Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-348-86 - SANDLER & ASSOCIATES - DT & C BUILDING AND SIX STAR BUILDINGDT &C BUILDING & SIX-STAR BUILDING TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS S0. OF 144T" ST. & WEST SIDE INTERURBAN AVE. S. 14500 INTERURBAN AVE. S. EPIC 348 -86 AFFIDAVIT Q Notice of Public Hearing Li Notice of Public Meeting J. Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 1 Board of-Appeals Agenda Packet [( Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet [l Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit [l Shoreline Management Permit OF DISTRIBUT10N hereby declare that: Determination of Nonsignificance El Mitigated Determination of Non - significance [l Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action [� Official Notice [] Other • Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of Project D Tot- (a, File Number , 19 . Signature CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MAILINGS ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Federal Agencies ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (Region X) State Agencies ( ) WA.ST. OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES ( ) WA.ST. TRANSPORTATION DEPT. )WA.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISIO ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF FISHERIES ( A.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR )WA.ST. DEPT. OF GAME ( ) WA.ST. PLANNING & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AGENCY ( )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL County Agencies ( ) K.C. DEPT. OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVEL. ( ) FIRE DISTRICT 18 ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) K.C. HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( ) SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( ) WATER DISTRICT 75 ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) GROUP W CABLE ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( ) TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ( ) TUKWILA MAYOR ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) Public Works ( ) Parks and Recreation ( ) Police ( ) Fire ( ) Finance ( ) Planning /Building ( )FIRE DISTRICT 1 ( )FIRE DISTRICT 24 ( )K.C. BLDG & LAND DEVEL.DIV. -SEPA INFO CNTR Schools /Libraries ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY Utilities ( ) PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER DISTRICT 20 ( )WATER DISTRICT 25 ( )WATER DISTRICT 125 ( )UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD City Agencies ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION ( )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) Edgar Bauch ( ) Marilyn Stoknes ( ) Joe Duffie ( ) Mabel Harris ( ) Charlie Simpson ( ) Doris Phelps ( ) Wendy Morgan Other Local Agencies ( ) PUGET SOUND COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT (PSCOG) ( ) PUGET SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( ) TUKWILA /SEA TAC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Media ( ) DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE ( ) RENTON RECORD CHRONICLE ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIVISION .Office /Industrial 10,000 gsf or more Residential 50 units or more Retail 100,000 gsf or more ( )HIGHLINE TIMES ( )SEATTLE TIMES 86 -56 -DR D T & C Building R. G. Zehner 317 Calle La Montana Moraga, CA 94556 Daniel B. & Tara K. T. Cornish 14446 59th Ave. S Seattle, WA 98168 Horst Gollnick 4465 Forest Ave SE Mercer Island, WA 98040 Ruth E. Hawley 14414 59th Ave S Tukwila, WA 98188 W.W. Kassner 18511 Normandy Terrace SW Seattle, WA 98166 Industrial Properties, Inc. 2450 6th S Seattle, WA 98134 Schneider /Nilsen Development Schneider L.D. & Nilsen G. 14675 Interurban Ave S #115 Seattle, WA 98168 Metro Land Development, Inc. P.O. Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98188 C. Rhett I 6437 S '4th Tuk a, WA 98188 CRI Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 58828 Seattle, WA 98188 Ruth M. Lee 6441 S 144th Tukwila, WA 98188 Burnhard Sanft 5030 25th Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 Elmer Ray & Bobbie Lou Jones 220 SW 197th P1. Seattle, WA 98166 Edith A. Fouty 6426 S 144th • Tukwila, WA 98168 William A. Fouty 6423 S 143rd P1 Seattle, WA 98168 Jerry Knudson 6421 S 143rd P1. Tukwila, WA 98188 Lloyd Hartong 5715 S 147th Tukwila, WA 98188 John C. Radovich 2000 124th Ave NE #6103 Bellevue, WA 98005 . Larry Knudson 18056 124th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Hillcrest Association Takashi Anb 117 W. Mercer St. Seattle, WA 98119 Robin Sanford Anderson Rt. 4 Box 330 Ellensburg, WA 98926 Pacific Tel & Tel co. Franklin E. Todd 14446 59th S Seattle, WA 98168 Hillcrest Association Takashi Anb 117 W. Mercer St. Seattle, Wa 98119 W. R. Hopper P.O. Box 88665 Tukwila, WA 98188 C. W. Lang 14920 62nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98168 W. H. Westergard 14720 59th Ave S Tukwila, WA 98168 David D. & Judy B. Kistler 18617 Occidental Ave S Seattle, WA 98148 M. N. Sandler & Associates,. Inc 200 -112th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98004 WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Two office buildings totaling 20,000 square feet located on 1.99 acres (DT &C Building and.Six -Star Building) Proponent M. N. Sandler &.Associates, Inc. Location of Proposal, including street address, if any 2 n' south of 144th Street and Interurban Avenue (Tracts 4, 5, 6, 7, Block 15 of Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts) Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC 348 -86 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. x[ There is no comment period for this DNS �[ 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 Planning Director Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwil Date Signature Phone 433 -1845 98188 You may appeal this determination to the ty 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.DNS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of Checklist: Pi fF, ( )1 I E O r 05 19851 i ( C...,.. ; OF i ii k; s i L.,:► The State,Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instruction for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. The City uses this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring prepara- tion of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise infor- mation known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply ". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shore- line, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the City staff can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels'of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The City may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Nonproject proposals refer to actions which are different or broader than a single site specific development project, such as plans, policies and programs. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the supplemental sheet for nonproject actions (part 0). For • nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Control No. Epic File No. Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: D T & C BUILDING and SIX STAR BUILDING 2. Name of applicant: M. N. Sandler & Associates, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:20o 112th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, Washington 98004. Martin N. or Mark A. Sandler 455 -9616 4. Date checklist prepared: Originally submitted October 20, 1986. Revised November 4, 1986. 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): It is anticipated that construction will start by January 15. 1987. The site is available for inspection at any time subsequent to the submission of the Environmental Check List. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. With this revised submission there are no plans for futur additions or expansion. . 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None to date. 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. Interurban street improvement. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. B A R, on site utility permits and building permit. 