Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SEPA E07-011 - FADDEN BOB - NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING
LANDMARK BUILDING OFFICE & WAREHOUSE CONSTRUCTION 6301 S. 143RD ST. E07 -011 / L V / DATE: NAME: COMPANY: �rJ v vb/ vvL CITY OF TUKWILA 40 a9'ia -DW REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS Ib(Z61o�' 6r-pitkk nit rv, MAILING ADDRESS: Z zs /oB f % fin_ svtiit_. Yk) CITY /STATE /ZIP: uCJ1/ vIA-- F600 tf .. PHONE: q= 75.2-3746 FAX: Y ri Y.-MS -E -MAIL: C J I-PH-eASchpl i w. TYPE OF RECORDS YOU ARE REQUESTING: 0 Building Permit 0 Mechanical Permit 0 Building Plans Date Range: Date Range: Date Range: Permit #: Permit #(s): Permit #(s): 0 Land Use File Date Range: Permit #(s): IR Other: sQk f Orig. Bldg. Name /Occupant:, �,,QQ Current Tenant Name 1 Site Address: // 300' 1 S. 1 Y3' V CJ C AA ((-aitdflWlC Q� J Sit �P PLEASE DESCRIBE IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR OR NEED COPIES OF: )5EP/It •60W /pla Once.. 141 oz, eua Act-put /V FOR OFFICE USE ONLY FUR'OlI YOUR REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS WILL BE RESPONDED TO WITHIN FIVE WORKING DAYS (RCW 42.17.320). There will boa 15 cent per pap charge for 8 Ve" x 11" and legal, 30 cent charge for 11" x 17 ", Oversized items will be assessed additional fees (RCW 42.17.260). Exact change or check, please. Sony, we do not accept credit cards. DATE RECEIVED: 10 �7 IN 01 Ace in STAFF INITIALS: IN L 014 loin /07 Frain Jac-L CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PROJECT INFORMATION Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects, on behalf of property owner Jerry Knudson, has filed applications for development of a 39,600 square foot commercial building with associated parking to be located at 6301 S 143rd Street. Permits applied for include: L07 -041 (Public Hearing Design Review), E07 -011 (SEPA Environmental Review) Other known required permits include: Tenant Improvement Building Permit, Flood Control Zone Permit FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW'`; The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. Project Files include: L07 -041, E07 -011, PRE06 -046 OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You are invited to comment on the project at a public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review, scheduled for November 8, 2007 at 7:00 p.m., at the Tukwila City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard. To confirm this date call Jaimie Reavis at the Department of Community Development at (206) 431 -3659. For further information on this proposal, contact Jaimie Reavis at (206) 431 -3659 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: June 19, 2007 Notice of Completeness Issued: July 16, 2007 Notice of Application Issued: October 24, 2007 H: \ Design Review \ Landmark Building \ Landmark Hearing Notice.DOC SOUTH 143RD STREET VICINITY MAP NO SCAM it LANE:SC14)3E PLAN scAus r • 20' NORTH C 2C 4/Y SOUTH 143RD PLACE MAIN STREET DESIGN - • LANDSCAPE. ARCHITECTURE 1PS IANtims ANL S. 00j fl-0044 arid, la. WA MHO NM NO-019S ka • Dept: Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION re---,' �� HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Project Name: ;w N Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: LL-1-/D41 /iY1_oi.i. Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Person requesting mailing: '-J CC. GO I di_ gPa v►'s 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 £95 day of a? .in the year 200?' '• PA ADMINISTRATIVEFORMSWORMSWFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION Project Name: ;w N NIJe.,IQ.Q„c4 Project Number: LL-1-/D41 /iY1_oi.i. Mailer's Signature: '`'. ' Cd2o-A\A-1 Person requesting mailing: '-J CC. GO I di_ gPa v►'s PA ADMINISTRATIVEFORMSWORMSWFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY • () FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINI ON () U.S. DEPT OF ' - ' .D. ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () NATIONAL FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES () DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( DEPT OF ECOLOGY OLOGY SEPA DAD DIV ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY G • SEND CHKUST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE ) DEPT OF FISHERIES WILDLIFEO «C DEV. KING COUNTY AGENCIES () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT 111 ' () FIRE DISTRICT 12 () K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DMSION () K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC () K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKW ILA SCHOOL DISTRICT () TUKWILA UBRARY () RENTON UBRARY () KENT LIBRARY' . - . . . () CITY OF SEATTLE UBRARY O OWEST () SEATTLE CITY UGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHUNE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES () HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE (. K.C..DEV & ENV1R SERVICE &SEPA IN O CNTR ICC. TRANSIT DMSION - SEPA OFFICIAL LAND & WATER - - -. • SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES () KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBLIC WORKS () FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR () CITY CLERK ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC UBRARY ( ) HIGHUNE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT O RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL-WE SEWER DISTRICT () WATER DISTRICT 120 ( ) WATER DISTRICT 1125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWER/WATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT - () CITY OF SEA -TAC () CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS () CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCW () STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES () DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY () SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION 'SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPUCATIONS ON °MAMISH MEN ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL PMDMTHIISTRATWEWF0RMSTHKUST.DOC ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.VWWY • • • RITTIKAIDACHAR,SUPALUK SANFT,LOUIE & ADOLPH 14250 59TH AVE S 6120 52ND AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 SEATTLE, WA 98118 SIMWEST CAPITAL LLC 600 UNIVERSITY ST 1925 SEATTLE, WA 98101 STRAY,FREDERICK M & FRANCES K 12805 NE 80TH ST KIRKLAND, WA 98033 SIVERTSEN,DAVID R 5703 230TH ST SW MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 98043 TUKWILA CITY OF 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD TUKWILA, WA 98188 SEGALE,MARIO A . PO BOX 88046 SEATTLE, WA 98138 SOUTHLAND CORP PO BOX 711 DALLAS, TX 75221 VIEWCREST WPIG L L C 1120E TERRACE ST 300 SEATTLE, WA 98122 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14201 INTERURBAN AVE S 14220 INTERURBAN AVE S 14275 INTERURBAN AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14301 INTERURBAN AVE S 14309 INTERURBAN AVE S 14406 59TH AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14438 59TH AVE S 14501 INTERURBAN AVE S 5906 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6234 S 143RD PL 6238 S 143RD PL 6275 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6350 S 143RD ST 6406 S 143RD ST 6410 S 143RD ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6411 S 143RD ST 6421 S 143RD PL 6421 S 143RD ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6424 S 143RD PL 6427 S 143RD ST 6437 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 ANDREW,LORI L SUTTON 14237 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 DAVIS,ROBERT L 14246 59TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 ENGSTROM,DONALD GLENN 6400 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 GLENN,BONNIE J 6420 123RD AVE SE BELLEVUE, WA 98006 INDUSTRIAL. PROPERTIES INC PO BOX 1716 AUBURN, WA 98071 JUSTIN,JAMES L & GAIL ANN 3110 N GOVE ST TACOMA, WA 98407 KNUDSON,GERALD C 6402 S 144TH ST 1 TUKWILA, WA 98168 MCINTOSH,KATHY J 2625 SW NEVADA CT PORTLAND, OR 97219 • • BAUM,PAMELA J 14305 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 DBSI FAIRWAY LLC 519999 12426 W EXPLORER DR 100 BOISE, ID 83713 FOUTY,CHARLES L & ELAINE J. 6426 S 144TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 GROSSE,ROGER L 14252 59TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 IVES,HELEN K 14247 56TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING COUNTY CORRECTIONS GLD 6417 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 MARIO GALLIANO LLC 16435 MILITARY RD S SEATAC, WA 98188 METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT INC PO BOX 88028 TUKWILA, WA 98130 CALIBUR MORTGAGE GROUP INC 6412 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 EBENEZER CHURCH OF GOD IN C PO BOX 18154 SEATTLE, WA 98118 FOUTY,WILLIAM A 6423 S 143RD PL SEATTLE, WA 98168 HINKSON,LESLIE & JANET 14628 SE 216TH ST KENT, WA 98042 JOHN C RADOVICH LLC 2835 82ND AVE SE 300 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 KING,JAMES T JR & CHARLENE 9500 RAINIER AVE S 207 SEATTLE, WA 98118 MASCHMEDT,ANTHONY & ABBEY 2326 14TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98144 MEZGEBU,TEWODROS Z 7421 S 116TH PL SEATTLE, WA 98178 OBRIEN,TIMOTHY PORTHEN,RONALD V PORTHEN,WILMA R 14217 S 59TH 14254 59TH AVE S 14254 59TH AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98188 SEATTLE, WA 98188 SEATTLE, WA 98168 RAHIMAN,PETER RED HOUSE PROPERTIES LLC RICKS,TIMOTHY B 8963 49TH AVE W PO BOX 88070 14228 59TH AVE S MUKILTEO, WA 98275 SEATTLE, WA 98138 SEATTLE, WA 98168 • • • TENANT TENANT TENANT 6439 S 143RD ST 6440 S 143RD ST 6440 S 144TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF APPLICATION PROJECT INFORMATION Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects has filed applications for development of the Landmark Building, a 39,600 sq. ft. concrete tilt -up building with associated parking, to be located at 6301 S 143rd Street, on the east side of Interurban Ave between S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place. Permits applied for include: L07 -041, Public Hearing Design Review; and E07 -011 SEPA /Environmental Review Other known required permits include: building permit Studies required with the applications include: Technical Information Report (stormwater) and Geotechnical Report. An environmental checklist has been submitted with the studies identified above. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the counter at the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100. Project Files include: L07 -041, E07 -011 OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at the address above or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M., August 21, 2007. Opportunity for additional oral and written public comments will be provided at a public hearing before the Board of Architectural Review, tentatively scheduled for September 26, 2007. To confirm this date call the Department of Community Development at (206) 431 -3670. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431 -3670. The design review application may be appealed to the City Council; environmental review for this project may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner. For further information on this proposal, contact Jaimie Reavis at (206) 431 -3659 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: June 19, 2007 Notice of Completeness Issued: July 16, 2007 Notice of Application Issued: August 7, 2007 LANDMARK BUILDING 28,100 SF. ROOF AREA PARKING SPACES SHOWN • 83 11,500 5F. SECOND FLOOR. 39b00 5F. TOTAL 21,600 5F. OFFICE e 3/1000 PARKING • 85 CARS 18,000 5F. U4 OUSE • 0000 PARKING • 18 CARS TOTAL PA .0 10 . 20 . 60 VICINITY MAP File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: City 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 -011 06/19/2007 10/10/2007 ISSUED Applicant: FADDEN BOB Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: SEPA review for new commercial building. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township /Range: 6301 S 143 ST TUKW 3365901665 SE 1/4, SECTION 14, TWP 23N, R4E, WM 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 Pace, - ponsible O ' icial City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 Date 1 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) doc: DNS -4/07 E07 -011 Printed: 10 -08 -2007 • City of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF DECISION To: Bob. Fadden, Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects Jerry Knudson, Owner State. Department of Ecology, SEPA Division King County Assessor PROJECT: Landmark Building FILE NUMBERS: E07 -011 ASSOCIATED FILES: L07 -041, PRE06 -046, PRE05 -027 APPLICANT: Bob Fadden, Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects REQUEST: Construction of a new 39,600 square foot building, including associated parking, for office and warehouse use. LOCATION: 6301 S 143rd Street, Tukwila, WA 98168 The project site is north of I -405 on the east side of Interurban Ave S, between S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place. 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 Jaimie Reavis, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3659 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). JR H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\SEPA.DOC Page 1 of 1 10/08/2007 3:20:00 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 • Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST File No: E07 -011 I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposal is to construct a two - story, 39,600 square foot project to include space for office and warehousing. II. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Landmark Building Applicant: Bob Fadden, Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects Location: The site is located north of I -405 on the east side of Interurban Ave S, between S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) District The following information was considered as part of review of this application. 1. SEPA Checklist and ESA screening checklist dated June 12, 2007. 2. Architectural drawings prepared by Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects; Civil drawings prepared by Bush, Roed & Hitchings, Inc. and Dodds Consulting Engineers; and Landscaping Plans prepared by Main Street Design Landscape Architecture. 3. Geotechnical reports including (1) a Preliminary Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation, dated March 27, 2006; and (2) Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Considerations, dated October 25, 2006. Both of these reports were prepared by Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 4. Technical Information Report prepared by Bruce J. Dodds, P.E., P.L.S., dated April 2007. 5. Landmark Building Level I Trip Generation and Distribution report prepared by Jake Traffic JR Page 1 of 6 H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc 10/08/2007 3:17 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Engineering Inc, dated May 4, 2007. NOTE: Technical reports and attachments referenced above may not be attached to all copies of this decision. Copies of exhibits, reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed and/or obtained by contacting Jaimie Reavis, Assistant Planner, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100, Tukwila, Washington, 98188, Phone: 206 - 431 -3659. III. REVIEW PROCESS The proposed action is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review as the project does not meet the exemptions listed under WAC 197 -11 -800. IV. BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL The proposal is to 'construct a two - story, 39,600 square foot concrete tilt -up building that will include tenant spaces for office and warehousing use. The project includes 19,000 square feet for office use, and 20,600 square feet for warehousing. The site is located on the east side of the Interurban Ave S transportation corridor, between S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place north of I -405. The project site is comprised of five parcels which will be consolidated along with a portion of previously vacated right -of -way (per City of Tukwila Ordinance No. 2063), to create one project site. Parking for the project will consist of 78 surface parking spaces. The project also includes construction of sidewalks along all street frontages, including Interurban Ave S, S 143rd Street, and S 143rd Place. There will also be a sidewalk connecting the building's main entrance on the west side to Interurban Ave S. V. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The following lists the elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for the proposed project. The numbers in the staff evaluation correspond to the numbers in the Environmental Checklist. If staff concurs with the applicant's response, this is so stated. If the response to a particular item in the checklist is found to be inadequate or clarification is needed, there is additional staff comment and evaluation. A. BACKGROUND: 1 -5 Concur with checklist. 