . poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist abundant iron oxide staining at 9.0 feet . - becomes wet dark gray at 10.5 feet Test Pit TP -5 Approximate Surface Elevation — 20 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 — 0.25 Topsoil and duff 0.25 — 1.5 ML Brown sandy SILT, medium dense, moist (Fill) contains gravel - trace plastic and ceramic debris along contact 1.5 — 6.5 ML Reddish brown, SILT, medium dense, moist - 19.4 percent soil moisture at 2.0 feet 6.5 — 11.0 SP -SM Brownish gray, poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist - 5.6 percent soil moisture at 7.0 feet pockets of dark iron oxide staining at 8.0 feet Test Pit TP -6 Approximate Surface Elevation — 20 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 — 0.25 Topsoil and duff 0.25 — 1.0 SM Dark brown, silty SAND, loose, moist (Possible Fill) - contains gravel 1.0 — 9.0 ML Brown, SILT, medium dense, moist - 25.9 percent soil moisture at 3.0 feet - becomes moist to wet at 3.0 feet 9.0 — 10.0 SP -SM Brownish gray, poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist - dark iron oxide staining at 9.5 feet Test Pit TP -7 Approximate Surface Elevation — 20 feet. Depth USCS Description 0.0 — 0.25 Topsoil and duff 0.25 - 1.5 SM Brown, silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist (Fill) - trace metal and plastic debris - 4.3 percent soil moisture at 1.0 feet 1.5 — 8.0 ML Reddish brown, SILT, medium dense, moist - 25.9 percent soil moisture at 3.0 feet - becomes brown at 3.0 feet 8.0 — 8.5 SP -SM Brownish gray, poorly graded SAND with silt, loose to medium dense, moist to wet - \:;.„'v'-'1.--773.--,i'. vrat � 0Il' r i' 'yy ' ''‘-‘-c .133 .1 Ise r lily '.ST- 5yy:'� > ,p'-.," ` , /---., • ro rAI _ <. ; >AS,�.� r L V --- i 44 8 - ` �4l' 'v � .. s bl fl [ rp ,$�'• Bv1C.e RTVFR P.:, ,,; ♦ '$ iTgii sT'" , `-1 f 31st S 41r T ; ` n ;\.,., !y. y 133 0 ,• . Ci , ns , i 5' (s t32n ST �I,y .r PAR81 I i +JiN 1 9wJ !! j Sr.s,tl 4T �` 1y ��e � '. e f? .' S 1 Ma %. r,I,. ,t, /�, T j;;;gi .._ x� '"-'y!// F`Q ` t `• i ` � �B LA �` stGOLF \'• S1 'p✓: , ♦ % �.� ,:..', L . � f ''j � K VR �� i 5 , 135TH i ]38` WY s ._ 134Th S I 11= _ S ,'Si' }.• <.• ' ' Z & aril la i'' ,. it p. ��'•, y�f 'F .4 1140TH 41 a ST _ ` c ST 1 `i l 440f1 ` S ! .;91: i �I Stn of 5 i lag D ST: y ' _ y .18-', N 4 .,• : vl 1 'FOSTER . ., MID _ S ml ..'n ■ 144TH �� Li �PKA 5'� gj )l.. Jll '! .. 14011 } 41 147./40 ST i I a 3 11 %/s f : t� �9f { ...1 ta,�� ! a -1- 51" ! . 1 1 H 2 ! ST ` �` � i + _ . I. f • S ' 14771 ev+ • z � '� _aA.rw 4-, ,1-1 <� s lane Si 0)0U u irwzeuvr k ;:i PARK ?;i ? LIB ' .3 Li S ''i �•\.T �\ . �,L 1 ` •. ;� - ' t 3.RD ST la9Rn � n -4:: 1 '?" _ ti. l ! b , - ., �}.tr. �,-. •I X r `a'K K' `` R ' l 4•BLACifAVVER , ' �RIPARIA)I �RlS7 `,, �s "4—. • `• a ' rY Y ♦s4:) v. 4t5-",..,:..4 �ri'r / . tr . j . 14611i . ^ ?7 `! 1 V i4 = . .. 53� NI : `^,145TH T ! i i 'g V * P 600 s 144 St. + ,� y T p \9 °` , <.y \" _ L `. �4 11 R u a\. y : -n. L C a a' s •;. I ! J,o L�, 0.-- i 9p. �"'e s 78TR 1 ST 4100.•. • iy.,.. Inl,t 1 I ST sisT. a 22 ' . _.r. _,, e ) 4200 'b-' _ .1 •: 5 I 9111 it . IN S 150TH ST �- L I� T — RND �•-� 1. ' i. ! s; tEIIJ i' mill sr 1 _ 41 'N \ �f+ I sTT !OA .5749115, -I�, _9;1.• _ ... \5 44111, },n Olii - s1 sr sTsotwl t -, �I trt i - 4: . ! .55. 1 23 KI 151 S 152ND 5T Ns;1,4 ^ �1 1 J `� • 152/4(1 Pl 4 '�E • r, 'Q;'�iOEN1Q1� O'.G \\, Y.nK .� 11n,P�;.•.INT_N S i v4r' it•°` 14ns, ii • \ =�i' sl r1TSj� > a ' a ST v }.i� •` �' x _ •, "� `S e : ♦ - 'fib" - ;1 ..� fl �' Q - �' -. •: - - - zti p' , .y.,.', 24 `� `.. - ^�� ,(�\f' .. s \ sl ce .�t ty 1'�y`' �'�,} sy 1'511.' . _ .. r 1^ - Jl!f%._ .5100 � ›. i' -� � I _s,,,,,,,1 -;: 7 �Q s 1567/41 sr ® gi ST '1� . \ ' - ! 158TH k 4403 -} �: ' t, �-. e( cm:'lLja f,,, ° i" �SVltt sk aer� l,o 50TH 1 ST V't t,. ati. n'r \ _ s labtit ` -1 « 'e .! t 1 - , rsenl' �� '. , ! - CRFSTrT M s yi -1 161ST ..3j kPARKI` • i . sl1fi910lv;5T 511.11 r) 1� ri?:P:g:t6ar 'rl' I - : i4.4 t I ?T. -_. ..._.. `r ,''"i � I_._..s -'vr -- I .+� -. + ' ' ° ` \S. .,�.�.�s ` �: rol` ,,. ?.r..153RD 01` .SQ(< : aj _ �C�N li . fR/ ■ ' iUkWI � � . SOUIHCENT'ER t .� O Nl'ct.r4 .5�V /_ <; ra17o_ TUb1ILA • ) ?I � PINT t.,4 - { , twos- , ''1 81, 'at: f /y0 ►405 l ®7 ',1rrl , E faisSy wITES .1 -11 .-1 I ' \ -I f 1 I S i OHFAPlE5 1� �1 31 ' . "1 souNvrR'a ASTRAK CASCADCS. I . �� _ ;I:. •-_ � ® N 5 px ,}ff :% � t HALL-- � /rO STRANDER is SIT �- 1q. YI Cir GRE BAKER °i I T. "OIV0 'ori� . ri>uene , �Y g i a �' "_ � � urnli • BLVD • 1 r a,rzaa = STA 1•Y ! 1r !r i ••) 1 I1 l ,_ IS TE ` • I ., 27 I 767x0 St 1681H S1 I N ��! .... _ ...•... 170111 I!>Nlrl 1.11 - I:...__... __ .� S.'_ 14,A'1 ... - - = yc, ;r 172/40 SI S l 1;'.111) pi 173120 = ;i .. „ 114111 S1 ,; y y, x L 1: VII Ili(11_II ' I_ �. t 109 '' • ,,, C • • i v! *� ' SQ')TIfCFNr�R PLAZA =-1 26 COURIYA HY MARRrO Z •.-- ;... -.. -' m - .� CORPORATE OR ti — f.ORPORA MIUVIfO DRS L �a r JRECK 11HDO A ,g ; : --ii-R— ._., — ,,rte i _ i ! V .� f ' - 1...'� WI FS ' t I 1= I t .I I l I 1 1 ,00 1 � i'. I i -I ., t .. 4 f�-1 - / - ('MnIfH f!'r �7ff t nun \� '?'.J, � l `e \\. 1 } : : R N I 1 I .,�.•i _ ! ' I " "�C 1' NTO N CFT I O ! RENTDiVf y p HETLAkit -Ni ° �•ra 1'33R01.' • 1 ¢i '1 ffi �° 1 '(16 cup JR Sl • Reference: Puget Sound Area King County / Map 655 By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated 2003 1.'.C•/ Earth Consultants, Inc. P F, Geotechnical Engineering Geology. Environmental Sciences ; - : Construction Testing& ICBO / WABO Inspection Services `k I l 111th= Vicinity Map Puget Westem Property Tukwila, Washington NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ECI cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Drwn. GLS Date Sept. 2002 Proj. No. 10323 Checked MGM Date 9/20/02 Plate 1 , • WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT Puget Western Project Northeast of Strander Boulevard Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: Puget Western, Inc. 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, WA 98011 August 28, 2002 Our Job No. 10431 RECEIVED JAN 1 7 2003 1 .irsWILA PUBLIC WORKS RECEVED JAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. V 1. Ew0C101••%. -.- CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES i 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, KENT WA 98032 • (425) 251 -6222 • (425) 251 -8782 FAX 4'G ENG‘N • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The findings and conclusions presented in this report are based on an interpretation of information currently available to Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. This summary is for introductory purposes and should be used only with the full text of this report. This wetland assessment was based on the On -Site Determination Method described in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (1997) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987). Based on the information derived through site reconnaissance and readily available documents wetland was not identified on or near the site. Remnants of an old drainage ditch that was created in upland soils, along the railroad grade, is located along the eastern property boundary. 1 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Scope of Services 1 1.2 Location and Description 1 2.0 DOCUMENT REVIEW 1 2.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Map 1 2.2 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio 1 2.3 Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of the King County Area 2 2.4 City of Tukwila Chapter 18 — Zoning Code 2 3.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 2 3.1 Site Conditions During Site Visit 2 3.2 Topography 2 3.3 Fauna 3 3.4 Vegetation 3 3.5 Soils 3 3.6 Hydrology 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 4 5.0 CLOSURE 4 6.0 REFERENCES 5 FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map FIGURE 2 Site Map FIGURES APPENDICES APPENDIX A Wetland Delineation Methodology APPENDIX B Definition Of Plant Indicator Status And Field Sheets • 1.0 • • INTRODUCTION Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., has completed a wetland determination for the Puget Western Project located northeast of Strander Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington (Figure 1). This work was performed to assist in site planning related to future development of the site with a parking lot. 1.1 Scope of Services The scope of work for this study was limited to the following tasks: • A visual assessment to observe existing site conditions and to identify and flag wetland, if located on the site. Wetland was not found on the site; therefore, flags were not placed on the site. This determination was accomplished using field procedures consistent with the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (1997) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987) (Appendix A). • A review of documents readily available. • A report documenting the process, findings, and conclusions for this project. 1.2 Location and Description The rectangular- shaped parcel contains approximately 3.5 acres of land and is located northeast of Strander Boulevard in the Northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 23 North Range 4 East, in Tukwila, Washington (Figure 1). The site contains an underground stormwater detention system with several catch basins and manholes located throughout the site, and overhead power lines. Overall, the site is undeveloped and contains grassy fields and blackberry thickets that have been recently cleared and mowed. North of the site is a building, south of the site is a gravel road which is the easement for Strander Boulevard, west of the site is the interurban trail and restaurants, and east of the site is the Union Pacific Railroad grade. The base of the railroad grade contains remnants of the ditch system. The gravel road that is situated within the Strander Boulevard easement and development north of the site filled the ditch and severed water flow through the ditch. 2.0 DOCUMENT REVIEW 2.1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Map The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Map of the Tukwila Area provided by GEOTRACT Interactive Mapping does not identify wetland on or near the subject site. 2.2 King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio The King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio (1990) does not identify wetland or streams on or adjacent to the subject site. -1- 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • 2.3 Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of the King County Area The U.S. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of the King County Area, Washington (1973) was reviewed to determine the general nature of soils on the subject site. The site is mapped as containing Newberg silt loam. The following soils information was taken from the Soil Conservation Service 1973 publication. The Newberg series is a well- drained soil formed in alluvium. Typically, the surface soil is very dark grayish brown, gravelly silt loam and very fine sandy loam to a depth of 20 inches. The subsoil to a depth of 60 inches contains stratified layers of dark grayish -brown and yellowish -brown very fine sandy loam, loamy sand, and silt loam. Faint mottles are present at a depth of approximately 3- to 4 -feet. The mottles become more prominent with depth. The mottles coincide with the seasonal water table. This soil unit may contain small areas of Briscot, Oridia and Woodinville soils. Newberg soils are not listed by the Washington State or King County Soil Conservation Service as hydric (wetland) soil. 2.4 City of Tukwila Chapter 18 — Zoning Code Review of the Definitions section and the Sensitive Areas Overlay section of the of the City of Tukwila Chapter 18 — Zoning Code indicated that "Constructed wetlands are not considered wetlands for the purpose of this chapter" and "Watercourses do not include irrigation ditches, stormwater runoff channels or devices or other artificial water courses.... ". The off -site ditch east of the site is a railroad ditch constructed through upland soils for the purpose of draining and conveying stormwater runoff from the railroad grade; therefore, would not be a wetland or watercourse using the City of Tukwila Chapter 18 — Zoning Code. 3.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 3.1 Site Conditions During Site Visit On June 6 and July 19, 2002, Ms. Theresa Henson with Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., visited the subject site to determine if wetland was present on or adjacent to the site. At the client's request, during the July 19 site visit, Mr. John Comis, a biologist with John Comis Associates, assisted with the wetland determination. The site visits included a visual observation of the subject site and surrounding area. Dominant vegetation on the site included grassy fields and blackberry thickets that had been recently cleared and mowed. Wetland hydrologic conditions, soils, and vegetation are not present on the site. Some wetland vegetation types are present east of the site in the railroad ditch. The ditch was constructed through upland soils, as indicated on the King County Soils Survey and confirmed in the field; therefore, would not be considered a jurisdictional wetland. Wetland was not identified on or adjacent to the site. 3.2 Topography The site is relatively flat and ranges in elevation from approximately 26 feet in the southeast corner of the site to approximately 18 feet in the northeast corner of the site. The high point is a mound of fill located adjacent to a depression located on the north side of the gravel road (the Strander Boulevard easement). The base of the depression is -2- 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • • • • • at an elevation of approximately 20 feet and appears to be a remnant of the temporary sedimentation erosion control facility that was present on the site during placement of the underground stormwater system. Generally, the site slopes very gently to the northeast. The bottom of the off -site ditch was located approximately three to four feet below the elevation of the site. 3.3 Fauna Various songbirds were seen on the site. No plant or animal species, listed federally or by the state as threatened or endangered, were observed on the site. 3.4 Vegetation Nine representative data plots were established to document plant species and dominance of vegetation on the subject property and in the ditch located east of the site (Figure 2). The site vegetative species composition included the grassy fields and blackberry thickets. Although vegetation on the site had been cleared and mowed, it was still easy to identify. Dominant vegetation in the off -site ditch included reedcanary grass, cottonwood trees, and red -osier dogwood. Hydrophytic (wetland) plant communities were not present on the site. Although hydrophytic vegetation was present in the off -site ditch, the ditch was not considered wetland because it was constructed through upland soils, according to the King County Soil Survey and field verification. Data forms detailing observations for vegetation are included in Appendix B. 3.5 Soils During the site reconnaissance, soil conditions, including color, texture, and relative moisture content, were observed and recorded at nine representative data points on and near the subject site. The site contains fill, gravelly sandy loam and silt loam soils that range from 10YR3/2 and 2/2 at the surface to 10YR 4/3 and 4/4 below the surface. The off -site ditch had soils that coincided with the lower soil profile of Newberg soils. This would be expected since the base of the ditch is 36 to 48 inches (3 to 4 feet) below the elevation of the site. Since the soil features coincide with the lower profile of the Newberg soil series, and Newberg soils are not considered to be hydric (wetland) soils by the Washington State or King County Soil Conservation Service, the ditch was not considered to have hydric (wetland) soils. Field sheets detailing observations for soils are included in Appendix B. 3.6 Hydrology Hydrologic conditions, including saturated soils, as well as indicators of wetland hydrology as defined by the wetland delineation manuals, were not observed during our site visits in June and July of 2002. The off -site ditch is expected to contain water during the rainy season because (a) it receives runoff from the railroad grade, and (b) the ditch was excavated 3 to 4 feet below the grade of the site and is expected to be at the level of the seasonal water table for Newberg soils (3 to 4 feet below ground surface). Since the off -site ditch was constructed through upland soils it is not considered to have jurisdictional wetland hydrologic conditions. -3- 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • 4.0 • CONCLUSIONS Based on the referenced wetland delineation manuals, vegetation, soils, and hydrologic conditions necessary for an area to be considered wetland were not found on the site. The off -site ditch was not considered to be a jurisdictional wetland because it was constructed through upland soils. The following evidence was used to determine that the ditch is not a jurisdictional wetland. 1. The ditch was constructed through Newberg silt loam soils that are not considered to be hydric (wetland) soils according to the Washington State and King County Soil Conservation Services. 2. The soil profile in the ditch was confirmed in the field to coincide with the lower Newberg soil profile at a depth of 3 to 4 feet. 3. The ditch was excavated to a depth of 3 to 4 feet below ground surface. 4. Newberg soil contains a seasonal water table at a depth of 3 to 4 feet below ground surface. 5.0 CLOSURE The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this project. They have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our work was also performed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our proposal. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Because of such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised in whole or in part. Theresa R. Henson Natural Resource Ecologist -4- 10431.001.doc [TRH/tepl • • 4110 6.0 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication FSW /OSB- 79/31. • Environmental Laboratory, 1987, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual Technical Report Y -87 -1, U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. King County, 1990, Sensitive Areas Map Folio, Map 5, December. Munsell Soil Color Chart, 1994, Rev. ed.: Baltimore, Maryland, Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation. Reed, P.B., Jr., 1988, National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1973, Soil Survey of the King County Area, Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2002, National Wetland Inventory Map from GEOTRACT Interactive Mapping for the Tukwila Area, King County, Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997, Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual, publication #96 -94. -5- 10431.001.doc [TRH /tep] • 144nu .rs,siitiket :1 `0,, 14s" PARK sm s „, 131RM.117R„, 1371 • sr 140TH <1 ST ST 4 4 s _1421 nil sr FOSTER • HS • 8 1441111 I 133RD , B LACK PR v, 546115_ ST /110 r • 144TH PT' 135-111 _ ST , - 900 RIVER t - 40; BLACK RIPARIAN FOREST 1 ST a. < J- 072 an, '4I ST S 14911 ST S 150TH ST ilS1 5_1_, 22 3 ri .1. s 151ST sr I-d-10 RN DY-K-'' 1,r V VI ■■• I 4200 518 5 144111 ST 5300 1 5900 A i r„.2_. pvpur I i _1 us 5 14 ij rES__ IkS V- 15t1 db 11. 5 149111 sr . Es 14;;;Sli 1...,0 5.6 / \•4, 1: 7 S ti—• rf9fir "Ir.15°IsT" 5 7160111 I , M P L ./ sr 4 r \ s_ _ 15 cl 2ND: ST 23 , sis5,17. ST • ,–. e ‘ I\ „N.....r.....,;s .152110 PL 11 \• S l; - Otilit _1/41 ,1 > < S 156T1 L ST .14r, 3 158TH ., "'' 0 xr r ----,— r ' !CRYSTAL! i0TFt HIT. 2 'SPRINGS PARK les,„is -,..,1-1 - ,,•1; I i ---77-1 : 1,77 t: 1 oEsnikw, ,c. ,.r. / 16151_ ..,............11 ' I 1 ' PARK fi; 5411.6a7DTL .- IT .9-563Ftrigr j 4.e r, -9,p 1 S 'S S j ''.. 4 „, --s---=,E 1- 16405 _ _ __ ST _ _ . _5 .16615 31 ■ 27 5 167111 Sr 168Tli ST _ ■ th s S 168,E11 111 I y 5 168111 ST • --.1-f v7, •••• 501515 170TH 73RD 172550 ” ST o o 175T11 176TH 5 IMP SI 47100 1 •. S 516515 ''';‘,9; 5.1 S MTh' ,l 05j ST S 17260 _ PL ST •r=1; Sr r's LAKE >U8 ,PK !1.78TH s S1 REFERENCE: THOMAS GUIDE a ---;""A•■milll - PKWY SOUTHCENTER EVNIS BULK BAKER 1 BLVD De MALL 18,4 PO BLVD STRANDER • CC • • 11,41n010 SOUnICE111 ERLZ rvues PLAZA cr, 1:Z I'1 71 fleASSY1 SUITES CREEP 26 COURTYA 0 BY MARRIOTT CORPORATE 05575— CORPORATE OR 7---- - ,,i MilI(LEP / I- ; UPLAIi0 ..1)511 9 • -7---,,- . 1 PARe.,1A; P1_,■ZA ! 1 1 , 1 1 7 riwrmo Ix '-' • 1 --f----\—... I i. -0 1 r, .1, 1 1 / 1 7-• • TR i L',4110 D'-' I TRECK DR a ANSCIUTRANDKERGISCADES STA SftE IQ- 1k- ENTON UNCT IC/N_ RENTON 25 WET"LANOS 1111 sw 3300 • ST _ Oftntf. catnon, PAG: I I. BLVD 0" won DR:, UNETLANDS TO!! W tpRILLA 9. 0 1 SW 38TH ST • , - • 51 Job Number 10431 Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A DATE: 9/4/02 0 ■ <TA, N MO. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH IqNT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES For: PUGET WESTERN STRANDER BOULEVARD TUKWILA, WA Title: VICINITY MAP P:110000s1104311exhibit110493-wl.cdr • • • APPENDIX A WETLAND DELINEATION METHODOLOGY • • • • APPENDIX A WETLAND DELINEATION METHODS The triple parameter approach of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987) was used to delineate the extent of wetlands on the site. Under this methodology, vegetation, soils, and hydrology are each evaluated to determine the presence or absence of wetlands. Based on the use of this method, an area is considered to be a wetland if each of the following is met: (1) dominant hydrophytic vegetation is present in the area, (2) he soils in the area are hydric, and (3) he necessary hydrologic conditions within the area are met. The site was evaluated by conducting a walking inspection of the property. As part of this inspection, species of vegetation adjacent to the site, soil conditions on the site, and hydrologic conditions on the site were noted at several data plots to more accurately determine if wetlands were present on the site. Wetland Vegetation Hydrophytic plants are plants specially adapted for saturated and/or anaerobic conditions. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has assigned an indicator status to many plant species that is based upon the estimated probability of the species existing under wetland conditions. Plants are categorized as Obligate (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), Facultative (FAC), Facultative Upland (FACU), and Upland (UPL). Species with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered to be adapted to saturated and/or anaerobic (i.e., wetland) conditions and are referred to as hydrophytic vegetation (Appendix B). Trees and shrubs off of the site directly to the west were inventoried to determine what was likely present on the site before it was cleared. The approximate percentage of cover for each of the different plant species occurring within the tree, shrub, and herb strata was determined. Dominant plant species are considered to be those that, when cumulatively totaled in descending order of abundance, exceed 50 percent of the areal cover for each vegetative stratum. Any additional species individually representing 20 percent or greater of the total areal cover for each vegetative stratum are also considered dominant. Hydric Soils Hydric soils are defined as those soils which are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. As a result of anaerobic conditions, hydric soils exhibit characteristics directly observable in the field, including high organic matter content, greenish or bluish grey color (gley formation), accumulation of sulfidic material, spots of orange or yellow color (mottling), and dark soil colors (low chromas). Soil observations were completed within soil data plots dug with a shovel to a depth of at least 18 inches below the existing ground surface. Soil samples were examined for the presence of hydric indicators. Soil organic content was estimated visually and textually. The presence of sulfidic material was determined by the presence of sulfide gases (i.e., a "rotten egg" odor). Soil colors were recorded after being determined through use of the three aspects of color in the Munsell Soil Color Chart: hue, value and chroma (e.g., a soil designated as 10YR 6/2 has a hue of 10YR, a value of 6, a chroma of 2, and a soil color name of light brownish gray). A soil chroma of two in combination with soil mottling or a soil chroma of one without soil mottling typically indicates a hydric soil. A -1 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • • • • Wetland Hydrology Hydrologic conditions identifying wetland characteristics occur during those periods when the soils are inundated permanently or periodically, or the soil is continuously saturated to the surface for sufficient duration to develop hydric soils and support vegetation typically adapted for life in periodically anaerobic conditions. Research has indicated that duration of soil saturation and inundation during the growing season is more influential on the plant community than the frequency of soil saturation and inundation during the growing season. For the purposes of this wetland delineation, the wetland hydrology criterion was considered to be satisfied if it appeared that wetland hydrology was present for at least 5 to 12 percent (12 to 29 days) of the growing season. The growing season begins when the soil reaches a temperature of 41 degrees Fahrenheit in the zone of root penetration. The hydrology was evaluated by direct visual observation of surface inundation or soil saturation within 18 inches below the existing ground surface in data plots. According the 1987 Manual, "For soil saturation to impact vegetation, it must occur within a major portion of the root zone (usually within 12 inches of the surface) of the prevalent vegetation." Therefore, if saturated soils or indicators were observed within 12 inches of the surface, positive indicators of wetland hydrology were noted. The area near each data plot was also examined for indicators of wetland hydrology. These indicators include dried watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, and drainage patterns. It was not possible to observe conditions during the entire growing season. Areas where positive indicators of hydrology were noted were assumed to contain wetland hydrology. A -2 10431.001.doc [TRH/tep] • • • • APPENDIX B DEFINITION OF PLANT INDICATOR STATUS AND FIELD DATA FORMS • • • • • APPENDIX B DEFINITION OF PLANT INDICATOR STATUS AND DATA FORMS Indicator Category Definitions OBL Obligate Wetland. Occurs almost always (estimated probability >99 %) under natural conditions in wetlands. FACW Facultative Wetland. Usually occurs in wetlands (estimated probability 67 -99 %), but occasionally found in uplands. FAC Facultative. Equally likely to occur in wetlands or uplands (estimated probability 34 -66 %). FACU Facultative Upland. Usually occurs in uplands (estimated probability 67 -99 %), but is occasionally found in wetlands (estimated probability 1 -33 %). UPL Obligate Upland. Occurs in wetlands in other regions (as defined in the National List of Scientific Plant Names), but occurs almost always (estimated probability >99 %) under natural conditions in uplands in the region specified. NI No Indicator. These species have not been given an indicator status. They are assumed to be upland. Source: National List of Plants That Occur In Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). 89 pp. B -1 10431.001.doc [7RH/tep] • • • Data Point: of 7 DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Indicator 1. Ylukt..•-:s tt.p1,.a1∎4a4ea- N go Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western Fi¢L I& 3. City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 5. County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No k' No 14 State: Washington 8. VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. Ylukt..•-:s tt.p1,.a1∎4a4ea- N go F14«i 2. c-42,l;u.rn s • N 10 Fi¢L I& 3. Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4. 5. likely A. t4.n it 'n't of -A. faNl oI'mj.vt Se.l ;rnenia,t'io» erosion C•n?ro l foete ?ILCed d"►;n5 past- 5rad.:t5 • 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. 10070 Cowardin Classification: %t%0 r< - i-L 4 rt a. ,..........6 Remarks: V* 'Vr }otA:0 l■ 0"- - s ;4-t. was C Item 6.0614 bwA- ;s c4:1 \ 0.411 All be 4ert+3-:•.1. 0{f -s;44_ veye+R-}-►,r. .n -44,e :ittn 1 -twv -e riot b'esn d:sibra. HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators C µ 1 Vtrt So•�'1;t eJ g 9 _ Inundated _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks _ Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches _ Water- Stained Leaves _ Local Soil Survey Data _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other _ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: 1.10'ikk., Depth of Surface Water: (in.) (in.) (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: Remarks: 7ept- eSSiDn — Cu •-+e4 4h non- hydt.e 50; IS t- c:i 1. likely A. t4.n it 'n't of -A. faNl oI'mj.vt Se.l ;rnenia,t'io» erosion C•n?ro l foete ?ILCed d"►;n5 past- 5rad.:t5 • 2- 99/DATA.FRM/rRH -trh AF.787.wpd • SOILS • • Data Point: 1 of 9 Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes D No 9 Project Description: Depth inches o -y LI- Is Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) 2.51 3/2. 2.5`i3/1 Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) nor►L novta_ Mottle Abundance /Contrast Texture, Concretions, Rhizospheres, etc. 5: + too.rn S ; 1 t— 10 0�. m Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions X Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors I-1-Y dr- c. 5a:1 comers 3 KY �4i'ea _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer _ Organic Streaking _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: +esf hole Au5 ;pi f erl 4 o f c c.Vto*%&r. *as'1 Dote c1 c/' LAO si' (1 4*, h :gh►r e1.00`I: ovl, 0 - 12 t o y IC 3J2, ! 1 - •8 as, 3,, tom- ll. 'a.•SY 3 /:L :el WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ', No D Yes D No Yes ❑ No 124. Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Remarks: /Job cons; cl e re a s u�t't-1 a n cj L )(ell Sforrn pone) re a Mta`kct kP hand So; 2- 99/DATA.FRM/IRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • • Data Point: 1. of 9 DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Stratum % Cover Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western 14 g o City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 4 2. o County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No ig No 51 State: Washington *1. o- l u► s vs s co to r VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 44. ?ha. la l i 5 arul n e# A a. c e ok. 14 g o FA Cc,v 92. Solo -Hann dalcaMo.ro- 4 2. o FAG 3. to r i'; c a, d i o: c a j-( 10 PA C *1. o- l u► s vs s co to r 5 h 2 0 Pile cti 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. o 70 Cowardin Classification: No A - 4)e'H6 h ci Remarks: • HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: D11 L. Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) (in.) (in.) Wetland Hydrology Indicators c ;keln {loot ec Inundated a ter; ri 9 Saturated in Upper 12 Inches rztoK {a,t _ Water Marks Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits , Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: 1;4ch ew t` $r■ uptarla sa;1 $;I) NrWbt�es 5; if loam 2- 99/DATA.FRM/1RH -trh AF.787.wpd • • • � q Data Point: 2. of SOILS Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes CX No ❑ Project Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) Mottle Texture, Concretions, Abundance /Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. L Io` 12 3/g_ s; 0 l oa.re% 6 — 18 2• sy 3 /a. 7•S1: 5) Colton* R , Inr t P tern: n e�nf S; 14 toe. vet Hydric Soil Indicators: los_ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor _ Probable Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors _ Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer _ Organic Streaking _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: ?tor:l a of Netabet So., S i b o'%I ow% D '( 1: }c i1 rh tuutl- WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Remarks: Yes jj No ❑ Yes ❑ No VI Yes ❑ No Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No . 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • Data Point: 3 of cr DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western % Cover Indicator Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western Prfca) .2. cornuts vie Ion ∎ {ere- SA City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 3. Rv.bu►s d: Se° for 511 to County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No No X State: Washington VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 4-1. Pha-10..r4s ar.A.A. •ta.ce a a 8 0 Prfca) .2. cornuts vie Ion ∎ {ere- SA 1O Fgc.0 3. Rv.bu►s d: Se° for 511 to P 4c.uA. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. •670 CowardinClassification: Non Wt'tko -ra atA-c.t.1 KMtnno"1- ) Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: » o A Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: Wetland Hydrology Indicators Inundated _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Water- Stained Leaves _ Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) I, kely ;tooaeek &up:45 M►:n{d►11 Remarks: a;4elk cnta`ki ixeldnl 4- L? &flc) So: ) N•e.4wbcto s: t# lodrit 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • Data Point: 3 of 9 SOILS Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Drainage Class: Well drained Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes g No ❑ Project Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) (Munsell Moist) ( Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0 - Q 104R 5/ 1 NoA.e_ {.nc SanatS lo.m Hydric Soil Indicators: (36.416 ") NvvtL f 1ov.M_r 11ra(,lt,o'f Neu►ber 50:1 Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes '] No . Yes ❑ No g Yes ❑ No Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No, Remarks: Nol c oAyitettcl 0. yell&ncl � K ntxAfit.Al- 0 •� cd,Rs i- r.ctied', ,ro Eon se s'Foevvn w.t_'4-e �►` ;v■ &? lwn.4 So. Is 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • Data Point: y of 9 DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Stratum % Cover Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western 14 qc) City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 Sly 'it, County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes 0 No R No N State: Washington 4. VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1 . ) k0.lar :s a.rMni ■■• ce a 14 qc) PA ca.) 2. twba3 discolor Sly 'it, PAcu. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. 'SDiO 11 cJ \\ Cowardin Classification: 0 A — W!'E 0.tf Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other _ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: N d/l.< Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Wetland Hydrology Indicators likc(i { 1.04 e4 s *kt 1'd.lrl Inundated Seat es\ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits .( Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches _ Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: /Jai- cOets;dtK el clPld r!M1t4t cdnsttkci-e el :et ae tax0 IS 'tv $%'c al wot -&1 O{ OL covtvey 2- 99/DATA.FRM/IRH -trh AF.787.wpd • Data Point: Li of SOILS Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Confirm Mapped Type? Yes /4 No ❑ Project Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) (Munsell Moist) ( Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. D- ID 10`.