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. The site is being short platted to define three parcels within the existing 3.87 acres. One parcel, approximating two acres, wiTITe donated to the City of Tukwila. On Nov. 3, 1986 £he City Council approved a resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept the donation. Two office buildings will be developed on the remaining two sites. Each new building parcel will be approximately 40,000 square feet. The building on the southern parcel will be 9,900 square feet (see below) 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. The proposed buildings will be located south of 144th Street and on the west side of Interurban Avenue South. Attached —as a part this, check list are the legal descriptions of the three &Fort platted sites, site plans, vicinity map and topograp►ic map. The proposed buildings will be immediately no-7TE of the Plaza One Building. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes. The back half of the site must be undeveloped due to slope considerations. The owners, subsequent to the original submission of the Environmental Check List, received permission from the City Council to donate to the City of Tukwila approximately 2.0 acres of the back half of the site for use as an open space green belt. 11. continued. and house the headquarters of the McCabe Damon Food Brokerage Company. The building on the northern parcel will be 12,000 square feet on within two stories and house the headquarters of the Intersales Marketing Company, a food brokerage business. -3- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Flat to steep slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Fifty percent. 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. Please see the attached soils report. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes. Please see attached soils report. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Please see the attached soils study report, grading olan and accompaning letters from the geo- technical engineer. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There will be no clearing beyond the developed areas. There will be a minimal cut into the embankment. Please see the attached grading plan. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Forty three percent. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Please see attached grading and drainage plan. 2. Air Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. No emission problems are anticipated at the time of completion as the buildings are to be utilized soley as office buildings. During construction there may be some emissions typical of such projects. 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: NA. 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. No. 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. No 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Nn Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Ground: Evaluation for 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. No Any ground or surface water will be discharged into the designed storm drainage system. 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. NA 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. Y1 - - - • - • • 11 . - -II • th. mmethnd -nf. -rn1 iPrting_ and posing of runo water. Rnnf and paving xiinnff shall be rol l erted in drains and condiirted into the City Storm System in Interurban Avenue. SPP attaChPd drawing Nn- 10 of imprnvementS to Interurban Avenue by Entranco Engineers. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: 'lease see the .attache, orm drai naage design. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs x grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Srriih material, linnecPqQnry srasc and some small unneeded txPQS� This will only be in the developed area. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None 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: See attached landscaping plan. 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: heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Seagulls mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, No d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Approximately two acres will be preserved in its natural state. 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. Gas and electric for heating and air condit1Qnjligs b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The State Energy Code will be met or bettered. (1986 Washington State Energy Code). 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. No 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: NA 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)? None 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. None 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: NA 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? £ommercial office building(P1aza One Building) and vacant 'itp_ b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. Nape 'l. Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the Site? C -2 and R1 -12 Following the short platting, the two building sites will be C -2. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the Site ?Commercial and low density residential. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? NA. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. See section 13 page 3. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Fifty five. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NA. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Landscaping will be coordinated with needs of Interurban Avenue and is in conformance with zoning code. 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? NA b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: NA 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? TwPnr . - ename1.ed metal rnofin b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:psoLessionally dPSi.nPd landscaping including a berm betweenner;me biilding: from the window sill height to rhP ground level landscaping. 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? Hooded parking lot lighting in the evening. Lighting will be sodium vapor. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Hooded lighting standards in the parking lot. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? City owned hiking trails. 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: NA 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. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NA. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NA. 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. See attached site plans. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Fifty five. Evaluation for Agency Use Only ,.1 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). Curbs, gutters and sidewalks as required by the City of Tukwila. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The peak hours would be mornings, lunch hour and evenings at the times of arrival and departure of the work force which will number fifty five for the two buildings. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: Combining the ingress and egress points for the two buildings being developed. g. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. NA. 16. Utilities Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. Cj.rcle tilities c_ - tly ay._abl- i- ite: electricity sep is ' em, 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. Nosmal g_as and electric requirements for a 10.000 sq. ft, office building. Puge_t- Power and Washington Natural Gas will he the suppliers. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the leas, agency is relying on them to make s decision. Signature: C�� ,2X Date Submitted: l d2ei+' 6j /q�,� TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for 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. Now 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? 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? 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: 'rf CBE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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? Headquarters for the McCabe Damon Food Brokerage Company. Headquarters for Intersales Marketing Company, a food brokerage business. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? NA. