HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E03-008 - MINOGUE BRAD / OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES - BURGER KING BUILDING DEMOLITION (KFC/TACO BELL)KFC TACO BELL
15036 TIB
E03 -008
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
FINAL STAFF EVALUATION
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
KFC /Taco Bell restaurant at 15036 Tukwila International Boulevard
File No: E03 -008
I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION
The current proposal is to demolish the existing Burger King restaurant and construct a new
3,568 square feet KFC /Taco Bell restaurant.
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
ti
Project Name: ., KFC /Taco -Bell
Applicant: Brad Minogue, Olympic Associates.
Location: 15036 Tukwila International Boulevard
Zoning: RC
Comprehensive
Plan Designation: RC
III. REVIEW PROCESS
The proposed action is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review as the project does
not meet the exemptions listed under WAC 197 -11 -800
IV. BACKGROUND /PROPOSAL
The current proposal is to demolish the existing Burger King restaurant and construct a new
3,568 square feet KFC /Taco Bell restaurant on a 39,458 square feet site along Tukwila
International Boulevard.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
V. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following lists the elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for
the proposed project. The numbers in the staff evaluation correspond to the numbers in the
Environmental Checklist. If staff concurs with the applicant's response, this is so stated. If
the response to a particular item in the checklist is found to be inadequate or clarification is
needed, there is additional staff comment and evaluation.
A. BACKGROUND:
1 -4 -- Concur with checklist.
5- The demolition and construction will follow issuance of SEPA determination and after
obtaining all required permits from the City of Tukwila or other agencies.
6 -8 Concur with checklist.
9 —In addition to City of Tukwila Demolition permit, the applicant must obtain separate
permits from the Fire Department. Applicant is also responsible for contacting and obtaining
other permits from other state agencies.
10 -12— Concur with checklist.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. Earth:
a -h -- Concur with checklist.
2. Air:
a – Applicant is required to obtain all relevant permits from Puget Sound Clean Air
Agency to address any emission to the air.
b -c– Concur with checklist.
3. Water:
a(1)- a(6)— Concur with checklist.
b(1) and (2) -- Concur with checklist.
c (1) – Existing utilities including storm drainage will be capped off during
demolition. The project shall meet all King County Surface Water Design Manual
drainage requirements. All impacts associated to drainage will be mitigated as part
of the demolition permit and construction permit.
• 1
c (2) – Best Management Practices must be followed to ensure that no construction
debris enters the storm drainage system. All impacts related to construction debris
will be mitigated as part of demolition permit and the construction permit.
d -- Concur with checklist.
4. Plants:
a -d -- Concur with checklist.
5. Animals:
a-d--Concur with checklist.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
7. Environmental Health:
a – Concur with checklist.
a(1)— Hazardous Materials Control Systems may be required to be in place to
address any spills or clean up practices as part of demolition permit review.
a(2)— Concur with checklist.
b (1) -- Concur with checklist.
b(2) -b (3) –The project must meet City of Tukwila noise ordinance requirements.
Compliance with applicable local, state and federal noise regulations will mitigate
any potential adverse noise impacts, associated with the project.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a -1 -- Concur with checklist.
9. Housing:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
10. Aesthetics:
a -c— Concur with checklist.
11. Light and Glare:
a -d -- Concur with checklist.
12. Recreation:
a -c – Concur with checklist.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
• •
14. Transportation:
a -g— Concur with checklist.
15. Public Services:
a -b -- Concur with checklist.
16. Utilities:
a -b -- Concur with checklist.
VI. CONCLUSION
The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the
environment and pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -340, a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
is issued for this project
This DNS is based on impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments,
and the above "Final Staff Evaluation for Application No. E03- 008 ", and is supported by
plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by city of Tukwila for the exercise of
substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions.
Prepared by: Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner
Date: May 7, 2003
Gity of Tukwila
Steven M Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF DECISION
To: Brad Minogue, Applicant
Agencies with Jurisdiction
State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division
King County Assessor (for changes to land use or value)
PROJECT: KFC /TACO BELL
FILE NUMBERS: E03 -008
ASSOCIATED FILES: DESIGN REVIEW L03 -011
APPLICANT:'BRAD MINOGUE, OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES
REQUEST: BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REIVEW FOR KFC /TACO BELL
RESTAURANT
LOCATION: 15036 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD
This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a
Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the above project based on the
environmental checklist and the underlying permit application.
Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to
the permits are available for inspection at:
Tukwila Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98188
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
The project planner is Minnie Dhaliwal, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for
further information.
The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land
Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C).
Last saved 05/07/03
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
City of Tukwila
• ATTACHMENT G
Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BL, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206) 431 -3670
DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
File Number: E03 -008
Applied: 02/21/2003
Issue Date: 05/08/2003
Status: ISSUED
Proponent: BRAD MINOGUE, OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES Lead Agency: City of Tukwila
Description of Proposal:
Demolish the existing Burger King building and construct a new KFC/Taco Bell restaurant
Location of Proposal:
Address: 15036 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BL TUKW
Parcel Number: 0041000525
Section/Township /Range: NW 22 -23 -04
The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by ZZ/ IA[O 3 .
The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below.
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila, WA 98188
(206)431 -3670
qya,
Date
Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of
action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time
period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075)
doe: Miscperm
E03 -008 Printed: 05 -07 -2003
April 11, 2003
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
Brad Minogue
701 Dexter Avenue North #301
Seattle WA 98109
Re: Request for additional information for KFC /Taco Bell at 15036 Tukwila
International Boulevard, Tukwila. File numbers L03 -011 and E03 -008.
Dear Mr. Minogue:
The Design review application for KFC/Taco Bell has been routed to different
departments of the City and they are in the process of completing their review. The
remainder of this letter lists comments from the Planning Department. Please provide a
response to the following items:
I. SEPA Application:
1. You had indicated that you are in the process of obtaining a soils report for the
property. Please provide a copy of the soils report for the subject site.
2. Please explain the boundary line issue since a portion of the adjacent property is .
included as part of this application. Also, what is the recording number of the
easement on the adjoining property that provides access to South 154th Street.
The survey does not-show it and I was unable to find it in the Title report.
II. Design Review Application:
1. Site Design:
a) Building must be integrated and connected with parking, public sidewalk
and adjacent sites (pg. 6 of the Design Manual). Parking on the site is not
connected by pedestrian paths to the entrance of the building. Particularly
there is a lot of pedestrian and vehicular conflict for people who will walk
to the building after parking at the designated parallel parking spaces
along the north property line. A pedestrian connection utilizing raised
walkways(pg. 17 of the Design Manual) that connects the parking areas
1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 -431 -3665
• •
to the building entrance must be provided. Also, use colored concrete to
provide distinction between vehicular and pedestrian paths (pg. 41 of the
Design Manual requires contrasting paving materials and colors to
distinguish between vehicular and pedestrian areas).
b) There may be opportunities for pedestrian connections to adjoining areas
or sites. Please look into if these connections can be provided (pg. 36 of
the Design Manual).
The pedestrian connection from the public sidewalk to the entrance of the
building must provide pedestrian amenities (pg. 40 and 66 of the Design
Manual). Pedestrian amenities must include seating (500 square feet of
pedestrian oriented space located adjacent or connected to sidewalk is
required- pg. 64 of the Design Manual. Also the definition of pedestrian
oriented space includes provisions for seating). No additional parking shall
be required for this seating since it is . for pedestrians and not outdoor
seating for the restaurant. Other pedestrian amenities that must be
provided include Tight fixtures, special paving, hanging flower baskets and
planters with seasonal displays (pg. 40). Also, high quality materials must
be used in site furnishings and features such as walls and paving (pg. 22
of the Design Manual). Provide a detail plan of the area around the
pedestrian plaza. Also -show details of site furnishings including decorative
bollards and bike racks.
