Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E07-019 - TRAVIS PRICE / MCDONALD'S - BUILDING DEMOLITION / NEW RESTAURANT BUILDINGMCDONALDS DEMOLISH & REPLACE EXISTING RESTAURANT & PARKING 15210 PACIFIC HWY S. E07 -019 • Brandon Miles - Re: E07 -019 & L07 -091 Page 1 of 2 From: To: Date: Subject: Brandon Miles stephfw @comcast.net 05/21/2008 1:38 PM Re: E07 -019 & L07 -091 Dear Mr. and Ms. Whiting: Thanks you for providing your email dated April 8, 2008 to the City regarding the McDonald's site on International Blvd South. To provide you some background, the applications were submitted to the City on December 18, 2007. A Notice of Application was posted on the site and mailed to surrounding property owners and tenants on January 29, 2008. A notice of public hearing was distributed on March 13, 2008. The City's Board of Architectural Review (BAR) reviewed and approved the site layout and building design on March 27, 2008. The site layout that was approved has two drive through speakers located along the east portion of the building. The new building has been pushed closer to International Blvd than the location of the existing building. The first speaker will actually be located further from the apartment buildings than the existing speaker. The 2nd speaker's distance from the east property line is about equal the distance from the existing speaker. While the drive through will be open 24 -hours a day it is likely that the 1st speaker will be used at night. Thus, the impacts associated with the speaker should be reduced since the distance between the speaker and the apartments has been increased. The City asked the applicant for information regarding the noise generated from the proposed speakers. The • City regulates noise between properties. The maximum permitted noise allowed to be generated from the McDonald's property and your apartment building is 57 decibels. This measurement would be taken at the property line. The applicant notes that the speaker would generate 70 decibels directly at the source. The 2nd speaker is approximently 40 feet from the property line that separates the McDonald's property from the apartment complex. This distance should provide sufficient space for the sound to diminish before reaching the property line. The applicant is proposing to retain many of trees along the property line between your property. Additional landscaping will be installed between your property and the McDonald's site. This vegetation should also assist in reducing any impacts from the speakers. I hope that this information has helped to reduce some of your concerns related to the proposed project. Please note that the City can enforce its noise regulations even after the project is completed and the McDonald's is up and running. Thus, if the noise becomes and issue the City can investigate to determine if the City's noise regulations are being met. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Best Regards, Brandon J. Miles Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Tukwila file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \Brandon - M\Local Settings \Temp \XPGrpWise \483425C... 05/23/2008 3M Building and Comme Services Division 3M Center St. Paul, MN 55144 -1000 651 733 1110 May 1, 2008 RECEIVED MAY 16 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT With the concern over environmental noise today, many communities restrict the audio level of drive -thru intercom systems and usually the level is specified to be below some number at the property line. Audio levels are measured in terms of "Sound Pressure Level" with the unit of change being the "Decibel." For example, the city of Chicago requires that sound levels not exceed 62 decibels SPL (sound pressure level) in an industrial area. Taking this into consideration, 3M pre - adjusts the intercom systems `k which they manufacture to assure compliance. The.3M XT -1 Intercom Systems are preadjusted at the factory to produce an audio sound pressure level of 70 decibels ( *) at a distance of 4 feet on axis to the center of the speaker. It must be remembered that sound diminishes at the rate of 6 decibels every time the distance from the sound source is doubled. So, at a distance of 8 feet, the level is 64 decibels, at 16 feet it is 58 decibels and so on. • -70 Please be aware that our systems, like ALL drive -thru intercom systems, have an G - adjustable output and, if the need arises, an installer can change the levels to accommodate an area with high background noise, such as near a major highway. The 61 Xt -1 system can be programmed to adjust it's audio level out at predetermined time. _ & . 1(0 To give you a reference of comparative audio levels, I have attached a list of typical sound levels for your use. If you have any questions regarding this or any additional information, please don't '5 2.- L hesitate to contact me at 651- 736 -4628. Thank you for your interest in our products, Best regards, Steven T. Awiszus Intercom Product Development Specialist 3M Building Commercial Services Division 51 felf3fri (* These level measurements assume the use of recommended 3M components.) r7-1— 016i • • Table of Sound Levels and Corresponding Sound Pressure and Sound Intensity To get a feel for decibels, look at the table below which gives values for the sound pressure levels of common sounds in our environment. Also shown are the corresponding sound pressures and sound intensities. From these you can see that the decibel scale gives numbers in a much more manageable range. Chart of sound levels L and corresponding sound pressure and sound intensity Examples Sound Pressure Level dBSPL Sound Pressure p N /m2 = Pa Sound Intensity 1 watts/m2 Jet aircraft, 50 m away • q< 200 100 Threshold of pain 63.2 10 Threshold of discomfort `?,to 20 1 Chainsaw 1m distance 110 6.3 0.1 Disco, 1 m from speaker 100 2 0.01 Diesel truck, 10 m away 90 0.63 0.001 Curbside of busy road, 5 m 80 0.2 0.0001 Vacuum cleaner, distance 1 m 70 0.063 0.00001 Conversational speech, 1m MAN 0.02 0.000001 Average home 50 0.0063 1E-07 Quiet library 40 0.002 1E-08 Quiet bedroom at night 0.00063 1E -09 Background in TV studio 0.0002 1 E -10 Rustling leaf 0.000063 1 E -11 Threshold of hearing 0.00002 1E -12 A given sound pressure level L c in dBSPL without the distance of the measurement to the specific sound source is useless. The reference for 0 dBSPL sound pressure level is p = 20 pPa = 2 • 10"5 pascal, the threshold of hearing. The sound pressure level decreases in the free field with 6dB per distance doubling. That is the 1lr law. Often it is argued the sound pressure would decrease after the 11r2 law (inverse square law). That's wrong. The sound pressure in a free field is inversely proportional to the distance from the mic to the source. p —1 1r. • • Distance From Menu Post 3M Intercom SPL (dB) 4' 70 8' 64 16' 58 32' 52 64' 46 128' 40 256' 34 512' 28 1024' 22 2048' 16 4096' 10 8192' 4 Note: 20 dB is the threshold of hearing. This occurs at approximately 1,250 feet from the speaker post. Page 2 of 2 tel (206) 431 -3684 fax (206) 431 -3665 bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us »> <stephfw @comcast.net> 04/08/2008 10:43 am »> Dear sir: We are Bryan and Stephanie Whiting, the managers of the Avalon apartments located at 3469 S. 152 St., Tukwila, Washington. We are writing to you on behalf of the owners and the tenants of the Avalon apartments with regard to the complete remodel of the McDonald's restaurant located directly behind our building and faces International Blvd. Bryan recently spoke with one of the assistant managers at McDonald's about where they plan to place the two new intercoms for the two new drive up ordering windows that will be built. He was told that they were to be facing south toward the Arco gas station. We have since found out that the proposed drive through lanes will be located on the east side of the property directly facing the Avalon Apartment's windows. We are extremely concerned about this as there is already an overwhelming amount of noise from the existing intercom that is currently in use 24 hours a day, seven days a week and this will double with the prosed plan. We respectfully request that the plan be changed so that the two intercoms are not pointing directly at the Avalon. With the way that the plan is now, there will be an extreme amount of noise 24 hours a day making it very hard to keep the property rented and will have a significant impact on the value of the apartment building. We hope that the plan can be revised and that we will not be forced to pursue a stop work order on the project. Please feel free to contact either of us. Our business line is (206) 242 -2598. We hope to be able to resolve this issue on a positive manner for both property owners. Thank you. Bryan & Stephanie Whiting file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \Brandon - M\Local Settings \Temp \XPGrpWise \483425C... 05/23/2008 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION 7kri 6(46,,ta /(HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Determination of Non-Significance Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Short Subdivision Agenda Shoreline Mgmt Permit Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Notice of Action. Official Notice Notice of Application FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Other Was mailed to ach of the addresses listed on this/I day of/4in the year 20 (') //' Project Name: ..2e ,.°,002,c7s. (5cF4 i2J2/,,,27).-r-fri, Project Number: Mailer's Signature: C //' File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: City of 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 -019 12/18/2007 03/12/2008 APPROVED RECEIVED INAR 17 2008 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicant: TRAVIS PRICE Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: McDonald's Corporation has requested to demolish the existing 4,974 square foot restaurant at 15210 International Blvd and replace it with a new 4,587 square foot building with associated parking. Additional work includes demolishing the existing trash enclosure and the freezer building both of which are located on the east property line. Additional work includes: Upgrading and relocation of some utilities; installation of a grease trap; and installation of frontage improvements both on International Blvd and S. 152nd Street. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Section/Township /Range: 15210 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BL TUKW 0043000090 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by ✓ I Acf ! 02 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Jack P. ' - po ble Official City of �� ' a 6300 S • thcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431 -3670 3/i/o Date Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21C.075) To: From: Date: Re: • • MEMORANDUM Jack Pace Brandon Miles March 10, 2008 (SEPA Determination) McDonalds Corporation Demolition of an existing 4,974 square foot restaurant, construction of a new 4,587 square foot restaurant and installation of approximately 70 parking stalls. Project Description: McDonald's Corporation has requested to demolish the existing 4,974 square foot restaurant at 15210 International Blvd and replace it with a new 4,587 square foot building with associated parking. Additional work includes demolishing the existing trash enclosure and the freezer building both of which are located on the east property line. Additional work includes: Upgrading and relocation of some utilities; installation of a grease trap; and installation of frontage improvements both on International Blvd and S. 152nd Street. Agencies with Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac Other Required Permits: Land Altering/Grading /Preloads Permit Approvals Right of Way Permit Right of Way Permit Building Permits Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Permits Demolition Permits Public Hearing Design Review Sign Permits City of Tukwila, Public Works City of Tukwila, Public Works City of SeaTac City of Tukwila, DCD City of Tukwila DCD City of Tukwila, DCD City of Tukwila, DCD City of Tukwila, DCD Interurban Retail E04 -006 Staff Report • • Summary of Primary Impacts: Earth The site is an existing developed property within the City of Tukwila. Most of the site is currently covered with impervious surfaces (either buildings or pavement). The proposal will reduce the amount of impervious surface located on the site. The total building footprint is being reduced and one accessory building will be removed. The site is relatively flat with a southwest to northeast slope of two percent. There is a 40 percent slope located on the southwestern portion of the property. However, this appears to be a man-made slope and the slope area should have no impact on the proposed project. The applicant had The Riley Group prepare a Geotechnical Engineering Report which is dated February 27, 2007. The report noted that the site soil on the site consists mainly of Vashon Till soil. This was determined by digging several testing bores on the site. The test bores also found loose soil with organics on the site. As a result of the soil condition on the site, the Geotechnical Report recommends floor slab on pile foundation. The applicant will be required to comply with a temporary erosion plan in order to reduce erosion during construction. Air Emissions to the air during construction and grading activities will be the result of vehicle and equipment exhaust and dust during dry weather. During construction, the applicant will comply with Best Management Practices to reduce emissions to the air. There are no known long term impacts to air quality upon completion of the project. Water There are no water bodies on or adjacent to the project site. The Duwamish River is located approximately four miles to the east. There is an unnamed stream located approximately one mile south of the site along SR 518. There is small open drainage ditch located along the south portion of the property. The applicant and the City investigated the drainage ditch and determined that the drainage is not considered a "watercourse" but that the water is run -off from adjacent roads and development and thus is not subject to the City's Sensitive Area requirements. Stormwater from rooftops, the parking area, driving areas, and walkways will be conveyed into an on -site detention facility which will be tied into the City's stormwater system. 