Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-133-80 - BESTWAY MOTOR FREIGHT - FREIGHT TERMINALBESTWAY MOTOR FREIGHT S 143 ST @ INTERURBAN AV S EPIC - 133-80 ICE MEMO CITY of TUKWILA TO: Fl Le EPIC- 133 - SO FROM: M4QK DATE: 21 itk�i 810 SUBJECT: 0.ESE cf. Tuz "P m!PdAT'u FE4t. - ON WITH FtrsrwaK's A.'TTOI435-4 TDK WAISR 11154 AseeD M� Nar Le µH Z MAti 9 v �NIt OLD pel LMl PA l O.) t p PftI &s wink_ p,r,1u 9411 chit.) I-1W Willi ME Az1JATTL`I , t Two TO -Rd hT pip NOT FESL 1101" to1 FIKIDIP6S {kR NE OTIkr5LEI 130T PkT I WOULD IN Apt WII,k,INc, TO LIST& To 114E,IR CoruG us , 1 LLSO STNIFO TMAT 1 W/ Lt. NCT AcC�'''l Wm W0310111 FOR DEL A`11 fo imi, se DF M'1 FIIJOI N6S� SIOCe 1 AM POI IJ G S6 Azi jldtlfL Tt, ettue ST • City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community. Development 2 December 1980 Bestway Motor Freight, Inc. 1765 6th Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98134 Attn: William Dahl, General Manager SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Enclosed is the original of the supplement -to Environmental Impact Mitigation Agreement (EPIC- 133 -80), signed by Mayor Todd, and ready for recordation. Please sign the document and record it with the county auditor. Following recordation, please advise us in writing of the file number and recording date assigned by the county. This process must be completed before release of building permits. Please let me know if you have any questions. TUKWILA LANNING DEPT. MC /jas k Caughey Acting Director t_AS.HSL. 00. • ,.`,Environmental • Supplement To: Impact•Mitigation Agreement (EPIC - 133-80) Agreement made this 'O 'day of _1980 between BeStway.� Motor Freight, Inc. (herein after referred to'as " Beltway ")`and'the City;` of.Tukwila, a municipal corporation in the State,' of- Washington..(herein -. • after. referred to as "City "). Recitals 1) Bestway is the owner of the following described property; and desires,"'', to construct thereon a truck terminal with ancillary office and sh'o'p .facilities (hereinafter referred to as "The Project "):, "East 20' lot 15, and all of lots 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,and of Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts according to the plat recorded; in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 24 in King County, Washington'. ) On 10 September 1980, an Environmental Impact Mitigation'Agreement' was recorded under Auditor's File #8090100494 and formalized'understanding between Bestway and City as -to which mitigating measures shall be imple- 26; 27 mented in conjunction with'constructing and operating -the project approved- `A ,,F under Conditional Use Permit 80- 9- CUP.. .3) 'On 17 November 1980,,the :Tukwila City Council granted a final waiver' from the provisions.of Ordinance 1137, contingent upon Bestway, recordin a :Supplement to theagreement referrenced in recital #2 regarding ,noise related to evening hour truck traffic. 81 82 •fo7 ' Siecord .. t kp €.est' u+; Address e«�:.�. -.r•ry ,:*Sarr. .•• • • ' 29 30 31 32 ' -Section 1: , Upon receipt of at least three :(3): complai.nts;from'• residents': • or business' operators.in,the Tukwila Community alleging viol aton;of�. Tukwila Noise Ordinance. # //2 0 • the Tukwila P1 anni'ng: Department:. 'shalllinvestigate the alleged violation: Upon 'substantiating that %suc violation is on-going, the Planning Department, shall schedule'`apubl lc, , hearing before the Planning Commission to consider possible ,revocati'on, • of Conditional ,Use Permit 80 -9 -CUP. Section 2: BINDING-EFFECT AND ASSIGNABILITY This agreement shall extend to, and be binding upon the administrators," , as'siFgns, and successors in interest of Bestway, /and shall run 'with the ' .:'i1and. • Section 3 :. RECORDATION This agreement shall be recorded by Bestway at its sole experise with the Department of Records and Elections; King County, Washington;- pripr,i, issuance by City of any development permits for the project:'' For City: Name • Date: /i Ma X;:)0,111,,f; Atle • • 6 Agreement made this t day of Ai, A% 1980 between Bestway 7 Motor Freight, Inc. (herein after referred to as "Bestway ") and the City 8 of Tukwila, a municipal corporation in the State of Washington (herein - 9 after referred to as "City "). 10 11 12 13 1) Bestway is the owner of the following described property, and desires 14 to construct thereon a truck terminal with ancillary office and shop 15 facilities (hereinafter referred to as "The Project "): 16 "East 20' lot 15, and all of lots 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 17 of Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts according to the plat recorded 18 in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 24 in King County, Washington." 19 20 2) On 10 September 1980, an Environmental Impact Mitigation Agreement was 21 recorded under Auditor's File #8090100494 and formalized understanding 22 between Bestway and City as to which mitigating measures shall be imple- 23 mented in conjunction with constructing and operating the project approved 24 under Conditional Use Permit 80 -9 -CUP. '25 26 3) On 17 November 1980, the Tukwila City Council granted a final waiver 27 from the provisions of Ordinance 1137, contingent upon Bestway recording 28 a supplement to theagreementreferrenced in recital #2 regarding noise 29 related to evening hour truck traffic. Supplement To Environmental Impact Mitigation Agreement 3'Y REClfDS ; EC Y 1CNS (EPIC- 133 -80) Recitals 30 31 32 6 1 2 3 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 • Agreement W`Ee. 2 4 19c') Section 1: Upon receipt of at least three (3) complaints from residents or business operators in the Tukwila Community alleging violation of the Tukwila Noise Ordinance # //20 , the Tukwila Planning Department shall investigate the alleged violation. Upon substantiating that such violation is on- going, the Planning Department shall schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider possible revocation of Conditional Use Permit 80 -9 -CUP. Section 2: BINDING EFFECT AND ASSIGNABILITY This agreement shall extend to, and be binding upon the administrators, assigns, and successors in interest of Bestway, and shall run with the land. Section 3: RECORDATION This agreement shall be recorded by Bestway at its sole expense with the Department of Records and Elections, King County, Washington, prior to issuance by City of any development permits for the project. For Bestway: For City: a2‘4!6? Name Ti t e v2e-f.,/-‘041C Date:/2 - jD Mayor, City of Tukwila Date : /I-o.