2. Building Design
a) Design criteria listed on page 45 of the Tukwila International design
manual states, "Develop an architectural concept for structure on the site
that conveys a cohesive and consistent thematic or stylistic statement..."
The proposed design has two completely different architectural elements
(KFC tower and Taco Bell vertical element) that do not convey a cohesive
and consistent thematic or stylist statement. Also, the architectural 'parts'
of a building must be related to the 'whole' (pg. 58 of the Design Manual).
The current proposal has two completely distinct and separate elements
that are not related to the 'whole'.
b) Design criteria listed on page 56 requires articulation that can be achieved
through a change of materials and texture.
One option to address these two code requirements would be make the KFC
tower and Taco Bell fascia on the south elevation similar to the vertical elements
on the north elevation. Also brick or some other material with a texture could be
used on all the vertical elements and the lower horizontal base of the building to
meet the articulation requirements. Additional reveals could be added to the
cornice of the building to further define the roofline of the proposed building.
2
•
c) Red is an accent color in the proposed color scheme and must be used as
an accent only. The materials and lighting of the red Tight band are not
indicated on the elevations. Please provide details of the light band and
indicate how it is consistent with the materials proposed for the building.
Also provide information about the wall light fixtures (labeled #8 on the
elevations). Further the proposed purple metal strip is not consistent with
the rest of the building.
The written consistency criteria states that the rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be screened by the roof parapet. Please provide a section
of the building showing how the screening requirements will be met.
e) Please provide details of exterior lighting fixtures. Please note that the
design and placement of exterior lighting fixtures must integrate with the
architectural design and materials (pg. 62 of the Design Manual).
III. Landscape Design
a) Ten feet of Type I landscaping is required along the west property line. This
includes one tree per 30 linear feet. Two additional trees must be provided
(one each in the two areas adjoining south driveway).
b) Five feet of Type II landscaping is required along the north and the south
property line. Ten feet of Type III is required along the east property line.
Refer to landscaping chapter for Type II and Type III landscaping
requirements. Since existing trees are being proposed to satisfy perimeter
landscaping requirements, they must be designated on the planting plan
showing botanical name, common name, caliper, condition, quantity and
remarks. It appears that some of the existing trees shown along the east
property line may be offsite. Please note that the landscaping requirements
must be met by on -site landscaping. Also, a certified arborist must provide us
with a written evaluation of the condition of those trees. The Arborist's
report, at a minimum, is to include the following: 1) specific protection
measures for retention of healthy trees during construction process including
details; 2) designation of all dead, dying or hazardous trees; 3) designation of
trees needing renovation pruning. All deciduous trees along the south
property line have been topped and this may jeopardized the health of those
trees.
c) The foundation landscaping along the north facade must include some trees
to break up the big facade. Also, some additional trees must be provided
along the south facade (pg. 56 of the Design Manual).
3
• •
d) All landscape islands must be a minimum six feet wide. It appears that the
island next to the loading area may be Tess than six feet.
e) The location of all freestanding signs including directional and menu signs
must be taken into consideration by the landscape architect to avoid any
conflicts with the requirement for footings and proposed plantings in the
area.
f) The proposed planting plan for the perimeter lacks visual interest and variety.
Otto Luyken is overused in this design and must be reduced. Additional
evergreen plant materials providing seasonal color are to be provided.
g) Gleditsia triacanthos 'Imperial' will create heaving of the pavement and
excess litter (seedpods). Please substitute with a more suitable street tree.
h) Hemerocallis'Stella D Oro' should not be relied upon to provide year -round
color. Although you may use this plant for seasonal color, additional
evergreen plant materials are to be provided at key focal points.
i) Acer circinatum is to be single - trunked, 2 inch caliper.
j) We question the use of Rosmarinus Officinalis'Blue Boy' on this site. Please
provide color photos of other installations where this plant material has been
used successfully by your firm.
IV. Signage
a) Per City's sign code, each business is permitted two signs. They can
choose between two wall signs (on different facades) or one wall sign and
one freestanding sign. There is still some question on whether they are
two physically separate businesses since both share the same common
space and each business does not have its own separate area. One option
may to combine the two signs on east elevation into one sign as has been
done in other communities by KFC/Taco Bell. In addition to one wall sign,
the business can choose to install one freestanding sign along the street.
If you are interested in information about the freestanding sign, please
call me and I can provide with specific requirements regarding
freestanding signs.
Per Design guidelines listed on page 77 of the Design Manual, the design
of signs is to be integrated with the architectural concept in scale,
detailing, use of color, materials and placement.
c) Per Design guidelines listed on page 81 of the Design Manual, high quality
materials and finishes must be used for . signage and backlit plastic and
sheet metal signs are discouraged. Please provide information on how the
proposed/signs meet the design standards.
4
As stated earlier your application is being reviewed by the City's Public Works
Department. I will provide comments after they complete their review. Please note
there may be additional planning comments if the comments from Public Works warrant
any site design changes. The City's Fire Department has completed their review and
would like you to maintain proper fire hydrant spacing. Also, I am attaching comments
from Valvue Sewer District.
If you have any questions you can reach me at 206 -431 -3685.
Minnie Dhaliwal
Senior Planner
5
r� ,OLYMPIC
♦ A 'ASSOCIATES
r COMPANY
O L Y M P I C 701 Dexter Ave. N., #301
ASSOCIATES Seattle, WA 98109
COMPANY
DATE:
JOB NO:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
RECEIVED
I MAY 4 0 7 2003
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
April 7, 2003
2002326
Minnie Dhaliwal
Brad Minogue
KFC Taco Bell Tukwila International Blvd.
TRANSMITTAL
Seattle Phone: (206) 285 -4300
Fax: (206) 285-4371
E -Mail: bminogue @olympicassociatcs.com
The following information is being provided as requested to complete the SEPA application review:
1. Attached is the soils report for the property.
2. The property owner has retained Barghausen Consulting Engineers to prepare a boundary line adjustment
that will be submitted for review concurrently with our building permit application. They indicated that
the title report for the adjacent property to the south of our project contained a copy of a memorandum of
lease to provide the easement access to S 152nd Street. The easement boundaries are described in the
lease, however, it did not appear to have a separate recording number. I will fax over a copy of this
information when received from the engineers.
Thanks for your assistance.
For Your Information:
For Your Use:
For Your Approval:
For Your Signature and Return:
Original in Mail:
Copy to:
document]
El
0
0
YES
NO
Via Mail:
Hand Delivered:
Other Courier:
❑ Via Fax: ❑
❑ FedEx: ❑
Fax #:
Total Pages, including this page:
OL
Bv:
OCIATES COMPANY
Minogu , AIA
•
Golder Associates Inc.
18300 NE Union Hill Road, Suite 200
Redmond, WA USA 98052 -3333
Telephone (425) 883 -0777
Fax (425) 882 -5498
www.golder.com
REPORT ON
AAA,
lGo1der �
Associates
SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
KFC / TACO BELL RESTAURANT
15036 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
chard D. Luark, P.E., P.E.G.
Associate
Distribution:
Submitted to:
Olympic Associates Company, Inc.
701 Dexter Avenue North Suite 301
Seattle, Washington 98109
Submitted by:
Golder Associates Inc.