2 Interurban Retail E04 -006 Staff Report Temporary drainage facilities will be utilized during construction in order to control run- off from the site. As noted, the project is a rebuild of an existing fast food restaurant. Currently run -off from the dumpster enclosure goes into the stormwater system. The run -off from the dumpster is not appropriate to be going into the storm system untreated. As part of this project the applicant will provide catch basins around the dumpster pad which will direct run -off from the dumpster into the sanitary sewer system. The project will not impact groundwater within the area. Plants As noted the site is currently developed and is operating as a fast food restaurant. There is a significant amount of landscaping on the site. Due to grading activities most of the landscaping will have to be removed. The applicant is going to attempt to retain existing trees on the east property line. These trees provide a significant amount of screening for the adjacent apartment buildings. The applicant is also going to attempt to relocate several of the flowering plum trees on the site. The applicant will also fully comply with the City's landscaping requirements as part of the design review application. Perimeter and landscaping will be added around the entire site. Additionally, landscaping will be added within the parking area of the restaurant. Automatic irrigation will be added to all landscaped areas. Animals The subject site is located within a densely populated urban area and does not provide a suitable environment for animals. Energy/Natural Resources The building will utilize gas and electricity when completed. The building will be constructed to meet current Washington State Energy Code requirements. Environmental Health Noise generated by construction equipment will occur on a short-term basis. The site is located within a commercial area of the City. The adjacent property to the east is zoned High Density Residential (HDR) and there is an apartment building located on the site. There will be two ordering intercoms located near the apartment building. The City received a comment from the apartment building owner who noted that the intercoms are sometimes loud and disturb people living in the apartments directly along the property line. Planning staff investigated and determined that the current intercom on the site was not loud. The project is required to comply with the City's noise regulations. If the 3 Interurban Retail E04 -006 Staff Report • go intercom noise becomes a concern in the future, the City's Code Enforcement Division would investigate. Land /Shoreline Use As noted a fast food restaurant is currently located on the site. The property is located along old Pacific Hwy which is a major commercial corridor. The properties to the south, west, and north are used for commercial businesses. The property directly to the east is zoned HDR and currently has an apartment building located on it. The new Link Light Rail station is located less than a mile from the site at the corner of Southcenter Blvd and International Blvd. There is no shoreline of statewide significance located in the vicinity. Upon completion of the new restaurant a total of 29 total employees will work at the site with no more than 14 at any one time. Housing No residential dwellings will be removed as a result of this project and the applicant is not proposing to add any residential dwellings. Aesthetics This project is subject to design review approval by the Board of Architectural Review and is subject to the TIB Design Guidelines. The proposed building on the site is the new "branding image" for the McDonald's Company. The new building will be smaller than the current restaurant on the site. The building will be approximately 21 feet tall. The colors of the building are softer than the traditional colors of McDonald's restaurants. The landscaping on the site will also be upgraded to meet the City's landscaping requirements. The applicant will attempt to retain existing trees on the east property line. Light and Glare Light will be emitted from within the building, signage, exterior building lights, and parking lot lights. The applicant has submitted a lighting plan, which indicates that light intrusion on adjacent parcels will be minimal. Recreation There will be no impact to any adjacent recreation facilities as a result of this project. Historic and Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks exist within the project areas. 4 • Interurban Retail E04 -006 Staff Report • • During construction if any landmarks or evidence of historical, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are found on the sites, work will stop immediately and the contractor will notify the City of Tukwila, Washington State Office of Archeology,, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Transportation The parcel is located at the corner of International Blvd and S. 152nd Street. International Blvd lies with the corporate boundaries of the City of Seatac. Metro buses will serve the site via International Blvd. The site is also located near a light rail station. A parking lot which will serve the light rail station will be located directly adjacent to the McDonald's site. Planning staff is currently working with Sound Transit and the applicant to install a pedestrian path between the two properties. The proposal is to replace a fast food restaurant building with a smaller building, thus there will no change in the traffic generation count. The project does not have to comply with traffic concurreny requirements and traffic impact fees are not required. Approximately 60 parking stalls will be provided on the site. Pedestrian linkages will be provided along International Blvd to assist pedestrians in visiting and leaving thes site. Public Services The project will require a minimal amount of police and fire service. The site will also have the ability to utilize Metro Bus Service along International Blvd and to utilize the new Light Rail station. Utilities The site is served by the following utilities: Puget Sound Energy for electricity and gas; Water District 125 for Water; Valley View for Sewer; and Verizon for Telephone. Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance 5 Mayor Ralph Shape Deputy Mayor Gene Fisher Councilmembers Chris Wythe Terry Anderson Tony Anderson Joe Brennan Mia Gregerson "The Hospitality City" City Manager Craig R. Ward Assistant City Manager Tina J. Rogers City Attorney Mary E. Mirante Bartolo City Clerk Kristina Gregg PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION February 13, 2008 Brandon Miles Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE:' McDonald's Design Review and SEPA Application Dear Brandon, The Engineering Division has reviewed your submittal and has the following comments: 1. The project shall install half street improvements (per SeaTac Municipal Code 13.200.010) along its frontage of International Blvd. (SR99) to consist of but not limited to sidewalks, curbs, gutters, street paving, traffic signalization, water mains, drainage facilities, sanitary sewers, all improvements required by any applicable ordinance and all necessary appurtenances. Such off -site improvements (except traffic signalization systems) shall extend the full distance of the real property to be improved upon and which adjoins property dedicated as a public street. Traffic signalization off -site improvements shall be installed pursuant to the provisions of all applicable ordinances. The project applicant may request deferral of improvements Title 14.10 if the SeaTac Municipal Code. This could be a covenant, bonding, security in lieu of bond, or payment of the frontage improvements costs per linear foot to a project fund that includes the improvements that are required. 2. The access points have been discussed on previous occasions and they look to be what has been discussed. 3. We commented on the possible conflict between the exiting vehicle from the drive through and the vehicles entering the site from the North drive off of International Blvd. previously. The site plan was adjusted so that the vehicle leaving the drive through must make a couple of turns before heading for said North exit to International Blvd. The area around the North driveway on International Blvd. is still 4800 South 188th Street • SeaTac, WA 98188 -8605 City Hall: 206.973.4800 • Fax: 206.973.4809 • TDD: 206.973.4808 • www.ci.seatac.wa.us r�e DI -213 .Page 2 of 2 • extremely busy with entering and exiting the site, exiting the drive through, and cutting across in between the building and International Blvd. to get back to the South parking lot and drive through. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Since Dixie allenberger, P. E. Engineering Technician Supervisor cc: file Florendo Cabudol, P.E. w City of Mimi l a Department of Communig/ Development Transmittal Letter TO: Dixie Hallenberger, City of Seatac FROM: Brandon Mil' s, Senor Planner, City of Tukwila RE: DATE: January 23, 2008 k Jim Haggerton, Mayor Jack Pace, Director fr 11gN vv°'9ks �G'�T OiNQ 008 Opd /V S�gTq N McDonald's Design Review and SEPA Application Attached please find the following for your review: 1. Endangered Species Screening Checklist 2. SEPA Checklist 3. Alta Survey 4. Geotechnical Engineering Report 5. Design Review Narrative 6. Civil Plans The City is currently conducting design review and environmental review for the proposed project. The City would like information pertaining to the following: 1. Any requirements for frontage improvements along International Blvd. 2. Any comments regarding the proposed access points for the site. 3. Any concerns, comments or requirements which may impact site layout. Thank you for your time in reviewing the application. The Notice of Application period will end on February 11, 2008. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206- 431 -3665 TO: w •. City of Tukwila Department of Community Development File Number 0i61 i_3--kx17 LAND USE PERMIT ROUTING FORM Public Works Fire Dept. J Police Dept. !'J� Parks /Rec REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and • plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS ^A(Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) !"I ?WI) 6 67/1.41 Plan check date: Comments prepared by: Update date: CtuProject: ,�4615 D6ic, h QV k1 Address: Date transmitted: I 13 j 1 '� 6 Response requested by: Staff coordinator: n ! t , / Date response ; received: REVIEWERS: Please specify how the attached plans conflict with your ADOPTED development regulations, including citations. Be specific in describing the types of changes you want made to the plans. When referencing codes, please identify the actual requirement and • plan change needed. The Planning Division review does not supplant each department's ability to administer its own regulations and permits. However, project consistency at the Planning review stage is important to minimize significant later design changes. More than minimal design changes require further Planning Commission review, even if alteration is required to satisfy a City requirement. This further review is typically a minimum 60 -day process. Requirements based on SEPA (e.g., not required by an adopted development regulation) MUST identify the impact being mitigated, the policy basis for requiring mitigation, and the method used to calculate the mitigation required. Calculations of project impacts and the mitigation required (e.g., water capacity, road level of service analyses, or turning analyses) may be required of the applicant. COMMENTS ^A(Attach additional comment sheets and/or support materials as needed.) !"I ?WI) 6 67/1.41 Plan check date: Comments prepared by: Update date: TO: Development Review Staff FROM : Brandon Miles, Senior Planner RE: McDonald's Design Review Application TIB DATE: January 9, 2008 McDonalds at 15210 Tukwila International Blvd has submitted a design review and a SEPA application to construct a new building at 15210 TIB. The application requires approval by the BAR. Please provide any specific comments which may impact the site layout or building design. D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGiNErR'S December 12, 2007 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Tukwila McDonald's To Whom It May Concern: RECEIV /ED DEC 1.8 200 t COMMLIMPi DEVELOPMENT Project No. 07052 This letter is in support of the Tukwila McDonald's project in regards to critical areas. The Site, also known as Tax Parcel Numbers 43000096 and 43000090, located at 15210 Pacific Highway South in Tukwila, Washington, is proposing to redevelop the existing improvements. Site work will involve removing all existing improvements and replacing them with new paving and a new restaurant building. Field reconnaissance was conducted on the Site in May 2007. There is an existing drainage swale located near the southern boundary•of the Site. It appears that this drainage swale was artificially created as part of the original Site construction. Any tributary runoff to this area is artificial. The runoff is created by the Site and partially by adjacent developed properties and would not meet the criteria for a stream based on the City of Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.45.100. Additional office research conducted utilizing GIS and other resources revealed that there is no data indicating historical streams adjacent to the Site. Further investigation also revealed that there are no documented wetlands on or within 1/2 mile of the downstream path of this Site. Based upon field observations and research, it appears that this Site does not have any critical area located on the property, nor are there any critical areas or buffers adjacent to the Site that this development would impact. Should you have any questions regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. Travis W. Price, ASLA Landscape ArchitectNNetland Ecologist TWP /sjw T.•1k07101070521wetland letter.doc Encjil )ef.rs Planners 10604 N.E. 38th Place • Suite 101 Kirkland, WA 98033 -7903 Phone: (425) 827 -3063 Fax: (425) 327 -2423 -loll Free: (800) 962- 1402 .vww.drstrona.corn Survey() rs RECAP DEC 18 2001 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E- mail: tukplan(a ci.tukwila.wa.us COMMUNITY SEPA DEVELOPM Ent ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: �U1G1�11v4 c--r.��a�n�S LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 1 5240 PAuc-ic., l-kt 44 w4.1 . (St- P) `il LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 000n S , , _ -2, coo° j o. 