-J, CITY OFiTUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. R s F I N A L DECLARATION OF 4ififtk atiNfE/iNON-S I GN I F I CA JCE Description of proposal MOTOR FREIGHT (TRUCK) TERMINAL Proponent Bestway :Motor Freight Co., Inc. Location of Proposal Easterly terminus of So..143rd St., adjacent to.Green River Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No EPIC - 133 -80 This proposal has been determined to (.- /not have) a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS (', /is not) required under RCW 43.21C.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Responsible Official Mark Caughev. Position /Title Acting Planning Director Date September 12, 1980 Signature COMMENTS: Final decision of environmental mitigation is based on information presented in "Expanded Environmental Checklist for Bestway Motor Freight Terminal Development" dated July 10, 1980, and is subject to the following stipulations: (1) Applicant Bestway Motor Freight, Inc., or their successor in interest, shall carry out all provisions of the "Environmental Impact Mitigation Agreement" contained in city file EPIC - 133 -80, and as recorded in King County records under file #8090100494. (2) Prior to issuance of construction permits for the subject develop- ment, applicants shall record an easement in favor of the City of Tukwila for public trail access and improvement purposes within the "river use zone" of the site as defined in the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program. CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO 74 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MITIGATION AGREEMENT UNDER CITY FILE EPIC - 133 -80. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the provisions of the Environmental Impact Mitigation agreement recorded under King County Auditor's File 8090100494, and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the public interest will be served by supplementing said agreement with provisions to restrict evening hour truck traffic at the subject site. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: The Mayor is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with Bestway Motor Freight, Inc. to control noise related to truck traffic associated with their developing motor freight terminal at the easterly terminus of South 143rd Street. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this /7 °day of , 1980. Approved as to Form a or ATTEST: it C erk City Attorney, Lawrennc . Hard • City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Frank Todd, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: City Councilmembers FROM: Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director DATE: 14 November 1980 SUBJECT: Bestway Motor Freight final waiver At last week's Committee -of- the - Whole, staff was asked to prepare a supplement to the Environmental Impact Mitigation Agreement which re- stricts the number of truck movements to and from the site during the evening hours (6 p.m. to 6 a.m.). The attached document, I believe, is what you requested. I urge the Council, however, not to adopt it. After discussing the idea of such a restriction with our City Attorney, and with Bestway's legal staff, I am convinced that such legislation is not in our best interest. A) The restriction is discriminatory to a single property owner in the M -1 zone; If you wish to impose late hour traffic restric- tions uniformly throughout the community, S you must treat all similar: uses in similar zones alike. B) Your decision to grant a preliminary waiver in essence welcomed Bestway's freight operation to the Tukwila business community. If_you did .not intend that this concern should grow and flourish in our midst, than you should not have invited them into town in the first place. If Bestway's business philosophy is successful, . their traffic will continue to grow. To artificially restrict such growth to an arbitrary plateau level denies Bestway the same benefits of our vital market area already enjoyed by other entrepeneurs in the City. C) The restriction is unenforceable. Larry and I both agree that this restriction will not withstand legal challenge; no demon- strable public benefit is offered to offset the real economic loss of business opportun ity which Bestway would no doubt claim if the City were to petition the courts for compliance. Neither would the City staff have much enthusiasm for staying up all night to count Bestway's truck trip activity! We believe that the existing mitigation agreement, along with the City's noise ordinance, provides a sufficient regulatory framework to deal with any problems associated with the Bestway operation. Also, the cooperative spirit evidenced by Bestway's management throughout the approval process convinces me that they wish to be a good neighbor, and will work with us to resolve problems as they arise. 1 1 2 3. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 dale s446.4, tzeztA•2P.A IN le-1)-16 e4,• ot 7 80 ` 0 t 0 0 4 9 4 • 10 svr . 80 ETIVIRMIMENTAL LMPACT MITIGATION AGREEMENT (EPIC- 133 -80) Agreement made this 9114- day of sep 6Em: , 1980 between Bestway Motor Freight, Inc. (herein after referred to as "Bestway ") and the City of Tukwila, a municipal corporation in the State of Washington (herein after referred to as "City "). Recitals 1) Bestway is the owner of the following described property, and desires to construct thereon a truck terminal with ancillary office and shop facilities (herein after referred to as "The Project "): "East 20' lot 15, and all of lots 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 of Hillmam's Seattle Garden Tracts according to the plat recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, Page 24 in King County, Washington." 2) In the context of permit approval processing for the project by the City, Bestway was required on 20 May 1980 to prepare an Expanded Environmental Checklist investigation of potential impacts associated with the project, as provided in Sec. WPC 197- 10-330 of the State Environmental Policty Act guidelines. 3) On 10 July 1980 the Expanded Environmental Checklist document was presented to City's SERA Responsible Official. 