18300 NE Union Hill Road
Suite 200
Redmond, Washington 98052
1 Copies - Olympic Associates Inc.
1 Copies - Golder Associates Inc.
March 3, 2003
Michael Mengelt
Staff Engineer
023 -1
040303mm1
OFFICES ACROSS AFRICA, ASIA, AUSTRALIA, EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA AND SOUTH AMERICA
April 3, 2003
-i- 023- 1320.000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services 1
1.2 Project and Site Description 1
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 3
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5
3.1 General 5
3.2 Geologic Setting 5
3.3 Subsurface Stratigraphy and Geologic Interpretation 5
3.4 Groundwater 6
4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 7
4.1 General 7
4.2 Seismic Design Criteria 7
4.2.1 Ground Motion Parameters 7
4.2.2 Liquefaction Potential 7
4.3 Foundations 8
4.3.1 Shallow Foundations 8
4.3.2 Spread Footing Dimensions 8
4.3.3 Lateral Load Resistance 9
4.4 Slab Subgrade 9
4.5 Foundation Drainage 9
4.6 Backfilled Walls 10
4.7 Retaining Walls 10
4.8 Pavement Design Criteria 11
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 12
5.1 General 12
5.2 Subgrade Preparation, Footing Preparation, and Geopiers 12
5.3 Earthworks 12
5.3.1 General 12
5.3.2 Structural Fill Placement and Compaction 12
5.3.2.1 Backfill Compaction Requirements 12
5.3.2.2 Fill Placement 13
5.3.2.3 Use of Excavated Soils 13
5.3.2.4 Imported Fill Materials 14
5.3.2.5 Capillary Break 14
5.3.3 Excavation 14
5.3.3.1 Temporary Slopes 14
5.3.3.2 Temporary Shoring Recommendations 15
5.3.3.3 Permanent Slopes 15
5.3.4 Geotechnical Construction Monitoring 15
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
•
-ii- 023- 1320.000
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT 16
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
LIST OF TABLES
Summary of Geotechnical Boring Locations
Capillary Break Gradation Recommendations
Recommended Drain Rock Gradation
Figure 1 Site Exploration Plan
Appendix A Borehole Logs
040303mm11
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
•
-1- 023 - 1320.000
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services
Olympic Associates Company, Inc. retained Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) to provide geotechnical
consulting services for the proposed KFC Taco Bell restaurant to be located at 15036 Tukwila
International Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington. The purpose of the activities described in this
report was to provide subsurface exploration and geotechnical recommendations for site
development.
Golder's geotechnical work activities consisted of provision of a field engineer during geotechnical
drilling, engineering analyses, and preparation of a geotechnical report performed in accordance with
our proposal, dated November 19, 2002 (P02- 1565). This report presents the results of the field
investigation and provides geotechnical design criteria for the project.
1.2 Project and Site Description
The proposed KFC Taco Bell building will be a single -story building located at 15036 Tukwila
International Boulevard in Tukwila, Washington. Based on the proposed development site plan
provided to us, the new structure will occupy a space of approximately 3,800 square feet, and will
front along Tukwila International Boulevard. The property is roughly rectangular, and measures
approximately 270 feet East to West by 160 feet North to South. The remainder of the property will
be occupied by a parking lot, with two accesses to Tukwila International Boulevard on the west and
an access to South 152nd Street near the southeast corner of the site. A former Burger King restaurant
currently occupies the site. The existing building is located in the northwest corner, and the proposed
restaurant structure will be located along the western side of the property. The northern half of the
new building envelope will overlap the southern half of the existing building envelope.
The site is bordered on the north by a Wendy's restaurant. The parking lot for Wendy's is 3 to 4 feet
higher than the project site. The border area is planted with grass, shrubs and small trees (less than
15 feet tall) at the west end and shrubs and medium trees (between 15 and 25 feet tall) at the east end.
The site is bordered on the east by a mobile home park. The project site is approximately 6 feet
higher than the adjacent mobile home park. The grade change is through a 2H:1V to 1.5H:1 V slope
on the east side of a chain link fence along the property line. There are large trees (greater than
25 feet tall) on the east side of the fence, whose branches extend 10 to 15 feet onto the project site.
The site is bordered on the south by a vacant lot (east of the access road to the project site) and a
Chevron station/used car dealership (west of the access road). There is little to no grade change
between the project site and these adjacent properties. The project site is separated from the adjacent
properties by a chain link fence that extends from the southeast corner approximately 60% of the
length of the south border. The border is lined with small trees on the north side.
The site is bordered on the west by State Highway 99 (Tukwila International Boulevard). There are
overhead power lines along the west edge of the project site.
The project site was previously used for a Burger King restaurant. The building and facilities are still
standing; the building is located in the northwest portion of the site. Most of the site (the parking
area) is paved with asphalt, while the north side (the drive -thru and the trash area) is paved with
concrete. Concrete sidewalks surround the building on the east, south, and west sides. The site is
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-2- 023 - 1320.000
landscaped with shrubs and grass between the west side of the building and Highway 99. There are
landscaping "islands" in the parking lot that also contain shrubs.
We anticipate that existing electrical utilities run throughout the site to supply existing parking lot and
exterior lighting. Several storm drains are located in the parking area. Utility meters and hookups are
located at the northeast corner of the building; we noted utilities for power and for natural gas.
There is some evidence of settlement beneath and around the existing Burger King building. A
hairline crack was observed near the east end of the north wall of the building. The crack extended
from the ground surface to a height of 3 to 4 feet, passing through both brick and mortar. Two large
cracks were observed in the wall of a planter at the southwest corner of the building. One crack is on
the west face of the wall and the other is on the south face of the wall. The southwest corner of the
planter wall sits approximately 1 inch higher than the ends of the wall on the west and south sides of
the building. The cracks are about 3/4 inch wide at the ground surface and taper with increased
elevation. They extend almost the entire height of the wall. The cracks had been filled with cement
or epoxy in an effort to repair them. There was no evidence of differential settlement of the
southwest comer of the building associated with the cracks in the planter wall.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-3- 023 - 1320.000
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
A field investigation was conducted at the site on February 13, 2003. The investigation consisted of
drilling two geotechnical borings near or within the proposed building footprint. The approximate
boring locations are shown on Figure 1 and summarized on Table 1.
TABLE 1
Summary of Geotechnical Boring Locations
'?j '`j z•. chin r7 r
Approximate Location'
, r R
Depth
eet t B+ +
i.
GA -1
4 ft W, 8.5 ft S of SE Corner Existing
Building
20
GA -2
16 ft W, 2 ft S of NW Corner of
Existing Building
19
'Location of borings determined visually and by hand measurements.
The borings were drilled with a truck- mounted Formost Mobile B -59 drill rig to depths of 20 and
19 feet below the existing ground surface using a 4- inch - inside - diameter hollow stem auger. Holt
Drilling provided the drill rig and crew under subcontract to Golder. Drilling and sampling of soils
were performed in accordance with Golder Technical Procedure TP -1.2 -5 "Drilling, Sampling, and
Logging of Soils ". Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed at 5 -foot intervals using a
standard two -inch diameter split spoon sampler driven by a 140 -pound hammer falling a distance of
30 inches, in accordance with ASTM D -1586. The number of hammer blows required for each
6 inches of penetration was recorded. The Standard Penetration Resistance (N) of the soil is
calculated as the sum of the number of blows required for the final 12 inches of sampler penetration.
The "N" value is an indication of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of
cohesive soils. If a total of 50 blows are recorded within a single 6 -inch interval, the test is
terminated and the blow count recorded as 50 blows for the number of inches of penetration. Field
judgment is required when assigning density descriptions to soils containing a high percentage of
coarse gravel, cobbles, and boulders: The driving resistance is often altered by the coarse - grained
fraction, artificially elevating the blow counts and indicating denser soils than the actual in -situ
conditions. At the completion of drilling of each boring, the borehole was backfilled with bentonite
chips.
The soil conditions were examined and logged by an engineer from our firm. Pertinent information
was recorded, including depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater
occurrence. Eight disturbed samples were obtained from the borings. The soil samples were-
classified in accordance with Golder Technical Procedure TP -1.2 -6 "Field Identification of Soil ",
which is summarized on the Soil Description Index in Appendix A. All samples were placed in
plastic jars and returned to our Redmond, Washington laboratory for further classification and testing,
as needed.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-4- 023 - 1320.000
The summary borehole logs of GA -1 and GA -2 are presented in Appendix A. The stratification
depths indicated on the summary log represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. The
soil and groundwater conditions were those recorded for the locations and dates indicated and may
not necessarily represent those of other times and locations.
