The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA E07-004 - HARKOVICH JONATHAN - FARNHAM 5 LOT SHORT PLATFARNHAM FIVE LOT SHORT PLAT 12610 40T" AVE. S. E07 -004 File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: CitAf Tukwila 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 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) E07 -004 03/16/2007 12/18/2007 APPROVED 1-a Applicant: HARKOVICH, JONATHAN Lead Agency: • City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR FIVE LOT SHORT PLAT Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township /Range: 12610 40 AV S TUKW 7340600661 SE 10 -23 -04 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.2 lc.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by 12 /3 1/ v7 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Jack P : ce, ' esponsible Official City o� la 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 ' Date 0-7 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) • Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Aw4. HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: ' O (— 0 O L Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting ai 1 jmg: ' 6 ECC. Ar -FOC Notice of Public Meeting ` Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ _ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this 2b day of fG- in the year 20 PAADMINIST EWORMS\AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION n NOD C t`-e r ' er — D1l1S ReA s:S ve d Project Name:' FA-72.N 1-110L4 itribe_Y /° U1-7- S FPA - Project Number: ' O (— 0 O L I, i � Mailer's Signature:` jlir Person requesting ai 1 jmg: ' 6 ECC. Ar -FOC PAADMINIST EWORMS\AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION 1 Department of Ecology SEPA Unit PO BOX 47703 Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 ValVue Sewer District 14816 Military Rd S PO BOX 69550 Seattle, WA 98168 International Gateway East LLC 12201 Tuckwila International Blvd 4th Seattle, WA 98168 Tenant 12626 Interurban Ave S Tukwila, WA 98168 Doherty, Paul A 3726 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Davis & Robinson Inc. 1201 S Monster Rd 320 Renton, WA 98055 Utilities Service Co Inc. 12608 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Marginal Island Properties LLC & Marleau Joseph 2514 Lake Park Dr S Seattle, WA 98144 Carosino, Lorraine 10652 Des Moines Memorial Drive Seattle, WA 98168 Tenant 12601 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Jonathan Harkovich 1201 S Monster Road #320 Renton, WA 98055 Anne Arundel Apartments LLC 10 W Market 1200 Market Towe Indianapolis, IN 46204 Tenant 12521 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Woolbert, Jim 12800 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Roberts, Bernard & Mendis 3807 S 127th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Tenant 12400 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 C & D Wells LLC 12677 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Campbell, Brie 3727 S 126th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Ouyang, Xian 12010 76th Avenue S Seattle, WA 98178 Tenant 12621 42nd Avenue S Tukwila, WA 98168 Water District 125 2849 S 150`h Street Seattle, WA 98168 Nguyen, Bill D 11227 SE 308th Street Auburn, WA 98092 Vale, Regina A 12607 E Marginal Way S Seattle, WA 98168 Gray, Leroy D & Marcia 1760 Ferry Ave SW Seattle, WA 98116 Staudacher, Robert N 10510 NE Northrup Way 130 Kirkland, WA 98033 Tenant 12539 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Trout, Laurie A 12812 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Pham, NGOC -NU T &M Nguyen Trust 3829 S 132 "d Place Tukwila, WA 98168 Tenant 12449 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Bosteder, D 12800 E Marginal Way S Tukwila, WA 98168 Tenant Tenant Hundtofte, Aaron 12822 E Marginal Way S 3725 S 126th Street 3727 S 126`h Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98168 Tukwila, WA 98168 Tenant Hoang, Kha L Puget Sound Tran Authority 4002 S 126th Street 4006 S 126th Street 401 S Jackson Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Tukwila, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98104 Nguyen, Stella Thao & Duc -Thang Du, Hung & Bophary Tenant 4012 S 126th Street 4018 S 126th Street 4020 S 128`h Street Seattle, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98168 Whitezel, Virginia M 4021 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Nguyen, Cam Trust Thi 4024 S 126`h Street Seattle, WA 98168 Brenner, Lisa K 4027 S 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Dempere, Jackie Le B Hemenway, Philip Tenant 4033 S 128th Street 4036 S 128`h Street 4040 S 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98168 Tukwila, WA 98168 Tenant Joaquin, Terry Tenant 4044 S 128th Street 4049 S 128th Street 4054 S 128th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Seattle, WA 98168 Tukwila, WA 98168 Botts, C P 4055 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Wang, Cheng E 4066 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Pitzer Homes Inc 46533 284th Avenue SE Enumclaw, WA 98022 CHAMPA Association Inc 6560 33`d Avenue S Seattle, WA 98118 Spencer, Candy L 4058 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Beuslinch, Micheal N 4071 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Hemenway, Daniel Trust 4816 Todman Street NW Washington, DC 20016 C & D Wells LLC 7265 2nd Avenue S Seattle, WA 98108 Capellaro, Larry & Terri 4061 S 128th Street Seattle, WA 98168 Tukwila School District 406 4640 S 144th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Capelouto, Isaac S Trust 5509 S Brandon Street Seattle, WA 98118 Le Tien 9420 8th Avenue SW Seattle, WA 98106 Seattle City Light PO BOX 34023 Seattle, WA 98124 • • Dept 207 PO BOX 4900 Scottsdale, AZ 85261 • HOANG,KHA L 4006 S 126TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 • PUGET SOUND TRAN AUTH V 401 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE, WA 98104 DU,HUNG & BOPHARY / 4018 S 126TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 NGUYEN,CAM TRUST THI 4024 S 126TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 HEMENWAY,PHILIP 4036 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 ✓ JOAQUIN,TERRY 4049 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 SPENCER,CANDY L 4058 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 BEUSLINCH,MICHAEL N 4071 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 1 HEMENWAY,DANIEL TRUST 4816 RODMAN ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20016 C & D WELLS LLC 7265 2ND AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98108 DEPT 207 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261 TENANT 4020 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 BRENNER,LISA K • 4027 S 128TH ST ,TUKWILA, WA 98168 7; TENANT 4046 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT 4054 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 CAPELLARO,LARRY & TERRI 4061 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTR 406 4640 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 CAPELOUTO,ISAAC S TRUST 5509 S BRANDON ST \/ SEATTLE, WA 98118 LE TIEN 9420 8TH AVE SW SEATTLE, WA 98106 • NGUYEN,STELLA THAO & DUC -THANG 4012 S 126TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 - \-/ WHITEZEL,VIRGINIA M 4021 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 DEMPERE,JACKIE LE B 4033 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT 4044 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 BOTTS,C P 4055 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 WANG,CHENG E 4066 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 PITZER HOMES INC 46533 284TH AVE SE ENUMCLAW, WA 98022 CHAMPA ASSOCIATION INC 6560 33RD AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98118" SEATTLE CITY LIGHT PO BOX 34023 SEATTLE, WA 98124 ANNE ARUNDEL APARTMENTS LLC 10 W MARKET 1200 MARKET TOWS NDI N-AROLIS, IN 46204 NGUYEN,BILL D 11227 SE 308TH ST AUBURN, WA 98092 V INTERNATIONAL G TEWAY AST LLC 12201 TUKWILA TERNATIONAL BL 4TH ATTLE, WA 99.1 -6 TENANT 12521 E MARGINAL WAY S ✓ TUKWILA, WA 98168 VALE,REGINA A 12607 E MARGINAL WAY S SEATTLE, WA 98168 TENANT 12626 INTERURBAN AVE S / TUKWILA, WA 98168 WOOLBERT,JIM 12800 E MARGINAL WAY S ✓ SEATTLE, WA 98168 GRAY,LEROY D & MARCI A 1760 FERRY AVE SW SEATTLE, WA 98116 DOHERTY,PAUL A 3726 S 128TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 ROBERTS,BERNARD & MENDI S 3807 S 128TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 • STAUDACHER,ROBERT N 10510 NE NORTHRUP WAY 130 KIRKLAND, WA 98033 DAVIS & ROBINSON INC 1201 S MONSTER RD 320 RENTON, WA 98055 • CAROSINO,LORRANE LJ 10652 DES MOINES MEMORIAL DR SEATTLE, WA 98168 OUYANG,XIAN 12010 76TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98178 TENANT TENANT ✓ 12400 E MARGINAL WAY S V 12449 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT , / TENANT 12539 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 981.68 12601 E MARGINAL WAY S v TUKWILA, WA 98168 UTILITIES SERVICE CO INC ✓ TENANT 12608 "E MARGINAL WAY S 12621 42ND AVE S SEATTLE,: WA x'98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 C & D WELLS LLC . 7 BOSTEDER,D 12677 E MARGINAL/WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 12800 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 TROUT,LAURIE A v / TENANT 12812 E MARGINAL WAY S 12822 E MARGINAL WAY S TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 MARGINAL ISLAND PROPERTIES LLC & MARLEAU ✓ JOSEPH & 2514 LAKE PARK DR S SEATTLE, WA 98144 CAMPBELL,BRIE 3727 S 126TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 • PHAM,NGOC -NU T & M NGUYEN TRUST 3829 S 132ND PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT 3725 S 126TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 J HUNDTOFTE,AARON y 3727 S 126TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT 4002 S 126TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 . Add to mailing list: Jonathan Harkovich 1201 S. Monster Road #320 Renton, WA 98055 Water District 125 2849 S. 150th St. Seattle, WA 98168 ValVue Sewer District 14816 Military RdS ✓ PO Box 69550 Seattle, WA 98168 Please add to the mailing list and make a label: Department of Ecology SEPA Unit P.O. Box 47703 Olympia WA 98504 -7703 r • NOTICE OF DECISION (Revised) To: Jonathan Harkovich State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division Adjacent Properties PROJECT: Farnham Short Plat Environmental Review FILE NUMBERS: E07 -004 ASSOCIATED FILES: L07 -018 APPLICANT: Jonathan Harkovich REQUEST: Five lot short plat LOCATION: 12610 40th Avenue South, Tukwila, WA This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application. This notice has been revised to include a 14 -day comment period. Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The public is invited to comment on this DNS by submitting written comments no later than December 31, 2007 at the above address. The project planner is Rebecca Fox, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). rf Page l of 1 FarnhamSEPA— E07- 004 — revisedNOD.DOC 12/18/07 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 1, Atiz02/60110 HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing x Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance G i Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Person requesting mailing: Notice of Action h0 . a' 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 / 7 day of in the year 20 01 P: ADMINISTRATIVEFORMS \FORMSUFFMAVITOFDistin'rrrnx Project Name: !1In i64. G i Project Number: E07-04 Mailer's Signature: 4/211Y4 Person requesting mailing: 6 h0 . a' P: ADMINISTRATIVEFORMS \FORMSUFFMAVITOFDistin'rrrnx • Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I. 113-7, HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Project Number: 6107.-/V4/ Determination of Non - Significance Mailer's Signature: Gf/ rtc& 4'-aorw , Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __ __ FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed lo each of the addresses listed on this I3day of - in the year 20 0 P:W DMINISTRATIVEFORM S\FORMS\AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIRnTfnx Project Name: M ka,rn Mnt 6 / Project Number: 6107.-/V4/ Mailer's Signature: Gf/ rtc& 4'-aorw , Person requesting mailing:{ 6 as ,r P:W DMINISTRATIVEFORM S\FORMS\AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIRnTfnx () U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS () FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY () U.S. DEPT U.D. ( ) NATIONAL NE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND OIV EPLT QF ECOLOGY, SEPA IVISION• �( ) 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 /12 () K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DMSION ( ) KC. DEPT OF PARKS & REC () KC. ASSESSORS OFFICE () TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT () TUKWILA UBRARY () RENTON UBRARY () KENT UBRARY () CITY OF SEATTLE UBRARY () OWEST () SEATTLE CITY UGHT () 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 ( ) HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE () KC. DEV & ENV!R SERVICES-SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) KC. TRANSIT DMSION - SEPA OFFICIAL () KC. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT () SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT O RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT &2O ( ) WATER DISTRICT1125 O CITY OF RENTON PUBUC WORKS () BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT () CRY 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 ( ) 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: ADMTNISTRATNEIFORMSICHKLIST.DOC Y MEDIA () DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY () SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COAUTION *SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPUCATIONS ON OUWAMISH RNER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKIMLA.WA.US.VWWV SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts to of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental eview Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) 'Any parties of record • send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division. -:SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section • State Attorney General *Applicant . •Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). • Any parties of record • send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) : • Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc: from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross- sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan - Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P: ADMINISTRATNEIFORMST1OCLIST •DOC Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, P,eibe6,\___ HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing `, , Determination of Non - Significance Project Number: 007-- 00/ Notice of Public Meeting Person requesting mailing: �il'> 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 1 ' Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this 12., day of 1'47,— in the year 20 07 (r!' 0.f: , ) Project Name: Fir-14 ka —. -k, l-P144'" S f5-19 Project Number: 007-- 00/ Mailer's Signature: Person requesting mailing: �il'> eGGeL--`D P:\ADMINISTRATIVE \FORMS \AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: Citipf Tukwila 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 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) E07 -004 03/16/2007 12/12/2007 APPROVED Applicant: HARKOVICH, JONATHAN Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR FIVE LOT SHORT PLAT Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township /Range: 12610 40 AV S TUKW 7340600661 SE 10 -23 -04 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Jack ` Respo e Official City , Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 2 c� .1)t- 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) NOTICE OF DECISION To: Jonathan Harkovich State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division PROJECT: Farnham Short Plat Environmental