4) Said document contains suggested measures to be taken during construc- tion and subsequent operation of the project which will offset antici- 'gated environmental impacts. The purpose of this agreth ent is formalize understanding between Bestway and City as to which mitigating measures shall be implemented in conjunction with constructing and operating the project approved under Conditional Use Permit 80 -9-CUP. Agreements In response to the City responsible official's final declaration of nonsig -• -1- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 nificance for the project, Bestway agrees to the following terms and stipulations: Section 1 ENVIROIMEN'',AL IMPACT MITIGATION A) "Earth" a) Bestway shall implement all temporary erosion /sedimentation control measures described on the "Temporary Erosion Control Plan for JUDO" prepared by Reid, Middleton & Associates, Inc. and dated 6- 11 -80. Said temporary erosion control plan is labeled "Figure 3" in the 10 July Expanded Checklist document. B) "Air" a) During construction of the project, Bestway, or its authorized agent, shall supervise grading, hauling and building activity to control construction dust and other particulate emissions in accordance with Article 9, Regulation 1, of Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency, Subsections 9.03, 9.04, 9.11 and 9.15 (a)-(c). b) During operation of the project following construction; unnecesary motor vehicle engine idling shall be eliminated; engines will be shut off except when moving vehicles, or during servicing, repair or maintenance operations. Bestway shall take reasonable measures to maintain vehicle. emission control devices in proper operating condition, and shall maintain compliance with all applicable goverment mandated motor vehicle emission - control standards. d) Bestway shall take reasonable steps to control escape of fuel vapors into the air during vehicle fueling operations. C) "Water" a) During construction of project, Bestway or its authorized agent shall insure that: - All natural vegetation and ground contour within the 40' wide river use zone as defined in the Tukwila Shoreline -2- Master Program is left undisturbed: = - The on -site storm drainage- system per figure S'of the Expanded Checklist is installed. - A' temporary barrier (such as "snoia- fencing ") is installed on.the westerly edge of the 40: wide river :use -zone to-• prevent 'damage to the shoreline •.from encroaching - . .construction equipment and -accumulated debris. - Adequate supervision of construction personnel is maintained to prevent littering and accumulation of debris on the shoreline, and to prevent waste frail entering and damaging the on -site storm drainage system. b) During operation of the project, Bestwav shall insure that: - Cleaning of paved surfaces, and the shop and warehouse floors is undertaken.as often as necessary to minimize entry of solid waste products or large concentrations of other pollutants into the on -site store drainage system, thereby damaging the effectiveness thereof. - The on -site store drainage system components -are inspected and maintained as necessary to insure maxim= operational effectiveness of the system. D) "Flora" 1) Bestway shall insure that all existing vegetation within the 40' wide river use zone defined in the Tukwila Shoreline Master Progr is retained in an undisturbed state in accordance with a landscape plan approved by the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review. 2) Prior to issuance of development permits by City, Bestway shall ob- tain Board of Architectural Review approval of an on -site landscape p1 E) "Noise" 1) During the construction phase of the project, Bestway or its authorized agent shall insure that: -- Construction activity shall not begin before 7:00 A.M. nor -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 • continue past 7:00 P.M. during the period of Monday through • Saturday inclusive. No construction activity shall be carried out on Sunday. - Reasonable effort is made to schedule construction operations which are especially noisy, such as grading with heavy equipment and material hauling during the mid -part of the construction activity day (i.e., 9:00 A.M. - 3:00 P.M.) 2) During the operational phase of the project, Bestway shall insure that: - Vehicles not owned by Bestway but traveling to or fran the Bestway.site in fulfullment of interline, agreements refrain.from use of Jacob Brakes. - The west- facing doors of the warehouse and shop building are maintained in a closed position during the hours of 11:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. - Electric equipment is used in preference to gas or diesel powered, when reasonably practical. Hydraulic or electric impact tools should be used when available, in preference to pneumatic tools, which require noisy exhausts and compressors. - Unnecessary engine . idling is eliminated. - Vehicles used by Bestway are not equipped with "Jacob" brakes (engine-controlled).— — Vans with refrigeration equipment are not operated while parked on - Maintenance and inspection of buidling air- conditioning/ heating fans and equipment is. conducted as often as necessary to limit noise emissions from such devices. - Air compression equipment (if any) is placed within a ' building enclosure or within an enclosed accessory structure to minimize noise propogation from such equipment. F) "Public Services" 1) Prior to issuance by City of site development permits, such as grading, hauling, building for the project, Bestway shall -4- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 present to the SERA responsible official a letter of agreement between Bestway and the crime prevention unit of the Tukwila Police Department detailing security measures to be undertaken during and after construction of the project to insure against disproportionate police service demands. G) "Transportation" 1) Prior to issuance by City of site development permits for the project, Bestway shall enter into a Developer's Agreement with City for one or both of the following: a) Improvement of So. 143rd Street as required by the Director of Public Works. b) Bestway' s participation in any future local improvement, districts in the project vicinity in which Bestway is determined to benefit. 