040303mmI 1
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-5- 023- 1320.000
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 General
The soil logs from borings GA -1 and GA -2 are presented in Appendix A. The logs contain pertinent
information including resistance to driving of the sampler; measured locations of the groundwater
table; and soil type and description. The information indicated on the logs represents the approximate
behavior with depth. It should be noted that information is accurate only at the location of testing and
may vary between locations.
3.2 Geologic Setting
The recent geologic history of the Puget Sound Lowland Region has been dominated by several
glacial episodes. The most recent, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, is responsible for most
of the present day geologic and topographic conditions. The Puget lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet
deposited a heterogeneous assemblage of proglacial lacustrine deposits, advance outwash, lodgment
till, and recessional outwash upon either bedrock or older Pre - Vashon sediments and bedrock. These
deposits, and the weathered soils derived from them, make up nearly all of the near - surface soils on
the slopes and higher elevations in the vicinity of the project site.
As the glacier retreated northward, it uncovered a sculpted landscape of elongate uplands and
intervening valleys. Postglacial deposits include; alluvium deposited within active stream channels,
modern lacustrine deposits, organic silt and local peat deposits within kettle depressions, drainages
and outwash channels; volcanic mudflow deposits and landslide deposits.
Our review of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Des Moines, Washington 1:24,000
Geologic Quadrangle map indicates that the project site and its immediate vicinity are underlain by
Ground Moraine Deposits (denoted Qgt in the published literature). The USGS quadrangle indicates
that the ground moraine deposits underlying the project site consist primarily of compact, unoxidized
till. In some areas, a discontinuous cover of sand and gravel is also shown. Other units which are
associated with the near surface Ground Moraine deposits include Vashon Drift and Recessional
Outwash.
3.3 Subsurface Stratigraphy and Geologic Interpretation
In general, the site appears to be underlain by compact to very dense, weathered to fresh ablation till
overlying dense to very dense basal till. Loose to compact weathered to fresh till 9 to 11 feet thick
was found near the surface, mantling the underlying dense to very dense till. In general, the soil units
consist of silty sand to sandy silt with variable fine to coarse subrounded gravel content. Near the
surface, organic content, consisting of plant debris and rootlets, was observed. A layer of topsoil is
present at the surface in the planter areas.
The soil units encountered in borings GA -1 and GA -2 are summarized below:
• TOPSOIL: A layer of topsoil was encountered at both boring locations. The thickness of
topsoil was approximately 6 inches. It is anticipated that the thickness of topsoil is
greater in other landscaped areas, while no topsoil should be encountered beneath the
footprint of the existing building or beneath paved areas on the site.
• WEATHERED TO FRESH ABLATION TILL: Loose to compact brown, weathered to
fresh sandy silt with iron oxide mottling, trace fine gravel, trace organics was
040303mml 1
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
\• •
-6- 023 - 1320.000
encountered on both borings beneath the topsoil layer. The thickness of the layer was
8.5 feet in GA -1 and 11.5 feet in GA -2. The material is more weathered near the surface,
and evidence of weathering decreased gradually with depth. Because the transition from
weathered till to intact till is gradual with depth, it is difficult to denote the exact
boundary between weathered till and intact till. Differentiation between weathered and
fresh till was made based on presence of iron oxide staining and observed lower density
of the upper, weathered section, and contacts noted on the borings logs should be
considered approximate.
• DENSE TO VERY DENSE LODGMENT TILL: Compact to very dense, brown or
grayish brown silty fine sand, trace to little fine to coarse gravel was encountered below 9
feet below the ground surface (bgs) in GA -1 and below 12 feet bgs in GA -2. This
formation was interpreted to be lodgement till underlying the ablation till near the
surface.
Based on our review of the published geological literature, we interpret the upper ablation till
formation to correspond with the near surface Ground Moraine soils mapped on the 1:24,000
Des Moines, Washington quadrangle mantling lodgement deposits at depth. The weathered to
fresh, loose to compact till soils documented in our borings are in general agreement with the
density and compositional notes for Ground Moraine soils mapped in the vicinity of the
development. The upper, oxidized layers are thought to denote areas of weathering in the Ground
Moraine sediments.
At roughly 10 to 12 feet BGS in the borings, brown to grayish brown, dense to very dense soils were
documented, corresponding to Vashon Drift sediments commonly noted throughout the Puget
Lowland.
3.4 Groundwater
During our investigation, wet soil was observed at approximately 12 feet below the ground surface on
the project site. Based on our field observations, we interpret this depth to be depth of groundwater.
It is important to note that because the water levels were measured during drilling, the actual water
table may be slightly different. Also, groundwater conditions can be expected to fluctuate, becoming
elevated during periods of heavy precipitation such as winter and spring.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-7- 023 - 1320.000
4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
This section of the report provides our interpretation of the factual geotechnical data obtained during
the current investigation. The recommendations provided are intended for the guidance of the design
engineers and are intended for this project only. The data may not be sufficient for construction and
where comments are made on construction, they are provided only to highlight aspects of
construction that could affect the design of the proposed project. Contractors bidding on or
undertaking the works must make their own interpretation of the subsurface information provided as
it affects their proposed construction methods, costs, equipment selection, scheduling, and safety
practices.
The following recommendations are for preliminary design purposes and after preparation of final
designs and plans, the recommendations may require revision.
4.1 General
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in our field exploration program, the site appears
suitable for development from a geotechnical standpoint.
The main geotechnical issue at the site is foundation and floor slab support due to the presence of
loose to compact silty sand to sandy silt soil (weathered till) at shallow depths beneath the site. Due
to the thickness of these loose to compact soil strata, we do not consider removal and replacement of
the weathered till to be economical as this operation could require cuts and fills on the order of 10 to
12 feet or more. Our foundation design and construction recommendations are detailed in
Section 4.3.
4.2 Seismic Design Criteria
4.2.1 Ground Motion Parameters
Peak horizontal ground motion is the most studied parameter of earthquake motion, because it is
directly obtained from earthquake accelerographs, and because it provides the most direct method of
obtaining an estimate of the forces acting on a structure during an earthquake.
The project site is located with Seismic Zone 3, as defined by the Uniform Building Code (UBC,
1997). Within this zone, a seismic factor (Z) equal to 0.30 is recommended for calculation of shear
and lateral load imparted on the structure during an earthquake.
Part of seismic design according to the UBC is the selection of one of several generic soil profiles for
seismic analysis. Based on our borings advanced for this study, and our knowledge of the deep soil
conditions in the area, the SD generic soil profile is recommended: This site is underlain by an
average soil profile in the upper 100 feet that is considered stiff.
4.2.2 Liquefaction Potential
Based on our geotechnical borings, the site is underlain by loose to compact sandy silt to silty sand to
a depth of approximately 10 feet. From 10 feet to the bottom of the borings, dense to very dense silty
sand to sandy silt with gravel was observed. These soils are interpreted to be weathered to intact till.
Wet soil was observed at 12 feet BGS in the borings; we interpret the groundwater table to be at
12 feet BGS.
040303 nun 11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
•
-8- 023- 1320.000
As discussed previously, the near - surface soils at the site consist of loose to compact, weathered to
fresh till deposits, interpreted to be Ground Moraine deposits as mapped by the USGS. The low SPT
blowcount and silty nature of these soils will create relatively low allowable bearing capacity levels
for shallow footings.
However, based on our findings and our experience, it is our opinion that the structure can be founded
on shallow strip footings. As such, we recommend that if spread and/or strip footing foundations are
selected, the design allowable bearing capacity should not exceed 2,000 psf. In our opinion, the
relatively low foundation bearing loads required for a single -story structure of this type will permit
construction using shallow foundations without ground improvement or deep foundations, provided
that the recommended allowable bearing capacity is not exceeded.