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: NA. 3 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? No Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: NA -23- CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN 86 -364 EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO Q BLDG © PLNG P.W. D FIRE (j POLICE Q P & R PROJECT 2 OFFICE BUILDINGS.- 250' SOUTH OF 144 STREET w/S INTER. AVE. FILE NO. LOCATION DATE TRANSMITTED 11/5 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11/6/86 STAFF COORDINATOR Rebecca Fox RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST, WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSI$LE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT �� UrP l S (1'Y�.l�, 3 fZ Nt 4 ) r( t TzLs u,tt\m w 1'(t . Irn+P . -txri1 -1 T(6s ,S-1\%3 l'l'1 Ut -zCIL 5y v. Dt Jkt u r -e-,iT F1HLS 'TO st Neu Nti 1b sql4 of &zip W N tvir. AvA44 L .Pud (f\1 l r k- wfu _ S ATE S L `9 N"MVOCOgitetS PREPARED BY Ay i D r l tlsoiL C.P.S. Form 11 wrntLs 2 k ftt i ? ~ ' -TtiCr #4 iu /1)00 ,); CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN 86 -364 EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL 'EVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: PROJECT LOCATION BLDG ji PLNG [ P.W. n FIRE n POLICE n P & R 2 OFFICE BUILDINGS - 250' SOUTH OF 144 STREET w/S INTER. AVE. DATE TRANSMITTED 11/5 STAFF COORDINATOR Rebecca Fox FILE NO. RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11/6/86 ,g-V1 RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT %/% (CY144) OW-441c Ducunte_. DATE ///7 /'4. COMMENTS PREPARED BY u sL C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CN 86 -364 CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: Q BLDG Q PLNG n P.W. ri FIRE POLICE n P & R PROJECT 2 OFFICE BUILDINGS - 250' SOUTH OF 144 STREET WS INTER. AVE. LOCATION DATE TRANSMITTED 11/5 STAFF COORDINATOR Rebecca Fox FILE NO. RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11/6/86 RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT CONCERNS: 1. DRIVEWAYS ACCESS POINTS AND IMPACT UPON EXISTING TRAFFIC PATTERNS. 2. LANDSCAPE DESIGN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PRINCIPALS OF CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN,I.E., GOOD VISIBILITY ON ALL SIDES OF THE BUILDING. 3. LIGHTING SHOULD INSTILL A FEELING OF SECURITY TO PERSONS IN YOUR PARKING AREAS AFTER DARK AND PROVIDE FEW SHADOWS OR COVER FOR UNAUTHORIZED PERSONS ON THE PROPERTY. 4. HAVE BUILDER CONTACT CRIME PREVENTION PRACTIONEER FOR THE LATEST INFORMATION ON ALARMS, LOCKS AND OTHER SECURITY HARDWARE. 11/6 pjl DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN 86 -364 EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86-56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FOR u CCG� TO: n BLDG Q PLNG \J\Pwl < FIR 1 POLICE cqP & R PROJECT 2 OFFICE BUILDINGS - 250' SOUTK0�r1�44 t. ETw /S INTER. AVE. FILE NO. LOCATION DATE TRANSMITTED 11/5 it STAFF COORDINATOR Rebecca Fox RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 11/6/86 RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT DATE / 67V COMMENTS PREPARED BY ��_ C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CN 86 -364 CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: BLDG 0 PLNG. (l P.W. Q FIRE POLICE E1-P_& R PROJECT Z.' OFFICE BUILDING - 250' SOUTH OF 144 STREET W/S INTER. AVE LOCATION DATE TRANSMITTED l /Ic- FILE NO. RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR " - -'"-- RESPONSE RECEIVED /1 THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT.- -'PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT POLICE CONCERNS: 1. CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS DURING CONSTRUCTION STAGE, PARTICULARLY MUD AND STONE SPILLAGE DURING SITE PREPARATION. 2. IMPACTS ON SOUTHBOUND MOVING TRAFFIC DURING CONSTRUCTION STAGE. 3. LANDSCAPING CAN BE BOTH PLEASING TO THE EYE AND PROVIDE A SECURE ENVIRONMENT. SIGHTLINES, VISABILITY OF PERSONS ENTERING SC AND LEAVING THE BUILDING AND THEIR SECURITY WHILE IN THE PARKING AREAS CAN BE ACHIEVED BY UTILIZATION OF THE PROPER LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DESIGN. 4. THE DEVELOPER SHOULD CONTACT THE CRIME PREVENTION PRACTIONEER FOR THE LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN OFFICE BUILDING SECURITY. 10/21/86 pjl DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 C Ns 'CITY OF TUKWILA PERMIT NUMBER CONTROL NUMBER al -f34-36 CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM. - ROUTING FORM TO: CZ BLDG. ❑ PLNG. P.W. CI FIRE Q POLICE Q P. & R. PROJECT DT C ( Idi ADDRESS r' ro tkf 14 rM 00 hel i i S hig DATE TRANSMITTED LQI -3/9h RESPONSE REQUESTED BY C.P.S. STAFF COORDINATOR. 11 k!ebeCCIIL. 1 )c RESPONSE RECEIVED PLEASE REVIEW THE ATTACHED PROJECT PLANS AND RESPOND WITH APPROPRIATE COMMENTS IN THE SPACE BELOW. INDICATE CRUCIAL CONCERNS BY CHECKING THE BOX NEXT TO THE LINE(S) ON WHICH THAT CONCERN IS NOTED: Q 1Eo1EG -NNK L/ 1-{V D' La/1cni_ 511wk I4i U sifts CI 121i/tnf,'r3 • 14 cA\ SlittiCTUN fltj i r WA/CI A Q n}� 3 n c,L eF PktiP ,7 . Q S f© ru..t1 / GI Cr PA_ t N! ow mt.) NE- S.% PLAN O EtaNiV1. ("441Vs. LP Q Tz. LLV[1 VL O S ,: ( % Q Q 0 a a a Q 0 vt . IF ANY fZ CIfilly L--lz 1 4?/c 14,14 • SBrow 3u)ty . % s Fuk of LisL hkci�.(T1�-S. D.R.C. REVIEW REQUESTED PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUESTED ED PLAN APPROVED 0 PLAN CHECK DATE % 3 �o COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. FORM 2 0 _ CITY OF TUKWILA CN 86 -364 CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: Q BLDG 0 PLNG. 0 P.W. ri FIRE 0 POLICE P & R PROJECT LOCATION FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 10/24/86 STAFF COORDINATOR RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT / / 9 ? 1 DATE i „?o&irr- COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA • s CN 86 -364 �r� CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC 348 -86 FILE 86 -56 -DR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: f--1 BLDG PLNG. ri P.W. ri FIRE n POLICE 0 P & R PROJECT LOCATION FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 10/24/86 STAFF COORDINATOR RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT 11 // Fi ?ZQ l,ilAiw y �©�'(� Werod. (o+/QCfAoil I'Zia��n 1- 50/1 ' - e- »JfLn per iit.Q C.0 11 j9 e.Ni / 1 CO [ cs,7it 1;s pte(-. do,k ,TAB wer 4 c f /0,;-, by goa4/)S f t _oicf( he rye ad 4y B �P f 7 L � ,� n�.ry 5, reicyyi n0 /(5- ?r curkAr, f rear . airy s, Work or 0074 5 1 -Lic_ 4l . DATE /© 0/516 COMMENTS PREPARED BY UCALE- C.P.S. Form 11 f-' Tai OF TUKWILA PERMIT NUMBER 1•CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM - ROUTING FORM CONTROL NUMBER �J-a,-?, f` TO: [[ BLDG. (] PLNG. Q P.W. Q FIRE Q POLICE P. & R. PROJECT Dili' C Bit ADDRESS IO /X434 W I 4C00 lVIWOrbd.h /11/61(x. Covg DATE TRANSMITTED 101ijSio RESPONSE REQUESTED BY C.P.S. STAFF COORDINATOR G0._ 5).c RESPONSE RECEIVED PLEASE REVIEW THE ATTACHED PROJECT PLANS AND RESPOND WITH APPROPRIATE COMMENTS IN THE SPACE BELOW. INDICATE CRUCIAL CONCERNS BY CHECKING THE BOX NEXT TO THE LINE(S) ON WHICH THAT CONCERN IS NOTED: D.R.C. REVIEW REQUESTED PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUESTED Q PLAN APPROVED [1:1 PLAN CHECK DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY iG / C.P.S. FORM 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND PI' of . A r _ �. -. PL.ARti`' 'L Dui. 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: D T & C BUILDING w__ .�.- 2. Name of applicant: M. N. Sandler & Associates, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 200 112th Ave. N.E., Bellevue, Wa.. 98004. Martin N: Sandler 455 -9616 4. Date checklist prepared: October 20, 1986 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): It is anticipated that construction will start by December 15. 1986. The site is available for inspection at any time subsequent to the submission of the Environmental Check List. Control No. 2k7- 660- z%/" Epic File No. 3��g- gip Fee $100.00; Rec'e AliaTNoUnR 1 h O C i IC 19861 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. With this particular proposal there are no plans for future aAdirions or expansion. However. the property is being short planed to accomodate -an office building with approximately 12,nnn sgnara fPPt. two floors. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Nine to date. 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. Tnternrhan srrPPr imprnvPmevt 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. B A R, on site utility permits and building permit. 