2) Should the Public Works Director determine that neither of the foregoing Developer's Agreements are necessary to the public interest, Bestway shall be relieved of the necessity to comply with the above - described Developer Agreement require- ments. Section 2: COSTS Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the City, Bestway shall bear all costs associated with implementing the provisions of this agreement. Section 3: BINDING EFFECT AND ASSIGNABILITY This agreement shall extend to, and be binding upon the administrators, assigns, and successors in interest of Bestway, and shall run with the land. Section 4: RECORDATION This agreement shall be recorded by Bestway at its sole expense with the Department of Records and Elections, King County, Washington, prior to issuance by City of any development permits for the project. -5- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 FOR BES'IWAY: FOR CITY: Name , Wi11ia' . '6ah1 9/3/80 Date Aga r, City of Tukwi▪ la Date Vice President and General Manager Title Name Date Title NOTARY: Subscribed rnd sworn to before m; this] 1'' day of 5 e r'} . 19g0 �o:ary Pubiic in and for �the State Washing en, residing a acs c —6— .City of Tukwil 6200 Southcenter Bou .rd PLANNING DEPARTMENT Tukwila Washington 98188 TRANSMITTAL DATE OF TRANSMITTAL 11 / JULY/ 80 TO: PROJECT: LOCATION: ❑ BUILDING DEPT. ❑ FIRE DEPT. P PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.0 hil) Bestway Truc Terminal S. 143rd @ Interurban Avenue 0‘) vo �` ¶ e,U 0\v °J�%!7 4044 . A/ pa on . reairui, rri r ' 4e std 6c ❑ POLICE DEPT. fni ',ext 3 c..ee.471.. J"ve r 04 me &11,4 .441 I req- ❑ RECREATION DEPT. asust.4,ed 0,4 axc ,,,,K•;• '11 C, fa-1...y ere col dw.f- 0 430nY / ei cA v/ 6e The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials for the above reference project: ❑Environmental Checklist • ❑Preliminary Plat ❑Environmental Impact State- EFinal Plat ment ❑Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone Request ❑Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request ❑Conditional Use Permit © Other: Prelim. EIS Application j/Kki,„ The attached materials are sent to you for your review and comment. The Planning Dept. needs your comments to satisfy review procedures and to complete the project file. ( PLEASE CONCENTRATE REVIEW ON TRAFFIC, HYDRAULICS & SOILS) Please use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate sheet. Requested response date: 15 / JULY/ 80 Review Department comments: le -4-U,,J. e,i L. ra..® By: Date: • City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development 20 May 1980 Bestway Motor Freight, Inc. 1765 6th Ave. So. Seattle, WA. 98134 Re: Threshold Determination, Environmental Checklist EPIC - 133 -80 In accordance with Section WAC 197- 10 -300of the State Environmental Policy Act Guidelines, we have reviewed the Environmental Checklist submitted in support of your application for Shoreline Management Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a truck terminal on South 143rd Street. The information contained on the checklist, and the environmental concerns raised by the City Council during their 19 May1980 review of your Waiver Application (80 -11 -W) lead us to conclude that we do not have sufficient information upon which to assess the environmental impact of your proposed development. Therefore, in accordance with Section WAC 197 -10 -330 of the SEPA Guidelines, we are requiring you to supply further information on the topics listed below. The information should be provided in reasonably- sufficient detail for the City of Tukwila, as lead agency, to determine the environmental significance of your project. Information should be formatted in a manner which discusses the source and magnitude of each potential impact, and then identifies possible mitigation measures and feasible alternatives to offset that impact. J1 Checklist Section I -9: Required permits -- justify "no" response regarding "hydraulics" permit; provide written confirmation from King County that permit is not needed. Checklist Section II -1: Earth -- provide a preliminary site grading study to include surface drainage pattern and riverbank protection strategy. Indicate cut /fill areas and estimate import material quanti- ties, if any. Checklist Section II -2: Air -- provide a quantitative air quality impact analysis measuring the influence of your project on the Tukwila community. This study should include pollution impacts from sta- tionary and point sources associated with your project, as well as an assessment of your project's incremental effect upon ambient air quality in the Interurban Avenue Corridor area. • - Checklist Section II -3: Water -- provide a quantified hydrology study describing the on -site drainage method, a description of run- off products and method by which such will be impeded from entering the Green /Duwamish Watercourse. Also provide calculations for asses- sing on -site storm water rentention capacity.' _ Discuss,, too.,_:the impact7 of site paving upon ground -water recharge. Checklist Section II -4: Flora -- justify "no" response to question 4a; site plan dated 4 -8 -80 shows nearly all existing trees, including some significantly -sized individual specimens to be removed. - Checklist Section II -5: Fauna -- analyze the potential deteriora- tion of the fish life habitat of the Green River as a consequence of channeling your site run-off directly to the river. - Checklist Section II -6: Noise -- provide a quantitative noise impact study, addressing particularly the impact of project - related traffic upon the 24 -hour ambient noise level of residentially- occupied lands in the Interurban Avenue Corridor area. Resultants should be expressed in terms of L10 & L90, Dr CNEL.descriptors, if possible. - Checklist Section II -10: Risk of Upset -- the Tukwila Fire Dept. has requested a listing of and indication of probable quantity of, all hazardous materials carried to and from the site and stored thereon. - Checklist Section II -13: Transportation -- justify "no" responses on questions 13b, c, f; provide a traffic study addressing the pro- bable impacts of project- associated traffic upon the City's existing transportation facilities. Particular attention should be directed to the fitness of South 143rd Street to handle increased truck traffic, and the safety implications of increasing incidence of truck movements through the 143rd /Interurban Intersection. - Checklist Section II -14: Public Services -- justify "no" response to question 14(b); Tukwila Police Dept. anticipates increased service demand for this proposed facility. Justify "no" response to ques- tion 14(c); increased truck travel willprobably shorten pavement life of South 143rd Street,increasing public maintenance costs. Checklist Section II -20: Archeological /Historical -- the University of Washington Dept. of Public Archeology;..:' has reported significant finds of early cultural remains on the Green River shoreline. Arrange- ments should be made with U. W. for an on -site archeological investi- gation, and a report summarizing their findings forwarded to the City. Contact Mr. Hal Kennedy, Asst. Director of the Public Archeology Dept., Engineering Annex FM -12, 543 -8359, to arrange for field reconnaissance. Section RCW 43.21C.030 of the State Environmental Policy Act provides that all branches of government shall: "(c) Include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on: (i) the environmental impact of the proposed action; (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; • (iii) alternatives to the proposed action; (iv) the relationship between local short -term uses of man's envi- ronment and the maintenance and enhancement of long -term pro - ductivity; and (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources . which would be involved in the proposed action should it.be implemented;" Accordingly, the information requested in this letter must be forwarded to, and accepted as adequate by, the Tukwila Planning Department before processing of the Conditional Use Permit or Shoreline Management Permit can go forward. We will be pleased to lend guidance as needed to you or your consultants in completing the required research. Thank you for your cooperation. TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. Mark Caughey Acting Director MC /mkb • 790x; 16 April 1980 City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 - 433 -1845. Office of Community Development Dept. of Game 600 North Capital Way Olympia, WA. 98504 Attn: Habitat Mgmt. Div. Re: Proposed Truck Terminal Adjacent to Green River (80 -9 -CUP) Attached is a_ copy of the environmental checklist (EPIC- 133 -80) submitted in conjunction_ with an application for conditional use permit to allow development of.a truck terminal adjacent to the Green River within the City limits of Tukwila. It appears that this development may impact the riparian habitat _. and water quality of the river; therefore, in accordance with Sec. UAL 197- 10- 330(c). of SEPA guidelines, the City of.Tukwila Planning Dept., acting as lead agency, is requesting your advice and insight on the fish and wildlife impacts implicit in this proposal. Receipt of your response on or before May 1, .1980 will enable us to adhere to the established processing schedule, and will be. appreciated.._- MC /mkb Attachment TUKWILA P NING DEPT. Ma Caughey Acting Responsible Official 410 CITY OF TUKWILA 1 ENVIRONMENTAL OUESTIOdNAIRE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: -5E Mc1jU2 'IcZE�I -li TE(LM1i /s.l. PROJECT ADDRESS: 5 1436 E v f INTEROQ'6ba) CrW1 /45✓ 14 L T 13—r / ( i 5�. ) - 1.. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW . (date) ______ (reviewer) u i -1 d i n g: by: 0"-EjEngineering: by: P Fire: by: Er-P +ter: QeGeE4.110 U by: 0 Police: by: Mei of 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: CITY OF TUKWILA fa ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: 1.. DEPARTMNTAL REVIEW: Lh Building: ❑ Engineering: ❑ Fire: ❑ Police: 3CSTwc1`( MaTU2 • Etc..Ki -m_fe.M104.L 5 19-36 E INTEIZUR6t&) (FLetkS /At,` s "1( '* imvivrANT i reviewer) (date) a by: by: by: by: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: DY 4,54./1,2_ CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: -5CSTwAkTh- Mo7U2 K Etc.Hi -re.o.Am JA.L 5 143 C1-1- E yr N) zsb43 Pl,t;A51✓ iz2P L 15,-r M ) 1.. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) ❑ BB 'lding: by: U Engineering: g//.8 /au by:. ❑ Fire: by: ❑ s: Q TO by: ❑ Police: by: pup; ICWts -.F� CITY OF TUAWILA . ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: /� v.,, o» °' Sri 1 S i C o ,N,A_Au - ill IV) 'TO R ' [ S S 64)6 ,on / V. , c . t-N 0 cuiuu ".s .. 17 l , v-, f'g P Q L-1.4 1 r n fl el tt. \\ I Yli City of Tukwila Fire Department TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Hubert H. Crawley Fire Chief OFFICE MEMO Planning Department Fire Department Environmental Questionnaire Review Form.for Bestway Motor Freight April 25, 1980 Would appear to have little impact on the department, if we were handling only one incident at a time. List of hazardous materials transported by this company should be furnished to the fire department before issuance of a building permit. Consideration of types of repairs done on site would need to be clarified prior to occupancy. Hubert H. Crawley Fire Chief City of Tukwila Fire Department, 444 Andover Park East, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 575 -4404 Ak CITY OF TUKWILA E��V I RO��ir� HTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REV I T FORM PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: C6Tw a'� }v2 • Rz.E:,% -t ► 7 JA JA.L 1.. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: ❑ Building: ❑ Engineering: 5 1 1-3 PI E„ f I1.4-rtRUQbbJ L-f 5-s IAA.'( 5� (date) 4= mkrr (reviewer) by: by: �e. — _ by. S: Qecsc4ToU `� 25 TO by: ❑ Police: - by: • 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: v-e a k y f/v ,r4:39'4 f .x c.-101.74--- ✓ y�O �¢ - / �i /'J c�occ.�� • ," G! /tad Q C �'� �wf to . a . Bf-- Tet''` - °.0 —.1_a_ c74‘ s..�e ,!�. CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: -61-v.) MoTVIZ- Te-ce-AW L "5 14'36 E Krv.tz u czish..1.3 ge-v 5-r 1. Ar'( )4K 11-W0V-TIVJT I. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) C3 Building: by: C3 Engineering: by: C3 Fire: by: by: -I-8O by: p Low e-ri 0 -Pfitottti-n-g-:Cee-gtgloi..) Er;olice: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: SUBJECT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST — BESTWAY MOTOR FREIGHT DATE 4 /16 / 80 INIESSACUE.13F — This particular area of Interurban is one of the high accident rate locations within the city. Traffic generated by a Freight Terminal can only add measurably to the existing problems. Should this permit be granted consideration should also be given /-1 ; • 1-4 the lnstallation oatraffic signal device at 58th Ave. south to aide in the safe movement Of trat fic thru the Interurban corridnr. '4 rm 14B. A facility of this type cannot but generate additional calls for service to the police ;•4 Al . 1 - - • . goo securi y p anning s . . e incorporaT • •-.. ,p, =.1, ;, the ft. • I.! ! :C .■ -III 4: II • s- 41 :4 . . s- 1 e_areasT—lightlng, fehoing„ ,,,„: employee parking sites, etc. SIGNED E.7.1 • .=-J. • ' t'L rET5 5—R—n 1. 