4.3.2 Spread Footing Dimensions
The footings can be designed based on the following criteria:
• MINIMUM FOOTING SIZE:
Isolated Spread Footings: 24 inches
Continuous (Strip) Footings: 18 inches
• MINIMUM FOOTING BASE DEPTH BELOW ADJACENT EXTERIOR GRADE:
DmiN = 18 inches
This is the minimum required depth for frost penetration. In addition to this specified
minimum depth it is important that the footings are placed on competent soils as
discussed below.
• MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE
Recommended Allowable Bearing Pressure: 2,000 psf
These values are appropriate for all dead and live loads. A one -third increase is
allowable for transient loading such as wind and seismic loads.
• FOOTING SETTLEMENT (Single Footings)
Total Settlement: approximately 1 inch
Differential Settlement: approximately Y2 inch
Note that the majority of footing settlement is anticipated to occur during the period of
construction.
040303mm1 I
Golder Associates
' • \ •
April 3, 2003
-9- 023 - 1320.000
4.3.3 Lateral Load Resistance
The foundation will have to resist lateral load from earth pressure, wind, and seismic loads. For
design purposes, these loads can be resisted by:
• BASE FRICTION: An ultimate value of 0.4 can be assumed for base friction between
the soil and spread footings.
• PASSIVE RESISTANCE ON SIDES OF SHALLOW FOOTINGS: For design purposes,
Golder recommends that the allowable passive pressure be based on an equivalent fluid
density of 300 pcf on the sides of the foundation elements above the water table.
4.4 Slab Subgrade
Conventional slab -on -grade floors can be supported on a subgrade of the native bearing soils as noted
in the Foundation Recommendations (Section 4.1), or on structural fill placed and compacted as noted
in Section 5. Slab -on -grade floors should not be founded on organic soils, loose soil or uncompacted
fill. The slabs should be underlain by a capillary break material, consisting of at least 4 inches of
clean, free draining sand and gravel or crushed rock meeting the following specifications:
TABLE 2
Capillary Break Gradation Recommendations
/ eve Size or Diameter (in) 4
�>>v
rG .,.s !-.... .4 rs e,;. -. . ., .. .. ,.
Percent Passin
._ _ .. ..., t' ., 0•. ... .,... . .. .r•�_.
1 inch
100
No. 4
0
— 20
No. 200
0 - 3
A vapor barrier consisting of reinforced heavy plastic sheeting (6 mil or thicker) can be included
between the slab and the capillary break. If desired, an additional two -inch thick layer of sand may
be placed on the vapor barrier to aid concrete curing.
4.5 Foundation Drainage
We recommend that foundation and slab -on -grade drainage systems be provided for the structure to
allow any seepage water which may develop to drain from beneath the foundations and slabs. These
may include perimeter footing drains or foundation wall treatments for any below grade portions of
the structure. A perimeter footing drain is recommended for all backfilled walls adjacent to any slab -
on- grade. The drainage should consist of a perforated drain pipe placed at the bottom of the footing,
enveloped in drain rock and covered with filter fabric. Drain rock should consist of clean, free -
draining sand and gravel having the gradation specified in Table 3. The drain should be tightlined to
the storm system or other suitable discharge point.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-10-
TABLE 3
Recommended Drain Rock Gradation
023 - 1320.000
S'eve;Sizef
s Percent Passing:
1 -1/2"
100
3/8"
10
-40
No. 4
0
— 5
No. 200
0
- 2
Roof drainage should be collected and conveyed in a tightlined system separate from the footing drain
system. The ground surface adjacent to the buildings should be graded to drain away from the
building.
4.6 Backfilled Walls
Adequate drainage should be provided for basement or below -grade walls to minimize lateral earth
pressures and to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. The wall backfill should be used in
conjunction with footing drains and /or other drainage provisions discussed above to provide full wall
drainage. The backfill should be compacted firmly in horizontal lifts with a loose lift thickness not to
exceed 12 inches. The moisture content of the backfill at the time of compaction should be
approximately equal to the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is the water
content at which the soil can achieve the highest degree of compaction, as determined by ASTM D-
1557, the Modified Proctor Density Test. The contactor should avoid over - compaction adjacent to
the wall in order to prevent over - elevated earth pressures.
Alternatives to the use of free - draining fill behind walls would include continuous geocomposite
drain strips placed continuously behind the wall or washed drain rock within 2 feet of the wall for the
full height of the wall. Both these alternatives would be used in conjunction with the wall footing
drains discussed above.
Backfilled basement walls can be designed for an at -rest earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid
density of 50 pcf, assuming there is no buildup of hydrostatic pressure.
4.7 Retaining Walls
Retaining walls may be used to accommodate grade changes, and general site grading around
buildings. A variety of wall types are feasible, including conventional cast concrete walls,
mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls, and rockeries. Once the grades are known, and a specific
wall type has been decided, detailed design recommendations can be developed. Gravity or
cantilever retaining walls can be designed using an active earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid
density of 35 pcf, assuming there is no buildup of hydrostatic pressure. Bearing capacity, base
friction, and passive earth pressure criteria are presented in Section 4.3.2.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
.'. •
-11- 023 - 1320.000
For preliminary design purposes, we recommend that rockeries be no higher than 6 feet in native cuts.
Block walls under 4 feet in height can generally be constructed without internal soil reinforcement,
while higher fill walls (MSE) will require soil reinforcement. All retaining walls should be
constructed with a permanent, full -face drainage system. The wall footing drain should consist of a
properly sized, perforated drainpipe bedded in clean gravel backfill. The footing drain should convey
the water under gravity flow to the storm water collection system.
4.8 Pavement Design Criteria
It must be recognized that pavement design is a compromise between high initial cost coupled with
low maintenance, and low initial cost coupled with the need for periodic repairs. As a result, the
owner should take part in the development of an appropriate pavement section. Critical features
which determine the durability of the pavement section include: stability of the subgrade, presence or
absence of moisture, free water, traffic volumes, and the frequency of use, particularly by heavy truck
traffic.
The majority of the paving requirements will be for interior access to the restaurant. Provided that the
pavement subgrade is prepared in accordance with the construction recommendations section of this
report, and traffic loading is anticipated to be light, the following pavement sections are
recommended for interior access roadways.
Recommended Minimum Pavement Section
2 inches AC - Class B
6 inches Crushed Base
Over firm, unyielding subgrade compacted to at least 95% modified Proctor density.
Alternative Pavement Section
2 inches AC — Class B
3 inches ATB
Over firm, unyielding subgrade compacted to at least 95% modified Proctor density.
If paving is required along the frontage of highway 99, the pavement section should be designed for
the anticipated traffic loading.
If the moisture content of the native soils does not allow for compaction of the subgrade to be firm
and unyielding, the use of admixes such as cement and/or fly ash could be considered to improve the
subgrade. Paving materials and minimum sections should conform to the local municipal criteria.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-12- 023- 1320.000
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 General
General geotechnical related site construction would consist of removal of the existing structures and
asphalt, excavation, subgrade preparation, placement of footings and slabs, placement and
compaction of fills, preparation of pavement section subgrades, and placement of footings drains.
This section discusses selected elements of these construction issues.
5.2 Subgrade Preparation
Based on the borings, the foundation subgrade will consist of loose to compact silty sand to sandy silt
with little gravel and trace to little organics. Due to the nature of the soils, the subgrade could
become disturbed under the influence of surface water, groundwater, and the Contractor's equipment.
The Contractor should implement suitable procedures to protect the subgrade, such as excavating
with a track hoe without tracking on native soils, use of a crushed rock or gravel working mat and
access roads, soil admixing of the subgrade, or other procedures as necessary to maintain the integrity
of the subgrade. Native competent subgrade that becomes softened by the Contractor's operation
must be over - excavated and replaced at the Contractor's expense.
