Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E06-009 - RW THORPE & ASSOCIATES / LEE JENNIFER - 7 LOT SHORT PLATSTAUDACHER PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT 4020 S 128 ST E06 -009 City oPi'ukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Web site: http: / /www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) File Number: E06 -009 Applied: 05/01/2006 Issue Date: 11/27/2006 Status: APPROVED Applicant: R.W. THORPE & ASSOC/JENNIFER LEE Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: 7 -lot short plat Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township/Range: 4020 S 128 ST TUKW 7340600664 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. The conditions for this SEPA Determination are amended at the end of this document. This MDNS is issued under WAC 197 -11 -350. The conditions are attached. Comments must be submitted by 12 i 2 / 0 & . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. For a copy of the appeal procedures, contact the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development. �-✓�. ■O,, . 2.rg , 200(0 Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Date City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 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) • • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Web site: http://www.cLtukwila.wa.us File Number: E06 -009 Applied: 05/01/2006 Issue Date: 11/27/2006 Status: APPROVED SEPA Determination Conditions: 1: 2: Applicant must meet the following conditions: 1) Applicant shall follow recommendations of geotechnical report (Riley Group, 9/9/05); 2) Slope setbacks shall be shown on final plat Steve Lancaster, Director Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION i, HEREBY DECLA E THAT: S ty.-P/L Project Name: it (AL) Jr� & ,a0c ; Notice of Public Hearing i Determination of Non - Significance _ Notice of Public Meeting V Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline.Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this year 20 0 tQ ay of fOtf, in the P:\ADMINISTRATIVEFORMS \FORMSW FFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION Project Name: it (AL) Jr� & ,a0c ; f Project Number: C.e, -00 cf i Mailer's Signature: _ Person requesting mailing: c)-- 2A402 V P:\ADMINISTRATIVEFORMS \FORMSW FFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION 0 All kvi g A De 04I" a Di 'bi 0.-, 1 y 0 Jevl 1., 9 Le m 72. w Tin or-pc- d A sso ciaf ..; 7. s, _I Sea-- N e WA I'L22 I c; 1 ,r 0,4 / 1 I` Gc,wi Jos- h Wot I d o c/ X066 S• 125 51-, T) k w (-14 tivfr 9,.•3i0. r ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE FEDERAL AGENCIES () U.S. ENVIRAINTAL PROTECTION AGENCY () U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. () NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. () DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANO DIV DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION' •( OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE > KING COUNTY AGENCIES () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 () K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION () K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC () KC. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ()TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT () TUKWILA LIBRARY () RENTON UBRARY () KENT LIBRARY () CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY () OWEST () SEATTLE CITY LIGHT () PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHUNE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT&T CABLE SERVICES SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE () POLICE () FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR () CITY CLERK OTHER ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM ( ) SEATTLE TIMES () SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:WDMTNISTRATIV E\FORMS \CHKLIST.DOC ( ) HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE () K.C. DEV & ENV!R SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) KC. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT () CfTY OF SEA -TAC () CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS () CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU () STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. LOCAL AGENCIES () DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY () SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION *SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPUCATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER MEDIA () HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW PliFIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR P TS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (continent period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section 'Applicant 'Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record ' send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division —SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS:.. Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21-day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General . 'Applicant 'Indian Tribes .. 'Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). Any parties of record ' send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) •. Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc: from PMI's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross- sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P: IADMINISTRAT IVEIFORMS\CHKLIST.DOC City ofTul„t Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Comm f i nit/ Development Steve Lancaster, Director STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLLIST Staudacher Short Plat File #: E06 -009 Summary of. Proposed Action The applicant proposes to short plat one 1.43 acre parcel into seven single- family lots with associated central access roadway, individual driveways and utilities. One residence is already on -site. General Information Project Name: Staudacher Short Plat Applicant: R.W. Thorpe and Associates /Jennifer Lee Location: 4020 S. 128th St., Tukwila Zoning: Low Density Residential (LDR) Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR) Review Process The proposed action is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review as the project does not meet the exemptions listed under Park Nine — Categorical Exemptions (WAC 197 -11 -800) Background /Proposal The proposal is to develop a parcel of land approximately 1.43 acres into seven single - family residences with associated road, sidewalks, driveways and utilities. The northeast corner of the site contains a steep, but stable, slope. The lots will be served by a 28 feet wide central access road that will connect S. 128th St., and 40t1i Avenue South. Built by the developer to public standards including curb, gutter, sidewalks and street lights, the road will be maintained by the City of Tukwila. The existing house, located in the southeast portion of the lot, will remain. There will be a tract with an underground vault for on -site storm water control and treatment. Rf 1 Q: \SEPA E06 -009 Staudacher Prelim Shrt Plt \E06 -009 StaudacherSEPAstaffrept.doc 11/27/2006 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 o Tukwila, Washington 98188 o Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206- 431 - 3665- _ - - -,.- • • Recommendation Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Existing Environmental Information Geotechnical Engineering Report (The Riley Group, 9/05) Wetland Determination Report (The Riley Group, 4/05) Technical Information Report (Pacific Engineering Design, 8/05) Summary of Environment Impacts The following describes the impacts of primary elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for the proposed project. . Earth The site generally slants from north to south. Average slopes are 12% throughout the site, but the northeast portion has slopes of up to 30 %. There is no indication of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity, but geotechnical engineers noticed creep and surface erosion of the toe of the existing slope during a site visit in 2005. Approximately 1,500 cubic yards of cut, and 650 cubic yards of fill will be needed for site development/plat improvement. Erosion control measures will be used to minimize the transport of sediment during construction. The geotechnical report makes a number of specific recommendations for site preparation and house development to accommodate the site's slope conditions. It suggests that the proposed development will not adversely affect slope stability if the report's recommendations are incorporated into final design and construction. These recommendations shall be followed during construction. Air Some dust and internal combustion engine emissions associated with the use of construction equipment will occur during the grading and construction of the project. Common dust - suppression techniques shall be used during construction. Water There are no surface water bodies or wetlands on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. New homes will be on sanitary sewer. The Technical Information Report states that a detention and water quality vault will be located at the southwest corner of the site i.e. the lowest point. The vault will detain the stormwater peak flows and provide a permanent pool for water quality. Plants Deciduous trees (alder, maple, aspen), grass and shrubs are at the site. Removal of existing trees and shrubs will be required for site development. Portions of existing tree canopy will be removed and replaed at 314 square feet per Tukwila 18.54.140B. Rf 2 11/27/2006 Q: \SEPA E06 -009 Staudacher Prelim Shrt Plt \E06 -009 StaudacherSEPAstaffrept.doc • • Animals Songbirds have been observed on the site. Energy/Natural Resources The completed project homes will use electricity and natural gas for heating, lighting and cooking purposes. Codes require insulation in walls, windows. Environmental Health There are no known environmental health risks on site. Construction noise will result from grading and building of individual homes. Noise levels will need to comply with City of Tukwila noise ordinances. Land/Shoreline Uses The zoning and comprehensive plan designations for the site are Low Density Residential (LDR). Adjacent uses are single family and warehouse. The site is bound to the north and east by an uphill slope and a single - family residence and a single - family residence, to the south by S. 128t1i Street, and to the west by 40th Avenue South. The site slopes down to the southwest with any average slope of approximately 12 %. The northeast portion of the site is a slope with a gradient up to 30 %. Housing Six new homes will be built. No housing will be lost. Aesthetics No views will be blocked. Recreation No recreational uses will be replaced. Transportation The site is currently accessed by S. 128th Street. The proposed access will connect S. 128th Street to 40t1i Avenue South. The nearest transit stop is approximately .03 miles away at E. Marginal Way S. and S. 128t1i St. Per the Checklist, the development will generate fewer than 50 trips per day; there is no discussion of when the peak trip hours would be. Any required mitigation fees will be assessed when the building permits are submitted. Public Services The homes will generate an occasional need for police and fire service. Utilities Electricity, water, garbage service, telephone and sanitary sewer are available to serve the project site. Rf 3 11/27/2006 Q: \SEPA E06 -009 Staudacher Prelim Shrt Plt \E06 -009 StaudacherSEPAstaffrept.doc • • Public Comments One neighbor asked to be kept informed of project developments, but had no specific comment. Recommendation Staff finds that the proposal should not have a probable significant adverse environmental impact if the following conditions are observed: 1) Recommendations made in the geotechnical report (Riley Group, 9/9/05) shall be implemented; 2) Slope setbacks shall be shown on final plat. Pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -340, staff recommends issuing a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (MDNS) for this project. Rf 4 11/27/2006 Q: \SEPA E06 -009 Staudacher Prelim Shrt Plt \E06 -009 StaudacherSEPAstaffrept.doc • STAUDACHER SHORT PLAT S 128th St. & 40th Ave. S. Tukwila, Washington Preliminary Technical Information Report Prepared for: Robert Staudacher c/o R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. . Attn: Jennifer Lee, 705 Second Avenue, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 624 -6239 Prepared By: Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53`d Ave. S., Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98188 Phone: (206) 431 -7970 Fax: (206) 388 -1648 Joseph M. Hopper, P.E. RECEll/ED /AUG 1 i ?006 _ . BENT April 28, 2006 Revised: August 15, 2006 PED Job No. 05099 Preliminary Technical Informatr eport for Staudacher Short Plat • 8/16/2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 II. OFF -SITE ANALYSIS 1 III. CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 2 IV. FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4 V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS 6 VI. EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN 6 APPENDIX • Site Data Notes • KCRTS Printouts • Wetpond Sizing Worksheet • City of Tukwila Zoning Designation Map • City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Designation Map • City of Tukwila Drainage Basins Map (Figure 2) • City of Tukwila Infiltration Restrictions Map (Figure 3) • City of Tukwila Level 2 Detention Areas Map (Figure 4) • King County Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors Map • King County Isopluvial Map • King County iMAP Aerial Photo Map with Contours • King County Soils Map • Off -Site Basin Map Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page i \ \bladel425 \Raid \Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc Preliminary Technical Informati eport for Staudacher Short Plat 1 8/16/2006 I. PROJECT OVERVIEW Site Location and Project Proposal The site is located in Section 10, Township 23, Range 4E, W.M. in the City of Tukwila. The King County Parcel Number is 7340600664. The lot size is 62,233 square -feet, which also equals 1.43 acres. The site is within the LDR zone in the City of Tukwila. The site is located at the intersection of S. 128th St. and 40th Ave. S. in the Riverton Neighborhood. The proposed project will divide the existing parcel into 7 single family lots, using the City of Tukwila Short Plat process. The existing residence is proposed to remain, and six additional houses will be built with this proposal. Existing Site Conditions The site slopes southwesterly at slopes ranging between 6 and 15- percent. The northeast corner of the site has steep slopes at 15- percent and greater for approximately 30 -feet horizontally. The site currently has a single family residence on the southeast corner of the parcel. The remainder of the property is covered with trees and brush. The site is located in the City of Tukwila's- Riverton Creek Drainage Basin. Proposed Detention and Water Quality Facility A detention and water quality vault will be used due to the natural grade of the site. The vault will be located at the southwest corner of the site, which is the lowest point on the site. The vault will detain the stormwater peak flows and provide a permanent pool for water quality treatment. Driveways will drain to the street and will be picked up within the catch basins within the street and conveyed to the detention facilities. The roof drains will be tight lined to the conveyance system and then routed to the detention facilities. II. OFF -SITE ANALYSIS Upstream Tributary Area The neighboring properties to the north and to the west are higher in elevation than the subject property. The neighboring lotto the west has a single family residence and several out buildings. The neighboring property to the north is undeveloped at this time. The upper limit of the upstream basin is approximately bordered by S. 126th St. and 41st Ave. S. It doesn't appear that off site storm water enters the site, there is no evidence of concentrated flows, scouring, or erosion due to stormwater runoff. The storm water most likely infiltrates into the ground prior to reaching the site. The neighboring parcel to the north, as we have been informed by the city, is also proposing to subdivide and create additional lots. It is assumed that this development will be required to capture and detain any additional stormwater runoff Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 1 \ \blade1425\Raid\Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc Preliminary Technical Informatio eport for Staudacher Short Plat • 8/16/2006 it creates and will most likely divert the flows from the site to the road side ditch running along the east side of 40th St. S. The potential for future runoff from upstream of the project site is minimal, and is not anticipated in the future. In the event that runoff does occur from the neighboring properties, an interceptor trench or swale may be needed along the north and west property lines to intercept the runoff prior to it flowing onto the site. Downstream Analysis The downstream basin is generally developed with industrial buildings & shops and large office buildings. It appears that this area is the headwater tributary area for the Riverton Creek. The only place where the creek can be identified is in the rear yards of several properties that abut East Marginal Way S. The creek crosses under S. 126th St. in a culvert and continues in a northerly direction. The creek is intermittent between open swale drainage courses and culverts /storm drain pipes crossing under roads and parking lots. The Riverton Creek ultimately outlets to the Duwamish River several miles to the north. There are road side ditches /swales along the east side of 40th Ave. S. and the north side of S. 128th St. adjacent to the proposed development. The site slopes in a southwesterly direction toward these swales. The swales converge at the northeast corner of the intersection of 40th Ave. S. and S. 128th St., which is also the southwest corner of the subject property. The swales are collected in a culvert and conveyed to the west to the storm drainage conveyance system under East Marginal Way S. The storm drain system continues in a westerly direction until it outlets into the Riverton Creek several hundred yards to the northwest. A telephone conversation took place on Wednesday August 9, 2006 with John Howat, the City of Tukwila Surface Water Superintendent. John informed us that the only concern he had for this project site was in confirming the size of the existing culvert to which the proposed drainage system is connected. He wanted to verify prior to constructing the proposed drainage system that the culvert is a 12 -inch pipe. If the pipe diameter is less than 12- inches, it will have to be upgraded to 12- inches. Visual inspection of the pipe confirms that it is 12- inches in diameter, and notes for the contractor to verify the pipe size prior to construction will be placed on the final engineering documents. One business downstream of the project site has previously complained about flooding, but according to John this is a separate issue relating to a sump pump system and is not directly related to the upstream drainage basin for that site. III. CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS CORE REQUIREMENTS — SECTION 1.2 OF KCSWDM 1.2.1 CORE REQUIREMENT #1: Discharge at the Natural Location The proposed project's storm water will be discharged from the site to the storm drainage system under the roadway within S. 128th St. and 40th Ave. S. at the southwest corner of the Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 2 \ \bladel425 \Raid \Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc Preliminary Technical Information Report for Staudacher Short Plat 8/16/2006 site. This location is the lowest point on the site and can be considered the site's natural discharge location. 