4S 472 SIGNED SEND PARTS 1 AND 3 WITH CARBON INTACT - PART•3 WILL BE RETURNED WITH .REPLY: • DATE PUS PE SETSI 10412 ^ , PI 174. rt ! T. , Ce.Se` /' 1 '' cba - _Zz/ s - - etpeld bL cj H DD -off a r,t -Z 'r42 ��_.. `o:Set-.'PPI CITY OF TUKWILA • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible Official that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible Official previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be completed. A fee of $50.00 must accompany the filling of the Environmental Questionnaire to cover costs of the threshold determination. I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: Bestway Motor Freight Inc. 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 1765 6th Ave. South MU 2 -8585 3. Date Checklist Submitted: /S- ed 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Tukwila Planning Commission 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Freight Terminal 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of,its scope and nature): Office and Truck Terminal with separate shop for Bestway Motor Freight Inc. 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im- pacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate under- standing of the environmental setting of the proposal): 6440 S. 143rd, Tukwila 98168 - East 20' Lot 15 All of Lot 16, 17, 18. 19, 20 and 21 Hillmans Seattle Garden Tracts 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: Fall 1980 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (federal, state and local): (a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc. YES. NO (b) King County Hydraulics Permit 0 (c) Building permit YES NO (d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit YES NOV" (e) Sewer hook up permit YES ✓ NO (f) Sign permit YES NO ✓ (g) Water hook up permit YES V NO (h) Storm water system permit YES NOV' (i) Curb cut permit YES NO ✓ (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES ✓ NO (k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES / NO (1) Other: 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: No 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: No 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, de cribe the nature of such application form: Md / _ _ II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- ing of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea- tures? (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? -2- YES 'MAYBE NO Z (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Explanation: 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Explanation: . Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters,' either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? -3- YES MAYBE NO 1 ti. (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise•avail- able for public water supplies? Explanation: 4. Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or bers of any species of flora (including L hrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the ..normal replenishment of existing species? (d) •Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: -4- YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: Typical diesel freight transportation - idential to vehicles used by Oak Harbor Freight Lines which is located two properties to the West. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Explanation: 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera- tion of the present or planned land use of an area? Explanation: 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate Of use of any natural resources? (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Explanation: 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radi- ation).in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Explanation: -5- YES MAYBE NO • • 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? Explanation: 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? - (b) Police protection ?. (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? -6- (f). Other governmental services? Explanation: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use'of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO/ 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: (a) Power or natural gas? ✓ (b) Communications systems? ✓ (c) Water? f (d) Sewer or septic tanks? ✓ (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: 1 • 1 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically of- fensive site open to public view? Explanation: 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of exist - ing recreational opportunities? Explanation: 20. Archeological /Histroical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a signifi- cant archeological or his - torical site, structure, :object or building? Explanation: CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT: YES MAYBE NO I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw.any declaration of non - significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. o Signature and Title Date -8- O1-101° WEST L_V/`\TW_(_e. f„i-Ftrew 60LT 11 ELEVAll.r4 ASV n.LevAcpc4„1,,,, =1-1011E_. H WM • • .MOSSO•MS 34. 0•••MYWO 1-191q-1-1 E.LMAT1Obl, . - . ffijerr• . • . . . ELEVATIOH WE5T EL EVAT Ott e.o. eat =ii.15, City of Tukwila EXPANDED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR BEST WAY MOTOR FREIGHT TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT Submitted July 10, 1980 THOMAS M. WALSH ATTORNEY AT LAW 909 SEATTLE TOWER / THIRD AND UNIVERSITY SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 682 -1931 July 10, 1980 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Best Way Motor Freight Terminal Development, Expanded Environmental Checklist, EPIC - 133 -80 We are pleased to submit for your review this Expanded Environmental Checklist for the Best Way Motor Freight Terminal Development. In April, 1980, Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. applied to the City of Tukwila for a series of permits to construct a new motor freight terminal. On May 12, 1980, the Tukwila City Council reviewed Best Way's application for the first of the series of required permits- -the application for a preliminary waiver. On May 19th, the Council approved Best Way's application for a preliminary waiver. On May 20, 1980, Mark Caughey, Acting Director of the Tukwila Planning Department, requested additional infor- mation to supplement the environmental checklist which Best Way submitted in April. (See letter in Appendix A.) This Expanded Environmental Checklist is submitted in response to Mr. Caughey's May 20th request. The information in this Expanded Environmental Checklist was compiled by a team of professionals retained by Best Way. Jon Potter served as General Consultant and