Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-32-89 - SCHOFIELD ROBERT - MIKAMI DESIGN REVIEWMIKAMI DESIGN REVIEW RETAIL SPACE & ADDITIONAL PARKING 16813 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY EPIC -32 -89 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER Date 40, ( `j '70 To Pac is First Federal Savings Bank Address 400 SW 152nd, Seattle, WA 98166 Please take notice that the account in your institution evidenced by account or passbook number and /or certificate number (s) QC-/ `�Qoi //Z) - _) in an amount of at least but not less than $38,50d4 00 has been assigned and transferred to the undersigned as collateral for the Obligations and that such money is payable directly to the undersigned. Please complete your acknowledgement of assignment and transfer and return same to the undersigned. City of Tukwi a £ (Authorized Signature) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We acknowledge receipt of your notice of assignment and transfer of the account of Robert H. Schofeild or Leslie M. Schofeild in this institution evidenced by and /or certificate number(s) 047- 1409115t9gether with all moneys and claims for moneys now and hereafter due or payable thereon. We further acknowledge that such moneys are payable directly to the City and that no account holder or assignee (except for the City) shall have any right to make any withdrawal from said account or to obtain any new certificate evid filing said /ccoun 1. filing fi t/ � Date of -14 -qn Pacific First Feder Savings Bank By PBRII (Title) WAC 197 -11 -970 • DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal CONSTRUCT 28,000 S.F. OF RETAIL SPACE IN 2 BLDGS AND 82 PARKING SPACES. REOUIRES BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT, STREET VACATION, & LOT CONSOLIDATION. Proponent ROBERT H. SCHOFIELD REPRESENTING MATT M. MIKAMI Location of Proposal, including street address, if any 16813 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY IN THE S.W. * OF SEC. 26, TWN 23, RGE 4; TUKWILA, WA. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC-32-89 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it 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. [ There is no comment period for this DNS D This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Address Planning Director Phone 433 -1846 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, TukwjerfOr 981:.8 Signature You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.ONS CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTF_RBOULE_VARD, TUKWILA. WASHINGTON 98188 March 21, 1990 Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Road Bellevue, Wa. 98004 RE: Southcenter Retail Building II Dear Bob: PHONE # (206) 433.1800 Gary L. VonDusen, Mayor The Public Works Department has reviewed your plan submittal for subject site (Plan Sheet Nos. C -1 and C -2 of 2) and request resubmittal to address the following comments: 1. On your Utility Permit Application form, check the permits you believe you are requesting. From Public Works initial review of the submitted plans, the following permits appear to be appropriate candidates: Fire Loop /Hydrant, Landscape Irrigation, Sanitary Side Sewer, Water Meter (Permanent), Water Meter (Temporary) ?, Water Meter Exempt ?, Curb Cut /Access /Sidewalk, Channelization /Striping /Signing., Hauling ?, Storm Drain, and Flood Control Zone Permit. 2. On your Utility Permit Application under "monthly service billings to ", check the boxes after "water, sewer, Metro" and "stand -by ". 3. The City has now instituted a new Storm and Surface Water Utility charge. Requested is you identify the demensions of all impervious surfaces, (including rooftops, drive- ways, asphalted areas including parking lots) and also all pervious surfaces including landscaping, and areas of natural vegetation). Next you are requested to provide the percentages of impervious surfaces (in square feet) over the entire lot size (after street mention R/W acquired) along with your storm and surface water billing account number, so that the City may adjust that billing per the modified impervious surfaces on this lot calculation for the proposed development. Please use the attached form to provide your calculation. This shall be part of the Development's site plan submittal. • • 4. Future South 168th extension (to east) and alignment to northerly access to proposed Development: A. Identify schematics for proposed 168th Street (contact Brian Shelton for existing plans and studies for this future alignment. (433- 0179). Brian believes he has given you this information in the past). B. Provide channelization plan of Southcenter Parkway fronting the development 500 feet to the north and south of the development, pre, post and future resignalization and extension of 168th. C. Identify (schematically)future signalization including signal poles, detector loop system and associated handholes /manholes in underground wiring. D. Identify to provide capped conduits for proposed signalization and for future signal interconnects relative to your proposed improvements. E. Identify schedule for South 168th Street and signalization improvements (by others). F. Identify proposed easements to the City for future signal poles /handholds /detector loops and underground conduits including interconnects. Based on schematics, identified in item 4 -C above). G. Locations shall be tied to known momumentation. H. Identify southerly Puget Power access and determine how your access fits in with this existing access. 5. Securing 30 foot right -of -way by the Development: Identify on plan, processes owner will go through after street vacation, including purchase of property from Puget Power. This plan cannot be approved until the owner has secured all properties. 6. Identify on plan submittal prior traffic studies and City determinations, including requirement to provide to the City $38,850, as a condition of the Curb Cut /Access Permit for your pro -rata share of traffic mitigations signed by all property owners involved. Also included in these easements shall be an easement to Puget Power, allowing access through the Development to Puget Power, before permits are issued (Refer to the City Engineer, Ron • • Cameron - 433 - 0179). 7. Curb Cut aprons: change your plan references from "new City Standard R -6" to "new City Standard R -7 for commercial driveways ". 8. Common access easements for north and south access points and internal driveways: Per the requirements of the boundary line adjustment process, the development has been required to provide easements for common access at the southerly joint access and common use of the northerly access and through the properties. These easements shall be submitted as part of this plan review approval and reflect the findings of -the BLA process. 9. Identify WSDOT drainage easement which traverses under proposed Building B. Identify if this easement is still in affect on the plans. Also identify the existing drain provided under the Grade and Fill Permit to accommodate WSDOT drainage system. Per the requirements of the Grade and Fill plan review, up- grade /replace this WSDOT system - identify how this state drainage system is now going to be accommodated. Finally in a letter from WSDOT or yourselves commemorating discussions with WSDOT, identify acceptance with this proposed accommodation to WSDOT drainage by this development. Please note all permanent storm drains shall be constructed to City Standards. 10. Provide a temporary and final erosion control plan showing intermittent contours and final contours during the construction phase. 11. Identify utility easements for joint use drainage, fire loop and other utility infrastructure and provide inter - development agreements between to the two parcels of property for the maintenance, operation, monitoring, repair or replacement of these facilities as part of your plan submittal. 12. On page C -2 of 2, under "note #16 - note! note!..." add "... and Fire Marshall and insurance underwriter." 13. On page C -2 of 2, note #23, identify PVC pipe. 14. Identify any slope easements by WSDOT, (if exist). Provide review and approvals from WSDOT for any construction into the hillside behind I -5, and accommodation of WSDOT drainage from the hillside through your property. 15. The northerly access behind Building A which turns to the south appears too close to the corner of Building A. Review turning radius of emergency vehicles and setbacks of buildings from edge of pavement, per City Standards Templates and Fire Marshall's review. Your traffic engineer shall conduct a triangulation study for sight distance for turning movements around Building A. 16. The City's drain pipe materials standard has changed since Tukwila Retail Phase I Development. The City no longer accepts corrugated metal pipe and requests that all storm drainage identifying corrugated metal pipe be changed to concrete and /or reinforced ADS pipe. 17. Drainage behind Building B: By the placement of this building in such close proximity to the edge of the I -5 bank, sub- surface water may either be blocked or must traverse under the building pad. This water shall be picked -up prior to its migration to the east through an appropriate drain system designed by your Civil Engineer. Questioned are the dash lines which go east and west into the State R /W: do these lines represent drain pipes how are they accommodated? A typical section of your proposed drain system behind your building, needs to be provided on the plans to assure that no surface /sub - surface drainage can impound at the footings or face of Building B. 18. Review the accessability of these buildings with the Fire Marshall, Nick Olivas, 433 -1859. 19. Provide an 18" minimum separation at crossings at all water and sewer systems. Sanitary side sewers and private sanitary sewer mains: Each structure shall have a separate side sewer from the structure to the main (public or private). Your side sewer from Building B exceeds 150 ft. Per the City's Development Standards, side sewers shall be no more than 150 ft. in length. Suggested is a common private sewer main common to Buildings A and B be provided at the juncture of the two side sewers shown on the plans. Required is a manhole structure at the upper reach /juncture of these two side sewers. 21. Provide cleanouts for side sewers every 100 ft. at bends and at the exit point of each structure. 22. On sheet C -1 of 2, bottom center, the note existing sanitary invert 14.0 plus or minus "verify ". This note shall be • revised to indicate (highlight this note), that this stub elevation shall be dug up, field verified by your surveyor and tied into all other buildings and site elevations prior to beginning any site construction overall. 23. Call out the type of pipe for sewer on the plans.. 24. Specify the bedding, backfill, based on your soils engineers report and include conditions which have been found to other engineering studies, (refer to soils engineer studies on file for LID # 32 - Southcenter Parkway Sanitary Sewer Extension). 6k �. It is questioned whether special backfill or special pipe 01 bracing of the sanitary side sewers /private mains will not g Abe necessary to assure that the 2% grade can be maintained in OL'4,62 these pipes to assure no significant sagging of pipes occur. On Plan Sheet 2 of 2, "Note 9 ", check on the calculation for P the soils condition for F type bedding to assure that this is appropriate per the soils reports on file. Provide specific design bedding and backfill based on the soils engineer Study of Record including soils engineers studies and final findings for the construction of LID #32 on file with the City. 25. On plan sheet C -2 of 2, "Note #10" - take out "except as shown` on plan" as there are no exceptions and add "for sewers and water lines ". 26. A southerly access shall be stripped for two lanes only, one ingress and one egress. 27. The City shall determine, based on the traffic studies, whether right turn in and out of the northerly access is appropriate. 