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: 1 I,,.. -1 P12 L� . Lac c .,sue Address: (0 CG C.)4 I-t e_ o 1 `r 8 0 �3 Phone: 42S E37 ?06,-4, E -mail: FAX: 4 ZS— 827 2zt 2.3 Signature: Date: /Z//®/O 7_ P: \ Planning Forms\ Applications \SEPAApp- 07- 07.doc July 20, 2007 FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus TYPE P-SEPA Planner: File Number: C.�,-7_ - 01 9 Application Complete (Date: ) Project File Number: Application Incomplete (Date: ) Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: �U1G1�11v4 c--r.��a�n�S LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 1 5240 PAuc-ic., l-kt 44 w4.1 . (St- P) `il LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 000n S , , _ -2, coo° j o. 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: 1 I,,.. -1 P12 L� . Lac c .,sue Address: (0 CG C.)4 I-t e_ o 1 `r 8 0 �3 Phone: 42S E37 ?06,-4, E -mail: FAX: 4 ZS— 827 2zt 2.3 Signature: Date: /Z//®/O 7_ P: \ Planning Forms\ Applications \SEPAApp- 07- 07.doc July 20, 2007 VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1"=1000' RECEIVED DEC 18 20011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT M: \07 \052 lots \3 \Fig \vicinity map.dwg 12/12/2007 12:15:36 PM PST COPYRIGHT U 2007, D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC TUKWILA McDONALD'S VICINITY MAP 15210 PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH TUKWILA, WA 98188 i DRS D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS OBM NE 01111 PLACE, SUITE 101 KIRKLAND, WA 91023 415117.1010 OFFICE 100.111.1401 TOLL FREE 1251111120 FAX 1 loin DRAFTED BY: 0M DESIGNED BY: 11P PROJECT ENGINEER: W DAZE 12.14.07 PROJECT NO.: 0700! SHEET 1 of 1 \ S 144TH ST S 146TH ST N I I I S 148TH ST F l S 150TH ST v 0 N a L N c, (n N el `' ' ROJECT p N N l a "' 7 SITE I a 4 S 152ND ST J N M p CA M I S 154TH ST ST S 156TH r- ---7-- 7 .. P [:11 VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1"=1000' RECEIVED DEC 18 20011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT M: \07 \052 lots \3 \Fig \vicinity map.dwg 12/12/2007 12:15:36 PM PST COPYRIGHT U 2007, D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS INC TUKWILA McDONALD'S VICINITY MAP 15210 PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH TUKWILA, WA 98188 i DRS D.R. STRONG CONSULTING ENGINEERS ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS OBM NE 01111 PLACE, SUITE 101 KIRKLAND, WA 91023 415117.1010 OFFICE 100.111.1401 TOLL FREE 1251111120 FAX 1 loin DRAFTED BY: 0M DESIGNED BY: 11P PROJECT ENGINEER: W DAZE 12.14.07 PROJECT NO.: 0700! SHEET 1 of 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan a,ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY RECEIVED DEC 18 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly swom and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non - responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on , 20 Print Name Address Phone Number Signature On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS DAY OF , 20 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at My Commission expires on P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \BARApp- 06- 07.doc, 06/12/07 1 • • Tukwila, WA 046 -0005 RIGHT OF ENTRY Project: Rebuild of Restaurant MCDONALD'S REAL ESTATE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation (hereinafter known as "Owner ") does hereby grant and convey unto the GRANTEE, City Of Tukwila, a municipal corporation and its assigns (hereafter known as "the City"), the rights of ingress and egress over, across and upon the following described land for the purpose of reviewing the premises in order to facilitate the permitting process, in accordance with the following agreements: It is hereby agreed as follows: 1. The Owner represents and warrants that it is the owner(s) of that certain parcel(s) of land described as follows: As legally described in Exhibit "A" ("Property ") 2. The City is about to place personnel and /or equipment on said lands in order to conduct certain site assessments for the purpose of facilitating the permitting process ("Work "). 3. The Owner shall allow the City, its employees and agents the right to ingress, egress and remain on the above described Property, in a reasonable manner, for the above mentioned reasons to work at all reasonable times. 4. The City shall indemnify, defend, protect and save harmless the Owner, its lessees, licensees, employees, agents, contractors and assigns, and each of their lessees, licensees, employees, agents, contractors and assigns from and against any and all claims, damages, loss of or destruction of property, expenses and costs (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney's fees and court costs) whatsoever, suffered by the Owner, his successors and assigns caused by said Work in connection with said project; however, the City shall not be so obligated in the event of gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Owner its successors and assigns, tenants, and licensees causing damage, loss or destruction. 5. The City shall upon completion of said Work in connection with said project described herein, remove all debris and restore the affected surface to the same or better condition that was present immediately prior to the City's entry thereon excepting any modifications or improvements made as a part of the Work. 6. The City hereby covenants and warrants to Owner that it has secured all of the necessary permits and approvals required to complete the City's Work. Document #: 448968-v1 7. Owner hereby reserves all such rights and privileges in the Owner's Property as may be used and enjoyed by Owner subject to the terms of this Right of Entry. 8. The City shall enter upon the Property and conduct the City's Work at its sole risk, cost and expense. The City hereby waives and relinquishes any and all claims, liabilities, causes of action, demands, costs and expenses related . to the subject matter of this Right of Entry now or hereafter arising in the City or any of its employees', contractors' or agents' favor with respect to injury to persons or property occasioned by, directly or indirectly, the conditions of the Owner's Property or any improvements thereon or any other facts or occurrences with respect to the City's conduct under this Right of Entry. The terms of this agreement shall be binding on the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties and shall be a covenant running with the land until March 31, 2008, when this agreement shall expire. Dated:. Owner: City: McDonald's Real Estate Company City of Tukwila Document #: 448968 -v1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT McDonald's Real Estate Company STATE OF ILLINOIS ) SS: COUNTY OF DUPAGE ) 1, Amy A. Evans, a Notary Public in and for the county and state aforesaid, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that Consuelo Boyd, as Attomey -in -Fact, of McDonald's Real Estate Company, having a principal place of business at One McDonald's Plaza, Oak Brook, Illinois 60523, who is personally known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument as such Attorney -in -Fact appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that she signed, sealed and delivered the said instrument as her free and voluntary act as such Attorney -in -Fact respectively and as the free and voluntary act of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and notarial seal, this 14th day of December, 2007. Amy A. Evans;11otary P, 6blic , My commission expires: 12/2/09 OFFICIAL SEAL AMY A EVANS NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EXP RES: ti 2109 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). Check items submitted with application Information Required. May be waived in unusual cases. upon approval of both Public Works and Planning APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1. Application Checklist (1 copy) indicating items submitted with application. ✓ 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. ✓ 5. Underlying permit application that triggers SEPA review. PUBLIC NOTICE MATERIALS: ;,,,T i 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). Q 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). ri/A 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. 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 /dcdldcdplan.htm) for additional information. MA- 11. Any drawings needed to describe the proposal other than those submitted with the underlying permit. Maximum size 24" x 36 ". RECEIVED TDEC 1 8 2007 „"T P: \ Planning Forms\ Applications \ SEPAApp -07 -07. doc July 20, 2007 City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: 12-/ii /c7 RECEIVED DEC- ?1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicant Name: 1`'1 �-y;;,,,o�� G, Street Address: t 2131 0 t3 City, State, Zip: ciAt--4.., ,,,1Q w .-- p).07. 4 , Telephone: 425 77 vdi %T Directions This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to result in potential "take" of Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, or Cutthroat trout as defined by Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or "No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if "take" is indicated: P: \Planning Forms \ Applications \SEPAApp -07- 07.doc July 20, 2007 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 F E 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. Continue to Question 3 -0 .1,y1.§,4 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. `N—O- Continue to Question 4 -0 y... ,r 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 a , propriate response. - 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 ipuld answer Yes. Please circle appropriate response. Y, N,eQ:L Continue to Question 6 -0 YES - Continue to Question 6 -0 P: \Planning Forms \Applications \SEPAApp- 07 -07.doc July 20, 2007 Part A (continued) City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist 6 -0 . Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs, groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect appropriate for the use of the land (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please circle appropriate response. NO — Checklist Complete yES: Checklist Complete Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 1 -1 Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response. ''NO Continue to Question 1 -2 YES - Continue to Question 1 -2 1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off site or increased rates of erosion and/or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in increased erosion and/or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and. Sedimentation Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO1\ 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) ;YES Continue to Question 1 -4 City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part B (continued) 1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the ground. If your project involves the construction of impervious surface and does not include the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater, answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. N Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2) YESw 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. N a Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2 -2 2 -2 Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC 18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a potential diameter - breast- height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -3 YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 2 -3 Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish' or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in the fall. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2 -4 YES - Continue to Question 2 -4 2 -4 Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1) YES - Continue to Question 2 -5 2 -5 Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2) NO - Continue to Question 3 -6 YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 City of Tukwila ESA 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. NO - Continue to Question 3 -8 YES - Continue to Question 3 -8 3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2) City of Tukwila ESA Screening Checklist Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer. 3 -1 Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -2 YES - Continue to Question 3 -2 3 -2 Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means" flowing into, via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels, remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man-made or artificial structure that precludes fish access should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -3 YES - Continue to Question 3 -3 3 -3 Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -4 YES - Continue to Question 3 -4 3 -4 Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 3 -5 YES - Continue to Question 3 -5 3 -5 Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal, and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response. DRS Project No. 06360 CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TUKWILA McDONALD'S REBUILD PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a Proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement .(EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable signifi- cant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your Proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the Proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your Proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your Proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your Proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply ". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your Proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your Proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this check- list may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 1 of 21 City of Tukwila Washington A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Tukwila McDonald's Restaurant 2. Name of applicant: McDonald's Corporation LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: McDonald's Corporation LLC 12131 113th Ave NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98032 425 821 -4970 Contact Person: Travis W. Price, ASLA D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. 10604 NE 38 Place, Suite 101 Kirkland WA 98033 425 827 -3063 4. Date checklist prepared: December 10, 2007 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will start upon the receipt of all required building and construction permits. This is estimated to occur in the spring/summer of 2008. 