5.3 Earthworks
5.3.1 General
Although the site work will be mainly excavations, some structural fill will be required for backfill
against walls, around and beneath foundations, in paving sections as required, and to establish final
site grades. To the extent possible, the major earthwork activities should be completed during the dry
times of the year. .
Although feasible, earthwork compaction during wet weather will significantly increase costs
associated with off -site disposal of unsuitable excavated soils, increased control of water, and
increased problems with subgrade disturbance and need for soil admixtures, geotextiles, and rock
working mats.
5.3.2 Structural Fill Placement and Compaction
Structural fill should be used below footings, slabs and pavements. Structural fill should be well -
graded sand and gravel that, when placed and compacted, will meet the required compaction
specification. Below all footings, and within three feet of grade in pavement areas, the fill should be
compacted to the structural fill compaction requirements noted in Section 5.3.2.1, below. Beneath
floor slabs and other structural components such as utility service trenches not underlying pavements,
non - structural compaction requirements should be met as detailed below.
5.3.2.1 Backfill Compaction Requirements
Structural and non - structural backfill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a loose lift thickness not
to exceed 12 inches. All fill associated with foundations, pavement structures, and /or trench backfill
supporting infrastructure such as pavements should be considered structural fill. Fill associated with
landscaping areas may be considered non - structural.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-13- 023- 1320.000
All fill must be capable of being compacted to the required specifications noted below.
Maximum Lift Thickness: 12 inches loose
Foundation, Pavement Structure Backfill and Pavement Subgrade Soil: Fill beneath
roadways shall be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum modified Proctor density
determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. All soft and/or wet areas of subgrade should
be removed and replaced with suitable materials or treated in place to create a suitable
founding surface. The subgrade should be cleared of all organics and /or debris prior to
compaction.
Utility Trench Backfill: The fill should generally be compacted to at least 90 percent of
maximum modified Proctor density determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. In
pavement areas, the fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum modified
Proctor density determined in accordance with ASTM D 1557. All soft and/or wet areas of
subgrade comprising the foundation of the new utility should be removed and/or replaced
with suitable bounding surface.
Non- Structural/Landscape Areas: Non - structural backfill should be compacted to at least
90 percent of maximum modified Proctor density determined in accordance with ASTM D
1557.
5.3.2.2 Fill Placement
Fill placement may be done with conventional earthmoving equipment including bulldozers,
backhoes and dump trucks. Fill lifts should be spread evenly in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches
per the guidelines of Section 5.3.2.1. Thinner Lifts may be required if compaction specifications
cannot be achieved. No fill lifts should be placed over previously placed lifts that have not met
compaction requirements.
Compaction should be achieved using standard compaction equipment such as jumping jack, drum
rollers, and hoe - packs. Wheel rolling is generally not an acceptable form of soil compaction, and
suitable compaction is not expected using this method. In areas with tight access, compaction may be
completed using a vibrating plate or jumping jack compactor; note that if small compaction
equipment is used, lifts thinner than 12 inches may be required.
Soil compaction should be tested by a qualified field construction monitor using a nuclear density
gauge. If density tests indicate that compaction is not being achieved due to moisture content, the
contractor should be immediately notified. At a minimum, the fill should be re- tested. If the soil
moisture is within a few percent of optimum moisture content, the contractor shall re- compact the fill
and, if necessary, moisture condition and recompact. If the soil is significantly over optimum
moisture, the fill should be scarified, moisture- conditioned to near optimum moisture content,
recompacted and re- tested.
Prior to placement of fill from a new source, or placement of a new fill soil type, a Proctor
compaction test should be performed to provide field construction guidelines.
5.3.2.3 Use of Excavated Soils
Re -use of on -site excavated soils depends on the site conditions- and the nature of the soil being
excavated. Based on our observations, some of the soils which will be excavated from the site
040303mm1 I
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-14- 023- 1320.000
contain a high silt content. Consequently, these materials are moisture sensitive and cannot be
compacted to a firm and unyielding condition when they are a few percent above optimum moisture
content. Therefore, these soils cannot be used as structural fill except during dry weather when
moisture conditioning is easily accomplished.
In general, high -silt excavated soil may be used in non - structural areas, such as beneath planters and
other landscaping features. High silt soils should not be used in pavement areas or as foundation
subgrades under any circumstances.
5.3.2.4 Imported Fill Materials
Imported structural fill materials should consist of well graded sand and gravel fill materials, such as
pit run or similar. If off -site structural fill is used during wet weather, it should be freely draining
with less than 5 percent fines (that portion of the soil passing the US # 200 sieve).
5.3.2.5 Capillary Break
Due to the silty nature of the native soils underlying the site, we recommend that all slab -on -grade
construction be underlain by a minimum 4- inch -thick capillary break layer, consisting of pea gravel
or similar freely draining gravel material. The capillary break should be connected to the footing
drain system to prevent buildup of pore water pressure.
Furthermore, we recommend that a vapor barrier consisting of plastic sheeting be placed beneath the
slab.
5.3.3 Excavation
We anticipate that small excavations of limited vertical and lateral extent will be necessary for
completion of the project. These could include excavation for footings, below grade walls and
installation of utilities. Based on our study, the soils should be amenable to excavation using standard
earthwork equipment such as bulldozers and trackhoes.
It should be noted that no groundwater is anticipated in the upper 10 feet of the soil formations at the
site. However, groundwater conditions can vary over time and potential for seepage and limited
perched groundwater lenses exists.
5.3.3.1 Temporary Slopes
Safe temporary excavations are the responsibility of the Contractor and depend on the actual site
conditions at the time of construction. All construction should comply with applicable OSHA and
WISHA standards. Cut slopes exposed for any length of time, particularly during wet weather,
should be covered with visqueen to prevent erosion and maintain stability.
Temporary cut slopes should not be graded steeper than 1H:1V. Slopes graded less steeply may be
required if instability is noted or an unsafe condition is identified. Limited vertical cuts less than
4 feet high will be allowed if space limitations require them and no instability or unsafe conditions are
identified. All vertical cuts shall be backfilled completely at the end of each shift to prevent
development of instability.
Maintenance of safe excavations is the sole responsibility of the contractor; however, a qualified
geotechnical engineer should observe excavation of temporary cut slopes.
040303mmI1
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
-15- 023 - 1320.000
5.3.3.2 Temporary Shoring Recommendations
Based on our understanding of the project, we do not anticipate that temporary shoring will be
required. However, if space limitations are noted during construction, or if vertical cuts of greater
than four feet are required, temporary shoring should be installed. Such temporary shoring could
consist of trench boxes or similar.
Shoring should be designed for a minimum construction surcharge of 400 psf and checked with
respect to the traffic loadings from construction equipment. Golder's recommended parameters for
design of temporary shoring works are shown below:
Active Earth Pressure Coefficient (KA) = 0.35
Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient (Kp) = 3.0
5.3.3.3 Permanent Slopes
Based on our understanding of the project and our visual reconnaissance, we do not anticipate that
permanent slopes will exist, owing to the flat nature of the site. If, however, long -term slopes are
planned for the site, slopes should be no steeper than 2H:1 V (50 percent grade) or flatter, assuming
proper compaction, drainage and erosion control measures are in place. In general, 3H:1V
(33 percent grade) slopes are preferable from a maintenance and landscaping standpoint.
5.3.4 Geotechnical Construction Monitoring
IWe recommend that a qualified geotechnical engineering firm be on site full -time during critical
it aspects of the project. This would include installation of deep foundation/ground improvement,
footings and slab subgrade preparation, and placement of structural fill.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
April 3, 2003
• •
-16- 023- 1320.000
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
This report is for the exclusive use of Olympic Associates, and their clients and contractors for
specific application to the Tukwila KFC/Taco Bell development discussed herein.
The exploration program was performed in general accordance with locally accepted geotechnical
engineering practice to provide information for the area explored. There are possible variations
between the exploration sites and in the groundwater conditions with time. We recommend that you
include a contingency in the budget and project schedule for unanticipated conditions.