(e. 3 10.; — — s; If l oa r t 0 -1$ to 412 `tJL 1•SY R 5 1P ovn cftt" �6 �vr.w..e � it S i d I' lo a r►1 Hydric Soil Indicators: WD/te love P Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors iftortie C below 20 ") DI At- Wiest s.: 1 Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer Organic Streaking Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No M Yes No Ni Yes ❑ No CA Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Ile Remarks: No'- a` wti-lknc nemtnani of a cj∎ k Consifaci upland co; 1 to Corte -1 S 1Fetrnwa'6t r-. 2- 99/DATA.FRM/rRH -trh AF.787.wpd Data Point: 5 of ct DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Stratum % Cover Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western hi LI0 City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 Sh 1,0 County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No No tCl State: Washington 4. VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. ?kalo.r;S arbLAA Lilac ea— hi LI0 PA}ck) 2. Ui.A-buLS at.Stelor Sh 1,0 PactA, 3. Remarks: Q∎ 4 Lk_ • O n 1%).4 2' d e e Q .1 n -t-k; S o. fte ck . 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. 070 Cowardin Classification: N O A `Well 0.11 el Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Tide Gage Wetland Hydrology Indicators A' k t 11 40 WO AL be 4 leoci • d ;A _ Inundated e s l,M •c loo .I _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches mr ra Ufa. 11 _ Water Marks even _ Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches _ Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stream, Lake, or X Aerial Photograph _ Other No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: OyAt— (in.) (in.) (in.) Remarks: Q∎ 4 Lk_ • O n 1%).4 2' d e e Q .1 n -t-k; S o. fte ck . 2- 99/DATA.FRWIRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • Data Point: S of SOILS Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes Lg No ❑ Project Description: Depth (inched Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors ( Munsell Moist) Mottle Texture, Concretions, Abundance /Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. ' 12 101 R 3/2 AV °Al___ N11 wy f0n -4- co. 4,1* l'1 - to 10410 3 /1 /PVC YfYst-11a SIli- loam 5;1 oaM Hydric Soil Indicators: x) d I'_ Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer Organic Streaking _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: a` n� m oil le m,Atn j- WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No IX Yes No Yes ❑ No CR Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRMJTRH -trh AF.787.wpd Data Point: L. of 1 DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Stratum % Cover Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western T 3o City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 S1, 30 County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No I No 111 State: Washington 4. VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1 . PotU. 1uS t1:C nct $fa T 3o Foe_ 2. Rwbus el∎scolor S1, 30 A—ActA. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. 0 4)0 Cowardin Classification: OA — t,,J e HA A! Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other _ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: W vrt.k Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: • Wetland Hydrology Indicators like 1 f /voJed .1n. Pp, Sracon Inundated _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches _ Water Marks Water Lines _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches _ Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data _ Other (Explain in Remarks) 'LMtMt,l' Remarks: Not considetcd toct -t nci 1%4. &V o'f d 1 c.L Co vi s t "t c- c : 61 ri c1 S o, I 1-o c o rt )t y S Ybrns 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • Data Point: 6 of 5 SOILS Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes I: No ❑ Project Description: Depth inches e»-tO Ib -/e Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) I0422f2 lo4R 3AQ Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) Nvx,L Mottle Abundance /Contrast rn�►n�t ia' t p A. tntnf Texture, Concretions, Rhizospheres, etc. 5i) i- Ioa.M 5;i t- loam Hydric Soil Indicators: No•tit, Iouveit Pray :tto 20± 36 of4e44 ber5 so;I , Histosol _ Histic Epipedon _ Sulfidic Odor _ Probable Aquic Moisture Regime _ Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer _ Organic Streaking _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No It Yes ❑ No l41 Yes 0 No tit Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No g Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRM'TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • Data Point: 7 of cl DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western % Cover Indicator Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western FRCK 2. Pot u�l& -S 4r:c.hoc. -►Pew T . City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 3. Rv. buts a∎Ceolar 5 1 40 County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No tS6 No 11 State: Washington VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. Acct- Ms. crorh1I,,vi T 6o FRCK 2. Pot u�l& -S 4r:c.hoc. -►Pew T . 2.0 F14C 3. Rv. buts a∎Ceolar 5 1 40 FOci.t. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. 3 3`)o Cowardin Classification: N DA — wt 4l n d Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: I (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: / (in.) Wetland Hydrology Indicators J _ Remarks: Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Water Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • SOILS • • Data Point: 7 of Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Drainage Class: Well drained Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No ❑ Project Description: Depth (inches) Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) o -ia 104R 3l1- ('l -� °o 10%-tit `i %3 Mottle Abundance /Contrast Texture, Concretions, Rhizospheres, etc. % I+ Ioa-.rrn SI loA-w1 Hydric Soil Indicators: to AA_ Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions _ Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors _ Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer _ Organic Streaking Listed on Local Hydric Soils List _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 Nor Yes 0 No Yes ❑ No 51 Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ Noj Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • • Data Point: 8 of ci DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western % Cover Indicator Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western ICRCk.) 2. R ,-bw s di trvlor Sit City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 3. Da Lt. c s..S C r-ot 0, H 3 D County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No lig No `[1J State: Washington VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. 4htta -t- S &timid;nacea._ 20 ICRCk.) 2. R ,-bw s di trvlor Sit L0 FtFcu... 3. Da Lt. c s..S C r-ot 0, H 3 D kP L. _. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. °%a Cowardin Classification: 0 et - vat- 4-1 a-rt 4 Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other _ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: /Jv> Depth of Surface Water: Depth to Free Water in Pit: Depth to Saturated Soil: i Wetland Hydrology Indicators Nd■Q Remarks: t Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Water Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) 2- 99/DATA.FRM/TRH -trh AF.787.wpd • SOILS • Data Point: 8 of Map Unit Name: Newberg silt loam Drainage Class: Well drained Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes l No ❑ Project Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle finches) ( Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Texture, Concretions, Rhizospheres, etc. o- 11 o Nvrt.t_ s; 1 - ! oarr) lb-l8 lo12. 3/2 Nvvt,l_ 4,t S ndAJ oa.rn Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low - Chroma Colors Remarks: Concretions High Organic Content in Surface Layer 1 Organic Streaking Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No Ii( Yes ❑ No I Yes ❑ No RI Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No XJ Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRM/IRH -trh AF.787.wpd • • • Data Point: 9 of 9 DATA FORM WETLAND DETERMINATION Project/Site: Puget Western Stratum % Cover Date: July 19, 2002 Applicant/Owner: Puget Western s ID City: Tukwila Investigator: TRH Job #: 10431 14. 2.0 County: King Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed: Is the area a potential Problem Area: (If needed, explain on reverse.) Yes • Yes • No IN1 No gl State: Washington 4. VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum % Cover Indicator 1. Rebus A;5' C010r s ID 119cA. 2. • 94.4icks Caro ia._ 14. 2.0 1.4.f7L 3. CiI" sikre% arJense 14 2.D FI4ctot_ 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (except FAC -). *- Dominant species. - CowardinClassification: /0Dr. — we.i-ld.nd Remarks: HYDROLOGY X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators fJ 0 it__ Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 Inches Water Marks Water Lines Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Water- Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage X Aerial Photograph Other _ No Recorded Data Available Field Observations: . r 10 1" Depth of Surface Water: (in.) Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRMJTRH -trh AF.787.wpd Data Point: 9 of 451 • SOILS Map Unit Taxonomy Name: Newberg silt loam Drainage Class: Well drained (Subgroup): Fluventic Haplorthods Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type? Yes • No S Project Description: Mottle Texture, Concretions, Abundance /Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors (inches) (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) O *-- ID 10 `l g Z/2. N t> 5ftt.Vell send 10 04.01 10- t8 toy t 3/& movie__ 1. -fill sI If lour, Hydric L _ _ _ — _ Soil Indicators: N eYu2_ Histosol Histic Epipedon Sulfidic Odor Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Reducing Conditions Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Concretions _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer Organic Streaking Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Listed on National Hydric Soils List Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soils Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Yes ❑ No tie Yes No 1;i, Is this Data Point Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Remarks: 2- 99/DATA.FRM/ TRH -trh AF.787.wpd (EXPIRES 10/10/01 1 LEVEL 1 OFF -SITE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS RECEIVED iJAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Eo3OO2. GHA V CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, KENT WA 98032 • (425) 251 -6222 • (425} 251 -8782 FAX %,... 2 www.barghausen.com ��?'G ENG%. Strander Car Center West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: Puget Western, Inc. 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, WA 98011 October 29, 2002 Our Job No. 10431 • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS EXHIBIT "A" Vicinity Map EXHIBIT "B" Downstream Drainage Map TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW EXHIBIT "C" FEMA Map EXHIBIT "D" Sensitive Area Folios EXHIBIT "E" SCS Soils Map EXHIBIT "F" Assessor's Map TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION EXHIBIT "G" Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS 10431.003.doc • TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS • TASK 1 STUDY AREA DEFINITION AND MAPS • • The proposed Strander Car Center project is approximately 2.89 acres in size located within a portion of the Northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington. More specifically, the site is located on the north side of Strander Boulevard between the Union Pacific Railroad and Taco Bell, Union 76 and Embassy Suite, all within the City of Tukwila. The enclosed Exhibit 'A' Vicinity Map depicts the approximate location of the proposed site. The existing topology of the site is fairly level in nature. Generally the site slopes in a northerly direction with an approximate grade of less than 1 percent. Currently the site is undeveloped, however it has been cleared of trees and consists of pasture -type land and brush over the majority of the site. There is an existing power easement with overhead transmission lines coursing through the center of the property in a north -south direction. There are several major utilities, including large diameter water lines, sewer lines, gas lines and oil pipeline, all coursing through the site in addition to underground power lines as well. The proposal for this development is to construct a parking lot with appropriate drive aisles, landscaping, stormwater collection and conveyance, water quality and detention facilities, all on a developed site in order to meet the City of Tukwila's current standard requirements, which are to design to the 1998 King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual requirements. There is an existing building at the far northernmost portion of the project site that will remain once construction is complete. There is an asphalt path located along the western portion of the project that is part of the King County trail system. There is also an existing ditch located east of the site between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and the project site which directs runoff from the upstream basin away from the project site and to the north. UPSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS Based on the USGS Quad Map and our site visit, it appears that there is very minimal to no upstream flow onto and through the site. As dictated by topography, there is an existing ditch located along the eastern side of the site that conveys runoff from the Union Pacific Railroad along the eastern portion of the project site in a northerly direction and away from the site. Development to the west of the site is all fully developed and those developments have their own water quality detention facilities discharging into the right -of -way of West Valley Highway. The site slopes in a northerly direction so that traffic to the north does not drain on the subject property, and there is a small area south of the site that tends to collect its flows either into an infiltration system within Strander Boulevard or into a ditch along the eastern portion of the project site and is conveyed in a northerly direction. For all intents and purposes, there is no upstream basin contributing runoff to the project site. 10431.003.doc • • EXHIBIT "A" Vicinity Map • • • 1 1— cc 0 z • .OURCE: THE THOMAS GUIDE (USED BY PERMISSION, EXHIBIT "B" • Downstream Drainage Map • • • TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW • TASK 2 RESOURCE REVIEW Adopted Basin Plan: The site is part of the Green River basin. Finalized Drainage Studies: This is not applicable. • • • Basin Reconnaissance Summary Report: Once again, the site is located in the Black River basin, which is part of the overall large drainage basin known as the Green River basin. • Critical Drainage Area Maps: Since the site is located in the City of Tukwila, the King County Critical Drainage Area Maps do not cover this area, however, this project is proposing Level 1 flood control and basic water quality as its means of disposing and treating stormwater runoff. • Floodplain and Floodway FEMA Maps: Please see the enclosed FEMA Map (Exhibit C) utilized for this analysis. Panel No. 978 of 1,725 Map No. 53033C0978 F revised May 16, 1995. As indicated by this FEMA floodway map, the site is adjacent to a small area that may have some flooding occurring during peak storm events. However, since the site is being raised 2 to 4 feet, this should not have an impact on the site at all. • Other Off -Site Analysis reports: The United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Service Map is also provided. The project site lies within the area classified as Newberg silt loam. • Sensitive Areas Folios: Based on a review of the King County Area Sensitive Areas Maps Folios, it was found that the subject site does not lie within any sensitive areas at all. • Road Drainage Problems: This is not applicable. • United States Department of Agriculture King County Soils Survey: Based on the soils map for this area, the entire site is located within Newberg silt loam type soils. • Wetland Inventory Maps: The site is not located within a wetlands as classified by the Wetland Inventory Maps. • Migrating River Studies: This is not applicable. 10431.003.doc • • 0 • EXHIBIT "C" FEMA Map STREET • :tQ FLOODING EFFECTS FROM SPRINGBROOK CREEK ZONE AE (EL 23) • 47026'15— 122 °13'07" To determine if flood insurance is available, contact an insurance agent or call the National Flood Insurance Program at 1800)638-6620. APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 500 0 500 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FINN FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 918 OF 1725 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) CONTAINS: COMMUNITY NUMBER PANEL SUFFIX KENT.CI1Y OF 530080 0978 F RENTON, CITY OF 530088 0978 F TUKWILA, CITY OF 530091 0978 F MAP NUMBER 53033C0918 F MAP REVISED: MAY 16,1995 Federal Emergency Management Agency • fir ZONE AH (EL 18) FEMA MAP NORTH • • EXHIBIT "D" Sensitive Area Folios • 1 1/2 0 MILE COAL MINE HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH • 1 1/2 0 MILE SEISMIC HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH • Oat *DNS/ %.3 tiiIRPV), A% 'N. ;T 1 1/2 0 MILE LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH 1 1/2 0 MILE EROSION HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH • 1 1/2 0 1 MILE STREAMS AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH �4 i ° a^ b`•' 4 a d� 11+617 7 7?`}� ,Y 4P `ti ‘ ilRlSll.7T J� i' ^ J.'SiY_571i" r TSSIT1 INEffien 4i Min SAYAUSr - trWrittatj. 