Review FILE NUMBERS: E07 -004 ASSOCIATED FILES: L07 -018 APPLICANT: Jonathan Harkovich REQUEST: Five lot short plat LOCATION: 12610 40th Avenue South, Tukwila, WA This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the above project based on the environmental checklist and the underlying permit application: Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. The project planner is Rebecca Fox, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for further information. The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C). rf Page l of l FarnhamSEPA —E07- 004 — NOD.DOC 12/12/07 STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLLIST Farnham Short Plat File #: E07 -004 Summary of Proposed Action The applicant proposes to short plat a .83 acre parcel into five single- family lots, General Information Project Name: Farnham Short Plat Applicant: Jonathan Harkovich (for Majestic Builders) Location: 40XX S. 126t1i 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 Part Nine — Categorical Exemptions (WAC 197 -11 -800) Background /Proposal The proposal is to develop a parcel of land approximately .83 acres into five single- family residences with associated sidewalks, driveways and utilities. The proposed work will include demolition of the existing foundation on the east side of the property, and the subdivision of the property into five residential lots. The project will include installation of concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk and closed storm drainage pipe and catch basin system along the property frontage on 40th Avenue South and South 126th Street. Lots 1 -4 will be accessed off S. 126th Street to the north. Lot 5 will be accessed from 41St Avenue South to the east. Individual lot infiltration trenches are proposed. Rf 1 12/12/2007 Q: \Farnham SEPA E07- 004 \E07- 004Famham shrt pit SEPAstaffrept.doc • • Recommendation Determination of Non - Significance Existing Environmental Information Geotechnical Engineering Report (Cornerstone Geotechnical Inc., 6/06) Technical Information Report (Patrick Herron and Associates, 11/06) Summary of Environment Impacts The following describes the impacts of primary elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for the proposed project. Earth Portions of site is class 2 and 3 steep slope area (Sensitive Area Ordinance). The site contains areas of Potential Geologic Instability Class 2, and Class 3 (See Soils Report). The geotechnical report indicates that there are many areas of geotechnical concern, and that planned development of the site will have to be designed to create a stable condition. The site is generally moderately sloping to the southwest. Previous grading activities have shaped the site into three tiers. The highest tier is in the eastern part of the site, and steps down to the west in approximate eight to ten foot elevation drops. Approximately 442 cubic yards of cut, and 2, 068 cubic yards of fill will be needed for site development/plat improvement, for a net of 1, 626 cubic feet of earth work.. 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 neither a storm water infiltration system nor full dispersion -type system appears feasible due to subsurface conditions. Several alternatives are suggested including limited infiltration, basic dispersion, rain garden, permeable pavement and rainwater harvesting. A dispersion trench is recommended with a vegetative buffer of at least 25 feet from the trench to the property Rf 2 12/12/2007 Q: \Farnham SEPA E07- 004 \E07- 004Famham shrt plt SEPAstaffrept.doc line. Due to soils that are highly sensitive to moisture, construction should take place in the drier months. Plants Deciduous trees (alder, maple, aspen), grass and shrubs are at the site. Any trees that are removed from the steep slope area will be subject to replacement per the Tree Ordinance. Animals Songbirds have been observed on the site. This area is part of the Pacific Flyway. A primary corridor for migratory bird species. Many common species of rodents and small mammals may be on the site on occasion. 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 homes, vacant land and right of way. Housing Five 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 40th Avenue South, S. 126th Street, and 41st Avenue South. The nearest transit stop is at E. Marginal Way S. and S. 128th St. Any required traffic 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. Rf 3 12/12/2007 Q: \Farnham SEPA E07- 004 \E07- 004Famham shrt plt SEPAstaffrept.doc Utilities Electricity, water, garbage service, telephone and sanitary sewer are available to serve the project site. Public Comments None received Recommendation Staff finds that the proposal should not have a probable significant adverse environmental impact. Pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -340, staff recommends issuing a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) for this project. Rf 4 12/12/2007 Q: \Famham SEPA E07- 004 \E07- 004Famham shrt plt SEPAstaffrept.doc 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: Jonathan M. Harkovich LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: FILE NUMBER: PROPOSAL: 12610 40th Avenue South, Tukwila, WA. Davis and Robinson, Inc. E07 -004 -- Environmental Review /SEPA L07 -018 — Short Plat 5 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 Environmental Review Checklist /SEPA and short plat application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on October 3, 2007. 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: 3/16/07 Notice of Completeness Issued:9 /18/07 Notice of Application Issued: 9/19/07 °mop �a0/ 126th Street Short Plat. Preliminary Technical Information Report Site Location: 40XX South 126th Street Tukwila, WA 98168 Parcel #s: 7340600661 & 7340600662 Prepared for: Jonathan Harkovich Davis Real Estate Group 1201 Monster Road SW Suite #320 Renton, WA 98055 It EXPIRES 8/07 Brian G. Harron, P.E. PATRICK HARRON & ASSOC., LLC 14900 Interurban Ave. S. Suite 279 Seattle, WA 98168 PHA Project #: 06110 Date: November 2006 126th Street Short. Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 2. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 3 3. OFFSITE ANALYSIS (Level 1 Downstream Analysis) 4 Task 1: Study Area Definition and Maps 4 Task 2: Resource Review 4 Task 3: Field Inspection 4 Existing Conditions 5 Tributary Upstream Drainage 5 Task 4: Downstream Drainage System Description and Existing and Potential Problems 5 Downstream Drainage Description 6 Existing and Potential Drainage Problems & Proposed Mitigation 7 4. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 8 5. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 12 6. SPECIAL REPORTS_AND STUDIES 16 7. OTHER PERMITS 16 8. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 16 9. BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 17 10. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 17 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A — Site Photos Appendix B — Percolation Test LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2 Site Plan 3 Figure 3 Existing Site Condition 5 Figure 4 Downstream Drainage Exhibit 6 Figure 5 Downstream Drainage Complaints 7 Figure 6 1998 KCSWDM — Rainfall Region 8 P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \061 10 Storm Report.doc 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report 1. PROJECT OVERVIEW This Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) is submitted in support of a preliminary short plat application for 126th Street Short Plat. The proposed work will include demolition of the existing concrete foundation on the east side of the property and the subdivision of the property into 5 residential lots. The project will include installation of concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, and closed storm drainage pipe and catch basin system along the property frontage on 40th Avenue South and South 126th Street. In addition, individual lot infiltration trenches are . proposed to minimize offsite runoff. The following tabulates the project site data: Address: Parcel Number: Site Area (including easements) Site Area (excluding easements and dedication) Zoning: Water: Sewer: Drainage Basin: Special Limitations: 40XX South 126th Street, Tukwila WA, 98168 7340600661 & 7340600662 36,316 sf (0.83 acres) 36,316 sf — 2,223 sf (proposed) — 133 sf (to be dedicated) = 33,960 sf (0.78 acres) LDR District No. 125 Valvue Riverton Creek, Duwamish River None (per City of Tukwila, the site is not located in a Level 2 Detention Area nor an Infiltration Restricted Area) This analysis is completed using the format set forth in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as adopted by City of Tukwila. Per City of Tukwila request, individual lot infiltration systems were designed according to the 2005 KCSWDM. Project Description: Please refer to Figures 1 — Vicinity Map and Figure 2 — Site Plan on the following pages to aid in the project description. The project proposes to subdivide a 0.83 acre property into five lots. The site is located south of South 126th Street and east of40th Avenue South in the City of Tukwila. The proposed construction will not add more than 5,000 sf of pollution generating impervious surfaces. Lots I -4 will be accessed off South 126th Street to the north. Lot 5 will be accessed off 4151 Avenue South to the east. Individual lot infiltration trenches are proposed. P:12006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports 106110 Storm Report.doc Page 1 of 19 S ,12th 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Figure 1= Vicinity Map Tukwila S•11su, St � �7IJUWelAiSAiFa�a ; .S leo•St s 122nd m S 123rd St s 12elh St.'- 1 St - .:.S .133rd St. Riverton More generally, the site is located in the SE 1/4, SW' /a, Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, Tukwila, Washington. P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP\Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 2 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Figure 2 — Site. Plan S 126th STREET • Gf4 : ?�'.JE 71.LCV // t '1' 1 INFILTRATION' ' 1 'k. '�- !' TRLNCII ft ■]D'Lx4'Wx4 Q . V \ ✓- ' TOP 70* C, 4' E 70..t ,K LOT 1 [ '. ' �� . YARD DRAIN #1 /PoU 79C �4' IE 70.5 V 11101 5A LOT 3 4' IE 100.0 j :0 INFILTRATION N I • 7O 4Wx4D TOP 102* 4' IE 99.5 SUMMONER SNORT PLAT DDIELOPNENT TO SOUTH (TD BE COORDINATED WITH PROJECT .CIVIL ENGINEER) IN'H21RATION 'V -9RCN A (t4t110 . 2. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY CORE REQUIREMENT #1: Discharge at the Natural Location The discharge from the proposed project will be collected and directed the drainage system on the east side of 40th Avenue South as it did in the existing condition. CORE REQUIREMENT #2: Offsite Analysis See the Level 1 Downstream Analysis included in Section 3 of this TIR. CORE REQUIREMENT #3: Flow Control Individual lot infiltration trenches are proposed for this development. See Section 4. CORE REQUIREMENT #4: Conveyance System See Section 5. CORE REQUIREMENT #5: Erosion and Sediment Control A construction entrance, silt fencing, and appropriate cover measures will be provided for erosion and sediment control for the site. See Section 8. CORE REQUIREMENT #6: Maintenance and Operations. A Maintenance and Operations Manual will be provided at the time of final engineering. P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP\Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 3 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report CORE REQUIREMENT #7: Financial Guarantees and Liability The Owner and or the contractor will provide the required bond and liability assurances. CORE REQUIREMENT #8: Water Quality No water quality is required for the site since the proposed improvements do not exceed the 5,000 sf threshold for pollution generating impervious surfaces. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #1: Other Adopted Area - Specific Requirements Not applicable. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation Not applicable. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #3: Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #4: Source Controls Not applicable. SPECIAL REQUIREMENT #3: Oil. Control Not applicable. 3. OFFSITE ANALYSIS (Level 1 Downstream Analysis) Task 1: Study Area Definition and Maps The study area includes research on upstream areas to the north of the property and that of the drainage system downstream of the property beyond the quarter -mile downstream point. The extent of the downstream drainage analysis and study area will extend beyond the quarter -mile downstream point, just beyond South 124th Street on East Marginal Way South as shown in Figure 5 — Downstream Drainage Exhibit included under Task.4. Task 2: Resource Review The following resources and documents were reviewed in preparing this analysis. Pertinent maps from these reports have been included in this study. 1. Percolation Test Report — Appendix B 2. King County Surface Water Design Manual (1998) 3. King County iMAP Task 3: Field Inspection Field investigation was performed on October 26, 2006, a clear and windy day by a representative of Patrick Harron & Associates. Please refer to Figure 3 - Existing Site Conditions below to aid in the following description. P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 4 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Figure 3 — Existing Site Conditions 'UPSTREAM 015 AC PROJECT SITE 0.83 AC Existing Conditions See Existing Conditions Photos (ECPs 1 -8) in Appendix A. Topography of the site slopes generally towards the southwest corner of the site with about 20% of the site sloping towards the southeast corner. Relief across the site is about 24 ft with grades ranging 3 -70 %. A concrete foundation exists in the easterly portion of the site. Ground cover consists of approximately 20% thick pasture grasses with the remainder being shrubs and 2"d growth forest (see ECP1 & ECP2). The site is fronted to the east by 41st Avenue South (ECP3), to the north by South 126th Street (ECP4), and to the west by 40th Avenue South (ECP8). No improvements (sidewalk, curb and gutter) exists on these streets along the frontage of the project site. Two drainage basins exists onsite, Basin A (west) and Basin B (east), 0.68 acres and 0.15 acres, respectively. Based on the Percolation. Test provided for the site (see Appendix B), soils onsite are infiltrative. Stormwater which is not infiltrated onsite would sheet flow over the existing vegetation to the neighboring properties to the south. Tributary Upstream Drainage Based on topographic survey and field investigation, it appears that only 0.15 acres of road fronting the site (south half of South 126th Street and east half of 40th Avenue South) is tributary to the site. Task 4: Downstream Drainage System Description and Existing and Potential Problems Please refer to and Figure 4 - Downstream Drainage Exhibit to aid in the following description. P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP\Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 5 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Figure 4— Downstream Drainage Exhibit Downstream Drainage Description See Downstream Photos (DSPs 1-3) in Appendix A. Basin A (West) Runoff from the majority of the site (0.68 acres) sheet flows southwest through neighboring undeveloped parcels (#s: 734060-0661&0664) then is collected in a grass-lined v-ditch system along the east side of 40th P:12006\06110 126th Street SP\Text\ Storm Reports\ 06110 Storm Report.doc Page 6 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report approximately 3ft wide x 1.5ft deep and drains south at 10 +% slope toward the intersection of 40th Avenue South and South 128th Street approximately 3OOft downstream of the site. At the intersection, the ditch transitions to a 5ft wide x 2.5ft deep section (DSP2) and conveys flow west for approximately 70ft beneath South 128th Street in an 18" concrete culvert to a catch basin on the east side of East Marginal Way