6 Construction will follow issuance of SEPA determination and Design Review and after obtaining all required permits from the City of Tukwila or other agencies. JR Page 2 of 6 10/082007 3:17 PM H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc 7— Concur with checklist. 8— Roadway improvements to be completed along Interurban Ave S are contained within the city's Capital Improvement Program. However, construction of frontal improvements (to include curb, gutter, sidewalks, and landscaping) must be constructed along Interurban Ave S, between S 143"I Street and S 143rd Place, as a condition of approval for this project. If the city's work is scheduled for a date that is later than the date of construction of the Landmark Building, the applicant is responsible for making the frontal improvements along Interurban Ave S in addition to frontal improvements along S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place. 9- 11— Concur with checklist. 12 —A small portion of the site lies within the 100 -year floodplain, as indicated on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. Earth: a- g— Concur with checklist. h —The project shall meet all King County Surface Water Design Manual drainage requirements. All impacts associated with drainage will be mitigated as part of the construction permit. 2. Air: a— Applicant is required to obtain all relevant permits from Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to address any emission to the air. b- c— Concur with checklist. 3. Water: a(1) -a(4)— Concur with checklist. a(5)— Applicant will apply for a Flood Control Zone Permit to address a portion of the site located within the 100 -year floodplain. a(6)— Concur with checklist. b(1) -b(2)— Concur with checklist. c(1) —The project shall meet all King County Surface Water Design Manual drainage requirements. All impacts associated with drainage will be mitigated as part of the construction permit. c(2) —Best Management Practices must be followed to ensure that no construction debris enters the storm drainage system. All impacts related to construction debris will be mitigated as part of the construction permit. JR Page 3 of 6 10/08/2007 3:17 PM H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc d —The project shall meet all King County Surface Water Design Manual drainage requirements. All impacts associated with drainage will be mitigated as part of the construction permit. 4. Plants: a–c---Concur with checklist. d— Landscaping will be provided that meets Tukwila Municipal Code landscaping and design review requirements. Animals: a- c— Concur with checklist. d— Applicant refers to a Green River Ordinance, to which proposed plantings will conform. The site is not located within 200 feet of the Green River, and so is not subject to the requirements of the Shoreline Management Act. However, native species are preferred plantings for use in required landscaping areas. 6. Energy and Natural Resources: a -c— Concur with checklist. Environmental Health: a(1- 2)— Concur with checklist. b(1)— Concur with checklist. b(2) -b(3) —The project must meet City of Tukwila noise ordinance requirements. Compliance with applicable local, state and federal noise regulations will mitigate any potential adverse noise impacts associated with the project 8. Land and Shoreline Use: a- g— Concur with checklist. h —A small portion of the site has been identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as being located within the 100 -year floodplain. The applicant will apply for a Flood Control Zone Permit. i- 1— Concur with checklist. 9. Housing: a- c— Concur with checklist. 10. Aesthetics: a- c— Concur with checklist. The project is subject to design review by the Board of Architectural Review and any aesthetic impacts will be mitigated as part of that review process. JR Page 4 of 6 10/08/2007 3:17 PM H:\Design Review \ andmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc 11. Light and Glare: - a-d— Concur with checklist. 12. Recreation: a- c— Concur with checklist. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation: a-b--Concur with checklist. c —If any historical or cultural artifacts are discovered as part of this project, the applicant will comply with state laws regarding preservation or permitting for excavation and removal of artifacts. 14. Transportation: a-b--Concur with checklist. c —The completed project will have 78 parking spaces. There are no existing parking spaces that will be eliminated. d —Street frontage improvements are included along S 143rd Street and S 143rd Place, to include curbs, gutters, and 6 foot sidewalks. Street frontage improvements along Interurban Ave S from S 143"I Street to S 143rd Place will include a curb, gutters, a 4 foot landscape buffer, sidewalks and additional landscaping in the remaining portion of the right -of -way extending to the western property line of the project site. See attached plans. e— Concur with checklist. f —The Trip Generation and Distribution report prepared by Jake Traffic Engineering, Inc. (May 4, 2007) will be reviewed as part of the concurrency application submitted to the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. The trip generation, trip distribution, level of service at the intersections and traffic impact fees are covered by the City's concurrency ordinance. All impacts associated with these issues will be mitigated during the building permit review process. It is likely that the project will be subject to the traffic mitigation fees that will go towards the street improvements projects that are in the City of Tukwila's Transportation Improvement Program and are in the vicinity of the proposed project. g— Concur with checklist. Applicant will be required to construct frontal improvements (to include curbs, gutter, sidewalk, and landscaping) along Interurban Ave S between S 143rd. Street and S 143"I Place if the city's work along this section of Interurban Ave S is not completed prior to construction of the Landmark Building. 15. Public Services: a-b--Concur with checklist. 16. Utilities: a -b— Concur with checklist. JR Page 5 of 6 H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc 10/08/2007 3:17 PM COMMENTS : There were no written comments received in response to the notice of application. VII. CONCLUSION The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment and pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -340, a Determination ofNonsignificance (DNS). is issued for this project This DNS is based on impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments, and the above "Final Staff Evaluation for Application No. E07-011", and is supported by plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by the City of Tukwila for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. Prepared by: Jaimie Reavis, Assistant Planner Date: October 10, 2007 JR Page 6 of 6 10/08/2007 3:17 PM H:\Design Review\Landmark Building\E07 -011 Landmark Building DNS.doc Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I. 61,0ek HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non - Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (45- Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Mailer's Signature: f-, wCJ( 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 ,116- Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this lJ day of year 20 07 .in the P: ADMINISTRATIVEFORMSWORMS \AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION Project Name: (L" l.IC- (45- Project Number: LeD1 �- C) 4i i l J1�O t Mailer's Signature: f-, wCJ( Person requesting mai 1 i ng: c) (312A, fI V2RANtis P: ADMINISTRATIVEFORMSWORMS \AFFIDAVITOFDISTRIBUTION ANDREW,LORI L SUTTON 14237 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 DAVIS,ROBERT L 14246 59TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 ENGSTROM,DONALD GLENN 6400 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 GLENN,BONNIE J 6420 123RD AVE SE BELLEVUE, WA 98006 INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES INC PO BOX 1716 AUBURN, WA 98071 JUSTIN,JAMES L & GAIL ANN 3110 N GOVE ST TACOMA, WA 98407 KNUDSON,GERALD C 6402 S 144TH ST 1 TUKWILA, WA 98168 MCINTOSH,KATHY J 2625 SW NEVADA CT PORTLAND, OR 97219 • • BAUM,PAMELA J 14305 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 DBSI FAIRWAY LLC 519999 12426 W EXPLORER DR 100 BOISE, ID 83713 FOUTY,CHARLES L & ELAINE J 6426 S 144TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 GROSSE,ROGER L 14252 59TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 IVES,HELEN K 14247 56TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING COUNTY CORRECTIONS GLD 6417 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 MARIO GALLIANO LLC 16435 MILITARY RD S SEATAC, WA 98188 METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT INC PO BOX 88028 TUKWILA, WA 98130 CALIBUR MORTGAGE GROUP INC 6412 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 EBENEZER CHURCH OF GOD IN C PO BOX 18154 SEATTLE, WA 98118 FOUTY,WILLIAM A 6423 S 143RD PL SEATTLE, WA 98168 HINKSON,LESLIE & JANET 14628 SE 216TH ST KENT, WA 98042 JOHN C RADOVICH LLC 2835 82ND AVE SE 300 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 KING,JAMES T JR & CHARLENE 9500 RAINIER AVE S 207 SEATTLE, WA 98118 MASCHMEDT,ANTHONY & ABBEY 2326 14TH AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98144 MEZGEBU,TEWODROS Z 7421 S 116TH PL SEATTLE, WA 98178 OBRIEN,TIMOTHY PORTHEN,RONALD V PORTHEN,WILMA R 14217 S 59TH 14254 59TH AVE S 14254 59TH AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98188 SEATTLE, WA 98188 SEATTLE, WA 98168 RAHIMAN,PETER RED HOUSE PROPERTIES LLC RICKS,TIMOTHY B 8963 49TH AVE W PO BOX 88070 14228 59TH AVE S MUKILTEO, WA 98275 SEATTLE, WA 98138 SEATTLE, WA 98168 RITTIKAIDACHAR,SUPALUK SANFT,LOUIE & ADOLPH SEGALE,MARIO A 14250 59TH AVE S 6120 52ND AVE S PO BOX 88046 TUKWILA, WA 98168 SEATTLE, WA 98118 SEATTLE, WA 98138 SIMWEST CAPITAL LLC 600 UNIVERSITY ST 1925 SEATTLE, WA 98101 STRAY,FREDERICK M & FRANCES K 12805 NE 80TH ST KIRKLAND, WA 98033 SIVERTSEN,DAVID R 5703 230TH ST SW MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, WA 98043 TUKWILA CITY OF 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD TUKWILA, WA 98188 SOUTHLAND CORP PO BOX 711 DALLAS, TX 75221 VIEWCREST WPIG L L C 1120 E TERRACE ST 300 SEATTLE, WA 98122 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14201 INTERURBAN AVE S 14220 INTERURBAN AVE.S 14275 INTERURBAN AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14301 INTERURBAN AVE S 14309 INTERURBAN AVE S 14406 59TH AVE S TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 14438 59TH AVE S 14501 INTERURBAN AVE S 5906 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6234 S 143RD PL 6238 S 143RD PL 6275 S 143RD PL TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6350 S 143RD ST 6406 S 143RD ST 6410 S 143RD ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6411 S 143RD ST 6421 S 143RD PL 6421 S 143RD ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TENANT TENANT TENANT 6424 S 143RD PL 6427 S 143RD ST 6437 S 144TH ST TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 • • TENANT TENANT TENANT 6439 S 143RD ST 6440 S 143RD ST 6440 S 144TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 TUKWILA, WA 98168 () U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS O FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMI E ION () DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIF () () () () () () () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL P'NU 1 CS.. i ►UN AUtNlT () U.S. DEPT F H.U.D. () NATIO INE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE N DEV. ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. TIDEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL. • SEND CHKUST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES () BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD () FIRE DISTRICT *11 () FIRE DISTRICT 82 () KC. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DMSION () KC. DEPT OF PARKS & REC () KC. ASSESSORS OFFICE SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES () TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT O TUKWILA UBRARY () RENTON UBRARY () KENT UBRARY () CITY OF SEATTLE UBRARY O INVEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY UGHT () PUGET SOUND ENERGY () HIGHUNE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT &T CABLE SERVICES () KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CRY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBUC WORKS () FIRE () POLICE () FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR O CITY CLERK UTILITIES CRY AGENCIES () HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE (.) KC. DEV & ENVIR SERVICESSEPA INFO CNTR �Q K.C. TRANSIT DMSION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) KC. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT 020 ( ) WATER DISTRICT 0125 () CITY OF RENTON PUBUC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR- LAKERIDGE SEWERIWATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT ( ) CITY OF SEAATAC () CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKVNLA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS () CRY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU () STRATEGIC PUNNING OFFICE' • NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW IC C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM ( ) FISHERIES PROGRAM ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P :MDMTNISTRATNEWFORMSCHKUST.DOC ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY () SOUND TRANSIT () DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COAUTION 'SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON OUINAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CLTUKWILA.VVA.US.VWWV SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on of mailing) f Ecology Environmental Review Section /'Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) — NO NE *Any parties of record - /VD N C. • 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 ofApplicatlon for 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: Mall 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 Attornev General: Permit Data Sheet • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3-part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) . • . .. . Shoreline Permit Application Form (filed 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 dc 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: ADMIMST RATTVEIFORMSCHICUST.DOC Page 1 oil 11.;* 4.4 433 , • 4it /-11 <CM WA ' 14, 4, • 4k. A aramoommosots 450ft N CityGIS Copyright @, 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein is the proprietary property of the contributor supplied under license and may not be approved except as licensed I Digital Map Products. http://maps.digitalmancentral.com/production/CityGIS/v07 01 034/indexA.html 08/02/2007 OWNER_NAME OWNER_ADDRESS OWNER_CITY OWNER _STA1 OWNER _ZI ANDREW,LORI L SUTTON 14237 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 BAUM,PAMELA J 14305 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 CALIBUR MORTGAGE GROUP INC 6412 S 144TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 DAVIS,ROBERT L 14246 59TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 DBSI FAIRWAY LLC 519999 12426 W EXPLORER DR 100 BOISE ID 83713 EBENEZER CHURCH OF GOD IN C PO BOX 18154 SEATTLE WA 98118 ENGSTROM,DONALD GLENN 6400 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 FOUTY,CHARLES L & ELAINE J 6426 S 144TH ST SEATTLE WA 98168 FOUTY,WILLIAM A 6423 S 143RD PL SEATTLE WA 98168 GLENN,BONNIE J 6420 123RD AVE SE BELLEVUE WA 98006 GROSSE,ROGER L 14252 59TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 HINKSON,LESLIE & JANET 14628 SE 216TH ST KENT WA 98042 INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES INC PO BOX 1716 AUBURN WA 98071 IVES,HELEN K 14247 56TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 JOHN C RADOVICH LLC 2835 82ND AVE SE 300 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 JUSTIN,JAMES L & GAIL ANN 3110 N GOVE ST TACOMA WA 98407 KING COUNTY CORRECTIONS GLD 6417 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 KING,JAMES T JR & CHARLENE 9500 RAINIER AVE S 207 SEATTLE WA 98118 KNUDSON,GERALD C 6402 S 144TH ST 1 TUKWILA WA 98168 MARIO GALLIANO LLC 16435 MILITARY RD S SEATAC WA 98188 MASCHMEDT,ANTHONY & ABBEY 2326 14TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98144 MCINTOSH,KATHY J 2625 SW NEVADA CT PORTLAND OR 97219 METRO LAND DEVELOPMENT INC PO BOX 88028 TUKWILA WA 98130 MEZGEBU,TEWODROS Z 7421 S 116TH PL SEATTLE WA 98178 OBRIEN,TIMOTHY 14217 S 59TH TUKWILA WA 98188 PORTHEN,RONALD V 14254 59TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98188 PORTHEN,WILMA R 14254 59TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 RAHIMAN,PETER 8963 49TH