It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. Please contact us if you have additional
questions, or if we can be of additional assitance on this or other projects.
040303mm11
Golder Associates
FIGURE
Golder Associates
GA-2&
J
FOOTPRINT OF EXISTING
BUILDING
1_
SGA -1
n
0
FOOTPRINT OF PROPOSED
BUILDING
30
60
FEET
i
FIGURE 1
SITE EXPLORATION PLAN
OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES /KFC & TACO BELL RESTAURANT/WA
K:\PROJECTS12002 \0231320 \000\ 0231320000F01.DW G
Golder Associates
•
APPENDIX A
Golder Associates
RTCORD OF BOREHOLE GA -1 SHEET 1 of 1 • PROJECT OAC/KFC Taco Bell/Tukwila DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -stem auger DATUM: ELEVATION:
PROJECT NUMBER: 023 -1320 DRILLING DATE: 2/13/2003 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90
LOCATION: 4' W, 8.5 S of SE air ex bldg DRILL RIG: B -59 COORDINATES: not surveyed
x I—
p V
—0
o
i
2
Z
CC
SOIL PROFILE
SAMPLES
PENETRATION RESISTANCE
BLOWS / ft •
10 zo 30 4o
NOTES
WATER LEVELS
GRAPHIC
DESCRIPTION
rn
j
0
< 0
0
ELEV.
w
CO
Z
w
BLOWS
per 6 in
14010 hammer
30 inch drop
N
r
O
CC
WATER CONTENT (PERCENT)
DEPTH H
Wr 1 Ow 1 W,
,-
-
-
0.0 - 0.5
SM
.• /+.•..t
•
' '.•-.•
Cuttings L1
1i • r
to
• -
114Bi /
0.5 - 9.0
Loose 10 compact, unstratified. brown and
gray sandy SILT, trace fine gravel, trace
organics, moist. Iron oxide mottled
throughout. Faceting and rocketing of
gravel noted. (ABLATION TILL)
0.5
1
SS
2 -2.4
6
0_8
-
ML
1.5
—5
—
m
'm
9.0
2
SS
9.11.17
28
1_0
■
• -
9.0
— 10
r
E
m
i
a
-20.0
Dense to very dense, unstratified, brown
silty fine SAND, trace to little fine to coarse
gravel, moist. Gravel is subrounded and
exhibits faceting and socketing.
1.5
Ben tonite
chips
_
(LODGMENT TILL)
»1
SM
3
SS
18 -23-35
>50
5
— 15
—
_
•
•
-
4
SS
16 -23 -23
46
1_2
1.5
—
Boring completed at 20.0 ft.
20.0
—25
—
-30
—
4
_
— 35
—
_
—40
—
1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: VanShaar -
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt Drilling CHECKED: R. Luark y ,\RGolder
DRILLER: Mike /Joel DATE: 3/28/03 ,ASSOCiates
Golder Associates
RECORD OF BOREHOLE GA -2 SHEET 1 of 1
PROJECT' OAC/KFC Taco BeIVT•ukwila DRILLING METHOD: Hollow -stem auger DATUM: ELEVATION:
PROJECT NUMBER: 023 -1320 DRILLING DATE: 2/13/2003 AZIMUTH: N/A INCLINATION: -90
LOCATION: 16' W, 2' S of NW cnr ex bldg DRILL RIG: B -59 COORDINATES: not surveyed
X c
p v
17
x
SOIL PROFILE
SAMPLES
PENETRATION RESISTANCE
BLOWS / ft •
10 20 30 40
NOTES
WATER LEVELS
GRAPHIC
1-
1
2
0
m
DESCRIPTION
rn
D
00
ELEV.
cc
2
Z
w
a
BLOWS
per 6 in
140 lb hammer
30 inch drop
N
a
U
K
WATER CONTENT (PERCENT)
a
V,
DEn) H
W. 1 OW 1 W,
0
-
-
`
-
- 5
r
`
-
- 10
-
-
-
- 15
-
-
-
-20
I- 25
H30
'L
i
i -35
-
i
I
i-
j -40
I
1
ro
E
m
g
S
_
0.0 -0.5
SM j_
L.'.�
■
•
II
»■
IP'�Y,
Cuttings l''y
:Vb."
188
•
•
Bentonite
chips
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
1Soola /
0.5.3.5
Loose, unstralihed brown sandy SILT, some
fine to medium sand, trace fine gravel,
moist. (WEATHERED ABLATION TILL)
ML
0.5
1
SS
4 -4 5
9
1_4 1.5
3.5 - 12.0
Compact, unstratified, brown silty fine to
medium SAND, trace to little fine
subrounded gravel, moist. (ABLATION
TILL)
12.0 -19.0
Dense to very dense unstratified brown to
grayish brown silty fine SAND, little to some
fine to coarse gravel, moist. Gravel is
subrounded and exhibits faceting and
socketing. (LODGMENT TILL)
SM
3.5
2
SS
5617
25
5
SM
12.0
3
SS
14-20-29
49
_4
4
SS
-33-50
>50
0_6
1.5
Boring completed at 19.0 ft.
19.0
I 1 in to 5 ft LOGGED: VanShaar =.
• DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Holt Drilling CHECKED: R. Luark C® \(,O1dCi
i DRILLER: Mike /Joel DATE: 3/28/03 v Associates
Golder Associates
At completion of drilling
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
March 19, 2003
Brad Minogue
701 Dexter Avenue North #301
Seattle WA 98109
Re: Notice of complete application for KFC /Taco Bell at 15036 Tukwila
International Boulevard, Tukwila. File numbers L03 -011 and E03 -008.
Dear Mr. Minogue:
Based on a review of your submittal relative to those requirements as set out in the
Complete Application Checklist for SERA and Design Review, your applications are
deemed complete.
A notice of land use application will be distributed within 14 days. The next step is for
you to install the notice board on the site. You received information on how to install the
sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, you may
obtain them at the Department of Community Development (DCD). Also, you must obtain
a laminated copy of the Notice of Application to post on the board. Please call me to
discuss the timing of the notice and to obtain a laminated copy of the notice. After
installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of
Posting to our office.
This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to
require that you submit additional plans or information, if such information is necessary to
ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the
review process.
If you have any questions you can reach me at 206 - 431 -3685.
Minnie Dhaliwal
Senior Planner
1
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
• RECEIVED
FEB 21 2003
COMMUNITY
stEALOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW
APPLICATION
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPM NT:
LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate
toffs). block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL
NUMBERS.
15i0 7Vfr*4A /k_ VJ1i hOtevf /' Lf • 7a1
prceJ f .S7S'
Quarter: Section: Township: Range:
(This information may he_/ nd on your lax .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:
Address:
Pro( /4
Phone:
Signature:
of Tic- Svc.. 1v • 4FZof 907c 7
C: \homepage \tukwila \dcd \ apps \SEPAAI'P.DOC, 08/31/00
FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P -SEPA
Planner:
File Number:
e 03- 00 S
Application Complete
(Date:
)
Project File Number:
P(4t001._p'5({
Application Incomplete
(Date:
)
Other File Numbers:
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPM NT:
LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate
toffs). block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL
NUMBERS.
15i0 7Vfr*4A /k_ VJ1i hOtevf /' Lf • 7a1
prceJ f .S7S'
Quarter: Section: Township: Range:
(This information may he_/ nd on your lax .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:
Address:
Pro( /4
Phone:
Signature:
of Tic- Svc.. 1v • 4FZof 907c 7
C: \homepage \tukwila \dcd \ apps \SEPAAI'P.DOC, 08/31/00
• •
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
Date:
City of Tukwila
Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist
2 - /(.o3
Applicant Name: _Ri
Street Address:
City, State, Zip:
Telephone:
701 /Xarfcv )5t N • w3c)7
�6 oar e3c)c)
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 Scction 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.