1.2.2 CORE REQUIREMENT #2: Off -site Analysis This core requirement has been addressed elsewhere in this preliminary report. Please refer to the Off -Site Analysis Section (Section II). 1.2.3. CORE REQUIREMENT #3: Flow Control On -site flow control will be provided by an on -site detention vault designed to Level 1 flow control using KCRTS analysis. 1.2.4 CORE REQUIREMENT #4: Conveyance System Site runoff will be collected by means of yard drains, catch basins and roof drains. Collected runoff will be conveyed to the detention facility within pipelines designed to convey 25 -year peak flows and checked for flooding conditions at the 100 year event. 1.2.5 CORE REQUIREMENT #5: Erosion and Sediment Control During construction of the infrastructure for this development, temporary erosion control methods will be implemented to prevent sedimentation and erosion as outlined in the City of Tukwila's design standards. The excavation for the detention facility will be used as a temporary erosion and sediment control during that phase of construction. A sediment trap will be provided during other times of construction prior to the construction and excavation of the detention facility. 1.2.6 CORE REQUIREMENT #6: Maintenance and Operations This requirement will be fulfilled by the property owner until bonds have been released and public drainage system(s) have been conveyed to the City of Tukwila. Only the drainage system within the right -of -way, catch basins and 12" pipe, will be conveyed to the City of Tukwila. The drainage facilities on the newly created lots will remain the property of the individual homeowners, and will not be conveyed to the City of Tukwila. 1.2.7 CORE REQUIREMENT #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability Bonds and insurance in accordance with the City of Tukwila requirements will be provided by or at the behest of the owner during site construction and until the drainage facilities in public street rights -of -way have been accepted by the City of Tukwila County for ownership. 1.2.8 CORE REQUIREMENT #8: Water Quality Runoff from roof drains will be tight lined directly to the catch basins within the street and conveyed to the detention and water quality vault. The possibility of infiltrating the roof Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 3 \ \blade 1425\Raid\Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc • Preliminary Technical Information-Report for Staudacher Short Plat 8/16/2006 drains on site prior to discharging to the storm drain system will be investigated during the construction document phase of the project. Runoff from driveways will drain to the street and will be picked up by the catch basins within the street and conveyed to the detention vault. A combined water quality /wet -vault will be constructed to provide water quality treatment. In accordance with TMC 14 and the City of Tukwila Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards the vault will be placed entirely underground. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS - SECTION 1.3 OF KCSWDM 1.3.1 Special Requirement #1: Other Adopted Area Specific Requirements Not applicable to this project. 1.3.2 Special Requirement #2: Flood Plain / Floodway Delineation Not applicable to this project. 1.3.3 Special Requirement #3: Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable to this project. 1.3.4 Special Requirement #4: Source Controls Not applicable to this project. 1.3.5 Special Requirement #5: Oil Control Not applicable to this project. IV. FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS The drainage analysis uses the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) software version 4.2. The on -site soils are most likely Alderwood, KCRTS Soil Group Till. The King County Soil Study maps do not show the soil classification in this area, because it is outside of the original study area. The neighboring soils that were identified in the Soil Survey near this area have been classified as AmC (Alderwood), or Ur (Urban Land). The proposal is located in Sea -Tac rainfall region with a scale factor of 1.0. EXISTING CONDITIONS Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 4 \ \bladel425\Raid \Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc Preliminary Technical Information Report for Staudacher Short Plat 8/16/2006 The site encompasses approximately 1.43- acres. The existing site area breakdown is as follows: o 1.07 Ac. Till Grass o 0.30 Ac. Till Forest o 0.06 Ac. Impervious DEVELOPED CONDITIONS This project proposes a total of 7 single - family houses on the 1.43 -acre site. Referring to the preliminary site plan, the developed site area breakdown is as follows: o 0.41 Ac. Till Grass (landscape strip, lawns) o 0.87 Ac. Impervious (sidewalks, roofs, driveways, and roads) o 0.15 Ac. Till Forest (undisturbed hillside in northeast comer of property) DETENTION ROUTING CALCULATIONS Level 1 flow control standards are applied to this project. This standard requires "maintaining the high flows at their predevelopment levels for the 2 -year peak -flow and the 10 -year peak flow ". The existing 2 -year 24 hour peak rate is 0.07 cfs The 10 -year 24 -hour peak rate is 0.13 cfs Using the appropriate release rates, the developed time - series was modeled in a vault. The analysis resulted in a required detention volume of 6,875 cf with preliminary dimensions of 20 -feet wide x 69 -feet long x 5 -feet deep. The vault shape has been defined to fit the site geometrics. A vault with dimensions of 20 -feet wide x 70 -feet long x 5 -feet deep is proposed for the site. The vault will actually be constructed 10 -feet deep. Detention will be in the upper 5 -feet of the vault and the lower 4 -feet will be used for water quality treatment. In accordance with TMC 14 and the City of Tukwila Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards the vault will be placed entirely underground. A control structure with two orifices has been designed to meet the release rate standards. The KCRTS calculations have been included in the Appendix. WATER QUALITY TREATMENT Water quality treatment will be in the form of a wet -vault combined with the detention vault. The storage volume required is 4,589 cf. The surface are required is 1,147 sf. The proposed 20 -feet wide by 70 -feet long vault will provide a storage volume of 5,600 cf and a surface area of 1,400 sf. Given the restrictions of the site, a bio- filtration swale or bio - filtration filter are not practical options due to the slopes on site. The best option is a combined detention/wet vault for this site. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 5 \ \bladel425 \Raid\Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc fi Preliminary Technical Information Report for Staudacher Short Plat • 8/16/2006 V. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS The conveyance analysis will be included in the final Technical Information Report at construction document submittal. The system will be designed to convey the 25 -year peak flows and checked for flooding conditions at the 100 -year event per the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. VI. EROSION / SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN Erosion and sedimentation control will be provided by utilizing BMPs selected from the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. These BMPs will likely include, but are not necessarily limited to, sediment pond(s) and /or trap(s), silt fencing, construction safety fencing, interceptor v- ditches, rock check dams, plastic sheeting of stockpiles, straw mulch, hydro- seeding, catch basin protection, and rocked construction entrance, etc. A Temporary Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan will be submitted as part of the construction documents detailing the means by which sediment and erosion control will be handled during construction. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Page 6 \\blade1425 \Raid\Project Files \05099 Staudacher Short Plat \TIR \05099 Preliminary TIR.doc 0 APPENDIX PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN LLC CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS JOB c;w tA-C►-ULiZ. INA CALCULATED BY DATE OSO 61°1 _ 1 Ai Ac. T«. � ss 1nnPt:V�S_= `Ti c_ 2Z.. i DEIN L&t5 e- i4occ, sF- 1/yh?/= e...v►ous 0.604 Ac... TZoAO.cas PK = 3b LF StDGLlrrkL 1o,? osF =0.2 AC. s) 1.0-1Ac. o olo Ac. 0:3o Ac. (r,00 0g.,veLx A.Ys) l(c� CUSS 1ILc; izes%_.� e1.rJC LL. oL U tv' .. 12-E, 1.0 V t✓ 1 Gnrn e 4 4 :t_ Ac- 0.'61 AL O. IS .- AL, SA VIC-7 V kb LT 112 (11, g(,o sv. C31, (6°l1 sG sc) 6:6-1S (f9' 20` x S' 4,a`'\ c t.141 sF DOb c.: �io�xZo' x ' �,.(000 c_$- (noizo,c4) 1 ._4 oD -s7• 1 5445 53R0 AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 100 SEATTLE, WA 98188 FAX 206 3813-1848 PHONE 425 251-B811 206 431-7970 Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:pre.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.122 4 2/09/01 2:00 0.067 7 1/05/01 16:00 0.151 2 2/27/03 7:00 0.035 8 8/26/04 2:00 0.070 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.127 3 1/18/06 16:00 0.114 5 11/24/06 3:00 0.276 1 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks pre.pks Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.276 1 100.00 0.990 0.151 2 25.00 0.960 0.127 3 10.00 0.900 0.122 4 5.00 0.800 0.114 5 3.00 0.667 0.070 6 2.00 0.500 0.067 7 1.30 0.231 0.035 8 1.10 0.091 0.234 50.00 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time series File:dev.tsf Project Location:sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.254 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.207 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.303 3 2/27/03 7:00 0.224 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.269 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.270 4 1/18/06 16:00 0.326 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.508 1 1/09/08 6:00 computed Peaks dev.pks Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (cFS) Period 0.508 1 100.00 0.990 0.326 2 25.00 0.960 0.303 3 10.00 0.900 0.270 4 5.00 0.800 0.269 5 3.00 0.667 0.254 6 2.00 0.500 0.224 7 1.30 0.231 0.207 8 1.10 0.091 0.448 50.00 0.980 • • Retention /Detention Facility Type of Facility: Facility Length: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice # Height (ft) 1 0.00 2 3.75 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Detention Vault 69.00 20.00 1380. 5.00 50.00 6900. 5.00 12.00 2 ft ft sq. ft ft ft cu ft ft inches Full Head Diameter Discharge (in) (CFS) 1.22 0.090 1.11 0.037 Stage (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.10 2.20 2.30 2.40 Elevation (ft) (cu. 50.00 50.01 50.03 50.04 50.05 50.06 50.08 50.09 50.10 50.20 50.30 50.40 50.50 50.60 50.70 50.80 50.90 51.00 51.10 51.20 51.30 51.40 51.50 51.60 51.70 51.80 51.90 52.00 52.10 52.20 52.30 52.40 Storage ft) 0. 14. 41. 55. 69. 83. 110. 124. 138. 276. 414. 552. 690. 828. 966. 1104. 1242. 1380. 1518. 1656. 1794. 1932. 2070. 2208. 2346. 2484. 2622. 2760. 2898. 3036. 3174. 3312. Pipe Diameter (in) 4.0 Discharge (ac -ft) (cfs) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.001 0.006 0.001 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.006 0.010 0.013 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.025 0.029 0.032 0.035 0.038 0.041 0.044 0.048 0.051 0.054 0.057 0.060 0.063 0.067 0.070 0.073 0.076 0.009 0.010 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.018 0.022 0.026 0.029 0.031 0.034 0:036 0.038 0.040 0.042 0.044 0.046 0.048 0.049 0.051 0.053 0.054 0.056 0.057 0.059 0.060 0.061 0.063 Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 • • 2.50 52.50 3450. 0.079 0.064 0.00 2.60 52.60 3588. 0.082 0.065 0.00 2.70 52.70 3726. 0.086 0.066 0.00 2.80 52.80 3864. 0.089 0.068 0.00 2.90 52.90 4002. 0.092 0.069 0.00 3.00 53.00 4140. 0.095 0.070 0.00 3.10 53.10 4278. 0.098 0.071 0:00 3.20 53.20 4416. 0.101 0.072 0.00 3.30 53.30 4554. 0.105 0.073 0.00 3.40 53.40 4692. 0.108 0.074 0.00 3.50 53.50 4830. 0.111 0.076 0.00 3.60 53.60 4968. 0.114 0.077 0.00 3.70 53.70 5106. 0.117 0.078 0.00 3.75 53.75 5175. 0.119 0.078 0.00 3.76 53.76 5189. 0.119 0.079 0.00 3.77 53.77 5203. 0.119 0.079 0.00 3.78 53.78 5216. 0.120 0.081 0.00 3.80 53.80 5244. 0.120 0.083 0.00 3.81 53.81 5258. 0.121 0.085 0.00 3.82 53.82 5272. 0.121 0.088 0.00 3.83 53.83 5285. 0.121 0.088 0.00 3.84 53.84 5299. 0.122 0.089 0.00 3.94 53.94 5437. 0.125 0.095 0.00 4.04 54.04 5575. 0.128 0.099 0.00 4.14 54.14 5713. 0.131 0.103 0.00 4.24 54.24 5851. 0.134 0.106 0.00 4.34 54.34 5989. 0.137. 0.110 0.00 4.44 54.44 6127. 0.141 0.113 0.00 4.54 54.54 6265. 0.144 0.116 0.00 4.64 54.64 6403. 0.147 0.118 0.00 4.74 54.74 6541. 0.150 0.121 0.00 4.84 54.84 6679. 0.153 0.124 0.00 4.94 54.94 6817. 0.157 0.126 0.00 5.00 55.00 6900. 0.158 0.127 0.00 5.10 55.10 7038. 0.162 0.438 0.00 5.20 55.20 7176. 0.165 1.000 0.00 5.30 55.30 7314. 0.168 1.730 0.00 5.40 55.40 7452. 0.171 2.530 0.00 5.50 55.50 7590. 0.174 2.810 0.00 5.60 55.60 7728. 0.177 3.070 0.00 5.70 55.70 7866. 0.181 3.310 0.00 5.80 55.80 8004. 0.184 3.530 0.00 5.90 55.90 8142. 0.187 3.730 0.00 6.00 56.00 8280. 0.190 3.930 0.00 6.10 56.10 8418. 0.193 4.120 0.00 6.20 56.20 8556. 0.196 4.300 0.00 6.30 56.30 8694. 0.200 4.470 0.00 6.40 56.40 8832. 0.203 4.630 0.00 6.50 56.50 8970. 0.206 4.790 0.00 6.60 56.60 9108. 0.209 4.940 0.00 6.70 56.70 9246. 0.212 5.090 0.00 6.80 56.80 9384. 0.215 5.240 0.00 6.90 56.90 9522. 0.219 5.380 0.00 7.00 57.00 9660. 0.222 5.520 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 0.51 * * * * * ** 0.43 5.10 55.10 2 0.25 * * * * * ** 0.16 5.01 55.01 3 0.26 0.13 0.13 4.98 54.98 4 0.27 * * * * * ** 0.12 4.79 54.79 5 0.30 * * * * * ** 0.10 4.04 54.04 6 0.16 0.07 0.07 2.92 52.92 7 0.21 * * * * * ** 0.05 1.65 51.65 8 0.22 * * * * * ** 0.05 1.65 51.65 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:dev.tsf Outflow Time Series.File:rdout 7034. 6915. 6875. 6607. 5572. 4034. 2275. 2275. 0.161 0.159 0.158 0.152 0.128 0.093 0.052 0.052 Inflow /Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.508 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.429 CFS at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Reservoir Stage: 5.10 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 55.10 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 7034. Cu -Ft 0.161 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.162 0.052 0.099 0.052 0.069 0.122 0.127 0.429 Computed Peaks 2 2/09/01 18:00 7 1/06/02 5:00 5 3/06/03 21:00 8 8/24/04 0:00 6 1/05/05 10:00 4 1/18/06 22:00 3 11/24/06 7:00 1 1/09/08 9:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 0.429 5.10 1 100.00 0.990 0.162 5.01 2 25.00 0.960 0.127 4.98 3 10.00 0.900 0.122 4.79 4 5.00 0.800 0.099 4.04 5 3.00 0.667 0.069 2.92 6 2.00 0.500 0.052 1.65 7 1.30 0.231 0.052 1.65 8 1.10 0.091 0.340 5.07 50.00 0.980 • KCRTS Program...File Directory: C: \KC_SWDM \KC_DATA\ [C] CREATE a new Time Series ST 0.30 0.00 1.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 pre.tsf T 1.00000 T [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies pre.tsf pre.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [C] CREATE a new Time Series ST 05099.exc 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.00 0.000000 Till Pasture 0.00 0.000000 Till Grass 0.00 0.000000 outwash Forest 0.00 0.000000 outwash Pasture 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Grass 0.00 0.000000 wetland 0.00 0.000000 Impervious 0.15 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.87 dev.tsf T 1.00000 T [T] Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module [P] Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies dev.tsf dev.pks [R] RETURN to Previous Menu [F] Size a Retention /Detention FACILITY Manual Design vault.rdf 5 Route Time Series 0 Return to Main Menu [F] Size a Retention /Detention FACILITY Manual Design vault.rdf 5 Route Time Series 0 Return to Main Menu [X] eXit KCRTS Program 0.00 0.000000 Till Forest 0.00 0.000000 Till Pasture 0.00 0.000000 Till Grass 0.00 0.000000 outwash Forest 0.00 0.000000 Outwash Pasture 0.00 0.000000 outwash Grass 0.00 0.000000 wetland 0.00 0.000000 Impervious Page 1 • • Wetvault Sizing Worksheet Summary of the 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Requirements Project Name: Staudacher Short Plat Project Number: 05 -099 Vault Description: Wet Vault Step 1) Determine volume factor f. Basic size? Large size? f= 3 f= 4.5 Step 2) Determine rainfall R for mean annual Storm Rainfall (R) 0.039 (feet) Step 3) Calculate runoff from mean annual storm Vr=( 0 .9A; +0.25A �9 +0.10Aff +0.01A09)xR = tributary area of impervious surface At9 = tributary area of till grass Aff = tributary area of till forest Aag = tributary area of outwash grass R = rainfall from mean annual storm Vr = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm Step 4) Calculate wetpool Volume Vb =fV, f= V, = Vb = Volume Factor Volume runoff, mean annual storm Volume of the wetpool Step 5) Determine wetpool dimensions Vb =h x A Vb = h= A= Volume of the wetpool Wetpool depth (minus sed. Storage) Vault width Vault length Water quality design surface area of wetpool Total Wetvault Surface area required = 37,897 (sf) 17,860 (sf) 6,534 (sf) 0 (sf) 0.039 (feet) 1,530 (cf) 3 1,530 (cf) (cf) 4,589 4,589 (cf) 4 (feet) 20 (feet) (feet) 1,147 (sf) (sf) 57 1,147 VTTLE„,.. • F. , KING - COUN RW.