AVE W MUKILTEO WA 98275 RED HOUSE PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 88070 SEATTLE WA 98138 RICKS,TIMOTHY B 14228 59TH AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 RITTIKAIDACHAR,SUPALUK 14250 59TH AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 SANFT,LOUIE & ADOLPH 6120 52ND AVE S SEATTLE WA 98118 SEGALE,MARIO A PO BOX 88046 SEATTLE WA 98138 SIMWEST CAPITAL LLC 600 UNIVERSITY ST 1925 SEATTLE WA 98101 SIVERTSEN,DAVID R 5703 230TH ST SW MOUNTLAKE TERRACE WA 98043 SOUTHLAND CORP PO BOX 711 DALLAS TX 75221 P OWNER_NAME OWNER_ADDRESS OWNER_CITY OWNER _STA1 OWNER _ZI STRAY,FREDERICK M & FRANCES K 12805 NE 80TH ST KIRKLAND WA 98033 TUKWILA CITY OF 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD TUKWILA WA 98188 VIEWCREST WPIG L L C 1120 E TERRACE ST 300 SEATTLE WA 98122 TENANT 14201 INTERURBAN AVE S SEATTLE WA 98168 TENANT 14220 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14275 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14301 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14309 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14406 59TH AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14438 59TH AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 14501 INTERURBAN AVE S TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 5906 S 144TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6234 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6238 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6275 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6350 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6406 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6410 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6411 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6421 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6421 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6424 S 143RD PL TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6427 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6437 S 144TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6439 S 143RD ST SEATTLE WA 98168 TENANT 6440 S 143RD ST TUKWILA WA 98168 TENANT 6440 S 144TH ST TUKWILA WA 98168 P • Print Map Page King County • Home News Services Parcel Map and Data ,41, j3ti690.'tt£fJ 336517!897 336SY71940 t* 33609/945 � . ` , , - S ta3/it SY --- --• 0002800007- I ' ,''..336599:460'' \ - °"" ,°3365901440` \ r '- "', ti-.., a • �' 3365901665 J. 3305971450` ): / 33G5Y9:05 ,,' 336697!445 � 336;901!07 33609/./35 It 336590745 � 3165971697 330599!4 ?0 1 336590!715 336990!687 Tukwila \„ 336599//10 0 33591355.; ; 336597/475 \ti • 59 r336599/49.5 \I 336573 346\ 33G 1J ?89 7 %1 3309918o S 144Ti1 Sr . _ S. 33659771400 i, \\ 777 ?39lm3 :3 :; 90,84! . 33E699/339 `y x`• ; N.;,,, 33G5YOti1;iG 3365901651 (C) 2006 ►4ng County §;, Et. 01 - ''0,. .0*--- _• . ,4300/345, Parcel Number 0002800007 Address Zipcode Taxpayer KNUDSON JERRY The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County." • Comments King County 1 GIS Center! News 1 Services 1 Comments 1 Search Search By visiting this and other King County web pages, you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site. The details. Page 1 of 1 http://www5.metrokc.gov/parcelviewer/Print_Process.asp 07/27/2007 Susan Brock - mailing labels correction 01 S 143rd Street _Page ,1 From: Jaimie Reavis To: Susan Brock Date: 07/26/2007 9:43 am Subject: mailing labels correction - 6301 S 143rd Street Hi Susan, I have a project that includes 5 parcels. Below is the list of parcel numbers that I will need mailing labels for: 3365901665 3365901680 3365901685 3365901690 0002800007 Thanks for your help! Jaimie • Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 RECEIVED. JUN 19 2001 DEVELOP 1MENT Site Design Concept The Landmark building is designed to provide commercial business space for manufacturing, service retail, general offices, and Tight distribution uses. Its location on Interurban provides an excellent location for service businesses, Tight manufacturing and flex/office uses. The project being on the transportation corridor is an ideal location for businesses that wish to locate north of Southcenter where access to Seattle is simple. The combination of location and allowed uses by zoning makes it a great location for creating a project design based on the utilization of the urban street concept. The urban street concept is based on providing a wide sidewalk in front of the building, a semi covered pedestrian pathway adjacent to the building. This simulates the experience of walking along a street where the buildings are two stories in height that you would find in a traditional commercial area in a city. This type of design is based on creating a secondary street parallel with the arterial along which drive up parking is provided along the walk. This enables users to pull up to the curb and access all of the businesses along the street. The site is currently shown with 83 parking stalls of which 30 are located in the rear for employees. This parking count, based on Tukwila Code, would allow 21,600 s.f. of office and 18,000 s.f. of manufacturing use. For additional information see the attached site plan. Building Design Concept The building as purposed is designed for multi tenant use. This goal is reflected in the building layout, the type of truck service provided the building height, and street facade. The street facade features a main entry element and individual entries . at the ground floor to each tenant space. The building height is about 30 feet and has windows at the second floor area where offices will be constructed. The design utilizes several different architectural elements to create a design that will be visually interesting and compatible with the various uses and will support the tenant sign program. The building is designed according to site conditions. This results in the west face of the building becoming the public side and where entrances will be located and the opposite east side becoming the service side where dock high and drive in access is provided. Landmark Building Proiect Description 6/18/07 Page Two This orientation provides convenient access to 143rd Street and Place for service vehicles and screens this area from view when traveling the arterial. Based on the traffic flow, it is designed for service vehicle to enter from the south and exit to the north. The building is designed as a partial two story structure with of IIIB construction for B, F -1, and S -1 occupancies with sprinklers. As located on the site based on the most restrictive use, the total allowable area is 45,000 s.f. The actual area will be less than 39,600 s.f. because the amount of second floor area is controlled by parking. The principal exterior material will be painted concrete. This surface will be articulated with reveals, windows, canopies, sun screens, a change in materials, and changes in color. The fenestration along the arterial side combined with the with sun screens, pedestrian canopies surface modulation and changes in parapet height will be used to create a fa9ade that will be a Landmark for the users. For additional information see the attached building elevations. Existing Site Conditions The existing site is undeveloped and used primarily as a construction storage yard. This yard is unpaved. Within the fenced area there are two frame single story buildings in poor condition. Drainage from the storage area runs to the north, south and east. Drainage to the south runs onto S. 143rd Place and flows west along the shoulder to point to the area formerly Maule Ave. Storm water on Maule Ave. flows south to the public main hole on S. 144th St. into a public catch basin. This catch basin connects to a 36 inch diameter storm drain line that conveys water directly to a flap at the river The run off from the north part of the site flows into site catch basins and offsite to the north through a ditch to the river. These catch basins also pick up drainage from the south half of the street. A single story storage building, and a two story frame house and a paved parking lot occupy the east 80 feet of the site. Drainage from the parking lot flows north into the public street (S. 143rd St.) The west part of the site flows to the east toward the vacated Maule Ave along with the area east of the former street. This water drains to the south as well along Maule Ave. The parts of the site which are not paved, graveled, occupied with building or inside the storage yard are covered with vegetation. This vegetation consists of grass, decorative trees, evergreens, and scrubs. Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 Page Three The existing site is separated from other uses on three sides by streets and on the fourth side abuts another light industrial use, storage. The property west of the site across Interurban is partially developed. About 60% is a wooded hillside that slopes up from Interurban. The other area has three older houses along the street. The street north and south of the site separate the Landmark site from other industrial uses. To the north of the site is a flex building designed by Lance Mueller & Associates (LMA) that is occupied with uses similar to what is proposed in this building and to the east of it, the Becker Trucking Freight Terminal. Across 143rd Place to the south is undeveloped property that fronts on Interurban Ave. The part of the property originally was separated from the building to the east by Maule Ave. which has since been abandoned. This property is now part of the parcel on which a light industrial tilt up building now occupies. This building is used as a warehouse and has some office use. To the east of the site is a storage yard that is used by the industrial building that is further east and a house which fronts on S. 143rd PI. For additional information see the attached survey from BRH, aerial photo and the photo packet submitted. Existing Streets This site is located on a major arterial street, Interurban Ave, on the east and bounded on the north and south by two dead end streets. The south dead end street extends about another 500 feet to the east and serves secondary access to six businesses and three houses. As a result, very little traffic is generated. The street to the North is S. 143rd St. which is located in a 40 foot right of way. This street generally drains to the shoulder and has a pavement section of about 24 feet in width. In the project area on the north side there is an open ditch and on the south side two catch basins on private property that collect the run off. Interurban Ave is at the west side of the site and is a four lane arterial with a center tum lane across the entire frontage. The east side has no sidewalk, curb or gutter. From the centerline of the left tum lane to the lot line is about 55 feet. The east edge of paving of Interurban is about 22 feet west of the west lot line. Drainage from the street in this area flows to the west across the roadway to catch basins. The street to the south is S. 143rd PI. which has a 26 foot right of way. The paving width in the right of way is about 10 to 12 feet. Storm drainage in the area of the site flows to the shoulders and to Maule.Ave. Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 Page Four See BRH survey and attached aerials and photo packet. Existing Utilities The site is currently served by utilities at S. 143rd St., former Maule Ave., and S. 143rd PI. Fire hydrants are currently accessible from both streets, sewer is available at the former Maule Ave., and power gas and phone at S. 143rd PI. The site at the north has storm catch basins that flow to the north of site. The majority of the current run off flows to a public catch basin at Maule Ave. and S. 144th St. See BRH survey drawing and site plan. Proposed Street Improvements As part of the project, the applicant proposes improvement on all three streets. These improvements are based on the existing conditions. Interurban Ave. currently has no sidewalk or gutter. The applicant proposes installing a pavement shim as needed along with curb and gutter and maintaining the existing drainage flow to the west. Frontage improvements shown comply with the City's current design for interurban improvements. S. 143rd St. along the south side has no sidewalk or gutter. In lieu of a dedication of right of way, the applicant proposes constructing a public walk on an easement granted to the City along with the gutter. Catch basins on site would be relocated to the gutter line and drainage from the street would continue as currently flowing. As part of the work a pavement shim would be provided to increase the pavement width to 28 feet along the frontage The purpose of locating the sidewalk on the easement is to allow the Owner to develop the property without reducing the buildable area but still meeting the 12' -6" building set back requirement for a second side street in the Zoning Code and the five foot landscaping requirement. At S. 143rd PI., the applicant purposes to dedicate 14 feet of property along the project frontage so a 28 foot roadway section along with 6 foot sidewalk with gutter can be constructed. To develop the street section, a paving shim would be provided along the south side of the street and a shim to the new gutter line would be provided at the north. At the north side of the street the gutter line would flow to the west to the current low spot and a CB would be installed and connect to the public system at Maule Ave. and S. 144th St. Storm drainage from the small south side paving shim would continue to surface drain to Maule through an asphalt swale along the south edge of the right of way. Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 Page Five The street sections at S. 143rd and S. 143rd PI. are currently under review by the soils engineer. Based on the recommendation of Jake Traffic the streets sections should be designed for light commercial traffic. The daily trip frequency for light truck trips is based on the land use for businesses east of the site, is 13 for 2 to 3 axle trucks and 10 for 4 to 6 axle trucks based on LUC 110. Business park trips that this development generates are included in this estimate. In order to accommodate this, the applicant may need to overlay the existing paving or do other modifications to achieve appropriate section. A recommendation for the pavement section within the right of way is included in the supplemental soils report letter of 10/25/2006 which is attached. See attached site plan for walks, gutters and new paving areas off site. On Site Storm Drainage The applicant proposes that the storm drainage system flows to the public manhole at Maule Ave. and S. 144th St. as the majority of the site currently does. This would require the applicant to construct a 30 inch line between S. 143rd PI. south in the existing Interurban right of way prior to building sidewalk, curb and gutters. On site drainage from the project would be collected into an underground ,vault at the southwest corner of the site. The vault would have one camber for treatment and a separate camber for detention. The majority of the roof drainage and a small portion of paving drainage at the northeast portion of the site would be collected and discharged to the existing street drainage system on S. 143rd. Ave. An area of roof equal in run off rate to the parking lot at the northeast corner of the site that currently runs on to the street is proposed to connect to the existing site drainage system that flows north without detention. This enables the roof to be drained efficiently and maintain the current run off patterns for the site. As part of the supplemental soils investigation, the engineer evaluated the possibility of infiltration on this site for roof water. He found the site is not acceptable. This information is contained is the supplemental report dated 10/25/2006 which is attached. See attached schematic utility and drainage plan for additional information. Traffic Generation Jake Traffic Engineering has reviewed the property and determined the ITE land use designation for this site is based on the C /LI zoning is most likely BP 770 "Business Park ". The AM peak hour trips for this project are 54 and the PM peak hour trips are 99. Based on the capacity of Interurban Ave and its distribution to connecting arterials no significant impacts are expected. Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 Page Six Jake Traffic has also reviewed the trips along S. 143rd St. and PI. Of the two streets S. 143rd has extremely low traffic flow. Since the project is at the head of the dead end street, new traffic will have little effect on the existing businesses to the east See attached Trip Generation Report. Project Entrances The project to be functional as an urban street requires access from S. 143rd St. and the ability to exit to 143rd PI. In an ideal situation, traffic heading north along Interurban needs to be able to go by the site and then turn right on to S. 143rd St. then into the site and park in the first available space or right in front of the door of a business. To accommodate this, the proposed development plan shows a driveway to the project across the street from the existing driveway into Fairway Center. Traffic traveling north also has the option of entering S. 143rd PI. Jake Traffic has reviewed the location of the site entry drive on S. 143rd Pl. and sees no traffic conflict because of the extremely limited traffic and the fact that the entry is for passenger vehicle and other short wheel base delivery trucks. In a similar manner, traffic heading south ideally needs to go by the site and turn left on to S. 143rd PI. then left onto the site at the existing Maule Ave. entry. This allows visitors and occupants when traveling south along Interurban to identify the address, enter the site and park near the business entry. However, after Interurban street improvement, this will no longer be possible. Delivery trucks servicing the site will enter primarily from S. 143rd PI. and exit to S. 143rd St. since this is the most efficient backing direction for a small semi trailer truck. These larger vehicles will then be entering Interurban Ave at the S. 143rd St. intersection which limits any conflicts with passenger cars entering the site at S. 143rd St. and S. 143rd PI. The four purposed drive ways have little or no conflict with existing driveway. Part of the reason is the alignment with existing drive and the fact that the probability of traffic turning into the site traveling from the east is extremely low since it is a dead end street. Based on Jake Traffic's initial review, all driveways have adequate visibility for the low speed and should function safely Building Use The building is currently being constructed on a speculative basis. Present plans call for the second floor to be used for office. and the lower floor to be used as light industrial, support offices. Parking currently is based on about 21,600 s.f. of office and about 18,000 s.f. of manufacturing. We expect much of the manufacturing area will be used as storage by some of the tenants. Landmark Building Project Description 6/18/07 Page Seven Parking, as provided, limits the amount of retail use within the building and prohibits its use as a restaurant. If, however, service retail uses occur, they would result in some of the manufacturing area being converted to warehouse, which would make more parking available. As a result of this change 9 more parking stalls would become available. This would allow all of the lower office area of approximately 10,000 s.f. to be used as service retail. NK -CD -1 /LANDMARK- BLDG -2.doc (LMA #06-102) CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplanO.ci.tukwila.wa.us R t77 AID 'JUN 19 2001 C DEVELOPMENT " ' SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY .Permits Plus TYPE P-SEPA Planner: J.—dim, P Reavi ^ s File Number: �' —O Application Complete (Date: 7//d/207) Project File Number: 1,07 — 0 Li I Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: LANDMARK BUILDING LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. East of Interurban Avenue between S. 143rd and S. 143rd P1. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 336590 - 1665 -08; 336590 - 1680 -09; 336590- 1685 -04; 336590 - 1690 -07; 000280 - 0007 -04 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: Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects Contact: Bob Fadden Address: 130 Lakeside, Suite 250 Seattle, WA 98122 Phone: (206) 325 -2553 E -mail: lb adder a�(imueller.com FAX: (206) 328 -0554 SignatuYe. cm-Log Date: 1C7 - 1 - G7 P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \ SEPAApp-06-07.doc June 6, 2007 rATI; itr' wAS1ifra:Til? Cot k.,y or KISS: • CITY OF TU.KWILA nepar(ment of Community Perriapment 630t1 Sour/wooer bouteyrird Tukwila H'A 98•188 • reic.pitoirw g06).431-367# FA (206) 431-3665 tttklzlan +r%ri,tuAyyit4.trr!. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY 11 the undersigned briny duly stsom and upon ',alit states',$ follows' t a:tt the :tomtit owner of the property whir iv i, thmsuhject of this nppticatiiftt.. Ali statements contained in the Applications have been prepared by me or my agents atafare true and correct to the hest of my knokkledge• The application is being submitted with my kn tw.teduc anti Consent. i.)wr,er avant$ Cite C•ityy+ts em ittvices, a sts to •i rs, o t ton or of er osentativ s the right to ••tterup. n pwnet'x enl proltcny, located at CFR 'T7 / ?$%1� -[a 9 10 g tot tote purpose of application review• for the timtled time net Jsar, tit cknnpicte'hat ; omosa. JUN 1 91007 OCV OPT NT i"twner agrees to hold the, C. hornless rift My his or d titoge to persons or propett }" tx- cwting on the privIsle property during the. t; itv•c entry upon the prripeny; unless tiro Itt s tit &rave is the•rcsuh of Maude ttcgligcnce of lire City. The tits stall. at 'WA discretion . cancel the application without refund of frees, if the applicant dugs not rend to specific requests rc t items on the "Complete Applicatitm Checklist" within ninety (90) days. 11`it t:'t' I El) at T22rl ... lefty), vl// ' _._,islateI.on _k _____ ._ _.• 20. / S-.E.i�_{2_ K udsoA) I14int \anei7 IP 4o a . S:, 14411 tin Mk tray personally' ..0 ed lscl'nre toe the 1i,fr46111;; insltN lf.-,r,.:''' flYli 'I ii 10 tt honed tltrz.44, ?w. '1.1" l • J•• :J L;1 tytii`µojl r t F;eii ME i'r 'Ill _ 6 _ , [)Al' or Z....Tell: 4C) 'll'iL. CP.f.,, ,Y ti(11 AI 1 °. Pl 11,1 alts In e — .; 0. Itwidimk nl ...._. de / � Av` l'7?- N l A (�Vt - '',1 Nlt Canttriksion cdriirr: On_ - .6 4.. RECEivED /'Illy .,tits tea, z- me krnn'n us he the individual who executed 1 tttc: seine is bon L %tau:li r) net and deed for the uses and purposes flt. A 1C ■ RECEIVED JUN 1 3 2007 LANCE MUELLER & ASsor 1 1 COMPLETE APPLICATION CHECKLIST The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing by the Public Works Department and the Department of Community Development. Please contact each Department if you feel that certain items are not applicable to your project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS MAY BE REQUIRED. The initial application materials allow project review to begin and vest the applicant's rights. However, the City may require additional information as needed to establish consistency with development standards. City staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670 (Department of Community Development) and 206 -433 -0179 (Department of Public Works). CO Pay' Check items - submitted :. with application . Information Required. JU N 1 9 May be waived in unusual cases, upon approval of both Public: Works: and Planning COm�� QFyFLOt- APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. V 2. Completed ESA Screening Checklist, SEPA Environmental Checklist and drawings (5 copies). ✓ 3. One set of all plans reduced to 8 1/2" by 11" or 11" by 17 ". 4. Application Fee $590. Affi u » 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA review. — Ai PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: See ruDiic Hearing Design 6. Payment of a $365 notice board fee to FastSigns Tukwila or Provide a 4' x 4' public notice board on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received (see Public Notice Sign Specifications Handout). Review Application 7. Payment of a $105 mailing label fee to the City of Tukwila or Provide two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (residents or businesses) within 500 feet of the subject property. Note: Each unit in multiple- family buildings—e.g. apartments, condos, trailer parks —must be included (see Public Notice Mailing Label Handout). 8. If providing own labels King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 ft. of the subject lot. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS: 9. Vicinity Map with site location. NA 10. Provide four (4) copies of any sensitive area studies such as wetland or geotechnical reports if needed per Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (TMC 18.45). See the Geotechnical Report Guidelines and Sensitive Area Special Study Guidelines (online at www.ci .tukwila.wa.us /dcd/dcdplan.htm) for additional information. 440.4 jr 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \ SEPAApp-06-07.doc June 6, 2007 1001 �y. Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -0 Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling, clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the existing ground surface of the earth (TMC 18.06.370). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 © Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3) 2 -0 Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (18.06.145). Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 YES Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4) 3 -0 Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly mark the soil from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter 18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response. NO Continue to Question 4 -0 YES - Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5) 4 -0 Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank. Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site during construction. Please circle appropriate response. 0 Continue to Question 5 -0 YES - Continue to Question 5 -0 5 -0 Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new well, change in water, withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. - O)Continue to Question 6 -0 YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \ SEPAApp-06-07.doc June 6, 2007 City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part A (continued) 6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. 67-0 Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. NO)Continue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared 3 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percnt of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. Continue to Question 1 -3 YES - Continue to Question 1 -3 1 -3 ' Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development. 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) Continue to Question 1-4 • City of Tukwila E 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) Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 2 -1 Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. (N15)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 oPBlack 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) . 1. City of Tukwila AO 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. 0) 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. O - 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. • CRT) Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 City of Tukwila Et Screening Checklist 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. 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. Oi)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: LANDMARK BUILDING (LMA #06 -102) 2. Name of Applicant: Lance Mueller & Associates /Architects 3. Date checklist prepared: June 12, 2007 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Start construction January 2008 Agency Comments 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Tenant permit work inside building. 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Soils Report — Attached. Level One Environmental Study. 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for govemmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Construction of Interurban Avenue. Roadway improvements. P:\Planning Forrns\Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 1 • • 9. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Environmental Determination (SEPA) Design Review 8, Approval, Grading Permit, Utility Permits, Street Improvement Permits, Site Development Permit, Building Permit, Tenant Improvement Permit, Plumbing Permit, Mechanical Permit, Electrical Permit and Boundary Line Adjustment (Lot Consolidation). 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. See attached Project Description. 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 attached legal, site survey photo, and vicinity map. 12. Does this proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? No B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: The site has several mounds of earth stored on the site. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 4/ 5% along the transition down from Interurban Ave.. Other areas -are sloped 1 to 2 %o for drainage. P:\Planning Forms\Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 2 • • 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. Site is not used for farming purposes. Soils are gravelly silty sand; fine sand and fine silty sand. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. All fill will come from approved off site barrow. The goal, at this time, is to balance the site and import material for the subbase at the paving and free draining materials below the floor slab and the building footing. At this time import quantities are not determined. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. Erosion could occur during construction. After completion all areas will be planted or be impervious. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 15% of the site will be pervious. l.__ -- --- h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The applicant will provide temporary erosion control during construction that will meet City standards. 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. During construction, emissions from vehicles and construction equipment will occur. After completion, emissions from gas heating equipment and utilities will occur. Quantities are unknown. P:\Planning Forms'Applications'.SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 3 1 b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Comply with heating equipment emission standards. To mitigate dust during construction, follow best construction practices and pave vehicle areas early in the construction sequence. 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 if flows into. The Green River within a 1/4 mile, but over 300 feet away from the site. 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 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 Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No P:\Planning Forms\Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 • • 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. No. The site doesn't infiltrate well enough to discharge even clean roof water into the ground — see Soils Report. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the systems are expected to serve. None c. Water Runoff (including storm water) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Water from the roof and paving areas will be collected into an underground system. Detention and water quality features needed will be provided. All drainage will go to the public street system. See attached drainage report. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts. See attached civil drawings, which show proposed system, how runoff will be controlled, and impacts are mitigated. P:\Planning Form■ApplicationsZEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 5 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X Deciduous tree: Alder, Maple, Aspen, other X Evergreen tree: Fir, Cedar, Pine, other X_ Shrubs X Grass Pasture Crop or grain et soil plants: Cattail, Buttercup, Bulrush, Skunk, Cabbage, other — See biologist report Water Plants: Water Lily, Eelgrass, Milfoil, other See biologist report Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered Existing grass, shrubs and trees will be moved, as a result of street, building, and landscape improvements. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None observed at the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: 2% of the site will be planted with vegetation that provide habitat or be a food source for birds and migratory wild life. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk, Heron, Eagle, Songbirds, other: Mammals: Deer, Bear, Elk, Beaver, other; Rabbits Fish: Bass, Salmon, Trout, Herring, Shellfish, other Other: Osprey, River Otter, Coyote b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None observed. PAPlanning Forms\Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 6 c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Pacific Flyway d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Provide plantings conforming to Green River Ordinance. 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. Electricity will be used for lighting, cooling, convenience outlet and perhaps manufacturing. Natural gas will be used for heating and be available as an energy source to heat water. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The building will comply with the State Energy Code for heated buildings at the office areas and semi heated building requirement elsewhere. Canopies and sunscreens are provided to shade windows. 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. None 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None anticipated for health hazard. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None are required. P:\Planning Forms ■Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 7 b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic equipment, operation, other)? Traffic and aircraft noise. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noise consisting of vehicles, equipment, and tools will occur and be limited to work hours. After completion, vehicle noise will be generated and noise from HVAC equipment. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Limit HVAC noise to standards permitted by Ordinance by using parapets, low noise units, or sound alternating techniques. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? CThe is currently a construction storage ay d�T.he adjacent property to the east is a storage yard and an industrial building. Property north and south of the site, across S. 143rd St. and S. 143rd PI. is developed either as distribution, a truck terminal, or office/commercial space. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. See survey — There is a house and several sheds and —a garage in various states of repair. d. Will any existing structures be demolished? If so, what? All structures shown on survey. These structures consist of a small house and a series of sheds and garages. P:\Planning FonnsApplications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 8 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site C /LI f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. C /LI If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify: No .1. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? J• The number of people working in the building would vary depending on the tenants. We would expect more than 25 but less than 100. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Two people who live in the house. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Conform to the City Design Guidelines, Planning Code, and good design practices. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None P:.Planning Forms ApplicationsZEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 9 • b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. The existing house is a non conforming use in the zone and will be demolished. The loss would be one middle income unit. 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? The parapet of the buildin ong Interurban would be the highest point at abou 39 feet. The principal materials would be glass and articulated painted concrete. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Provide buffer landscaping and a building design that will be appropriate for the streetscape along Interurban. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of Tight or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The building will have walkway and parking lot lighting for safety and security. The security lighting would occur from dawn to dusk. The vehicles on the site will generat Ile ght from their headlights. This will be mitigated at the parking area by the low landscaping. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. All lighting will be controlled through the use of photometrics, baffles and plants. This will limit the lighting effects to the site and not result in any safety hazard. P:\Planning Forms Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 10 1 c. What existing off-site sources of Tight or glare may affect your proposal? None. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The site design, landscape design and fixture design will prevent glare and light from affecting neighboring property. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Walking on the River Trail. The Tukwila Golf Course is within a 1/2 mile and the City Rec. Center is 1 -1/2 miles away on Interurban. An amusement park is also about 1 -1/2 miles to the south of Interurban as well. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation 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: The building owner will advise the tenants of recreational facilities available. 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 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Cbis--TiD1 P:\Planning Forms Applications\SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 11 z • 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highway serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Site access is from S. 143rd Ave. and S. 143rd PI. which connects to Interurban. Interurban Ave. provides access to the site from 1 -5 and 1- 405 and Grady Way. It also connects to West Valley Highway and provides access directly. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes — 300 feet north. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 83 new stalls — none 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). Street frontage improvement will be provided at Interurban, S. 143rd Ave. and S. 143rd PI. See project narrative and attached plans. e. Will the project use (or occur in immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. See attached trip generation study. The proposed Land Use Group based on the ITE Manual is Business Park (BP 770). Peak AM trips would be 54 and peak PM trips 49. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Contribute traffic impact fee to City. No impact on the existing street corridor is anticipated that would require a project specific improvement to a roadway or intersection. P:1Planning Forms\Applications\,SEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 12 • 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. Normal fire, car and police service will be needed. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Contribute impact fee if needed. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural pas, water, refuse service, . telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: Internet and Optic fiber. 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. The electric and gas service is provided by Puget Sound Energy. Phone by US West. Water, Sewer, & Storm Drainage by The City of Tukwila. All services are available currently at the site except storm drainage. The applicant to connect to the public drainage in S. 144th Ave. will extend a line south from S. 143rd PI. in the Interurban right -of -way to the public manhole. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decisi Signature: Date Submitted 10-1f5-t7 NON- PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND , ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). NK/LAN DMARK- BLDG.CHK P:\Planning FormsApplicationslSEPAAPP.doc April 4, 2006 13 • Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting A Tem . n Company Landmark Development Group P.O. Box 2010 Milton, Washington 98354 Attention: Mr. Brett Jacobsen likECE! VED FJUN 1.9 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Project No. 81052407 25 October 2006 Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Engineering Considerations Proposed Warehouse 6301 South 143`d Street Tukwila, Washington Dear Brett: In accordance with your 18 October 2006 authorization, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) has prepared this letter presenting additional geotechnical engineering considerations regarding surface water infiltration, pavement section design, and floor subgrade preparation. This letter supplements our 27 March 2006 report. This letter is an instrument of service and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of Landmark Development Group, and its agents, for specific application to this project location and stated purpose. Surface Water Infiltration Each of the explorations completed for our original site evaluation disclosed a surficial horizon of fill material that ranged in thickness from approximately 4 inches to 3 feet. The fill generally consisted of medium dense, moist to wet, brown and gray, silty sand with a varied gravel content. Brick clasts were observed within the fill at the test pit TP -1 location, while the fill at the test pit TP -3 location consisted of crushed rock. Some roots and scattered organic materials were observed within the fill on an inconsistent basis. The fill material was underlain by loose to medium dense fine sand and silty fine sand, as well as soft to stiff silt and fine sandy silt. It is our opinion that surface water infiltration on the site would not be feasible from the geotechnical perspective given the relatively fine grained nature of the site soils. It has been our experience that the likelihood of successful surface water infiltration is increased with clean sand and gravel soils. The site is characterized by silty fine sand and fine sandy silt; these soils are typically characterized by a relatively low permeability and the potential for permeability reduction over time. 18905 33rd Avenue West #117, Lynnwood, WA 98036 425-771-3304 Fax: 425 - 771 -3549 • • Concrete Slab -on -Grade Support Criteria LDG Tukwila Warehouse Project No. 81052407 25 October 2006 Page 2 Our 27 March 2006 reports presents recommendations for slab -on -grade floor subgrade including a discussion regarding the use of a plastic sheeting vapor barrier. In clarification, we recommend the use of a vapor retarder beneath the interior slabs. We recommend using a puncture - resistant proprietary product such as RUFCO 3000B, Vapor Block VB 10, Stego Wrap, or an approved equivalent that is classified as a Class A vapor retarder in accordance with ASTM E 1745. The vapor retarder seams and laps should be sealed with a tape product that is approved by the vapor retarder manufacturer. To avoid puncturing of the vapor retarder, construction equipment should not be allowed to drive over any vapor retarder material. The slab designer and slab contractor should refer to ACI 302 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. Pavement Section Recommendations Recommended on -site asphalt pavement sections are presented in our March 2006 geotechnical engineering report. We understand that it will necessary to construct improvements to portions of South 143' Street and South 143` Place on the north and south sides of the site, respectively. Lance Mueller Architects provided us with anticipated passenger vehicle and truck traffic information for the adjacent streets. Described as "light industrial", the traffic loads are relatively light (both streets are dead ends and do not receive thru traffic). Based upon conditions observed at the exploration completed on the site, the road subgrade soils are anticipated to generally consist of fine sand and silty fine sand; these soils are typically rated as offering poor to fair subgrade support characteristics with an estimated California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of about 7. In order to use this CBR value, the soil used beneath the pavement must have support characteristics equivalent to these soils and must be placed under engineering monitored conditions. This estimated CBR value is based upon a comparison of soil samples retrieved from the explorations with published data; performance of a CBR test was not within our authorized scope of services for the project. The following recommendations assume that the pavement section subgrade and any structural fill will be prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in our March 2006 report. The top 12 inches beneath the pavement section should be compacted to a 'minimum of 95 percent compaction using ASTM D 1557 (modified Proctor) as a standard. We referenced the City of Tukwila Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards (Second Edition, Revision 1, 2005). As such, specifications for pavements and crushed rock base course should conform to specifications presented in Division 9, Materials, of the 2002 WSDOT Standard Specification for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Publication M41 -10). We recommend the following pavement section for the street improvements: 81052407, 25 October 2006 Material Class B Asphalt Concrete Crushed Rock Base Course Class B Gravel Base Minimum Thickness (inches) 3 4 (compacted thickness) 6 (compacted thickness) LDG Tukwila Warehouse Project No. 81052407 25 October 2006 Page 3 Crushed aggregate base course should meet the requirements presented in Section 9- 03.9(3) of the 2002 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Asphalt concrete pavement should be Class B as described in Sections 5 -04 and 9 -03.8 of the Standard Specifications. Class B gravel base should comply with Specification 9.03.12(1)B. We recommend compacting the crushed rock base course and gravel base to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. It would be feasible to substitute Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) for the crushed rock base course. Should this substitution be made, we recommend placing a minimum 3 inch thickness of ATB. Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) should conform to Sections 4 -06.3, 5 -04, and 9 -03.6 of the Standard Specifications. In the event that the road subgrade preparation is completed during wet weather or under wet site conditions, improved pavement section performance would be realized by placing a separation geotextile between the subgrade and the gravel base; the geotextile will reduce the migration of fine grained soil particles from the subgrade up into the crushed rock. We recommend the use of Mirafi 140N, or equivalent, for this purpose. CLOSURE We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you, and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this letter or other aspects of the project with you at your convenience. • Respectfully submitted, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. David C. Williams, L.E.G.c Associate Distribution: Addressee () 81052407, 25 October 2006 John E. Zipper, P.E. Principal La IKS 1 /24/01 • ZZA Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Pigy Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting A lrerracon Company agii&mkoz9 Landmark Development Group P.O. Box 2010 Milton, Washington 98354 Attention: Mr. Brett Jacobsen • RECEIVED 'JUN 19 20011 DEVELOPMENT J -2407 27 March 2006 Subject: Preliminary Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation Proposed Warehouse 6301 South 143rd Street Tukwila, Washington Dear Brett: Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. (ZZA) is pleased to present herein a copy of the above - referenced report. This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and preliminary geotechnical engineering evaluation relative to the site grading and foundation design and construction for the proposed project. Written authorization to proceed with this study was provided by Landmark Development Group on 22 February 2006. Our services have been provided in general accordance with our Scope of Services and Fee Estimate dated 22 February 2006 (P- 3228). The purpose of the study was to establish general surface and subsurface conditions at the site from which preliminary conclusions and recommendations regarding site grading and foundation design and construction could be formulated. Our scope of services included field explorations, laboratory testing, geotechnical engineering analysis, and preparation of this preliminary report. Our scope of services did not include sampling or testing of soil or water for regulated environmental contaminants. The project was in the preliminary design stages at the time this report was prepared in that the configuration and location of the proposed warehouse building had not been determined. Consequently, we made some design assumptions in our analysis. In the event of any changes in the nature, design, or location of the proposed structure, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this preliminary report should be reviewed and modified, if necessary, to reflect the changes. We recommend that ZZA be allowed the opportunity to review the plans and specifications of the project as they are developed to determine that the recommendations presented herein have been properly interpreted with respect to this project. This report is an instrument of service and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of Landmark Development Group, and its agents, for specific application to this project location and stated purpose. 