28. Per the Ritten house - Zeman and Associates Sub- Surface Exploration and Geotechnical Report (W -6407) (October, 1989) - 4.3.1, identifies pilings (15,500 ft. /# to 26,000 ft. / #). An analysis of rosidum settlement to adjacent utilities and structures shall be provided including the flat sewer main in Southcenter Parkway shall be provided by your soils engineer. Also, a monitoring program and schedule shall be provided (Reference: Prior grade and fill requirements for this development, of Public Works). 29. Per Section 4.5 of the Soils Report, elaborate on WSDOT horizontal drains: their function; current condition; WSDOT access forr maintenance and monitoring; conditions needed be kept to afford stability to I -5 slope; any rehabilitation of WSDOT needed; WSDOT review of your soils report and findings under Section 4.5 and plans. Requested is a resubmittal of these plans, addressing the above comments. Once Public Works Department has received this re- submittal, we will continue with our review process. If you have any questions or I can be of further assistance do not hesitate to call me at 433 -0179. Sincerely, Phil Fraser Senior Engineer Public Works Dept. PF /amc xc: Ron Cameron Brian Shelton Ross Heller Ted Freemire Vernon Umetsu John Colgrove Permit Coordinator Development File: (Schofield) Southcenter Retail Bldg. 2 Enclosures (4) PF /amc:SCII March 21, 1990 L. Rick Beeler City of Tukwila SEPA Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98116 RE: EPIC -32 -89 (Mikami Design Review). Dear Mr. Beeler, I request that the description of proposed action and environmental checklist be amended per the attached environmental checklist and clarifications below. The description of the proposed action is herewith further clarified to satisfy the minimum standards below. I agree that further SEPA review by the City will be done based on a review of this information to be submitted, which demonstrates project consistency with the standards below. I recognize that: a. all of the provisions below must be satisfied in order to have completed the SEPA process and allow issuance of any grade and fill or building permit, b. project design changes may be necessary in order to satisfy these standards, and c. any project design changes will require further City review. MODIFICATIONS TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Existing and finished grades shall be documented in a fully licensed survey. This shall include a plan view and at least three east -west cross - sections showing existing and finished grades as specified by the Public Works Director. All retaining walls, buildings, drainage and utility lines shall be shown on this plan and cross - sections. 2. All construction shall be in accordance with Rittenhouse - Zeman and Assoc. (RZA) recommendations and City standards including satisfying all provisions of the Public Works Dept. letter of March 21, 1990 as determined by the Public Works Director. This shall be demonstrated with the minimum following additional information: a. Plans shall reflect all structures and utility lines with more detailed design information such as dimensional call outs on maximum and minimum conditions such as maximum retaining wall height and minimum utility line depth and slope. b. A letter certifying site preparation in full accordance with RZA geotechnical recommendations (i.e. RZA:6 -7) shall be submitted. c. RZA shall review and approve the resubmitted plans for conformance with their recommendations. Special measures in construction and design of underground structures shall be called out on plans to demonstrate conformity with geotechnical recommendations (i.e. RZA:5 -6 & 9). This shall include, but not be limited to deep footing drains for Building B (RZA:9), steep sloping drain lines and a one -year pre -load or equivalent prior to installation of underground lines (RZA:5 -6), and flexible connections (RZA:9). d. Pile driving will be observed by a qualified geotechnical engineer (RZA:8). e. An analysis of potential surrounding utility and structure settlement resulting from construction activities shall be submitted and a program of monitoring shall be approved by the Public Works Dept. as was required for the initial grade and fill permit. 3. A geotechnical analysis of hillside stability as related to the increased exposure of life and property to slope failure shall be submitted. This analysis will include the following: a. The role, operation and required maintenance of Washington State Dept. of Transportation ( WSDOT) drainage facilities after construction (i.e. the role and continuing maintenance requirements of on slope horizontal drains) and b. Geotechnical recommendations for slope drainage (RZA:9) to be implemented. Implementation plans shall be submitted for City and WSDOT approval after RZA approval. 4. The proposed storm drainage system and construction shall be consistent with the WSDOT drainage easement and ability to maintain upslope horizontal drains to the west as determined by WSDOT the Public Works Department. 5. Reciprocal access, utility, and parking easements between Southcenter Retail Phase I and Phase II owners shall be provided in a form which satisfies both Public Works and Community Development directors. This agreement shall be recorded with the King County Assessor and may not be modified without written City consent. • • 6. A channelization study on Southcenter Parkway between the south access driveway and the north edge of the northern driveway shall be provided as approved by the Public Works Director to demonstrate acceptability of driveway location. 7. The acceptability of the northern driveway location with respect to future 168th St. improvements shall be further demonstrated by locating both driveway and street with respect to known monumentation. The driveway shall be aligned with the street improvements so that there is no overlap of lanes facing on- coming vehicles. All work shall be done by a licensed civil engineer or surveyor. Driveway design with provisions for future traffic signalization shall be approved by the Public Works Director. It is recognized that loss of building or parking area will result should the driveway need to be shifted southward. 8. The previously agreed to traffic mitigation payment of ,i� „..56.- for intersection improvements (EPIC- 25 -89) shall be provided prior to building permit issuance. 5-8004 9. Easements shall be provided for a traffic signal at the northern driveway's intersection with Southcenter Parkway. This shall include areas for a signal sensor loop in the northern driveway (i.e. 50 ft. deep into the driveway), signal poles, interconnect conduit between various signals, and controller as necessary per the designs and locations established in Item No. 7. 10. The northern driveway shall be designed to maintain access to the existing Puget Power driveway on the immediate north unless Puget Power agrees to close it off. 11. Puget Power shall be granted an access easement to the southern access driveway, as shown in the proposed plans, from Southcenter Parkway. 12. Changes to the northwest corner of Building A may be made to eliminate a blind corner. Design changes will be proposed by my traffic /civil engineer and approved by the Public Works Department. 13. The southern driveway shall be striped for two lanes only,© OR_ A5 APPR.ovED By TF PV &Lrc czort s 1)(&EG-ro2. 14. Street trees shall be located in a manner which does not interfere with street lighting and satisfies Board of Architectural Review design approval as determined by the Public Works and Community Development directors. 15. A legal description of the property with all easements and property lines shall be submitted and described on a site plan. All construction shall be consistent with the provisions of these easements. This shall include, but not be limited to: i a. Consistency of the proposed storm drainage system and construction with the Washington State Dept. of Transportation easement and ability to maintain upslope horizontal drains to the west as appropriate, b. The new Puget Power access easement to the south of their property via your northern driveway, and c. Other new easements for traffic mitigation. d. All joint operating, maintenance, and replacement agreements necessary for common infrastructure. Sincer Robert H. Schofie A. BACKGROUND kCY SEI) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 3 /zl / ?C) Co' -ol No. E. File No. 32-9? Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 34C 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: ,t((KANi / 'b r(G� eel,- 2. Name of applicant: Msk7 -r M fb.4 rr i 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: /u.,3 ,jo,e7iice7vrex. 00 ,y f i v e . glit: 57c =oPi 4; eo. r4cr i t r A a a v i t i a d e gr s u r W i t : 2 4 42 / i M'wrt r b me- Ro. A V L A .. 4 %. 91 4. Date checklist prepared: A'. 8q 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): LINJrrag cTION y'• 90 '1b 9- !G . 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected .with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List anyenvironmental information you know about be prepared, directly related to this proposal. LWrtre ., s1 Dire- Pose— pu . J <Rr►oa fir.. r that has been prepared, or will w /leento•ver 4%04014 c.+r,oN . 9.. Do you know_ whether appInations are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals ;' d1ctlyefi`cting. the property covered by your proposal? If yes, exp%ain.i v "s,r� i..#ckric✓ ;...� y'•,r:5 "L "'tea:, Yi C • • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. IS ®c7 eVDA2`i �tMa- AD a uSr1 f- sTR.QT V4 cA -1--( Loy co&tsocr, as} -riovv of VACA7- Ea ST2 r A2671) WS Vo ( Srottm -Da.A ,NA GE A-PPko vAC_� 02CcrP2k co UTrc.r rr a- ACc6sS- 7 S EYV TS 49/ S oc) TN Pit° PeY2 T Y:z EAS ENl ENT Fog- Po -r Pow L•� R A cc4rYr (Ale-c,) bP(Ve1WfiY To SbUTN C,DC -GY" p(_ $V$STAT/onr £u, L- bfr.( P (v(1-7- UT(C. ITY PE2M(T . 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. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. Coal T, c'.oY , f3 000 . . ffeffr7 I PC D S .d g2. PA 2Kir CSPACe-5 Re-autg s fooavPARY ADTCJSTMET(T rice i VACATfor' 4.. L0T cars( Soc.► p,4T(d"l. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand =: the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if' any and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would..occir over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). ProOde a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, ift, reasOnab =1y..., „. available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you.are not`' required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this checklist. 14.28 SCHATAKE")47E71— "fre&JAy / �p-sr An, Q T ,ag.irS F.i2ert 2w.■ rfA�•cver 4+1.3,2&j»drtc a FII - A#rt4a.(( owsu*T If LC'GA Cr ESc►21 PTfors! 4,11 77( A IS Sf(Own1 AS A'TT,4CNNIE7ht I-4- S C- ,4 altv T S G- Su gm r 77-Lib d- ! C. C. U S T2 A /nt A S's rA Sv2VE'•C__ P%ZIo12 To UIC -b /,' ; PAM cT 13. Does the proposal He within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? 6-x-ce p i' FoR ` A Ai2.C74 /� 7-e(” ` 7 e14 (r 1.0o ow P r-1 Cs rot S LO Pes- o veZ / S % . A SV s r , vGr A r2.&? t0 R- ATO/Zt. U M GJA .v.G}YL. i!A re ( /SStJG1b R TffC 7%) ,J( (-A C11-4W;$7:46 0 /- ;ei t:7. -ri' : o 4 (- LO C,,) P 2 a GT AA- e- -3- u ,a.t�turiWLtitu dr APPLILk (. Evaluation for . Agency Use Only £B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? S 6- W/P€c/{n(T rc st,OPCsS Pet. st 7 C 1 or -Sol 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. C -&AV 1 , p 6,5-Ar p4412 (3 a-0 TOEGH 20 ADR7' C A- cggD) . Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. ND e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. .,m5.4go�, �p„W�: 11A MO x/MArC , y- 20® _e. un, '- P-7 L. C N err) ez TGNj p• - ire -r /)_ 7-e-At 7"ro6v- b t T c. N. f. Could erosion occur as a result of 'clearing., construction, or use? If so, generally describe. I a iexgM 3)E7el.lTrnn/ CSro20- C) %5(0,v.62,ireO. 160g- • D vR. i N G C o w ST2 u C,Tt orf SF6,1 L c d Cs P/Lov1 D61 As- kPP20 cam Y _ • PO F LA c „..c,,,la tc s eP7 Pg. 4, of To nom, :::IyS !