441 1 1/2 0 MILE SOURCE: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO WETLANDS NORTH • • EXHIBIT "E" SCS Soils Map • • SOILS MAP NORTH GUIDE TO MAPPING UNITS For a full description of a mapping unit, read both the description of the mapping unit and that of the soil • series to which the mapping unit belongs. See table 6, page 70, for descriptions of woodland groups. Other information is given in tables as follows: • Acreage and extent, table 1, page 9. Town and country planning, table 4, page 57. Engineering uses of the soils, tables 2 and 3, Recreational uses, table 5, page 64. pages 36 through 55. Estimated yields, table 7, page 79. Woodland Described Capability unit group Map on symbol Mapping unit page Symbol Page Symbol AgB Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes 10 IVe -2 76 3d2 AgC Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 8 IVe -2 76 3d1 AgD Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. 10 VIe -2 78 3d1' AkF Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep 10 VIIe -1 78 2d1 AmB Arents, Alderwood material, 0 to 6 percent slopes 1/ 10 IVe -2 76 3d2 AmC Arents, Alderwood material, 6 to 15 percent slopes . l / 10 IVe -2 76 3d2 An Arents, Everett material 1/ 11 IVs -1 77 3f3 BeC Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 11 IVe -2 76 3d2 BeD Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 12 VIe -2 78 3d1 BeF Beausite gravelly sandy loam, 40 to 75 percent slopes 12 VIIe -1 78 3d1 Bh Bellingham silt loam 12 IIIw -2 76 3w2 Br Briscot silt loam 13 IIw -2 75 3w1 Bu Buckley silt loam 13 IIIw -2 76 4w1 Cb Coastal beaches 14 VIIIw -1 78 - -- Ea Earlmont •silt loam 14 IIw -2 75 3w2 Ed Edgewick fine sandy loam 15 IIIw -1 75 2o1 EvB Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes 15 IVs -1 77 3f3 EvC Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes 16 VIs -1 78 3f3 EvD Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 16 Vle -1 77 3f2 EwC "Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes 16 VIs -1 78 3f3 111/1 InA Indianola loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes 17 IVs -2 77 4s3 InC Indianola loamy fine sand, 4 to 15 percent slopes 16 IVs -2 77 4s3 InD Indianola loamy fine sand, 15 to 30 percent slopes 17 VIe -1 76 4s2 KpB Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 17 IIIe -1 75 2d2 KpC Kitsap silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 18 IVe -1 76 ;d2 KpD Kitsap silt loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 18 VIe -2 78 2d1 KsC Klaus gravelly loamy sand, 6 to 15 percent slopes 18 VIs -1 78 3f1 Ma Mixed alluvial land 18 VIw -2 78 2o1 NeC Neilton very gravelly loamy sand, 2 to 15 percent slopes 19 VIs -1 78 3f3 Ng Newberg silt loam 19 IIw -1 74 201 Nk Nooksack silt loam 20 IIw -1 74 201 No Norma sandy loam 20 IIIw -3 76 3w2 Or Orcas peat 21 VIIIw -1 78 - -- Os Oridia silt loam 21 IIw -2 75 3w1 OvC Ovall gravelly loam, 0 to'15 percent slopes 22 IVe -2 76 3d1 OvD Ovall gravelly loam,•15 to 25 percent slopes 23 VIe -2 78 3d1 OvF Ovall gravelly loam, 40 to 75 percent slopes 23 VIIe -1 78 3d1 Pc Pilchuck loamy fine sand 23 VIw -1 78 2s1 Pk Pilchuck fine sandy loam 23 IVw -1 76 2s1 Pu Puget silty clay loam 24 IIIw -2 76 •3w2 Py Puyallup fine sandy loam 24 IIw -1 74 2o1 RaC Ragnar fine sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 25 IVe -3 77 4s1 RaD Ragnar fine sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes 26 VIe -2 78 4s1 RdC Ragnar- Indianola association, sloping: 1/ 26 -- - -- Ragnar soil -- IVe -3 77 4s1 Indianola soil -- IVs -2 77 4s3 RdE Ragnar- Indianola association, moderately steep: 1/ 26 -- - -- Ragnar soil -- VIe -2 78 4s1 Indianola soil VIe -1 77 4s2 • U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE :1973 0 - 468 -266 GUIDE TO MAPPING UNITS -- Continued Woodland Described Capability unit group 111/0 M on page Symbol Page Symbol ap symbol Mapping unit - -- __- ___ -___ >_ 26 IIIw -1 75 3w1 Re Renton silt loam--------------------------------------------- 27 VIIIw -1 78 - -- Rh Riverwash------------------------------------------------------ 27 IN-1 74 2o1 Sa Salal silt loam ----- - - ------------------------------------- 27 IIw -2 75 3w1 Sh Sammamish silt loam--- - - ---- - -- _____ -__ 28 IN-3 75 - -- Sk Seattle muck--------------------------------------------- 29 IN-3 75 - -- Sm Shalcar muck------- ------ -- ------ -- - - - - -- 29 IIw -1 74 201 - - - - -- Sn Si silt loam--------- -- ---'-'"'"' " " - -- 30 IIw -2 75 3w2 So Snohomish silt loam----- ---- ---- ------- - - - - "- 31 IIw -2 75 3w2 Sr Snohomish silt. loam, thick surface variant - - - -- -- 31 IIw -1 74 3w2 ---------------- Su Sultan silt loam-------- ----- ----- - - - - -- 32 IIw -3 75 - -- ------------------- Tu Tukwila muck- - - - - -- ----------- -_____ 33 -- --- Ur Urban land---- - - - - -- _-- - - - - -- 33 IIw -2 75 3w2 Wo Woodinville silt loam 1/ —the controlledcwellsenoughoto interpretsfor theeexpect that of soilse others in the Area, but it has been • • EXHIBIT "F" Assessor's Map • O R 1 237-0 -------- 5 .rte' N r rb75-99 2 N O" ,tvaiAeo, E ZE55 VI% tsvor. %G2 tor/ 65 v C. A4). Ao • .�f mot /Ay? - 4 qvl .f (758 -G I -1* 4 c%jp. 3B r �Sl►W 3AO �az49 v =e) 5;Iln 181 09%02 �► � — „ ay? g° N y b ! 4t(4k 0 ti's �. -4 S • lZ3.5� rCivo 3Z3.0I v a J93C `�3�3 3�d �tw a TACOMA P S. E. FORMER SEATTLE /B9 got- 'z► -49W G43.G1 -24. -34W ws o.>■ W� •�O S9,- • •ip-oe•W 327.11 OIL- --•-•- 325.! Rr $72%(05 • 7 G83y 406.00 4LA 0 -130 - V 00 3 v e• v - 2- 46 -28E 2 L I 80 LA 0V b; YR, N p Ew 3. C.M.ST. R a P.p UNION PACIFIC �P�aEe "- A03-37-43 B [LA R• G837 /07.80 LLA lb N I Wr !92.23 RR. 67;u4/7- 956 O . c.-P o O C %Ie,,Az C. M. ST. P. & O& UNION PACIFIC RI C•1o,NT a) 0 • v eas ruKWILA CITY LIMITS oat,. TukWILA CITY LIMITS -$ E IZENTDN N 2- 07-28e /322.85 724ew /4.4 Wiry L,..)-/5 SEE /2E4/7 -A4I aeo. 4.° % —en* �.o nQO,� 0 CdPRR RAI) • • • TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION • EXHIBIT "G" • Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table • • Basin: Green River • OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: Black river Subbasin Number: • .!.,.--..cY51„'k ,...,,.;... ■I'',''' -2.k.1,.,..r7.,:71.715.741n6,n.7.14%& "Type"Niine;fali'd.Size., ' '-',:... :: dgot;E'-i..1iz4..t.;..*r.-g,--:.i;r:',-- . 7,4 i., '.."- Description 4-- -. ' . .< ■-....''' - 4:2... 4".".9.1 -.• .'.S•'.' l o—*p". e%.: j'. . .,.,_„...,::.::...:,..._ .r..,,:.':,..... :.., .. :. - ' .. - ' Distance'' - —.'7 ...f ..;...: ;::- ; - from r Site .. . Dischafge' ..., E,..:,k, :iti n.• g ....,•"'."z".. :' Problems .:'......: ., ,,-,,,'...,,::%-.. , - P,C.ot e,: i4. tit a - l .i.:', ',',,' .- .- .,•:;.:.-P(91?!erlIts. t''::- :,:...c:,,,, ,,: , ,- . 9;.1.:...; s. 6, i y sZa:r tio-;:ns;o f f' i`.'e:`.. ld..,'-'i2::::%;■-')::k‘,. . . ..t...' .:..-3:',.,i''' .-. `, ;- 4,. ,. . :,,•:n:specto,r.r.,,,,,.); .....,:,...,.. ''. :',geSOUrce ReY1PY1Pr, or Resident See Map Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume % Ft Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion Tnbutary area, likelihood of probletn, overflow pathways, potential impacts 1. 24-Inch CPEP Flows northeasterly from a CB at the NEC of the site. 1 0-20 None Noted None Noted 2. Earth-lined ditch with vegetated side slopes Flows north along railroad right-of-way, 8-foot bottom, 3:lside slopes, 5-foot deep. 2 20-80 None Noted None Noted 3. 24-Inch CPEP Flows north along railroad right- of-way 2 80-280 None Noted None Noted 4. Vegetated ditch 3-foot bottom width, 2:1 side slopes, flows north. 2 280-320 None Noted None Noted 5. 24-Inch CMP with trash rack Flows to manhole. --- 320-328 None Noted None Noted 6. 24-Inch CMP Flows to box culvert in Longacres Way. --- 328-335 None Noted None Noted 7. 1.85-foot by 4.70-foot RCB culvert Flows east. 0.04 335-755 None Noted None Noted 8. Outfalls to earth-lined ditch Flows north, 12-to 15-foot wide bottom, 1:1 side slopes, 4 feet deep. 1 755-1855 None Noted None Noted 10431.004.wpd • • TASK 3 FIELD INSPECTION There were no problems reported or observed during the resource review, other than the site being adjacent to an area that floods occasionally, but that is being taken care of by the site being developed 2 to 4 feet higher in elevation than the surrounding ground. 3.1 Conveyance System Nuisance Problems (Type 1) Conveyance system nuisance problems, in general, are defined as any existing or predicted flooding or erosion that does not constitute a severe flooding or erosion problem. Conveyance system nuisance problems are defined as flooding or erosion that results in the overflow of the constructed conveyance system for runoff events less than or equal to a 10 -year event. Examples include inundation of a shoulder or lane of a roadway, overflows collecting in the yards or pastures, shallow flows across driveways, minor flooding in crawl spaces or unheated garages /outbuildings, and minor erosion. Based on the site visit conducted for this project and conversations with City officials, including John Howat and Ryan Larson, there is no on -site conveyance system nuisance problem and even though the downstream drainage course passes nearby to some areas that flood, there is no conveyance system nuisance problems occurring anywhere on the downstream drainage course. 3.2 Severe Erosion Problems (Type 2) Severe erosion problems are defined as downstream channels, ravines, or slopes with evidence of or potential for erosion/incision, sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems or propose a landslide hazard by undercutting adjacent slopes. Severe erosion problems do not include roadway or minor ditch erosion. Based on our site visit there is no evidence of a potential for erosion/incision sufficient to pose a sedimentation hazard to downstream conveyance systems anywhere along the downstream drainage course. 3.3 Severe Flooding Problems (Type 3) Severe flooding problems can be caused by conveyance system overflows or the elevated water surfaces of ponds, lakes, wetlands, or closed depressions. Severe flooding problems are defined as follows: • Flooding of the finished floor of a habitable building for runoff events less than or equal to the 100 -year event. Examples include flooding of finished floors of homes and commercial or industrial buildings, flooding of electrical/heating systems and components in the crawl space of a garage of a home. Such problems are referred to as "severe building flooding problems." • Flooding over all lanes of a roadway or severely impacting a sole access driveway for runoff events less than or equal to the 100 -year event. Such problems are referred to as "severe roadway flooding problems." As mentioned previously, there is no evidence of the downstream course this project drains to experiencing flooding as mentioned by the City of Tukwila personnel. There is an adjacent drainage course at Longacres Way .underneath the Union Pacific Railroad that apparently will 10431.003.doc • • • pond in the roadway 3 feet deep, our drainage course bypasses that area and does not contribute to that flooding at all. 10431.003.doc • TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND • PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS • • • • TASK 4 DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTIONS Runoff leaves the site via an existing 24 -inch storm drain that is actually corrugated polyethylene pipe which flows in a northerly direction on the east side of the existing barn located in the northern portion of the project site. Runoff exits the site after coursing through the catch basin, flowing northeasterly into an existing ditch where it is conveyed for approximately 60 feet in an earth -lined ditch with vegetated side slopes. This ditch has an 8 -foot bottom and 3:1 side slopes and is approximately 5 feet deep. Runoff then enters a 24 -inch corrugated polyethylene pipe which flows north for approximately 200 feet along the railroad right -of -way where it discharges to a vegetated ditch with a 3 foot bottom and 2:1 slopes which courses for approximately 40 feet in a northerly direction into a 24 -inch corrugated metal pipe with a trash rack and conveys flow to a manhole which directly discharges it to a box culvert on the south side of Longacres Way, which courses underneath the Union Pacific Railroad in an easterly direction along the south side of Longacres Way, ultimately discharging on the north side of Longacres Way into an earth - lined ditch with a 15- foot -wide bottom, 1:1 side slopes and 4 feet deep. Runoff then courses in a northerly direction for approximately one - quarter of a mile and this is as far as the downstream course was walked. 10431.003.doc • • • TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS • • • TASK 5 MITIGATION OF EXISTING AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS The area downstream of the proposed project known as Strander Car Center does not exhibit any potential problems, nor is there evidence of any existing problems in this downstream drainage course. The large - width channel at the downstream end of the downstream drainage course has recently been maintained, within the last two months, and appears to make a smooth flow path for runoff coursing through the reinforced box culvert, which discharges to that earth -lined channel. This channel appears to act as a large detention pond as it is discharged underneath the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad tracks through a 24 -inch diameter concrete culvert at its terminus near I-405. Runoff then enters Spring Brook Creek after coursing through the City of Renton drainage system for a period. This project will neither aggravate nor create a problem as specified in the problem specific mitigation requirements set forth in Section 1.2.2.1 of the 1998 King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual as delineated in Task 4 of this report. A Level 2 or Level 3 off -site analysis should not be required for this project site as there is no evidence of existing or potential problems identified that would require a further analysis. In addition, this project site does not constitute more than 15 percent of the total peak flow drainage downstream from the site. 10431.003.doc Sen;. by: Earth Consultants 425 746 0860; 02 /25 /03 '0:37AM;JetFax #636;Page 2/5 l gill c:;c�r1 u1t��nts, Inc. rIG�• �< (iul (1U),:11I'.IU;IIN/YI CO* NiSihW 1.1 I•II.N1111(1)1r1I: k1111..I; �k,17•(11U1�y (% inStr■ h ,ItY I• I(Nill}�$ µj!!), WWI ) U1:1xx H*ul N(71'Ul:; February 25, 2003 Puget Western, Inc, 19515 Northwest Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, Washington 98011 Attention: Subject: Dear Mr. Erickson: Mr. Gust Erickson R. CEWED MAR-2:8 2000 COliiMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Visual Site Reconnaissance and FiII Placement Recommendations PSE South Site West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard Tukwila, Washington t:s ult)listied 197 E -10505 As requested, Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) is pleased to present this letter summarizing our visual site reconnaissance for the subject site. In preparing this letter, we visited the subject site to observe the general site conditions, reviewed the proposed development plan and reviewed information in our library and files regarding subsurface information in the site vicinity. This letter presents a summary of our observations and our recommendations for placing the planned fill at the site. Project Description We understand it is planned to fill the subject site up to the. level of West Valley Highway, which borders the west side of the ;site. :, The fill material would consist of general fill material imported from a nearby site. Eventually the site will be developed: with a commercial or office development, however the scope of this study is limited to providing recommendations for placing fill at the site. 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 201, Bellevue, WA 96005 Bellevue (425) 643 -3780 FAX (425) 746 -0860 Toll Free (888) 739 -6670 Sent by: Earth Consultants Puget Western, Inc. February 25, 2003 425 746 0860; 02: /25!031:38AM;JetFax #636;Page 3/5 E -10505 Page 2 Site Reconnaissance On February 10, 2003 a representative from our firm visited the subject site to observe the existing site conditions. The subject site is located east of West Valley Highway, about three hundred (300) feet south of the intersection of West Valley;.Highway and Strander Boulevard. The rectangular- shaped property extends about two hundred eighty (280) feet in the north - south direction and seventy -five (75) to one hundred forty' (140) feet in the east -west direction. The site is bordered to the north by a Puget Sound Energy the east by the Tukwila Interurban Trail and undeveloped land, to the west by West substation, Valley Highway, and to the south by a single -story retail development. The site is located about five feet below the elevation of West Valley Highway and is relatively flat, with Tess than about three feet of elevation change across the length of the site. The site is currently vegetated with tall grass, blackberry brambles, cottonwood trees, and brush. Subsurface Conditions No subsurface exploration was conducted as part of this reconnaissance. The study area is located within the Green River Valley. Based on our experience, in this area, we anticipate the site is underlain by moderately compressible loose silt and poorly graded sand. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the results of our reconnaissance, in our opinion, the site can be filled generally as planned. The area to receive structural fill should be stripped and cleared of surface vegetation, organic matter, and other deleterious material. Based on our experience in this area, we anticipate a stripping depth of six (6) to twelve (12) inches should be adequate. However, in some localized areas the stripping depth may need to be increased to twelve (12) to eighteen (18) inches. Stripped materials should not be mixed with materials to be used as structural fill. Earth Consultants, Inc. Sent by: Earth Consultants 425 746 0860; • Puget Western, Inc. February 25, 2003 02 /25 /01:38AM;JeLFax #636;Page 4/5 E -10505 Page 3 Following the stripping operation, the ground surface where structural fill is to be placed should be observed by a representative of ECI. Proofrolling may be necessary in order to identify soft or unstable areas. Proofrolling should be performed under the observation of a representative of ECI. Soil in loose or soft areas, if recompacted and still yielding, should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill to a depth that will provide a stable base beneath the general structural fill. The optional use of a geotextile fabric placed directly on the overexcavated surface may help to bridge unstable areas. Structural fill is defined as compacted fill placed under buildings, roadways, slabs, pavements, or other Toad- bearing areas. During dry weather, a granular compactible soil with a maximum grain size of six inches can be used as structural fill. The structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding twelve (12) inches in loose thickness and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its laboratory maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D -1557 (Modified Proctor). The fill materials should be placed at or near their optimum moisture content. The site should be graded such that surface water is directed off the site. Loose surfaces should be sealed at night by compacting the surface to reduce the potential for moisture infiltration into the soils. Permanent fill slopes should be. ;,inclined no steeper than 2H:1V (Horizontal:Vertical). Permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve stability,of;.-the surficial layer of_ sail± The weight of the fill that will be placed to raise site grades cwill induce settlement in the underlying compressible soils. In order to monitor the rate and amount of settlement, settlement monitors should be placed on the existing site subgrade before placement of the fill. ECI can provide and install the settlement monitors and obtain periodic settlement measurements. Earth Coneultanzs, 1nC. Sent by: Earth Consultants Puget Western, Inc. February 25, 2003 Limitations lio425 746 0860; 02 /25 /031:38AM;JetFax #636;Page 5/5 E -10505 Page 4 Our recommendations and conclusions are based on visual observations of the existing site conditions, information provided us and our experience and engineering 9� g judgment. The conclusions presented are professional opinions derived in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. No warranty is expressed or implied. We trust this information meets your current needs. If you have any questions, please call. Respectfully submitted, EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. Scott D. Dinkelman, CEG Associated Engineering Geologist SDDfcsm Scott Dinkelmanl cc: Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attention: Mr. Jason Hubbell Earth Consultants. Inc. 4.4; Sl9 F gG•, fj7l. bZ .1/77-1-111.6 • W 0 1 2 I00 .9 3-0 ,p= 5729.105 oS? O< y o c. (f,E,e C. M. ST. A. 4837 406.06 4 L --150— to 0 z •o 0 Q .y 2-07 -28E /3e2•85 7-z-,,eue /44 eery Ge,,,,/ 5 SBE /2 /TLicr oeo. 4-° is -ru►cv 4711/4 N E RR_ 7/A CW/LA C/ry it/r7/7-5 55z • i,✓ 020. 4040 / r/ :; ,,. 7 G. . /7O 269. le ACV. aG-AP +��t/2-G►v-4BE U► /29.69 .1/ 2 -a 7= 413 4 25/.58 rr5 - •r-e iV 2,07-43 E /7U9. zLr TtIK1U1LAZITY KENTON CITY /WRY- AOJ• REI tv? cS1 \ rcNa3Z3.d1 I4&3•' c,%Ir44/ ,. �`c TACOMA P. S. E. �o l � ��RM�R� O /�a3 N "6-4-m NYI SITE .6 643.61 1J/- 24- -34W 325.1 ws c �8 c s S9; 40•04W 327.11 to N z G) ft W •0 0 d` m Lts 132 N ; ;4 r 21151 to N d %� /00 .16 /9 dt .69 v•\ 1i1r-2G --94rY S 9-41 --3o " FOR RF! -lNQ• OY sr - -■••■/ O , M.o c C's • o I 113.!8 $•C 59603$ 293.7. r p05280G'42 E TO CITY OF rNKri/1LA A• F 8 230.54 � »y A//-2 17 % i . - TU. SP % 91-10 - 4Y� 1 s i..� 8O lk a itiPq 1it v 0). 12 + 411 ..L • �� Ili .9 • d V` l N ®i: o • N N3- i m 27 85 (5P) S 9Z/1101678 � 92 / � 678 ...y? tir 4 34 I O �o � c-• c:. 96.15 99.98 j-- -r- -46E .59 (5P) -s 2 61' Z� 1 0 cyjil (b 4 O15 4 t9P4'.04.. 11.9-,32 -53e 364.42 11 1-. ,A.41% 14 41 4 18,4Y4 40° 0 .--1 c-. w o 0 A )11-44111. ‘vi, o % 7t• t • QWt4$y VA! PtAttlA6 -„ coNRSE ic-N MAP , • z ,,, C. M. ST. P. 81 P.)81 UNION PACIFIC RR. (Jo,NT 11s&) TU1(WlLR CITY Li/set/TS 01Z0 4040 -rvt LA CITY LIMITS -5EG 2E'NTaN C,JPIZR Ir /w) TI.TKWILA•Z1TV LIMITS 55E R01JT01J ORD. 4040 Z - 07 - 43 /068 .13 (Sr1K EENTOn1 CITY LIMITS OEY. APi. REN• 01212. 4040 tf� 8. N. 1. "1.....111111 M . z ' 372. 76 88.78 m rn I!3 v (PtiGET SOUNP 51-1ORE X.R. C0• SEA-1-N.) (1058 J /709.63 ti z EN 0 01 0 f ° o qc /CFaM. S�TzR & t j81 UNION PACIFIC RR. o c. 0 w w co TUSP L98 -0007 0 /'4.94 R. 3773•¢9 /80.19 9803129013 N fig; 'tISK�IL fir IHf:Is _•rr CIiY I' SUKMILA apa0 SEE RENiOrf ORD • oV ITS Mr- e{ N 2 - . 7- 4-3E IOW .1ACKSON AVE sw Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION January 24, 2003 Jason Hubbell Barghausen Engineers 18215 72nd Av S. Kent, WA 98032 RE: Puget Western Properties E03 -002 PW03 -002 Dear Mr. Hubbell: Your application for rough grading of two sites located east of West Valley Highway, north and south of Strander Boulevard has been found to be incomplete. In order to be a complete application, the following must be submitted to the permit center: a. Complete the Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist (see Attached). b. Submit the Appendix and Figures referenced in the SEPA Checklist. c. Submit a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the south lot (see Attached). d. The parcel B shown for the north site on sheet T1 does not match the configuration on the Assessor's Map, please correct. e. You have only submitted the notice radius map for the north lot. Does this mean that you have not generated mailing labels for the south lot? Please clarify and submit the southern labels and/or the 500' radius map. f. Neither the Traffic Impact Study nor the Geotechnical Engineering Study includes analysis of the south lot. If you wish to pursue development on that lot the studies will need to be expanded. From aerial photos it appears that the vacant portion of the south lot was cleared of trees between mid -2000 and the present without a permit. Your proposal is to remove the remaining vegetation with no plan for mitigation or restoration. This is unlikely to meet the shoreline permit approval criteria so you may wish to delay grading on that site until a project has been developed for the lot. Q: \LETTERS\Pug West_INCOMP.DOC 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Upon receipt of these items, the City will re- review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. These applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). If you have any questions with this matter you may call me at (206) 433 -7141. Sincerel Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor Enclosures Q: LETTERS\PugWest_INCOMP.DOC City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES January 10, 2003 RECEIVED JAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RE: Submittal of SEPA Environmental Review and Grade and Fill Permit Application for Strand& Car Center/PSE South Site BCE Job No. 10705 On behalf Puget Western, we are submitting the following plans and documentation to initiate the SEPA and Grade and Fill Permit process for the Strander Car Center site located on the east side of West Valley Highway near Strander Boulevard. The following plans and documentation are being submitted for your review and processing of the SEPA application and Grade and Fill Permit: 1. One copy of the SEPA Application Checklist 2. Six copies of the SEPA Environmental Review Application 3. Six copies of the SEPA Environmental Checklist 4. One each Affidavit of Ownership and Hold Harmless Permission to Enter Property 5. One copy of the Vicinity Map 6. One Copy of the King County Assessors Map and Mail Labels (2 sets) for 500 -foot Radius 7. One copy of the Surrounding Land Use Map 8. One copy of the Title Report 9. Four copies of the Traffic Impact Study 10. Four copies of the Geotechnical Engineering Study 11. Four copies of the Level 1 Off -site Drainage Analysis 12. Four copies of the Wetland Determination Report 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251 -6222 (425) 251 -8782 FAX www.barghausen.com City of Tukwila Planning Department -2- January 10, 2003 13. One Check for SEPA fee in the amount of $325 14. One copy of the Miscellaneous Permit Application for Land Altering/Grading 15. Ten se s of the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans 16. Four copies each of the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Calculations 17. One copy each of all plan sheets reduced to 8 -1/2 x 11 Please review the enclosed plans and documents at your earliest convenience and please feel free to contact me with any questions or if you need any additional information at this time. Thank you. Sincerely, J Hubbell, P.E. Project Engineer BSD/bd 10705c.001 enc: As Noted cc: Gust Erikson, Puget Western (w /enc) Hal Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukDlan @ci,tukwila.wa,us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY rRECE VE 1JAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly swom and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 000580 -0012 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 on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at ELL (city), IVA (state) on 06:7704 4 7 , 1- o Y PUGET WESTERN!, INC. (Print Name) 19515 N. Creek Parkway, #300 Address) Bothell, WA 98011 (425) 487 -6567 (Phone Nuny r) / Q (Signature) /� On this day personally appeared before me R. a• (304.1J to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same'6s his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS _7__. DAY OF D 7-0/P 4. ( , 2,0 2- ��,1111IIilJJ/// ``��rA ;; Fm ;r / I NOTARYPUBLI iin and for the S��t,,,tateccc f Washington `��� 'p�l�sxp /��T. •„ I� residing at Cam.- r� ` 1, 4,7 CO : ik ` Rv : �Oa% ■ --//-G ••• � `Ivty Commission expires on 1 oz -hJJI „ItOs- STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: I . I am the currant owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, employees agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 000580 -0008 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any Toss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. The City shall, at its discretion , cancel the application without refund of fees, if the applicant does not respond to specific requests for items on the "Complete Application Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 7. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at 8 S Gc.E VC/k (city), VY2 - (state), on OC7o /3'E2 % , ZO P PVCr._.i 0•4626 -y� /WIC (Print Name) / (Address) (Phone N (sign,. ) . s . McAloty On this day personally appeared before me Z . J' . 4(C ryd1.7 v to me known to be the individual who 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 therein. ````0%111c1 ll/�/// El SUBSCRIBED AND swl w 'KtflgF(3RE /f/V1ils 7 74 ►1� • 0d70.Be2 , 2/40 2— • __ . : N O TA R pit ]PUBLIC in and for the State of Washi n 1� residlr pA10.J! WAS zN24': PUBLIC •2� 9 M expires on 9' is.- 0" �'�F 15,' • 0 '''4/11114 11\�, �``� A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project: 2. Name of Applicant: Puget Western, Inc. 3. Mailing address, telephone number of applicant and contact person: • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST • eve t Strander Car Center/PSE South Site Applicant Contact: Puget Western, Inc. Attn.: Gust Erickson 19515 North Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Bothell, WA 98011 Telephone: (425) 487 -6567 Architect: Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Attn.: Jason Hubbell 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Telephone: (425) 251 -6222 4. Date checklist prepared: Prepared. January 2003 5. Agency requesting checklist: The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development is the lead agency for SEPA compliance, as well as the agency with land use permit authority. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Upon approval of the necessary plans, the applicant wishes to commence rough grading of the site during the Spring/Summer of 2003 on both sites. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or in connection with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, future development of the Strander Car Center site into a car sales facility may be proposed and would include using the existing building as a sales office and the addition of a parking lot. This development would be processed under a separate SEPA application. There are no future plans for the PSE South site at this time. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following information is incorporated intc'this environmental review by reference: Wetland Determination Report Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Geotechnical Evaluation Earth Consultants, Inc. Traffic Impact Study Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC Level 1 Off -Site Drainage Analysis Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 1 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. I0705.002.doc 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. SEPA Threshold Determination City of Tukwila Land Altering/Grading/Preloads Permit Approvals City of Tukwila SMA Permit for the PSE South Site City of Tukwila Additional permits may be identified through the permitting process. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information or project description.) The proposed project is the rough grading of the site on what is now vacant land. A 3,660- square -foot building is located on the very northerly portion of the Strander Car Center site and would remain intact for this proposed development. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range of boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Strander Car Center site is located in Tukwila, Washington, near the northwest corner of the intersection of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard. The site is within a Puget Sound Energy easement tract and adjacent to a Union Pacific Railroad tract. The applicant, Puget Western, Inc., is an affiliate of Puget Sound Energy, therefore the proposed use of the easement area for the parking lot does not violate any rights associated with the easement. The Strander Car Center site is located within the northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 23, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. The PSE South Site is located along West Valley, south of Strander Boulevard and the existing PSE substation site. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 2 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Both sites topography is generally flat, with a very slight slope to the northeast. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is approximately 25 percent and is located along the eastern boundary line between the subject property and the Union Pacific Railroad property on the Strander Car Center site. The steepest slope is approximately 50 percent and is located along West Valley Highway on the PSE South site. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of the King County Area, Washington (1973) was reviewed to determine the general nature of soils on the subject sites. The sites are mapped as containing Newberg silt loam. The following soils information was taken from the Soil Conservation Service 1973 publication. The Newberg series is a well- drained soil formed in alluvium. Typically, the surface soil is very dark grayish brown, gravelly silt loam and very fine sandy loam to a depth of 20 inches. The subsoil to a depth of 60 inches contains stratified layers of dark grayish -brown and yellowish -brown very fine sandy loam, loamy sand, and silt loam. Faint mottles are present at a depth of approximately 3 to 4 feet. The mottles become more prominent with depth. The mottles coincide with the seasonal water table. This soil unit may contain small areas of Briscot, Oridia, and Woodinville soils. Newberg soils are not listed by the Washington State or King County Soil Conservation Service as hydric (wetland) soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Based on the existing soil types, there does not appear to be any indication of unstable soils. See attached geotechnical evaluation for further information on soils. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 5,000 cubic yards of fill will be imported for the sub -grade construction. Approximately 2,000 cubic yards of on site material will be excavated and used as fill within the Strander Car Center project site. The source of fill is not yet known but will be from an approved source. Approximately 3,500 cubic yards of fill will be imported for the PSE South Site. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. During construction, erosion could occur as a result of clearing and grading activities. Clearing and grading would be limited to the removal of grass and other vegetation and within the areas where the STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 3 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • parking lot would be located. In order to reduce potential erosion problems, all grading activities would be in accordance with an approval grading and erosion plan. Erosion would not occur as a result of the use of the finished site. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? None. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. Grading activities would be in accordance with an approved grading and erosion control plan. A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) plan has been developed for this proposal. See attached Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan. The TESC plan was designed in accordance with the latest edition of the City of Tukwila Engineering Standards. The plan includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) that, when used in combination, prevent or reduce pollution of water caused by construction activities. The TESC plan indicates the minimum necessary , measures that the contractor shall implement during the construction process. BMPs are defined as physical, structural, and/or managerial practices that, when used in combination, prevent or reduce pollution of water caused by construction activities. The TESC plan for the proposal has been designed to protect off -site properties, as well as minimize the quantity of sediment -laden water from entering the public storm system. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Short-term emissions to air from construction could occur. Suspended particles would be generated by dust missions from construction activities and vehicle emissions from automobiles and construction equipment. Dust could occur during grading/construction operations. These impacts should be minimal. Long -term emissions to air would be typical of current conditions and are not anticipated to have an impact to the area. b. Are there any off —site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Current air emissions are predominantly from vehicular traffic in the area and would not adversely affect the proposal. No other off -site emissions would affect the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. The Washington Clean Air Act requires the use of all known, available, and reasonable means of controlling air pollution, including dust. Construction impacts would not be significant and could be controlled by measures such as washing truck wheels before existing the site and maintaining gravel construction entrances. In addition, dirt- driving surfaces would be watered during extended dry periods to control dust. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 4 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • 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 into which it flows. There are no surface water bodies on either of the subject properties. Both sites are east of the Green River. Grade changes and public roads separate the river from the subject properties. 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 for this work. This Strander Car Center project site will not require any work over, in, or within 200 feet of the Green River. The PSE South site will require work within 200 feet of the Green River. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material and/or disposal site. No filling or dredging activities are necessary for the development of the proposed project. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This project does not require surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panel, the sites are outside of the 100 -year floodplain area. 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. This proposal will not involve any discharges of waste materials into adjacent surface waters. 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. This project will not require groundwater withdrawal or discharge. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 5 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • 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, 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. The site will be served with public sanitary sewer facilities, therefore discharge of domestic sewage will not occur. Additionally, the finished project will not store or use industrial or toxic chemicals and will not discharge waste materials into the ground. 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. Runoff would consist of stormwater from the graded site area for both sites. The existing Strander Car Center site contains catch basins along the eastern property line and near the terminus of Strander Boulevard. The existing PSE South site has an existing drainage ditch along the western property line. Stormwater runoff generated by the proposed sites would flow into the new interceptor ditches and then to a temporary stormwater facility for water quality settlement before being discharged into the natural downstream drainage course. See attached Storm Drainage Report. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials would not enter ground or surface waters as a result of this proposal. The storm drainage system would provide adequate downstream protection from any potential waste materials. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Both' sites will be developed with a temporary erosion/sedimentation control system to reduce surface water impacts. Installation of interceptor ditches, along with a temporary erosion/sedimentation control facility, will treat stormwater before discharging it into the natural downstream drainage course in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The discharge rates will model the pre - developed rates in accordance with the regulations. See attached Storm Drainage Report and Grading and Storm Drainage Plan. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other: black cottonwood evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs: blackberry thickets X grass pasture crop, or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other: STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 6 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation: The above is valid for both sites. See attached Wetland Determination Report for a complete description of the vegetation found on the Strander Car Center site. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The existing vegetation within the development areas would be removed for construction of the parking lot. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known threatened or endangered species existing on the site or in the vicinity. See attached Wetland Determination Report. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None at this time for the Strander Car Center site. A landscape plan has been prepared for the PSE South site. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or that are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other The above is valid for both sites. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known for the Strander Car Center site. Chinook Salmon, Coho Salmon and Cutthroat Salmon for the PSE South site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The entire Puget Sound area is part of the Pacific Flyway. The Green River Corridor serves as a more localize pathway for many birds and animals. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None at this time. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 7 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • 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. None at this time. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The proposed project would not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. There are no buildings or structures associated with the proposed project that would affect the use of solar energy by, adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The finished project will require minimal amounts of electrical energy, therefore measures to reduce or control energy impacts are not proposed. 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. This proposal will not involve use or storage of toxic chemicals or hazardous waste, nor will the finished project use or store explosives or involve uses requiring open flame, therefore there are no anticipated environmental health hazards associated with this proposal. During construction vehicle fuel will be on site and contained within construction vehicles. The appropriate spill prevention and response policies will be in place. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. No special emergency services would be anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. The proposal would not generate any health hazards. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, aircraft, other)? Traffic noise on existing roads near the site would be audible, but would have very minimal effects of the finished project. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 8 Environmental; Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • 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 the hours that noise would be generated by the site. During the construction phase, short-term noise would be created by workers and machinery associated with construction activities. The hours of construction would comply with applicable City of Tukwila regulations. At 200 feet from the area of construction, the equivalent sound level (leq) would be approximately the following: Activity Leq (in decibels) Clearing 71 to 72 Excavation 59 to 77 Short-term impacts would include construction activity occurring from approximately 7 a.m. until 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; and occasional weekend activities from approximately 7 a.m. until 4 p.m. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise, if any: Construction noise would be of short duration and would be limited to the provisions of the City of Tukwila's requirements for hours of operation. Once completed, the finished project would not create an increase in existing noise levels. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently undeveloped, with the exception of a vacant structure. To the immediate north is a fast food restaurant, a railroad line to the south, and various commercial areas within the general vicinity of the site. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: To our knowledge, the site has not been used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site: The site contains a 3,660- square -foot building, located near the northernmost point of the property. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None. The existing building would remain on site and could eventually be used as an office space for an auto sales lot under a separate application. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification for both sites is TUC - Tukwila Urban Center. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 9 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current Comprehensive Plan designation for both sites is TUC - Tukwila Urban Center If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable for the Strander Car Center site. The PSE South site is in a Shoreline. The Classification is "Urban" h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify: To our knowledge, this site does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None at this time. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project will not cause displacement. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None are proposed. 1. Proposed'' measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposal is consistent with the TUC zoning, and the comprehensive plan designation. The surrounding land uses are commercial and the general area is urban in nature, therefore the proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses and the general area. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether it would be high, middle, or low- income housing. The proposed project would not provide any housing units. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None. The site does not contain any residential structures or uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. g. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 10 Environmental. Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas or chimneys? What is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The proposed project does not include construction of any buildings or antennae. The proposed graded area would be at- grade, and would consist of soil materials. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The graded area would be at -grade and would not block any views. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None at this time. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None at this time. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views or affect wildlife? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light and glare are generally from surrounding commercial land uses and would not affect this proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None at this time. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The site is within a 1/4 -mile of Bicentennial Park. Christensen Greenbelt Park is approximately a 1/2 -mile south of the site. Fort Dent Park is located about a mile away. Family Fun Center is also located nearby. The interurban Trail system is adjacent to both site and will not be disturbed or impacted during construction. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed project would not displace any existing recreational uses. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 11 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • 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 or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers on or next to the site? If so, generally describe: None are known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There are no known historical landmarks on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. If evidence of a historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural significance is found, construction would be stopped immediately and the State Historical Preservation office would be notified. 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. Primary access into and out of the site is proposed at the eastern terminus of Strander Boulevard, just east of West Valley Highway. A secondary access would be provided via an access easement on the hotel site to the north. See attached Site Plan. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest transit stop is located approximately 200 feet north of the West Valley Highway /Strander Boulevard intersection. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None at this time. 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). The proposed project would not require any new roads or streets. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 12 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water or air transportation? If so, generally' describe. No. The project would not use or occur in the vicinity of water or air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None at this time. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The intersection of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard would maintain the same Level of Service (Level E) with the addition of traffic generated by the proposal during the p.m. peak hour. Therefore; mitigation measures are not proposed for this project. 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: The proposed project would not create a need for additional public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impact on public services, if any: None. 16. UTILITIES a. Identify existing utilities by name including: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity Puget Sound Energy Water City of Tukwila Telephone QWest Sewer City of Tukwila CATV AT & T Broadband Refuse SeaTac Disposal 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: None at this time. STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 13 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc • • 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. Applicant/Representative Signature: Alf/ Jason Hubbell, B ghau en Consulting Engineers, Inc. Date submitted: 6/3/03 STRANDER CAR CENTER/PSE SOUTH SITE Page 14 Environmental Checklist BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 10705.002.doc CITY OF TUKWILA RECEIVED 1 JAN 10 2003 SEPA COMMUNlr�,�. Department of Community DevelopmentD�ELOPi1flElJNVIRON IENTAL REVIEW 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplanaci.tukwila.wa.us APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Strander Car Center 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. Near the northwest corner of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard Tax Parcel Nos. 000580-0008 and 000580 -0012 Quarter: NW Section: 25 Township: 23 Range: 4E (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: Jason Hubbell, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Address: 18215 -72nd Avenue South, KentL WA 98032 Phone: (425) 251 -6222 FAX ::_(425J 251 -8782 Signature: - -- C: \homepage \tukwila \dcd \apps \SEPAAPP.DOC, 08/31/00 Date: /k2_ FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P -SEPA Planner: File Number: e 0 3 - 00 2 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: OK oa — 0 ■ S Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Strander Car Center 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. Near the northwest corner of West Valley Highway and Strander Boulevard Tax Parcel Nos. 000580-0008 and 000580 -0012 Quarter: NW Section: 25 Township: 23 Range: 4E (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: Jason Hubbell, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Address: 18215 -72nd Avenue South, KentL WA 98032 Phone: (425) 251 -6222 FAX ::_(425J 251 -8782 Signature: - -- C: \homepage \tukwila \dcd \apps \SEPAAPP.DOC, 08/31/00 Date: /k2_ 18215 7261) AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 88032 (425)251 -6222 (425)251 -8782 FAX CM. INNEEMIG. 1.4110 I'IN/IDIC SIE 616 . I7aI1100ENfN SIMaS Pon —Ian. Chmiod 111611127 waver PUGET WESTERN, INC. 19515 NORTH CREEK PARKWAY, SURE 10 BOTHEL, WA 98011 (425) 487 -6567 r-2a 118IHX8 ONIavIIO HOf1OEJ • 180 INw. ROUGH Ci 1ADWQ EXH®R PSE SOUTH SITE o -: SHORELINE CROSS SECTIONS SECTION B-B SECTION D-D ' \:: \• RECEIVED MAR 2 8 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CALL BEFORE YOU DO • ECOVED 1JAN 10 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4.4/46 NO SOURCE: THE THOMAS GUIDE (USED BY PERMISSION) VICINITY MAP NORTH i" , '''; t :1` \Li 5■4. I i 1.SIP„..fiti ZAR,::W: \ '.. ''' ..."' ';','‘...:. ';''.. ' ■,. ti.PT, 72.,,i-!....