7. Do you have any plans for . future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this Proposal? If yes, explain. No. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWJ A McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 19 City of Tukwila, Washington 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this Proposal. cch The Riley Group / _L ��- February 27, 2007 v ttgJ 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your Proposal? If yes, explain. None to our knowledge. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your Proposal, if known. SEPA Determination City of Tukwila Grading Permit City of Tukwila Building Permit City of Tukwila Other Customary Construction Related Permits City of Tukwila 11. Give brief, complete description of your Proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your Proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.). Redevelopment of the site by demolishing the existing 4,974 sq. ft. McDonald's restaurant and replacing it with a new restaurant, approximately 387 sq. ft. smaller than the existing one. The new construction will be a one - story, 4,587 -sq. ft. building. 12. Location of the Proposal. Give sufficient informa- tion for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a Proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checldist Page 3 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The site address is 15210 Pacific Highway South in the City of Tukwila, Washington 98030. The Site is located within the Southwest Quarter of Section 22, Township 23, Range 4E. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. eral description of the site (circle one). ie rolling, steep slopes, mountainous o er. In general, the majority of the property is relatively level with an average slope of 2- 5 %. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? There is a very small isolated area in the southwestern corner of the Site in excess of 40 %. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The soils on the Site are not mapped in the Soil Survey of King County, Washington, prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service does not have this area classified, however the Geotechnical Report prepared by the Riley Group indicate that this is a Vashon Till Soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None to our knowledge. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist - Page 4 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The purpose of the site grading will be to upgrade the existing restaurant and replace with new restaurant and parking. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There could be a short -term increase in the potential for on -site erosion where soils are exposed during site preparation and construction; however, the Project will comply with all applicable erosion control measures, short term and long term. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 70% of the Site will be covered by impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. A temporary erosion control plan will be implemented at the appropriate time. Erosion control measures may include the following: hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, stabilized construction entrance, and other measures which may be used in accordance with requirements of the City of Tukwila. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the Proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. ®2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 5 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Short -term emissions will be those associated with construction and site development activities. These will include dust and emissions from construction equipment. b: Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your Proposal? If so, generally describe. Off -site sources of emissions or odors are those that are typical mixed -use commercial areas. These include automobile emissions from traffic on adjacent roadways. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. The Washington Clean Air Act requires the use of all known, available, and reasonable means of controlling air pollution, including dust. Construction impacts will not be significant and could be controlled by measures such as dirt - driving surfaces being watered during extended dry periods to control dust. In addition, washing truck wheels before exiting the site and maintaining gravel construction entrances. 3. WATER a. Surface. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wet- lands)? If yes, describe type and pro- vide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The there is an unnamed stream adjacent to SR 518, which is located one mile downstream of Site. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 6 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington ii. 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. iii. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate . the source of fill material. N/A iv. Will the Proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, there will be no surface water withdrawals or diversions. v. Does the Proposal lie within a 100 - year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. vi. 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. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn. A public water main will be installed to serve the ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 7 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington required fire sprinkler system development. No water will be discharged to the groundwater. ii. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; in- dustrial, containing the following chemicals....; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The. Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. c. Water Runoff (including storm water). 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. See attached Level One Drainage Analysis Report. ii. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. C 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 8 of 19 . City of Tukwila Washington d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. A City approved storm drainage conveyance system will be designed and implemented in order to mitigate potential adverse impacts from storm water runoff. Temporary drainage facilities will be used to control quality and quantity of surface runoff during construction and Site will connect into existing storm drainage system. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, vine maple, black cottonwood other: (birch, dog- wood) evergreen tree: fir, cedar, spruce, pine, other: x shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: other types of vegetation (Deer fern, blackberry, holly, scotch broom) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation within the development area will be removed at the time of development. • Landscaping will be installed in accordance with the provisions of the City of Tukwila Zoning Code. c. List threatened or endangered species known . to be on or near the site. ® 2007 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 9 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington None known or documented within the project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, . or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. All landscaping provided will meet City of Tukwila standards. 5. ANIMALS 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: crows mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, small rodents, raccoon, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish other: None. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Western King County as well as the rest of Western Washington, is in the migration path of a wide variety of non- tropical songbirds, and waterfowl, including many species of geese. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. None proposed. 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? © 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 10 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and /or natural gas will serve as the primary energy source for the restaurant's daily operations. 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 required measures of the Washington. State Energy Code and the Uniform Building Code will be incorporated in the construction of the restaurant. rEnergy conservation fixtures and mate a s are encouraged in all new constructioi 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. There are no known on -site environmental health hazards known to exist today and none will be generated as a direct result of this proposal. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be required.. ii.. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. Special measures are not anticipated. -® 2007 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 11 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington b. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The primary source of off -site noise in the area originates from vehicular traffic present on adjacent streets. ii. 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)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Short -term impacts will result from the use of construction equipment during site develop- ment and restaurant construction. Construction will occur during the day -light hours, and in compliance with all noise ordinances. Construction noise is generated by heavy equipment, hand tools and the transporting of construction materials and equipment. iii. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Construction will be performed during normal daylight hours. Construction equipment will be equipped with noise mufflers. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The existing Site consists of one McDonald's Restaurant. The remaining Site is paved parking and limited landscaping with the ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 12 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington southern portion containing a shrub -lined Swale. The current use of adjacent properties is listed as follows: North: Mixed Use Commercial South: Mixed Use Commercial East: Mixed Use Commercial West: Mixed Use Commercial b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. McDonald's restaurant. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, the above - mentioned structure will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification is RC. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Regional Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 14 at one time and 29 total employees. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers lnc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 13 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington J• Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the Proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed development is compatible with the prescribed land use codes and designations for this Site. Per the City Zoning Code, the development is consistent with the density requirements and land use of this property. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. N/A 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 maximum building height will conform to City of Tukwila Standards. b. What view in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 14 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Views in the vicinity are not likely to be enhanced, extended or obstructed by development of this project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? The location . of the buildings adheres to or exceeds the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district. The landscaping will be installed at the completion of building and paving construction. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the Proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will be produced from building lighting. Light will " also . be produced from vehicles using the Site. The light and glare will occur primarily in the evening and before dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare from the project will not cause hazards or interfere with views. c. What existing of site sources of light or glare may affect your Proposal? The primary off -site source of light and glare will be from vehicles traveling along the area roadways. Also, the adjacent residential uses and streetlights may create light and glare. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. Site will utilize existing streetlights. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 15 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. None. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. 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. There are no known impacts. If an archeological site is found during the course of construction, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be notified. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the proposed project will be from Pacific Highway South/SR -99 and South 152nd Street. 0 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 16 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest public transit stop is approximately .1 miles south. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project will have 74 parking spaces, including 4 handicapped stalls. The project will eliminate 3 stalls. d. Will the Proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The existing frontage of SR 99 and South 152 "d Street will be improved to meet city regulations. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Yes, the site is located within one mile of Sea -Tac International Airport and is directly adjacent to the proposed Sound Transit Regional Light Rail Station. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This development will generate traffic volumes typical of Fast Food Restaurants. Since this project will only replace the existing structure with a slightly smaller one, changes to the existing trip generation should be minimal. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. N/A ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 17 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. No. 16. UTILITIES Circle utilities currently available at the site: natural :as _ wate • (refusj septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. 