Mav 24, 2001 1
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project
including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and
ongoing and sche duled 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
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.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -0
YES - 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.
NO - 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 - ontinue 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
- -mpt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response.
NO Continue to Question 6-0
YES - Continue to Question 6 -0
May 24, 2001
2
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
Part A (continued)
6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the
regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of
transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover,
and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate
for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -13). For the
purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle
ropriate 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 answe r.
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.
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
appropriate response.
CY--E. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2)
Continue to Question 1 -4
Part B (continued)
May 24, 2001 3
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
1 -4 Will your project generate stonnwater 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 stonnwater
treatment and management system intended to contain all stonnwater 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
stonnwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stonnwater, answer Yes to
this question. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2)
�E) 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.
0 Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 2 -2
2 -2
Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of
a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as
any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter -
breast- height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle
appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -4
YES - Continue to Question 2 -3
2 -3
Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary
high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of
this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the
fall. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - 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)
YES - Continue to Question 2 -5
2 -5
Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
May 24, 2001
4
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high
water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each
question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to,
construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled
maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer.
3 -1
Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the
Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the
area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream
bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes 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 inckdes 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
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
May 24, 2001
5
City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist
Part D (continued)
3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to
another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat
conditions that support saltnonid 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)
May 24, 2001 6
•
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
fG "taco fai-wkettiovat g/cot .
2. Name of Applicant:
ifSSZta
3. Date checklist prepared:
Z- f / -Zc-v3
4. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Tukwila
5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
_6•5 " in sai fit"-
6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
A/U
7. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
!illCa/%
8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
(;:'nrrH,N LANDtSE.APP ■SErnnrr.Doc.IJ$ 31 W )
1
Agency Comments
•
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
•
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal.
10. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of
the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this
paj.6)
3,E
11. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, the tax lot number, and
section, township, and range. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the
range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and
topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the
agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit
applications related to this checklist.
/9236, aitiormacr/ial
• r(*aibit l -
12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use
Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive?
( \ APPHA \',LA\DC'SE.APP \SEPAAPP.DUC, 08,31,00
2
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one
other:
oiling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
Agency Comments
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (ap roximate percent slope)?
;
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.
/1/74. -- Sim- 'o F-
_tmot_ _ f __ -_Mad
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describc.�O
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
rI� A.wi r. .% . (ere/ ,
(7:1APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP' SEPAAPP.DOC, 11N;31,00
3
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
f. Could erosion occur as.a result of clearing, construction, or use?
If so, generally describe.
g.
Aommea
About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Bel
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
01-22 - -- -
2. Air
IS
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust,
automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is
completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
-hao5f f _ ei
24_�I,.�!Jhtvv
-Q s k_'an hawse- herd
%2gflwGc4t- !s o /afer?1 •
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
G:\ APPHAN\LAXDUSE.APP1SEPAAPP.DOC, ON3 L00
1
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
c. Propose me sures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: 7A.
____as_ i,,,,,e
3. Water
a. Surface:
1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including
year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
M7
2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be
affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
do
G: \APPHAN \LANDUSGAPP \SEPAAPP.DOC. 08 31,00
5
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known.
c7
5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type
of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
b. Ground:
1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, ppurpose, and approximate quantities, if known.
G:\ APPHAN \LANDUSE.APP,SEPAAPP.DOC, ON 3100
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
2. Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals...; agricultural; etc). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve:
% k i' w& be
�
a ��Y'v
�^ - 4 as re41/11,e4
Agency Comments
c. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this
water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Aiic ` off wit
4.tt f
2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
AV-0 --
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
25iiis 2Y-114
G:I APPHAN \LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC. 0}1.3 1,00
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
'"--.
Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
✓Evergreen
tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
V
Shrubs
✓Grass
Pasture
Crop or grain
Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush,
skunk cabbage, other
Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
Other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be remove or altered?
-�S -
f�� f
t ui rem Eli feeed
pater.- i &&
_ar 41/(_-. .
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
44rki Matti f rzezmee /� l(/� 7�1` , shn/ks
G:\ APPHAN ILANDUSE.APP,SEPAAPP.DOC, 11% /31:14)
8
•
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to
be on or near the site:
Birds:
Mammals
Fish
Other
Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
Deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
iVOUZ A407/V1/1
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
MiLe •
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.
itiafWei
-sElteried. 67
G: IAPPHAN \LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 11W3I MO 9
Agency Comments
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe.
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:
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.
Nt 3
1. Describe special emergency services that might be required.
AlU%2,
2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
_b_fattvi kras
G:IAPPHAN\LANDUSE .APP \SEPAAPP.DUC, MO
10
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
b. Noisc
1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on
a short-term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
7 t ( C 5P z_m --fit( monc �zt
- - thirYle. tic kvo-s - c sfi-.
raker ,terise
Agency Comments
3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Nom_
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
_*) A L _tar t' rioustrat, Tarim
fit'* _ -t-
%' iztor -mr acivss ri B • - f- ote2 srie .
b. Has the site bbe'. used for agriculture? If so, describe.
ime00-0,T-
G: UPPHAN\LANDUSE.APPrSEPAAPP.DOC, 08'31,0
11
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
c. Describe any structures on thc si
d. Will any struc
es be demolished? If so, what?
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
Cam).
Agency Comments
f What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site
--- -�s5__ 1744. �l ) tip vvrri
-- - -- - fI�� si?ei --- - - -- - -- -
g.
If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of thc site?
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
G: \APPHAN \LANDUSE.APP,SEPAAPP.DOC, 0831,00
12
•
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Aioss
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
/01C—
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
*a- Gam' /rah
L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,
or low- income housine?
G:\ APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP,SEPAAPP.DOC, (H3 MO
13
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low- income housing. a
Po alPecto(
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior b ilding material(s roposed?
5(1/Lex2 tzREM ct* �M
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
ee ftE G%okS rail/7
Ats
�.'
leglired
0:\APPHAN\LAND SE APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, ux;31,00
14
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
180141144 - Uzi,/
to geo-e
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
1 - -. az
M
/la
1.
c. What existing off -site }}sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
ViAt
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
12. Recreation
a. What designed and informal /recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Me
A/
G:\ APPHAN \LA \DGSE.APP;SEPAAPP.DGC. Otti3 IMO
15
• •
Please respond to all questions. Usc separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
NanR.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, National, State, or Local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
jV
L O% kieW%'i •
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
Nam bviowm exist L•r�
is a reel -
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
(i:UPPHANILANDUSE.APP SEPAAPP.DOC. O831dK)
16
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
- -/Vettiliel Iittlerna fr / liArd .r s. / "d •
771.6. na- vr�d Y e _ Served z.
( trn 1-00-) *Ai bow(
gz,m,,,,k-* t-dnr�°�e as .r b. Is ee s served by public transit? If not what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
_ail __• t•
s
c ' w corp OF_ -SI_
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminat 9
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).
fin.
er
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation?
If so, generally describe.
G:iAPPHAN,LANDISE.APP ■SEPAAPP D(JC 4)8.34.)14)
17
• •
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses: Agency Comments
f How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would
occur.
AVE e"'"171/14 225 o 275 r ✓ W N -try
vciores J A/e� s +
J
1-dintier. 17
f Geo -7e-x))
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
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.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities current] available at the site
electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer eptic system
other:
G:\ APPHAN \LANDUSE.AI'P \SEPAAPI'.DOC, 08.3Id1)
18
•
Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary.
Applicant Responses:
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.
Walevt --- Caof __G-v f va /vve
j Ol t"• col fe
-mss_ I_-�i
_� • 1-€141149
• _ t the,•
'i -•
Agency Comments
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers ar e and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them ake its decision.
IIV
Signature:
Date Submitted:
(NON- PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND
ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE
FOLLOWING PAGES).
G:I APPHAN\LANDUSE.APP,SEPAAPP.DUC, {I8,31 MI
19