• ' "" '''sk •t>.' • - \ ' ..!..1‘4 %t • :,•,,,, - ' 'IS s.,, , ' ' P ' ■ .1: "344T1:1' %'' ' r. • ts.' ;•■•■7.• -‘4s -2.',--- oRr,`-ft It, 2 I ' ,,,L repum 1 .:.,' ,,,,:. , . ct) , ¢`,..-.. 4.-.'.,:.• ;251-11' = - .. ,':', S 5 •-. 14 O :, -,. •.:.•:,'.;:,, . ■....; . r', t, :' ' -0 • • ' ::.,4; : 7• ; , I 0: ST , • : '• ...,:"., . ;'•' , • ,. C;:',1 .x. C" . ' -. •;.,, ; 1424 ." .; ,,..n '.':-',..ii'.^, A if:'&.", ..... Si ..s.4.-,....' ''... ' ;. ' ': .`• ',..:;4 •'• E ,i....1 i.``... .•., 0, •:....;.• • • ... . ''. ....-. ,' ' •• . t - .S...• • 147 lb :. ../.ti,•':''',1.- :, . ',.': 'S I .2.-- '. • 11:1', sra:. 59°9 '... -.. :. '11Aiii'litiT... mg( .. :. ••. - - ....?•:, •FS'A.-•;:•,-' ,..-•-' • '‘` "' --;.' „,. Ci(c„.kIV : ' PUPA AN" ,•• t`'f4t, 4 t.' ,.• ' ' 3 .4 , M. 4i. 4' .. 4 .' .■• ''''''' ; .. ' 0 ' - ,v•,, . ;s- ...-.- .,. .,. 1, .. .:•, • '-:' .,:.Z .• - :.',",.'. ; •• • •;41,„1 15151-S.I.,' „.;';•• : Sioo 3 • ii- • ' 'is litlait;N• -:,'-.,,'...:.. '.',.. ,:::::; ..."5 '148111..S ...'...;.:' T;f1,;'' • •• ..'-*: •-•••••• OTh ,,,,Y,P.1; ^..,.., • .• ' ST .-,;;';,'... • . ,,,,. --s, ;,,, ; .- ,, ••'.1-'',';' 1/4:V. '..S :: •-!: '', 49 • -• \11,;,.,.i , , , .' ' :. N TO • ,, , 3 .:-■ . e ..6.; ,... ,, ..,... , ! , :•• :.:2:.?,,1**. -;,'''' 4'\,-,..' qa,,'"'.':,4.4 , -;''':sit:"....:,;=,■:,:i` o. , •'"i '''-'1,1- • :•',..-..s.TEN,:.• ,,, i.,.> ! .:,• •.!:',9m.•• -• , •'• •ol : S-,.... ..,..- ". , ',IY,', ..',4 151 ST !'', g'-..- 152N0=';'!':'ST•••:' ' :'• ••--:.:.•= ' .' 'i '.'.■ ":`....e.'' ' ' .:.,1,.,-.e."2"'•. • • ..:-„.. s 152ND: Pl:,-. %•e -••• ' ' ''''' ''' ' ' :.' ' :7;1- A.:- 44,, r -• ,.-,•:-..,,, ';',.‘"•tif.'": .'s . 2 4••,...'. . , ..:- . ••••.?4 • ••••••••• - •f•••., • '-• ''r!'",•• ''. '•'-'.' '' '.2 . *-,I"c,••• •••• 91. ... ...i .-.........„., 'r,'.% •;.-'.1'..I.1,• -...‘. i; •:• 6' .• 3 •` \q".',... S' • • 1530-?. - _ '. -...._ -' .' -;'-'- ..3, 1.,:2.‘c, - - '-‘'':: :-.3, 4 - ,•;'' - rs..->. •••`' # '6•400'.. irli,,.16t1. ' :■:- • , ._ . . Isisi 71 •.' ' • • - -f• S , . - •• `24-.4-: ...,•,, , • , , ' '' * Ctiii 7:4 ., . , • , '1"'` *-- ," li\i - •: ' 1.,.. .:,......",..5.00.1... . 1 el r,f CH ':. •,.. . `:."-• '•:•', •,'-',Or • • ' - • -SUITES -74 ''• la - '•'' ' • ',:'.•, ''' ., . .• !,•1 ., • . . - ): ." • ..,.... ANTRA& CASCADES •• ; . .." : ,. Ili i• .,:•11 - --.--'-- , ._:. - - .......,.41,,, 0 •',•'• • MALL '..., DR. .. - GWEN ' •••_•113AKER,-.7* •.'4, . •,c.i ' ' .' ',„-• CY, •.• •.,- "Z ' .1 u •. ',....:•BLVD•.• cc , • • - „ ,, c, IDOL( -, • • . — ., ,i—, • . ..:• 16?0. ,51 1 : ' ' - ' STRANDER I' .' B• eC• C' : • .. . kl 0 -r.- -:- 415'W VL • . T ' 3' : ' , - • , .* ., , • • . .. ' .. . - ' 26 akT - ' ;• ' . R• - • . BY MRRIO ' A 7..10. -. C. - .- • ' `- ,,, . " .• .. . — .,. - :• , I • • ' . '" '-' .. :.• '.; .. -- -,,-• , . : .? N i' .. ,l... - .A.',I,.4-•:- V. '4- -: •q y ETON • - ' -' •-e• s , . ' A•1 I S 168T ' . • ' ST ' . ' : '. • ." ••• , • ..• ' • "°141'. CORPOT: FS .1 ii,q1MAN,' P'StIr •',..;?■••••gli'ig ":."1:s RD.; T - 5100 - L'' 12 , .• •.,i, .-;••••••:' t . .),--; .r.... -•".'"• > .. . .. , .- . '... PL . • ., S . . • - ' ,• : 'CORPORA . MINKLER • ' ' •-• ; • • ...s. a '., r•- -----P-' ' \ PACUOiAr 't • • ., • , TR! • ND:: , . -• IR , • ANDOVER -. _ . • ° ANDOVER ., 0178TH .... .„- CT .12911i i S0 - .. - ''',- •:•'• . - ., :•..• ' ° ' i• - ,..1._,_../grY.q._. V ..; ,,,.. - 7;•;:z..,,',/,',,,: :.,. ,,, si,t.', —,_ 4.4/46 NO SOURCE: THE THOMAS GUIDE (USED BY PERMISSION) VICINITY MAP NORTH Shoreline Zone I 100 0 100 Feet Puget Western Property 100 0 100 200 Feet • Page 1 of 1 • c file: / /C: \GIS_temp\PW_S_Lot.gif 01/22/2003 30 80 EC. JACK N THE BOX 5 COVER SHEET A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST OUARTDR OF THE NORTHWEST OUARTER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 N, RANGE 4 E., WLLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TUKWLA, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON EC TACO BELL D. M IMI 1 EX. 78 GAS STA11011 1980.970.00' • N0V20'1!Y SOt CRY OF TUKWLA GRADING GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SAALL BE N ACCORDANCE WITH 1HE 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, MID MUNICIPAL Cp61RUCT )N.• WASHINGTON STATE DEPARIYEER OF TRANSPORTATION MO AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASm0ATBN, 849154GTON STATE CHAPTER 1999 EO110N. TOGETHER WITH THE LATEST DIMON OF THE CITY OF 100851. EMINEF791G SEAWARDS. 2. AN APPROVED 2. PROM. COPY OF THESE PLANS MST FIE ON ME WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION 6 3. R SHML BE THE SOLE RESPOMBUTY OF THE maw= 10 OBWN STREET USE MD ANY OTHER RELATED PERMITS PRNR TO ANT Cd6RICRON ACTIVITY IN CITY RCM-OF -WAY. 4. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVLTY. THE CITY 85 TUKWIA SIMMERING DEPARTMENT ( 433 -1850) MUST BE CO/0CIED FOR A PfEWISTRUCIKIN MEETING. 3. AU. LOCATIONS OF 9941190 MUTTS USG MUM HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM ANCORE RECORDS AND %LOUD THEREFORE BE 0014100 RE APPROXBY1E ONLY AND NOT NEDESSARLY COMPLETE TTE. R 6 THE SOLE IESRISBU1Y OF THE CONTRACTOR TO IOEPD40D41LY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL U LADY LOCATIONS SHOWN, AND TO FURTHER 06COVER AND AVOID ANY num MIMES S NOT 94089 HEREON WHICH MAY MI u.IOD BY THE OROIDTA1NN OF INS T(1 C ME ONTACT 4- (100 TC0NSTRUCION. OR S ATM SOU. BE IMMEDIATELY CONTACTED IF A UTILITY OONfl1CT EXISTS. 8. THE TEMPORARY EROSION A1KIN CONTROL DICTUMS SWAT BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ANY OR EXTENSIVE LAND CLEARING N ACCORDANCE WITH 1140 APPROVED TEMPORARY DIOSCN A110F4 CORM= PLANS. THESE FACNIE.S MUST BE SATISFACTORILY UNIT CONSTRUCTION MW UAmSCAPN0 6 CO PLETED AND THE MORTAL PG 01-STE FR090N HAS PASSED. 7. ALL EARTHWORM UNDER PANIC TO BE IISM BY VEF4CULAR TRAFFIC SLWL BE COMPACTED TO B 95 PIERCER DO' OPTIMUM DENSITY PER AST.1L 0- 1557 -70 8. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL 0.40 1046 SHOWN M PAVED AREAS ON THE RAMS ARE TOP OF PAVING 9. 540901910.7 FOLLOWING FINISH GRADING. AMY DISTURBED AREAS NOT SPECIFIED FOR PERMANENT LMN9CAPNC SHALL BE SEEDED AID STABRJffD WTH PERMANENT VEGETATION. COMSb)N4. t RAPID PfA9SID4T. AND LEGUME GRASSES (10m4W 80 PER ACM. THIS 6 TO INCLUDE - 20 PERCD4T AMNIA, PE EIOML. OR IMMO RYE GRASS - 40 PERMIT CREEPING RED FESCUE - 40 PERCENT ROTE 01996 10. THE SIZE MURK IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE L: NSIRUCED AOCXIED940 10 111E APPROVED PLANS WHIM ARE ON FOE 94 THE ENONEMING DEPARTMENT. ANY DEVIATION FRO14 THE APPROVED PLANS WILL REQUIRE APPRO1i) FROM THE PROPER AGONY. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHAT KEEP PARLOR: LOOS AND STREET CLEAN AT ALL TIMES BY SWEEPING. WASHING OF ANY TRAVELED SURFACE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. 12. ALL PARKING AND DRIVEWAY MFRS 10 WOVE POS14E DRAINAGE 1D COLLECTION/CONVEYANCE 5MTDLS OR 0988AN8 SHEET OCAN ALFAS AT ONE PERCD(T IMAM SOPS RAN DETAILS 9991 MQT SUPERSEDE MS REOCAR 8047. 13. 01.04-CUT ROAD CROSS/ CS FOR UTILITY TRENCHES MN DOSING TRAVELED ROMMAYS DULL M INCOME) IN ACCORDANCE NM 0117 CF TUKWIA WSD0T //APYA STANDARD FUN 0-11, AND MECHANICALLY (IMPACTED. CUTS 900 hff 81098 008491T SHALL BE MAT -UNE CUT WITH SAW N A CONTINUOUS TUNE A 1F9PORARY COLD MN PATCH 401E 90 PLACED BOE>MAATI31 AFTER RAOOVL AND COMPACTION. A P8 4AKFM HOT YO PATCH SHALL BE PLACED YO1WM 30 DAYS MW SHALL BE 114E MCP= OF THE ORIGINAL ASPHALT OR THREE (3) INCHES. ISHC EVER 6 GREATER. 14. EXR810ED =DR CONCRETE 611895 IRGND ASPHALT EDGES SHALL 6E CONSTRICTED PER DUAL CONSTRUCTION SEOUBNCE: 1. CONFIRM THAT ALL A PICABIE CONSMU.Ti0N PERU15 HAVE BFIN SECURED. 2. INSURE THAT ALL NECESSARY PRECONSTRUCTION MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACIMIIES. 3. LOCATE E70.Sm1 MIMES AND INMATE 030RDINATION MRH may *0054051. 4. FUG ALL CLEARING MG FDA NEW BUILDING PAD AREA 0. PROTECT ALL EC STORY °RAMAGE CONVEYANCE 595106 FROM 547 LADEN MAIM 8. ROUGH GRADE SCE AND STABOIg W/6TRUC5ON AREA 7. PRELOAD NEW BUOD540 ADDITION 10 ELEVATION SHOWN. 8. INSTALL F41ER FABRIC AND 1ESC 011:49995 TD PROTECT STORM SYSTEM FROM SILT LADEN WATERS. 9. COVER ALL AREAS THAT WU. BE IA19AN8ED FOR MORE THAN 7 DAYS 01.51/0 THE DRY SEASON AND 2 DAYS DURING THE VET SEASON. 10. UPON COMPLETION OF THE 80.1001. STASLIZE ALL DISTURBED AREAS AND TONNE IMP'S IF APPROPRIATE. CITY OF TUKWLA GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND YAIERYLS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD. BRO1:E. AND MUNICIPAL consTR 1C110N.• 8ASN4GTON STATE OEPARR/DST OF TRANSPORTATION AND AMMAN PUBLIC WORKS • ASSOCNIIOR WA98NO7ON STATE CHAPTER. 1998 MIN. TOGETI ER WITH THE LATEST ERNNN OF 1TE CITY OF 11.1KW0A 04GN9F3tlNG STANDARDS. 2. AN APPROVED W PING COPY OF THESE PL MUST BE ON 9TE WHENEVER COMMOTION 6 3. TT 94.4LL BE THE SOLE MSPON Il117 OF THE CONTRACTOR 10 OBYAN STREET USE AND MW OTHER RELATED PERMITS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACINBY IN CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY. 4. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, THE CITY OF 1UKWIA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ( 433 -1850) MUST BE CONTACTED FOR A PRECOIGTRICOWI IBBING. 5. ALL LOCATIONS OF DOSING UTILITIES SOWN HEREON HAVE 8E84 ESTABLISHED BY FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED TROY AMIABLE RECORDS AND 9NU111 THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPROXIMATE ONLY Mm NOT NECESSARY COMPLETE R 6 1H4E SOLE RESPORMI TY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY 111E *MOW( OF ALL MIRY LOCATIONS SHOWN. AND TO FURTHER 06COVER AND AVOID ANY OTHER 111111s NOT SAWN 40984 WHICH INT AFFECTED BY THE IYPU]IEN08ION OF IND RAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE U188IFS UNDERGROUND LOCATION SEANCE (1- 800 - 424 -5555) PRIOR TO C0)GITOmCTNN. THE CAME OR EIS ARM: SHALL BE MMATELY CONTACTED IF A =WY CONFLICT FASTS. 8. THE SITE WORK 914110699405415 STALL BE CONSTRUCTED A=010540 TO THE APPROVED PANS WHICH ARE ON FOE N 'NE DODO DEPARTMENT. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED RAMS 901 REQUIRE APPROVAL FROM THE PROPER AMEIILY. 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL I_EEP PARKING LOTS AND STREET CLEAN M ALL TIMES BY %WAND WASHING OF AMY TRAVELED SURFACE W91 NOT BE ALLOWED. B. ALL PIPE ITEO)540 SHALL CONFORM TO 959OT /APIA SECTION 9- 03.12(3) FOR Al PIPE. AU. TRDCFN BA7F)LL SHALL BE TO_ TO 95 PERCENT WORM DRY 00611 PER AS,TAL Q -1557 -70. 9. ALL PIPE SHALL BE WD ON A PROPERLY PREPARED FOUNDATION ACCORD= TO WASHINGTON STATE SPECIFICATION 7 1). 1 8 SHALL MUM NECESSARY LEVEILD OF THE TRENCH BOTTOM OR THE TOP OF THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL AS WELL AS PLACEMENT AND COMPACTOR OF REQUIRED BFDOI14G w1ERAL TO UNIFORM GUIDE SO THAT EMNE LEINIH OF 114E PIPE GU. BE SUPPORTED ON A UNIFORMLY OUSE IAAIEIDDD BASE E THE NATIVE MATERIAL N THE 80T101 OF ME TRENCH MEETS THE 1EDUIREIM 5 FOR Yx9WEL BAGOI1 FOR PIPE EEDWD.• THE FAST (FT OF PIPE MOOING MAY BE OMITTED, PROVIDED ME YAIBIAL N 114E BOTTOM THE TRUST 5 LOOMED. REGRADED. A COMPACTED TO FORM A DENS: IANYELD940 BASE 10. PRIOR TO OCOPA CY. THE P9RAMER STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM MUST BE GLEANED OUT ET/ RAPING 00 NOT PUMP OR DEPOSE INTO ANY OTHER STREAK STORY SEWER. OR warmer, SEWER 5911118) TE.S.C. LEGEND PROPOSED TYPED CATCH BASIN PROPOSED TYPE 1 CATCH 0•114 981114 G TYPE 8 CATCH BASIN 98190 TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN PROPOSED STORY DRAINAGE LINE timI MIS= STORY 9804A00 UNE 0 DOS= SMEARY SEWER MOUE 0 DOSING S9045*911 SEWER LIFE = = == DOSING 9ATII0NN 98)00 FRE IMPART EXISTING MATER VALVE PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS EXISTING SPOT ELEVATIONS ENDING CONTOURS FILTER FABRIC FENCE TEMPORARY CONSTRICTION ENTRANCE FLOW ARROYF TEIIPORA67 OTADAGE DITCH LIDS OF CLEARING 4fIFOF" 90242j NOTE FOR FLL MATERIAL AND COMPACTION REOUIREMENTS REFER TO t3EOTECHNICAL REPORT BY EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATED OCTOBE 7, 2002. INCORPORATE THE FtEC:OMMENDATIONS OF THIS REPORT INTO THE PROJECT. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING PERMITS FROM THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR REMOVING AND REPLACING ALL SURVEY MONUYEMATNN THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PURSUANT TO MAC 332 -120. APPLICATIONS MUST BE COMPLETED BY A REGISTERED IAN SUNEYOR APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS TO REMOVE MONUMENTS MAY RE OBTAINED FROM THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. OR NT CONTICRNG THEIR OFFICE BY TELEPHONE AT (208) 902 -1190. MA49KFTON STATE DEPARHEM OF NATURAL RESOURCES PUBLIC IMO SURVEY OFFICE 1111 WASHINGTON STREET SE. P.O. 80X 47080 OLYMPIA WASHINGTON 98504 -7080 UPON 5110141194 OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL MOM8E4T5 DISPLACED. ROMYED, OR DESTROYED SHELL BE REPLACED Elf A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR AT THE COST AND AT TAE OIEC1NN OF THE CONTRACTOR PIIRSUNLT TO THEM REGUATNN.S RAE APPROPRIATE FORS FOR REPLACE/DR OF SAID IWMAFMATNN SHALL ALSO BE THE RESPONSIBLY( OF THE CONTRACTOR. SURVEY INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTIOM MILE RIYORT Nor MOWED) A PORTION OF PS EL RR IN THE ALE, 1/4 OF THE N.W. 1/s OF SECTION 21 TON6WP 27 MORIN RANGE 4 FAST. 9'Y TOPOGRAPHICAL SITE SURVEY FOR 11(491 WESTFRA7. =WED 94 THE ILE 1/4, OF 11E R.M. V.C. MF SELTNN 23, TOWNSHIP 23 11045. RANGE 4W1m-RAHDLp B4S18 OF BEARINGS TIE FAST LINE or Cm Or norm. S.P. N0. 1870031 tow 1940 COUNTY RECORD= 81 9804219002 89145 807.2212 W. IERT CAL DATUM: NOW 22 PER NATIONAL FLOOD 99890 Z E{W • PK NAL AND srowER SL7 IN SOVTIRIFST =MR or WOOD WDAOWALL ON 1142 STREET RAILROAD- 88198 OVER OIEM WEIL 0.30 NILE SOUTH ALONG TIME RIVER FROM 5411 =ANDER 80IREAa90 NBDOE OVER OJEM RIVER ELEVATION - 31.99' SITE THIIPCRARY BEI CI'ATARiC (SUE TBMA SET PK 9141. WEST Or CENTERLINE OF ASTMS TRAIL AT GATE IN FENCE TO WEIDY5 PARIOAIG LOT ELDRITCH - 23.35' CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2o0 US FEET BOLICARY NOTE BOUNDARY LINES AND DOEA®OA6 SHOWN ARE NOT INTEND To DEPICT ACTUAL PROPERTY 101498412. A T71LE REPORT VAS 'NOT PROV9TED, ONLY ASSESSOR LAPS 771E BOINOARY AS SWORN DOES DEPICT A PORTON Or 17E PSP. 51 L CO. MATT OF PT LYING =7406.7 of THE COILEM.DLE of B09 LAKE PPE LNE (080) RCM Or WAY AS SHOWN ON COY OF TU1M9A SP. iN O. 1970003 EXTENDED EAST, AND NORTHERLY OF A 90' SHIP OF LAID FOR STREET RICHE 0 MAY DEDICATED TO THE CITY Or =WA UM= RECOEDBXO No. 94091=17. 1 Ia A 8 INDEX OF SHEETS 11 OF 3 COVER SHEET T2 OF 3 T131PORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN T3 OF 3 TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS EARTHWORK OUAN1 T1ES CUD 2,000 C.Y. FLLP 7,000 C.Y. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1- 800-424 -5555 UiLA NAT NOTE THE CONTACTOR 91AL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VER YOC 1FIE LOCATION AND OEP OF ALL COSTING CHUTES WHETHER SHOWN MI THESE rims oR NOT BY Forma3 M THE MUMS AND SURVEYING THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCATION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THIS HALL INCLUDE CALLING URU TT LOCATE 0 1- 800 - 424 -5555 AND 191EN PORNUNO ALL OF THE DOTING 0@JOE5 AT LOCATN76 OF NEW LINTY CROSSINGS 10 PHYSICALLY VERIFY *mum OR HOT CO1LCIS EXIST. LOCATIONS of SAN MIMES AS SHOWN ON THESE CONFLICTS PLANS ARE SHOULD OCCUR CONTRACTOR SIW1 CONSULT 1D VARIATION. IF CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC. TO RESOLVE ALL PROBLEM PRIOR TO P60984 G WITH COMTRUCTICIL RECEIVED MAR 2 8 2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,43 -0rz-1 co co rn � 3 1 H w Z LL O NI 10 CO N 09 <D 90 � 3 vT vE N 1V ) 03 Yvv EXP7510512 -30-04 1 p 8 8 i6 cff Q88 § v 0 O 30 BO 120 Lc1WMIk': Nom. i SCALE 1•WO' CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555 CRY OF TUKWILA GRADING GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "STANDARD SPECIFICTIONS FOR ROAD, SEDGE, AND MUNICIPAL COTSTRUCTIO N' WASHINGTON STATE DEPORTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND NIEM AN PUDIC wORI6 ASSOCIATION, 81194101011 STATE CHAPTER 1998 EDITION. 109210:8 WITH THE LATEST ED810N OF THE CITY OF HAMRA ENGINEERING STANDARDS. 2. AN APPROVED COPY OF THESE PLANS MOAT BE ON 9IE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION S IN PROGRESS. 3. IT SHALL 66 THE SOLE RESPO15630Y OF THE CONTRACTOR 70 081AIN SKEET USE AND ANY OTHER RELATED PFR8019 PRIOR 10 ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN 01Y RICHT -OF -WAY. 4. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVMY, THE CITY OF TUKWILA Ericatioattic D EPARTMENT (433 -1850) MUST BE CONTACTED FOR A 1R1JCTON YEETl4. 5. ALL LDGT10T6 OF EX9OIG UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON HAVE DEEM ES1ABL5HED BY FIELD SURVEY OR 0ERA0ED FROM AMIABLE 1ECORIS AHD SHOULD THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED APPRODEOTE ONLY M0 NOT NECEESN9LY 0010'LETE. R S 046 SOLE RESPONSIBIUIY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO 90666 DENTL1 VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL UTILITY LOCATIONS 91OWt. AND TO FUR01Et MOONIER AND AVM ANY 011ER UIILIRES NOT SHOWN HEREON WHICH MAY AFFECTED BY TIE IMPLEMENTATION OF TH&S PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE UTILITIES UNDERGROUND 1X4111 N S RVOE (1 -800- 424 -5555) PR10R TO CONSTRUCTION THE OWNER OR HS ATT E SHALL BE CONSTRUCTION Y CONTACTED IF A UTILITY CONFLICT 21915. & THE TELPORNY ATON CONTROL FACILITIES 94AL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR T1 ANY GRADING OR EXT067VE mu' 0EAIBNG W ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED TDPORART ER090N ATOM CONTROL RAMS. THESE FACIUf1ES COAT BE SATSRACIORLY IMINTAMED KARL CONSTRUCTION AND LAHDSCARNO S COMPLETED AND THE POTENML FOR ON-91E EROSION WAS PASSED. 7. ALL EARTHLD51. UNDER PAVING 10 BE USED BY VEHICULAR TRAFFIC DOLL BE COMPACTED TO MOWN 95 PERCENT DRY OPTIMUM OEN91Y PER A .STY D- 1557 -70 (MODIFIED PROCTOR). 8. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ALL ELEVATIONS SOWN IN PAVED AREAS ON THE PUNS ARE TOP OF PRANG. 9. IMMEDIATELY FOU.OWING ROSH GRADING. ANY DISTURBED AREAS NOT SPECIFIED FOR PERMANENT LANDSCAPING SHALL BE SEEDED AND STABO.QED WM PERWINE4T VEGETATION. CONSISTING OF RAPID. PERSSIEM, AND LEGUME GRASSES (IDNWUM 801 PER ACRE). 1648 S TO OGLIIDE - 20 PERCENT ANNUAL, PERQO4AL, OR HYBRID RYE GRASS - 40 PERCENT CREEP 4C RED FESCUE - 40 PEOTDD 9701E CLOVER 10. THE STE WORK IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE CG16TRUC1ED ACCORDING TO THE APPROVED PW6 WHICH ARE ON FIE IN 114E DOWERING DEPARTMENT. ANY OEVIATI0N FROM DE APPROVED PLANS WILL REWIRE APPROVAL FROM THE ROPER AGENCY. 11. 046 COMPACTOR SHALL KEEP PARI4NG LOTS AND STREET CLEAN AT ALL TILES BY SWIPING. WA5OG OF ANY TRADED SURFACE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. IL COIFGTON /CO4VEYANCE minis OR OVERLAND 91EET DRAIN AREAS AT ONE PERCENT MINIMUM 9DPET PUN DETAILS 9VLL NOT SUPERSEDE THOS REQUIREMENT. 13. OPEN -CUT ROAD CR0SSINGS FOR UTILITY TRENCHES ON COSTING TRAVELED RWOWAYS SHALL BE BAGIO06ID IN ACCORDANCE WIT11 OTT OF 1UMIALA WSDO7 APWA STANOND RAN 8-11, AND MECHANICALLY COMPACTED. CUTS 0110 TIE DOSING ASPHALT SHALL BE NEAT -UNE WT WITH SAW IN A CONTINUOUS UNE A TEMPORARY COD MDI PATCH MUST BE PLACED IMMEDIATELY AFTER BAC1IF61 AND COMPACTION. A PER/INTENT NOT MO PATCH STMT BE RACED WITHIN 30 OATS AND DWI. BE THE THICKNESS OF THE ORIGINAL ASPHALT OR THREE (3) COWES WHICHEVER 10 OEAMER 14. EXTRUDED CEMET CONE 8165 AROUND ASPHALT EDGES STALL BE emmyolrIsn asn rsT COVER SHEET - _ -fir kl; ' \ -. �� ) Y L ---�� \ \\ \ j/. p �8. �r g111 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE: 1. 0070881 THAr ALL APPl1CABLE CONSTRUCTION PERMITS HAVE BEEN SECURED. 2. INSURE THAT ALL NECESSARY PRECONSTRUCTION 146M= LOVE BEET HEO PR02L TO ANY CONSTRUCTION A.IRYrtES 3. LOCATE DOSING UTUIIFS AND MATE COORDINATION WITH LIMP! AGENCIES 4. FUG ALL CI AR01G UNITS FOR NEW FAL PAD AREA 5. PROTECT ALL 01 ST004 ORANNGE CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS FROM S&1 LAODI WATER & ROUGH GRADE DIE MD STABILIZE CONSTRUCTION AREA 7. 146066 FOR FILL PAD TO ELEVATION SHOWN. & 545!1111 FILTER FABRIC AND 1250 MEASURES 70 PROTECT STORM SVSIEM FROM SOS LADEI WATERS 9. COVER ALL AREAS THAT WILL RE LAIWORKED FOR MORE DWI 7 GAYS DUR46 DIE DRY SEASON AND 2 DAYS DURING THE WET SEASON. 10. UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, STABILE ALL 08TIRi8ED AREAS AND REMOVE IMPS IF APPRORIATE. CRY OF TUKWILA GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL WORK AND MAIEIALS SHALL BE IN ACCOREWI E WITH THE *STANDALO SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROM, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTOR; WA9O4.TO1 STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC/4110N, WA4@4MON STATE °A PTER, 1988 EDITION. TOGETHER WM THE LATEST EDMON OF THE OTT OF TUM89A ENGINEERING STA7ON0S 2. AN APPROVED COPT CA THEE PLANS MUST BE ON STE WHOEVER CONSTRUCTION 10 IN PROGRESS. 3. IT SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPOrma1IY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN STREET USE AND ANY OTHER R0A1ED FERRIS PRIOR TO ANY aR6ROCTiON ACTIVITY IN OTT RICHT-OF -WAY. 4. PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRICTION ACINRY, THE CITY OF TUKMILA ENOMEERRING D EPARIMEM ( 433 -1850) MUST BE 064//10706 FOR A PREWIGIRUCIION MEETING S. ALL LOCATORS OF EXISTING 1)161185 DOWN HEREON HAVE 8EO4 92611665549 8Y FIELD SURVEY OR OBTAINED FROM AVAILABLE RECORDS AND 940ULD THEREFORE BE CON90ER06 APPROXIMATE ONLY M40 NOT HE MSSOLT COMPLETE IT IS 046 SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR 10 INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE ACCURACY OF ALL nun' LOCATIONS 91664. AND TO FIRMER DISCOVER 645 AVOID ANY OTHER UTILITIES NOT 91064 HEREON WHICH WY AFFECTED BY DIE 111PW4 ITATON OF 065 PLAN. THE CONTACTOR STALL CONTACT DOE UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION 9;RNCE (1- 900 -424 -5555) PRI0R TO CONSIRI101ON. THE OWNER OR HIS THE STALL BE d00E7D111F11 CONTAC1ED IF A LIMIT CONFLICT FROSTS & THE SITE WORK IMPROVEMENTS 9 *U. BE CONSTRUCTED ACCORDING 10 THE APPROVED P LANS Meal ARE ON FILE 54 THE ENIINEDOG 0FPARIMENT. ANY DEVIATION 1ROL DE APPROVED PL/F6 911 REWIRE APPROVAL FROM THE PROPER AG0ILT. 7. 174E CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP PARIOLG LOTS AND STREET CLEAN AT ALL TOES 8T 01406110. WASTING OF ANY TRAVELED SURFACE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. & ALL PIPE BEDDING SHALL =aroma ro W5o01 APIA SEC101 9-03.120) FOR ALL PIPE. ALL TRENCH 8A0IFOL STALL BE COLIPACTCI TO BS PERCENT 1601U11 OY DENSITY PER AS.711. D- 1557 -70. D. ALL PIPE SHALL BE IAD ON A PROPERLY PREPARED FOUNDATION ACCORDING TO WA9OGTON STATE SPECIFICATION 7-02.3(1). 005 SHALL INCLUDE NFDESSNY LE*E1NG OF ONE TRENCH BOTTOM OR THREE 106 OF THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL AS WELL AS RADEME 4T AND COP9MOI OF REQUIRED BMOC MATERIAL TO UU49OO1 GRADE SO THAT ENTIRE 166115 OF 0E PIPE MU. BE 916606TED ON A UNIFORMLY DEBT 1111610940 BASE. IF THE NATWE MATERIAL IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TRENCH MEETS THE RF0l0E14RS FOR 'GRAVEL BACOIEL FOR PIPE EEDOD45. 046 nest LEFT OF PIPE BEDDOG MAX BE OMITTED, PRONIDEO THE 1493911. IN THE 891O14 THE TRFNC4 6 LOOSENED, REGRADED. A C 146601 D TO FORM A DOSE UNYIELDING BASE 10. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. THE PEAIWENT STOW DRAINAGE SYSTEM MUST BE CLEANED OUT BY PUDNOG. (D0 NOT PIMP OR =P0SE INTO ANY OTHER SRENL 510OI1 STAYER OR SMQTARV SERER SYSTEM.) X09 TES.C. LEGEND PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS DOMING SPOT 6EVA1O76 EXISTING CONTOURS -- 22 -- FILTER FABRIC FENCE TOPORAR0 COIATRIILTION ENTRANCE ROW MEOW 1E6ORARY DIWNAGE DITCH -� UNITS OF CLEARING r Q94)91)90 /151)S(Z7$i SURVEY INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION: rr .4 PORTION OF P.S. lIl IN IN 1746 NE 1//4 OF TIE IAN. 1/4 OF SEOMON 29, TOM 49611 22 NORM, 011M 4 EAST, NAL TOPOC APHdAL SIZE SURVEY LOCATED L 4! � 1/4 OF THE N AL 7/4. OF SECTION 25, TOWN9AP 23 NORM( RANGE 4PR ANCE.D BASIS OF BE CI THE EAST UWE OF GMT OF TULIYAA SP. N0. L970052. LAMER MG COUNTY MORO= NO 9904219002 BONO 140r2252Y. VERTICAL DATUM: (4060629.49897614611110089491414(0? LOP PN NAIL AND DOER SET IN S0UMNEST CORNER OF 6000 WOGWALL ON THE SMELT RAILROAD 95006 0621 GREEN MYER. 1.30 ROLE SOUTH .ALONG THE RMLN FROM 71C SIRANDFR BOAEMYO BROM GY R GREEN RIMER EE1641L6N SRE 7EMPORARY BISVCHMARK (TIE TW» SET PK WAD. REST OF CFNm01E OF ASPHALT ME AT GATE LY PENCE 7O 1192OY5 PARKING LOT BEWITCH - 2278' r CONTOUR BHIBWVALT 2.00 US. FEET 1. BOUICARY NOTE; 001021MY 104:5 AND O0010D16 9AOW1 ARE NOT DIMMED 70 DEPICT AC77.01. PROPERTY OOP. A ROLE REPORT WAS NOT PROVO= MAY ASSESSOR COPS 1141 BOUNDARY AS SHOWN 006 00710T A POMRON OF 7746 P.S.P. 11 L CO =HT OF WAY LYON SOurNERLy Or 1746 GFR7FRIUE of ear LAZE PIPE LUE (960) mar OF MY AS SOWN ON 01Y OF TUKWILA SP. N0. L970053 EXTENDED FAST, AND NORTHERLY OF A 60' STRIP OF LA1O FOR STREET RIGHT OF 96? O 1041ED 70 174E CRY OF 715M4A WIDER RECOR000 Na 0409120817. EARTHWORK OUANTTTmES (AS SHOWN IN THIS PLAN SEA) 04PCR7. 3.500 G.Y. CINT/70L• 100 GY. RECEIVED JUL 15 20113 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS 1 8 INDEX OF SHEETS TI OF 3 COVER SHAT JUL 15 2 T2 OF 3 ROUGH GRADING AND TBNPORAFIT EROSION/ SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN T3 OF 3 ROUGH GRADING AND TEMPORARY N/ SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS JUL 152 0 i j 1 1 z gi a g Scots: 1 -60 krood )(refs: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES 1. AFPRDVAL of 1809 EROSION N0 SEDIMENT CONTROL PUN DOES NOT COI61TMIE AR APPROVAL OF PERIWQIR Rom OR 618541E DESIGN (E.G.. SEE AND Ui011 LOCAATION OF ROADS. PIPES. RESTRICIOR5. CAMELS. RET011308 MIMES. 2. THE SPNEYENTA110N OF THESE ESC PLANS AND THE CONSTRUCTION D TEXAN E, EMMERT. M0 UPGRADDW OF THESE ESC FACILITES IS 11E RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPUCAIIT /ESC SUPERVISOR am. ALL CONSTRUCTION 6 APPROVED. S THE BOUNDARIES OF THE QEARDO WETS SHOWN ON THIS PAIN 91E1 BE CLEARLY FUGCED BY A CONTIBI S LENGTH OF SURVEY TAPE (0R FENCING, IF REDU5D) PBIXN 10 CONSTRUCTION DURING THE CONSTRUCTION P911900, NO DISTURBANCE *510140 THE clam UMITS SHALL BE PERMITTED. THE QFNNNG UNITS SHALL RE IINTONNED BY THE /MUM/IT/ESC SUPERVISOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION 1. THE ESC FACILITIES 90WN ON 7)09 PLAN MUST BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO OR IN SEDIMENT CONJUNCTION WITH ALL CLEMAG AND GRAM SO AS TO ENSURE THAT ME TRANSPORT OF 1010�T.113 SURFACE WATERS. DRAINAGE 5157016. MIS A0.MC04T 5. 114E ESC FA0IUTES SHORN ON 1195 PAN ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR ANTICIPATED S71E CONDITIONS. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. THESE ESC FApURES SWILL BE UPGRADED AS NEEDED FOR STORM DENTS MID MOWED TO ACCOUNT FOR CANCNG 91E CONTEMNS EG. AOOOx7NAL SUMP PUMPS, RELOCATION OF DITCHES M0 SLLT FENCES, ETC. 8. THE ESC FACILITIES 9A1 BE INSPECTED DALLY 8Y THE MP CANT SUPE14 0R AND MANTA ED TO ENSURE CONTINUED PROPER FUNCTIOICNC. WRITTEN RECORDS 94ML BE IOPT OF Y REVISE OF 714E ESC FACW8F5 OUROIO THE WET SEASON L �.J�AD OF UONDLLY RENEWS DURING THE OR/ SEASON (MAY 1 7. ANY AREA OF EIIPOSEO S00$ IN LUDINO ROADWAY EMEENTOIEN S, THAT ELL NOT BE QED FOR TWO OATS DURING THE WET SEASON OR SEVEN DAIS DUREO 114E OM' SEASON SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY STABILIZED VIII THE APPROVED ESC METHODS (E.G. SEID0G, MULCHING, PLASTIC COVERING. ETC.). & ANY AREA DNEEDING WHIN FIFTEEN ) DAYS. SATE ADDITION SHALL BE 9. THE ESC FACILITIES ON INACTIVE SITES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED A IMPALE OF ONCE A MONTH OR WITHIN THE 48 HOURS FOLIATING A STORM EVENT. 10. AT NO DINE SHALL MORE THAN ONE (1) FOOT OF SFDITO 48 BE ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE WITHIN A CATCH BASIN. ALL CATCH 0*985 AND CONVEYANCE LINES 9w1 BE CLEANED PRIOR TO PAVING. THE CLEANING OPERATION SHALL NOT RUSH SE011EM -RADEN WATER INTO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. 11. STAB0Jg0 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AM 80108 SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE BEGINNING OF CONSTRUCTION AND MADOAIED FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONAL MEASURE& SUCH AS WASH PADS MAY BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT A. PAVED AREAS ARE KEPT CLEAN FOR THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 12. ANY PERMANENT DM CONTROL FACTUTY USED AS A TEMPORARY SETTING EMSIN SHALL BE MODIFIED WITH THE NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND SHALL PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY. IF THE FACILITY 5 TO FUNCTION *111745161 AS AN IIILTRN1ION SSTEN TFE TEMPORARY FACILITY MUST BE GRADED S1 THAT THE BOTTOM AND SDFS ARE AT LEAST THREE FEET ABOVE THE FINAL GRADE OF 114E PERIMEDI1 FAC11I1Y. 73. WHERE STRAW MULCH FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL 6 fEOI3RED. IT SHALL BE APPLED AT A MEDIUM 115a04ESS OF 2 TO 3 INCHES. 14. P80R TO THE BEC000NG OF ITO WET SEASON (OCT. 1). ALL 057URBED AREAS SHALT. BE REVISED TO IDENTIFY WTOCH ONES CAR BE SEEDED IN PREPARATION FOR THE WINTER RAINS ObT0IBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED *711424 ONE WEE) OF THE BEGOODO OF THE *58 SEASON. A %E7CH MAP OF THOSE AREAS 10 BE SEEDED AND THOSE AREAS 10 004*4* UNCOVERED SHILL BE SUBNDED 10 THE ODES INSPECTOR THE DOES INSPECTOR CAN REWIRE SFID90 OF A MON & AREAS IN ORDER 10 PROTECT SURFACE WATERS. ADJACENT PROPERTIES, OR OAOMfE FAt7UIRS AS PER 10140 COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS. DEVEYTAYS SHALL BE PAVED TO THE EDGE OF R/w PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TO AVOID DAMAGING OF THE ROADWAY. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE ENTRANCE BE CROWNED SO THAT RUNOFF DRAINS OFF THE PAD ILffS 1) COMA TRA RE4GRDRIW FOR WORM A noon DE AMMAN OR A MUDD BASIS. 2) 5 OECTO BY THE cam LWOW/ 0160 DAIS 195f BE AXED. 3) 101 BE (78(1D A niE PDOYIAIf APP1R1O1 =0[R TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TEMPORARY EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS NOT TO SCALE N FILTER FABRIC WIRE BE SAUCED OR /MIS T POSI9. USE STAPLES, WIRE RIGS OR QUIVALENT TO ATTACH FABRIC TO POSTS E 140.5 POST SPACING MAY BE 0ICRFASED TO 8. IF WIRE BACKING IS USED N01E: SLIER FABRIC FENCES SWILL BE WALLED ALONG CONTOUR WHEREVER POSSIBLE II II 2' x 2' BY 14 G0. WIRE OR EQUIVALENT, F STANDARD STRENGTH FABRIC USED FILTER FABRIC USE HIRAFI 1005 OR EQUAL MINIMUM 4' x 4' TRENCH SOL OFT TRENCH WITH WASHED SAC OFT 3RENCH "WASHED GRAVEL FILTER FABRIC SILT FENCE DETAIL 2' x 4' 01000 POSI5, STEEL FENCE POST5, REBAR, OR EQUIVALENT NOT TO SCALE ALTER FABRIC FENCE DETAIL A 114E FILTER FABRIC SELL BE PURCHASED IN A CONTINUOS ROIL CUT TO THE LENGTH OF THE BARRER TO AVOID USE OF JOINTS WHEN J0245 ARE NECESSARY, F&1ER CLOTH SWILL BE SAUCED TOGETHER ONLY AT A SUPPORT POST 00TH A MINIMUM 8-INCH OVERLAP. AND BOTH EN05 SECURELY FASTENED 70 THE POST. & THE ELDER FABRIC FENCE SHALL BE 245TAILED TO FOLLOW THE I1Mp (*ERIE 8L� THE FACE POSTS . 5 LEEDS ACED A MAXIMUM OF 6 FEET APART AND ORM SECURELY 800 THE GROUND ND 1( 8T8MUM OF G A TRENCH SHALL BE ECAVA1E0. ROUGHLY 8 INCHES WIDE AND 12 INCHES DEB, UP90PE AND ADJACA41 TO THE WOOD POST TO ALLOW DE FILTER FABRIC 10 BE BURIED. D. WRAC STANDARD SADISM 80107 FABRIC 5 USED, A WIRE ME91 SUPPORT FACE STALL BE FASTENED SECURELY 10 THE UPSOPE 925 OF THE POSTS USING HEAVY DUTY WEE STAPLES AT LEAST 1 INCH LONG. TIE WIRES OR HOG RINGS. 714E WOE STALL DODO INTO THE TRENCH A MI IRIL OF 4 114015 AND SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 38 INCHES ABOVE ME ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE. E THE STANOARD 51RE74114 FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE STAPLED OR WEED 10 THE FENCE, AND 20 INCHES OF TIE FABRIC SHILL BE A000ED 2410 THE TRENCH. THE FABRIC SELL NOT EXTEND YORE TITAN 38 ACHES ABOVE 714E 0R *48*. GROUND SURFACE. FILTER FABRIC SHALL NOT BE STAPLED TO DOMING 150. F. WHEN AURA- 5518'M FIVER FABRIC AND CLOSER P09 SPACING NE USED. THE WOE MESH SUPPORT FENCE MAY BE E1801ATED. IN SUCH A CASE, THE FILTER FABRIC IS STAPLED OR *RED ERECTLY 10 THE POSTS TIM ALL OTHER PROMOS OF STANDARD NOTE E APP1.710. G THE TIEHCH4 SELL BE BACKSLID NM 3/4 -0471 PODIUM DAL ETIER WASHED GRAVEL. H. FILTER FABRIC FENCES SNAE. BE BELOVED WHEN 1141 HAVE SERVED THEIR USEFUL PURPOSE, BUT NOT BEFORE 1HE UPSIDE AREA HAS BEEN PERI/MEN Y STABILIZED. L ROM FABRIC FACES SHALL BE INSPECTED 170EDIA1ELY AFTER EACH RAINFALL AND AT LEAST DALY DURING PROLONGED RAINFALL ANY REQUIRED REPAQS SHALL BE MADE IYYEDAIELY. BEST MANAGEMBIT PRACTICES (IMP) ALTERNATIVES IRACH MA790AL 6104108 MNOATOE AFFIOL1 IE D918 OP /120:1 RP /ACM Mf4I'JOCM GRAVEL. SAC. OR GIBED SORE WAITED. 3/4' -1 -1/r DIE 9 CU NOS 3 NOES FOR SORT SLOPES AND MOM WOODY RANTS @ OWNLENWS 115E IM RE SUBJECT 10 NOT MARC. *PDX ZOO 435/CLT YD. HAY 0R STRAW AN GOD, FREE FROM UNWANTED BEDS @ COATS MATERIAL 75 -100L8S OR 2-3 BALES 1-1/210 2-1h OR BO -120 BALM cam OF 2 N DEPTH. CREAM ON STEEP AREAS OR NEAR FYOECTD LEAS) USE WHERE THE YACIOIC EFFECT IS 10 BE DAMNED FOR LEIS THAN 3 MOMS. ANCOR 6 C0HPW4 COMM MINT IETI046 SPRAY010 WITH TKHOER A0/OR KEPT HOST. RUSK 9E1TWO YNOOM O-I01 THICKNESS ANCHOR WITH 51408145 OR TORS ON 10 -FOOT GRID N ALL DIRECTIONS. 0568» EDGE NTE MU, WOVEN STRAW BLANKET BLANKET N/A N/A USE ON STEEP SLOPES GREATER 1X41 01 N A0ORION TO HIDROSfID OR WOOD RNA REM TAOOILR IMOD FIBER • " (PAA R.Y DIGESTED FIBERS) WWO80ODD DYED GREEN SHOULD NOT GONAN CROWN 0000700 ACTORS 25-30 L!$ 1001 - 150185 E USED ON C MCAL AREAS OR STEEP SLOPES, DOUBLE THE NORMAL AFFILIATION ROE RAY W/HCROKACTER. NO 1E-024111 REQUIRED. WOOD FIBER 'MUM • HYDROSEEDDIG DT AU:ft 1.25 TONE PER ACE; BAN COPS 1ot O 2 IL DEPTH USE 011 120 GIL/ACRE � X S1 ® Ell TRAM 2SDPE3 LESS THIN 00 NOT USE ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 601 DIPS 068 NIII "m' "m' RFEm �L/TON 101. OF 2 DL DEPTH DO NOT USE ON SLOPES STEEPER THAN 121 HYDROS® 1B: YO =EMENDED ABM USE 008 SLOPE 1/1 FOR STEEP SLOPES. 4' MIN 1 3:1 I 3:1 1 .41D204114121.1.,32,":4• 3.5' - 5' FAT 801104 1' MIN OVERFLOW r 1 YIN 3/4' -1 1/2' WASHED GRAVEL NOTE TRAP MAY BE FORMED 88 BERM OR BY PARTIAL EXCAVATION CROSS SECTION RIP RAP 2' -4' ROCK OMEGAS TO STABILIZED CONVEYANCE. OUTLET OR LEVEL SPREADER TRAP OUTLET YNNTDNANCE STANDARDS 1. SEDMENT $WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE TRAP WHEN R REACHES 1 FOOT N DEPTH 2. AIN DAMAGE TO THE TRAP EMBANKMENTS OR SLOPES SHALL 8E REPAIRED SEDIMENT TRAP OUTLET DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 1l4IE 1) 00 NOT PUCE FABRIC UNDER GRATE 2) APPUFS w/ SUBORADE WORK ONCE CRUSHED ROCK 8ADELENT PRECEDES FOR FlNAL PAVING, WRAP GRATE W/ FABRIC MAKING WATER- TIGHT UNTIL FNAL ADJUSTMENT IS COMPETE 3/4' OR LESS W ROCK FILTER OVER FILTER FABRIC 3' APART (IWO 2'x2'44'(MIN.) WOODEN STAKES. DRIVEN INTO GROUND 18' (MIN.) IN DEPTH. PE- 21 ' GIN. SAP BURIED FILTER FABRIC W/ GRATE -A (4 soots) liCalRaLA 6' D 12' WIDEEP E x CATCH BASIN /MANHOLE PROTECTION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 1.0' MN. WALE SLOPE CHECK DAY SPACING 0 T050 150' 5 TO 105 100' RIP -RAP ARMOR DITCH OVER 10z PIPE 4EQU92E0 3' 3' Y DITCH FLOWUNE CC CHECK DAM ASV 0.5' MIN. KEY ROCK INTO V MICH 0.25' (YIN.) '1r D!lt*1 X-aEc'DoN AT ROCk( CFECK DAM FLOW Y DITCH MN. 0.25' SUMP BEHIND ROCK CHECK DNA BE ACLEANNED COUEC DAILY. D 5 D OEDRI EXCEEDS 1/2 OF RS DEPTH NOTE ROCK SHALL BE 4' LORDS CAMEO ROC(. ROCK DAM X ROCK CHECK DAM DETAILS NOT TO SCALE TEMPORARY 'V' DITCH NOTE DITCHES SHALL BE ARMORED YAT11 RP -RAP FOR SORES OVER 50 AN0 LESS THAN 108 PIPES SHALL BE USED INSTEAD OF DITCHES OVER 105 SLOPE NOT TO SCALE 1 A (425) 487-6567 §z a5 cs_ EXPIRES 12-30-04A