18905 33rd Avenue West #117, Lynnwood, WA 98036 425 - 771 -3304 Fax: 425 -771 -3549 • LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3-2407 27 March 2006 Page 2 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is a combination of multiple developed parcels located at the southeast quadrant of the Interurban Avenue South and South 143rd Street intersection in Tukwila, Washington). The property is bordered to the east by developed properties, the south by South 143`d Place, to the southwest by the Maule Avenue South right -of -way (unimproved), and to the north by South 143`d Street. The site is irregularly shaped and has a north -south dimension of approximately 250 feet and an east -west dimension of approximately 365 feet. The proposed site improvements include: • Erection of a warehouse building that is expected to employ concrete tilt -up construction. At this time, we understand that the panel height may range from 18 to 27 feet.' The structure will employ a concrete floor slab; • Development of asphalt -paved vehicle access and parking areas around the building; • Installation of underground service utilities; and, • Structural fill placement to raise site grades slightly. SITE CONDITIONS The site conditions were evaluated in March 2006. The surface and subsurface conditions are described below, while the exploration procedures and interpretive logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory testing procedures are described in Appendix B and the results are presented on the logs in Appendix A. The proposed site development and approximate exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. Surface Conditions The western portion of the site, which is roughly triangular, served as a construction equipment and materials storage yard at the time we completed our field evaluation. One small wood -frame building was located in this portion of the site. The eastern portion of the site included a single - family residential lot, a parking lot, and small commercial property with a parking lot. The approximate locations of the buildings and pavement on the site are shown on Figure 1. The southern and central portions of the site were mostly level, but to the north the site had a slight slope downward toward South 143rd Street. According to published topographic maps of the site vicinity, the ground surface elevation is approximately 25 feet. The single- family site has some lawn and ornamental landscaping, while the remainder of the site lacks significant vegetation. We did not observe standing or flowing surface water on the site. J -2407, March 2006 ZZA Subsurface Conditions LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3 -2407 27 March 2006 Page 3 The subsurface exploration consisted of excavating five test pits (TP -1 through TP -5) at the . approximate locations shown on Figure 1. Soil descriptions presented in this report are based on the subsurface conditions encountered at specific exploration locations across the site. Variations in subsurface conditions may exist between the exploration locations and the nature and extent of variations between the explorations may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear, it may be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Review of the publication Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle and Vicinity, Washington (U.S.G.S. Map I -354, 1962) disclosed surficial mapping which characterizes the site as being underlain by alluvial deposits that may be on the order of 25 feet thick. The alluvium is described as consisting of normally consolidated sand and silt, although peat and clay may be present. The developed nature of the site suggests that fill material may be present as well. Tertiary sedimentary bedrock is exposed in a steep slope located west of the site along Interurban Avenue South. The depth to bedrock in the site vicinity is described as below approximately 10 meters, or 33 feet, in the U.S.G.S. publication Map Showing Depth to Bedrock of the Tacoma and Part of the Centralia 30'X 60' Quadrangles, Washington (Map MF -2265, 1994). Each of the explorations disclosed a surficial horizon of fill material that ranged in thickness from approximately 4 inches to 3 feet. The fill generally consisted of medium dense, moist to wet, brown and gray, silty sand with a varied gravel content. Brick clasts were observed within the fill at the test pit TP -1 location, while the fill at the test pit TP -3 location consisted of crushed rock. Some roots and scattered organic materials were observed within the fill on an inconsistent basis. It should be noted that the depth, composition, and density or consistency of fill material may vary over relatively short distances. The fill material was underlain by loose to medium dense fine sand and silty fine sand, as well as soft to stiff silt and fine sandy silt. These alluvial deposits ranged from brown to gray in color and from damp to wet. We also reviewed public data bases maintained by the Washington State Department of Ecology and the University of Washington in order to obtain logs of boring explorations completed by others in the site vicinity. A boring advanced in 1992 by Converse Consultants NW at the intersection of South 143rd Street and Interurban Avenue South disclosed the following stratigraphy: Depth (feet) Soil Condition 0 -7 7 -11 11 — 20 20 -23 23 — 26 J -2407, March 2006 Stiff sandy silt Medium stiff clayey silt Medium stiff sandy silt Medium dense silty sand Medium dense to dense sand ZZA rof miLLwa. LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3 -2407 27 March 2006 Page4 The descriptive log of this exploration did not include numerical "N" values, nor did the log indicate the depth to groundwater, if present. The Ecology web site contained logs of several borings and groundwater observation wells that were installed to a depth of 20 feet in May 2004 at 14201 Interurban Avenue South, about a block northwest of the subject site. The logs describe alluvial soil conditions similar to those encountered at the test pits ZZA completed on site and the boring described above, although the logs do not contain granular soil density or cohesive soil consistency descriptors. The logs indicate that a static water level was recorded at 9 feet below grade at the time of drilling. Groundwater Groundwater, in the form of seepage at the test pit locations, was not observed; in fact, the soil moisture content generally decreased in depth, based upon our visual observations. The moisture content of selected soils tested in our laboratory ranged from 21 to 33 percent on a dry weight basis. It should be noted that groundwater conditions and soil moisture contents are expected to vary with changes in season, precipitation, site utilization, and other on- and off -site factors. Regulated Geologic Hazards We reviewed the Parcel Report for the presented on the King County Assessor's web site, and also the Sensitive Areas Map Folio (King County, December 1990) in order to assess the potential presence of regulated geologic hazards on the site. According the referenced sources, the site is not listed as within areas containing coal mine, erosion, landslide, or seismic hazards. It should be recognized that the site is underlain by alluvial soils of a currently undefined thickness. A definitive determination of the potential for liquefaction of the alluvium below the site would require advancing a boring to a depth greater than that achieved by the test pit explorations completed for this evaluation. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed site improvements include constructing the building, installing underground service utilities, and paving areas adjacent to the building for vehicle access and parking. The building configuration shown on Figure 1 is considered preliminary, and final site grades have yet to be established. For purposes of this report, we have considered that the lower eastern portion of the site may be raised a few feet to match the grade of the remainder of the site. Based upon conditions observed during the field exploration, the project appears feasible from the geotechnical perspective utilizing shallow foundation support for the building. However, the presence of loose and soft surficial soils presents an element of risk regarding potential building settlement if these soils are not densified, or removed and replaced with J -2407, March 2006 ZZ r61 nx LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3 -2407 27 March 2006 Page 5 adequately compacted structural fill. Also, the relatively low density alluvial soils will be sensitive to loading imparted by fill embankments. Consequently, the potential for settlement should be evaluated .. if the grading plans, once they are developed, include raising site grades significantly. Presented below are our conclusions and recommendations regarding site preparation, excavations, foundation design and construction, site drainage, and pavement. Seismic Criteria Geotechnical earthquake engineering input to development of the general design response spectrum of the International Building Code 2003 requires a site class definition and short period (Ss) and 1- second period (S1) spectral acceleration values. The USGS National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project (http://eqhazmaps.usgs.gov/) computes the 2002 spectral ordinates (5 percent damping) at building periods of 0.2 and 1.0 seconds for ground motions at the project site with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years as 1.4451g and 0.4954g, respectively. Therefore, we recommend that Ss and S1 be assigned values of 1.4451g and 0.4954g, respectively. Based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site and published geologic literature, and in the absence of boring data . that clearly indicates the depth to bedrock below the site's alluvial soil mantle, we estimate that the average properties of the upper 100 feet of the site profile correspond to Site Class D, consistent with very dense soil and soft rock characterized by a shear wave velocity of 600 to 1,200 feet per second, Standard Penetration Resistance values ranging from 15 to 50, and an undrained shear strength in the range of 1,000 to 2,000 pounds per square foot. Site Preparation Demolition and Utility Abandonment Site preparation should include the removal of all construction materials, buildings, building foundations, and pavements. Underground piping should be removed from below the new building location; if any other piping is abandoned in place, we recommend backfilling the pipes with Controlled Density Fill (CDF). Underground fuel storage tanks, if present, should be removed in accordance with applicable Washington State Department of Ecology requirements. Surface Water Control Preparation for site grading and construction should begin with procedures intended to drain any ponded water and control surface water runoff. Attempting to grade the site without adequate drainage control measures will reduce the amount of on -site soil effectively available for use as structural fill for embankments or utility trenches, increase the amount of select import fill materials required, and ultimately increase the cost of the earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project. We anticipate that the use of shallow ditches and sumps with pumps would be adequate for surface water control during wet weather and site conditions. - The locations of these features would best be determined during construction. Site Stripping and Grubbing J -2407, March 2006 ZZA • LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3 -2407 27 March 2006 Page 6 Stripping efforts should include removal of any remaining vegetation, organic materials, and deleterious debris from areas slated for building, pavement, and utility construction. The surficial topsoil that we observed at the test pit TP -5 was approximately 2 inches thick. However, deeper accumulations of organic materials may be present around tree rootmasses and in depressions. The site is mantled with a variety of surfaces; including grass, bare earth, pavement, and concrete. Following removal of the organics and hard surfacing, we recommend that a ZZA representative complete a visual observation of the exposed surface as part of efforts to identify accumulations of organic or other deleterious material that should be removed prior to grading. It should be noted that much of the soil has a high percentage of fines (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve), rendering the material highly moisture- sensitive and susceptible to disturbance when wet. It may be necessary to curtail site preparation activities and grading during wet weather or wet site conditions. It may also be necessary to place working surfaces of granular material for equipment travel and materials storage. Subgrade Preparation The shallow soils consisted of loose to medium dense silty fine sand and soft to medium stiff fine sandy silt; these soils generally increased in density or consistency with depth. Proofrolling and subgrade compaction should be considered an essential step in site preparation. After stripping and grubbing, and prior to placement of structural fill, we recommend that subgrades of the concrete flatwork subgrades, pavement areas, and areas to receive structural fill be proofrolled and compacted to a firm and unyielding condition in order to achieve a minimum compaction level of 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557) to a depth of at least 1 foot below subgrade elevation. , Foundation subgrade preparation recommendations are presented separately in the Foundations section of this report. Proofrolling and adequate compaction can only be achieved when the soils are within approximately ± 2 percent moisture content of the optimum moisture content. Soils which appear firm after stripping and grubbing may be proof - rolled with a heavy compactor, loaded double - axle dump truck, or other heavy equipment under the observation of a qualified geotechnical engineer, or his representative. This observer will assess the subgrade conditions prior to filling. Areas where loose surface soils exist due to previous fill placement procedures or stripping and grubbing operations should be considered fill to the depth of the disturbance and treated as subsequently recommended for structural fill placement. The need for or advisability of proofrolling due to soil moisture conditions should be determined at the time of construction. We recommend that a representative of our firm observe the soil conditions prior to and during proofrolling and subgrade compaction to evaluate the suitability of stripped subgrades prior to fill placement. In wet areas it may be necessary to hand probe the exposed subgrades in lieu of proofrolling with mechanical equipment. J -2407, March 2006 LDG Tukwila Warehouse J -2407 27 March 2006 Page 7 Subgrade soils that become disturbed due to elevated moisture conditions should be overexcavated to reveal firm, non-yielding, non - organic soils and backfilled with compacted structural fill.. In order to maximize utilization of site soils as structural fill, we recommend that the earthwork portion of this project be completed during extended periods of warm and dry weather if possible. ' If earthwork is completed during the wet season (typically November through May) it will be necessary to take extra precautionary measures to protect subgrade soils. Wet season earthwork will require additional mitigative measures beyond that which would be expected during the drier summer and fall months. This could include diversion of surface runoff around exposed soils, draining of ponded water on the site, and collection and rerouting of groundwater seepage. It will be difficult to grade the site during wet weather or wet site conditions, in our opinion. Subgrade Protection Once subgrades are established, it may be necessary to protect the exposed subgrade soils from construction traffic. Dedicated haul roads and material laydown areas would reduce the amount of potential disturbance. Placing 2 to 4 inch quarry spalls, crushed recycled concrete, or clean pit -run sand and gravel over these areas would further protect the soils from construction traffic. Materials considered suitable for subgrade protection are described in the following sections of the 2004 WSDOT /APWA Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Publication M41 -10): 9- 03.9(1) Ballast* 9- 03.9(3) Base Course* 9 -03.11 Recycled Portland Cement Rubble* 9 -03.18 Foundation Materials Class C* * These material specifications should be modified so that the percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve is less than 5 percent based upon the fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. Structural Fill All fill material placed in building, pavement, and non - landscaped areas should be placed in accordance with the recommendations herein for structural fill. Prior to placement, the surfaces to receive structural fill should be prepared as previously described. All structural fill should be free of organic material, debris, or other deleterious material. Individual particle size should generally be less than 6 inches in diameter. Structural fill should be placed in lifts no greater than 10 inches in loose thickness and each lift should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 test procedure. We recommend that a geotechnical engineer, or his representative, be present during grading so that an adequate number of density tests may be conducted as structural fill placement occurs. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as it proceeds. In the case of roadway and utility trench filling and J -2407, Mach 2006 ZZA LDG Tukwila Warehouse -2407 27 March 2006 Page 8 wall backfilling in municipal rights -of -way, the backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with current City of Tukwila codes and standards. Our recommendations for soil compaction as a function of location are summarized below. Table 1 ,;,:. Summary of Soil Compaction Recommendations Location Recommended Minimum Compaction* General fill embankments 95 All fill below building floor slabs and foundations 95 Wall backfill extending behind the wall a distance equal to the wall height 90 Upper 1 foot below pavement section 95 Upper 4 feet of on -site sewer and water trenches 95 Sewer and water trench backfill below 4 feet 90 * ASTM D 1557 Modified Proctor Maximum Dry Density The suitability of soils for structural fill use depends primarily on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult, or impossible, to achieve. Generally, soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight (based on that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve) cannot be compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition when the moisture content is more than a few percent from optimum. The optimum moisture content is that which yields the greatest soil density under a given compactive effort. At the time of the subsurface evaluation, the site soils disclosed by the explorations had moisture contents that we interpreted to be near or above their anticipated optimum moisture content relative to their possible use as structural fill. However, soil moisture conditions should be expected to change throughout the year. Selective drying of over - optimum moisture soils may be achieved by scarifying or windrowing surficial materials during dry weather. Soils which are dry of optimum may be moistened through the application of water and thorough blending to facilitate a uniform moisture distribution in the soil prior to compaction. We recommend that the site earthwork budget provide provisions for import granular fill material in the event that grading occurs during the wetter times of the year. In the event that inclement weather or wet site conditions prevent the use of on -site soil or non - select material as structural fill, we recommend that a "clean", free - draining pit -run sand and gravel be used. Such materials should generally contain less than 5 percent fines, based on that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve, and not contain discrete particles greater than 6 inches in diameter. CDF would be a feasible alternative to compacted structural fill, and is most commonly used to backfill confined areas such as utility trenches and foundation excavations. Crushed recycled concrete can also be used as fill under a variety of weather conditions. It should be noted that the placement of structural fill is, in many cases, weather - dependent. J -2407, March 2006 ZZA :0" RECE ? \D LDG Tukwila Warehouse 3 -2407 rJUN 19 20011 27 March 2006 Page 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Delays due to inclement weather are common, even when using select granular fill. We recommend that site grading and subsurface utility work be scheduled for the drier months, if at all possible. Soil Stockpiling Most of the non - organic granular site soils could be used as structural fill below pavements, concrete hardscapes, slabs, and in utility trenches, but only under favorably dry weather and site conditions. If soils are stockpiled for future reuse and wet weather is anticipated, the stockpile should be protected with plastic sheeting that is securely anchored. If on -site soils become unusable, it will become necessary to import clean, granular soils to complete wet weather site work. Utility Trenching and Backfilling We recommend that utility trenching, installation, and backfilling conform to all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations such as WISHA and OSHA regulations for open excavations. In order to maintain the function of any existing utilities, we recommend that temporary excavations not encroach upon the bearing splay of existing utilities. Likewise, utility excavations should not encroach upon the bearing splay of footings or floor slabs. The bearing splay of structures and utilities should be considered to begin 3 feet away from the widest point of the pipe or foundation and extend downward at a 1 H:1 V slope. If, due to space constraints, an open excavation cannot be completed without encroaching on a utility, we recommend shoring the new utility excavation with a slip box or other suitable equipment. We recommend that utility subgrades be firm, unyielding and free of all soils that are loose, disturbed, or pumping. Such soils should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. After a firm subgrade has been established, we recommend that a minimum of 3 inches of bedding material be placed in the trench bottom. Under dry trench conditions, pipe bedding material should conform to Section 9- 03.2(3) of the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Under wet trench conditions, the fines content of the bedding should not exceed 5 percent based on that fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve. We further recommend that all bedding material extend at least 4 inches above utilities that require protection during subsequent trench backfilling. All trenches should be wide enough to allow for compaction around the haunches of the pipe. Otherwise, materials such as CDF or pea gravel could be used to eliminate the required compaction around the pipe. Backfilling the remainder of the trenches could be completed with on -site soils if they can be compacted to the minimum levels recommended in the Structural Fill section of this report. Wet soils excavated from the trenches could only be used as backfill by reducing the moisture content to within a few percent of optimum. We recommend completing density tests in all utility trench backfill beneath concrete flatwork and pavements in order to determine that the backfill has been compacted in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. J -2407, March 2006 Temporary and Permanent Cut Slopes LDG Tukwila Warehouse J -2407 27 March 2006 Page 10 Temporary slope stability is a function of many factors, including the following: 1. The presence and abundance of groundwater; 2. The type and density of the various soil strata; 3. The depth of cut; 4. Surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation; 5. The length of time the excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under the variable circumstances to pre - establish a safe and "maintenance -free" temporary cut slope angle. 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. It may be necessary to drape temporary slopes with plastic or to otherwise protect the slopes from the elements and minimize sloughing and erosion. We do not recommend vertical slopes or cuts deeper than 4 feet if worker access is necessary. The cuts should be adequately sloped or supported to prevent injury to personnel from local sloughing and spalling. The excavation should conform to applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. Based upon our review of WAC 296 - 155 -650, Part N (Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring), we have interpreted the existing undisturbed native granular soils and existing granular fill material disclosed by the explorations to meet the Type C definition. The contractor should be prepared to adequately shore all excavations. Foundation Considerations The proposed building is expected to employ either concrete tilt -up construction, and the panel heights are expected to range from 18 to 27 feet. The project was in the preliminary design stage at the time this report was prepared and no structural loading information was available. Consequently for purposes of this report, we have assumed that wall loads will may range from approximately 3,000 to 5,000 pounds per lineal foot, and that column foundation loads may be on the order of 15 to 20 kips. As described previously, the shallow native soils disclosed below the variable depth surficial fill material consisted of loose to medium dense, silty fine sand and soft to stiff, fine sandy silt. These alluvial soils are not particularly dense, and in order to accommodate reasonable loads imparted by conventional shallow continuous and column foundations, we are recommending specific foundation subgrade improvement procedures. In the event that the subgrade preparation procedures, allowable bearing pressures, and settlement estimates described below are not considered feasible or appropriate for the design, it will be necessary to consider alternative foundation types as the project design proceeds. J -2407, March 2006 Foundation Subgrade Preparation — Alternative 1 LDG Tukwila Warehouse 1 -2407 27 March 2006 Page 11 on,. We recommend overexcavating the native silty fine sand and fine sandy silt soils to a depth of 2 feet below the design foundation subgrade elevation. The excavations should extend laterally 2 feet out from each side of the foundation member. The exposed subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density to a depth of at least lfoot below the excavation surface. Following . compaction of the excavation subgrade, we recommend backfilling the excavations up to foundation subgrade elevation with an imported sand and gravel mix. We recommend that the import granular fill have a gradation that generally conforms to Specification 9.03.14(1) for Gravel Borrow as described in the 2004 WSDOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Publication M41 -10). The fill should be compacted in lifts to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Alternatively, it would be feasible to backfill the excavations with CDF that has a minimum compressive strength of 30 psi. Continuous and isolated column foundations constructed above a subgrade prepared as described above may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 1,400 pounds per square foot (psf). A one -third increase of this bearing pressure may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. We estimate that the total settlement of foundation members constructed above a bearing surface as described above will approach one inch. Differential settlement is expected to approach one -half of the total settlement. Foundation Subgrade Preparation — Alternative 2 Removing the loose sand and soft silt soils to a greater depth than described above for Alternative No. 1 will allow the use of a higher allowable foundation bearing pressure. It appears feasible from the geotechnical perspective to excavate the soft or loose soil and then backfill the overexcavated areas with structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557) up to design foundation subgrade elevation. With this alternative, we recommend that the excavation extend outward from the base of the foundation at a 1H:1 V (Horizontal:Vertical) slope. It would be feasible from the geotechnical perspective to substitute CDF with a compressive strength of at least 42 psi for the compacted structural fill in overexcavated areas. If CDF is utilized to backfill overexcavated foundation areas, the excavation need only be as wide as the foundation base. Based on the conditions observed at the test pit locations, we anticipate that the depth below existing site grades to at least medium dense or medium stiff soil may range from approximately 3 to 7 feet. We recommend that a ZZA representative be on site during the foundation excavation phase in order to evaluate the adequacy of the excavation subgrades. Continuous and isolated column foundations constructed above a subgrade prepared as described above may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). A one -third increase of this bearing pressure may be used for short-term wind or seismic loading. We estimate that the total settlement of foundation members J -2407, March 2006 ZZA ply %vs LDG Tukwila Warehouse J-2407 27 March 2006 Page 12 constructed above a bearing surface as described above will approach three quarters of one inch. Differential settlement is expected to approach one -half of the total settlement. Passive Resistance For building and retaining wall foundations, we recommend using an allowable base friction value of 0.30 and a maximum allowable passive resistance of 250 pcf for those foundations embedded at least 18 inches below finish grades, neglecting the uppermost foot of embedment. This passive resistance assumes that the backfill material placed around the foundations consists of sand and gravel compacted to at least 95 percent density (ASTM D 1557). Foundation Embedment Exterior footings should extend at least 18 inches below adjacent grade for frost protection, while the interior footings should extend at least 12 inches below adjacent grade. Foundation widths should be determined by the structural engineer based upon current IBC requirements and the allowable bearing pressure described above. Foundation Drainage We recommend protecting the structure by a perimeter footing drain if the presence of moisture below the building interior will be undesirable. The drain should consist of a minimum 4 -inch diameter rigid perforated pipe, placed with the perforations facing down, and embedded in at least a 6 -inch thick envelope of clean, free - draining granular material, such as pea gravel. Footing drains should be directed toward appropriate storm water drainage facilities. Roof, drains should not be connected to the footing drains in such a fashion that water from the roof could enter the foundation drains. Backfilled Walls It is our preliminary understanding that no significant retaining walls are proposed for the site. However, if loading docks are constructed, backfill placed behind conventional cast -in- place concrete walls should be placed in accordance with our recommendations for structural fill - The following recommended earth pressures, presented as equivalent fluid weights, are based on the assumption of a uniform level granular backfill with no buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. To minimize lateral earth pressures and prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressures, the wall backfill should consist of a free - draining granular material coupled with a perforated pipe: drain placed at the base of the wall backfill, similar in . configuration to that described for the perimeter footings. All backfill within 24 inches of the wall should contain less than 5 percent fines, based on the portion passing the U.S. No 4 sieve. If the backfilled walls are structurally restrained from lateral movement at the top, we recommend that they be designed for an "at- rest" equivalent fluid weight of 50 pounds per cubic J -2407, March 2006 LDG Tukwila Warehouse -2407 27 March 2006 Page 13 foot (pcf). If the tops of the walls are free to move laterally in an amount equal to at least 0.1 percent of the wall height during placement of backfill soils, they may be designed for an "active" equivalent fluid weight of 35 pcf. Surcharges due to floor loads, equipment loads, or materials must be added to these values. The above equivalent fluid pressures assume that the wall backfill was compacted to approximately 90 percent, of the modified Proctor maximum dry density. Additional compaction adjacent to the wall will increase the earth pressure, while a lesser degree of compaction could permit post construction settlements. Concrete Slab -on -Grade Support Criteria Given the lack of a grading plan at the time this report was prepared, whether slabs will be founded on native ground or fill material is currently unknown. In any case, slabs -on -grade should be founded on soils compacted to 95 percent relative density (ASTM D 1557). 