-iti:053 1. it SEATTLE 1 nis Is ivy& aposeArtn al bad usa destrzticra atitod by Cti Cana 12,05. LAW rreGS We Ord Pr'40-4 Res, dograits, ar4 ciffe( aim tdrmatto valat,4 4Tital3 NOM% d Monty Certioprott *If -.nott t.trvetut worpat.en rntat to = meNJ, ad •ts 0411 Is ,Str Figure 18-9 4111191180.gf I at 0r_t LOR-Low Density Residents' MDR-Medbm Density Residential HDR-High Density Residential 0-0ffice MUO-Mbead Use Office FICC-ResIdental Commercial Center NCC-Nelghbortiood Cornmerclal Center RC-Regional Commercial RIM-Regional Committal Mixed Use TUC-Trdiwila Urban Cfltet CO-COMMerall 1410 Industrial 11/S-Tukwita Valley South U-Ught Industrial HI-Heavy Industrial 1,41C/L-Manufacturing Industrial CenterAlght auJusbtal MIC/H-Manufaching industrial Center/Heavy Industrial Ovedays and Sub Aims i Publlc Recreation Oveday Shorellne Overlay {Approx. 200' each side of (ver) - 'Tukwila City Lints Commercial Redevelopment as (Dimensions are APProximate) z cc ) SEAITLE IV, KING COUNTY .74 nit a otric wesetit6ln 615nd MI *sown &caul trot, Card 114495. SEATAC Comprehensive Plan Designations LOR-LOW Clen.§ty Residential MDR-Mellon Den&ily Residential HDR-fith Densny Resiclurtial 0-Office MUD-Mbeed Use Office RCC-Residential Commercial Center NCC-fleighbarhood Corranerclal Center RC-Reg:anal Commercial RCM-Regional Commie' Mbced Use TUC-Tukwila Urban Center CA.1-Commerciel LigM Industrial 1VS-Tubtraa Valley Muth Industrti ill-fiervy Industrial MICA:Manufacturing Industrial Cent Industrial MICIH-Manufacturing !mistrial Center/Heavy Industrial Overlays and Sub Areas CD 1— Z" 1-1-J Cr 1 1 Public Recreation Overlay Shoraie Overlay (Approx. 200' each side al river) Maradasbning Industrial Center Minutely Tukwia South Master Plan Area Tukwila Urban Center Potential Amstar Area Tukwila Clty limits 9 a: KENT OW 76+70.78.0e_.022003009.wr rsamosrM mr" Lake Washington 1 0 !son Placelf. II ng Acres Basin t P17 Basin J Southeast CBD Basin Legend Roads Streams Water BodyMletland Basin Boundary (Jurisdicidons) • Figure 2 Drainage Basins 0 os 1 Miles City of Tukwila Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan Study Area Data shown in this map are In Washington State Plane NMh, MAD 1983 Map Legend ,%/ Infiltration Not Allowed �___e 1 City Limits s Not to Scale Date: September 23, 2003 MINIM Map Legend Level 2 Detention Required City Limits MUM Date: September 23, 2003 111 Ascii • s Not to Scale � ay MM M r ST 1.0 ST 1.0/ LA 0.8 LA 0.9 LA 1.0 LA 1 2 ..SNOHOAAISH COUNTY KING COUNTY ST 1.1 ARTOMI, I PAC WINO COUNTY ST 1.0 Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors E.1111 Incorporated Area River /Lake Major Road PIERCE COUNTY LA 0.9 ST 1.1 ST 1.0 ST 1.0* LA 1.0 LA 1.2 LA 0.8 LA. 0.9 • SNOHOMISH COUNTY :'%'COMER • KING COUNTY Elliott Bay MERCER HIAND S ATYLE ENTO `_ RUMEN ��fIOI�VMAiK PARK Puget Sound 0.54" (0.045') 111.-il Incorporated Area .� River /Lake Major Road t.ill(+�t 0.47" (0.039') KING COUNTY PIERCE COUNTY 0.47" (0.039') NOTE: Areas east of the easternmost isopluvial should use 0.65 inches unless rainfall data is available for the location of interest 24 The mean annual storm is a conceptual storm found by dividing the annual precipitation by the total number of storm events per year 0.52" (0.043') 0.56" (0.047') 0.65" (0.054') l�auf vuLp Lte King County • iearct • aE,C.. 1 J1 1 iMAP - Property Information (Planning) k '. *". - c;.�,.,,11( {(iPrj �. 'C cQ 1` a . f S _ Sr 51 4ti'. t XT rC Y N 4- , 1 •1 A r/ 1' -•.yii c(�r�>f.�} tin `,'. 1! ! iYi C l, i k .,..y, 1 1, ,IPk , r �' W ^ -'E�� 1, s.��, 9 )� . C-1 ( . r.!•5:4.0.1 -I� 'f,), 7 , '�, ? ` I t t "�i rr Lt r: P.! ! O$ 4� z' i- tt t '�{�1n • •--� 'l.a r :f,lb,r!{r� '`':, !'�j'S ; 0A, :ti. ,l`� r _II �. 11.k.1 , yi,{ t++s +[} 1 /� t { i{r .21 -16, h 31C t i- s • t i c� I rr�� 4 .rri Gl, ( ^l l'. 2.Y C--�r Yf f »•i/ 1 '� '.r'Q ' —t••'. 2 ' ^M t Il L ,- �1.1�,r )`.G`�lt t• N- tr-4'4,- jtri., { ,} 1 ,t-n� 1r ;i. 'CR'� �`i. y . -. P.1 .., . 1 1� 'r1TL •�.e ` 3S"la.. P"'i rit4} • n T A i "» c'. • 3r xt t 1 r f rLO r.. . -S t fq :? j�'R�q�[, ^4cI - r" , ;'. ' "S, rJ.- .„,""a jj�+ 1l ni�a,t.-.•`{, , b _y �.A rti'P7'LT '!"'tl"a', c7i{ r } fi'r �l ,.1i•et9 h F / Zl C r L sih i, P , • � { fl 4dy�,' �`, tC'! tb rl t , y4 �, J •R t fsi "fi 'n t Frirmot �r ti \ tJt qze tl yy �� 1A, {o. o�C �(j� + 3 ... ' . L , 4 . 1 T \F 1', U.I1 i 9� 4,1L :' Jl +.1+, i,� .L .:1, - M1S i f v -F r l ;r` "F.1i.5,b!IbH, w} °'C t yT ` )�t'> e r` �,'4'C" J t. -1 z 1 i fd :r t r; i 1 {�� t v�l !j tt 't@ r /. r �`' s S 4 r k t e i cN f . i �} h`3 • 7` , a) n l^ Y y r? , -er s, 1 iv C 1 �, .ii% l v C a, <h i. r- r i t t'd ) -r '' ss L d' >, u : �' t ' 1'i2 1 ' jj t ;d � ' ,r' •fir t � P.V.i, }. _ . t1- # ;• E� ? }y,v� i ,' (tlf a 1(�¢,l. f p,,� -`` ,* t 5 c{ �y 9 N� ''''%1',.," �Jh t L. �.d S j 15 ' T l �M1 , gl' )., `TS�'1 ) X { LS " �� '. N.,,,,,,4-‘ _ .,,i ❑ 1 n'1r. '4 �s 1 4'• S x t .� Q •f `ttt 1 `.' ? IV s: � d} -'•�i t. v-E ♦.. T •C [�{, <'rl q 1, °i '' fr 'R Itr e -- ] i� • • • p s•� 4;,� tr t t 1 a �\ 14t1 '�1 � v r a1?,c fb R9 r 'x 4�y tP i, 1 . r '.i ..i .1., • t {, l T .'Y'■ .1 t l P r r ldfJG'l_G. 44 "'" ^-, - ' Y r , J- • ye q , r �b' t .. , ri." Ys ✓/ ,.f l i. lb t IE b3..11 )� , y;n • .7'`. r te. Y f b Gb � :,,..• �,,f ;I x 1. vF"fi t . e, r .. .� rY 4y j' k - tg �A" r � ,1 k r l 1fi `` Y ,il't�t. ,P ' •` i y Sif( ae. �, ) k \ } t, i�, 7 i 13'JE It �b rIC, .7, YL i T `\.-. t r lfi " , 5Q {��5�,i'l:� K Gk t q7� F 3� L.l l ` P 4 ; z4j' , Js rtfye:g7.•, c. .• Q. Y }iia } i ,�f t11 .. f..y y lM •k t ' t3' , Niii. ;tt 1 , ly t tt I { ( e4 �' i '"1a . A P 1 6 ( Y �ZT '3 - A - •-�y:+ - ,4. §• 'r.qq r• 3 ..a- 1 - f6 i 'v kF gI�5.,'7Sr4LIJ GGr...:p:,' li 3.4113 4'i. r4 ivti d 4 .{C i3 (,t 1+ t.3k? Y k 1 a fs ��prie3B�trll i lr 1 c, rti` x +c t kxc�I�Arix �� "' t tr1. { +�!t1 5 •* f s�4 t Y r, •i r i }7'�' "TS, +� 'a# V' ?,a, �' `A cry S $' , 4 4. �, ^� ce.: r rt ,, • '�1 pp i y�..'/ { ?(tll t 7 t E3" H .,.1 --r• r. , r cl:. s!; t 9,� s raj- 'j'',t '- 3� r )'.� '.tF Y}. fM f' 'DV1 L 1 P LL Ii2 - .i^,)S' . i. F ;,' ♦ t{ X iti* T f +tf" iQ3 ,t t J y a r - 1 T[ p C{ 'tail ri , fi ' % ml #v 2 +'a> -,.. a.—.+. 1 i t ! t 1 4f- -S 4 �. C'�7.1 r:r r 1` }(t s FF t : tR,( / �.T� .;,c: i"P1 yY i y - - 71 1 Sn. .4 • elr .,{ �` -.a.� ` l �T�, I 1 1� s'O 1 • i� �VLst.t11' �^ > #' "ia ,,,,N, i. t / •111 [ i 1 + Kr ',Ai s ( o i a < >, V ii • .,fit- r +., Y r e # z }T r 4 , �L... x�^�7a , 6, Y1 lF P J q'•4 ( h yK yjt'1iN.I c. sl§ `+ f�{ �t a3Yy r ( St e 1 t 4 �t),��,� a' i{. , t„ _t� td �T 'r+^ 5r+t'�.s �7 IE ". f i `t.' � 44: , �`r rt ,.� r �l r! its ° .1 }� t l a %� � r� 1 1 u ` A 1 " .• x•,, d r t'K' ;. . c ' - ° am : S �1 r1 ! ^� b T,. 5 rY T �. -gyp 1 r L.. ( .,,,.: J 'f " '11 �p 'P V P'?'a�.$' '�f'C t�f' t t I yt. -, 7 - 1_ f{. K�Y X r 1 t -3 r I; s1 � tf1 i r '. t 4 Y . , 3y ,, w� pct � rCt, i N. 4, .i {I +tUbUt; lb rr r }x c ,•: 43 t f t� ^•? `Ji 't tiff- it y • jp I I r+3 !A Y •i T. f r 11 .5{Mk y •� .Y j ,r dr a r lyw rev 4' • T«tu w I 'i' � ° h « f ^"� k , � rt r, `Y A I{ 1 sc _: ,lj n 4k z +s.. r, 1f y - ;b4+ 1 - } nk F 1 K� >t '. �, 1 . t •,y4 4? !s< +y "i' 1 • f1` j 1) 4 1 4'CC i+ 'f�hi d .. i r 1G � e 7^f f { S c° 3R l 1py 'c' IIIhl 1 ..r `!' f tirD { to'Y'e -. 1 S4 66rrL .t�.. 1 iT - 1' ,s. r >�� .F {G'I:dA3KirrgCaurtty..S ' "( k' 7i Y�? , v a a: � i41't y ''il j f 1: - �tll[rrlse- ; 'it. 4S`_ yr. l',:-.7. ;N^31 �p• i� 1. r4 d ■ i.ye.+,_ .n. '134 UbU! if t. - T H t~? ■, �? .z1. YJML r i rk,r } -?i1 t;. lfrr[,,I! (t ,•^' 1 -z,, -,� of 'r .. -) ����.,,y 1 Ir. = • - .l t. ;r►,t°rbt ! }..2 !!i4 q*,.' 0 .44 f. k ' .•r i. . OFF"... t• -C, W ,.• : $' ' ce'fy CG LJ C 3 ,t 1 r f kl ii k t 1 '°te"..l .z -.r.l .t .A" • �, • M1 ":.:51'_16'_1'....;.6.2. rJSO5Lt1!•EkAi '� -'` -1.,.-4,..,.._. Y"- •H, 1 n nn `r15n -ril ti.u'' &1'F*'ii.� J (L !Sf ,I 1� o�� �i21 f�±:.f Legend ° 0 County Boundary 7 Lakes and Lange Rivers Streets ...../ Streams ,}- •licrrn:gt r —j Parcels 1,N.,/ a- tc-ia,s - Topo Contours (5ft) Luca 2002 Color Aerial 'Photos (Wast KC only) The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. King County I GIS Center [ News I Services I Comments I Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. http: / /www5. metrokc. gov/ servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?ServiceName= overview &Clien... 8/2/2005 King County • • iMAP • • o ` 1n � '! Duvvarnisb kiver IF;) z rn S 11261 E11 ST S 12eTH_SL( \.- y i p I ti � ti IC) 2OD8 King County 1 1� 1 g 0 _ • \y The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. Date: 4-25-2006 Source: King Coun iMAP - Pro se Information (h .: //www.metrokc.gov /GIS/iMAP OFF-5t1 BASIN MAP Permit N: 1E06.009 Status: PENDING Date: 05/01/2006 ®. ppr OA: gv,.'cr)u`rJ0'J Sec I Item Id I Description I Approves I Rec I Items I Actior ■ I 20 IALL PLANNING ROUTES 1Yes I R 12 1 AP Screen I I Screes Desc F �I Doc 1 1 1 P Wor Li ►J r Display Updateable Items Only Entries- for Itern:20 ALL PLANNING ROUTES COMPLETE Aspen I G7mmenty IEy I Dare AP 1, 11/22/2001 Action: AP J By Comments: Mig Date: 11/27/2006 MDNS - -The following conditions shall apply: 1) Applicant shall follow the recommendations of geotechnical report (Riley Group. 9/9/05): 2) Slope setbacks shall be shown on the final plat. Entered Date: 11/27/2006 Entered By: ToolBar Order agal ors; Link 1683 Select Multiple r Add Item Inert Item Rrmo,,e (tern Print Add Entry Update Entry Delete Entry Refresh a Print ' F Back Exit Penman PIIWS k.'Sl=l$l( ©2001 - Accela, Inc All Rights Received Licensee: Tukwila, WA - City Of Serial Number 6220 Users- 020 1 Version v 5 214 - ®9 b I !LjDocument bliss osof..� ^'''7 (o) ,11, N 171 9:24 AM Ittztialiw Permit N: E06 -009 Status: PENDING Date. 05/01/2006 Screen Desc I Fees ®. Ap ru:r1L'ilr 0u- `U1_1'J Doc P Wor MCI 11 Item Id Description 20 IALL PLANNING ROUTES Approvec 1 Yes I AP ►1 r Display Updateable Items Only Action: Comments: AP J By: rF Date: 11/22/2006 Entered Date: 11/22/2006 ToolBar Order ii Oros Link Entered By: 1683 Select Multiple r Add Item Insert Item Remove Item a Print Add Entry Update Entry Delete Entry Refresh a Print f Back Exit 'rennin' J'IIL 'SL=lf rI ©2001 - Accela, Inc All Rights Reserved Licensee: Tukwila, WA - City Of Serial Number 6220 Users: 020 1 Version v. 5 214 J•`(4-)eW 5.4 0_3111 N(?lV"c 9:23 AM Entries for Item:20 - ALL PLANNING ROUTES COMPLETE fl Action I Comments 1 By 1 Date AP AP rf 11/22/200 MDNS - -The following conditions shall RF 11/27/200E I LJ ►J Action: Comments: AP J By: rF Date: 11/22/2006 Entered Date: 11/22/2006 ToolBar Order ii Oros Link Entered By: 1683 Select Multiple r Add Item Insert Item Remove Item a Print Add Entry Update Entry Delete Entry Refresh a Print f Back Exit 'rennin' J'IIL 'SL=lf rI ©2001 - Accela, Inc All Rights Reserved Licensee: Tukwila, WA - City Of Serial Number 6220 Users: 020 1 Version v. 5 214 J•`(4-)eW 5.4 0_3111 N(?lV"c 9:23 AM CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION The following has been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: R.W. Thorpe and Associates for Robert Staudacher LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: FILE NUMBER: PROPOSAL: 4020 S. 128th St., Tukwila, WA (Parcel #7340600664) Robert Staudacher E06 -009 - -SEPA /Environmental Review L06-031 — Short Plat 7 lot short plat OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Grading Infrastructure FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Please call (206) 431 -370 to ensure that the files will be available OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on the SEPA and short plat application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on June 21, 2006. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. For further information on this proposal, contact project planner Rebecca Fox (206) 431- 3670 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: 5/1/06 Notice of Completeness Issued:5 /26/06 Notice of Application Issued: 6/5/06 7"----224.90' Found 3" brass disc with punch. incased. at intersection of Marginal Way South and South 126th Street. 30 60 SCALE: 1" = 30' 0 U) 40th Avenue LEGEND: N00'16"18'W 339.86' Found 1/2' refer with yellow CO staged 8*0TA0 L5 13731',,ouse 20' I� 0.9'S C 2.1' w( foundation 1 6.1'W N89'36'02'E 624.90' 400.00' South 126th Street N89'36'0 'E 230.00' Found 1/2' refer with yellow tg staged FWbid0 LS 13731' 0.9'5 01 N Calculated Northeas corner Tract'45 Riverside Interurban Tracts. Vol. 10. pg 74. 119.4 01 N69'43'42'E . 36.51' • 36.51' N N89'43'42,2 10 20'' 31.46 ti W �w o .5'5 1 1.6'M 0 +3. J> o. ▪ - Monument found as noted. 'hafted Novemeer 4. 2005. • - Set 64 roller with yellow elastic cap stamped ' 22338/38965'. I999q- Lot address. L -' n \,. Toe r ry a 3 I 6 __l L 6570 50. FT. N ® mb m W J\ 1.y_ °' \ 4. 8. e 0.. g �\4 o • 40 %. 45. /\ . • \\' _ ''%.",- .g. / \\ f 0 \ FBi. \ J3 \ d.> eb y'b rJt'J4't X2'09 pf\V '4ss 4 8260 S0. FT. \� \ \\ '. 110.51' 2 \\ V.10/ 1 \4. o,@ 2 6320 50. FT. BEM 4. / s1 / .P / .0 / r� 5070 S0. FT. • LINE CHORD BEARING ARC DELTA RADIUS L1 N89'36'02 "E 69.68' L2 N10'31'36 "E 4 11' C1 S35'00'06"E 15 89' 91'03'25' 10.00' L3 580'31'48 "E 36 26' L4 S81'42'41 "E 27 62' L5 572'50'09 "E 37.08' L6 519'10'43 "E 25.31' L7 S19'01'15'E 48 B3' L8 S18'24'40 "E 36.11' L9 S08'17'33'E 21.46' C2 S16'50'48'E 2.99' 17'06'30" 10.00' L10 525'24'03'E 36.63' 111 500'16'16'E 64 86' 25 5 \` 8860 50. FT. 99 \ m m\ E 6'� \90' �r;"1p 5658L�"I ml I \ w\ \l 6 �\ 1 6790 S0. FT. \\ 1 roove0) 1 I 159 10 7 Ax 7660 9O. FT. N �B,J. h/\ "-Steps all 09, \+ e X 1Garage 2.7'M 1 iih�L 1.5' iron pipe _s.7 - e `9o/I '�8 if 1' iron pipe 7 0.8'M MM00d fence DOSt SOO'16'18 "E 3 0.8'M 91.021'49'E 6. M "000 3c� S80'43.27- NO0'16'18 "W 56 165, 87 Vim' CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT NO. Notes: 1) The monument control shown for this site was accomplished by field traverse utilizing a one (1) second theodolite with integral electronic distance measuring meter (Geodimeter 600) and Real Time Kinematic (RTK) / Static Global Positioning System (GPS). Linear and angular closure of the traverses meet the standards of MAC 332 - 130 -090. 2) Utilities other than those shown may exist on this site. Only those which are visible or having visible evidence of their installation are shown hereon. 3) This survey represents physical improvement conditions as they existed January 5. 2006, the date of this field survey. 4) Legal description provided by client. No additional research has been attempted. 5) Offset dimensions shown hereon are measured perpendicular to property lines. 6) It is not the intent of this survey to show easements or reservations which may effect this site. Areas: Overall 62260 S0. FT. 1.429 Acres Tract A 8600 50. FT. 0.197 Acres Tract 8 3130 5O. FT. 0.072 Acres Centre Fed Avenue South eral Way, WA 98003 Pointe (253) 881 -1901 Surveying °an sy 0 Moods rar472 J Kieswetter WI May 11. 2006 88 NAm SP scas NA ae Na 2594 '81112 DIU SW -SW 10, T23N, R4E, WM 508565 NB Pacific Engineering Design. LLC 4180 Lino Avenue SW Renton. Ma. 98055 -4973 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON SHEET 3 OF 3 Dept. Of Community Developmen City of Tukwila N • AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION . Raf5ck___ HEREBY DECLARE PAT:. Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non- Sri gni f,i cance tJ +F Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of ;Non .. Significance ` {' Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination; of Significance'& Sing Notice _ f. .r Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of 'Action; �```i c. l y < ?" Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice � ' °r r Short Subdivision Agenda 6/4oti ce of Application ` f f -` °s Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice ofrApplication= -for Shoreline Mgmt t :�tl Permit <;: > • . 