0-4 r Electricity Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas Puget Sound Energy Water .Water District No 125 Sewer Valley View Sewer District Telephone Verizon ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting. Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 18 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Travis W. Price ASLA DATE SUBMITTED: j 7 . /7 , 2007 C 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA'McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 19 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington DRS Project No. 06360 CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TUKWILA McDONALD'S REBUILD PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a Proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable signifi- cant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your Proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the Proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your Proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your Proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your Proposal, write . "do not know" or "does not apply ". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your Proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your Proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this check- list may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. 0 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUK VLLA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 1 of 21 City of Tukwila Washington A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed' project, if applicable: Tukwila McDonald's Restaurant Name of applicant: McDonald's Corporation LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: McDonald's Corporation LLC 12131 113th Ave NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98032 425 821 -4970 Contact Person: Travis W. Price, ASLA D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. 10604 NE 38 Place, Suite 101 Kirkland WA 98033 425 827 -3063 4. Date checklist prepared: December 10, 2007 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will start upon the receipt of all required building and construction permits. This is estimated to occur in the spring/summer of 2008. 7. Do you have any plans for . future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this Proposal? If yes, explain. No. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this Proposal. The Riley Group r _ c February 27, 2007 v 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your Proposal? If yes, explain. None to our knowledge. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your Proposal, if known. SEPA Determination City of Tukwila Grading Permit City of Tukwila Building Permit City of Tukwila Other Customary Construction Related Permits City of Tukwila 11. Give brief, complete description of your Proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your Proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.). Redevelopment of the site by demolishing the existing 4,974 sq. ft. McDonald's restaurant and replacing it with a new restaurant, approximately 387 sq. ft. smaller than the existing one. The new construction will be a one - story, 4,587 -sq. ft. building. 12. Location of the Proposal. Give sufficient informa- tion for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a Proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. 0 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 3 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The site address is 15210 Pacific Highway South in the City of Tukwila, Washington 98030. The Site is located within the Southwest Quarter of Section 22, Township 23, Range 4E. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS EARTH a. - eral description of the site (circle one). 14) rolling, steep slopes, mountainous o i er. In general, the majority of the property is relatively level with an average slope of 2- 5 %. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? There is a very small isolated area in the southwestern corner of the Site in excess of 40 %. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The soils on the Site are not mapped in the Soil Survey of King County, Washington, prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service does not have this area classified, however the Geotechnical Report prepared by the Riley Group indicate that this is a Vashon Till Soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None to our knowledge. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist - Page 4 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The purpose of the site grading will be to upgrade the existing restaurant and replace with new restaurant and parking. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There could be a short -term increase in the potential for on -site erosion where soils are exposed during site preparation and construction; however, the Project will comply with all applicable erosion control measures, short term and long term. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 70% of the Site will be covered by impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. A temporary erosion control plan will be implemented at the appropriate time. Erosion control measures may include the following: hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, stabilized construction entrance, and other measures which may be used in accordance with requirements of the City of Tukwila. 2. AIR What types of emissions to the air would result from the Proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 5 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Short -term emissions will be those associated with construction and site development activities. These will include dust and emissions from construction equipment. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your Proposal? If so, generally describe. Off -site sources of emissions or odors are those that are typical mixed -use commercial areas. These include automobile emissions from traffic on adjacent roadways. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. The Washington Clean Air Act requires the use of all known, available, and reasonable means of con trolling air pollution, including dust. Construction impacts will not be significant and could be controlled by measures such as dirt - driving surfaces being watered during extended dry periods to control dust. In addition, washing truck wheels before exiting the site and maintaining gravel construction entrances. 3. WATER a. Surface. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wet- lands)? If yes, describe type and pro- vide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The there is an unnamed stream adjacent to SR 518, which is located one mile . downstream of Site. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 6 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington ii. 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. iii. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A iv. Will the Proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, there will be no surface water withdrawals or diversions. v. Does the Proposal lie within a 100 - year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. vi. 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. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn. A public water main will be . installed to serve the C 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 7 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington required fire sprinkler system development. No water will be discharged to the groundwater. ii. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; in- dustrial, containing the following chemicals....; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. c. Water Runoff (including storm water). i.. 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. See attached Level One Drainage Analysis Report. ii. Could waste materials enter_ ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No waste material is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. 0 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 8 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. A City approved storm drainage conveyance system will be designed and implemented in order to mitigate potential adverse impacts from storm water runoff. Temporary drainage facilities will be used to control quality and quantity of surface runoff during construction and Site will connect into existing storm drainage system. 4. PLANTS Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, vine maple, black cottonwood other: (birch, dog- wood) evergreen tree: fir, cedar, spruce, pine, other: x shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other: other types of vegetation (Deer fem, blackberry, holly,.scotch broom) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation within the development area will be removed at the time of development. Landscaping will be installed in accordance with the provisions of the City of Tukwila Zoning Code. c. List threatened or endangered species known . to be on or near the site. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 9 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington None known or documented within the project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. All landscaping provided will meet City of Tukwila standards. 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: crows mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, small rodents, raccoon, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish other: None. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Western King County as well as the rest of Western Washington, is in the migration path of a wide variety of non- tropical songbirds, and waterfowl, including many species of geese. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. None proposed. 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? ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 10 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and /or natural gas will serve as the primary energy source for the restaurant's daily operations. 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 required measures of the Washington. State Energy Code and the Uniform Building Code will be incorporated in the construction of the restaurant. rEnergy conservation fixtures and mate a s are encouraged in all new constructioi 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. There are no known on -site environmental health hazards known to exist today and none will be generated as a direct result of this proposal. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be required. ii. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. Special measures are not anticipated. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 11 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The primary source of off -site noise in the area originates from vehicular traffic present on adjacent streets. ii. 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)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Short -term impacts will result from the use of construction equipment during site develop- ment and restaurant construction. Construction will occur during the day -light hours, and in compliance with all noise ordinances. Construction noise is generated by heavy equipment, hand tools and the transporting of construction materials and equipment. iii. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Construction will be performed during normal daylight hours. Construction equipment will be equipped with noise mufflers. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The existing Site consists of one McDonald's Restaurant. The remaining Site is paved parking and limited landscaping with the ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 12 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington southern portion containing a shrub -lined swale. The current use of adjacent properties is listed as follows: North: Mixed Use Commercial South: Mixed Use Commercial East: Mixed Use Commercial West: Mixed Use Commercial b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. McDonald's restaurant. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, the above - mentioned structure will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification is RC. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Regional Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 14 at one time and 29 total employees. ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 13 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. N/A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the Proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed development is compatible with the prescribed land use codes and designations for this Site. Per the City Zoning Code, the development is consistent with the density requirements and land use of this property. HOUSING . a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. N/A 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 maximum building height will conform to City of Tukwila Standards. b. What view in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? o 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 14 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Views in the vicinity are not likely to be enhanced, extended or obstructed by development of this project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? The location . of the buildings adheres to or exceeds . the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district. The landscaping will be installed at the completion of building and paving construction. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the Proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will be produced from building lighting. Light will " also . be produced from vehicles using the Site. The light and glare will occur primarily in the evening and before dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare from the project will not cause hazards or interfere with views. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your Proposal? The primary off -site source of light and glare will be from vehicles traveling along the area roadways. Also, the adjacent residential uses and streetlights may create light and glare. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. Site will utilize existing streetlights. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 15 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington None. b.. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. None. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. 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. There are no known impacts. If an archeological site is found during the course of construction, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be notified. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the proposed project will be from Pacific Highway South/SR -99 and South 152nd Street. © 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S • SEPA Checklist Page 16 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest public transit stop is approximately .1 mites south. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project will have 74 parking spaces, including 4 handicapped stalls. The project will eliminate 3 stalls. d. Will the Proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The existing frontage of SR 99 and South 152" Street will be improved to meet city regulations. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Yes, the site is located within one mile of Sea -Tac International Airport and is directly adjacent to the proposed Sound Transit Regional Light Rail Station. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This development will generate traffic volumes typical of Fast Food Restaurants. Since this project will only replace the existing structure with a slightly smaller one, changes to the existing trip generation should be minimal. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. N/A ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 17 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington L 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. No. 16. UTILITIES Circle utilities currently available at the site: natural _ as wate • refus septic lectrici e ephone system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas Puget Sound Energy Water .Water District No 125 Sewer .Valley View Sewer District Telephone Verizon anitary sewer ® 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting. Engineers Inc. TUKWILA McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 18 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Travis W. Price ASLA DATE SUBMITTED: ;per , 2007 © 2007 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. TUKWILA•McDONALD'S SEPA Checklist Page 19 of 19 City of Tukwila Washington CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW /SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. ( ) NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY () TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. \ DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST "(\) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT (1 PUGET SOUND ENERGY ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) COMCAST SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: () PUBLIC WORKS () FIRE () POLICE ( ) FINANCE () PLANNING () BUILDING () PARKS & REC. () MAYOR () CITY CLERK OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL () SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE () MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ( ) CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM** () FISHERIES PROGRAM** ( ) WILDLIFE PROGRAM "*Send SEPA Checklist and full set of plans w/ NOA MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL P:\ADMINISTRATWE \FORMS \CHECKLIST.DOC ( .) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV, NW Regional Office DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISIO ( OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS • SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION () HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE ( ) K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES -SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY () K C PUBLIC LIBRARY ()HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE �(. ) VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( WATER DISTRICT #20 WATER DISTRICT #125 ( CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR - LAKERIDGE SEWERNVATER DISTRICT () RENTON PLANNING DEPT CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE* " NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. () DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE* ( ) P.S. AIR POLLUTION CLEAN AGENCY OUND TRANSIT () UWAMISH RIVER CLEAN -UP COALITION" * SEND NOTICE OF ALL APPLICATIONS ON DUWAMISH RIVER ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES ( ) CI.TUKWILA.WA.US.WWW Travis W. Price, ASLA N.E. 38th Place, Suite #101 Kirkland, WA 98033 Doug Bates Area Construction Manager McDonald's Northwest Region 12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98034 Terry Beals Sound Transit 401 S. Jackson St., Seattle, WA 98104 -2826 Dixie Hallenberger, PE City of SeaTac 4800 S. 188th St. SeaTac, WA 98188 -8605 The Riley Group Inc. RECEIVED DEC 18 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Riverton Heights McDonald's 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, WA 98188 Project No. 2007 -021 Prepared By: The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 Prepared for: Ms. Anne Thorpe McDonald's USA, Inc. 12131 — 113th Avenue NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98034 February 27, 2007 Serving the Pacific Northwest Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Tel (425) 415 -0551 • Fax (425) 415 -0311 The Riley Group Inc. February 27, 2007 Ms. Anne Thorpe McDonald's USA, Inc. 12131 — 113th Avenue NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98034 Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Riverton Heights McDonald's 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, WA 98188 Project No. 2007 -021 Dear Ms. Thorpe: As requested, The Riley Group, Inc. (Riley) has performed a geotechnical engineering study for the above - referenced site. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical anticipated aspects for the project design and construction. Our field exploration indicates that the site is generally underlain by 3 feet of loose fill over native soil. The native soil includes 3.5 feet of very loose to loose silty SAND with some gravel, clay, and trace organics overlying medium dense to very dense silty SAND with gravel. The fill consists of loose SAND with trace silt. Test boring B -2 which is located at the southwest portion of the sit encountered 6 feet of loose fill over loose native soil. Groundwater seepage was encountered during our field exploration at depths of 11.5 to 15.0 feet below ground surface (bgs). Based on the subsurface soil observed, the loose soil with organics underneath the site is not suitable for directly supporting building foundations. If the building foundations are directly supported on the loose soil with organic contents, they will be subject to differential settlements due to consolidation. Therefore, we recommend supporting the proposed building and floor slab on pile foundation to transfer the building load to dense soils below the loose soil and organics. Driveway and new pavement sections can be supported on 12 inches of structural fill over geotextile fabrics. ServinE the Pacific Northwest Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Tel (425) 415 -0551 • Fax (425) 415 -0311 ii February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report February y 277200 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA Alternatively, the proposed building can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organic soil. The expected excavation depth is approximately 8 feet bgs in the south of the proposed building area and 4 feet bgs in the north. The floor slab can be similarly supported on the structural fill. We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, THE RILEY GROUP, INC. Chien -Lin (Johnny) Chen, P.E. . Project Engineer JC /RW Ricky R. Wang, Ph.D., P.E. Principal Engineer The Riley Group, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2 3.1 SURFACE 2 2 3.2 SoILs 2 3.3 GROUNDWATER 2 3.4 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 4.1 GENERAL 3 4.2 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING 4 4.3 FOUNDATIONS 6 4.4 SLAB -ON -GRADE CONSTRUCTION 6 4.5 RETAINING WALLS 6 4.6 DRAINAGE 7 4.7 UTILITIES 7 4.8 PAVEMENTS 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 8 6.0 LIMITATIONS 9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure I Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 3 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 4 Typical Footing Drain Detail LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing The Riley Group, Inc. 1 February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report Project #2007-021 0 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, RSA I 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located at 15210 Pacific Highway South in Tukwila, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Site Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The subject site is currently occupied by an existing McDonald's building and asphalt parking. Riley understands that the client is planning to redevelop the site, demolish the existing building, and construct a new McDonald's building (5,062 square feet in size) in the middle portion of the site along with the associated parking and utilities. Riley's understanding of the project is based on a Site Sketch (Option A) prepared by Freiheit & HO Architects, Inc. dated November 1, 2006. At the time of the preparation of this report, detailed site grading and building plans were not available for our review. Based on our experience with similar projects, we anticipate that the building will be single -story structure supported on perimeter bearing walls and a series of isolated columns. The building loads are typically from 1 to 2 kips per linear foot for perimeter walls, up to 50 kips for interior isolated columns. The recommendations in the following sections of this report are based upon our understanding of the above design features. If actual features vary or changes are made, we should review them in order to modify our recommendations as required. In addition, Riley requests to review final design drawings and specifications to verify that our project understanding is correct and that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK On February 13, 2007, Riley drilled a total of six test borings to a maximum depth of 16.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Test borings were drilled with a truck- mounted, hollow - stem auger drill rig. Test borings B -1 and B -2 were drilled in the proposed parking and driveway areas. Test borings B -3 through B -6 were drilled within the proposed building footprint area. The approximate test boring locations are shown on Figure 2. Using the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, we performed analyses to develop geotecbnical recommendations for project design and construction on the following: > Soil and groundwater conditions > Seismic considerations > Site preparation and grading • Structural fill recommendations > Foundation support > Slab -on -grade support > Retaining walls > Drainage > Utilities > Pavements The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report 2 February 27, 2007 #2007 -021 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The site is a trapezoidal - shaped parcel of land approximately 1.75 acres in size. The site is bounded to the north by South 152nd Street, to the east by a retail building and an apartment, to the south by a rental storage shop, and to the west by Pacific Highway South. The site is currently occupied by an existing McDonald's building and covered by asphalt parking around the building. The site gently slopes down to the southeast with an overall elevation difference of approximately 10 feet. 3.2 Soils The soils encountered in the test borings are relatively consistent across the site. The typical soil profile consists of 3 feet of loose fill over native soil. The native soil includes 3.5 feet of very loose to loose silty SAND with some gravel, clay, and trace organics overlying medium dense to very dense silty SAND with gravel. The fill consists of loose SAND with trace silt. Test boring B -2 which is located at the southwest portion of the sit encountered 6 feet of loose fill over loose native soil. Review of the Geologic Map of Surficial Deposits in the Seattle 30' by 60' Quadrangle, Washington by James C. Yount, et al. (1993) indicated that the native soils were snapped as Vashon till (Qvt). The native soils include light to dark gray, nonsorted, nonstratified mixture of clay, silt, sand and gravel up to boulder -size. These descriptions are generally different from the soils encountered in our field exploration. The soils we encountered at shallow depth are much looser than the soil described above. More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered are presented on the Test Boring Logs, Figures A -2 through A -7 in Appendix A. 3.3 Groundwater Minor groundwater seepage was encountered from 11.5 to 15.0 feet bgs in the test borings B -5 and B -6 during our subsurface investigation. The groundwater seems to be perched above the dense soil layer. Fluctuations in groundwater level should be expected on a seasonal and annual basis. The level will be highest during the extended periods of heavy seepage in the wet winter months. Given the time that the field exploration was performed, Riley believes that the groundwater should be close to the season- high.level. 3.4 Seismic Considerations Based on the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), the site soil is Class D (Table 1615.1.1). The earthquake spectral response acceleration at short periods (SS) is 127% g and at 1- second period (S1) is 44% g. The Riley Group, Inc. • • 3 February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report Project #2007 -021 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure ,induced by vibrations from a seismic event. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine - grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this intergranular friction, thus reducing or eliminating the soil's strength. We reviewed the soil conditions encountered during field exploration and assessed the potential for liquefaction of the site's soil during an earthquake. Since the native soil below groundwater is dense to very dense, Riley believes that the potential of soil liquefaction during an earthquake event is low. 