South (DSP3). Downstream drainage continues approximately 45ft to a catch basin on the west side of East Marginal Way South. The drainage system in East Marginal Way South continues downstream along the west side of the thoroughfare (assumed at shallow grade or 1 -2% based on road grade) in a northwesterly direction until reaching the quarter -mile downstream point just beyond South 124'h Street. Basin B (East) Runoff from the eastern portion of the site (0.15 acres) sheet flows southeast through neighboring properties and into the creek passing beneath Highway 599 and Interurban Avenue which ultimately flows into the Duwamish River approximately 700ft downstream of the site. No drainage problems were observed on the day of the field investigation. Note that above described downstream drainage course would be for stormwater that is not infiltrated onsite. Existing and Potential Drainage Problems & Proposed Mitigation From King County records, there were no drainage problems documented for the area within the quarter - mile downstream point of the project site (see Figure 5 — Downstream Drainage Complaints). However, there were documentation of drainage problems within the quarter -mile proximity of the downstream drainage path of the site but is shown to have been resolved (per King County iMAP) since the late 80's. Documented drainage problems for downstream properties within the proximity of the site are shown in the above Downstream Drainage Exhibit in orange hatch. Documentation of their status is provided in Figure 5 — Downstream Drainage Complaints below. Figure 5 — Downstream Drainage Complaints Rec Complaint Status Problem Type Recd Close TB PADD PADD-1 PADD PIN NTB Comments No Date Date SUF 1 1988 -0291 CLOSED DRNG C 4/25/198 10/7/198 33E 12633 35TH AVE S 734060062 625D RUNOFF /SILTS IN POND 8 8 4 2 7 2 1989 -0581 CLOSED SILTATO C 9/8/1989 10/5/198 33E 12633 35TH AVE 734060062 625D RIVERTON HOSP RUNOFF N 9 4 2 7 Rec Complaint Status Problem Type Recd Close TB PADD PADD 1 PADD PIN NTB Comments No Date Date SUF 1 1988 -0108 CLOSED DRNG C ' 2/17/198 3/29/198 33E 3519 128TH ST 735960001 625D WATER IN BACK YARD 8 8 4 5 7 Rec Complaint Status Problem Type Reed Close TB PADD PADD 1 PADD PIN NTB Comments No Date Date SUF 1 1982 -0200 CLOSED C 5/7/1982 5/7/1982 33E 12802 37TH AVE S 734080078 655D STREAM DRIED -UP 5 2 2 Rec Complaint Status Problem Type Recd Close TB PADD PADD 1 PADD PIN NTB Comments ' No Date Date SUF 1 1977 -0019 CLOSED FLDG C 9/16/197 9/16/197 33E 3717 S 128TH S 734560093 655D WEST OF TUKWILA/EAST OF RIVERTON HOS 7 t 7 5 T 5 2 P Note that this is a list of only several properties out of area within the'' /4 -mile radius but not within the'/ - mile downstream path. All are similar in nature and have all been closed. According to City of Tukwila there are no documented drainage problems within the area with the P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page7of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report According to City of Tukwila there are no documented drainage problems within the area with the exception of flooding within Riverton Creek. No drainage problems are anticipated from the proposed development. Drainage from the proposed homes and driveways are proposed to be infiltrated and should not have any adverse impacts on downstream properties. 4. FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The project proposes individual lot infiltration trenches. It is assumed that the homes proposed for these lots will cover approximately 1,500 sf of footprint area. Including driveways, the impervious area per lot would be about 0.04 acres (1,500 sf home + 20' x 12' driveway). The proposed infiltration trenches are designed to infiltrate up to the 100 -year peak storm event as sized using the King County Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) program shown on the following pages. No water quality is required for the site since the proposed improvements do not exceed the 5,000 sf threshold for pollution generating impervious surfaces. Figure 9 below shows the rainfall region and scale factor used in the KCRTS program. Figure 6 — Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors ST 1.0/• Sr1.0 LA0.8 LA 0.9 LA 1.0 _ LA12 y. Sr 1.1 ST 1.0 Rainfall Regions and Regional Scale Factors Incap miedArea • Rive/take - - - -- Major Road LA 09 .P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP\Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Repon.doc Page 8 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report KCRTS Output (parameters: SeaTac, Scale Factor 1.0, hourly time steps) Estimated Inflow ing County Runoff Time Series Program Version 4.42b All files will be read /written in the Working Directory Working Directory:T:\06110 126TH ST KCRTS\Inf Trench KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series : HOME &DRIVE.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File :C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI6OR.rnf Impervious 0.04 acres Scaling Yr: 8 Total Area : 0.04 acres.. Peak Discharge: 0.019 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:HOME &DRIVE.tsf 8 Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies . Loading Stage /Discharge curve:home&drive.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:home &drive.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to Fi.le:HOME &DRIVE.pks - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates-- - Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.010 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.008 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.012 3 12/08/02 18:00 0.010 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.012 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.011 5 1/18/06 16:00 0.015 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.019 11. 1/09/08 6:00 Computed Peaks Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.019 1 100.00 0.990 0.015 .2 25.00 0.960 0.012 3 10.00 0.900 0.012 .4 5.00 0.800 0.011 5 3.00 0.667 0.010 6 2.00 0.500 0.010 7 1.30 0.231 0.008 8 1.10 0.091 0.017 50.00 0.980 P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 9 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Infiltration Facility Sizing: Trench Dimensions: 30'L x 4'W x 3'D Design Infiltration Rate (per Section 5.4 Infiltration Facilities of the 2005 KCSWDM): 'design ='measured+ Ftesting+ Fgeometry+ Fplugging where 'measured = 4.14 in/hr (based from slowest rate from Percolation Test Report by R.A. Owen included in Appendix B) Ftesting = 0:50.(ASTM D3385 method) Fgeometry = 4D /W + 0.05 = 4(3/2) +0.05 = 6.05 4 use 1.0 max Fplugging = 0.9 medium sands 'design = 4.14 in/hr x 0.5 x 1.0 x 0.9 = 1.86 in/hr (32.26 min/in) Retention /Detention Facility Type of Facility: Gravel Infiltration Trench Facility Length: 30.00 ft Facility Width: 4.00 ft Facility Area: 120. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 3.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft Storage Volume: 108. cu. ft (@ 30% voids) Vertical Permeability: 32.30 min /in Permeable Surfaces: Bottom Riser Head: 3.00 ft Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.06 0.06 2. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.16 0.16 6. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.26 0.26 9. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.36 0.36 13. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.46 0.46 17. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.56 0.56 20. 0.000 0.000 0.01 0.66 0.66 24. 0.001 0.000 0.01 0.76 0.76 27. 0.001 0.000 0.01 0.86 0.86 31. 0.001 0.000 0.01 0.96 0.96 35. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.06 1.06 38. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.16 1.16 42. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.26 1.26 45. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.36 1.36 49. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.46 1.46 53. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.56 1.56 56. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.66 1.66 60. 0.001 0.000 0.01 P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 10 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report 1.76 1.76 63. 0.001 0.000 0.01 1.86 1.86 67. 0.002 0.000 0.01 1.96 1.96 71. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.06 2.06 74. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.16 2.16 78. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.26 2.26 81. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.36 2.36 85. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.46 2.46 89. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.56 2.56 92. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.66 2.66 96. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.76 2.76 99. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.86 2.86 103. 0.002 0.000 0.01 2.96 2.96 107. 0.002 0.000 .0.01 3.00 3.00 108. 0.002 0.000 0.01 3.10 3.10 108. 0.002 0.308 0.01 3.20 3.20 108. 0.002 0.871 0.01 3.30 3.30 108. 0.002 1.600 0.01 3.40 3.40 108. 0.002 2.390 0.01 3.50 3.50 108. 0.002 2.670 0.01 3.60 3.60 108. 0.002 2.930 0.01 3.70 3.70 108. 0.002 3.160 0.01 3.80 3.80 108. 0.002 3.380 0.01 3.90 3.90 108. 0.002 3.590 0.01 4.00 4.00 108. 0.002 3.780 0.01 4.10 4.10 108. 0.002 3.970 0.01 4.20 4.20 108. 0.002 4.140 0.01 4.30 4.30 108. 0.002 4.310 0.01 4.40 4.40 108. 0.002 4.470 0.01 4.50 4.50 108. 0.002 4:630 0.01 4.60 4.60 108. 0.002 4.780 .0.01 4.70 4.70 108. 0.002 4.930 0.01 4.80 4.80 108. 0.002 5.070 0.01 4.90 4.90 108. 0.002 5.210 0.01 5.00 5.00 108. 0.002 5.350 0.01 Hyd Inflow Outflow Target 1 .0.01 0.00 2 0.02 * * * * * ** 3 0.01 * * * * * ** 4 0.01 * * * * * ** 5 0.01 * * * * * ** 6 0.01 * * * * * ** 7 0.01 * * * * * ** 8 0.01 * * * * * ** Calc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Peak Stage .Elev 1.95 1.95 3.00 3.00 1.69 1.69 3.00 3.00 1.80 1.80 1.62 1.62 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.42 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:home &drive.tsf Outflow Time Series File:r`dout Storage (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 70. 0.002 108. 0.002 61. 0.001 108. 0.002 65. 0.001 58. 0.001 21. 0.000 15. 0.000 Inflow /Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: 0.019 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.003 CFS at 8:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Reservoir Stage: 3.00 Ft Peak Reservoir Elev: 3.00 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 108. Cu -Ft P: \2006 \061 10 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc ' Page 11 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report 0.002 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:rdout.tsf Project Location: Sea -Tac - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates - -- Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) (ft) Period 0.000 5 2/09/01 19:00 0.003 3.00. 1 100.00 0.990 0.000 8 1/05/02 17:00 0.000 3.00 2 25.00 0.960 0.000 4 2/27/03 10:00 0.000 2.50 3 10.00 0.900 0.000 7 8/26/04 3:00 0.000. 2.12 4 5.00 0.800 0.000 6 10/28/04 19:00 0.000- 1.80 5 3.00 0.667 0.000 2 1/18/06 21:00 0.000 1.69 6 2.00 0.500 0.000 3 11/24/06 6:00 0.000 0.58 7 1.30 0.231 0.000. 0.42 8 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 0.002 3.00 50.00 0.980 0.003 1 1/09/08 8:00 No overflow shown for 100 year peak storm 4 OK Per 2005 KCSWDM infiltration trenches are sized by length per square footage of roof impervious surface. Trench Length (2' width) = roof square footage x length /1,000 sf of roof area = 1,500 sf (estimate) x 30 1f /1,000 sf (medium sands) = 45 If �45'Lx2'W =90sf Trench Length Provided 30'L x 4'W =120 sf> Required 90 sf (33% F S.) 4 OK 5. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN No "defined" drainage system exists onsite or offsite. No curb or pipe drainage systems exist within the property frontage on 40th Avenue South or South 126th Street. The proposed drainage system will consists of curb, gutter, and closed pipe and catch basin system in the frontage roads. Onsite drainages systems will consist of individual lot infiltration trenches with overflow systems and a ditch to pipe system in the case the infiltration system capacities are exceeded. The following show the estimated tributary flows to each system and calculated capacities. KCRTS Output (parameters: SeaTac, Scale Factor 1.0, 15- minute time steps) P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \061 10 Storm Report.doc Page 12 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Estimated Flows Retention /Detention Facility Design End Sizing Retention /Detention Facility KCRTS Command CREATE a nev Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series 1AC- IMP.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating 15- minute Time Series File Loading Time Series File :C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI15R.rnf 8 Impervious 1.00 acres. Scaling Yr: 8 Total Area : 1.00 acres Peak Discharge: 1.18 CFS at 6:30 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:1AC- IMP.tsf 8 Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage /Discharge curve: lac- imp.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:lac- imp.tsf Project Location:Sea -Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:1AC- IMP.pks - -- Annual Peak Flow Rates - -- Flow Frequency Analysis Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob.. (CFS) (CFS) Period 0.476 6 8/27/01 18:00 1.18 1 100.00 0.990 0.332 8 9/17/02 17:45 0.901 2 25.00 0.960. 0.901 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.646 3 10.00 0.900 0.383 7 8/23/04 14:30 0.532 4 5.00 0.800 0.505 5 10/28/04 16:00 0.505 5 3.00 0.667 0.532 4 10/27/05 10:45 0.476 6 2.00 0.500 0.646 3 10/25/06 22:45 0.383 7 1.30 0.231 1.18 1 1/09/08 6:30 0.332 8 . 1.10 0.091 Computed Peaks 1.09 50.00 0.980 Using the KCRTS program to generate peak runoff conservatively assuming 100 % impervious area, it was estimated that the flow per acre for the 100 -year peak storm event is 1.18 cfs /ac. Off -site System (frontage pipe system on 40th Avenue South and South 126th Street): Tributary Area = 1.25 acres Tributary Flow = 1.18 cfs /ac x 1.25 acres = 1.48 cfs On -site System (overflow): Tributary Area = 0.83 acres Tributary Flow = 1:18 cfs /ac x 0.83 acres = 0.98 cfs P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 13 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Individual Lots Tributary Area = 8,241 sf (max lot size) = 0.1.9 acres Tributary Flow = 1.18 cfs /ac x 0.19 acres = 0.22 cfs System Capacity (Manning's) Off -site and Onsite: Pipe (12" diameter pipe @ 3.58% minimum design slope): Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Circular Solving for Flowrate Diameter 12.0000 in Depth 12.0000 in Slope 0.0358 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0120 Computed Results: Flowrate 7.3029 cfs Area 0.7854 ft2 Wetted Area 0.7854 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 37.6991 in Perimeter 37.6991 in Velocity 9.2983 fps Hydraulic Radius 3.0000 in Percent Full 100.0000 % Full flow Flowrate 7.3029 cfs Full flow velocity 9.2983 fps Pipe Capacity = 7.30 cfs 9 > 1.48 cfs 9 OK V -Ditch On -site System (overflow): Channel Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Trapezoidal Solving for Flowrate Slope 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0300 Depth 12.0000 in Height 120000.0000 in Bottom width 0.0000 in Left slope 0.5000 ft/ft (V /H) Right slope 0.5000 ft/ft (V /H) P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 14 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Computed Results: Flowrate 4.0966 cfs Velocity 2.0483 fps Full Flowrate 4.0966 cfs Flow area 2.0000 ft2 Flow perimeter 53.6656 in Hydraulic radius 5.3666 in Top width 48.0000 in Area 2.0000 ft2 Perimeter 53.6656 in Percent full 100.0000 % Critical Information Critical depth 9.1716 in Critical slope 0.0210 ft/ft Critical velocity 3.5065 fps Critical area 1.1683 ft2 Critical perimeter 41.0165 in Critical hydraulic radius 4.1016 in Critical top width 36.6862 in Specific energy 1.0652 ft Minimum energy 1.1464 ft Froude number 0.5107 Flow condition Subcritical Channel Capacity = 4.10 cfs > 1.48 cfs 4 OK Individual Lot (6" diameter @ 0.5% min): Manning Pipe Calculator Given Input Data: Shape Circular Solving for Flowrate Diameter 6.0000 in Depth 6.0000 in Slope 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's n 0.0120 Computed Results: Flowrate 0.4298 cfs Area 0.1963 ft2 Wetted Area 0.1963 ft2 Wetted Perimeter 18.8496 in Perimeter 18.8496 in Velocity 2.1891 fps P:\2006\06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 15 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report Hydraulic Radius 1.5000 in Percent Full 100.0000 % Full flow Flowrate 0.4298 cfs Full flow velocity 2.1891 fps Critical Information Critical depth 4.7575 in Critical slope 0.0084 ft/ft Critical velocity 3.5483 fps Critical area 0.1714 ft2 Critical perimeter 12.9398 in Critical hydraulic radius 1.9075 in Critical top width 6.0000 in Specific energy 0.6154 ft Minimum energy 0.5947 ft Froude number 0.7191 Flow condition Subcritical Pipe Capacity = 0.43 cfs 9> 0.22 cfs 4 OK All proposed systems are shown to have adequate capacity to convey estimated flows. Note that flows are conservatively estimated assuming 100% impervious area and that design flows used were those generated for the 100 -year peak storm event which exceeds those of the 25 -year event as required by the 1998 KCSWDM. 6. SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES • Percolation Test Report, prepared by Robin A. Owen for Keystar, Inc., received by the City of Tukwila in April 2000. Report included in Appendix B. 7. OTHER PERMITS None at this time. 8. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control measures that minimize the transportation of sediments to the drainage system have been proposed. Siltation fences and a rock construction entrance will be the primary BMP's. It is likely that the developer will be grading the site in stages per each lot. Additional BMP's may be required if mass - grading of the site occurs. It is anticipated that there is little potential for erosion to downstream properties since very little grading is proposed near the bottom slope of the lots to the south. The installation of the filter fence should P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 16 of 19 126th Street Short Plat Preliminary Technical Information Report adequately protect the downstream area from any adverse erosion impact. 9. BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT The Owner and or the contractor will provide the required bond and liability assurances. 10.OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The proposed drainage facilities (infiltration trenches, pipes, and ditch) will remain private and will be maintained and operated by the owner. P: \2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text \Storm Reports \06110 Storm Report.doc Page 17 of 19 Appendix A — Site Photos EXISTING CONDITIONS PHOTOS (ECP): ECP1: Looking toward southwest corner of the property from South 126 Street showing land cover and topography. ECP2: Looking toward the southwest potion of the property from South 126th Street showing general shrub and 2nd growth forest land cover. ECP3: Looking toward southeast corner of property along 41st Avenue South showing frontage (no improvements). ECP4: Looking west along South 126 Street from intersection with 41' Avenue South (high point) showing existing pavement along frontage (no improvements to either side). ECP5: Looking west along South 126th Street at road transition to 40th Avenue South showing grade of road. ECP6: Looking east along South 126`h Street near 40th Avenue South showing road grade and utility poles and luminares to be relocated. ECP7: Looking south along the west side of 40th Avenue South showing thickend edge curb. ECP8: Looking south along the east side of 40th Avenue South showing existing pavement (no improvements). DOWNSTREAM PHOTOS (DSP): DSPI: Looking south along the east side of 40th Avenue South from southwest corner of property showing existing downstream ditch (approximately 3 ft wide x 1.5 ft deep). DSP2: Looking northwest toward 12" concrete culvert crossing west beneath 40th Avenue South near its intersection with South 128t Street (approximately 5ft wide x 2.5ft deep). DSP3: Looking south along East Marginal Way South showing downstream catch basin from 12" culvert. No standing water was observed in catch basin on this day. It...1.-.ANANT .Iftft 1110:144qii4 DSP4: Looking northwest along the west side of East Marginal Way South from the South 128th Street. Appendix B — Percolation Test Report RNP R.N. PARNELL COMPANY KEYSTAR, INC. RESIDENTIAL .BUILDING PERMITS CITY OF TULWILA PUBLIC WORKS: COMMENTS D2000 -035, 36, 37, & 38.... APRIL 24, 2000 CIVIL ENGINEERING WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT • WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ON .CONSTRUCTION STAGING Site clearing was completed in March 2000 and subsequently stopped- of. Tukwila Erosion control was placed in the form of sediment rabnio` fence along . the'perimeter, and hydroseeding on those areas exposed and not vWorked The site was lnspected' on•Apnl 5; 200.0 and the parcels cleared aireas: were stabilized 'and the.fabric fence upright .. arid- functioning Nq erosion was noted..: Clearing limits are . the full site areas: for each of and proposed. loft when residential building commences due to the configuration, size, and area 'of the:. • lots. • Total area of the 8 Iots;is about 2 :.-acres,'The•two;parcels to'tfiesouth• of. South 1260' Street are in the process of being short= plat, there Lire there are only y ., two legal Tots south. of South 1.26' Street and six Iots:north,'of south 126ht:Street`: at-this time for _ residential construction permit pUrpdses Residentoal . �wldin . • 4 g permit ;applications •have 'been ,submitted .and :are •bein . rocessed b � the .. Cs p . Y. ty‘ of;Tukwila, and the applicant is providing supplemental - informationas .re quested, including•this resubmittal: Residential Construction will commence-just as soon as the permits are issued by the City Of Tukwila. • 8rosion.: control. is part of'the permit conditions and will be placed during construction to prevent sediment from leaving the site APR .28 20.00 4422 18701 Place S.E. • Issaquah;. WA 98027. • 425/643 -3560 • FAX 425/641 •5095 TUKWIL.A PUBLIC WOFIKS 17xt.vse6i9I/7-- 1. 77df /12 /.v /frfr7 r7 •c Th' /r4iSIX o"J 770.3 7i7 / 7 /77 , ,g. __e/'y /7,7, f�i� . - 47/,49G/Tx/e /ii-ii . / Z- s' �' /Aip - 5'7fx6z/e Ott Z>' € 4,27 5.90 -aI ). 2• / c 4e,i. G 14)(7 .oil C-0 cc. z. tv' CSC ?!441 pi /a00"" //j'P�.GV' Dar/ 'e.GC Lt . /Au s,C //n--€495A:2,4.4' 40 ' c . 4 7 t e /a. c. o Sou& . /C , Or/yl.E;v1/�a ?'A//De /-r7 'syi -- .2 Vr©X.P777' — SCE /14./.r S,l4✓51) - l IE' /9I /.J �... imp .v r Aeraieeriyts Av .:,v T g ,c/s t vN s"v,o c' 7 ZS RECEIVED CITY OFTUKWILA APR 2 6 2000 PERMIT CENTER RECEIVED APR 2 8 2000 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS R.A. OWEN ON -SITE . DISPOSAL SYSTEM DESIGNER I KING COUNTY CERTIFIED # D0032 ROBIN A. OWEN 5594 S. LANGSTON RD. SEATTLE WA 98178 FOR: STEPHEN T. HARAKI PC 2100 116TH AVE NE 'BELLEVUE WA 98004. PERCOLATION TEST REPORT OFFICE: 772 - 4740 FAX: 772 - 0481 MOBILE: 930 - 0802 STABILIZED PERCOLATION RATE SUBJECT PROPERTY: LOT HOLE It DEPTH (MINUTES PER INCH) PARCEL # 734060 - 0662 (A ) 34" 11.5 29" 12 3 28" 12.5 4 33" 13 PARCEL # 734060 - 0661 (H) 1 29" 14.5 32" 13:5 3 27" 11.5 4 30" 13 30" 14 6 26" 13.5 32" 14, 8 28" 14.5 1)Z000 a3 RECEIVED PR 2 8 2000 In It TUKWILA • PUBLIC WORKS 2/28/_ RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA - �yyI E.::i CENTER R. A. OWEN CITYOFTUKWILA APR 2 fi 2000 FLA. OWEN ON -SITE DISPOSAL SYSTEM DESIGNER 1 KING COUNTY CERTIFIED # D0032 ROBIN A. OWEN 5594 S. LANGSTON RD. SEATTLE WA 98178 OFFICE: 772 - 4740 . FAX: 772 - 0481 MOBILE: 930 - 0802 FOR: STEPHEN T. HARAKI PC 2100 116TH AVE NE BELLEVUE WA 98004. PERCOLATION TEST REPORT SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1 LOT HOLE # . DEPTH (MINUTES PER INCH) 5 1 25" .13:5 STABILIZED PERCOLATION RATE SQUIRES REPLAT: 2 1 32" 1 14 1 28" I 12 2 I 35" I 15 1 1.34" 1 14 2 30" 13.5 8 1 24" 1 11.5 2 . l 30" I 13 9 1 1_ .35" I 10, 2 30" I 12 10 1 27" 10.5 2 i 32" 10 D RECEIVED RECEIVED RECEIVED CP ", OF TUKWILA APR 2 6 200 APR 2 8 OOO 2/28/0 2 TUKWILA t CENTER PERMIT CENTER PUBLIC WORK- A. OWEN SCALE: 1" = 50' 40TH AVE S 13.64 CO 45.04 5 0 02 50.04 01 02 • 5.74 01 02 45.04 10 RECEIVED APR 2 800Q TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RECEIVED crry OF TUKWILA NEORIVID CITY OF TUKWILA 2 . ..,:t APR a. 6 '-2000 0414MIT f)ENTER PERMIT CENTER L CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us h / SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: f,11L N J-ji41-( ,((-/D ,LT PLA T C L-0 TO LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Lk oxx S, 12.6A- yTv l LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 73if 06 0066! --73 0 60o bbl DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: ✓Or) k ihcf ,i 19A r■�o v /G4 Address: /24/ 1117,7 Clef Ad -5- f72E '" 32© ,end (.14- 780.. - C °/ Phone: i2f-- 22 g Syrq k 238 FAX: 9-2-f-- 224 ^ f 2-2-7 E -mail: `0/147A+.ethAe ofRv(f'- kvr¢d , con, Signature: Date: P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 cc// - 253-3/5- -317° FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus TYPE P-SEPA Planner: G■— X File Number: ( 07 _0 0 [y Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: E % -00( Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: L- 01— 01 8 NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: f,11L N J-ji41-( ,((-/D ,LT PLA T C L-0 TO LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Lk oxx S, 12.6A- yTv l LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 73if 06 0066! --73 0 60o bbl DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: ✓Or) k ihcf ,i 19A r■�o v /G4 Address: /24/ 1117,7 Clef Ad -5- f72E '" 32© ,end (.14- 780.. - C °/ Phone: i2f-- 22 g Syrq k 238 FAX: 9-2-f-- 224 ^ f 2-2-7 E -mail: `0/147A+.ethAe ofRv(f'- kvr¢d , con, Signature: Date: P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 cc// - 253-3/5- -317° STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E- mail: tukplan(rbci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY ss The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. '2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 110,01 S /Z(.67 wr',5 01/6,C6/pt . /nrE€ 4f J j� for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), (state) on Print Name "M -77 �/t/ • ,20 Address a° � /97"1/5 r4t 10 5kj 5-7E4° 3fd Phone Number 12s =Z3,, �666)6 d 1°W7v ■■ Signature On this day personally appeared before me /11&l/�R //l/50/✓ to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his/her voluntary act . V deed for the s and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED ANI��t �I9 jBEFORE ME ON THIS &° DAY OF O�Op® A�8041 *.. o4 �;� ,gaeroi:• °�e�p4q��9N e9 o ro doc> •ir • ea% °vHV9•!�: ,� ®�WAS�®e,e My Commission expires on P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 a ?es 19, 2006 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: Applicant Name: Jonathan M. Harkovich (for Majestic Builders) Street Address: 1201 Monster Road SW Ste #320 City, State, Zip: Renton, WA 98057 Telephone: (0) 425.228.5353 ext.238 (C) 253.315.3170 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. P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 X 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 (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 YES - Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 X 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 (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 YES - Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 X 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 X 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 (TMC 18.06.385). 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 X 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 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 6 -0 YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 City of Tukzvila ESA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. NO — Checklist Complete X YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. X NO - Continue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 1 -3 X YES - Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development. Such areas include, but are not limited to, rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development (TMC 18.06.445). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) X YES - Continue to Question 1 -4 City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) X 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 X Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast- height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -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. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below, the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -2 YES - Continue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man-made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross- sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -5 YES - Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a 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. City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside seeps and wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -7 YES - Continue to Question 3 -7 3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife, particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) STATE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 126th ST Short Plat (Farnum Short Plat) 2. Name of Applicant: Jonathan M. Harkovich 3. Date checklist prepared: 11/30/06 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Most likely within the construction season of 2007. 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Development of parcels 7945200045 & 7340600485 adjacent to northeast corner of the property. 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None that is known at this time. 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. Agency Comments P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPA_App - June 2006.doc June 19, 2006 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. R.O.W., Grading, and Building Permit. 10. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The project proposes to subdivide a 0.83 acre property into five single- family residential lots. Right -of -way improvements will include the construction of sidewalk, curb & gutter, storm, and addition of new asphalt along the frontage roads (40th Ave S and S 126th ST). 11. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, the tax lot number, and section, township, and range. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. (see Figure 1 - Vicinity Map attached) Site Address: 40XX S 126th ST, Tukwila WA, 98168 Parcel #s: 7340600661 & 734060062 General Location: SE 1/. SW U. Section 10. Township 23 North. Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, Tukwila, Washington 12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth Agency Comments X X a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Topography of the site is rolling to steep. Relief across the site is about 24 ft with grades ranging 3 -70 %. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 70 %. 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. Loamy sands, fine to medium. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None that is known of. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Site pads are required to be elevated to near road grade for driveway access. At the extreme, approximately 25' of relief exists between the front of proposed lots (South 126th Street) to hack of lots (smith end of property) Approximately 1,200 ry of fill is anticipated to Level out the pads Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, erosion can potentially occur in steep slope areas of the site g. Steep slopes run through the middle of the site. Finished grades of prnpnserl Rite will reriur•e A-1(7)pp to he nn greater than 2W•1V About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 20% (homes & drive) of the site is estimated to be covered with impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Silt fences, cover measures, construction entrance, and any additional measures necessary to reduce erosion will be in compliance with the City of Tukwila and the King County Surface Water Design Manual. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Some dust and automobile odors are anticipated. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None that is known. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None that is known. 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. The Duwamish River is within a quarter -mile downstream of the site to the east. Riverton Creek is within a half -mile downstream of the site to the west. 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. 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. None. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Percolation tests show that onsite soils are infiltrative. Surfacewater from the site is proposed to be infiltrated in the developed condition. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Storm water will be infiltrated onsite. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 2. Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve: None. No septic systems are proposed. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so; describe. Stormwater runoff from residential homes are to be collected and infiltrated in trenches. Excess runoff would be tributary to Riverton Creek. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste materials (oils, soaps, etc.) from driveways which are proposed to be collected and infiltrated in a trench could enter ground water. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Proposed infiltration trench systems would reduce surface water. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? About 0.6 acres of existing vegetation (pasture grasses, shrubs, and trees) are anticipated to be cleared. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None that is known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of nati a plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaping of yards (lawn grasses, shrubs, and some trees) will most likely be provided for each lot. Agency Comments Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X Shrubs X Grass X Pasture X Crop or grain Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? About 0.6 acres of existing vegetation (pasture grasses, shrubs, and trees) are anticipated to be cleared. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None that is known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of nati a plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaping of yards (lawn grasses, shrubs, and some trees) will most likely be provided for each lot. Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Mammals Fish Other Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None that is known. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None that is known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Unknown. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None known at this time. 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. Electric and or natural gas will be the most likely source used for heating. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This is possible due to the elevation of the site relative to the adjacent property to the south. 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: None that is known. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Very unlikely. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire Department and Police Department. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None that is known. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Some traffic due to the sites location near (but not directly connected to) SR -599. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction during standard operating hours per City of. Tukwila on a short term basis. Traffic for 5 additional residence on a long term basis. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Measures as implemented by contractor. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Currently the site is undeveloped. Single- family residential homes to the north, SR -599 to the east (beyond 41st Ave S), undeveloped property to the south, and commercial building to the west (between E Marginal Way S and 40th Ave S). b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Unknown. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Describe any structures on the site. Existing foundation located within the eastern portion of the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The existing foundation will most likely be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Residential. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Low Density Residential (LDR). g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation ofthe site? Not applicable. h. Has any part ofthe site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. None at this time. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Five single - family residential homes are proposed. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing? Five units are proposed that would most likely be middle income housing. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Maximum height of structures will comply with City Ordinance. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views from adjacent properties to the north would be obstructed. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None known at this time. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare would be those produced from typical homes. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? It is unlikely. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None that is known. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None known at this time. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 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 that is known. 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 that is known but is highly unlikely. 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 to be located on or adjacent to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 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. (See Figure 2 - Site Plan attached) 40th Avenue South to the west of the site, South 126th Street to the Agency Comments north of the site, and 41st Avenue South to the east of the site. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. Approximately 500 ft to E Marginal Way S. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Five homes are proposed. It is assumed that these homes would have a parking garage with 2 parking spaces. No parking spaces would be eliminated 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). Frontage improvements (curb and gutter, asphalt, storm) are proposed for 40th Ave S and S 126th ST (public streets). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Average Daily Trips (ADT) for 5 single - residential, family homes are expected. Peak volumes are unknown at this time. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None known at this time. 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, the project would increase the need for fire protection, police protection, health care, and schools based on the increase of 5 single- family residential units. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None that is known. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system other: Electricity, natural gas, water, telephone, and sanitary sewer. • Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 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 Natural Gas: Unknown Water: Water District 125 Sewer: Valvue Sewer District. 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 jts decision. Signature: Date Submitted: (NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON - PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitats, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Agency Comments Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. • M • 126t Street Short Plat (Farnum Short Plat) — SEPA Attachments 9 :112th;St Figure 1— Vicinity Map Ouv,ainlsh °S:t2n7h:Pt Allentorm S"123td:St wt <r tpr 9`128th :St:J 8= A22nd:rSt" N• N N N g PHA Project #: 06110 12/5/2006 P:\2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text\Applications \SEPA Attachments.doc 126th Street Short Plat (Farnum Short Plat) — SEPA Attachments Figure 2 — Site Plan PHA Project #: 06110 12/5/2006 P:\2006 \06110 126th Street SP \Text\Applications \SEPA Attachments.doc • RF.CENED MAR 1 6 2007 COMMUNITy DEVELOPMENT Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington For Magestic Homes Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. June 19, 2006 Mr. Mike Davis Majestic Homes 1201 Monster Road SW, #320 Renton, Washington 98055 Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington CG File No. 2064 Dear Mr. Davis: 17625 -130th Ave. NE, C102, Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone: 425-844-1977 Fax: 425 -844 -1987 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering investigation at your proposed single - family residential project in Tukwila, Washington The site is located between the 12600 block of 41' Avenue South and 40th Avenue South, as shown on the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. You have requested that we complete this report to evaluate subsurface conditions and provide recommendations for site development. We have been provided with a copy of a site plan dated May 25, 2006, by Kenneth R. Anderson and Associates, titled "Davis Real Estate Group, Farnum/Tiede ", that shows the existing topography at the site. . PROJECT DESCRIPTION The planned development consists of a total of six single - family residences. We have not been provided SCOPE The,.purpose of this study; is to explore, and; - characterize _the '.subsurface .conditions and .present ,._. recommendations for site development. Specifically, our scope of services as outlined in our Services Agreement, dated March 1, 2006, includes the following: Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 2 1. Review available geologic maps of the area. 2. Explore the subsurface conditions at the site with backhoe- excavated test pits. 3. Explore and evaluate the subgrade soils under the existing pavement at South 126th Street. 4. Provide recommendations for building foundations for the four remaining planned residences. 5. Provide recommendations for future site preparations and grading. 6. Provide general recommendations for site drainage, including recommendations for the planned infiltration/dispersal trenches based on the test results and City of Tukwila requirements. 7. Prepare a written report to document our conclusions and recommendations. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The irregularly- shaped project site is about one acre in size, and has maximum dimensions of approximately 380 feet in the east -west direction and 130 feet in the north -south direction. The site is bordered by 40' Avenue South to the west, South 126th Street to the north and 4ls' Avenue to the east. Two single family residences border the site to the south. A layout of the site is shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The site is generally moderately sloping to the southwest. Previous grading activities have shaped the site into three tiers. The highest tier, in elevation, exists in the eastern region of the site and steps down to the ' 1s 0 Og ,a.. rY `^F1.3 3 •�•_. _ ' _ -'3 ,R„ ;.,r - ;. Most of the Puget Sound Region was affected by past intrusion of continental glaciation. The last period of glaciation, the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation, ended approximately 11,000 years ago. Many of the .geomorphic feat res.seen tod y ig trot ,s oaring and oveinding :by: glacial ice. _ During::the Vashon Stade, areas of the Puget Sound region were overridden by over 3,000 feet of ice. Soil layers overridden by the ice sheet were compacted to a much greater extent than those that were not. Part of a Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 3 typical glacial sequence includes advance outwash sand overlain by glacial till. Advance outwash sand is described as sand and gravel. Glacial till is an unsorted mixture of sand, silt, and gravel that was deposited below the glacier, and is commonly referred to as "hardpan." The glacial till has been consolidated under the weight of the glacier and exhibits both high strength and low permeability. The geologic units for this area are mapped on the Geology of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, by Howard H. Waldron, et al (U.S. Geological Survey, 1962). The site is mapped as being underlain by a deposit of glacial till with advance outwash mapped along the steep slope to the east of the site. Our site explorations encountered varying amounts of fill material overlying glacial drift. Glacial drift, as defined in this report, is similar to glacial till but is typically less dense and exhibits sorting or contains sand seams. Explorations Subsurface conditions were explored at the site on March 7, 2006, by excavating a total of six test pits and coring through asphalt in three locations within South 126"' Street. The test pits were excavated to depths of 9.7 to 12.7 feet below the ground surface. The explorations were located in the field by an engineer from this firm who also examined the soils and geologic conditions encountered, and maintained logs of the test pits. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the Site Plan in Figure 2. The soils were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, a copy of which is presented as Figure 3. The logs of the test pits are presented in Figures 4 and 5. ..General: v A brief description of the conditions 7encountered'in our explorations is included below' For a more detailed description of the soils encountered, review the test pit logs in Figures 4 and 5. 12.7 feet. Fill material was observed to be loose to medium dense from 0.0 to 5.6 feet in depth and became medium dense at 5.6 to the bottoin of the exploration. Fill material consisted of an array of sands •and ilty sands with roots; o rciatineotiselkld `garbage: Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 4 Test Pit 2 was excavated on the north side of the existing foundation in the eastern region of the site. Fill material consisting of medium dense, gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel was encountered at the surface of the exploration to 2.3 feet in depth and a layer of buried topsoil was observed beneath the fill from 2.3 to 2.6 feet in depth. The buried topsoil consisted of loose to medium dense, dark gray to black silty fine to medium sand with gravel. Medium dense, brown mottled gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel was observed beneath the topsoil at 2.6 to 3.8 feet in depth and was evaluated as being a native deposit. The test pit was completed in dense, brownish -gray silty fine to medium sand with gravel at a depth of 9.9 feet. This material is interpreted as glacial drift. Test Pits 3 and 4 were excavated on the second tier in the central region of the site. Test Pit 3 was excavated in the central region of the middle tier on a small knob. Loose to medium dense fill and topsoil were observed in Test Pit 3 from the surface to a depth of 2.6 feet, and native medium dense to dense silty fine to medium sand with gravel was observed from 2.4 to 10.2 feet in depth. This material is interpreted as glacial drift. Test Pit 4, excavated in the northwest region of the middle tier, encountered loose to medium dense fill material from the ground surface to 6.6 feet in depth and medium dense fill at depths of 6.6 to 11.5 feet. Medium dense to dense, native grayish -brown silty fine to medium sand with gravel was observed at the bottom of the excavation at 11.5 to 11.9 feet in depth. This material is interpreted as glacial drift. Test Pit 5, excavated at the northwest corner of the existing foundation on the lower tier in the western , region of the site ry- ,encounter d ,.0 6 t .,of topsoil hand fi11 material from 0 6- to 10.5 Afeet in depth. _Fill matenal was evaluated as- -being mediumdense =to dense Native dense,.