contributed the bulk of the writing for this report. Reid, Middleton & Associates served as project engineers and contributed heavily to the sections on earth and water. Dames & Moore conducted the soils investigation and contrib- uted information for the sections on earth and water. Stradling & Stewart served as project architects, developed overall plans for the proposal, and contributed heavily to the section on flora. Ken Cottingham served as transporta- tion engineer for the project and contributed heavily to the section on transportation. The University of Washington, City of Tukwila July 10, 1980 Page 2 Department of Public Archaeology provided the information on archaeological /historical impacts. A complete list of the names and addresses of the members of this professional team is attached. In addition, the City of Tukwila's Planning Department, the Department of Public Works, and Police Department provided substantial information and assistance ' in the development of this report. A great deal of informa- tion was gathered from other local, state, and federal governmental agencies. AUTHORS AND PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS This Expanded Environmental Checklist was prepared under the direction of the City of Tukwila Planning Department; research and analysis was provided by the following firms: COTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 701 Plaza Building 6th Avenue at Stewart Street Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: 447 -9977 DAMES & MOORE Environmental & Applied Earth Sciences 155 N.E. 100th Street, Suite 500 Seattle, Washington 98125 Telephone: 523 -0560 JON D. POTTER Planning Consultant 2911 25th Avenue West Seattle, Washington 98199 Telephone: 284 -9418 REID, MIDDLETON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Engineers, Surveyors, Planners 324 Main Street Edmonds, Washington 98020 Telephone: 775 -3434 STRADLING & STEWART Architects Bellingham Towers Bellingham, Washington 98225 Telephone: 733 -2100 THOMAS M. WALSH Attorney at Law 909 Seattle Tower Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: 682 -1931 WASHINGTON ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES COUNCIL -- WESTERN OFFICE Office of Public Archaeology FM -12, Engineering Annex University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98105 Telephone: 543 -5240 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1 EARTH 1 AIR 4 WATER 10 FLORA 13 FAUNA 14 NOISE 16 RISK OF UPSET 25 TRANSPORTATION 26 PUBLIC SERVICES 26 ARCHAEOLOGICAL /HISTORICAL 26 REFERENCES 28 APPENDICES 29 LIST OF FIGURES 1. SITE PLAN AND ELEVATIONS 2 2. GRADING PLAN 3 3. TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN 5 4. AIR MONITORING STATIONS MAP 8 5. STORM DRAINAGE PLAN 11 6. LANDSCAPE PLAN 15 7. NOISE MONITORING STATIONS MAP 19 i. LIST OF TABLES Page I. SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS, TUKWILA AREA 6 II. SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF SOUND MEASUREMENTS AT AND NEAR THE PROPOSED SITE 17 III. ANTICIPATED MAXIMUM NOISE LEVEL FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 21 IV. IMMEDIATE ABATEMENT POTENTIAL OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT- -NOISE LEVEL IN dBA AT 50 FEET 22 V. dBA LEVELS OF COMMON NOISE SOURCES 23 ii. NAME OF PROPONENT Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. 1765 6th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98134 NATURE OF PROPOSAL The proposed action would develop a slightly less than three acre site into a truck terminal. The facility would include a 4,572 square foot single story warehouse, a 4,107 square foot two story office building, a 4,600 square foot single story shop building, and a covered fuel island. (See Site Plan and Elevations -- Figure 1.) PROJECT LOCATION The site is located on South 143rd Street between Interurban Avenue and the Duwamish River. The boundaries of the tri- angular site extend west from the Duwamish River approxi- mately 620 feet along South 143rd Street, then northward approximately 500 feet back to the Duwamish River. xisting Conditions The site lies on the generally level terrain of the Duwamish River floodplain. The ground surface slopes slightly down- ward toward the Duwamish River. The highest points of elevation generally range between 19 and 20 feet above sea level along South 143rd Street. The lowest points of eleva- tion range between 17 and 18 feet along the top of the river bank. (See Grading Plan -- Figure 2.) A soils investigation of the site indicates fill material at the ground surface in all but one of the test pits. The fill ranges in depth from 6 inches to 5 feet. Density of the fill ranged from loose in the majority of the explora- tions to dense at a test pit in the middle of the site. The native material encountered in the first 8 to 12 feet consists of loose to medium dense slightly silty to silty fine sand. Based on the soils investigation soils at the site have been sup determined by the engineer €o be satisfactor for ort of the proposed frei ht terminal. (See Report of Soils Investigation -- Appendix B.) 1. Cu-.. L E6 EL P/ 500,01/01 THE E.Sr 20fr 00 tor /5 e Alt OP LOrS /l, /), /5, /°, 20. ?. /, 820CC N /<LM/w"J SE<r7t4 644004 703. A5 000 Pu0 REC8E060 ONDER •Se. // Of PL/r$,0460 20, 0000005 00 •/1/6 COONTy, N/5R/N6TON OENCNMlOC 60 /ass Jr - C1411 <l0 500444 ON N. 000140 6E N.5/01 4r 4110 04 CavaST• S,0••1t.• 67 .5rweey £//05.5 /6//, 30W. M.. 00 60 M-OS l <l✓ 2020 fT .50E REPoRT Of PR[V/<S Romer 008 //Are• 5N904C• 0t••-427ON• M GREEN R/vEQ PP M. /0.116 057-480 /5100 8y G0905 00' EN66. 4• Of SEC- /J , T 25•. q. 31 , WA,/ (GREE DUµ yyt ""'"'"-r MA• 5rrE. M." 4im LQ' vT'CCH Orr /D`+E• 21L' • •_• - L' N1,A 4N• t q tG O me Nnv.rr m2 OP. ••••-••••• - - ••Over - owe. -- eacc ur-e _.. _ CC•{ I.,l1P.S - -- rz,o cry ur.e • awe T 7 F Q • f • • } • 1 SARI 4 a -i ,r Z d mem +• fa. m 1 � FIGURE 1 Page 2 of 2 0 rn INS _a •TIIWAQT A�IM� ASA -_ �••••111111.1 PRCfbo GFFIGZ Avii4Ke-tu/-12P Fes. DC WAY N'GTO(Z J 1T LNG, urr or ;LKvntA 0 . HYf z a- Wall? � • «0' d1(76 0h 4' or8WAV .0.4/ o' El erg /5.8 Fr AO oFrl,I.✓ /,W47 "ABM coQ,A7 Of !A'r/MEEA' 'cote*, / GIU/,,I416yl4' Z'P'Kfj 1&A'rfY REpoAr outs /711 -5 A•ivY LJ.° 4 itGAi Dl:rg,7T161l r TM Lost 10 feat of tot IS tad .11 of Lots 14. 27. I4. 1S, 70, One 21, 4lo. 14. akin..'. S..ttl. Garden ►roc i .s p. pl.r recuNee under vine II of Plots, pp. 71. record. of alas Cone's. Wshipto. (44TH �YSIIITlt1 1. SA00 CooIC Terd. f{N4enlpsant Iported. 2. 