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. The proposed office building will be under 10.000 square fegLLand will house the headquarters of the McCabe Damon Food Brokerage company. The size of the site is 3.87 acres. However, it is anticipated that only 40,000 square feet will be utilized for this building. The site will be short platted to accommodate another office building approximating 12,000 square feet on two floors (6,000 square foot footprint.) 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. The proposed building will be located at_approximately250 ft. S. of 144th Street and on the west side of Interurban Avenue South. Attached as a part of this check list is the legal description. Site plan. _ N r i ni ry MAP and to he pro- pase.4 -hu-11 u$ -will be imme.diatel north of the Plaza Onebuilding. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes. The back half of the site must be undeveloped due to sloe _ considerations. The owners are presently in the discussion stage with the City of Ttikwil a for purpos..e of donating Sri dedi rating 1.99 acres of the site to the City for use as an open spacgreen belt. -3- TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Flat to steep slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Fifty percent 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. Please see the attached soils report. d. Are .there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes. Please see attached soils report. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Please see the attached soils study report grading plan and accompaning letters from the geo- technical engineer. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There will be no clearing beyond the developed areas. There will he a minimum rut into the emhankment. Please see the attached grading plan. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Thirty eight percent. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: P1PA P CPP attached grading and drainage plan. 2. Air Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. No Pmissinn_ Problems are anticipat.d at the. time of completion as the building is to iie_utilized soley as an office building. During construction there may be some emissions typical of sash _ projects. 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: NA 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. No 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. No 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Nn Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. No Any ground or surface water will be discharged into the designed storm drainage system. 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. NA 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. she attached storm drainage system dPsjgn. --will he _themezharLDL: cn11 Prting_ and di.gposing of ruaQt.f,_ water. Roof and Paving _r_nnnff shall be rollprtPd in ArainS and conducted into the City Storm System in Interurban Avenue. SAP attached drawing N..p.. 10 of impruiaiuents to Interurban Avenue by.Entranco Engineers. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Pleas e a the tache_d_ Storm drainag.e design 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs x grass pasture _ crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Scrub material, 11PnPL`PCCAry ass and some m sall unneeded tre.�— This will only be in the develo2ed area. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None 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: See attached landscaping plan. 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: heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Seagulls mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Approximately two acres will be preserved in its natural state. 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. Gas and electric for heating and air condi fining_ b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The State Energy Code will be met or bettered. (1986 Washington State Energy Code). 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. No 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: NA -10- 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) ?__ None 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. None 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: NA 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Commercial office ilding(Plaza one B>ildin ) and vacant b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. NADe Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? c -2 and R) -19 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial and low density residential. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? • NA g. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. See section 13 page 3 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Twenty five j• Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NA 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Landscaping will be coordinated with needs of Interurban Avenue and is in conformance with zoning code. 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? NA b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: NA 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? T.w.e_n-t 3_ £ o u r feet- Cr c i r3 i rl —a ud- e n am o -1-e-d metal rnnfing� b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:professionally designed landscaping including a berm betweenperimeter btilding_from the window sill height to the ground level landscaping. 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? Hooded parking lot lighting in the evening. Lighting will be sodium vapor. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if -any: Hooded lighting standards in the parking lot. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? City owned hiking trails. 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: NA 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. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NA 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. See attached site.plans. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate ?_'__ Third _gight Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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). Curbs, gutters and sidewalks as required. by the City of Tukwilp e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. Now many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The'peak hours would be mornings. lunch hour and evenings at the times of arrival and departure of the work force which will number twenty five. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: Combining the ingress and egress points for the two phases of the prnp rty_ 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. Nn b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. NA Evaluation for Agency Use Only 16. Utilities a. C. cle_ -- utilities curre tly ay.abl ite: lectricity; sane ary sewer sep is em, 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. Normal gas and electric requirements for a 10.000 sq. ft, office building. Page.]' _Power anal Washington Natural (;as will he, the suppliers. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete my knowledge. I understand that the/Jlead agency is relying on them to make its, decision. to the best of Signature:1 �C Date Submitted: Cx�if' `G/ /7fJ TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? 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? 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 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? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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? Headquarters for the McCabe Damon Food Brokerage Company. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? NA 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: NA Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? No Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: NA -23- Interurban Avenu Tuk rc'Y 1D-S-8 azeinut Park aot•cc^. ■v'# Walla r Minims dune. LOCATION AND VICINITY . 0 INTERURBAN AVENUE .4" EXISTING PARITING:!::•:-:ic;:: • 0 5 10 15 20 40 60 80 100 1.1 sc•Ie: on• Inch •pu•IS Ive•nly 1110 •1:tt.,•• • 5. PLAZA ONE 1 5.) DRAM.