= grayish - brown; silty fine to • medium sand with gravel was observed at 10.5 to 11.0 feet in depth. This material is interpreted as glacial drift. ��;•�� Tom" .��-R, �-�_ medium sand with gravel. The test pit was completed in native medium to dense silty fine to medium sand with 7.6 to_9.7 feet in depth. This.material.is interpreted as glacial drifftf Roadway Cores: Three locations were cored within South 126th Street, beginning with Core 1 near the intersection of 40th Avenue South and ending at Core 3 at the intersection with 415` Avenue South. Cores Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 5 1 and 2 encountered 4 inches of asphalt with a thin layer of 5/8 -inch minus crushed rock underneath the asphalt. Dense silty fine to medium sand with gravel was observed beneath the crushed rock. Core 3 encountered approximately 5 inches of asphalt and approximately 1 foot of pit run material consisting of fine to coarse sand with gravel before encountering dense silty sand with gravel. The subgrade soils were probed with a 1 /2- inch - diameter steel probe rod and the probe rod did not penetrate more than an inch in depth. Hydrologic Conditions Slight to moderate groundwater seepage was observed in Test Pits 4 and 5 at depths of 8.5 and 7.3 feet, respectively. Groundwater was observed in Test Pit 4 within a layer of fill containing fine gravel with silty fine sand. The fine gravel had the appearance of washed rock and could be an old drain field. Groundwater in Test Pit 5 was observed in a layer of fill consisting of fine to coarse sand with gravel. The dense drift soils encountered at the base of our explorations are considered poorly draining. Dunng the wetter times of the year, we expect perched water conditions will occur as pockets of water on top of the drift layer. Perched water does not represent a regional groundwater "table" within the upper soil horizons. Volumes of perched groundwater vary depending upon the time of year and the upslope recharge conditions. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Landslide Hazards 'The core of the °site is iriferredIcy, be= composed 7of.'glacially overndden.,soils: = We.consider these soils to-be of high strength and considered to be- stable with regard to deep - seated slope-failures:- We did not observe - indications of surficial seepage on the site, nor did we observe indications of shallow or deep- seated slope failures. There i a potential- thafthe'surf cial "soils on the `steeper sectioris of'the slope could slough over .,�a...,..�.a'+w. -a `4 nom• - m -.-''- _� .c. = 'cam • al�riactg�d bj��surface �atex,anti �:riade�.�:.�� ' tl 011 m1F: •a' 40. - _ a e unpacts./The =.nsklof slough° vents, •a . u e u Q d f proper drainage "is `install.ed,'vegetation on- the:slope' ~ is maintained, and yard waste and other debris are kept off the slopes. We would expect if a slough event were to occur, it would besmall_in scale and relatively shallow. We. did not observe any indication of recent sloughuig on site. • Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 6 Erosion Hazard The erosion hazard criteria used for determination of affected areas include soil type, slope gradient, vegetation cover, and groundwater conditions. The erosion potential is related to vegetative cover and the specific surface soil types (group classification), which are related to the underlying geologic units. Over the majority of the site we consider the erosion hazard to be slight with vegetative cover in place and moderate when stripped of vegetation. Steeper areas, such as fill embankments, are generally considered to have moderate potential for erosion when covered with vegetation and high when stripped of vegetation. Best management practices (BMPs) and applicable codes should be followed during site grading to limit potential for erosion. We do not expect this site will require unusual or extreme erosion management methods. There are no water bodies adjacent to the site. Seismic Hazard It is our opinion based, on our subsurface explorations, that the Soil Profile in accordance with Table 1615.1.1 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) is Soil Class C. We referenced the 2002 map from the US Geological Survey (USGS) website to obtain values for S, and S,. The USGS website includes the most updated published data on seismic conditions. The seismic design parameters are: Ss SI Fe 148.36% g 51.09% g 1.0 From Table 1615.1.2(1) of the 2003 IBC rom: Table 1.615 :1.2(2) of the :2003 IBC Site specific coefficients and adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration parameters apply as-showwin -Section - 161F5.1 _of the lBG = Y' ,/- . � L°al- �s�3'Y}�TN')rer �''�i• � - _Cw^f°.� a .� s s �i a e. (s eVS l e'bt�n�ldl a dram hficatthr Of grOUTlda�lnotlons t soft soil deposits. The liquefaction potential is highest for loose sand with a high groundwater table. The underlying dense soil is considered to .have ,a.,very low potential for liquefaction and amplification of ground :otrion. _ hu -3.; _ Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General It is our opinion that the site can be developed into a residential subdivision. There are many areas of geotechnical concern, and the planned development of the site will have to be designed to create a stable condition. We recommend that the foundations for the structures extend through any topsoil, fill, loose, or disturbed soils, and bear on the underlying medium dense or firmer, native glacial soils, or on controlled structural fill extending to these soils. Based on the depth of the fill encountered by our explorations, we expect that a deep foundation system, such as drilled piers, will be needed for the planned residences. Alternatively, the fill could be over - excavated and replaced with rock spalls or structural fill as recommended in the Foundations subsection of this report Based on the soils encountered in our explorations, it is our opinion that the subsurface conditions at the site do not appe' _• • -easi•: ._ •Inl water infiltration system or full ispe�yy e s stemmm.. B-cause le lots are small, we recommend that you consi.er on or more o t e following al ernatives; limited infiltration, basic dispersion, rain garden, permeable pavement and rainwater harvesting similar to those altematives provide in the King County Surface Water Manual (KCSWM) — Appendix C, 2005. Dry wells could also be used between the house and roadway. ,We hame ,attaehedkwithtthistrieportlra typica dispersi_onerternittrarailetow folnitillt anon. hffihe storm water volume is large, the trtench �ll u p - th..d�sps_e over the ground, surface. Acvegetative buffer _ofat- least.25_feet.should be maintained .from • the dispersion trench t� the •property line: We have included in this - 'report typical sections from the KCSWM, which illustrates such a system. The dispersal trench should be at least 10 feet long for each 700 square feet of impermeablesurfamarea collected_: We should be.retained_to review the storm design nand evaluatettlie locatronfof the trend es$an a Fhowth ey relate ythe slopes '. , --- , ,y� tb ,...y� +y`I' 'F^ 1 �� "X �..." �- r'h^'2"-•., r`�r; ` c�*'*%- 4'-T Y __ art-i�f -- 's _- r-' .t �G + �'y•,, 3 s5 ate.. s�; • The soils likely to `be exposed during construction are highly moisture' sensitive and will disturb easily when wet or during wet conditions: We recommend that construction take place during the drier summer months, if possible.. If constru,ction takes,glace during the wet season, additional expenses and delays should be expected due to the wet conditions. Additional expenses could include additional depth of site Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 8 stripping, export of on -site soil, the import of clean granular soil for fill, and the need to place a blanket of rock spalls in the access roads and paved areas prior to placing structural fill. Discussion on Settlement Potential of the Existing Fill Our concern with the existing fill is that it is difficult to confidently characterize its engineering properties and its consistency throughout the site. Even if the test pit explorations were representative of the range of fill characteristics across the site, potential settlement could not be estimated with standard geotechnical procedures. Instead, it would be estimated empirically, based on experience with past performance of other uncontrolled fills and existing conditions. If the explorations were not representative of the existing fill, additional unknowns would be realized. These include the aerial extent of fill, the range of total depths of fill, the material type and consistency, depth to, and thickness of, compressible zones, possible existence of voids, debris or highly organic zones, and possible existence of well compacted fill. Settlement of the existing fill could impact planned hard surfaces, such as roadways, sidewalks, and garage slabs, causing cracking. Also, where the fill extends deeper than the planned underground utilities (e.g., sewer lines), settlement of the fill under the utility lines could result in a localized "bellying" of these lines. Therefore, we recommend that gravity-based underground piping systems be designed with a gradient sufficient to counter the effects of localized settlement. Alternatively, the utility trenches can be overexcavated through the loose or fill zones, with the removed soil replaced with compacted structural fill The settlement ential.really depends_on the,density: of the existing fill... • Site Preparations and Grading The first step of site preparation should be to strip the vegetation, topsoil, or loose soils to expose medium dense orfirmer native soils .in pavement and building areas. The excavated material should be removed • '. ....- 4>l *..= . —�.zP' "yx' -e.'; ,_ r �?-Y: r^ .e c=r '"'° i—, �r- .r:c --r. ^.,,c •; --x'. r g1 abngllThtesultmg sgrade should be compacted' to a firm, non- yieldmg condition. Areas-observedto p ump or'weave'should be repaired prior to placing hard surfaces. Due to fill depths encountered, alternative to excavating fill soils may be needed and can - be evaluatedatthe time of construction. The soils likely to be exposed during construction are considered highly moisture sensitive, and the surface will disturb easily when wet. We expect these soils would be difficult, if not impossible, to Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 9 compact to structural fill specifications in wet weather. We recommend that earthwork be conducted during the drier months. Additional expenses of wet weather or winter construction could include extra excavation and use of imported fill or rock spalls. During wet weather, alternative site preparation methods may be necessary. These methods may include utilizing a smooth - bucket trackhoe to complete site stripping and diverting construction traffic around prepared subgrades. Disturbance to the prepared subgrade may be minimized by placing a blanket of rock spalls or imported sand and gravel in traffic and roadway areas. Cutoff drains or ditches can also be helpful in reducing grading costs during the wet season. These methods can be evaluated at the time of construction. Structural Fill General: All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field - observation procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in -place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: Imported structural fill should consist of a good quality, free - draining granular soil, free of organics and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported, all- weather structural fill should contain no more than 5 percent fines (soil finer than a Standard U.S. No. 200 sieve), based on that fraction passing the U.S. 3/4 -inch sieve. The use'of on -site soihas;structural fill will be dependent: on moisture content control. Some drying of the native soils may be necessary in order to achieve compaction. During warm, sunny days this could be accomplished by spreading the material in thin lifts and compacting. Some aeration and/or addition of moisture may also be necessary. We expect that compaction of the native soils to structural fill '*•. G. -_'i' _ .°v._-, -r, �•• 'i .z. eg • � ons wo 1'd b a refall Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structural fill may proceed. Fill should be placed. in 8- to -:10 -inch thick umfoim lifts,' :;and,eacli lift should be spread; evenly: and be thoroughly' compacted prior - - -to placefi ent'ofsubsequent. lifts 'All'structural- fill underlying building areas, and within a depth of 2 feet below pavement and sidewalk subgrade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density. Maximum dry density, in this report, refers to that density as Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 11 Foundations General: In our opinion, the site is suitable for support of the planned building provided that the foundations are extended down into the medium dense or better native soils. This can be accomplished with a deep foundation system, such as drilled piers, or by overexcavating down to medium dense or better native soils. Due to the depth of fill encountered in our explorations, we expect that pre - drilled shafts for concrete piers would be a more economical and expedient option than overexcavation. Drilled Piers: Drilled piers can be used to support residences or portions of residences where fill exists between the planned footing elevation and the underlying dense native soils. The piers are constructed by drilling an open hole through any fill or loose surficial soils and into the dense native soil. The hole is then filled with concrete immediately to reduce the chance of caving. The bearing capacity of the piles will be subject to the soil conditions encountered, the depth into the bearing soils, and the diameter of the pile. Since the required embedment depth is also tied to the potentially variable depth of fill or loose sods, pile depth may vary from house to house and from pile to pile. We recommend vertical load capacities for a 12 to 16 inch pile embedded 3 feet into native soil will support a vertical load of 8 to 10 tons. We are available to provide greater load capacities based on the size and embedment of the pile. An increase of one -third is allowed when using the alternate load combination in Section 1605.3.2 of the IBC that includes wind or earthquake loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than 1 -inch total and '' /rinch:differential betweem.footings.,or across a distance of about- .3Q feet. We. should;be retained to: evaluate the drilling of the-holes-to- verify: tieal-Mg soils are encountered:- Conventional Foundations: Conventional shallow spread foundations should extend through the existing fill zone and be founded on undisturbed, medium dense or firmer soil. If the soil at the planned .