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General Based on our study, the site is suitable for the proposed construction from a geotechnical standpoint. The major geotechnical concern for the project is that the loose soil and organic contents underneath the site may consolidate in the future. If the building is directly supported on the loose soil and organic contents, it will experience a certain amount of differential settlements. In order to avoid the potential of building damage, we recommend supporting the proposed building and floor slab on pile foundation . to transfer the building load to dense soil below the loose soil and organics. Driveway and new pavement sections can be supported on 12 inches of structural fill over geotextile fabrics. Alternatively, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organics. The expected excavation depth is approximately 8 feet bgs in the south of the proposed building area and 4 feet bgs in the north. The floor slab can be similarly supported on the structural fill. Detailed recommendations regarding the above issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading To prepare the site for construction, the existing building and pavements within the proposed building footprint should be demolished and stripped. Surface stripping depths of up to 6 inches should be expected to remove the asphalt surface. All remnants related to previous construction, which occupied the site, should also be cleared and removed from the site. Once clearing, stripping, and other preparing operations are complete, cuts and fills can be made to establish desired building grades. Prior to placing fill, we recommend proofrolling The Riley Group, Inc. February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report 4 Project #2007 -021 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA all exposed surface to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. Proofrolling should also be performed in cut areas that will provide direct support for new construction. The on -site excavated soil has organic contents and is not suitable for use as structural fill. We recommend importing a material that meets the grading requirements listed in Table 1. Table 1. Structural Fill *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. Prior to use, Riley should examine and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D -1557 (Modified Proctor) until the desired finished grade is met. The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within about two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM method. 4.3 Foundations As discussed, the major geotechnical concern with this project is loose soil and organics underlying the site. If the foundation is directly supported on the loose soil, the building may experience unacceptable post- construction settlement. To avoid excessive building settlement, we recommend supporting the building using piles to transfer building loads to the competent native soil. Alternatively, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organics. Driven Piles Based on the subsurface soil conditions encountered, Riley recommends that 3- to 4 -inch steel pin piles be used for the site. The minimum pile embedment depth is 5 feet into the competent native soil (medium dense silty sand with gravel) below the loose layer. Based on our experience with similar project, the pile capacities listed in Table 2 can be used for structural design and pile layout. Riley expects that the pin pile capacities can be reached at approximately 15 to 20 feet bgs. However, the actual pile termination depth should be determined in the field based on pile driving condition. The Riley Group, Inc. U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 3 inches 100 percent No. 4 sieve 0 to 75 percent No. 200 sieve 0 to 5 percent * *Based on minus 3/4 inch fraction. Prior to use, Riley should examine and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill materials should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D -1557 (Modified Proctor) until the desired finished grade is met. The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within about two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM method. 4.3 Foundations As discussed, the major geotechnical concern with this project is loose soil and organics underlying the site. If the foundation is directly supported on the loose soil, the building may experience unacceptable post- construction settlement. To avoid excessive building settlement, we recommend supporting the building using piles to transfer building loads to the competent native soil. Alternatively, the proposed buildings can be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organics. Driven Piles Based on the subsurface soil conditions encountered, Riley recommends that 3- to 4 -inch steel pin piles be used for the site. The minimum pile embedment depth is 5 feet into the competent native soil (medium dense silty sand with gravel) below the loose layer. Based on our experience with similar project, the pile capacities listed in Table 2 can be used for structural design and pile layout. Riley expects that the pin pile capacities can be reached at approximately 15 to 20 feet bgs. However, the actual pile termination depth should be determined in the field based on pile driving condition. The Riley Group, Inc. Geotechnical Engineering Report Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA February 27, 2007 Project #2007 -021 Pipe Diameter 3" Table 2. Pin Pile Design Capacities (tons) Full single pile capacities can be used, provided that pile spacing is at least three pile diameters. For closer spacing, there will be a slight reduction in the allowable single pile capacity due to group effects. The amount of this reduction will depend on the number of piles in the grouping and their spacing. We can provide this information, if required. The lateral load capacity assumes 1 -inch deflection on the top of the pile. Following the successful installation of the driven piles, you should expect maximum total and differential post - construction settlements of h4 -inch to 1/2 -inch. Spread Footings Alternatively, Riley recommends that the proposed building foundations be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organics. The expected excavation depth is approximately 8 feet bgs in the south of the proposed building area and 4 feet bgs in the north. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) on structural fill. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity can be used. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.25 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the side of the footing and buried portion of the foundation stem wall can also be considered for resisting lateral loads. We recommend calculating . this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). At perimeter locations, we recommend not including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent fill soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. The recommended friction and passive resistance values include a safety factor of 1.5. With spread footing foundations as recommended, you should expect maximum total and differential post - construction settlements of 1 -inch and '/2-inch, respectively. The Riley Group, Inc. Uplift Load Lateral Load Compression Load 7 3 0.7 4 1.0 10 Full single pile capacities can be used, provided that pile spacing is at least three pile diameters. For closer spacing, there will be a slight reduction in the allowable single pile capacity due to group effects. The amount of this reduction will depend on the number of piles in the grouping and their spacing. We can provide this information, if required. The lateral load capacity assumes 1 -inch deflection on the top of the pile. Following the successful installation of the driven piles, you should expect maximum total and differential post - construction settlements of h4 -inch to 1/2 -inch. Spread Footings Alternatively, Riley recommends that the proposed building foundations be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on structural fill after removing all loose soil and organics. The expected excavation depth is approximately 8 feet bgs in the south of the proposed building area and 4 feet bgs in the north. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should be at a minimum depth of 18 inches below final exterior grades. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) on structural fill. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity can be used. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.25 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the side of the footing and buried portion of the foundation stem wall can also be considered for resisting lateral loads. We recommend calculating . this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). At perimeter locations, we recommend not including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundation will be constructed neat against competent fill soil or backfilled with structural fill as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. The recommended friction and passive resistance values include a safety factor of 1.5. With spread footing foundations as recommended, you should expect maximum total and differential post - construction settlements of 1 -inch and '/2-inch, respectively. The Riley Group, Inc. IP • 6 February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report Project #22772001 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA 4.4 Slab -on -Grade Construction With site preparation completed as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section, suitable support for slab -on -grade construction should be provided. Riley recommends that the concrete slab be set on top of piles or firm structural fill. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a 4 -inch thick capillary break layer of clean, free - draining sand or gravel that has less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, an 8 to l0 -mil thick plastic membrane should be placed on a 4 -inch thick layer of clean gravel. The membrane should be covered with 1 to 2 inches of clean, moist sand to guard against damage during construction and to aid in curing of the concrete. For the anticipated floor slab loading, we estimate post- construction floor settlements of 1/4- to '/z -inch. For thickness design of the slab subjected to point loading from storage racks and fork lift vehicle traffic, we recommend using a subgrade modulus (Ks) of 150 pounds per square inch per inch of deflection (pci). 4.5 Retaining Walls At the time of preparation of this report, Riley is not aware of any new retaining walls proposed for the site. If retaining walls will be needed, they should be designed based on the soil parameters provided below. Riley recommends designing unrestrained walls for an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. For restrained walls, an earth pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid weighing 55 pcf should be used for design. For seismic design, an addition uniform load of 5 to 7 H (H is wall height) should be applied to the wall surface. These values assume a horizontal backfill condition without building or traffic surcharge loading on the wall. The walls must also be provided with adequate drainage and should be waterproofed. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is shown on Figure 3. 4.6 Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from building. Water must not pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building area. We reconunend providing a minimum drainage gradient of 3% for a minimum distance of 10 feet from the building perimeter, except in paved locations. In paved locations, a minimum gradient of 1% should be provided unless provisions are included for collection and disposal of surface water adjacent to the structure. The Riley Group, Inc. 1 2007 27, 27 February Geotechnical Engineering Report 7 Project February 27, 027 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA Subsurface We recommend installing perimeter foundation drains. A typical reconunended drain detail is shown on Figure 4. The foundation drains and roof downspouts should be tightlined separately to an approved discharge facility. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. Infiltration Riley understands that an infiltration system is being considered for the on -site disposal of storm water run -off. Riley performed an infiltration test at a depth of 4 feet bgs in test boring B -5. Soil encountered was medium dense silty sand with gravel and trace organics. The test was performed in accordance with a falling head percolation test procedure that generally used in the area The field rate was measured between 4 to 8 inches per hour. The field infiltration rate cannot be used directly for system design. Based on our experience with similar projects in the area, Riley recommends that an allowable infiltration rate of 2.5 inches per hour be used for infiltration system design. Riley recommends that the proposed infiltration surface consist of native sand and gravel without impermeable layers. If isolated silt or clay lenses or other unsuitable soils are encountered, they should be overexcavated and replaced with gravel. A geoteclu7ical engineer should observe the infiltration system construction. 4.7 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) specifications. For site utilities located within the City of Tukwila right -of -ways, bedding and backfill should be completed . in accordance with City of Tukwila specifications. The trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section. Where utilities occur below unimproved areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to a minimum of 90 percent of the soil's maximum density as determined by the referenced ASTM standard. As noted, soils excavated on -site are not suitable for use as backfill. Structural fill will need to be imported for backfilling the trenches. The backfill material should satisfy the structural fill requirements listed in the Site Preparation and Grading section. 