4 . ; __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other h; tom`' - ; Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this year 20 p(Q Project Name: C . W Project Number: =p(:Q =GYM I+ joLQS Mailer's Signature: 71), Person requesting mailing: -- QioeCC,ck P:GiNAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM Irma Anderson 13209 37th Ave S Seattle, WA 98168 Terry Bitzig 4049 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Lisa Brenner 4027 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Larry & Terri Capellaro 4061 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Russell Cleaveland 3717 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Paul Doherty 3726 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Factoria Properties L L C 23 Vashon Ky Bellevue, WA 98006 Cathy Gillispie 4117 S 130th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Larry & B Belinda Hall 12902 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Kha Hoang 4006 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Sam Barnes 224 W Division Ave Ephrata, WA 98823 Darwin Bosteder 11051 24th P1 SW Seattle, WA 98146 C & D Wells Llc 7265 2nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 Tina Carbonatto 3717 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Babara Davidson 4020 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Assc Factoria PO Box 97 Mercer Island, WA 98040 First Inter Bnk- kirkland PO Box 63931 San Francisco, CA 94163 James & Yvonne Graves 3809 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Philip Hemenway 4036 S 128th St Seattle, WA. 98168 Richard Houle 12910 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 • Ii Michael & Katrina Beuslinch 4071 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 C P Botts 4055 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Brie Campbell 3727 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Lorraine Carosino 10652 Des Moines Memorial Dr Seattle, WA 98168 Darrel & Christina Deatry 4136 S 130th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Factoria Auto Center Llc 2748 Milton Way Milton, WA 98354 Mary Flanders 3714 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Leroy & Marci Gray 4511 44th Ave SW Seattle, WA 98116 ■ Linda Hilmes 370 S Reynolds Rd #8 Othello, WA 99344 International Gateway East Llc 12201 Tukwila International Blvd Seattle, WA 98168 Anthony & Evelyn Jackson 3803 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Kimschott Factoria Mall Llc 3333 New Hyde Park Rd #100 New Hyde Park, NY 11042 Gomez Northwest Mcdonald's 3201 Shore Ave Everett, WA 98203 Chi Nguyen 4018 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Wilma Patapoff 3703 S 126th St Seattle, WA 98168 Bernard & Mendi Roberts 3807 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Dave Stein 4054 S 128th St Seattle, WA 98168 Tukwila School District 406 4640 S 144th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Regina Vale 12607E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Jim Woolbert 12800 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Robert Karch 6905 S Tyler St Tacoma, WA 98409 Justine Leyson 1 4128 S 130th St Seattle, WA 98168 Clarence Moriwaki 4033 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Duc -thang & Stella Nguyen 4012 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Carlos & Veronica Rasmussen 3805 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Byron & Joyce Saunders 4118 S 130th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Tpwa Llc 1790 NW 93rd PI Portland, OR 97229 United Food & Commercial Work 12838 SE 40th P1 Bellevue, WA 98006 Virginia Whitezel 4021 S 128th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Patrick & Marites Kelley 4122 S 130th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Marginal Island Properties L L C & 2514 Lake Park Dr S Seattle, WA 98144 Cam Nguyen 4024 S 126th St Tukwila, WA 98168 Kelly O'neil 5919 119th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98006 Regency Fund Associates PO Box 25658 Seattle, WA 98165 R Schneebeli 12923 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Laurie Trout 12812 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Utilities Service Co Inc 12608 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Jeffrey Wong 1821 Rolling Hills Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Jam and Smudge Free Printing Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® Puget Sound Tans. Auth. Attn: Real Estate Div. 401 S. Jackson St. Seattle, WA 98104 Bill D. Nguyen 11227 SE 308th St. Auburn, WA 98092 Keith J. Tiede 7209 S. 180th St. Kent, WA 98032 Tien Le 8415 7th Ave. SW Seattle, WA 98106 Aaron Hundtofte Brie Campbell 3725 S. 126th St. Tukwila, WA 98168 Champa Association Inc. 6560 33`d Ave S. Seattle, WA 98118 Harold James Hemenway 4036 S. 128th St. Tukwila, WA 98168 Sean P. Willmore & Jes Langton 4026 S. 130th St. Seattle, WA 98168 Richard Quealey 4020 S. 130th St. Seattle, WA 98168 William P. Schmidt 12924 E Marginal WY S Riverton, WA 98168 ®09LS ®Al2J]AV www.avery.com • 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Alice R. Smith 4102 S. 130th St. Tukwila, WA 98168 Brian D. Martz & Imogene I. 4106 S. 130th St. Tukwila, WA 98168 William Joseph Waldock 4066 S. 128th St. Tukwila, WA 98168 Daniel Hemenway Trust C/O John D. Tee Hemenway 4816 Rodman St. NW Washington DC 20016 Build & Design Group Attn: Lorie Kemp PO Box 906 Fall City, WA 98024 Gregory I Egashira PO Box 94485 Seattle, WA 98168 Seattle City Light Attn: Accounts Payable PO Box 34023 Seattle, WA 98124 «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» A2l3AV-OD-008 -1 woyfuene•mmm 0 AVERY® 5160® «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» «Next Record» ®091.5 1 Jege6 al zasmul apidei a6etpas a ;a a6e.unogi ;ue uoissaidwi ®0915 Jasei 7345600995 STADLER JON P 3836 S 130TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 /7340600821 ' DATE BRIAN + VICKIE 4103 S 130TH SEATTLE WA 98168 7345600980 DELREAL JUAN 3820 S 130TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 ®0915 Joj a1eidwa) as fl 7345600985 PALMA ELIZABETH ALVARADO 3826 S 130TH ST SEATTLE WA 98168 7341600215 SCHMIDT WILLIAM P 12924 E MARGINAL WAY SO RIVERTON WA 98168 7340600840 BEDELL TERESA L 4111 S 130TH ST SEATTLE WA 98168 Jennifer Lee RW Thorpe & Associates 705 2nd Ave., Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 siege' ssaippV ®Jltl3AV • 7345600990 DROZ MICHAEL J JR +KIMBERLY 3832 S 130TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 1 7340600820 SHUB GALE H PO BOX 68249 SEATTLE WA 98168 7340600841 GILLISPIE LAURA 4117 S 130TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 Wls ;aays paaa wows • FEDERAL AGENCIES () U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY () U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. () NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT () DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES () OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. () DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE > () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. I'DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION' ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT #11 () FIRE DISTRICT #2 () K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION () K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC 10 KC. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY () RENTON LIBRARY () KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY 40WEST DN s SEATTLE CITY LIGHT () PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT IS SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT D ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES, UTI LMES CITY AGENCIES () KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE () POLICE () FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR () CITY CLERK () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE () KC. DEV & ENV!R SERVICES-SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES () FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT () RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT () OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 () WATER DISTRICT #125 () CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT () CITY OF SEA -TAC () CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS () CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU () STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES t,J ° UGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL )S) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE pd CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM FISHERIES PROGRAM OWILDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES () SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:WDMD ISTRATIVE\FORMS \CHKLIST.DOC QQDUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY () SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION 'SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPUCATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CLTUKWILA.WA.US.WWW State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila I 4 . t Id�►'t t ( RINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tuk ila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice o Completeness. I certify that on . the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the of er . appl" able guidelines were posted on the property located at 0 •L� S'a j 2, S�' Wit, so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number Z 0 6 " C7 3 / I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remov and immedia of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a tim (14) days of a Notice letter. • CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Soutltcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) Applica or Project Manager's Signature � � On this day personally appeared before me l ,�,&lGLt - �2J �L to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his / ber,voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this CO day of G vim-- , 206 C 40 4 • ,: ▪ ♦110TA/1 a!rlw• 011 Vi` Vs lot OLIO '4,• NMA000000 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for he State of Washington C0/1 residing at ,L—/ My commission expires on P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 May 26, 2006 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Jennifer Lee R.W. Thorpe and Associates Tukwila Public Works Department 705 2nd Avenue, Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: Robert Staudacher Preliminary Short Plat -4020 S. 128th St., Tukwila, WA Short Plat (File # L06 -031) SEPA (File #E06 -009) Dear Ms. Lee: Your application for SEPA review and preliminary short plat on behalf of Robert Staubacher is considered complete effective May 26, 2006 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, please call me. Once you have notified me that the notice board has been installed you may come to our office to obtain a laminated copy of the Notice of Application that you will post on the board. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. The Notice of Application will also be mailed by the City to all tax payers and residents or businesses within 500 feet of the site. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if we believe that such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. RF Q: \StaL06- 031 \Staudacher COMPLETE.DOC 05/25/2006 -1- This notice of complete application applies only to the P e rmits identified above. It is your responsibility to apply for and obtain all necessary permits. Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Senior Planner RF Q:1StaL06- 0311Staudacher COMPLETE.DOC 05/25/2006 -2- City of Tukwila Department of Community Development TU KvV i to PUBLIC WORKS RECE!If D mAY 61006 File Number E 06 005 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: ❑ Building ❑ Planning Public Works ❑ Police ❑ Parks/Rec Project Name: Sty 44 C.h er Sh 0 r f- Plat- Address: 4.020 Date Transmitted: Staff Coordinator: Instructions 5. I22tS 5124 Rc becc Fnx Response Due by: 6121' o6 Date Response Received: The attached environmental checklist was received for this project. Please review and provide the following information: a) Potential environmental impacts, b) how each should be mitigated (i.e. SEPA condition, ordinance requirement, permit requirement etc.), c) recommended specific language as to how the mitigation measure should read, d) the policy basis for the recommended mitigation (i.e. adopted policy), e) the nexus between the recommended mitigation and the impact, and f) corrections to the checklist and supporting documentation. THIS INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT IN PROVIDING TIMELY AND ACCURATE SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. Attach additional sheets if necessary. If you find the submittal incomplete and would like to request additional information, please inform the staff planner within five working days! For {ecAn report -- See 5kor-+- Plat InF- 'LOb - o3( n 0 G'on Comments Prepared by: For • • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number E06 - 005 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM Firc TO: ❑ Building 11 Planning 1:1 Public Works �l�eifee ❑ Parks/Rec Project Name: Sft& d 4 Gil e! Sh o r4- Mott Address: Lf0Z0 5• $Z St. Date Transmitted: 51241° b Response Due by: Gil-11196' Staff Coordinator: gt be cc a Fox Date Response Received: Instructions The attached environmental checklist was received for this project. Please review and provide the following information: a) Potential environmental impacts, b) how each should be mitigated (i.e. SEPA condition, ordinance requirement, permit requirement etc.), c) recommended specific language as to how the mitigation measure should read, d) the policy basis for the recommended mitigation (i.e. adopted policy), e) the nexus between the recommended mitigation and the - impact, and f) corrections to the checklist and supporting documentation. THIS INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT IN PROVIDING TIMELY AND ACCURATE SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. Attach additional sheets if necessary. If you find the submittal incomplete and would like to request additional information, please inform the staff planner within five working days! Cto%ln reforf --See 5tior+ Plat lnFo 1.047 - 031 /Uo Coh,Mewi-3 44-l' ►u Comments Prepared by: /4141 571 Date: 3-- 3o-o -6 • • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number E06 - o o y ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: Building ❑ Planning ❑ Public Works ❑ Police ❑ Parks/Rec Project Name: Sizes d 4 CJ 1 Sh o' Molt Address: 4-o2 o Date Transmitted: 6124/° Response Due by: (/21' 06 Staff Coordinator: R be cc Fox Date Response Received: Instructions The attached environmental checklist was received for this project. Please review and provide the following information: a) Potential environmental impacts, b) how each should be mitigated (i.e. SEPA condition, ordinance requirement, permit requirement etc.), c) recommended specific language as to how the mitigation measure should read, d) the policy basis for the recommended mitigation (i.e. adopted policy), e) the nexus between the recommended mitigation and the impact, and f) corrections to the checklist and supporting documentation. THIS INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT IN PROVIDING TIMELY AND ACCURATE SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC. Attach additional sheets if necessary. If you find the submittal incomplete and would like to request additional information, please inform the staff planner within five working days! For Leo-Fed") reporf --See Skor -+- Plat Info I. 06 - 031 (ogfri Comments Prepared by: / Date: S ��a� • kEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Staudacher Short Plat 4020 South 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Proiect No. 2005 -150 THE RILEY GROUPS INC. IVED MAY 01 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • WETLAND SERVICES Serving the Pacific Northwest Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Suite A • Bothell, WA 98011 • Tel (425) 415 -0551 • Fax (425) 415 -0311 http:www.Riley - Group. com The Riley Group Inc. • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Staudacher Short Plat 4020 South 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Project No. 2005 -150 Prepared By: The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE, Suite A Bothell, WA 98011 Prepared for Mr. Robert Staudacher 10510 Northup Way Kirkland, WA 98033 September 9, 2005 SERVING THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Suite A, Bothell, WA 98011 The Riley Group Inc. September 9, 2005 Mr. Robert Staudacher 10510 Northup Way Kirkland, WA 98033 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Staudacher Short Plat 4020 South 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Project No. 2005 -150 Dear Mr. Staudacher: As requested, The Riley Group, Inc. (Riley) has performed a geotechnical engineering study for the above - referenced subject site. Riley understands that you are planning to develop a parcel of land approximately 1.43 acres into 7 single- family residences with associated driveway and utilities. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects anticipated of the project design and construction. Our field exploration indicates that the site is generally underlain by medium dense to very dense silty SAND with some gravel and trace cobbles and boulders. Test pit TP -2 located at the middle south of the site encountered 8 feet of medium silty SAND overlying very stiff SILT with some find sand. Groundwater was not encountered during our field exploration reaching a maximum depth of 9 feet below ground surface. Based on the soil conditions observed, we recommend supporting the proposed residential building on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on the medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill if needed. Slab -on -grade and pavements can be similarly supported. Based on our study, the existing steep slope that is located on the northeast portion of the site seems to be in stable condition. No obvious signs indicating a previous failure or landslide were found. In our opinion, the proposed development will not adversely affect slope stability if the geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated into final design and construction3;.Riley recommends-that- the - building -setbacks - should- be- at- least-YO - feet-from the toe ofthe steep slopes. SERVING THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Suite A, Bothell, WA 98011 We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call; Sincerely yours, THE RILEY GROUP, INC. !EXPIRES SEPT. 12, 2do7 • Chien -Lin (Johnny) Chen, P.E. Project Engineer JC /RW Ricky R. Wang, Ph.D., P.E. Principal Engineer The Riley Group, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 SURFACE 2 3.2 SOILS 2 3.3 GROUNDWATER 2 3.4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 2 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 4.1 GENERAL 3 4.2 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING 3 4.3 EXCAVATIONS AND FILL SLOPES 4 4.4 FOUNDATIONS 5 4.5 RETAINING WALLS 5 4.6 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 6 4.7 DRAINAGE 7 4.8 UTILITIES 7 4.9 PAVEMENTS 7 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 8 6.0 LIMITATIONS 8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 3 General Slope Fill Detail Figure 4 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 5 Typical Rockery Section Detail Figure 6 Typical Footing Drain Detail APPENDICES Appendix A Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report 0 likeptember 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 1 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The property is located at 4020 South 128th Street in Tukwila, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The site is currently occupied by a single - family residence with a garage in the southeast portion of the site. The rest of the site is vacant and covered by grass, blackberry, and trees. Riley understands that you are planning to develop a parcel of land approximately 1.43 acres into 7 single - family residential lots with associated driveway and utilities. Our understanding of the project is based on a Concept Lot Layout prepared by R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. dated August 1, 2005. At the time of preparing this report, detailed site grading and building plans were not available for our review. Based on our conversation with the client during the field investigation, we understand that the single - family residences will be two -story, wood -framed structure without basement. Riley also understands that the proposed residential buildings will be built to match the existing topography. Riley expects that the minor grading with cut/fill less than 44feet will be needed to reach the final grade. Riley also expects that the proposed residences will be supported on perimeter walls with a bearing load between 1 to 2 kips per linear foot and a series of interior columns with a maximum load up to 75 kips per column. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based upon our current understanding of the proposed site development. If actual features vary or changes are made, we should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. In addition, Riley requests to review the site grading plan, fmal design drawings and specifications when available to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and construction. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK On August 24, 2005, Riley excavated a total of seven test pits (TP -1 through TP -7) to a maximum depth of 9 feet below ground surface (bgs). Test pits were excavated using a rubber -tired backhoe. Test pits were excavated approximately in the proposed residential lots. Approximate test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. Using the information obtained from our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, we performed analyses to develop geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction on the following: ➢ Soil and groundwater conditions ➢ Retaining walls ➢ Geologic hazards ➢ Slab -on -grade ➢ Site preparation and grading ➢ Drainage ➢ Excavations and slopes ➢ Utilities ➢ Foundations ➢ Pavements The Riley Group, Inc. LGeotechnical Engineering Report • "September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 2 Project No. 2005 -150 ITukwila, WA 98168 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The subject site is a trapezoid- shaped parcel of land approximately 1.43 acres in size. The site is bound to the north and east by an uphill slope and a single - family residence, to the south by South 128th Street, and to the west by 40th Avenue South. The site is currently occupied by a single - family residence with a garage in the southeast portion of the site. The site slopes down to the southwest with an average slope gradient approximately 12 %. The northeast portion of the site is a slope with a gradient up to 30 %. 3.2 Soils The soils encountered in the test pits are relatively consistent across the site. Typical soil profile includes medium dense to very dense silty SAND with some gravel and trace cobbles and boulders. Test pit TP -2 located at the middle south of the site encountered 8 feet of medium silty SAND overlying stiff to very stiff SILT with some fine sand. Review of the Geologic Map of King County, Washington, by Derek B. Booth, et al. (2002) indicates that the soil in the project vicinity is mapped as Till (Qvt), which is compact layer containing subrounded to well - rounded clasts, glacially transported and deposited. The native soil includes minor stratified fluvial deposits, and generally forms undulating layer a few meters to a few tens of meters thick. These descriptions are generally similar to the findings in our field exploration. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented in the Test Boring Logs included as Figures A -2 through A -4 in Appendix A. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater seepage was not encountered during field exploration to a maximum depth of 8 feet bgs. The groundwater level appears to be deeper than the test pit termination depth. Fluctuations in groundwater level should be expected on a seasonal and annual basis. The level will be highest during the extended periods of heavy seepage in the wet winter months. Given the time that the field exploration was performed, Riley believes that the groundwater should be below the season -high level. 3.4 Geologic Hazards Steep Slopes Riley reviewed the Sensitive Areas Map Folio, King County, Washington, (Map 4) dated March 2001. The review indicates that the site is not mapped as a landslide hazard area. Based on the existing site plan, the northeast portion of the site is a slope with gradient up to 30 %. The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report • September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 3 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 Riley performed a site reconnaissance and evaluated the slope stability condition during our field observations. We did not find any obvious features such as curved trees, tension cracks, other obvious features suggesting past or recent deep- seated landslides on the site. Riley believes that the site is in stable condition. However, creep and surface erosion was observed on the lower portion of the steep slope. Riley recommends that the proposed development minimize the slope disturbance and vegetation removal to keep the existing condition. Based on our conversation lient, the proposed residence will match the existing site topography. No major excavation into the site is planned. In our opinion, the proposed development will not adversely affect slope stability if the geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated into final design and construction. Riley recommends that a building setback of 10 feet from the toe of the slope be used for the proposed building layout. Seismic Considerations Based on the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), the site soil is Class D (Table 1615.1.1). The earthquake spectral response acceleration at short periods (Ss) is 142% g and at 1- second period (S1) is 49% g. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine - grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil's strength. We reviewed the results of the field and laboratory testing and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site's soil during an earthquake. Since the site soil is dense silty sand with gravel, Riley considers that the possibility of liquefaction during an earthquake is minimal. 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General Based on our study, the site is suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical standpoint. Foundations for the proposed residential buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill if needed. Slab -on -grade and pavements can be similarly supported. Riley expects that excavation up to 6 feet may be to reach the proposed final grade elevation. Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report •September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 4 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading Ct To prepare the site for construction, the existing structures /should be demolished. All remnants related to previous construction which occupied the site should also be cleared and removed from the site. All vegetations including grass, blackberry and trees within the perimeter of the proposed construction area should be removed. Surface stripping depths of up to 12 inches should be expected to remove topsoil. Once clearing, grubbing, and other preparing operations are complete, cuts and fills can be made to establish desired building grades. The on -site excavated soils without organic materials can be suitable for use as structural fill except silt in test pit TP -2. However, the native soil contains a significant amount of fines and is moisture sensitive. If the construction occurs in wet weather, the native soil would be difficult to be compacted. i the construction occurs in wet weatheeillgiile lecommendsauseaimportrd si gradingighelimported matZMIEhould meet the grading requirements listed in -the table below. U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 3 inches 100 percent No. 4 sieve 75 percent No. 200 sieve 5 percent * *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. �P,rior a geotechrucal engineer should examine and test all materials imported to the site or use asiEstrtucturalfifilha truc_turaLfill.. materials ..shouldi eaplacedoiniuruform loose : layers not exceedingl2 =inchesaandacompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D -1557 (Modified Proctor . The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within about two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM method. 4.3 Excavations and Fill Slopes Excavations at the site with confined spaces, such as basements, footings, utility trenches, etc., must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal requirements. Based on Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, the native undisturbed soil classifies as a Group B soil. Acc ,d g erformexeauationson eathanefourafe_ettbutiless than 0NMIlin depth, e tempo_ rary�si� deaslop�es, �shoul latrA aid�bac c with a iii slope irnclu at 1 ikHorizontali•aerticahkokat a eatiue�undisturbtlissoiln f ;the'rtelisliins. Vient room The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Staudacher Short Plat Tukwila, WA 98168 September 9, 2005 5 !Project No. 2005 -150 om fete =theiexeavationsain■ this .manner,00rdtexeauations, greater wthan2,0 ..feet.,imdepth`are plated, sing t�'empo_� raryfsho igtosuppott4thetexcauationsshouldkeaconsidered. 'the perman en trardgiBlElopf sTshoul libe gradediw th . f nished i c'Tinafion no" greate"r. thanile lire rri ralaVrrtic 1 lW on comple iotTABf construction, tErgiope face2shoul'dabe' tracksoll, ced, ampa dAandotvategetatedwor provided withiTother physical means ;:to -guard { ag ,t rsttrerosion inalv..grades3atAhettop;of tthe existing slope- must_promote -surface - drainage_ away from the existing slope crest. Water must not be allowed to flow in an uncontrolled fashion over the slope face. If it is necessary to direct surface runoff towards the slope, it should be controlled at the top of the slope, piped in a closed conduit installed on the slope face, and taken to an appropriate point of discharge beyond the toe. All fill placed for slope construction should meet the structural fill requirements as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. In addition, if new fills are placed over existing slopes of 20 percent or greater, the structural fill should be keyed and benched into competent native slope soils. A typical slope key and bench configuration is shown on the general slope fill detail on Figure 3. 4.4 Foundations Following the preparation and grading, Riley recommends that the proposed residential building can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on medium dense to dense native soil or structural fill if needed. aP, erimet undations exposed to the va thergghT l tObe irri "` mmun depth o fe18 mhes below final exterior grades. Interior oundationstean.be- eonstn' n4 ed o any con a u2ent` p below the Wigarg mmend�designingpfo lotions for aAnetf4allowablDFbea: ing cap cit IP42 5'00 po ds o er s:qu eife(pis fl `for native soi?ld structur` a1gff1NFo' shortYtermwl_oads,tsuch; as,-:3 d and seismic, a t increase in thiskahlowable. capacitTcan -be; used. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.4 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the side of the footing and buried portion of the foundation stem wall can also be considered for resisting lateral loads. We eeomm. eu ncl caieulatin . this lateral. resistance sing an equti alent ghtriof 2ibpounds =Cable foot (pcf). At perimeter locations, we reeo end not including the upper atinchesfgffiso l in�tlu potation because the can�be affected biymeather orid skturbed by, fu gr g, acti atyThi"s value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent fill soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. The recommended passive resistance value includes a safety factor of 1.5. With spread footing foundations as recommended in this section, you should expect maximum total and differential post - construction settlements of one inch and '/2 inch, respectively. The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report • September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 6 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 4.5 Retaining Walls At the time of preparing this report, Riley was not aware of any retaining walls. v owever__� .based on the_ site - topography; Riley - expects °that- excavation-up-to -6 feet may -be- needed- tom re a--7- e- proposed - final - grade .elevation- R_etaini_ng. -walls -will_be•needed_ -in- someareas.,__ .- iley- recommends- cast -in- place concrete- walls- for - building basement walls and rockeries for non-buil walls-for-protecting-the. slo esand:retainin falls - The— retauun walls " C_ - ip g g shoul d be designed land constructed following the:recomrriendations in this section. Concrete Walls Tr asement walls_should be designed_ and- constructed-as- retaining - walls: The magnitude of earth pressure development on retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill.(We- recommend- placing - and - compacting- wall- backfill.as-structural fill Wall rainage- w lhbe_needenieelurid -the wall face -A- typical - retaining -wall- drainage - dehisce [shown in Figures N<Vith wall backfill- placed- and - compacted as- recommended,- and - drainage- properly_installedi, wecrecommend- designing- unrestrained - walls- for_amactive_ earth- pressure- imposed-by- an- - --,-2. equivalent ~fluid - weighing 5 -pcf- -For restrained walls, -an- earth- pressure - imposed by an e • uivalent fluidrweiglTing.55_pcf_sh ` ould -be used =for design.- For- seismic- design;.ari_atidition uniform- loadI 5 =to 7 H- (H is- wall height)- shouldbe- applied -To the. wall _surface: These values su e=alT riz ntal- backfill condition andthat no :other surcharge loading; such_as_ traffic- loading; sloping enibankriients; or adjacent buildings; will act on the wall. If such conditions:_will- exist; alien- the - impose ■dl)adingmustbe`:mcluded -in -the wall design. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in the Foundations section of this report. Rockeries Rockeries are not intended to function as engineered structures to resist lateral earth pressures like retaining walls. The primary function of rockeries is to cover exposed excavated surface and thereby retard the erosion process.Qndividual-rockery heights should e 1_imited-td 8 feet against cut in dense_native_soil: Thecut slope aliove the_rocker_y_should be _gradeddwith- aamaximum gradient-of-2:1- (Horizontal: Vertical). A=rockery detail: is k--- shown -on the-attached-Figufe -5-/ The - rockery should be- constructed- by --an- experienced -- rockery- contractor_follo_wing} guidelines -as- published by Assdciatedn.Rockery. _contractors- (ARC-): - Rockery backfill� should- be- compacted _as structural fill as recommended in the_Site-Ereparationcand_Grading rse Riley recommends -tthat- Egeotecl calae`ngineer be present on thersite to monitor site work - ' The Riley Group, Inc. Ceotechnical Engineering Report Staudacher Short Plat Tukwila, WA 98168 •September 9, 2005 Project No. 2005 -150 4.6 Slab -on -Grade Construction With site preparation completed as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section, suitable support for slab -on -grade construction should be provided pRi'leayAecornmends,.that,,r, ethe concrete slabillbetiseteoristopirofs f r enativeisa ihortonistrtt ral,�fil�h.Immediately�be�lo, w� the floor slab, we recommend placing a four -inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free - draining sand or gravel that has less than five percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Typically, an eight to ten -mil thick plastic membrane is placed on a four -inch thick layer of clean gravel to avoid moisture by vapor transmission. The membrane should be covered with one to two inches of clean, moist sand to guard against damage during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post - construction floor settlements of '/4 to Y2 inch. 4.7 Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the building area. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. For non - pavement locations, we recommend providing a minimum drainage gradient of three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeter. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of one percent should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. Subsurface We recommend installing perimeter foundation drains. A typical recommended drain detail is shown on Figure 6. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. 4.8 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. For site utilities located within the City of Tukwila right -of -ways, bedding and backfill should be completed in accordance with City of Tukwila specifications. At a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Where utilities occur below unimproved areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to a minimum of 90 percent of the soil's maximum density as determined by the referenced ASTM standard. As noted, soils excavated on -site will generally be suitable for use as backfill material if The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report all • September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 8 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 soil's moisture can be properly controlled. Boulders may be encountered during trench excavation. The contractor should be prepared to remove or break the boulder if encountered. 4.9 Pavements Pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report. Regardless of the relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. This condition should be verified by proof - rolling with construction equipment or hand probe by inspector. The required pavement thickness is not only dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils, but also on the traffic loading conditions which will be applied. For driveway and parking lot with typical passenger vehicle traffic, two inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) can be used. For streets and heavy traffic area, three inches of AC over six inches of CRB should be used. The paving materials used should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for Class B asphalt concrete, and CRB surfacing. Long -term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, surface drainage gradients of no less than two percent are recommended. Also, some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report • S September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat 9 Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Riley is available to provide further geotechnical consultation as the project design develops. We should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. Riley is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may arise in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. 