✓:: r BU! t ,,A'G P &M t-r. g. About .whatpercent;of the site will be covered Nith imperv.ious-= sur- faces tafter project construction (for example;,; asph'al't= oe hu1idings)? 4,,,,,..,� ve y Evaluation for. 411 111 Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion,-or other impacts to the earth, if any:z2,86,2gticAafiammana S�rG f" -AnID SHOT C-2 , 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the the proposal (i.e., dust, industrial wood smoke) during the project is completed? describe and give approximate Aare 4:7-7-r iss ...vs air would result from automobile odors, construction and when If any, generally quantities if known. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Aj c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Nucor -- 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year - round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,, wetlands.)? If yes, describe type and provide or names - .If '.appropriate, state what a p �k streanL river, in flows into. • 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. ro 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. ,,,,4 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No Su2Fa¢Ge" svffsu2FACe- &J4 r co f (-C.- Jet inf TeiLGel°Tb To 7ff'Gr to aST of= ?La G, S P6A Ge-o7 ccN Raro2T, 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ,uo 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No Evaluation for Agency Use Only b.' Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. ,u , Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve._& c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where wills this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. a,.` ;� t�/ ,�,t Ta log.(.�T •N 5 #7V 7 6• racer Sr5.d?1 -,.*Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. 100 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: /xszott- Al naZi M C 3IVS7RQC.7 o'/ M CAS (>'US 4, .'r flPe2o✓Ob BY Po73c,cc taolC,KS.. PfEoros 7 Po-cal An/E/yT TI/k/4-1 nifFCC S((Ow n4 iw CLI a 2. To l?s Mo'DcF(CP AOL Pclt?L[C Wo(L.k.s `> 61.71' T. 4 G TO 7' &-C /4 Al IF CA74.1 r t 6,NCbA 77 o -s (A -T-7A ,-CZ, , 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture . crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? . _ ,. � •ter.. r...: :�w... _ r• y c. Llst � eatenedt o� endangered species known to be on or : near, = d. Proposed landscing, use of native plants, or It measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: r¢v-�s � Ass r— �� a ���. S SaLtdta.L 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: �►�owle fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. qa.,— ,uelo -41 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N•Afi • Agency Use Only' ( 6. Energy and Natural Resources Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will- be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. AC , EU. r4 jC, b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. ,vv 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: co v.s 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. Ado 1) Describe- special emergency services that might be requ.ired :: O u yi • 2) Rroposedmeasures`to reduce or control.environ- mental health hazards, if any: ,L„ve- .. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? ,v,y 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long -term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 72a(xs ,r 6 ' - eit.. c ewIST. N e is er — (". s.a ecAYS . 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: A,a,,g- land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? A, D3Arc. o our tS ,?Er9, t. of P11.1 EX- 'r»rr dhi • A•), b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Gamic,,, c. Describe-CO • tY,4* structures on the site Evaluation for Agency Use Only Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the si (ONAC Re-rAtc., f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? C.0 1-4 eryu,AL g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? AiA. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. 6 s /I, Ig Pc.3 i. Approximately how many people would-reside or work in the completed project? io - 3s" e.,Jo iCKE7eS. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: No...e- 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if 'any: - _ • A144 c ©N- Stc-rAmcYY At,c:.erA) BC Ce7) OF A2ca! Tcc -c t,4c_ 2-ekl t ' q- ©- 7,cat' as1..b(ivAnvcaS . 4 PRnr e-srGnr Se +t-L MOi►! F(. @D 7-0 . -et-I AcA- re- A ri'L V Af A cukt, r /a 7-6-.- Al, C.4.) co &nre OF LAG 'A Pet 7RAFFrG ewe X72 t r7?or4S P(IBc.,IG (..)o2izS HPP2.oVAC.. 14027-44(02,0V 'DR•tvcswAY SKi4t,L ire- -Aes(GivC'a 1N Fuc_c. Coo2a /A/ATtoe.% C.7(TK so. (68 re! S� co, e-cTOR "tie S /GN. -12- Evaluation for. Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing? b. Approximately how many,units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. NONC c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: ti,,,_ 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? 28' ,571tcc.o 7i LE su. O. .What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? 10.6,04::_, c. Proposed_r:measures to- reduce or control aesthetic impacts = „1f,_ any. .1 : dr,a",.N F4, tr. P2.1, rege- 11. Light and Glare • . What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? N a ti►a- b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? NU c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? /u o ,4 el- d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: w.ue 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? /lr7a,c_ epo,wl4 0e-A-s (Se E" sr,nr6 LA....p N sa ,VJ A-/,s, b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. /JO c. Proposed measuresrto' reduce or control impacts on recreation-;-including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: ,.,,.br tvaluation for Agency Use Only 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. x,0 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. ,v,,,,, c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: ,/e..•a- 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. E2uBn 3Y 3,-ii Cfrurex. a O ewitY .30 erne . b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If . not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? %lEi , r Ta03 Ar AWAVnyy . C. How many parking spaces would the completed project How: many many =would the project eliminate? A pii-, o ri L .O r P Nv9-Se -S CPwi4`sg :� ' i ! -e; x r S'T,„r GIv ( Evaluation for • Agency Use Only 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). -, . 1NTcrYS CT,oI.I l/"1PkovG 2Jv ,CT2RFF/C S[G /VA CS) F _ 2a-z0At 6)-• ser/4- Mb,V arc- zS -.9°6 PR,o vt S(o0■e5 Fog. IM P2o vaem tCT'S D USCG rs i■401, [Crc,4 'r'c ones Pen_ PUTS, R, KS ter-r rot d i 3%I 17 CM ►.0 °S• '` - 8.)lc.c.. g - Mc-r ) P12 colt To iSXLANCEr oFA- gwi.LDIKG e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate Pmtcn vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. 1,,p f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. f r 7ai.Pc,c -ok 2EaonlE" :Pr c -2s-- g ?) jr.,vy Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No b. Proposed; measure sN "to. reduce or control direct impacts'' n :public "services, if any. Alit 1 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: CeJectricity natural 'as, ate efuse service telephon- sanitar sewe 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. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.. Signature: Date Submitted: // //o -8q PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. Evaluation for Agency Use Only w b. LUMNLtItU by APPLIC4 • O. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS 4 Evaluation for Agency Use Only (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? c4Le---Asr kJA ram_ a,•,.,, upc- 4 A. pp "14,aer Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Lis E- C.47ZK 8AS,N r Fo,c. Si..r l' 71 a,J s, r.T /177E)v7-1 a.+ Sv re,' •4 O N 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? c..,ss 04r 440A4, r r Fe So,-.t /3 /mss to- LI ,1.,.,,,v74 , Proposed measures to. protect or conserve plants, ani- 'mais, fish, or.,marine life. are: so,L. ".0A. NK.AJ p<i4'1i'riNcs ./r. T. FS .Pra.+61 SAA-sf Fc. ,.,. rst J Evaluation for Agency Use Only Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land 'use impacts area: ti How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? co,-/Ay 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? �s Pcr-n- sr+" 44_ /2.e-rA .. pito. rcT Q tr 1 , Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: / n Gn• ref" ,3.s N c-. zs,, -ny 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. ",o il0 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila 0Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? ,uo Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPL NT Evaluation for • Agency Use Only E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT w PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc,. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? LNH ce.r Pet, a" . TeX•T/AL 4J Co •-• s, s r r i . J T 1,4.7.• 74• Az C e.a 00/2.e. NET, i -• 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Owe2. Des ccnvS. • 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: 67Ne7i 2.0,40'1 •t,- • " -tiA -r • • •.• C2 • • Rick Beeler, Director, D.C.D. City of Tukwila Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Building Permit Review for Southcenter Retail Building Phase II. Dear Mr. Beeler, The Tukwila City Council granted this project a waiver from the moratorium pursuant to ordinances 1544 and 1550, and I have executed the attached "Agreement to be Subject to a Sensitive Areas Ordinance." I hereby request that you immediately begin all necessary reviews to ensure the timely issuance of a building permit. I acknowledge the following: 1. That this building permit application has been submitted prior to SEPA review, approval by the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review and receipt of the City's fully clarified conditions to the moratorium waiver, 2. That this building permit application is vested only to the extent it is consistent with all the conditions finally established in the reviews listed in Item No. 1. 3. That the above analyses and City actions may require project design changes which may result in additional plan check fees and review time, 4. That the building permit shall not be issued until the proposed project is consistent with all final conditions in Item No. 1, 5. I agree to pay any such fees, and 6. I hold the City harmless for any delays or costs incurred as a result of project design changes due to the above. Sincerely, Robert Schofield cc: Beeler /City Attorney /file. Date • • AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE The undersigned owner /developer of real property located at 16813 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, Washington, and more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto, hereby acknowledge that such property is subject to the moratorium imposed by Tukwila Ordinance Nos. 1544 and 1550. The undersigned have petitioned for relief from the provisions of the moratorium as provided for in Ordinance No. 1550 and in consideration of such relief, agree that if the City of Tukwila will process the following applications: EPIC -32 -89 — SEPA for Mikami Design Review 89 -15 -DR — Mikami Design Review (BAR) Mikami Building Permit Application to Implement Above Project The development of the property described in Exhibit A will be subject to all of the provisions of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as finally passed by the City Council, even though those provisions may be more restrictive than any conditions or limitations imposed by or resulting from the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes described above. The undersigned agree that such processes will be continued solely at their risk and expense and that the result of the final Sensitive Areas Ordinance may be to require extensive project modifications and reevaluation or rescission or withdrawal of any approval arising out of the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes. It is also understood and agreed that continuation of the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes does not mean that any other application for this project will be accepted or processed unless the City Council approves a petition therefor. The undersigned acknowledge that the waiver was made subject to the following conditions which the undersigned agree to meet as partial consideration for the waiver. A. Fill may be emplaced to feather grades up to the existing 34-ft. contour; however, cuts may not be made into the 28 ft. contour west of the drainage ditch. Development may occur up to the 30 to 34-ft. contour which lies westerly of the drainage ditch as shown in Exhibit B and represents the toe of the 15% slope. B. In the stockpile area, the original 34 ft. contour shall be used as the maximum cut line. No cuts into original slopes above this contour shall be allowed. This maximum cut may only be done if slopes no more than 2:1 can be established between any cut and the existing slopes. No development shall occur above this 34 ft. contour line in the stockpile area as shown in Exhibit B. C. No rockeries or retaining walls shall be allowed in the northwest corner of the site. 1 The undersigned further acknowledge that this conditional waiver was given in reliance on the accuracy of the information supplied by the undersigned, including the original and existing grades as shown on the Bush Roed & Hitchings survey as revised on March. 