* MVIU.11 M.N. 5003 W. 10-14-80 DEVELOPER: M. N. SANDLER & ASSOC., INC. HOWARD A. KINNEY ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS 5220 HIOHLANO DRIVE BELLEVUE WA (206)044-0254 ICI PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR THE 0 T 8C BUILDING 14400 BLOCK. INTERURBAN AVE 5 TUNWILA,WASHINGTON \ MORINO I ARDOR(' MANI WWI 15118 161.40:41 1.43.4.0A %AM. AY CITY OF TUKWILA Central Permit System MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM • Control # File #(s) Fee(s) $ /4p,47c7 Receipt # 39yp PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY OR TYPE ALL REQUESTED INFORMATION -- INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR PROCESSING. SECTION 1: GENERAL DATA TYPE OF APPLICATION: D BSIP DsHORT O SUBDIVISION OsHORELINE D PRD DPMUD ® BAR PLAT PERMI'T INTERURBAN OCONDITIONAL USE DUN CLASS. USE 0 VARIANCE CHG. OF rICOMM PLAN ZONING LJAMENOMENT APPLICANT: NAME M. N. Sandler & Associates TELEPHONE (206 ) 455 -9616 ADDRESS 20.0 112th Avenue N.E. Bellevue, Wa. ZIP 98004 PROP. OWNER: NAME D T & C Partnership TELEPHONE (206 ) 767 -6250 ADDRESS 5950 6th Ave. South, PO Box 81247 Seatt14IP 98108 PROJECT LOCATION: (STREET ADDRESS, GEOGRAPHIC, LOT /BLOCK) SECTION 11 :. PROJECT INFORMATION 4) DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE. A ten thousand square. foot office building to be utilized by its owner as its food brokerage headquarters. 5) ANTICIPATED PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION: FROM 12/15/AA TO 8/1/87 6) WILL PROJECT BE DEVELOPED IN PHASES? © YES NO IF YES, DESCRIBE: Short plating of site in process to accomodate second office huilding_ PROJECT STATISTICS: A) ACREAGE OF PROJECT SITE: NET 3 . 8 6 GROSS 3.87 EASEMENTS 0.0132 B) FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION: TOTAL # FLOORS one INCLUDES; O BASEMENT u MEZZANINE TOTAL GROSS 19,960 INCLUDES: O BASEMENT Q MEZZANINE FLOOR AREA EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES SITE UTILIZATION: ZONING DESIGNATION C -9 C -9 COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION CommPrria] BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA _L9,950 O f t 0 LANDSCAPE AREA 10,000 0 0 PAVING AREA 15,840 0 0 TOTAL PARKING STALLS: -STANDARD S 1 ZE 34 - COMPACT SIZE - HANDICAPPED SIZE 1 TOTAL LOADING SPACES AVER. SLOPE OF PARKING AREA AVER. SLOPE OF SITE 8) 1S THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE MAP? ❑ YES 10 NO SECTION. 111: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT I , V,. V/ Teo E 6 , BEING DULY SWORN, DECLARE THAT 1 AM THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OR OWNER OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THIS ICATION AND THAT THE FORE- GOING STATEMENTS AND ANSWERS HEREIN CONTAINED AND THE I ION HEREWITH SUBMITTED ARE IN ALL RESPECTS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE BEL I DATE j x (SIGNATURE OF CONTRACT PURCHASER OR OWNER) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME TH 1 S /eG ':wPf DAY OF 19 y lo. NOTARY PUBL1 ^. RESIDING AT / 6 b.;-/ Yg 1 N AND FOR TIE STATE OF WAaSH 1 NGTON NORTHWEST AA/ SOIL ENGINEERING A92(-mu March 30, 1986 Project No. 840301.2 McCabe -Damon Company 5950 - 6th Avenue S, P.O. Box 81247 Seattle, Washington 98108 Subject: Preliminary Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Report - Interurban Property 14500 Block of Interurban Avenue Tukwila, Washington Gentlemen: We are pleased to present a copy of the above referenced report. This report summarizes the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering studies and offers recommendations for the preliminary design and development of the site. Our recommendations are preliminary in that definite building locations and construction details have not been finalized at the time of this report. Based on design concepts provided by your developer, Martin Sandler, we understand that the proposed development will consist of one or two, single -story buildings. Our field exploration disclosed that the soils generally consisted of varying amounts of fill overlying medium dense to dense sands. The medium dense sands will provide suitable foundation support. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that the recommendations presented in this report will aid in the successful completion of your development. It you should have any questions or it we can be of additional help to you, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, NORTHWEST SOIL ENGINEERING Gary T. Lobdell, P.E., P.G. 10480 NE 201 ST /BOTHELL, WA (206) 486 -7984 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT INTERURBAN PROPERTY; TUKWILA, WASHINGTON I. PROJECT AND SITE CONDITIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our preliminary subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering study for the proposed development in Tukwila, Washington. The approximate locations of the explorations accomplished for this study are presented on the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 1. In the event that any changes in the nature of the structures are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and modified or verified as necessary. 1.1 Purpose and Scope The purpose of this study was to 1) determine if the property was suitable for the proposed development, and 2) to provide subsurface data to be utilized in the preliminary design and development of the site. Our field study included excavation of exploration pits and performing geologic studies to assess the type, thickness, distribution and physical properties of the subsurface soils. Engineering studies were also conducted to determine the type of suitable foundation, allowable bearing pressures, anticipated settlements, p11e capacities, floor support recommendations, slope stability considerations, and drainage recommendations. This report summarizes our current field work and offers development recom- mendations based on our present understanding of the project. 1.2 Authorization Written authorization to proceed with this study was granted by Mr. Herbert DeBoer of McCabe -Damon Company, Inc. on March 12, 1986. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of McCabe -Damon Company, Inc., and their agents, for specific application to this project, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering and engineering geology practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. Our observations, findings, and conclusions are a means to identify and reduce risks. Such risks are inherent. to development on or near slopes; it should be understood that no recommendations or engineering design can yield a guarantee of slope stability. 2.0 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION This report was completed with an understanding of the project based on design concepts presented by M. N. Sandler & Associates, Inc. Present plans call tor one or two, one -story buildings with the lowest level to be near the grade of Interurban Avenue. The property studied was situated on the west side of the 14500 block of Interurban Avenue in Tukwila, Washington. The 3.8 acre parcel was generally level along Interurban Avenue; however, the western portion sloped upward to the west. Total elevation change across the property was on the order of 148 feet. Vegetation consisted of stands of decidous trees and scattered evergreen trees with thin undergrowth. Water was visible along the base of the slope in several areas but no defined drainage channels existed. 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Our field study included excavating a series of 9 exploration pits to gain information about the site. The exploration pits were limited to the low, relatively level area where the proposed development is planned. With the exception of the exposed slopes, no sampling was planned or performed on the higher areas. The surf iciai soils forming the steep slopes on the western portion of the property were sampled by hand to develop engineering characteristics used in the slope stability analysis. The various types of soils as well as the depths where the soils or characteristics of the soils changed are indicated on the exploration logs presented in the Appendix. The depths indicated on the logs where soil conditions changed may represent gradational changes between soil types in the field. Our exploration pits were approximately located in the field by pacing from known site features shown on a topographic survey prepared by Jones Associates, Inc. and dated 28 December 1978. It is our opinion that some of the slide activity indicated on Figure 1 post -date the above ment- ioned survey. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the 9 exploration pits completed for this study. The number, location, and depth of the explorations were completed within site and proposal constraints. Because of the nature of exploratory work below ground, extrapolation of subsurface conditions between field explorations is necessary. It should be noted that differing subsurface conditions may sometimes be present due to . the random nature of deposition and the alteration of topography by past grading and /or filling. This is especially true on this property which was previously used as a borrow site. The nature and extent of any variations between the field explorations may not become fully evident until construction. If variations are observed at that time, it may be necessary to reevaluate specific recommendations in this report and make appropriate changes. 3.1 Exploration Pits Part of the field study included excavating a series of exploration pits with a tractor - mounted, extendable backhoe. Each of the pits penetrated between 6 and 18 feet below present ground surface and permitted direct, visual observation of subsurface conditions. The materials encountered in the exploration pits were studied and classified in the field by a geotechnlcal engineer. All exploration pits were backfilled immediately after examination and logging. Selected samples were then transported to our laboratory for further evaluation as necessary. 4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions on the parcel were inferred from field explorations accomplished for this study, visual reconnaissance of the site and its topography, and applicable geologic literature. As shown on the field logs, the exploration pits generally encountered fill materials overlying natural deposits in the low areas. The higher elevations were characterized by dense deposits overlain by loose weathered materials and slide debris. 4.1 Stratigraphy Fill sons (those not naturally placed) were encountered in all of the exploration pits. The fill ranged in thickness from 4 to 15 feet. As noted on the exploration logs, the fill consisted of loose, silty, fine to medium sand with organics and minor amounts of rubble and debris. The fill was deepest in the northern and eastern portions of the level area. Because the property was once used as a borrow site, the depths and uniformity of the fill soils are expected to be quite variable. Natural sons beneath the fill materials consisted for the most part of medium dense to dense, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sands. These sands were underlain by dense to very dense, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand or sandstone known geologically as the Renton Formation. This same sandstone is visible in the steep exposed slope faces which can be seen at the higher elevations. A gray sandstone also appears to underly the entire site and was encountered in many of the exploration pits. The steep slopes consisted of a rusty -tan sandstone which Is typically weathered to sand in a relatively short period of time. As the steep sandstone face weathers, sand falls away and forms a second, flatter slope (termed slide debris) which usually extends to the base of the hillside. 4.2 Hydrology Ground water seepage was encountered in several of our exploration pits at the time of our field study. The depth of seepage ranged from 5 feet to 15 feet and probably indicated a perched condition. Perched water occurs when surface or rain water infiltrates down through relatively permeable soils and becomes trapped or "perched" atop a comparatively impermeable barrier such as the dense sand or sandstone. Seepage in the low areas was noted atop the dense stratum. Ground water flow was also observed emaninating from the toe of the slide debris at several locations around the base of the hillside. It should be noted that seepage may also occur at random depths and locations in fill soils. In addition, fluctuations in the level of the ground water may occur due to variations in rainfall and time of the year. 11. DESIGN 13ECO1'INENDATIOBIS 5.0 INTRODUCTION Our exploration indicates that the parcel appears to be suitable for the proposed development. The bearing stratum is overlain by a layer of f i l l in the southern portions of the low area and spread footings may be used if the fill is removed. The northern portion of the low area is underlain by a considerably thicker sequence of fill and a deep foundation system bearing on the lower dense sands will be required for this area. The slopes on the upper areas are steep and have undergone sliding in the recent past; however, proper setbacks will provide a safety factor for the buildings. 6.0 SITE PREPARATION Site preparation of planned building and parking areas for the southern portion of the low area should include removal of all trees, brush, debris and any other deleterious material. Additionally, the upper organic topsoil should be removed and the remaining roots grubbed. If the thickness of the fill is such that removal and replacement is ecomonical, then spread footings may be planned. In this case, all fill under the building area should be stripped down to the underlying medium dense sands found at 4 to 10 feet in depth. Loose sands which do not contain organics may be reused in fills. The planned parking areas should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet below the bottom of the proposed pavement grades. Since the density of the fill is variable, random soft pockets may exist and the depth and extent of stripping can best be determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist. Site preparation of planned building and parking areas for the northern portion of the low area should consist of overexcavating to a depth of 3 feet below the bottom of the proposed floor or pavement grades. If areas of soft subgrade remain after overexcavation, these areas should be further overexcavated and backfilled with structural fill as discussed under Section 7.0, Structural Fill. Following overexcavation, the surface of the exposed soils should be rolled with a vibratory roller compactor. The Contractor should note that in areas where soft or loose soils are to be removed and replaced, a perched water table may develop in the excavation or stripped areas. If it is not possible to achieve gravity drainage, the water table can build in the granular f111 material and prevent compaction from being achieved. Therefore, prior to earthwork, the Contractor should be prepared to provide drainage as needed. 7.0 STRUCTURAL FILL After overexcavation /stripping has been performed to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer /Engineering Geologist, the upper 12 inches of exposed ground should be compacted to 90 percent of the Modified Proctor Maximum Density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. If the subgrade contains too much moisture, adequate recompaction may be difficult or impossible to obtain and should probably not be attempted. In lieu of recompaction, the area to receive fill should be blanketed with free - draining gravel, washed rock, or quarry spalls to act as a capillary break between the new fill and the wet subgrade. After recompaction of the exposed ground 1s tested and approved or a free - draining base course is laid, structural fill may be placed to attain desired grades. Structural fill is defined as soil acceptable to the Geotechnical Engineer, placed in 8 -inch loose lifts with each lift being compacted to 90 percent of the Modified Proctor Maximum Density using ASTM:D 1557 as the standard. The bottom of the compacted fill body should extend outward a minimum distance equal to the depth of the fill plus 3 feet beyond the location of perimeter footings or edge of parking. The contractor should note that soils in which the amount of fine- grained material (smaller than No. 200 sieve) is greater than approximately 5 percent are considered moisture - sensitive. Use of moisture - sensitive soil In structural fills should be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed during wet weather or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, a select import material