6.0 LIMITATIONS This report is the property of The Riley Group, Inc. and was prepared in accordance with 'generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is intended for specific application to the Staudacher Short Plat in Tukwila, Washington and for the exclusive use of property owner, Mr. Robert Staudacher, and their authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon data obtained from the test pits excavated on -site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, The Riley Group, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with construction. The Riley Group, Inc. S 112TH 19TH ST S119 ST: Southern Hel 3 1x TH ST .., SY44TH-ST • S 145TH 9= 160T�1'3T �e f DELORME Seals 1 : 24,000 1 "2000 ft 2002 D.Lorme. Tope USA O. Data copyright of content owner. www.delorme.00m pe- The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Site Vicinity Map Figure 1 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington i L 1 I /\1 11 .1�__ tr ` .11'1\\\\1:1:..:171191111-P.:73....;"1-; \ \ \ sl .1 .,.,\i's \ .).7.. \sis• \ i 1-. • -\\*;:•-If i .." 1 4.-„; . I v , X, 1 - II 1 \I \ \ \\\ \,... -- — \\TP-5 ''....i..." I \ . \ \ 1111 \� li,`„\\‘ \ �� 2324,0' 111 S 126th St. • ND FRONT SETBACK \\ DESIGNATION REQUEST") --..., FOR REASONABLE BUILDING - -. .-. \ �PAD WIDTH • X41§ ......1A?9 ?SI4 _— ....._._ _..__. _ ....... .... AVAILAM =Urn SP .. 4v.ebcn ,._._.._.» Pubrc.Setwer._.._: Front eetkdt•20' ..1__ r deft. porch 1S 1 1 Conenotq tWtet : 2MfF1m4 _. IV__.__..— _._ t .. She S ifsv !U 1 Reference: Figure modified from Concept Lot Layout prepared by R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. dated August 1, 2005. \ 15 -25% SLOPES i I I TYPICAL APItROXIMATEI BUILDING AREA I i I TYPICAL YARD 1 1 SETBACK LIME I I I 28' WIDE RIGHT OF WAY 1 ! f EXISTING GARAGE f 1 -}, Geotechnical test pit location excavated by The Riley TP -1 Group, Inc. on August 24, 2005. DRAWING NOT TO SCALE I / TThe Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 2 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington 1 NEW STRUCTURAL FILL MAXIMUM SLOPE GRADIENT: 2:1(H:V) SLOPE TO DRAIN 2 EXISTING GRADE TYPICAL BENCH — MAY REQUIRE SUBDRAIN IF SEEPAGE CONDITIONS ARE INDICATED GRADE AFTER THE REMOVAL OF :... TOPSOIL AND OTHER LOOSE SOILS KEY CUT AND TOE DRAIN — 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE ENVELOPED IN 1 cu.ft. 3/4" DRAINAGE GRAVEL NOT TO SCALE NOTES 1. SLOPE SHOULD BE STRIPPED OF TOPSOIL AND UNSUITABLE SOILS PRIOR TO PLACING ANY FILL. 2. "BENCHES" SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET WIDE. 3. "KEY" SHOULD BE MINIMUM 2 FEET DEEP AND 6 FEET WIDE, EXTENDING THE FULL LENGTH OF THE SLOPE FACE. 4. FINAL SLOPE FACE SHOULD BE DENSIFIED BY COMPACTION. 5. PLANT OR HYDROSEED SLOPE FACE TO REDUCE EROSION POTENTIAL. 6. ALL STRUCTURAL FILL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 95% OF SOILS MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY PER ASTM D -1557 (MODIFIED PROCTOR). gThe Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat General Slope Fill Detail Figure 3 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington 12" MINIMUM WIDE FREE - DRAINING GRAVEL 12" MIN. r FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL i, /yi.. / . i. .\ °O 00 O • SLOPE TO DRAIN ow- ° o° ° �ag0'1°0°0: O0o o•o• O0000° O _ 0 00o a °V a o0o $t, oaOOO �to 4" DIAMETER PVC PERFORATED PIPE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) COMPACTED STRUCTURAL BACKFILL (NATIVE OR IMPORT) 12" OVER THE PIPE 3" BELOW THE PIPE NOT TO SCALE PtThe Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 4 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington i ti Slope 2:1(H:V) max. Swole for surface drainage control 1 • »• /j `i`: »••.gar`• i• • •4146 ,,�,�.�.�,, 1.5' • • i � a 1.44441 4404 .144 41:41 I Reinforcement (Mirafi 7XT) L > 2/3 of rockery height t H =8' 6 3' (min.) ---i 1.5' 0.5' (typ.) I 1.5' Crushed rock filter material, between 2 and 4 inch size with less than 2% fines. 1.5' 18 in. min: Firm undisturbed soil to be verified by Geotechnical Enginee Keyway Keyway should be sloped down towords the face being protected 3 in. min. gravel bedding 4 in. minimum diameter drain pipe surrounded by clean washed 3/4" drain gravel NOT TO SCALE 0.5' • • �� The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Typical Rockery Section Detail Figure 5 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington r-+ BUILDING SLAB d? 4. Q .. 4 A 0, • 4" PERFORATED PIPE 3/4" WASHED ROCK OR PEA GRAVEL NOT TO SCALE FILTER FABRIC Arr' The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Typical Footing Drain Detail Figure 6 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington Geotechnical Engineering Report • • September 9, 2005 Staudacher Short Plat Project No. 2005 -150 Tukwila, WA 98168 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Staudacher Short Plat 4020 South 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 On August 24, 2005 we performed our field exploration using a rubber -tired backhoe. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by excavating seven test pits to a maximum depth of 9 feet below existing grade. The test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing building and property boundaries. The Test Pit Logs are presented on Figures A -2 through A -4. A geologist/engineer from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).described on Figure A -1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of typical sample was measured and is reported on the Test Pit Logs. The Riley Group, Inc. MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION COARSE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% material larger than No. 200 sieve GRAVELS More than 50% of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve CLEAN GRAVELS <5% fines GW Well- graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. GP Poorly- graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. GRAVELS with fines GM Silty gravels, gravel- sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines. GC Clayey gravels, gravel- sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. SANDS o More than 50 /o of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve CLEAN SANDS <5% fines sw Well- graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SP Poorly- graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS with fines SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines. SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. FINE GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limits less than 50% ML Inorganic silts, rock tlour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limits greater . than 50% MH Inorganic silts, elastic. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, (fat clays). OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS SAND or GRAVEL Density SPT (Blows /Foot) 2" Outside diameter split spoon 1 sampler 1 2.4" Inside diameter ring sampler or Shelby tube • Water level (date) Tr Torvane reading, tsf pp Penetrometer reading, tsf DD Dry density, pcf LL Liquid limit, percent pl Plasticity index N Standard penetration, blows per foot Very loose 0-4 Loose 4 -10 Medium dense 10 -30 Dense 30 -50 Very dense >50 L O >- J J 0 Consistency SPT (Blows /Foot) Very soft 0 -2 Soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4 -8 Stiff 8 -15 Very stiff 15 -30 Hard >30 /-i The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 L WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat • Unified Soil Classification System Figure A -1 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington Logged By: JC Date: 8/24/05 Test Pit No. Depth (ft) Soil Description Sample TP -7 Surface 0.5 - 8 8 - 9 Blackberry surface. 6 inches topsoil with roots. Brown silty SAND with some gravel, trace cobbles, damp, medium dense to dense, (SM). Brown silty SAND with some gravel, trace rock pieces, moist, dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 9 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Depth (moisture) 2.5 ft (8.0 %) 5 ft (10.3 %) 8 ft (10.9 %) The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Test Pit Logs Figure A -4 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington Logged By: JC Date: 8/24/05 Test Pit No. Depth (ft) Soil Description Sample TP -1 Surface 1 - 7 7 - 8 Tall Grass and blackberry surface. 12 inches topsoil with roots. Brown silty SAND with some gravel, one 2 feet diameter boulder at 3 feet, damp to moist, dense to very dense, (SM). Gray silty fine SAND, mottled brown, moist to wet, medium dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 8 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Depth (moisture) 2.5 ft (10.7 %) 5 ft (15.0 %) 8 ft (22.7 %) TP -2 Surface 0.6 - 8 8 - 9 Grass and blackberry surface. 8 inches topsoil with roots. Gray silty SAND, moist, medium dense, (SM). Gray SILT with some fine sand, low plasticity, moist, stiff to very stiff, (ML). Bottom of test pit at 9 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 2.5 ft (22.7 %) 5 ft (22.2 %) 8 ft (24.2 %) TP -3 Surface 0.5 - 7.5 7.5 - 8.5 Trees and blackberry surface. 6 inches topsoil with roots. Light brown silty SAND with some gravel, trace cobbles, damp, medium dense to dense, (SM). Light brown silty SAND with trace gravel, damp, dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 2.5 ft (6.5 %) 5 ft (6.7 %) 8 ft (9.6 %) The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE,. SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Test Pit Logs Figure A -2 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington Logged By: JC Date: 8/24/05 Test Pit No. Depth (ft) Soil Description Sample TP -4 Surface 0.5 - 7 7 - 8 Blackberry surface. 6 inches topsoil with roots. Light brown to brown silty SAND with some gravel, trace organics and cobbles, one 2 feet diameter boulder at 3 ft, damp to moist, medium dense to dense, (SM). Brown silty SAND, with some gravel, moist, dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 8 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. Depth (moisture) 2.5 ft (14.5 %) 5 ft (7.2 %) 8 ft (12.9 %) TP -5 Surface 0.5 - 8 8 - 9 Blackberry surface. 6 inches topsoil with roots. Brown silty SAND with some gravel, two 2.5 feet diameter boulder at 3 and 4 ft, damp, dense to very dense, (SM). Brown silty SAND with some gravel, moist, dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 9 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 2.5 ft (7.5 %) 5 ft (16.0 %) 8 ft (11.6 %) TP -6 Surface 0.5 - 7 7 - 8 Blackberry surface. 6 inches topsoil with roots. Brown silty SAND with some gravel, some rock pieces (2" to 4 ") at 5 feet, damp to moist, dense, (SM). Brown silty SAND with some gravel, moist, dense, (SM). Bottom of test pit at 8 feet. No groundwater seepage encountered. 2.5 ft (12.8 %) 5 ft (10.3 %) 8 ft (10.9 %) The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE, SUITE A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Short Plat Test Pit Logs Figure A -3 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington R.W. IPHORPE & ASSOCIAT S, INC. Seattle • Anchorage • Denver • Winthrop Planning • Landscape • Environmental • Economics •:• PRINCIPALS: ASSOCIATE: Robert W. Thorpe, AICP, President Jennifer Lee, ASLA Stephen Speidel, ASLA, Vice President Landscape Architect February 21, 2006 Carol Lumb, Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Parcel #7340600664 (4020 S 128th St.) Determination of No Wetlands Dear Carol, We are including The Riley Groups April 18th Wetland Determination Report by with the environmental studies requested as part of the environmental checklist. At the 06/09/05 pre - application meeting and written on the attached pre - application planning -land use checklist, is the city concurrence with the Riley Group's wetland report/ findings that there are no wetlands on the site. Sincerely, q't-/\ R.W. Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Jennifer Lee, ASLA Project Manager RECEIVED MAY 01 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT •: 705 Second Avenue Suite 710 • Seattle WA 98104 • Telephone: (206) 624 -6239 • Fax: (206) 625 -0930 • E -Mail: admin @rwta.com •: THE RILEY GROUP INC. • WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT STAUDACHER SHORT PLAT 4020 S. 128Th STREET TUKWILA, WASHINGTON PARCEL # 7340600664 April 18, 2005 PREPARED BY: The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 PREPARED FOR: Robert N. Staudacher c.o. RW Thorpe & Associates, Inc. Jennifer Dischinger, ASLA 705 2nd Avenue Suite 710 Seattle, WA 98104 PROJECT No. 2005 -064 SERVING THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Tel (425) 415 -0551 • Fax (425) 415 -0311 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 1. Introduction This report presents the results of our wetland determination and critical areas study regarding the Staudacher Short Plat located at the northeast corner of 40th Avenue South and South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington (hereon referred to as the Site). The Site is a 62,233 square foot (1.43 -acre) parcel (tax parcel # 7340600664); Figure 1. 1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION A single - family home . and detached garage are present on the southeast corner of the Site; the balance of the Site is undeveloped. The Site slopes from 100 -feet to 50 -feet from the northeast corner to the southeast corner. A small copse of black cottonwood trees with a shrub understory is located at the northwest corner of the Site. The south - central area is grassy and the balance of the Site is dominated by nearly monocultural Himalayan blackberry. 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Tukwila wetland inventory has identified one wetland, identified as Wetland 13, on the north side of the site (Figure 2). According to Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor for Tukwila as related in a phone conversation that took place on April 1, 2005, this determination was .based upon aerial photographic and drive -by level investigation and no on -site verification was conducted. The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not any wetlands are present on, or within 300 feet, of the Site (the "study area ") that would affect the proposal to develop the Site with ± 7 lot short plat, and to determine the presence of any other environmentally sensitive areas that may affect Site development. 2. Wetland Determination .& Methodology On March 23, 2005, Ms. Celeste Botha with The Riley Group, Inc. (Riley) examined the study area for indicators of critical areas, such as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas (including streams, areas occupied by sensitive, threatened, or endangered species) and wetlands. Wetlands were identified based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology using the routine method outlined in the 1997 Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Manual), and following City of Tukwila regulations. During the study area evaluation, five detailed sample plots were located in distinct representative vegetation units in order to characterize the wetland and non - wetland communities. Field observations at each sample plot were compiled on preformatted Wetland Data Sheets, labeled 1 through 5. The locations of the data plots are shown on Figure 2. Per Bennett P.S. &E., Inc. 1984 Record of Survey Welland Determination Report 1 April 18, 2005 Staudacher Plat Tukwila Site Project #2005 -064 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. In addition, a general assessment of the functions of the wetland system (if any) was completed and wetland community types were classified using Classification of Wetlands and Deep Water Habitats in the U.S. (Cowardin et al., 1979). 2.1 VEGETATION Vegetation was evaluated across the study area to determine the presence of hydrophytic plant communities. Plant communities are considered hydrophytic when more than 50 percent of the dominant species in the plant community have a wetland indicator status of facultative (FAC +, FAC, & FAC -), facultative wetland (FACW +, FACW, & FACW- ), or obligate wetland (OBL), as listed in the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands, Region 9 — Northwest (Reed, 1993 and 1988). The indicator codes for plant species are noted in Table 1. Table 1. Plant Indicator Codes . .. yc 'IndicatorsCode rk = _ ... _ . s . _ "_ _ , :: n .. '_ �; Frequency of Occurrence m Wetlands~ _ (underrnatural conditions) ,. . Obligate Wetland (OBL) — occur almost always in wetlands >99% Facultative Wetland (FACW *) — usually occur in wetlands 67 -99% Facultative (FAC *) — equally likely to occur in wetlands or non - wetlands 34 -66% Facultative Upland (FACU *) — usually occur in non - wetlands 1 -34% Obligate Upland (UPL) — occur almost always in non - wetlands <1 % Not Listed (NL) — no indicator status - -- * Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU also have + and — values to represent species near the wetter end of the spectrum ( +) and species near the drier end of the spectrum ( -). Dominant species were recorded as species comprising more than 20 percent of the plant community in each stratum (tree, shrub, and/or herb layer). 2.2 SOILS Anaerobic (saturated) conditions cause hydric soils to form certain characteristics that can be observed in the field. Hydric indicators include: the presence of a matrix chroma of 1 or less in unmottled soil or 2 or less in mottled soil, gleyed soil, organic soils (peats and mucks), and the accumulation of sulfidic material. Soil pits were dug in each data plot, using a shovel to depths of 16 to 18 inches below ground surface (BGS). Soils textures were characterized using Natural Resources Conservation Service protocol, and examined for hydric indicators as described by the Washington State Manual. Soil colors were identified using a Munsell soil color chart (Kollmorgen Corporation, 1988). Depth of soil saturation was recorded for each plot. Wetland Data Sheets are included in Appendix B. Wetland Determination Report 2 April 18, 2005 Standacher Plat Tukwila Site Protect #2005 -064 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. Several secondary plots were examined across the wetland/upland boundary in order to determine the approximate boundary line, although data forms were not completed at the secondary plots. The secondary plots were used to examine similarities or differences in soils between major data plots and to establish mapped soil unit boundaries. 