4.8 Pavements The asphalt pavement on the existing parking seems to be in acceptable condition. For typical passenger vehicles, the final pavement can be finished by overlaying 2 inches of asphalt concrete. In area where existing pavement surface will be removed during construction, the new pavement section should be constructed using the procedure in the following sections. The Riley Group, Inc. 8 Februaty 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report project #2007-021 20 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA Pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in the Site Preparation and Grading section of this report and as discussed below. The subgrade should consist of at least 12 inches of structural fill. Typically, a geotextile fabric such as Mirafi 500X or equivalent can be placed on the subgrade. Regardless of the relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. This condition should be verified by proof - rolling with heavy construction equipment or hand probe by inspector. With the pavement subgrade prepared as described above, we recommend that the general parking area be paved with flexible pavement surface. The following pavement sections are reconunended: D For heavy truck traffic areas: 3 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 6 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) over 12 inches of structural fill; and D For general parking areas: 2 inches of AC over 4 inches of CRB over 12inches of structural fill. The asphalt paving materials used should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for Class B asphalt concrete and CRB surfacing. Long -term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly- drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum pavement performance, surface drainage gradients of no less than two percent are recommended. Also, some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over tune. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Riley is available to provide further geotechnical consultation as the project design develops. We should review the final design and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and construction. Riley is also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the earthwork and construction depends on proper site preparation and procedures. In addition, engineering decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. Construction monitoring services are not part of this scope of work. If these services are desired, please let us know and we will prepare a cost proposal. The Riley Group, Inc. • • February 27, 2007 Geotechnical Engineering Report 9 Project #2277200 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA 6.0 LIMITATIONS This report is the property of The Riley Group, Inc., McDonald's USA, Inc., and their designated agents and was prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is intended for specific application to the Riverton Heights McDonald's at 15210 Pacific Highway South in Tukwila, Washington and for the exclusive use of McDonald's USA, Inc. and its authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based upon data obtained from the test borings drilled on -site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, The Riley Group, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with construction. The Riley Group, Inc. Foster 7TN S.T 119TH ST. . 1'01M5 ELO ®2002DeLorme. Topo USA O. Data copyright of content owner. www.delorme.00m P.P.'T1 The ley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Seale 1 : 24.000 1 "x2000 ft 0 600 00 1000 4100 0000 0 400 100 KO KG 1000 - Riverton Heights McDonald's Site Vicinity Map Figure 1 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington Ji\ 1 1 gggggg,I\ `• J jl. J -.... i d owe Fi zttc -' ,\ j.. . i I 117 \ to et>.•>, t f ` rye f .- ... • Is � pyf li y: 11 11 \ , l I ; .�. C i!i t t ` J 1i. I ,ii r 1 a ty!Ion Ks .K Yom• z, 3; 1 �+,, j_ 14 e J, t _. f --- Zr y��' I t w • jg :: .- To a' tl .,. _ , .tom _ ..., / 1 1 -..-4"..,' _J t 1 ~ 3�-y t '�� r i t.. is 1 Q: ( 1 ligif ,j,.... A /at.re+a.: ; w ,' ---1W-- 1 .f ri i:'i jra 1 J Kl a( -- ` 1 /i I, n lip ..i I - - -. T 1)J/ : �.- - :?st 1. Y t , --.,�� / -� - :- ..... ... ;; l,111,/ • , �-� ; , ;[mac t` j; 1 : .' il,, . .........._....-* rarX.i.tnit.kgX.;/rwr rt- t r`F .Sig y ;�,� �` ��% .. 1 tl .. t '2 - -,;cxv .m,a»a.: :;r cur vs+.a.r:. rr:s.�s.?. + W. ,:M LI.,ii •••• • t:A•7,•:••• KtI,/. ±.:Wtalcr-R.. f 1„,,f - T ES f.N..b i'I::S TJ..4t 1 1M-1 M.m'.h1[ L Or 11 0 _____4, SITE SK2T H �C+?TH�H A - - LI MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT . n-„ i_; , sa, -'al 1 T & H Q� I AP.CHI ECT5, 11,1C ., P.S. -,. -gym Reference: Figure modified from Site Sketch prepared by Freiheit & HO Architects, Inc. dated November 1, 2006. Not to Scale Geotechnical boring location drilled B -1 by The Riley Group, Inc. on February 13, 2007 ' The Riley Group, Riverton Heights McDonald's g .Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riley Project 42007 -021 Geotechnical Exploration Plan Figure 2 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington 12" MINIMUM WIDE — FREE — DRAINING GRAVEL 12" MIN. FILTER FABRIC MATERIAL /, /,. /. O 00o SLOPE TO DRAIN 0 ? C �,. /. /, 4" DIAMETER PVC PERFORATED PIPE po�I 12" OVER THE PIPE 3" BELOW THE PIPE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) COMPACTED STRUCTURAL BACKFILL (NATIVE OR IMPORT) NOT TO SCALE �� The Riley Group; Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Figure 3 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington BUILDING SLAB 40 4 a, e a e a ea ea • d 'COMPACTED..; 'STRUCTURAL BACKFILL :.' / / /\ / / /\ / / /\ / / /\ / / /\< 4" PERFORATED PIPE \ FILTER FABRIC •• •• •11, ri.r• s / r•;.- \ 3/4" WASHED ROCK OR PEA GRAVEL NOT TO SCALE ' The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Typical Footing Drain Detail Figure 4 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington • Geotechnical Engineering Report February 27, 2007 Riverton Heights McDonald's, Tukwila, WA Project #2007 -021 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Riverton Heights McDonald's 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, WA 98188 On February 13, 2007, we performed our field exploration using a truck- mounted drill rig. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by advancing eight test borings to a maximum depth of 16.5 feet below existing grade. The test boring locations are shown on Figure 2. The test boring locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing property lines and streets. The Test Boring Logs are presented on Figures A -2 through A -7. A geologist/engineer from our office conducted the field exploration and classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test boring, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A -1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test borings were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of a typical sample was measured and is reported on the Test Boring Logs. The Riley Group, Inc. MA JOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL c as 0 4 Z_ co Q > L 0 Lij E oo NI u) O ° o °Z Q c 0 as r U 2 `o 2 GRAVELS More than 50% of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve CLEAN GRAVELS <5% fines GW GP GRAVELS with fines GM GC SANDS More than 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve CLEAN SANDS <5% fines SW SP TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Well- graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorly- graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, gravel- sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines. Clayey gravels, gravel- sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. Well- graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poorly- graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS with fines SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non - plastic fines. 0 w z Q 0 w z LL J_ O 0) More than 50% material smaller than No. 200 sieve SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limits less than 50% SC ML CL Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. Inorganic silts, rock tlour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limits greater than 50% MH Inorganic silts, elastic. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, (fat clays). OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS O w 0 Q o Density Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense SPT (Blows /Foot) 0 -4 4 -10 10 -30 30 -50 >50 Consistency Very soft Soft Medium stiff Stiff Very stiff Hard SPT (Blows /Foot) 0 -2 2 -4 4 -8 8 -15 15 -30 >30 2" Outside diameter split spoon sampler 2.4" Inside diameter ring sampler or Shelby tube • Water level (date) Tr Torvane reading, tsf pp Penetrometer reading, tsf DD Dry density, pcf LL Liquid limit, percent PI Plasticity index N Standard penetration, blows per foot Ar " The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald `s Unified Soil Classification System Figure A -1 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington Boring No. B -1 Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Approximate Elev.: N/A Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth Density (feet) 0 m (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with trace silt, (Fill). Loose Gray silty SAND with some gravel, damp, medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense Gray silty SAND with little gravel and organics, moist, dense, (SM). Dense Terminated at 9.0'. No groundwater seepage encounterred. 5 — 10 — 15 15 30 14.3 27.1 111/' The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B -1 Figure A -2 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington Boring No. B -2 Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Approximate Elev.: N/A Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Density Depth (feet) a E (2 (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with trace to little silt, loose, (Fill). Loose — 5 1 1 8 7 8.8 16.1 Dark brown to gray silty SAND with trace gravel, trace organic clay, damp, loose, (SM). __ Loose __ Terminated at 9.0'. No groundwater seepage encounterred. -- -_ -- — 10 15 PP' r The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011. Riverton Heights McDonald's Test BOring Log B -2 Figure A -3 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, Washington Boring No. B -3 Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Approximate Elev.: N/A Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth Density (feet) (3) 0 m (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with ittle silt, (Fill). Loose Homogenous brown to dark brown to gray SAND with little silt, trace organics, to silty SAND with trace gravel, damp, very loose, (SM). Very Loose Mottled brown to gray silty SAND with little gravel and silt, slightly plastic, damp, medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense Brown silty SAND with little gravel with SAND lens (15.7' - 15.9' moist), damp, medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense Terminated at 16.5'. No groundwater seepage encounterred. I"— 5 10 - 15 1 0 19 25 13.8 21.9 12.9 lir The BROTiHley GWAro up, Inc. BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B -3 Figure A -4 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, Washington Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Soil Description Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with ittle silt, (Fill). Gray silty SAND with some gravel, trace organic clay, damp, loose, (SM). Mottled orange brown to dark brown silty SAND with some gravel, trcae clay, damp, medium dense, (SM). Brown silty SAND with SAND Tens (16.0' - 16.1' moist), transitioning to mottled orange brown sandy SILT with clay, damp, stiff, (ML /SM). Terminated at 16.5'. No groundwater seepage encounterred. Co S Boring No. B -4 Approximate Elev.: N/A 1r '� The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B -4 Figure A -5 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tulcwila, Washington nsistency/ .elative Density Depth (feet) a E in . (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Loose 5 10 15 — I 4 20 14 8.2 12.1 17.6 Loose Medium . Dense tiff /Medium -- Dense -- 1r '� The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B -4 Figure A -5 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tulcwila, Washington Boring No. B -5 Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Approximate Elev.: N/A Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Density Depth (feet) Q E (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with trace silt, (Fill). Loose 5 T I 16 19 73/12" 13.3 11.5 12.3 (2/13/07) Mottled orange brown to brown to gray silty SAND with some gravel, trace organci clay, slight plasticity, damp, medium dense, (SM). — Medium _ Dense Brown silty SAND with some gravel, damp, medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense -- 10 Brown silty SAND with some gravel, damp to wet, very dense, (SM). -- Very _- Dense 15 — Terminated at 16.5'. Groundwater seepage encounterred at 15.0' • w.-- The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 BOTHELL WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B-5 Figure A -6 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila, Washington Boring No. B -6 Logged by : PL Date: 2/13/07 Approximate Elev.: N/A Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Depth Density (feet) a) cn 0 (N) Blows /ft Moisture Content ( %) Asphalt 3" underlain by gravel 6 ". Brown SAND with trace silt, (Fill). Loose Mottled orange brown to grayish brown silty SAND with some gravel and silt, damp, medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense Brown silty SAND with some gravel, damp (moist /wet @ tip); medium dense, (SM). Medium Dense Brown silty SAND with some gravel, damp, very dense, (SM). Very Dense 5 10 — 15 Terminated at 16.5'. Groundwater seepage encounterred at 11.5' T 22 50/5" 9.0 (2/13/07) (No Recovery) pr'i The � °oup, Inc. 4 17522 BOTHlELL Ri Riley y WAY NE BOTHELL, WASHINGTON 98011 Riverton Heights McDonald's Test Boring Log B -6 Figure A -7 Site Address: 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, Washington The Riley Group Inc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT Riverton Heights McDonald's 15210 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, WA 98188 Project No. 2007 -021 Prepared By: The Riley Group, Inc. 17522 Bothell Way NE Bothell, WA 98011 Prepared for: Ms. Anne Thorpe McDonald's USA, Inc. 12131 -113th Avenue NE, Suite 103 Kirkland, WA 98034 February 27, 2007 Serving the Pacific Northwest Main Office: 17522 Bothell Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011 Tel (425) 415 -0551 • Fax (425) 415 -0311