consisting of a clean, free - draining gravel and /or sand should be used. Free-draining fill consists of non- organic soil with the amount of fine - grained material limited to 5 percent by weight when measured on the minus No. 4 sieve fraction. If fill is to be placed on slopes steeper than 5H:1V (horizontai:vertical), the base of the fill should be tied to firm, stable subsoil by appropriate keying and benching. A qualified geotechnical engineer or his field representative should inspect the stripped subgrade and 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 filling progresses and any problem areas may be corrected at that time. 8.0 FOUNDATIONS Spread Footings - Spread footings may be used for building suppport when founded on medium dense natural soils or structural fill placed as discussed under Section 7.0, Structural Fill. An allowable bearing pressure of 2500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be utilized for design purposes, including both dead and live loads. An increase of one -third may be used for short -term wind or seismic loading. Perimeter footings should be buried at least 18 inches into the surrounding soil for frost protection. Interior footings need only extend 12 inches below adjacent grade. However, all footings must penetrate to the prescribed bearing stratum and no footing should be founded in or above loose, organic, or existing fill soils. In addition, all footings should have a minimum width of 15 inches. Anticipated settlement of footings founded on medium dense sand or approved structural fill should be on the order of 1 Inch. However, disturbed soil not removed from footing excavations prior to footing placement, could result in increased settlements. All footing areas should be inspected by a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to pouring concrete, to verify that the bearing soils are undisturbed and consistent with the recommendations contained in this report. Such inspections may be required by the governing municipality. Perimeter footing drains should be provided as discussed under Section 11.0, Drainage Considerations. C. Piling - For foundation support on the northern portion of the level area and as an alternative to placement of structural f111 on the southern portion, cast -ln- place concrete piling (Augercast"') or drilled piers may be used. We recommend that the placement of all piles be accomplished by a contractor experienced in their installation. The actual total length of each pile will be adjusted in the field based on required capacity and conditions encountered during drilling. Since completion of the pile takes place below ground, the judgement and experience of the Geotechnical Engineer must be used as a basis for determining the required depth and acceptability of each pile. Consequently, use of the presented pile capacities in the design requires that all piles be inspected by a qualified Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist who can interpret and collect the installation data and examine the contractors operations. Augercast'" piles or drilled piers with a minimum diameter of 16 inches will be capable of supporting the loads on the order of 70 tons when embedded a minimum distance of 5 feet into the very dense sand or sandstone which underlies the site. Allowable design loads may be increased by 1/3 for short -term wind or seismic loading. Anticipated settlements of pile- supported structures will typically be on the order of 1/2 inch. 9.0 FLOOR SUPPORT After removal of the existing variable fill is planned, a slab -on -grade floor may be used over structural fill or pre- rolled medium dense natural ground. The floor should be cast atop a minimum of 4 inches of clean, free - draining sand or pea gravel to act as a capillary break. It should also be protected from dampness by an impervious moisture barrier. If the existing fill will not be removed, two options would be to use a structural floor supported by piling or to "float" the slab on a thin structural fill. After overexcavating at least 3 feet below finish floor, grade, a structural till would be placed. After the fill is completed and approved, the moisture barrier and free- draining layer may be placed. The floor slab can then be cast on top of the free - draining layer. The floor slab should not be tied into the building's foundation but should be free to settle independent of footings. Floating floor slabs should contain bar reinforce- ment to minimize differential movement across any cracks which might develop. 10.0 SLOPE STABILITY Our field study indicated that the higher portions of the site have been affected by previous slope stability. problems. The recommendations presented in this section are a means to identify and reduce the inherent risks to the owner. I t should be understood that no recommendations or engineering design can yield a guarantee of slope stability. The approximate extent of previous slide activity 1s shown on Figure 1, Site and Exploration Plan. As can be seen from Figure 1, the majority of the upslope areas have slid in the past and scarp faces are currently visible near the top of the slopes where the rusty -brown sandstone is exposed. Figures 2 and 3 show interpreted geologic cross - sections through the two slide areas indicated on Figure 1. The cross - sections reveal similar geometries with the dense sandstone standing in exposed faces at approximately 55 degrees and debris slides below the faces resting at 35 to 40 degrees. The bottom extent of slide movement is characterized by toes with ground water seepage emaninating from the base of the toe. The slide debris was stable at the time of our field exploration; however, we do expect some minor readjustments of the toes and slide debris to bring them down to their angle of repose at 28 to 35 degrees. Because of this possibility for slope readjustment, we recommend that the buildings be preliminarily sited using a minimum setback of 30 feet from the base of the slopes. We also recommend that the existing, old topographic survey be updated to reflect the new slope geometries. Following completion of that survey, the stability of the hillside should be re- evaluated and setback recommendations verified or modified as necessary. Parking may be planned with 15 foot setbacks if the toe of the slopes are regraded to angles not exceeding 2H:1 V (horizontal:vertical) along the edge of the parking areas. We recommend that all vegetation existing on slopes be left intact. Woody plants with root systems not only use considerable amounts of water but also tend to bind the soil together and minimize surface erosion. If vegetation is removed, increased setbacks would be appropriate. 11.0 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS At the site, the surf icial sands accept water quite readily and naturally disperse it downslope. The underlying glacially compacted soils are relatively impermeable and water will tend to perch atop these strata. For this reason, seepage will occur along the toe of the slopes during most of the year. Additionally, rain water entering the slide debris will tend to destabilize the toes of the slopes. Therefore, prior to site work and construction, curtain drains should be installed at the top and the bottom of the slope toes to provide drainage. Drains should be tightlined into the storm water system. All footing walls should be provided with a drain at the footing elevation. The purpose of the drain is to 1) prevent the loss in strength of the bearing soils due to saturation, and 2) to reduce the chances of a wet floor slab or crawlspace. Drains should consist of perforated pipe enclosed in a pea gravel, sand -free trench. They should be constructed with sufficient gradient to allow gravity discharge away from the building. Roof and surface runoff should not discharge into the footing drain system but should be handled by a separate tightline drain. In planning, exterior grades adjacent to walls should be sloped downward away from the structure to achieve surface drainage. 12.0 PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING At the time of this report, site grading, structural plans, and construction methods have not been finalized. As the project design develops, we are available to provide additional .geotechnical consultation regarding various aspects of the project. 