2.3 HYDROLOGY At each data plot, observations of direct and indirect wetland hydrology indicators were evaluated and recorded. Under normal conditions, hydrologic indicators are used to determine if the hydrology is either currently present or can be inferred from the guidelines provided in the Washington State Manual. These indicators include: recorded data, visual observation of inundation or saturation, watermarks, drift lines, sediment deposits, drainage patterns, local soil survey data, oxidized root channels, and water - stained leaves. 3. Wetland Study Results Based on our investigation, five data points (DPs), and research, Site vegetation, soils, and hydrology are presented below. 3.1 VEGETATION Three plant communities are present on the site, including a small copse of woodland, a small patch of grassland, and a nearly monotypic shrub /vine community comprised of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procerus). DPs 1 and 2 were established close together in the area designated on the city's maps as potentially wetland. The location of DP 1 was selected because this area represented the area most likely as having wetland criteria, based upon the presence of a small, approximately 40 square -foot patch of creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) dominates in the overstory. Hawthorne (Crataegus monogyna) and Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis) comprise the understory, together with Himalayan blackberry at DP 1. Aside from cottonwood, the dominant species in the wooded plant community are non - hydrophytic. DPs 3 and 4 represent the shrub /vine community dominated by nearly monotypic Himalayan blackberry. Hawthorne is scattered within this community as at DP 4. This is a non - hydrophytic plant community. DP5 was established lower on the slope within the grassed area west of the existing residence. Tall fescue (Festuca arundinaceae) forms a monoculture in this area. Thus, this area is dominated by non - hydrophytic species. Wetland Determination Report 3 April 18, 2005 Staudacher Plat Tukwila Site Protect #2005 -064 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. 3.2 Sou, Soils in the northern perhaps two- thirds of the site have the appearance of fill material. Soil at DPs 1, 2, 3, and 4 are heavily compacted loamy to gravelly sand. Soil color does not meet hydric soil criteria at DPs 1, 2, 4, or 5; although mottled, the matrix color is too bright at DP 1 and no mottling was evident at DPs 2, 4, and 5. However, at DP 3, soil was moist mottled 2.5 Y 3/2 sandy loam, which does meet the hydric soil criterion. 3.3 HYDROLOGY Soil saturation was not encountered at any of the DPs. Even in the area deemed at first glance to potentially meet the criteria based upon the presence of buttercup, soils were dry to 16 inches during the time of year when hydrology is most likely to be present. 4. Conclusion There were no areas on . or within 100 feet of the Site that exhibited indicators of all three wetland criteria, i.e., hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils or wetland hydrology. In the absence of the three requisite criteria for determination as a wetland, the entire Site is considered non - wetland. 5. Report Limitations Work for this project was performed, and this report prepared for, Robert Staudacher and RW Thorpe & Associates, Inc. in accordance with generally accepted professional practices. This report is not meant to represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Wetland determinations and/or wetland boundaries delineated by Riley are subject to verification and approval by regulatory agencies. Any site design work prior to verification of wetland boundaries is subject to corrective changes. If you have any question regarding this delineation report or its findings, please call us at (425) 415 -0551, or contact us by fax at (425) 415 -0311. Sincerely, THE RILEY GROUP, INC. — Celest Botha Senior Wetland Ecologist Attachments Report Distribution Paul President R. W. Thorpe & Associates (5 copies) LHG Wetland Determination Report 4 Standacher Plat Tukwila Site April 18, 2005 Project #2005 -064 sz ',FLl• 1� ']t ��`: \�1\ \�WN 'fig �{�"�, '�!�r . IESu.�i Nif ktg 4„2: tatik to � V • �S USGS, . 1 995, Des Moines, Washington 7.5- Minute Quadrangle Scale = I :25,000 irT Rey Gp, . 17522 he BOTHELL il WAY rou NE, SUITE Inc A BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Wetlands Project #2005 -064 Site Vicinity Map Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington Figure 1 S 126th St. 1. sr Approximate Location 71. • of Type 3 Wetland as Presumed or Shown on the City of Tukwila Map ji i• 230.0• 0' ; e 40, 0 N. N36;s:t ! \ \ • N . • N sC) 1;4 N N \ 'N N W • \N • 35.B4 • EXISTING GARAGE EXISTING HOUSE • Approximate Data Plot Location by The Riley Group, Inc. on March 23, 2005. Modified by The Riley Group, Inc. from Existing Site Plan Prepared by R.W. Thorpe * Associates, Inc. dated March 3 I , 2005. NORTH 0 801 P■IT171:2e2 BRoTilqLG, 7,1 Aro NupsInEcA. BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Staudacher Wetlands Project #2005-064 Site Plan Figure 2 Site Address: 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington THE RILEY GROUP, INC. APPENDIX A: REFERENCES Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle. King County DDES website, http: / /www.metrokc.gov /ddes /gis /parcel/ Munsell Color. 1992. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). 244 p. 1993 Northwest Supplement, Region 9, December 1993. Snyder, D.E., P.S. Gale, and R.F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1985. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service. 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with the National Technical committee for Hydric Soils. U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Northwest Supplement to National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Region 9. Biol. Rpt. 88(24). Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication #96 -94. Washington State Department of Transportation. 2002. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects. WSDOT Environmental Affairs Office, Wetland Strategic Plan Implementation Project.. Welland Determination Report 5 April 18, 2005 Sta,dacher Plat Tirlcwila Site Project 02005 -064 THE RILEY GROUP, INC. APPENDIX B: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS Welland Determination Report 6 Standacher Plat Tukwila Site April 18, 2005 Project #2005 -064 SlV i, • • ••• ••••••••4• ••••• aawaa�w„�� (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • of ci/SIIe: / % '.../r `r � :, 7�p Pn C-f_ koplicant/ow'ner: - tr,il�0 l 1_..y'' 5 /' invPSlinatorlsl: C.-- . `.%�' !%? _ Date: .3 / ,- 9 ..r County: /( i ; / . r State: ff SIT/R: � ✓c�" -= `-4°!" Do Norrnai Circumstances exist on the site? ( es ) no is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation t? yes no Ls the area a potential Problem Area? yes no Explanation of arvpical or problem area: ` Community ID: Transect ID: ;9 Plot ID: VEGETATION. (For strata. indicate T = tree: S = shrub: H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum 9c cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Cc cover Indicator papa ha Lc i " /o . F- t , v-4 . aC.. ...,,,--2.? ' Cv.) L1. ce4t4 <- "� ( ( r ;/<'444t? "Fie.✓... -- t '<•' ° F4 -I i/ } HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS c of dominants OBL FACW. FAC & FAC _ Check all indicators that apply & explain below: - in Physiologicalireproductive adaptations Visual observation of plant species crowing Wetland plant database areas of prolonged inundation/saturation Personal knowledge of regional plant commuraities Morphological adaptations Other (explain) Technical Literature Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY ~ f' Is it the growing season. y s no Based on: - soil temp (record temp ) Water Marks: yes r Sediment Deposits: yes ?no Drift Lines: yes ono Drainage Patterns: yes other (ex a 1 ain ) Dept. of inundation: — inches Oxidized Root (live root) Channels <12 in. yes (114 Local Soil Survey: yes n r •- inches 14-'< _ Depth to free water in pit: _ ,t'r,,, FAC Neutral: • yes %on) Water- stained Leaves yes _ Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gaze data: Other (explain): Aerial photozraphs: Other. Wetland hydrology present? eves a Rationale for decision/Remarks: Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (suborouo) • Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes map d tv.e? No Profile Description Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color (Munsell moist) Mottle colors (Mansell moist) Mottle abundance size & contrast Texture, concretions. structure. etc. Drawing of soil profile (match description). yie,12.41,-) j= ? %yf/ ,mow. Hydric Soil )Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low- Chroma (=I) matrix Matrix chroma _S. 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hydric Soils List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing Listed on Gleyed Other (explain Hvdric soils present? yes ttr • • Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) yes () r-- yes Is the sampling point yes (no yes no within a wetland? Hydrophvtic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: NOTES: Revised 4/97 • 11V4aua•%. • ,.••w18.1.41 Yom••.• (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or erlan�l ielineation Manual) • rojcNSitc: 'e "`r' '71-4 if -- 4ppliranUouner: ,� ,! - �,sC- +!+F,�,�t.,z._1°'yt' investieatons.1: C'' Date: ?/ . ' 7 -r- County: ,- 4 State:; r ? no Do Normal Circumstances exist. on the site. �,.� Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation r yes lib., s the area.a potential Problem Area? yes no Explanation of atypical or problem area: -- Community ID: Transect ID: Piot ID: r' s _.... _ VEGETATION (For strata. indicate T = tree: S = shrub: H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Cr cover Indicator Dominant Plant SDecies Stratum tic cover .Indictor j tf 4 0file, C/ A 1 rilo ri c) 7r /IC tfi - 1(. 1_. C A''G . C' l l..G --- • ,r" f )a-. 71.4 roc:., i( €.7.20 r d a' -e. .... 41/ A/4- • .V /22 l HVDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS z of dominants OBL'FACW,•&:FAC Check all indicators that apply 8 explain below: in Physiological/reproduciive adaptations Visual observation of plant species ero«ins Wetland rintabase areas of proioneed inundation /saturation plant Personal knowledge of regional plant communities Morphological adaptations Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydz- ophytic vegetation present? yes no') Rationale. for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY Is it the growing. season? ). no Based on: It- It- ' ;, Soil temp (record temp ) Water Marks: ves ino Sediment Deposits: yes(o) Drift Lines: ,,.es ('nl Drainage Patterns: yes (time other (explain t Dept__ of inundation: _„__... inches Oxidized Root (live roots) Channels <12 in. ves ano i Local Soil Surrey: yes (n0; %;.. A. t? D-43. th to free water in pit: — inches ' / r. FAC Neutral: - yes Aio) Water- stained Leaves yes 'tio Depth to.saturated'soil: '`'"inches Check all that apply Si. explain below: Stream. Lake or gage data: Other (explain): Aerial photoeraphs: Other. . Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: ves 116) Map Unit Name (Series S Phase) Taxononw (subsrrou • Drainace Class Field observations confirm Yes No rna.. d e? Profile Description Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color (MunseIi moist) Mottle colors (Munsell moist) 1Mttle abundance size e: contrast Texture. concretions. structure, etc. Drawing of scii profile (match description) Jj l elf 7. 48; •`j r 4 4- . I/ ? a Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low- Chroma ( =1) matrix Matrix chroma <_ 2 with morales Concretions Consent in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local Hvdric Soils List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Mg or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing. Listed an Gieved Other (explain Hydric soils present? yes / o ) Rationale for decision/Remarks:. �1 Wetland Determination (circle) yes yes ,. o ' Is the sampling point tics no ; yes (no I' within a wetland? Hydrophvtic vegetation present? Hydricsoils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: • NOTES: Revised 4/97 ftVUYAa, (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1487 Cssrps Wetland Delineation Manual) • roject/Site: y,.. r ,- , ---> .-./1 4ppiicantlowne /. �atr� invest ivator(s): 1. ; _ Date: j tw / rF County: l -`� , f State: -- : a StT!R: ,` .�I:'"::• = Do Normal Circumstances exist On the site' yes no is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes If i is the area a potential Problem Arta? Les o Explanation of arvpical or problem area: Community ID: Trsnsect ID: , . Plot ID: ✓` - VEGETATION (For strata. indicate T = tree: S = shrub: H = herb; V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Cr cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum 4c over Indicator (` ' )11,414 1 { / F , :l - ,rel R DROPHY T IC VEGETATION INDICATO Si of dominants OBL. FACW. & FAC t' Check all indicators that apply' & explain below: Visual observation of plant species grown_ in areas of prolonged inundation /saturation Morphological adaptations Technical Literature Hy drophytic vegetation present? Rationale for decision/Remark: Physiolo_ica)ireproductive adaptations Wetland plant database Personal knowledge of regional plant commur.ities Other (explain) yes H Z DROLOG-Y Is it the growing season:' yes,,) no Based on: l' C:.' . soil temp (record temp other ( explain ) Dept. of inundation: 'm" inches Depth to free water in pit: inches Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or ease data: Aerial photoeraphs: Wetland hydrology present'. Rationale for deciston/Rerrarks: Water Marks: yes t) Sediment Deposits: yes( no/ on Drift Lints: ves :ISO i Drainage Patterns: s no; Oxidized Root (live roots11 Channels <12 in. ves (no,, FAC Neutral: • yes (nol Local Soil Survey: yes (rib) Water- stained Leaves yes'' no) Other: Other (explain): yes /no Map Unit Name (Series & Phase.) Taxonomy (suborou Profile Description • Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes ma.. d �• �.1 No Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix color (Munsell moist) Mottle colors (Munsell moist) Mottle abundance. size & contrast Texture. concretions. . structure. etc. Drawing of soil profile • tmarch description .. 0---igyi- 23-2y2_ /es eI of rat r e> ?.;.,r 17 14-- - L. ' _.....4-)--' .f� Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low -Chroma ( =,l) matrix t Matrix chrorna _< 2 with mottles Concretions Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils National/Local H_ydric Soils List in remarks) • Histic Epipedon Me or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic Reducing Listed on Gloved Other (explain Hydric soils present?. fees no • Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Deterrnination.(circle) • yes (no) yes `n� Is the sampling point yes no yes (gip) within. a wetland? Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrolo ry present? Rationale/Remarks: `—'` NOTES: Revised 4197 • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • ?rUJCC✓Site: *24.27., „-., i a 4pplit antlowm r. , , ; �?' *( :; , ? : t*- .. ;r investi_ator(s): Date: 3/..-.5,A.-} j County: �v 67 State: , / STFIR: 11/..k (AL, fe��� Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site' J. no s the site significantly disturbed (atypical. situation)? yes to " "' Ls the area a potential Problem Area? _yes ,. 0 Explanation of atypical or probiem.area: Community ID: Transect ID: Plot ID: ,� p..- ! • Revised 4/97 (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or W etland Delineation Manual) ?rojeet/Site: s i/1 , r� r,.• r /) ?,,:,, '. -- r 'Aviv- __, kpplicantlouter. c, , Investie.atoris1: Date: , r/2' 7'a State: .7 3 . a }� _ S/T/R: vC• V '" Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site' 1.4 J no- Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes i is the area a potential Problem Area? yes ; no,� Explanation of atypical or problem•area: Community ID: 7ransect ID: Plot ID' _ VEGETATION (For strata, indicate T = tree: S = shrub: H= herb: V = vine) Dominant Plant Species Stratum 9c cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum cic cover Indicator ) §�""'''''� ir a 4: HYDROPH'ITIC VEGETATION INDICATORS. Ce of dominants OBL FACW, & FAC Check all indicators that apply & explain below: .. in Phvsiolo_ical/reproductivt adaptations Visual observation of plant species growing kVetiand database areas of prolonged inundation /saturation plant Personal knowledge of regional communities Morphological adaptations plant Technical Literature Other (explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes rep Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY. o Is ii the growing season. L °es no Based on: -.'.& soil tempt record temp ) Water Marks: yes on �. Sediment Deposits: yes .•–•, Drift Lines: yes (n Drairagge Patterns: yes (nt ) other (explain) Dept. of inundation: — inches Oxidized Root (live roots, --. Channels <12 in. Yes (n0J Local Soil Survey: yes nj� r¢ a �� Depth to free water in pit: __. inches ' ' ' "s'`"'"- FAC Neutral: • yes = it Water- stained Leaves yes.no) . Depth to saturated soil: • — inches Check all that apply & explain below: Stream, Lake or gaze data: - Other (explain): Aerial photosraphs: Other: � Wetland hydrology present? Rationale for decision/Remarks: yes Map Unit Name (Series & Phase) Taxonomy (subarou • Drainage Class Field observations confirm Yes ma _d tv•c? No Profile Description NOTES: Revised 4/97 Depth (inches) Horizon Many( color (Munsef moist) 'vioule colors (Munsell moist) 'Mottle abundance size & contrast Texture. concretions. structure. etc. Drawing of soil profile • (match description) -/...1.- A- re),Yiti — .._..