-. �.c, ;f' ,-,-f....,..7.?,:, •;, +�E.s'" n , " 7 Y °4.S e excavation`'should b6 ii lei withg.kra l-Is or stiuciural` fill, or the footing maybe over - poured with extra concrete. If structural fill or rock spalls are used, the trench should extend at least 1 foot beyond the footing on each side for -every 2 feet of rock that will be placed under the footing. Footings should extend at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finished ground surface for frost protection and it should also extend at least 1 foot into bearing soils, whichever is deeper. Minimum Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tulcwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 12 foundation widths should conform to IBC requirements. Standing water should not be allowed to accumulate in footing trenches. All loose or disturbed soil should be removed from the foundation excavation prior to placing concrete. For foundations constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable design bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) be used for the footing design. An increase of one -third is allowed when using the alternate load combination in Section 1605.3.2 of the IBC that includes wind or earthquake loads. Potential foundation settlement using the recommended allowable bearing pressure is estimated to be less than 1 -inch total and V2 -inch differential between footings or across a distance of about 30 feet. Higher soil bearing values may be appropriate for footings founded on the unweathered drift, and with wider footings. These higher values can be determined after a review of a specific design. Lateral Loads The lateral earth pressure acting on retaining walls is dependent on the nature and density of the soil behind the wall, the amount of lateral wall movement, which can occur as backfill is placed, and the inclination of the backfill. Walls that are free to yield at least one - thousandth of the height of the wall are in an "active" condition. Walls restrained from movement by stiffness or bracing are in an "at- rest" condition. Active earth pressure and at -rest earth pressure can be calculated based on equivalent fluid density. Equivalent fluid densities for active and at -rest earth pressure of 37 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and 57 pcf, respectively, may be used for design for a level backslope. These values assume that the on- site soils :or importedrgranulari. fill .are„used for backfill,, arid that the wall. -backfill. is d rained. The preceding values do not-include the effects 'of surcharges, such as due to foundation loads or other surface loads. Surcharge effects should be considered where appropriate. The above drained active and at -rest values should be increased.by a uniform pressure of :8.2H and,.25..7H..psf, respectively, when considering ;.:;seismic.conditions. _- represents ..:..,_:_ e above latei1115retsures rriaybe- -re; t- b dion at the base 'Of the -wall and °passive` resistance against the foundation, concrete piers, and grade beams.. A coefficient of friction of 0.45 may be used to determine the base fraction in the native glacial soils:. An- equivalent fluid density of 225 pcf may be used i z - N >is for passive resistance design. To achieve this value of passive pressure, the foundations should be poured "neat" against the native dense soils, or compacted fill should be used as backfill against the front of the footing, and the soil in front of the wall should extend a horizontal distance at least equal to three times Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Famum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 13 the foundation depth. A factor of safety of 2.0 has been applied to the passive pressure to account for required movements to generate these pressures. The friction coefficient does not include a factor of safety. All wall backfill should be well compacted. Care should be taken to prevent the buildup of excess lateral soil pressures due to overcompaction of the wall backfill. This can be accomplished by placing wall backfill in 8 -inch loose lifts and compacting with small, hand - operated compactors. Slabs -On -Grade Slab -on -grade areas should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection. Slabs should be supported on medium dense or firmer native soils, or on structural fill extending to these soils. Where moisture control is a concern, we recommend that slabs be underlain by 6 inches of free-draining coarse sand or pea gravel for use as a capillary break. A suitable vapor barrier, such as heavy plastic sheeting, should be placed over the capillary break. An additional 2- inch -thick damp sand blanket should be used to cover the vapor barrier to protect the membrane and to aid in curing the concrete. This will also help prevent cement paste bleeding down into the capillary break through joints or tears in the vapor barrier. The capillary break material should be connected to the footing drains to provide positive drainage. Drainage We-recommend _that runoff from impervious surfaces;: such .as roofs,, driveway_.and_access roadways, be collected and routed to an appropriate storm water discharge system.' We suggest that the finished ground surface be sloped at a gradient of 3 percent minimum for a distance of at least 10 feet away from the buildings, as . indicated in.:IBC,:Section 1803.3_ Surface. water _should be collected_ by permanent catch basins and drain:lmes and be=dis hargai tola1storInxdrain's stem Surface water should be dispensed as> � °��r,'i �; a^Set"a•`: t }_t.. �3i 7.f .'tea .R 3y�.a... ;i i-�.. ?..r � %•nr ;z�� F � .c ��„ -L .,� s)�itiwo�ut: e attac 'I g et!t n F.igur� G 4 B If it -'is deteir -tined Elie dispersal trench is not feasible, other alternatives could be used and should follow any codes by the. City of Tukwila. Since the storm water may infiltrate into the existing fill; we should be retained to evaluate the location of the discharging5areas to evaivate'stability and settlement- of the;fill: We recommend that footing drains be used around all of the structures where moisture control is important. It is good practice to use footing drains installed at least 1 foot below the planned finished Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 14 floor slab or crawl space elevation to provide drainage for the crawl space. At a minimum, the crawl space should be sloped to drain to an outlet tied to the drainage system or to a pipe that allows positive flow until it daylights. Surface water or groundwater should not be allowed to puddle in the crawl space. The footing drains should consist of 4- inch - diameter perforated PVC pipe that is surrounded by free - draining material, such as pea gravel. Footing drains should discharge into tightlines leading to an appropriate collection and discharge point. Crawl spaces should be sloped to drain, and a positive connection should be made into the foundation drainage system. For slabs -on- grade, a drainage path should be provided from the capillary break material to the footing drain system. Roof drains should not be connected to wall or footing drains. Utilities Our explorations indicate that specific deep dewatering will not be needed to install utilities. Anticipated groundwater is expected to be handled with pumps in the trenches. We also expect that some groundwater seepage may develop during and following the wetter times of the year. We expect this seepage to mostly occur in pockets. We do not expect significant volumes of water in these excavations. The soils likely to be exposed in utility trenches after site stripping are considered highly moisture sensitive. We recommend that they be considered for trench backfill during the drier portions of the year. Provided these soils are within 2 percent of their optimum moisture content, they should be suitable to meet compaction specifications. During_the _wet season, it may be difficult to achieve compaction specifications; "therefore, =soil= amend compaction with the on -site materials. Pavement 4:-,• i=2+= • perfo oa .vo k . elated o the condlt pps of tQ401. derlytttg su .m ased on the elkeetak' ?�uring4eoui "*explorations,- it•appeafed•that the. paired road section "was not =as thick as County standards would dictate. However, the underlying subgrade appeared to be firm, and the road surface appeared to be_perfornung adequately: ;We recommend that the existing asphalt surfacing be left in place during -construction and evaluated -forits performance under the repeated heavy loading typically associated with construction traffic (e.g., trucks, loaders, etc.). Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 15 In all areas other than the existing pavement, we recommend that the subgrade soils under planned hard surfaces be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading subsection of this report. Prior to placing base material, the subgrade soils should be compacted to a non - yielding state with a vibratory roller compactor and then proof - rolled with a piece of heavy construction equipment, such as a fully - loaded dump truck. Any areas with excessive weaving or flexing should be overexcavated and recompacted or replaced with a structural fill or crushed rock placed and compacted in accordance with recommendations provided in the Structural Fill subsection of this report. CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION We should be retained to provide observation and consultation services during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, and to provide recommendations for design changes, should the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated. As part of our services, we would also evaluate whether or not earthwork and foundation installation activities comply with contract plans and specifications. USE OF THIS REPORT We have prepared this report for Majestic Homes and its agents, for use in planning and design of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding and estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions.. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractors' methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, exceptas specifically described in our report, for consideration in'design. There are possible a a ee ondi (p `� c itat* ect laz tngincli de�conttngencies m budget aril schedule :shoihl"d'areasbe Fo1ira witfi co • roris that vary-froin those`descnbed in this report. Within the limitations of scope;schedule_and`budget for our services, •wehaVestrived to take care that our serviced have`been coinpletxed in accordance with - generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time this report was prepared. No other conditions, expressed or implied, should be understood. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. 40 Number and Approximate ,Location of Test Pit Site Plan • •- --•:- 40' - - - Number and Approximate Location of Roadway Cores 844-1977 Reference: Site Plan based on electronic site plan844-1987 dated May 25, 2006 and titled "Farnum / Tiede". 8072 Majestic Homes - Farnum Property File Number Figure 2064 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 16 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. If there are any questions conceming this report or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Jeff Laub, LG Project Geologist `EXPIRES 08/16/D4 1 Rick B. Powell, PE _-Principal JRW:JPL:RBP:nt Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Vicinity Map Cornerstone Fax: (425) 844-1987 Phone: (425) 844 -1977 Geotechnical, Inc. 17625 -130th Ave NE, C -102 • Woodinville, WA • 98072 Majestic Homes - Farnum Property File Number Figure 2064 1 Geotechnical Engineering Report Farnum Property Tukwila, Washington June 19, 2006 CG File No. 2064 Page 10 determined by the ASTM D1557 compaction test procedure. Fill more than 2 feet beneath sidewalks and pavement subgrades should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The moisture content of the soil to be compacted should be within about 2 percent of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet surficial soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Temporary and Permanent Slopes Temporary cut slope stability is a function of many factors, such as the type and consistency of soils, depth of the cut, surcharge loads adjacent to the excavation, length of time a cut remains open, and the presence of surface or groundwater. It is exceedingly difficult under these variable conditions to estimate a stable temporary cut slope geometry. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the contractor to maintain safe slope configurations, since the contractor is continuously at the job site, able to observe the nature and condition of the cut slopes, and able to monitor the subsurface materials and groundwater conditions encountered. For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary cuts in the fill zones and near - surface weathered soils be no steeper than 1.5 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (1.5H:1V). Cuts in the dense drift may stand at a 1H:1V inclination or possibly steeper. If groundwater seepage is encountered, we would expect that flatter inclinations would be necessary. We recommend that cut: slopes be .,protected from:: erosion MeasuresAaken may include covering cut slopes with plastic sheeting and diverting surface runoff away from the top of cut slopes. We do not recommend vertical slopes for cuts deeper than 4 feet, if worker access is necessary. We recommend that • • Fuial slope tncltnattorisfor structural: • any t euts m the native 'soils‘should`be no`steeper n 2H :1 V. Lightly compacted fills or. common fills should be no steeper than 3H:1V. Common fills are defined as fill material with some organics that are `-`trackrolled" into place. They would not meet the compaction • specification of`struetiiraTfilr. ' Finarslopes'should be vegetated and . covered with straw - or : jute netting. The vegetation should be maintained until it is established. Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Unified Soil Classification System MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE - GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% RETAINED ON number 200 SIEVE GRAVEL MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL- GRADED GRAVEL, FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GP POORLY - GRADED GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSES NO.4 SIEVE CLEAN SAND SW WELL- GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY- GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND SC CLAYEY SAND FINE - GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% PASSES NO. 200 SIEVE SILT AND CLAY LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50% INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY LIQUID LIMIT 50% OR MORE INORGANIC IVIH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT x z E. _ NOTES:.- , 1) Field classification visual examination accordance 2) Sol,.:classification Wi t':.'" ate`st5ISy -.„ .t • 3) Descriptions consistency interpretation visual appearance :: test data _ is based on of soil in general withASTM'D2488 usll-- �laliorat a_ ' ° _ dal __ n4:� "-a ___ ,s_ =83. " -7' - "` '''°"- ° '. _ � - . SOIL MOISTURE Dry- Absence . - to the Moist Dam MODIFIERS of moisture, dusty, dry touch _ _ _ - . _, _ abut no visible water; -- ..fie free wafer or-satutated t soli is obtained from table .. ;. °--- Amp t� `� -. -4,:t --c Vet Visible u "sljally below.water . - ,— t A, 7 . ,_5 _� . of soil density Or are based on ofblovvcount,data, :' of soils, and/or: : • : Cornerstone Phone: (425) 844-1977 Geotechnical, Inc, Fax: (425) 844 -1987 17625 -130th Ave NE, C -102 • Woodinville, WA' 98072 Unified Soil Classification System Figure 3 DEPTH LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT ONE 0.0 - 0.3 GP FINE GRAVEL WITH FINE TO COARSE SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 0.3 - 2.2 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 2.2 - 5.6 SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL ROOTS AND HOUSEHOLD GARBAGE (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 5.6 -10.5 SM BROWNISH GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (FILL) 10.5 - 12.1 SM JUMBLED GRAY BROWN AND BLUISH GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (FILL) 12.1 - 12.7 SP BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE ROOTS AND ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (FILL) TEST PIT TWO 0.0 - 2.3 SM 2.3 - 2.6 SM 2.6 - 3.8 SM 3.8 - 9.9 SM TEST PIT THREE 0.0 1 :5 1.5 - 2.4 2.4 = 5.3 SM SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 8.2, 11.2, 11.8 AND 12.7 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 12.7 FEET ON 3/7/06 DARK GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) DARK GRAY TO BLACK SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) BROWN MOTTLED GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) BROWNISH GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (GLACIAL DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.4 AND 6.7 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 9.9 FEET ON 3/7/06 BROWN SILTY FINE •TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ROOTS (MEDIUM DENSE, `MQIST)"(FILL) . . DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS AND ORGANICS (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) _' SM K` `BROWN MOTTLED GRAY SILTY FINE TO'MEDIUM SAND'WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE MOIST TO WET) . ..r y:.