'Interior building slabs should be underlain by capillary break comprising a minimum 4 -inch thickness of coarse free draining granular material such as pea gravel or 5/8 -inch crushed rock. A plastic vapor barrier should be installed between the granular capillary break and the concrete slab. The shallow alluvial soils are not particularly dense. Consequently, we recommend that we be provided the opportunity to evaluate the potential for consolidation of the site soils in the event that the grading plans include raising site grades, particularly below future floor slabs. Pavement Section Recommendations On -site vehicle parking facilities and driveways will be available for both passenger vehicles and trucks. It must be recognized that pavement design is a compromise between high initial cost with low maintenance on one side, and lower initial cost coupled with the need for periodic repairs and higher long -term maintenance. Critical features that govern the performance of the pavement include the stability of the subgrade soils, the presence or absence of moisture, free water, and organics in the subgrade, the fines content of the subgrade soils, the traffic volume, and the intended use. The subgrade soils are anticipated to generally consist of silty fine sand and fine sandy silt; these soils are typically rated as offering poor to fair subgrade support characteristics with an estimated California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of about 7. In order to use this CBR value, the soil used beneath the pavement must have support characteristics equivalent to these soils and must be placed under engineering monitored conditions. This estimated CBR value is based upon a comparison of soil samples retrieved from the explorations with published data; performance of a CBR test was not within our authorized scope of services. The following recommendations assume that the subgrade and any structural fill will be prepared in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report. The top 12 inches beneath the pavement should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent compaction using ASTM D 1557 as a standard.' J -2407, March 2006 ZZA x Eriarto LDG Tukwila Warehouse 1 -2407 27 March 2006 Page 14 Specifications for pavements and crushed base /top course should conform to specifications presented in Division 9, Materials, of the 2002 WSDOT Publication M41 -10. In lieu of crushed gravel base /top course, asphalt treated base (ATB) can be ;substituted. ATB could be utilized to provide a wearing surface during construction and protect the subgrade soils that would otherwise be subjected to construction traffc. Some degredation of the ATB in areas subjected to repeated and/or concentrated equipment traffic should be anticipated. Degraded areas would require removal and repair prior to paving with Class B asphalt. The following table presents recommended minimum pavement sections for light (automobile) and heavy truck traffic levels. The heavy section described below would be appropriate for those portions of the site that are likely to see regular truck traffic, such as the entry /exit drives, and the route to the dumpster area and loading/unloading areas. Table 2 Recommended Pavement Sections Traffic Type Asphalt Thickness (inches) Compacted Crushed Base /Top Course (inches) ATB Substitute for Crushed Aggregate (inches) Light 2 6 4 Heavy 3 8 5 Crushed aggregate base course should meet the requirements presented in Section 9- 03.9(3) of the 2002 WSDOT Standard Specifications. Asphalt concrete pavement should be Class B as described in Sections 5 -04 and 9 -03.8 of the Standard Specifications. Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) should conform to Sections 4 -06.3, 5 -04, and 9 -03.6 of the Standard Specifications. In areas where the pavement section subgrade consists of silty fine sand or fine sandy silt, improved pavement section performance would be realized by placing a separation geotextile between the subgrade and the crushed rock base course; the geotextile will reduce the migration of fine grained soil particles from the subgrade up into the crushed rock. We recommend the use of Mirafi 140N, or equivalent, for this purpose. Surface Water Drainage Considerations The proposed configuration of the property will result in covering much of the site with impervious surfacing. We recommend that the site grades be established such that the ground surface slopes away from the building, allowing surface water to drain via gravity toward approved surface water drainage provisions. Recommendations for Further Study'"''' This report should be considered preliminary in nature in that the building location has yet to be firmly established, foundation loads were not available at the time this report was prepared, and site grades were still unknown. We recommend that we be given the opportunity to review the project plans as the design proceeds in order to verify that the recommendations J -2407, March 2006 ZZA WV. LDG Tukwila Warehouse J -2407 27 March 2006 Page 15 presented herein have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the design, and to determine whether or not additional subsurface exploration to better characterize site conditions may be valuable. At this time, we anticipate that the project may benefitfrom at least one boring that would allow a determination of the depth to either glacially consolidated soils or bedrock (this would help to better characterize the seismic site class) and to better evaluate the site's liquefaction potential. In the event that the decision is made to raise site grades significantly, it would be appropriate to assess the effect of the loading imposed by the additional fill material relative to consolidation of the existing shallow soils. CLOSURE The conclusions and recommendations presented in this preliminary report are based on the explorations accomplished for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations for this study were completed within the site and scope constraints of the project so as to yield the information necessary to formulate our recommendations. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you, and would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of the project with you at your convenience. Enclosures: Distribution: J -2407, March 2006 Respectfully submitted, Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. C-Stavid C. Williams, .E.G. Associate r‘i?'' John E. Zipper, P.E. Principal Figure 1 — Site and Exploration: Plan Appendix A — Field Exploration Procedures and Log4ExpiREs Appendix B - Laboratory Testing Procedures and results Addressee (3) 1/24/07 \STAFF \ -,D \_Current Projects \2400s \J -2407\ LEGEND: 9 TP -1 TEST PIT NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING BUILDING 1 APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF L _ J EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT J rES: XPLORATION AND SITE FEATURE LOCATIONS ARE )ROXIMATE. IGURE TAKEN FROM DRAWING PROVIDED BY LDG, ZIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, AND ZZA FIELD MEASUREMENTS. Porposed LDG Warehouse Tukwila, Washington FIGURE 1- SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES AND LOGS APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES AND LOGS J -2407 The field exploration for this current phase of the project included logging subsurface conditions disclosed by five test pits (TP -1 through TP -5). The test pits were excavated by a local contractor working for Landmark Development Group. Approximate exploration locations are shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. Exploration locations were determined by measuring distances from existing site features with fiberglass and steel tapes relative to an undated site plan provided by Landmark Development Group. As such, the exploration locations should be considered accurate to the degree implied by the measurement method. Ground surface elevations of the explorations were not determined. The following sections describe our procedures associated with the exploration. Descriptive logs of the explorations are enclosed in this appendix. Test Pit Explorations An independent contractor working under subcontract to Landmark Development Group excavated the test pits through the use of a tracked excavator. An engineering geologist from our firm continuously observed the test pit excavations, logged the subsurface conditions, and obtained representative soil samples. The samples were stored in moisture tight containers and transported to our laboratory for further visual classification and testing. After we logged each test pit, the operator backfilled them. Some settlement of the backfill should be expected over time. We completed a hand auger boring at the test pit TP -5 location subsequent to completion of the test pit. The purpose of the additional exploration was to obtain relative density and consistency values for the soils. Granular soil density and cohesive soil consistency were determined through the use of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in general accordance with ASTM Special Technical •Publication No. 399. This procedure entails driving a steel rod equipped with a specifically sized conical 'tip into the ground with a 15 -pound drop hammer free falling 20 inches. After seating the penetrometer into the soil a depth of 2 inches, the number of blows required to drive the penetrometer over three successive 1.75 -inch intervals is recorded and averaged. This numerical value, "Nc ", has been shown to correlate with the Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D 1586) "N" value. The Nc values for specific depths are indicated on the log for test pit TP -5 in this appendix. The enclosed test pit logs indicate the vertical sequence of soils and materials encountered in each test pit, based primarily on our field classifications and supported by our subsequent laboratory testing. Where a soil contact was observed to be gradational or undulating, our logs indicate the average contact depth. We estimated the relative density • • and consistency of in situ soils by means of the excavation characteristics and by the sidewall stability. Our logs also indicate the approximate depths of any sidewall caving or groundwater seepage observed in the test pits, as well as all sample numbers and sampling locations. 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771 - 3304 Test Pit TP -1 Project: LDG Warehouse, Tukwila Project No.: J -2407 Date Excavated: 2 March 2006 Location: See Figure 1 Approx. ground surface elevation (feet): Not determined Depth. (feet) - Material Description Nc Moisture Sample Testing 1 Medium dense, moist, brown and gray, gravelly, silty SAND with some brick fragments (Fill) 2 Medium dense, moist, gray and brown, silty SAND 3 with silty, gravelly SAND clasts (Fill) Medium dense, moist, gray grading to brown at 6 feet, silty fine SAND Medium stiff, moist, brown with some gray, fine sandy, SILT Medium dense, damp, gray, fine SAND with some silt 4 21% S -1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 33% S -2 12 13 Total depth = 12 feet 14 No groundwater seepage or caving observed. 15 16 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. Lynnwood, Washington 98036 (425) 771 - 3304 Test Pit TP -2 Location: See Figure 1 Approx. ground surface elevation (feet): Not determined Project: LDG Warehouse, Tukwila Project No.: J -2407 Date Excavated: 2 March 2006 Depth (feet) Material Description Nc Moisture Sample Testing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 10± inches medium dense, wet, gray, silty, gravelly SAND with some roots and fine organics (Fill) Very stiff, moist, gray, SILT - desiccated Soft to medium stiff, moist, brown, SILT with some sand and scattered roots to 18 -inch depth Loose to medium dense, damp, brown, silty fine SAND with some fine sandy silt horizons Total depth = 10.5 feet. No groundwater or caving observed. 33% S -1 GSA Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33'" Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33'd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 Test Pit TP -3 Project: LDG Warehouse, Tukwila Project No.: J -2407 Date Excavated: 2 March 2006 Location: See Figure 1 Approx. ground surface elevation (feet): Not determined „Depth (feet) Material Description Nc Moisture Sample Testing 1 4± inches 5/8 -inch CRUSHED ROCK (Fill) above 2 soft to medium stiff, moist, brown, fine sandy SILT with some silty fine sand horizons 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Total depth = 12 feet. No groundwater or caving observed. 15 16 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33'd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 • .v , Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 Test Pit TP-4 Project: LDG Warehouse, Tukwila Project No.: J -2407 Date Excavated: 2 March 2006 Location: See Figure 1 Approx. ground surface elevation (feet): Not determined Depth (feet) Material Description Nc Moisture Sample., ,Testing 1 Medium dense, moist, brown, gravelly, silty SAND (Fill) 2 Loose to medium dense, damp to moist, brown, fine ■ ■ e ■ ■ ■ 3 SAND and silty fine SAND - become mottled gray and brown 23% S -1 4 5 6 7 8 9 ■ s ■ 10 � 11 12 13 14 15 Total depth = 14 feet. No groundwater or caving observed. ■ 16 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 Test Pit TP -5 Project: LDG Warehouse, Tukwila Project No.: J -2407 Date Excavated: 2 & 3 March 2006 Location: See Figure 1 Approx. ground surface elevation (feet): Not determined Depth (feet) Material Description Nc Moisture Sample Testing 1 7± inches loose, moist, gray- brown, silty SAND with trace gravel and fine organic material, some fine roots in upper 2 inches above soft to medium stiff, damp to moist, brown, fine sandy SILT Stiff, moist, brown SILT with trace to some fine sand 2 3 3 4 5' 3 6 7 7 8 9 7 10 11 11 Total depth =.10.6 feet. No groundwater or caving observed. 12 13 14 15 16 Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc. 18905 — 33rd Avenue West, Suite 117 Lynnwood, Washington (425) 771 - 3304 F • • s„. APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND RESULTS APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES J -2407 A series of laboratory tests were performed during the course of the this study to evaluate the index and geotechnical engineering properties of the subsurface soils. Descriptions of the types of tests performed are given below. Visual Classification Samples recovered from the exploration locations were visually classified in the field during the exploration program. Representative portions of the samples were carefully packaged in moisture tight containers and transported to our laboratory where the field classifications were verified or modified as required. Visual classification was generally done in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification system. Visual soil classification includes evaluation of color, relative moisture content, soil type based upon grain size, and accessory soil types included in the sample. Soil classifications are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A. Moisture Content Determinations (MC) Moisture content determinations were performed on representative samples obtained from the exploration in order to aid in identification and correlation of soil types. The determinations were made in general accordance with the test procedures described in ASTM: D -2216. The results are shown on the exploration logs in Appendix A. Grain Size Analysis (GSA) A grain size analysis indicates the range in diameter of soil particles included in a particular sample. Grain size analyses were performed on representative samples in general accordance with ASTM D 422. The grain size analyses were conducted only to determine the fines content of samples - the dry weight percentage of soil passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve (200 wash). The results of the fines content determinations for the samples are presented on the logs in Appendix A. 36• 100 GRAIN SIZE OF OPENING 12• SIZE ANALYSIS IN INCHES 6• 3• 11/2• - i 3/4• 3/6• Test U.S. 4 10 Results STANDARD 20 40 Summary SIEVE 60 [ SIZE 140 200 I ASTM D 422 HYDROMETER 90— I- 1 80 • • W - 70 >- 03 — W 60 Z LL Z 50 W _ 0 W 40— 0 30_- 20 10_ 0- 1000.000 100 000 10.000 1.000 0.100 0.010 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS BOULDERS Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay COBBLES GRAVEL SAND FINE GRAINED Comments: Exploration Sample Depth (feet) Moisture ( %) Fines ( %) Description TP -2 S -1 2 33 90.8 SILT with some sand ZZA rem.- Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc JOB NO: J -2407 DATE OF TESTING: 3/7/2006 PROJECT NAME: LDG Warehouse Geotechnical and Environmental Consulting SOUTH 143RD STREET VICINITY MAP NO SCALE LIGNT SOUTH 143RD PLACE t LANDSCAPE pi_ AN SGALEt I" • 20.-0" LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE rULJ Bainbridge 19. WA 98110 (208) 780-0198 fez 271 Madison Ave. S. TifnET (208) 780-0148 NORTH 87 80' 20' 40' STATE OF WASNIKTVON REaSir-FED LAM:kg:APE AR OitTECT t � . ,- , . O • . ak ' i tO ©200 r • •11w 51 ?Hcro