� ; I Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (check all that apply) Odor Moisture Regime Conditions or Low- Chroma ( =l) matrix Matrix chroma < 2 with morales Concretions Content in Surface L3yer of Sandy Soils Streaking in Sandy Soils Natianal/Local Hydric &As List in remarks) Histic Epipedon Ms or Fe Sulfidic High Organic Aquic Organic - educing QLeved Listed on Other (explain Hydric soils present? ig, no Rationale for decision/Remarks: Wetland Determination (circle) yes eo no Is the sampling point Yes ; ° no yes no within a wetland? Hydrophvtic vegetation present? Hydric soils present? Wetland hydrology present? Rationale/Remarks: • NOTES: Revised 4/97 RECEIVA MAY 01 2006 COMMUNITY SEPA CITY OF TUKWILA ENT Department of Community Development ENVIRONMENTAL 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci,tukwila.wa.us REVIEW APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P -SEPA Planner: gei ec _,- (yam File Number: is 04„, - pQ er Application Complete (Date:5174'06) Project File Number: peg 0 S - 02,1 Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: Li -• D 3 1 NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Staudacher Preliminary Short Plat Application LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL 10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS. 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila Parcel #: 7340600664 Quarter: SW Section: 10 Township: 23N Range: 04E (This information may be found on your tax statement) DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, an • is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: R.W. Thorpe & AssocJ Jennifer Lee, ASLA Address: 705 Second Ave. Suite 710 Phone: 206424 -6239 E -mail: Jlee@rwta.com FAX: 206- 625 -0930 G: APPHANILANDUSE.APPISEPAAPP.DOC. 09/11101 ate: February, 2006 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: February 2006 Applicant Name: Robert Staudacher Agent: R.W. Thorpe & Associates Contact: Jennifer Lee/ ASLA Street Address:10510 NE Northup Way, Suite 130 705 2nd Ave., Suite 710 City, State, Zip: Kirkland. WA 98033 Telephone: 425 - 828 -3862 ex. 204 Seattle, WA 98104 206 - 624 -6239 Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated. Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 YES Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response. 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 -1.1). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 5 -0 YES - Continue to Question 5 -0 5 -0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements`of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. NO- Continue to Question 6 -0 O- E Continue to Question 6 -0 urty of l ukwtla L, A Screening Checklist appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Continue to Question 1 -4 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes:to this question Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review 'each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Diiwamish.or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES-'Continue to. Question 272 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 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO 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. Carty of l ukwtla t5A Screening Checklist • watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. 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. 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. Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILE NO: FEE: RECEIPT: Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Government agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write do not know or does not apply. Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered does not apply. IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words project, applicant, and properhy or site should be read as proposal, proposer, and affected geographic area, respectively. RECEIVED MAY 01 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Please respond to all questio•se separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Staudacher Short Plat 2. Name of applicant: Robert Staudacher 10510 NE Northup Way, Suite 130 Kirkland, WA 98033 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Robert Staudacher Agent: R.W. Thorpe & Associates 10510 NE Northup Way, Suite 130 705 2nd Ave. Kirkland, WA 98033 Seattle, WA 98104 425 - 828 -3862 ex.204 Contact: Jennifer Lee 206 - 624 -6239 4. Date checklist prepared: April 2006 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. This application is for a preliminary plat. After preliminary plat decision by the City of Tukwila, site development/ plat improvement plans and/or performance bonds will be submitted as required by Tukwila Municipal Code. Future building permit application for individual lots may be developed in phases. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Geotechnical Engineering Report and Wetland Determination Report was prepared by The Riley Group, Inc. A preliminary technical information report (TIR) regarding stormwater/ drainage has been prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No other applications for other proposals are pending governmental approvals to the knowledge of the applicant. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Future land use permits for clearing and grading, and construction. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description). Please respond to all questielse separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments This is a proposal to subdivide the 1.43 acre parcel into seven single - family residences (one residence already on site) with associated driveways and utilities. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range 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 City, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with the application related to this checklist. The site is located at 4020 South 128th Street, Tukwila, Washington. It is located in the SW 1/4 of Section 10, Township 23, Range 04. See the vicinity map, survey and site plan submitted with the preliminary short plat application. The site contains a trapezoid- shaped parcel that is bordered to the north and east by an uphill slope to the south by South 128th Street, and to the west by 40th Avenue South. The existing house and garage is located in the south west portion of the site. Legal description: A portion of tract 45 Riverside interurban tracts, according to a plat thereof recorded in volume 10 of plats at page 74 records of King County Washington, describes as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said tract, said point being on the centerline of the street; thence west along said centerline 150.00 feet; thence south parallel to the west line of said tract, 152.50 feet to the true point of beginning; thence south along said parallel line, 333.85 feet to a point of curvature; thence along a curve to the right making a radius of 15.00 feet, a distance of 33.835 feet to a point of tangency, which point is on the northerly line of south 128th St. (Formerly River Street); thence along said street line, north 50 °45'30" West, 265.35 feet to the easterly line of 40th Ave. South (Formerly Dale Street); thence north along said easterly line, 177.61 feet to a point from which the true point of beginning bears east; thence east 230.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Please respond to all questio•se separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The northeast portion of the site is a slope with gradient up to 30 %. The average site slope is ±12 %. (The Riley Group, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report). c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Geotechnical Engineering Report indicates that the soils are relatively consistent across the site. Typical soil profile includes medium dense to very dense silty sand with some gravel and trace cobbles and boulders. The middle south portion of the site contains 8 feet of medium silty sand overlying stiff to very stiff silt with some fine sand. Till (Qvt) is the compacted soil layer located in the area and displayed on The Geologic Map of King County Washington by Derek B. Booth, et. al. 2002 The IBC (International Building Code) classifys the site soil as Class D. The Riley Group concludes that the potential of liquefaction during a possible earthquake was minimal. (Staudacher Short Plat Geotechnical Engineering Report, The Riley Group, Inc. 9/9/05) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No, there is no surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity. There is no mapping of landslide erosion hazard areas per King Counties 1990 Sensitive Map Folio. Creep and surface erosion of the toe of the existing slope was noticed by the Riley Group, Inc. during a site visit in 2005. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Cut/fill volumes have been prepared by Pacific Engineering Design and approximately 1,500 cy of cut and approximately 650 cy of fill were calculated for site development/ plat improvement. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The Geotechnical Engineering Report suggests that the proposed development will not adversely affect slope stability if the geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated into final design and construction. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 20% h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, other impacts to the earth, if any: If the site soils are found to have moderate to severe erosion potential when areas of vegetative cover are removed, a silt fence should be constructed around the downslope side of all excavation areas or areas where the vegetation has been disturbed. Surface water should be routed away from stripped areas to reduce erosion potential or straw bales and silt Please respond to all questiise separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: • Agency Comments fences used to reduce water velocity and sediment load. After construction, the disturbed areas should be revegetated and the vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Where the vegetation has not been disturbed, erosion should be minimal. Erosion control measures should conform to state and local requirements. For example existing vegetation shall be retained until building permits are approved. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (ie, dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The site will generate vehicle emissions from trucks and construction equipment grading the site. Eventual building activities will also generate some temporary dust and emissions typical of a single family use. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no off -site sources of emissions or odor that would adversely affect the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Short term emissions resulting from future construction activities could be controlled through the use of common dust - suppression techniques. 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. In the absence of the three requisite criteria for determination as a wetland, the entire site is considered non - wetland (The Riley Group, Inc., Wetland Determination Report April 2005) 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. No. The Green River is located more than 200 feet northeast of the subject site across highway 599 and Interurban Ave S. 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. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. N/A 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No Please respond to all question se separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Ground 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example, domestic sewage, industrial, containing the following chemicals..., agricultural, etc). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Six new houses will be served with sanitary sewer service plus one existing house that is already served by sanitary service. c. Water Runoff (including storms water) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Run -off from houses, related single family structures, roadway and drives would occur. The method of collection and disposal would comprise of grading of the topography to divert and disperse runoff. Drainlines, catch basins, and a storm detention and water quality vault are the other methods that are to be used to regulate water flow. Please see the Preliminary TIR report by Pacific Engineering Design that was submitted as part of the preliminary short plat package. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. None anticipated d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None required 4. Plants a. Check, circle and/ or underline types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Removal of existing trees and shrubs will be required for plat improvement related to the short plat. Portions of the existing tree canopy removed will be replaced at 314 square feet per replacement tree according to TMC 18.54.140B. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. Please respond to all question se separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Significant trees may be retained or replaced according to Tukwila Municipal Code. 5. Animals a. Circle or underline any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Street tree and perimeter tree planting may provide habitat for area songbirds. 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. TBD b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The current codes require insulation in walls and windows. New appliances may be of energy saver type. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Emergency response services for single family residences. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example, traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Adjacent roadways. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, Please respond to all questioo.se separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Future construction noises on the subject site resulting from grading and building of individual home sites and possible road improvements would occur on a short term basis on site between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? North: Single Family- LDR Zone South: NCC- Neighborhood Commercial Center & LDR Zone East: Single Family- LDR Zone West: Utilities Service Co. Inc. Warehouse C & D Wells Inc. Service Garage & Warehouse C/LI Commercial Light Industrial Zone Southwest: NCC- Neighborhood Commercial Center • b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. Existing Residence and Garage. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Garage to be removed. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? LDR Low Density Residential f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? LDR Low Density Residential g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally sensitive area? If so, specify. The site has 15 -25% slopes and slopes up to 30%. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The subdivision of seven lots could accommodate seven (single - family) residents). J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Zero. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None proposed. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Approximately six new Please respond to all questieV se separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments and one existing single family for a total of seven high to middle income houses would be provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Zero. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 30 feet per TMC 18.10.060. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce aesthetic impacts, if any: 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Very little reflection is anticipated to occur or the average amount that occurs in a single- family residential neighborhood. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not anticipated. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None proposed. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There is a community center and park located approximately three blocks south of the site. Southgate park is located approximately 1 mile south of the site. Hilltop Park is located approximately 1 and 1/2 miles west of the site and Allenton Pea Patch is located approximately 1 mile north of the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None proposed or required. 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. None known. Please respond to all questii Use separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 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. The site is currently accessed by S. 128th Street. Proposed access will continue to be from S 128th St. via a 28' wide right of way. This right of way comprised is comprised of 20' wide concrete surfacing along 6 of the seven lots and would narrow to 15' of pavement and provide emergency connection to 40th Ave. S. Both S. 128th Street and 40th Ave S. connect to E. Marginal Wy. S., which connects to S. 130th St. See site plan and vicinity map of the short plat application package. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The closest transit stop is 0.03 mile at East Marginal Way S. & S. 128th R. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? No parking spaces will be eliminated by the project. Two off street parking spaces per dwelling unit required including existing house when garage is removed. 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). Per the pre - application file no. PRE05 -021, frontage improvements (TMC 11.12.030) required include curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk, street lights, pavement, channelization and typical cross section. If the existing public roads of S. 128th and 40th Ave S. are not the minimum width for two lanes, half street improvements are required. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Less than 50 trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed. 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. Yes, minor incremental ingress similar to any single family residential increase in population. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None proposed Please respond to all questiiUse separate sheets as necessary. • Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity: Seattle City Light or Puget Sound Energy Water: Water District 125 existing 6" mainline in 40th Ave r.o.w. and 128th St. r.o.w. Refuse Collection: SeaTac Disposal Telephone: Qwest Sanitary Sewer: Val Vue Sewer District existing 8" mainline in 40th Ave r.o.w. and 128`h Street r.o.w. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. ci�-` Signature: `-� LQ�_ T` �b cJ• �rK� Date Submitted: difA. 2x0C0