12, 1990, and agree that they bear all risk of inaccuracy of such information. The undersigned acknowledge that the covenants herein run with the land described in Exhibit A, and that this document will be recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections and that those covenants cannot be released without the written consent of the City of Tukwila. MATT M. MIKAMI, Owner ROBERT H. SOHO Developer /Applicant STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that MATT M. MIKAMI, Owner, and ROBERT H. SCHOFIELD, Developer /Applicant are the persons who appeared before me, and said persons acknowledged that they signed this AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE, and acknowledged it to be their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: Marta► ,1990. Use. lic in for the State o Notary lib of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires: • DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: EXHIBIT A, Page 1 of 2 THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OP THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE SUBDIVISION) IN SECTION 26. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST M.M. LYING WEST OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 972. MESS BROTHERS ROAD. CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 921233 (SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY FORMERLY 57TH AVENUE SOUTB), DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, 1.020 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH. ALONG SAID WEST LINE. 294.82 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 294.62 FEET. MORE OR LESS, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH A LINE RUNNING EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 (SR 5) BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5524599 AND 5992105; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 6343852; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA. COUNTY OF KING. STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE WHICH IS 1,020 FEET NORTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OP THE HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST M.N., DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH IS OPPOSITE HIGHWAY ENGINEER'S STATION (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS HES) LW 2504 +89.33 ON THE LW LINE SURVEY OF SR 5, SOUTH 178TH STREET TO SOUTH 126TH STREET, AND 553.73 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE EASTERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2505 +00 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 590 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2505 +75 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 570 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2507 +15 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 515 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2509+50 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 500 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE SAID HES AND 428.97 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE SOUTHERLY IN A STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA, COUNTY OF KING. STATE OP WASHINGTON. ,a) S si rr • •HIBIT A, Page 2 of 2 ••440 / `dI1 11 ill $ \/ V% 1,T0 S N V �•• s °� I I ti 1 1 1 i 1 f� 411 I • i 411 4 e' 0 11.1r • • 1 • 54 '', ,jO " _ I * ORDER NO. 3 ESCROW NO. LOAN NO. MORTGAGOR PLAT MAP Vol P C E •1 • • • • -4 327 99 -1 It� I. P i tl ^w CI ' M • O wo 1 III ti NO AWN • •�qvy itt his map does not purport to show all highways, roads or easements affecting aid croaerty: no liability is assumed for variations in dimensions and location 40 ss 5o LS 20 32 I ....1_ ,...r $ o --.. _ y_ -_ 4- ° cox- .24- 4xOLVITT uMCsw.7.) - -- -1 -- - 01, 0 PRDPF.PT( LIME ELEVM IOU WWu, fEDFILE NO SV I 1-D MI- A TY,EIL 4L•CW0w•• Tor 299 1414 22.80 \�.,\ \ N .411,.E w- el Y l r 02•12 I'C1013116‘ MO.. 400.411 a1a - 7 I 1 1111 6'.046 S 240 - -� {'i _: • 1111 p. }p1SOCJ01f�g120: - y Fl� Yart o'. 00 K u s0. f'7. 170 lF 0' 81'1 C.TGW E.41M 611 X6.0V1 A �I' 0 {1• 1419E L-'. -. ,/ C4YM 560061E TYPEI wt...., Tap 26.40 004 2. lA/1Li'1116 -?, T"'"" „ SF. • 29.0 TYtaY • TA, 1�) 2251E b' S.M. luV 00.40 05 TYRZ-46.:=[ 1 1DP 26 WM 0420 1L6096.1 _..2121 2D 0¢u.1sr_ Tlfw Is., [.100 E. 0 11t TvPE I u.doysf roP TOP.u.90 NV 0.50 flu 4,2.4 Ps CA12H 46..141 ,1 9041 (PE I2 547 W /IMLL) ID? u600 T TOP 417.0 fp1LL IMV 11.10 1.1.10 (10 010 ) 21.10(0 -SE) $u11.D11u1 •A. FE Z%.O (AYo IDAHO (a TYPE To? 27.0 4141 1541 CATGK 9960.1 ♦ 5 72981E TI' 141 /1111 1'10P 209 = 24.). 141V • 11.9,5(•4•") 10.VV(4') �Tff 5TP0Er 0(4 TD P,r- /040160 912102. ID 44041144611044 (0.04261. . 04.004101E 44. _ TYPE/ 72 "0.04 GB Y(/ 1141.44-1bP TCP • 25.5 M 1 14.-1 042 44.00) 121. LS t4" E14EE. 11)1 2.0(4910.8 0021 4l1 11(01 GO D69 0046 EE9I14E Eu esrstCT 4I 01210E 0 1004 (0410 01 0/ NEW cosy STD RL 1 210....-4 (x+6141•. 4440L4µ1 Es 041 0.141 00121001_ SIAE11Ct%M 1 TYPEIL -541' 0/601010? 113P • 25.4 - 1414 • 16.'5 0040 '.Ou, 1 25.7 IS" 2X62 114/ 1% • 021...1 Et S. W4140 > (may!. E. 400 a4111G'T� -a- TOT t9.02 Sry ICl/ 60Ur44CEMTf. . 4144.1!4..0•4 004641.14) 10 L924" 4 CI O.s•s µ.L1 i I I Ully -n 0181) CITY STD 04 Co00E0c(.c-. 0EWE_ 1J1T14 •0101 44 64000 vu £CD3aw+ COEGTFDL Goo '.y W ITi FLAAJ PREP#Y00 HN Ts■tt• L--OEO s RIYNIMN VATIO 10hoa.11S7 - 2L ..s86 %o1815' As hPPQ64DD To_ I..ITL OP I U IL-NO, .Dr. 1.0404101 OF 11116 LAME 04400.502. 1.71144a 0901 CD DES '.10.144 041 0410.1141.. uR 010.11.4 /WD F1 .0 1 .411E tit 4400s,17.0410 AHD 411¢141(4415 FEbCM1■011 990. •1020•• SE411I....: 48410. 1X6.4ME43 09420 SP • CALL 45 Nouns BEFORE YOU MG 1.1004245555• 129 4t'. Ev SPDT44PP -1' 920905410 45b1. 91005 4206E 414 00011002 -• --[ ]- P9.96.6D F1H'SI! .20004 4046 09 1.1640 MH1. 112 00144287E - -t:- - 41.0E 1460.01.444 PPWI1r, _ D A{ 1.104101. Scare 41.6011...06.4 161. T 000.065 0 9009421'0 4141416 Deb Mow 144100444144 P12•4106D 64 L..... PERPGo-1(9,4. 1EHF 40) 00X,11418 µ40 141[0.41. 941400 C,1.ccw'(au. to.IUC) SE9r,141"1 (4440.LGOC 514144.. 910123 YER19Y 04.1- 11.90•0.001 9210E TD CP.00.1.1o3 • GRAPHIC SCALE I. TIT z HR2 2140 (" 20' /23/90 69343.00 -4141 CI .. CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA. WASHINGTON 98188 February 9, 1990 PHONE # (206) 433.1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Road Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Moratorium Waiver and Building Permit Application for Southcenter Retail Building II. Dear Bob, I need you to execute the attached SAO agreement document and mail us an equivalent of the attached letter. The SAO agreement document is necessary to satisfy the Council's conditions to the moratorium waiver. I have attached a large map showing DCD's interpretation of the "no development area" which should serve as Exhibit B in the SAO agreement. This large map must be reduced to 8.5 x 11.5 inch size using a PMT process or equivalent to allow easy recording (photocopier reductions are not acceptable). All originals must be submitted to the City by March 8, 1990. The City will then record all documents with the County and bill you for recording costs. The attached letter is a draft request to process the building permit application before completing all normal review processes. A letter with this substance is required in order to begin permit review. The permit has . already been inserted into the normal building permit review process in anticipation of this letter. A letter must be received prior to February 18th in order to avoid delays. Please contact me at 433 -1858 if I you have any further questions on these matters. Vernon Umetsu, Assoc. Planner • AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE The undersigned owner /developer of real property located at 16813 Southcenter Parkway, Tukwila, Washington, and more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto, hereby acknowledge that such property is subject to the moratorium imposed by Tukwila Ordinance Nos. 1544 and 1550. The undersigned have petitioned for relief from the provisions of the moratorium as provided for in Ordinance No. 1550 and in consideration of such relief, agree that if the City of Tukwila will process the following applications: EPIC-32-89 SEPA for Mikami Design Review 89 -15 -DR Mikami Design Review (BAR) Mikami Building Permit Application to Implement Above Project The development of the property described in Exhibit A will be subject to all of the provisions of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance as finally passed by the City Council, even though those provisions may be more restrictive than any conditions or limitations imposed by or resulting from the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes described above. The undersigned agree that such processes will be continued solely at their risk and expense and that the result of the final Sensitive Areas Ordinance may be to require extensive project modifications and reevaluation or rescission or withdrawal of any approval arising out of the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes. It is also understood and agreed that continuation of the SEPA, BAR and Building Permit processes does not mean that any other application for this project will be accepted or processed unless the City Council approves a petition therefor. The undersigned acknowledge that the waiver was made subject to the following conditions which the undersigned agree to meet . as partial consideration for the waiver. A. Fill may be emplaced to feather grades up to the existing 30 ft. contour; however, cuts may not be made into the 28 ft. contour west of the drainage ditch. Development may occur up to the 30 ft. contour which lies westerly of the drainage ditch as shown in Exhibit 8. B. In the stockpile area, the original 30 ft. contour shall be used as the maximum cut line. No cuts into original slopes above this contour shall be allowed. This maximum cut may only be done if slopes no more than 2:1 can be established between any cut and the existing slopes. No development shall occur above this AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE - Page 1 W \JFC \002 -2 30 ft. contour line in the stockpile area as shown in. Exhibit B. C. No rockeries or retaining walls shall be allowed in the northwest corner of the site. The undersigned further acknowledge that this conditional waiver was given in reliance on the accuracy of the information supplied by the undersigned, including the original and existing grades as shown on the Grade and Fill Permit approved by the City on October 23, 1989, and agree that they bear all risk of inaccuracy of such information. The undersigned acknowledge that the covenants herein run with the land described in Exhibit A, and that this document will be recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections and that these covenants cannot be released without the written consent of the City of Tukwila. MATT M. MIKAMI, Owner ROBERT H. SCHOFIELD, Developer /Applicant STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify. that I know or have satisfactory evidence that MATT M. MIKAMI, Owner, and ROBERT H. SCHOFIELD, Developer /Applicant are the persons who appeared before me, and said persons acknowledged that they signed this AGREEMENT TO BE. SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE, and acknowledged it to be their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED: , 1990. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires: AGREEMENT TO BE SUBJECT TO A SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE - Page 2 W \JFC \002 -2 EXHIBIT A, Page 1 of 2 DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE SUBDIVISION) IN SECTION 26. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST M.M. LYING WEST OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 972. MESS BROTHERS ROAD. CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 921233 (SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY FORMERLY 57TH AVENUE SOUTH). DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION. 1.020 FEET NORTH OP THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF: THENCE NORTH. ALONG SAID WEST LINE. 294.62 FEET. MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST. ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION. TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH. ALONG SAID WEST LINE. A DISTANCE OF 294.62 FEET. MORE OR LESS. TO THE INTERSECTION WITH A LINE RUNNING EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE POINT OP BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON POR PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 (SR 5) BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5524599 AND 5992105; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING EASTERLY OF THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 6343852; SITUATE IN THE CITY OP TUKWILA, COUNTY OF KING. STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE WHICH IS 1,020 FEET NORTHERLY OP AND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OP THE HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO NORTHEAST 1/4 OP THE SOUTHWEST 1/4: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST K.M.. DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH IS OPPOSITE HIGHWAY ENGINEER'S STATION (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS HES) LW 2504 +89.33 ON THE LW LINE SURVEY OF SR 5. SOUTH 178TH STREET TO SOUTH 126TH STREET. AND 553.73 PEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE EASTERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2505 +00 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 590 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2505 +75 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 570 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2507 +15 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 515 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE HES LW 2509+50 ON SAID LW LINE SURVEY AND 500 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT OPPOSITE SAID HES AND 428.97 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY THEREFROM: THENCE SOUTHERLY IN A STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA. COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. . EXHIBIT A, Page 2 of 2 •• •• __ • f mop "e!i'. 42. w— . N c"•— `,, •. • 1 A�aa : e.11.,0 1 j Sd�� I w to 31$ _ b ,r ss 3a 1 ........ 1 /4•a l'$ • ' • 8. r t' , 01 • ... 1 .4. I ./ e i I i'I ,1 e' -s- e 4/ 1 - '• 1 Ir arl • e 41 1 1 0 *•r••. ... /. .5 • ~ r�• ` w 1 �0 I ‘ ill yw $ Pp. o on 111 defSa/401 i ORDER NO. ESCROW NO. LOAN NO. MORTGAGOR PLAT MAP Vol • PC • ire his map does not purport to show all highways, roads or easements affecting aid orooerty: no liability is assumed for variations in dimensions and location Rick Beeler, Director, D.C.D. City of Tukwila Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Building Permit Review for Southcenter Retail Building Phase II. Dear Mr. Beeler, The Tukwila City Council granted this project a waiver from the moratorium pursuant to ordinances 1544 and 1550, and I have executed the attached "Agreement to be Subject to a Sensitive Areas Ordinance." I hereby request that you immediately begin all necessary reviews to ensure the timely issuance of a building permit. I acknowledge the following: 1. That this building permit application has been submitted prior to SEPA review, approval by the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review and receipt of the City's fully clarified conditions to the moratorium waiver, 2. That this building permit application is vested only to the extent it is consistent with all the conditions finally established in the reviews listed in Item No. 1. 3. That the above analyses and City actions may require project design changes which may result in additional plan check fees and review time, 4. That the building permit shall not be issued until the proposed project is consistent with all final conditions in Item No. 1, 5. I agree to pay any such fees, and 6. I hold the City harmless for any delays or costs incurred as a result of project design changes due to the above. Sincerely, Robert Schofield Date cc: Beeler /City Attorney /file. CABLE 10 THE TIME OF YEAR IN QUESTION. GRASS SEEDING ALONE WILL 5E ACCEPTABLE ONLY DURING THE MONTHS OF APRIL THROUGH SEPTEMBER INCLUSIVE. SEEDING MAY PRO. EED OUTSIDE THE SPE- CIFIED TIME PERIOD WHENEVER IT IS IN h; :. INTEREST OF THE PERMIITEE. UUT MUST BE AUGMENTED win MULCHING. MEETING, OR OTHER TREATMENT APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT. ALL EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PONDS WITH A DEAD STORAGE DEPTH ExCEEDING 6 INCHES MUST HAVE A FENCE WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 3 FEET. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE 1. ATTEND PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING. 2. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. 3. FLAG CLEARING LIMIT. 4. PLACE STRAW BALE DAM IN EXISTING DITCH. INSTALL FILTER FENCE AND DIVERSION DITCHES. 6. CONSTRUCT NORTH EROSION CONTROL DITCH /POND WITH PERFORATED RISER. 7. CLEAR AND GRUB SITE. 8. REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL. 9. GRADE TO SUBGRADE MAINTAIN EROSION /SEDIMENTATION CGNT;'OL MEASURES DURING ALL GRADING. rAu. woo **MA- (D 4? . ► W rrW at1 totP,E - ZerviAxl �o u4 PORr'DI.T'ED car W6401 t 44 20 CALL 48 HOURS • BEFORE YOU DIG 1 - 800.424.5555 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 10 .0 ♦0 ( IN FEET ) 1 inch - 20 ft. Qci o a 1989 14RMIT CENTOf 80 0 Z z Fri 0 '5 0 W w rml z U Ch x Z E-4 V�2 ROBERT SCHOFIELD WASHINGTON DRAWN br HRJ CHECKED Br RMR SCALE 1"==20' DATE: 10/02/f X08 NO 89343.00 Cq'. -ol No. E�File No. .32- 9? Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 3 G 6 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: J-((KA -M l 1J7Gai /eel-V/641,- 2. Name of applicant: /yam -,,- ,..r, 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:/4t/3 Jaw 77/c&mtx. Tile. flit) $7s-- on • e6.4.4hcr f%71.sdA., 1.1 Rotez, Sclrc4,c2/) 4,2/1. HtMrd I49nvT I2P. /4ELL.. '/..h • 914 4. Date checklist prepared: f.,6-_1y 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): C ./..4-17724cn0N 41.96 to T -1 . 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. /00 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 7Qac/ STuiX/ a Ewlliha&mMt),To( L//Q-cm&4 7 abver Fca4 Flt... 46/P.A.-AG- • jta.,T y or-tao.V ).,Ls ,4rianI - 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. , s.—r /./.#cA7 -,0✓ 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. 7L/ IC wl t-a C/ r Cdar nt s ier 1-CW AOp u-v,4c- 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. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. .t i..niN6S ApA,Qexrr. / .sBooe See sires 8S,_j/' �6 Sr Rc-bo�� T2oi -► p - / --7. G. 2 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this checklist. 8 i3 So►+r ern PR,¢,e�.,,e / s,, es r s .� e- o� HAS- /�A/la-rrousc et urLa 7 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLIC( Evaluation for • Agency Use Only B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? AID Nc 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. S,,.-,...v d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. ND e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. • 476 t s-c• , A,p f_E.Qu dLV f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? �,ti. . Fa % Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if 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. A" r a C�'�t's. , it.,S b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N0Q- 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year - round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. /up 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. ,,, 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. ,,,o 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ,moo 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. ,,,o Evaluation for Agency Use Only • b. Ground: Evaluation for qgp Agency Use Only 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. /JO 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. ,V4 c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. ALt re. (OLC.ELT ON s /7v r 4u Tatar STeµH 3Y.sre-s -1 • 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Na d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: DN Se7er Per/2.0 7'( oGJ14 kk..1)L4 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture . crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on • or near the site. n,,Nlf Evaluation for Agency Use Only Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: ya•,ss r,¢ciL= sia.e.waJ 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: Ai Co- mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Naga fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: )..J,,.,e b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. ,, - c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain• a— a4- G �v 4 ?A,r,c _Fcy�.ky d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: iv 4, Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. C7.4 S , eaza72-1c b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Ado 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: /2 caves 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. ,,o 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. ,v,,,.,r 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: A,,,vE.- Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other) ?_ 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long -term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 72g ale .r Oz‘heit.. c6. 1ST . Moist- - (,.►6,2r y . 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: ivUNLy 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 04 D.7 1S 'rr.-r,rnr . N I") GsE e#j szTE if7 .-st&T • b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. 677,a.42-0C,.J c. Describe any structures on the site. 110 Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? i4 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? /2_ t -7. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? C.0?- 4tre72 -c..,a L g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? ^,ti. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. /OD i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? lc, - 3 - j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? , -aB,,,r- k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Noa� 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: /.1E -.4,,,.e �C4u�- j ,,1 • Ce..,s..xz i win-0-- Co iy.0/4e'seKiS..,r Jc.4n1. Fo4,Lo-.,J c,Ty Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? A,,, b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: AJti 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? Z8' T_ 574 c,.. -0 .t 7)&6- . 