13ecause the plans and concepts upon which this report Is based may change, proper use of all recommendations Presented herein should be verified by the geotechnical engineer prior to final design or construction. In this way, our earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design. As discussed, building setbacks should be re- evaluated after an updated topographic survey is completed. We are also available to provide geotechnical engineering and monitoring services during construction. The integrity of the foundation depends on proper site preparation and construction procedures and engineering - decisions may have to be made in the field in the event that localized variations in subsurface conditions become apparent. We have enjoyed working with you on this study and are confident that these recommendations will aid in the successful completion of your project. If you should have any questions, or wish to schedule monitoring services, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, NORTHWEST SOIL ENGINEERING Gary T. t obdel 1, P.E., P.G. �✓ e*' 1.• l �Q ,. C' wT.fle • � ce'�� "-... •�• EP-4- 'EP-6 - EP-7 7 7; EP-2 VICINITY MAP - NORTH • SCALE OF FEET N 6116 33. OS' 393.34 . • -;.LEGEND EP-9 NUMBER OF EXPLORATION PIT AND APPROXIMATE LOCATION SITE AND.: EXPLORATION. PLAN • FIGURE 1 — INTERURBAN PROPERTY — Tukwila, Washington .. . , - , - , . A pm NORTHWEST. 0 wow 9°IL ENGINEERING I . 840301.2 i deb 150 100 50 c exposed Renton Formation existing ♦ ` slope 28' 55/' 38' san a,_■ building setback line A' Figure 2 - Geologic Cross - Section A-A 0 150 100 50 a •r c 0 •r w B exposed Renton Formation existing sllope Scale of Feet Figure 3 - Geologic Cross - Section B -B' 28! building 'I, setback line ,s'an" , : d 3g° i' toe 1 50- 100 GEOLOGIC CROSS- SECTIONS -- INTERURBAN PROPERTY Tukwila, Washington Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington NORTHWEST SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 1 1 APPENDIX Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. 1 Soil Description Notes — _ Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand with minor organics (Fill). , _ Medium dense, moist, mottled rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand (Fill). Dense, moist, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand. ; _ Dense to very dense, moist, rusty -tan, silty, fine to (Renton formation). , medium sand — Very dense, moist, gray and rust, medium sandstone. ■ Moderate seepage at 5 feet. . LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description 2 Notes Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand with . organics (Fill). Amml Medium dense, moist, dark tan and rust, silty, fine to medium sand with organics (Fill). Medium dense, damp, light rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand (weathered Renton formation). MOM Very dense, damp, tan, rust and gray, medium sand. No seepage. Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington NORTHWEST SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 I March 1986 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description Notes — — Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand . (slide debris). . . - -Very dense, moist, dark gray, medium sandstone. No seepage. _ LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description 4 Notes — _ Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand (slide debris). . . Dense, damp, rusty -tan, fine to medium sand. ' — _ Very dense, damp, dark gray, medium sandstone. No seepage. . Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington A Apr NORTHWEST logaw SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 I March 1986 I Depth (ft) 0 15 20 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 18 LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description Notes Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand (Fill). 1 Loose to medium dense, moist, mottled tan and black, silty, fine to medium sand with organics and wood debris (Fill). 8" stump at 10' and 12'. Loose, saturated, gray and black, silty, fine to medium sand with roots and glass (topsoil). Medium dense, saturated, gray, silty, tine to medium sand. Moderate seepage at 12', rapid seepage at 15'. LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. 6 Soil Description Notes Loose, moist, mottled tan and rust, silty, fine to medium sand with organics (Fill). Small concrete rubble at 4'. Soft, wet, black, topsoil. Medium dense, moist, tan, silt and fine to medium sand. Medium stiff, wet, tan, fine sandy, silt. Rapid seepage at 12'. Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington NORTHWEST IsrAw SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 I March 1986 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 Depth (ft) 0 5 I0 15 LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description Notes — _ Loose, moist, mottled tan, silty, fine to medium sand with . roots and minor organics (Fill). , . _ — — Medium dense, moist, gray, black and tan, silty, medium sand with organics and silt chunks (Fill). . Medium dense, moist, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium . sand (weathered Renton formation). . ' _ Dense, wet, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand , (Renton formation). . Moderate seepage at 12'. LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description 8 Notes _ Loose, moist, dark tan and black, silty, fine to medium sand with organics (Fill). . — — Medium dense to dense, moist, mottled tan and gray, silty, fine to medium sand and medium sand chunks (Fill). ' _ Dense, wet, rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand (Renton formation). . Dense, wet, gray, silty, medium sandstone. r No seepage. Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington rff NORTHWEST lr WIN/ SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 I March 1986 I De th (ft) 0 10 15 Depth (ft) 0 5 10 15 LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description 9 Notes _ Loose, moist, tan, silty, fine to medium sand (Fill). Medium dense to dense, mottled rusty -tan, silty, fine to medium sand (weathered Renton formation). , _ — Dense, moist, rusty -tan and gray, silty, fine to medium sand (Renton formation). • —' — _ No seepage. LOG OF TEST HOLE NO. Soil Description Notes WWI Amml MEM Interurban Property Tukwila, Washington A Alms: NORTHWEST iirmy SOIL ENGINEERING 840301.2 I March 1986 1 CITY OF TUKWILA - Planning Department APPLICATION TIMETABLE CHECKLIST Project D T & C Bldg. Location Approx. 14500 Interurban Ave S Pre - application meeting date Pre -app. # File #(s) 86 -56 -DR SEPA # EPIC 348 -86 Control # 86 -364 Date application received 10/16/86 Fees $ 160.00 Receipt # 3940 Kroll page 334E Qtr- Sec- Twp -Rng NE 23 -23 -4 Tax Lot # 336590 - 1370 GENERAL INFORMATION Request BAR Review Interurban Special Review District Description of project 10,000 Professional Office APPLICATION INFORMATION Contact Person Martin Sandler Address 200 112th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA Property Owner D T & C Partnership Address 5950 6th Ave So. /P.O. Box 81247, Seattle, WA Phone 455 -9616 Zip 98004 Phone 767 -6250 Zip 98108 Contract Purchaser Phone Address Zip PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS /DEADLINES Notice publication deadline 11/7/86 Date published 11/9/86 Notice to property owners deadline 11/7/86 Date mailed Notice posted on property deadline 11/11/86 Date posted Notice of Shoreline app. deadline 30 day comment period ends ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 1st notice published 2nd notice published Comment period: Yes X No 15 day deadline from action Date routed 10/17/86 Due back 10/27/86 All comments received Additional information required Date submitted Date routed Due back All comments received DNS issued Mitigated DNS issued EIS required Date BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT /PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting date(s) 11/20/86 Date of final action Approved Approved with conditions Denied Conditions Appeal deadline Appealed: Yes No Shoreline Permit sent to DOE. Date DOE received 30 day appeal period ends CITY COUNCIL Hearing date assigned Results of Hearing Ordinance or Resolution assigned Effective date LAND USE MAP UPDATED ZONING MAP UPDATED (23 /ATC)