� . >e.,s�,. z, : _ x" ht.• -' > - - - =-+r _c - - --? i :44- SA't?1D{ VI y �RA�lEC 4 NSE iIOIST) (GLACIAL` SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.1 AND 7.2 FEET GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED ,. TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED ' ' TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 10.2 FEET ON 3/7/06- CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 2064 FIGURE 4 DEPTH LOG OF EXPLORATION USC SOIL DESCRIPTION TEST PIT FOUR 0.0 - 2.4 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL AND ORGANICS (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 2.4 - 6.6 SM JUMBLED GRAY AND BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (LOOSE TO MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST TO WET) (FILL) 6.6 - 7.7 SW FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (FILL) 7.7 -11.5 GP FINE GRAVEL WITH SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (MEDIUM DENSE, WET) (FILL) 11.5 - 11.9 SM GRAYISH BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE TO DENSE, MOIST) (GLACIAL DRIFT) SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 3.1, 6.9, 7.9 AND 11.7 FEET MODERATE GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 8.5 FEET MODERATE TEST PIT CAVING WAS ENCOUNTERED BELOW 5.2 FEET TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.9 FEET ON 3/7/06 TEST PIT FIVE 0.0 - 0.6 SM DARK BROWN TO BLACK SILTY FINE SAND WITH ROOTS AND ORGANICS (LOOSE, MOIST) (TOPSOIL) 0.6 - 3.8 SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 3.8- 8.0 SM BROWNISH GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) 8.0- 10.5 SW BROWN FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE. MOIST) (FILL) 10.5- 11.0 SM GRAYISH BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (GLACIAL DRIFT) TEST PIT SIX 0.0-7.6 7.6 - 9.5 9.5 - 9.7 SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED AT 8.4 AND 11.0 FEET SLIGHT GROUND WATER SEEPAGE WAS ENCOUNTERED AT 7.3 FEET TEST PIT CAVING WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT WAS COMPLETED AT 11.0 FEET ON 3/7/06 ---,t,JUMBLED,GRAKAND,BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) (FILL) SM BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE, MOIST) SM . GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM -SAND WITH GRAVEL (DENSE, MOIST) (GLACIAL • CORNERSTONE GEOTECHNICAL, INC. FILE NO 2064 FIGURE 5 C.2.4 BASIC DISPERSION FIGURE C.2.4.B TYPICAL GRAVEL- FILLED DISPERSION TRENCH FOR BASIC DISPERSION °d °d°d °0 ° v QD. A p 0D vd dp d °a°a voa° a ° a V v4Qov4a o °o a4° avao ° a° o ° ° o V0 ° 0 • ° ° 18' min '"uo od o do °_°° D /t7 vO°4 °oC ° °04 0 ° °QV0 0O9Dp 4 a°0 a °v °v °o 03ea° °° • 00 °p 0°v°°° 0 °a° ,,VA 0 c c ° a° Qv4v o° c °° ° g ° . ° 0 0 ° 0 24" min TRENCH X- SECTION NTS ,tope. 4" pert pipe level outlet 11/2" -3/4" washed rock small catch basin or yard drain Foot Vegetated .,F low path. Segment;_, Simple 10 -foot trench Type I CB .,__ '- L Maximum • .�. --_. � t� &'_' s'�T� • Q ,S e' >:. -.��rA { `•.•OF OO■ _1_ Y. NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN, NNNNNNNNJ.NNNNNNNNNN� NNNNNNNN� NNNNNNNNNN� NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. NNNNNNNNNN V NNN. 5 ;Ep9fVe0e:t ted�N ainrp�ftc,�,iti:eNz NN: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNJNN, HNNNNNNW NNNNNwnNNNNNNNNN� NNNNNNNN�� • .r,50 foot trench wlnotch .. eTigure C 2 1sD, p TC32) 2005 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix C C -53 1/24/2005 SE 126TH ST SHORT PLAT 1/4. SW 1/4. SEC 10. TRIP 231V. RGS 4E. W.M. 50' / �`').„; 1 �p 1 \ ; ,�. \�zs��`\ 111 N T� 11 / 11L^e1ty ' \ 1 lmvc 11 atY R \ v ."4 BE RELOCATED BEHIND WALK 8 tl a a dd400<,14 EX6TS C .E441.141424 1ll �: _ 11__________x- 'A PROJECT INFORMATION DEVELOPMENT DATA: PROJECT NAME SITE AREA SITE ADDRESS ACCESSORS PARCEL MAOER ZONED MIMMUM LOT SDF SETBACKS FRONT SECOND FROM BIDE YARD REM YARD BUILDING HEIGHT 094J0 UTILITIES SEWER WATER POWER 'TELEPHONE e0HOOTS FIRE DISTRICT 125115 STREET SHORT PUT 1.04 A RF_S 401348 129111 STREET T,MWOA WA, 911153 7340600016 73110500582 LIRT 8.593 S.F. 20 FEET 10 FEET 5 FEET 10 FEET 30 FEET LEGAL DESCRIPTION 13290894 LOT 2 DUVALL SP 79-3 REC 18102020681 SD SP DAF W 1N OF E 4/5 OF 5100E N ID OF SE IN OF SW 5N LESS RD DATUM HORIZONTAL DATUM: WASIODTON STATE PLANE NORTH HAD R1N1 VERTICAL DATUM: NAM 118 BASED ON CPS OBSERVATIONS PROJECT TEAM ?RWEC1 ENGINEER BRIAN G. NARROW, PE PAT RKX I VINiON a ASBGLIATES. L1c 14900 INTERURBAN AVBAXE 59779 SEATTLE, WA 011155 206474409 PROJECT1URVEYOR: KENNETH R ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. P.O. BOX 4173 FEDERAL WAY, WA MOST 39.038.5100 PROJECT CONTACT: MR JONATHAN /WIXOVICN DAVIS REAL ESTATE CROUP 1201 MONSTER ROAD SW, SURE 320 RENTON. WA I5056 PARCEL OWNER BUILD 6 DESIGN CROUP P.O. BOXY FALL CRY. WA 00024 PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS INVENTORY NEW ASPHALT WALK 6 CURB DRIVEWAYS NEW S4ERVIOUS CREDITS: REMOVE EXISTING IMPERV 000 ROAD SURFACE NET NEW IMPERVIOUS 1.153 5F. 2.3215F. 12005F. 4,$84 SF. 511 S.F. 4.1739,7. SHEET INDEX 1. COVER 66IEET 5 SITE PLAN 2. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONIR0L PLAN 3. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETMS 4. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN B PROFILE 5. FRONTAGE. GRADING AND DRAINAGE DETAILS 6. UTIUIY PLAN VICINITY MAP 5413 COVER LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED • snoI1FEN mwE 0 nos cm (As osNSO mace cos re 'um weave EMS I00 LoCs - 4wun lA.Lon F,OIEV MARE YES - RGIR GC, RN11 URRY ME O,RwNE ECM Mfgf rm716 WENT MCAT - x- N- a,vroWag ..wnrue 4 —veou rtaaewwIaEUM SEWER LAE (41 rao seam ammo; -WATER LYE • p- wwr.50 NPM.E SON. MO su A MW mu. 34 Pv wX cal .av vwl O Carped EC no GRAVEL OMR& N TORY fYOY'MOO MO O•EO -••■•• P ARS. SMn... A..m.e•.. L/C E..RI.....I..E nMw w 05110 SC 57400 BCH APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION BY DATE BY CITY ENGINEER DATE UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT - 11.1805 - T -20 APPROVAL EXPIRES. 1 6 C.2.1 FULL DISPERSION FIGURE C.2.1.D 50 -FOOT DISPERSION TRENCH WITH NOTCHED BOARD pipe O.D. 1' -0 1' -0 min /end cap or plug ° ve clean out wye from pipe ve e 4" or 6" perforated pipe laid flat/level notched grade board 2 "x 2" notches 18" O.C. bolts Cpl "1 7," d2" �- v° clean out wye from pipe a a PLAN NTS type 1 CB w /solid cover (locking) influent pipe (max design flow <_ 0.5 CFS per trench) pipe OD 1�ll l ITU Ei pressure treated grade 'a board 4" x 4' support post 4" or 6" perforated pipe laid flat flow to second dispersal trench if necessary flow to other branching CB's as necessary 18" 0.C. grade board notches NOTES: type I CB w /solid cover clean ( <_ 5% fines) 1. This trench shall be constructed so 11/2" - 3/4 " washed rock as to prevent point discharge and /or .erosion. _ - -.2: Trenches may be placed no closer than 50 feet to one another: (100 feet along flowline) 3. Trench and grade board must be - level: Align to.follow contours of-'site.. 4 SupportpostRspacing_as required by ` - soll'eonclitrbns t -•• _ensu re gradeLboard femainsaevel filter fabric 2005 Surface Water Design Manual — Appendix C C -33 1/24/2005 Geotechllical Engineering Report Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. The following information is provided to help you manage your risks. Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one - -- not even you — should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes —even minor ones —and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change Read the Full Report A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer - engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. ing report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of Do not read selected elements only. time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report A Unique Set of Project - Specific Factors to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or _Geotechnical engineers consider a_number of ,unique,.projeckspecific•fac- _; analysis could_prevent major problems. tors when: establishing the scope of a study Typical factors include the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general Most Geoteehnieal Findings' Are Professional nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of Opinions the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where such :as access roads,.parking.lots; -and underground utilities lJnless the - f ,subsurface: tests. are conducted or. samples•are.taken. Geotechnical engi- 6t geotechnical engineer whoconducted me studymcificallyrindicates other nseitee s e va i l sdiet) rafa�d laoorrrdaitfofory ns d amta andifftehr–en saopply. t itrhneeisr professional 're doareyooeent tljenueg . tlgenp rekftinron about asufsurface condtions throgout he not p epredf , ■ not prepared for youiprojeca, from those indicated in'your report. Retaining,the'geotechnical engineer • not prepared for the specific site explored, or who developed your report to provide construction observation is the •..'completed before important project changes wereimade.. -,- H=`; j : most effective Method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated • conditions.: Typical changes that can` erode' the reliabihtyrof art existirfg'gedteehnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when its changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes'. To help reduce the risk engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" construction observation. many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical Misinterpretation engineer should respond fully and frankly. Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- •Geoenvironnlental Concerns Are Not Covered technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron- submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or conferences, and by providing construction observation. regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen- Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man - Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or someone else. omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, that separating logs from the report can elevate risk operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com- prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make mold prevention consultant Because just a small amount of water or contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num- they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con ber of mold prevention strategies focus 00 keeping building surfaces dry. tractors the cornplete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services per - engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- flan. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed tors have sufficient timeto perform additional study. Only then might you in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from be in a position to give.contractors..the best Information available to you ._,y. _ growing in oron the structure involved. while requiring- them- to at least Share some of the;financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Rely►, 0n Your ASFE- Member Geotechncial Engineer for Additional Assistance Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical Some clients, design professionals,, and, contractors .do.not,recognizethatr ,engineers to a wide. array of risk management techniques that can be of geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci genuine benefit,for everyone involved with -a construction project. Confer `plines T IS,1ael of tinrerstantlrng�has' ate' eatistlrAg ct 'ol i wrih you ASFF member geotechnical engineer for more mfojmation:':: Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Tile Besl. [aolle ao Earn 8811 Colesville Road /Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301 /565 -2733 Facsimile: 301 /589 -2017 e -mail: info@asfe.org www.asfe.org Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with ASFE's specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only. for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use th/s document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation. IIGER06045.OM S.E..1 /4, . S.W. 1/4, : SECTION .10, TWP.. 23 N., 4 E., : W.M. ■ cW INFORMATION: PARCEL MAMER(0 734050051, 730500582 4010 S. 128114 ST. TUGOA WA '8426E PROPERTY 01RER DANS/R09NSG1 NC 1201 MONSTER R0. 58 5230 TENTON. WA 89057 -TOIK AREA:- 38.112 E.S. (0.370 AC) 514AUEST LO0 0.502 SF. .'. AYERADE LOT ABEL 7.773 S.F. I FGAI DFSCPoPTIONS` (PLR STEWART TIRE GUARANTY COMPANY. SUMPASOI ONARANIFL 00 -2531 -12537. OMER 1 10514091. DATED SEPTEMBER 8. 2005) PARCEL '6 (puma 08811 TIE EST 203 FEET 611E NORTH 132.5 FEET'S TRACT 44 RIVERSIDE INTERURBAN TRACTS, ACWDN10 TO DE PLAT i1EAE6 RECD DFD N VOLUME 10 OF PLATS PAGE 74. RECORDS 6 1011 COUNTY, WASIOICYCK SITUATE N BE COUNTY 6.IOD, STATE OF WA90DT11. (I 1LNOTE . - . 1640 5R'0UD WATER SE1 I SIOML'IUD OAS UNITES AND SD0C11NAL AIFIDIFWWQS ARE SIDMI AS INDICATED a RECORDS NIPS FUNISIED BY OTHERS AND LOCATED 1E0,MEAE POSSMIE BY FOUR SURFACE FEATURES LOCATED N THE TE D. E ASSURE NO UAB5111' FOR THE • ACGRAY OF AESE RECORDS. FOR FMK LOCATION 6 THESE NO MB EBBW UIUIES N AREAS 0811CAL TO . MOON. ONTAOT 11E 141 1TY OWNER / AGENCY. 1 PARCEL 'B' (1734050 0562): , . - - -ATE NOR1N .1323 FEET'S TRACT 44 maze MTD6AMA11 TRACTS. - \ \\ �. BOOBOO TO TIE OF LAT DERE6 RECORDED N MOLI E 10 6 PLATS. 01 \\ - \\ \ '' mon NE BST 200 FEET DERBY; ' ...i•,(\ \\\ \ AND ONO 551 70P01 COURT CONCERNED NO FOR 4 STATE N1M'AAY .„ ' \ \ UNDER ONO COUNTY 9PDAOR KURT CAUSE MO 617372: SITUATE COUNTY OF ONG,' STATE 6'EA961DTa y , � .\ \\\ \ .HID COUNTY ASSESSORS YAPS Cr SECIDNF 10. T. 23 N. R4 E. ELL :\a\ \ \�. P1A7 6 MADt9K INTERURBAN 15ACTS` Vat 70 P'6 74.. ) \ \ 1013115 REPLAY 6 PART OF TRACT 33, BERME INTERURBAN . - . TAACIS YOL 24 PO 101 PAD MOUNTED TRANSFORMER • . U15N1' POLE • O--):(UTILITY POLE W/U6DU11E OSANITARY SEVER MAMDUE ,2 swim -snot sae RARER !DD COMB WATER D15T. 725 (200) 242 -9547 .SEVER VK NE SEER 14ST. (200) 242 -3238 POSER PLRET -SOUND DENT - (555) 225 -5773 PLIQT SURD DERV (886) 225 -5773 TD11GTT - (425) 368 -4231 0 T (800) 573 -1311 7 lr O NAD83/91 WASHINGTON STATE PLANE. NORTH 2014E \PER WASNNGTON CO ML . 6 COUNTY SURVEYORS 14 TONG CONTY CCN1RO1. SURVEY PADS OF BEARINGS BASED UPON THE NWAEN1ED VEST 750 OF NNE WORTHIEST QUARTER OF SECTION 10-2314 -040 B A BB 60r44•341 • \ `.':l ?"-t- 1 • :11 `. r U� fit'•, `: r • • • S. 126TH STREET. (ALDER STREET) I O 93.15- •N D•'72 POSSIBLE ENCROACHMENT - OVERHEAD - , ELECTRIC. CONDUCTOR WIRES . ... -25.00 ` \ . L-39.12' 1_ _` -LOT 1 217 -•.b•8r391r( 6.593 5F. \ � 1 \ - 0.151 AC. $1.30' R01.106.81 • . 10.9479(SE) .. . ' )Zf LE.95.70(9).' POSSIBLE ENCROA011101T- -A BOOTY POLE GUY AND-O( r � BUILDING \ pOSSIBLE ENQtOACHMENT- OV•.7HEAD .\:. \: ".. -,\ . ;... \:d- 4�. \. LOT 3 oo ' \ ` 6.241-SF. P AC. - . NENENVAY PHILIP 734060'0663 S84'47.3rE HENENWAY :DANIEL .734060.068`_