6us..s b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? N �� _ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: b/1� jEcv,E , TREES Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Ala x.)6" b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? NU c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? /1r1-74,L Str °P n.J4 �. - S ( Se— a Sr 6.v1l oS) 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: 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. x,(..) b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. aJN� c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: rvo „a— 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. .1e12. 4,6-D Ald•G AY . 33211-,E. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? YE-1 , TQA.,3, r STovS AT c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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). ,uo e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. ,00 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. .4-e- �,iacc, lr.,oy _ g . Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: ,r,� ., F,A-- ev e-+ r, u*+T ? ' ' ' ' - 1 5 . 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. Not 16. Utilities a. Circle `, Evaluation for Agency Use Only utilities currently available at the site: natural as, ciatei sanitary sewe septic system, other. ectric telephone 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. - gLrzt-►.D�I "TF�cle . C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICR" Evaluation for • �4111 Agency Use Only D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? fit -AS boil. rt.-7c_ ,z,.,,-, ()pc-4 APA /roar 7 4 * •Cs'- Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: GSE C4-Tel'' 3054,, r Co c Si r.r Cu «rzri a,v on..) s,re- /1e /eNnaN Sy.>i t1•4 • 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? /71....10- cwia o< 10.44, TA-7— it Sy,-. c= ,r3/ 4-4).S '- a.Bit"-' ..v 7.1 Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: 1°0.t /Vtf7J ,•CA, Ng,l -, 777-e- 1 .5',..i8£ S4i+ -if, %- 44 w ern_J OD Evaluation for Agency Use Only Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? co,, -,n ..y 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? AJ Pon SMn.44- 2-7'/i pt e. cr (=I Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: fry T+ cti rc ,4.i n, �'c�t�,+rLy 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. No /0- .p,}cri Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? N D Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: 0 NL� TO BE COMPLETED BY APPL( 'NT • E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? LNNAnicf_ . P Tt7v7 /AL 41 CONS /srcAn' 4.1,7-4/ 7tii'w'LA c 'sew •(ice 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? /26-2--o e" - /41- , c -�, C -� �, r1 -L . 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: �` 67Men- 2- nNr3 el- TLr..) 1, yr Evaluation for Agency Use Only SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT 1V1AR 19 1990 CITYV OF �J; :VV LA PLANNING DEPT. SOUTHCENTER RETAIL PARCEL Tukwila, Washington Prepared For Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive Bellevue, Washington W -6407 October, 1989 RZA RITTENHOUSE- -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants �.�.. RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants 1400 140th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98005 -4594 (206) 746- 8020 /FAX (206) 746 -6364 13 October 1989 Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive Bellevue, Washington 98004 Subject: Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Study Southcenter Retail Parcel Tukwila, Washington Dear Bob: W -6407 We are pleased to present herewith a copy of the above referenced report. This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering study relative to the foundation and construction considerations for the proposed retail development. Authorization to proceed with this study was provided verbally by Mr. Bob Schofield. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service to you and we would be pleased to discuss the contents of this report or other aspects of the project with you at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, ,444.44 Gtr ,tom v .LOGG Kurt W. Groesch, P.E. Associate Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Study Southcenter Retail Parcel Tukwila, Washington Prepared for Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Points Drive Bellevue, Washington 98004 Prepared by Rittenhouse -Zeman & Associates, Inc. 1400 - 140th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98005 October 1989 W -6407 TABLE OF CONTENTS W -6407 Page 1.0 SUMMARY 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 3.0 SURFACE CONDITIONS 3 3.1 Subsurface Conditions 3 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Site Preparation 4.2 Structural Fill 4.3 Pile Foundations 4.3.1 Pile Installation 4.3.2 Lateral Loads 4.5 Drainage Considerations 4 4 6 7 8 8 9 5.0 CLOSURE 9 Figure 1 - Site and Exploration Plan Appendix A - Subsurface Exploration Procedures and Logs SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION SOUTHCENTER RETAIL PARCEL TUKWILA, WASHINGTON W -6407 1.0 SUMMARY The proposed project construction is considered feasible with respect to the subsurface conditions encountered at the project site. A brief summary of the project geotechnical considerations is presented below: • Our subsurface exploration program consisted of a series of backhoe excavated test pits along the west property margin and western portion of the site supplemented by a series of Dutch cone penetrometer probes. On -site data regarding existing site conditions was supplemented by the results of an adjacent study to the south, our report W -5437. a Subsurface conditions disclosed along the west margin of the proposed building and the test pits were quite variable. Interbedded soft silts and organics were disclosed at the location of test pit TP -1 while test pits TP -4 and TP -5 encountered medium dense, gravelly silty sands near the proposed footing elevation. Extensive deposits of organics, soft material, decomposed wood and other highly compressible materials were disclosed at the location of the other test pits excavated for the project. o Deep explorations, consisting of Dutch cone penetrometer probes generally disclosed interbedded soft clays with organics, loose sand deposits with probe refusal noted generally in the range of 30 to 35 feet below existing site grades. Based on the adjacent explorations we anticipate the deeper native deposits present at depth will likely consist of very stiff to hard silt soils. o Owing to the extensive thickness of compressible deposits and the random distribution of organic soils below the site, significant total and differential settlements should be anticipated associated with the filling of the project site. Based on subsurface conditions encountered, and the variations in thickness of the highly compressible organics and soft materials encountered, we recommend the proposed structures and floor slabs be supported using treated timber pile foundation. The treated timber piles should be driven into the very stiff to hard silt layer located between 25 and 35 feet below existing site grades at the location of our explorations. Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 2 o It may be possible to support the northernmost portion of the westerly . building using spread foundations. Based on site topography, and the results of our test pit exploration program, it appears that the northern half to one - third of the westerly building line may be supported by spread footings. The transition point from pile to spread footing support in this area could be evaluated in the field once construction begins. This summary is presented for introductory purposes and should be used in conjunction with the full text of this report. The project description, site conditions and our design recommendations are presented subsequently in the text of this report. Exploration procedures and logs are presented in Appendix A. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located on the west side of Southcenter Parkway in Tukwila, Washington. The site is presently occupied by a residence, garage and several small outbuildings. The proposed development will consist of two retail structures with their approximate orientation shown on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1, attached to this report. Site grades will fall from approximately a planned floor grade of 28 feet for the westernmost building and site grades will match that of the adjacent Southcenter Parkway along the east margin of the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to establish general subsurface conditions from the site from which conclusions and recommendations for foundation design and construction could be formulated. Scope of work consisted of the field explorations, geotechnical analyses and report preparation. In the event of any changes in nature, design or location of the structures, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified, if necessary, to reflect those changes. This report has been prepared for exclusive use of Mr. Bob Schofield, for specific applications to this project in accordance with generally accepted engineering practice. Site conditions were evaluated in October, 1989. The surface and subsurface conditions are described below, while the exploration procedures and detailed interpretative logs of Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 3 the explorationaccomplished for this study are presented in Appendix A. The approximate locations of the explorations are indicated on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. 3.0 SURFACE CONDITIONS The project site was actively farmed at the time of our exploration program. The southern portion of the site was cultivated land, while the house, garage and several outbuildings occupied the northern half to two- thirds of the parcel at the time of our site work. Site grades appear to be on the order of 4 feet below the elevation of Southcenter Parkway. Along the west margin of the property site grades were somewhat higher. The drainage ditch crossed the southern third of the parcel and was carried via a culvert to discharge into a ditch along the north property margin. Horizontal drains installed to hillside supporting Interstate 5 were not apparent along west margin of the property except at the extreme south end of the proposed development site. The flow from the horizontal drains were captured and collected and directed off -site southward in flexible hoses to the adjacent storm water collection system for the adjacent development. 3.1 Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions vary considerably across the proposed site. Test pits TP -4 and TP -5, which were excavated along the west margin of the north -south trending building, indicated medium dense granular deposits at or near the likely foundation grade. The other test pits and the deep explorations accomplished for this study generally disclosed loose, highly compressible organic materials within the depths explored. The Dutch cone probes generally encountered refusal resistance within a depth of about 35 feet below existing site grades. Based on subsurface conditions disclosed for the adjacent retail parcel to the south, we anticipate the native soils present at depth will likely consist of very stiff to hard silt soils. Detailed descriptive Togs of the explorations accomplished for this study are included in Appendix A, together with a descriptive narrative of the exploration procedures utilized for this study. A number of the test pits and Dutch cone probes indicated the presence at a significant depth of organic clays with distinct organic zones noted at random depths throughout the deposits. Such organic soils, when loaded, undergo significant volume change as manifested by ground surface settlement. The settlement response of the organic Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 4 deposits occurs in two distinct phases. The initial or primary movement occurs rather rapidly over a period of several months. Longer term settlements, associated with secondary compression of the organic constituents can also be of relatively large magnitude and can extend with decreasing rates of settlement in excess of 20 years. Groundwater, as manifested by seepage into the test pits, was encountered at depths of 3 to 31/2 feet in several test pits. However, near surface materials were mottled in a number of the test pits which indicated intermittent saturation likely associated with seasonal variations in the groundwater conditions. We would anticipate the groundwater would rise to within several feet of the existing site grades during the wetter winter months. It should be noted that groundwater conditions will vary with seasonal changes, changes in site utilization, changes in off -site utilization and other factors. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We understand that proposed project is to consist of two retail buildings with the approximate orientation shown on Figure 1. Site grading is proposed to bring the site to the approximate elevation of Southcenter Parkway. We would anticipate significant total and differential movements would be associated with the fill placement. In order to improve the performance of fill supported pavements and utilities we recommend the construction of settlement sensitive utilities and pavements be deferred as long as possible after the initial placement of fill. In general, pile support for the proposed buildings is recommended. Evaluation of alternative spread footing support for the extreme northern portion of the westernmost building should be evaluated at the time of construction. The following sections of this report present our recommendations relative to site preparation, foundation design and construction, and site drainage. 4.1 Site Preparation We recommend the brush, vegetation and trees present along the west margin of the property be stripped and grubbed. The existing residence and outbuildings should be demolished and the debris removed from the project site. The existing utilities, underground tanks, and the septic tank should be removed or abandoned in place in accordance with local codes and practice. Existing foundations, floor slabs, debris should not be disposed of on -site as they could obstruct later pile driving operations. Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 5 We recommend that the cultivated areas be closely mowed, with vegetation removed prior to fill placement. The near surface site soils which will comprise the site subgrade prior to fill placement will be predominantly silty deposits. These soils are prone to disturbance in wet site conditions. Fill placement across silty soils in wet site conditions may require the placement of an initial thickened lift in order to provide support for construction vehicles. In very wet weather, a working surface of quarry spalls or sand and gravel may be necessary to protect the subgrade and support rubber -tired construction traffic. If the subgrade exposed by stripping or after demolition is more than several percent over optimum moisture content, at the concurrance of the geotechnical engineer, compaction of to the subgrade by prerolling should not be attempted. Rather, the subgrade should be cleaned as much as possible of loose or soft materials and a thickened layer of clean sand, sand and gravel or quarry spalls be placed before compaction is attempted. Due to the anticipated magnitude of settlement it appears advantageous to place fill on the project site as soon as possible. It does not appear that a preload or surcharge, even is extending over a period of several months, would effectively reduce post- construction settlement to allow slab -on -grade support of the proposed buildings. For that reason, it appears a general site filling operation rather than localized fill placement and surcharge in building areas would help to mitigate future settlement distress. Construction of settlement sensitive pavements, structures or utilities should be deferred as long as possible. Steep gradients should be provided for buried gravity utilities where gravity flows are to be maintained. Along the east margin of the property, existing buried utilities if present at conventional burial depths would be underlain by an extensive deposit of very soft to medium stiff clays and organic clays. The settlement response of these deposits will be slow, owing to their low permeability, and should extend over a number of years as organic zones and layers were noted in our explorations. However, the actual magnitude of increased vertical stress in the deposits below the pipes would be small, as it appears that the soils above the pipes presently are generally at or near the grade of Southcenter Parkway. As Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 6 a gross approximation, the settlement of the pipelines would be roughly equal in inches to the thickness of fill placed above the pipelines in feet. The off -site impacts of fill placement may generally be assumed to extend to a horizontal distance equal to about half the thickness of compressible deposits present below the site. 4.2 Structural Fill All fill under roadways, parking Tots, sidewalks and within the building area for lateral resistance to the piles should be placed in accordance with the following recommendations for structural fill. Prior to placement of structural fill, the ground surface to receive fill should be prepared as previously recommended. Structural fill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Individual lifts should be compacted such that a density of at least 90 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM:D 1557) is achieved. We recommend that a representative of our firm be present during placement of structural fill to observe the work and perform a representative number of in -place density tests. In this way, the adequacy of the earthwork may be evaluated as grading progresses. The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soils become increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight can not be consistently compacted to a firm, non - yielding condition when the moisture content is more than about 2 percent above optimal. Based on the interbedded and highly variable nature of the compressible deposits on -site, it does not appear feasible at this time to preload building pads. In order to improve the long -term performance of fills under parking areas, we recommend that the fill in parking and building areas be placed as soon as possible and the construction of settlement sensitive utilities or pavement structures be deferred until the following construction season. We recommend the upper two feet below pavements and within the building area consist of clean sands and gravel. This recommendation is intended to provide improved subgrade support for parking areas and pavements, and to promote drainage below building areas. The upper 2 feet of fill should consist of a well graded sand and gravel Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 7 with less than 5 percent fines when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction. It should be recognized that even during the summer, delays in grading may occur due to precipitation. In the upcoming wet weather months, it may be impractical to use silty deposits and attempt to compact those soils unless protracted periods of dry weather occur. If it is not practical to dry back wetted silty soils, it may be necessary to waste them off -site. We would recommend any of the on -site soils not meeting the above specifications for drainage material within building areas be overexcavated, and placed in the deeper portions of site fills below pavements. Soils used for structural fill purposes should have a maximum particle size on the order 6 inches and be free of organics or any other deleterious debris or materials. 4.3 Pile Foundations Due to the depth and compressibility of the organics, peat and soft silts, we recommend that the building and floor slabs be supported on pressure treated timber piles. We recommend that timber piles be driven on the order of 5 to 8 feet into the very stiff to hard silts interpreted to be present at depth below our excavations from approximately 25 to 35 feet below the existing ground surface. For timber piles with 8 inch minimum tip diameter, we recommend a maximum allowable vertical capacity of 20 tons. Timber piles with 10 -inch minimum tip diameter may be loaded to the maximum allowable vertical load of 25 tons. A one -third increase in this value could be used to resist transient seismic or wind loads. These allowable pile capacities have been reduced to account for down drag or negative skin friction. Negative skin friction will develop due to the downward relative movement of the sands and structural fill around the pile as the soils consolidate. We expect pile length range up to about 40 to 45 feet. Some variability in driven lengths should be anticipated, based on the Dutch cone probes. Probe refusal was noted as high as about 22 feet at the location probe P -5 and as deep as about 35 feet at the location of probe P -1. In general, it appears that deeper piles will be required along the north and east sides of the proposed buildings, while the pile lengths for the long, north -south trending building would be somewhat Tess. Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 8 4.3.1 Pile Installation We recommend that timber piles be driven with a diesel, air, or steam hammer having a rate energy not less than 15,500 foot pounds, and not more than 26,000 foot pounds per blow. In our opinion, a drop hammer would not be appropriate for pile installation at this site. Where piles are placed in groups, we recommend that the pile spacing of no Tess than 3 pile diameters on center be maintained. With large pile groups or clusters, piles should be driven from the center of the pile group outward. During driving, the actual pile capacity should be verified in the field, based upon the use of a dynamic pile driving formula. The piles should be driven until they reach an apparent capacity in excess of their allowable capacity to account for downdrag Toads. 8 -inch tip piles should be driven to an apparent capacity of 25 tons, and 10 -inch tip piles should be driven to an apparent capacity of 30 tons. These apparent capacities include the allowance for the downdrag loads the piles will experience due to the consolidation of the organics and overlying deposits. We recommend that the installation of all piles be observed by a qualified representative from our firm. Our observer would evaluate the contractor's operation as well as collect and interpret the pile installation data. Due to variations in the density and gradation of the bearing horizon, the test pile driving program could be used to evaluate the pile driving characteristics of the site and to allow a closer determination of pile order length. 4.3.2 Lateral Loads Lateral loads imposed on the building may be resisted by passive pressure applied against the embedded portion of grade beams, pile caps and piling. We recommend an allowable passive earth pressure, expressed in the form of an equivalent fluid unit weight, of 200 pounds per cubic foot. This pressure may be applied over an area of 2 pile diameters to a depth of 6 feet. If grade beams or pile caps are embedded in structural fill, we recommend the passive pressure be utilized in design discounting the upper 1 foot to account for possible settlement in the underlying soils. Frictional resistance below grade beams or floor slabs should not be assumed. These above pressures include a minimum factor of 1.5 which is considered appropriate for the transient nature of horizontal Toads applied. Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 9 4.5 Drainage Considerations During the initial construction activities along the west property margin, we recommend surface water be intercepted and directed off -site to an appropriate discharge. We recommend the buildings be underlain by at least 2 feet of clean, free draining materials in order to promote drainage. In lieu of a conventional footing drain at the footing or pile cap invert elevation, we recommend the building perimeter be protected from moisture through the installation of a deepened footing or perimeter drain extending at least 3 feet below the surrounding finish grade. If soft or wet areas with spring activity, or at the location of existing horizontal drains emanating from the 1 -5 embankment to the west, those areas should be blanketed with rock or the drain's flow should be collected via tightline and directed to an appropriate discharge point. Prior to construction, all sources of surface water should be routed away from construction and building areas as much as possible. Site grades should be planned to slope away from the building. Roof and surface run -off should not discharge into the footing drain system. Rather, a separate tightline drain network should be installed or splash blocks should be used. As the settlement response of the site soils is variable and will be differential in nature, we recommend that the gravity utilities be provided with steep gradients to promote long- term performance. As some settlement between the pile supported buildings and surrounding fill supported utilities may occur, the use of flexible connections at transition points may be appropriate. 5.0 CLOSURE The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the explorations accomplished for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within the site constraints so as to yield the information utilized to formulate our recommendations. The future integrity of foundation depends largely on proper pile installation. The performance of pavements, and ancillary structures depends largely on site preparation, fill placement and construction procedures. Rittenhouse -Zeman would be available to provide geotechnical observation and construction observation services during the pile installation, earthwork and foundation construction phases of the project. Mr. Robert H. Schofield 4212 Hunts Point Drive W -6407 Page 10 It has been a pleasure to be of continued service to you. If you have any questions regarding this report or other topics, please contact us at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Thomas Jones Geological Engineer 1.0 4_0 el Kurt W. Groesch, P.E. Associate KWG:ns1 s• 3, -0ti �got,Q: °a ®a SIONAV_o4 -� TP -1 P -6 -� L TP -4 TP -5 -- ® - - - - -- T EAPPROXIMATE LIMITS OF PROPOSED BUILDING Q TP -3 1 PROPERTY LINE P -5 • P -3 D 1 TP -6 APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF PROPOSED BUILDING I• P -4 P -1 • DRAWING BASED ON PLAN BY BUSH, ROED 8 HITCHINGS, INC. DATED 10/2/89. 0 40 80 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET LEGEND TP -6 INDICATES TEST PIT NUMBER AND © APPROXIMATE LOCATION P -5 INDICATES DUTCH CONE PROBE • NUMBER AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION SOUTHCENTER RETAIL BUILDING II TUKWILA, WASHINGTON SITE & EXPLORATION PLAN FIGURE 1 W O W -6407 BY KWG DATE OCT L989 SCALE NOTED RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES. INC. Georechnical & Environmental Consultants RZA 14(X) !4(hh .-Ivenue N. E. Bellevue. IIitshintuen 9S(X)5 -ice APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND BORING LOGS APPENDIX A W -6069 Field Exploration The field exploration program conducted for this study consisted of excavating test pits and a program of 6 Dutch cone penetrometer probes. The approximate exploration locations were obtained in the field by hand -held compass and taping from site features shown on a plan provided by the project architects. The locations of the explorations should be considered as accurate as the degree implied by the method used. Test Pit Excavations Six test pits were excavated on 4 October 1989 with a rubber -tired backhoe by a local excavating contractor. Each test pit was continuously logged and observed by one of our experienced engineering geologists /geotechnical engineers. In -situ strength and quality attributes of materials encountered in the test pits were estimated by our field observer based on experience with similar soils and on the difficulty incurred during excavation. Disturbed, but representative, samples of the soils in the test pits were retrieved, classified in the field, and transported in plastic containers to our laboratory for further evaluation and classification. The depths shown on the test pit logs are approximate. The test pit logs presented in this appendix are based on the inspection of the samples secured and the field logs. Static Cone Penetrometer Probes Six static cone penetrometer probe or Dutch cone test was performed for this project on 9 October 1989 by an exploration company under subcontract to our firm. The equipment used for this test consists of a cone and friction sleeve which are advanced hydraulically by rods reacting against a drill truck. The static cone penetration test is performed as follows: 1) the cone is pushed down by an inner rod and the point resistance is recorded; 2) the cone and the sleeve are then pushed and their combined resistance is measured; 3) the cone resistance is subtracted from the total resistance to provide the frictional resistance. A direct correlation between point resistance and the bearing capacity of the soils is obtained. The relative density or consistency of the soil probed is empirically related to the cone resistance. Comparing the cone bearing capacity and the friction ration (sleeve friction /cone bearing) provides an interpretive soil classification based on the Dutch Cone soil classification chart prepared by J. H. Schmertman, 1969. The descriptive soil interpretations presented on the static cone penetrometer probe logs have been developed by using this classification chart as a guideline. Modifications to the classifications were developed according to correlations of soil types disclosed in the boring performed on the site and careful interpretation of the probe results. The detailed interpretive log of the static cone penetrometer probe accomplished for this study is presented subsequently. RZA aror RITTENIIOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC. Ceoteclrnical / IlJclrogeological Consultants STATIC CONE PENETROMETER PROBE NUMBER P -1 W O W -6407 PROJECT NAME Southcenter Retail SOIL INTERPRETATION IAPPROX. GROUND SURFACE ELEV. DEPTH rn 1-- ¢ w w w 1- LL w 2 SLEEVE FRICTION TONS /SO. FT. 0.1 0.2 .0.5 1 2 5 10 CONE PENETRATION RESISTANCE TON /SO FT. 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 400 FRICTION RATIO 4 8 1214 Loose silty SAND - Organics Soft to medium stiff clay and organic clay Organic Organic Loose to medium dense SAND Silt layer Probe refusal Probe completed 10/9/89• 1 5= 2 10 -_ 3 - 5 20 - __ 6 25 _- 7 30 - - 9 35 10 - 13 1 9 1 T1 1 LEGEND — Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) •RZA RITTENIIOLISE— ZERIAN & ASSOC., INC. @°''krise Geotcclnrical / 1 lyilro Bolo gicrll Consultants PROBE NUMBER STATIC CONE PENETROMETER P -2 w O. W -6407 PROJECT NAME Southcenter Retail LEGEND — Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) 5- 10-- 15- 20-- -7 25- 30- 35_.- 10 40- -4-12 45 - -1 !IiiiiiI IZEIRVIIIM 1191111111111 111 111111011111 IIIMMIllif II Irmilirri, III I t 1201 I =MPH Mudi 111 II 11111 MOW 7:1111111111111 II 11 I 11 I 111 ii 1 nu I E811ij 191 .... 11 I j "? 1 1 ... I II ... 1111111 111 gini Id Il I I i I ' SOIL INTERPRETATION APPROX. GROUND SURFACE'ELEV. FEET m v 1 METERS 2 . SLEEVE FRICTION TONS /SQ. FT. 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 FRICTION CONE PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO TON /SQ FT. 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 400 4 8 121 Soft CLAY Loose SAND interbed : Organics Organic Layer • 10-_3 - -_ 15- -- - 20- - - --8 - 30 -- 35- - 40 , 45 -- - 1 - ._2 , 5 _ 9 10 11 - — - Iii 11111 11 1 111111 11111 I 1 1 1 1 I 111 III I__ • �• ai� -.411.19111111 ��� a_aid u 111l - I 1111111 _ /-W:11 MI 11111 1111 11111111 Ii 01 11111111 _ s ! — -- — 11 1 111111-11 Til = 111 _ !■ 1 C _�� � Loose to medium dense SAND Becomes medium dense to dense Probe refusal 111 1Iii:TTTLIIII -- _ 1 It -a �aai =:� 11 _ - ii I, II _ 1 I • 1 025- 1111 ' III a- a- III 1 11 I _ __■ = =■ Probe completed 10/9/89 1:100 1111 I — - - 11 III III 11- ■ - - - - _ . I I I 13 II -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) 1RZA RITTENHOUSE- ZENIAN & ASSOC., INC. mogrAtjbam, Ceoteclulicol / 1IyiIrogeolosicol Consultants STATIC CONE PENETROMETER PROBE NUMBER P-4 WO W -6407 PROJECT NAME Southcenter Retail SOIL INTERPRETATION APPROX. GROUND SURFACE' ELEV. DEPTH SLEEVE FRICTION TONS /SQ. FT. ¢ 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 tu w 1- CONE PENETRATION RESISTANCE u. w TON/S0 FT. • 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 400 4 8 1214 Soft organic CLAY Sand interbed Loose SAND Very soft CLAY and organic CLAY --- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) Loose to medium dense SAND Soft SILT interbed w /organics Probe refusal Probe completed 10/9/89 `1 5 — 10 _— 15— —5 20— 25 —� 30_ —_11 40 x-12 45 - -13 FRICTION RATIO Mil% iii ENIM 1 II -- ;111111111111 Idi IIINAINgill 'd mil 1111 NI1" iiiiiiiiiiil lii alibi if 111 lining! 1 iiiiiii ill li 1 1111"iiii 01 li i millin 11 1 lini IIIII di lb oi 9 1 min b 1 I 11 W - LEGEND LEGEND Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) Probe completed 10/9/89 10 15- -5 20- -7 25- 30- 351-10 40 - - 12 45 - ~- 13 FRICTION RATIO 10 20 50 100 200 400 4 8 1214 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 RZA rIr. Vaal RITTENIIO[ISE -ZEMAN & ASSOC., INC. Geoteclnricnl / llydrogeolo,l,'ical Consult Hits LEGEND -- Sleeve Friction (kg /cm2)10 2 Cone Pressure (kg /cm2) STATIC CONE PENETROMETER PROBE NUMBER P-6 PROJECT NAME Southcenter w O W -6407 Retail SOIL INTERPRETATION APPROX. GROUND SURFACE•ELEV. DEPTH rn 1- o: w �w w 1- u- w i Very soft to soft organic CLAY and PEAT SAND interbed Loose SAND and silty SAND Organics Becomes medium dense Probe refusal Probe completed 10/9/89 5— 10- 15_ 20— _ -7 25— 30_ 35-40 — 11 40 -r 12 45ti 13 SLEEVE FRICTION TONS /SO. FT. 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10 FRICTION CONE PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO TON /SO FT. 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 400 4 8 1214 Depth (feet) TEST PIT LOGS Soil Classification W -6407 Test Pit TP -1 0.0 1.0 Soft, moist, brown SILT, roots to 3 inches 1.0 2.5 Soft, wet, blue -gray SILT 2.5 3.5 Soft, wet, black PEAT 3.5 7.0 Soft, wet, blue SILT 7.0 8.0 Soft, wet black PEAT 8.0 8.5 Medium stiff, moist, mottled, brown -gray, sandy SILT Seepage at 3.5 feet Logs below 3.5 feet Caving below 6 feet Test Pit TP -2 0.0 1.0 Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND (Topsoil), roots to 3 inches 1.0 1.5 Soft, moist, mottled, gray -brown SILT 1.5 9.5 Loose to medium dense, moist, gray, silty SAND 9.5 12.5 Soft, wet, brown, PEAT, some logs and wood Seepage at 10 feet No caving Test Pit TP -3 0.0 0.5 Loose, moist, brown, sandy SILT (Topsoil) 0.5 1.0 Loose to medium, dense, moist, mottled, gray- brown, silty SAND 1.0 2.0 Loose, wet, dark brown, organic SILT with roots and wood 2.0 9.0 Medium dense, wet, gray, sandy SLIT Logsat9feet W -6407 Test Pit Logs, Page 2 Depth (feet) Soil Classification Test Pit TP -4 0.0 1.0 Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND (Topsoil) 1.0 2.0 Loose to medium dense, moist, gray- brown, mottled, silty SAND 2.0 7.0 Medium dense, wet, blue, gravelly, silty SAND, small cobbles to 6 -inch diameter 7.0 12.0 Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, silty SAND Roots to 3 feet Test Pit TP -5 0.0 0.5 Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND (Topsoil) 0.5 2.0 Medium dense, moist, gray- brown, mottled, silty SAND with gravel 2.0 4.0 Medium dense, wet, gray, mottled, gravelly silty SAND 4.0 9.0 Medium dense to dense, wet, gray, silty, sandy GRAVEL Peat interbed, north side of test pit, 11/2 feet thick Seepage at 6 feet Caving below 4 feet Test Pit TP -6 0.0 1.0 Loose, moist, brown, silty SAND, minor roots 1.0 7.0 Loose to medium dense, wet, gray, sandy SILT 7.0 10.0 Soft, wet, brown, PEAT Wood fragments Logs at 9 feet Seepage at 9 feet No caving