2lilinp and *realms shall M la conformance 4. elth trot. S111a fa 44 10.45 4 - Chiseled goner. on Norte Corner of Ibrtn slde et IMO of COM,Ote sld...ls by "Street Inds" slip, JO. N.Y. of Gd 10.45 11n: 70.70 ft. Se e .port of profile point for woke/ aurfKe elesotions on Green 41ser pp 4o. 10.25 G.t.►sl.hed by Corp.,of tn,lna.rs. 40T(: 11152110 LFDU1.40•10 ruILITI(S MCI 4L(■ WWI ON THIS 06AY110 204 22.0 p11i40St 04 ASS /STING THt CONTlALT04 I4 LOCATING SAID 2101011I1S IN THI rlLL0. 1HC COHIIACTOI SHALL 46 4t$►ONSIKt 204 CN(CAING ACTUAL LOCATIONS I4 T1( 21110 AND CHICAING WITH 4.4P404AIAT1 AGEICI(S 'NAT MT NNW 11100 6602410 2ACILITILS WITHIN TN/ MOJLCT 1111111. 12.0 C04T6AC104 SHALL H WILT 4112040IK1 20N MT 0AK4G( TO t9.0(N- G40t4D 2KILITI1S *1S2ILT116 FROM NIS 0414AT10HS. • FIGURE -2 10. 1444. 4 H / OA0 1111 k►� 1 egi IA \ .g) t, 1 r j _T_7+___„ it itOs r° 18 4 /. h 19 J � f X00 NN_ !. ! 10�tR A 0 1 C �3 a w O • sea • � r N L%f • • • C • C 1 4,tt?' 000 Gt. 1' • v• 1r=- R /,r 6o orr rp.Or I \� I,I'� J �_�` L A/'ft 1 ♦y II or aJ►,ai ------ 15/74/' '��"� of / /i. .Y Ii• OS'l!'AV � 1L M 17.Ot:— __ - - -_ f 70 4 1704. t0 �' 4, ---- — III"• _� \� 1- _ cc Cr 0 0 2 d cn W m 3� .0, Wa of CC N Z 7t O. UW Z {O o & qr W W � W g Y 00- 044 Impacts Slight modifications of a few feet will take place in order to provide stable foundations and meet flood - proofing re- quirements. ,Ag roximatel 3,400 cubic ards of fill will be imported to the site. General surface erosion during construction should not be a problem due to very low slope gradients and a temporary erosion control plan proposed by the proponent to be fol- lowed during construction. (See Temporary Erosion Control Plan -- Figure 3.) The plan includes two retention ponds with straw bales used for filtering the water. A second filter will be used at the outfall. A 12 inch high earth berm will be constructed along the river frontage. When completed, the development will cover approximately 85 to 90 percent of the site with buildin n --p .ate. TH remainder of the site will have ferti e surface soils capable of supporting existing or newly planted landscaping. Surface drainage will flow into a closed storm water system, where it will be filtered and channeled into the river. (See WATER, below.) Any existing surface erosion should be decreased by the development. Riverbank protection will not be affected, since the 40 -foot strip of property adjacent to the river will not be developed and will remain in its existing vegetated state. Mitigating Measures The Temporary Erosion Control Plan will be followed to miti- gate potential surface erosion during construction. Miti- gating measures will not be necessary after construction is completed. AIR The site is located in the Green River Valley and has a typical northwest Pacific Coast marine climate. During the fall and winter, prevailing winds are from the southwest, and during the late spring and summer from the northwest. Low level temperature inversions may occur in the Valley which, coupled with low wind speed, can result in the trapping of pollutants. This condition is most prevalent during the winter months. 4. z� • LEIAL Dusuu..e*0a r•• [..t 70 feet of Let IS .«d. all of Lots IL, 17, N. 19, 70, awl 11. Elo b 19, **0 . I Seattle PardOo Tract, n per plat retarded Mlles Nolw 11 of Plats, pay. P4. records of R1o9 Counts. Wa Sbl.gtow • 1111711 won't_ • 1, s400 C..eic f.rds Dolkonhoeot I•go.tw. 0. I l K.Md wading j shall N le se foraewed OEA'9�OL A07704. -lti . e seer e o, i. *F' sFT$ Q A •.IOM A! w Of seer. /0 a i7 A0 oere,r.M /Aro /ow COA'se! e, ensavetAv f tw rt ay1/ AYr,,,, 1d%ArrfY RFPOAr PAD"LE. IVAY fs` •TA1CS • MAIJTASI •TtA)A/ ISAL.!/S yi) FILTS FAbR1G .�- Frswce sL0Conalta Gd IO.1S 9 - Cllseled sywr. ow 10.11 Co..., of Morin ♦Id. as .rd of ro.crele sidewalk bf ••St...I Iw'S" •Mgr, AA• U.W. of Gd I0.9S fl... 70.70 ft. S.. '.port of profile eblnl few we ter swims •lae•tlows on 6r..o elver pp 00. 10.•S EsIabllsh.d be Cofps of Engineers. NOTE, 1/101106 UIDERGb0f11D IACILI2Its ISM VII* SHOWN Ow THIS NRAsIw6 FOR TAE PURPOSE 07 ASSISTING Twt CONTACTOR IN LOCATING SAID PACILITIE4 IN TOE FIELD. THE CONTRACTOI SHALL EE R1S►ONSI114t roR («(021116 AcTWAI LOCATIONS 111 TN1 11EL9 AY CN(CRING NITA APPROPRIATE AGENCIES TINT Iq1 WWI 010206900.0 • FACILITIES WITHIN 711E PIOJECT LIMITS. TA) COORIACT011 S0Ait eE SOtILT RE000101111 ION AN1 OA•MG1 TO 1 $111 - GROV1D FACILITIES RESULTING 111011 NIS DPEIUT10NG. } FIGURE 3, 1lsoaK MAN, t•0sICN / stD4*• $ T10N m ayo. FLAN terms . .l. L wan 1Ofsast. ItfWT** NATURAL OEOLS*T10N 00R S A.7 COKROL. OUTFALL DETAI4. t1'r• !. T1A PORAR/ swarm AND OETLNT1oiu PONDS TO Oi CONSTRUCT1O ST 1LACw $TINA• OALn ACROSS $wit 31. ALL TCNFORART smSATRO. AND animal FONDS sou. K IMAMS= N A UTISFACTORT 60/1[1171011 %I14?4. *0 w UWE 711AT mamma NOJOR Cp1STRUCTt011 4 c°aLITTtq AND TIME FERIIAIKIIT 0RAtt1A0i RICtuTICS ARC OPERATIONAL, ♦ 0670.1 STLTATTOlt CONTROL AREAS TO ORISC*•L seams 601t01T NNS. • Il•-• CASE (ROTA MOM OF SALES FOR (A0S10N CONTROL. As ottoman. • AFPRONAL OF TAM$ FLAN Sots NOT CONSTITUTE AN APPROVAL 00 OMNI. WI IOM LOCATION Of OWES. K$TRICTORS. 6MAMIELS OR NETINTION FACeLITIUS OUT 11 AN APPROYLL 00 TT* TttMFORART SEOt•E11TAT101 CONTROL FLAN COLT 4t1 t. 11 I. I .TAKE • w►►u7Art1 imam*, VALb• CT VTAKE6 /111Ali) (G7 D� TT4A? FIND A MIN VOL. lee FT• -1 SECTION A-A ti 6 e O • • • • v W 1 "TOW SKS* BAErH USIA 1481 DETAIL) LILCO 11 E.GTIOW B-8 U T4 lese T F.MT � ken tx. 46w Ft* \ N ril t 1 :it \ \ . ..\ \11641::-- — —.77-‘-':::,)- 1\ 110611 =GC .4(e•! x x "E. 110 ACLIASS ..� _ �. 1YP. BERM S�CTIOU N74 .i J 3 a 2 J •_ o ce4 z o t- Z tai • 0 i H as '� a • Q� W m � 4 • z • O m a. 2 p-n z 11- w s / / / /OD •••• • 4/0 -0404.0 Data accumulated by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) indicates that the concentration of suspended particulates in the Tukwila area has generally increased with increased urbanization of the Valley. The following table summarizes data collected at a number of air monitoring stations in the general vicinity. (See Air Monitoring Stations Map -- Figure 4.) TABLE I SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS TUKWILA AREA Suspended Particulates micrograms per cubic meter Distance From Site Wa. State Location (# on map) (Mi.) 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 Standard Renton Municipal Bldg. (1) Southcenter (2) 12026 42nd Ave. S. K.C. (3) 1.8 37* 51 50 37 60 0.9 51* 46 48 45 34 60 1.8 57* 55 60 (Source: Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency, Air Quality Data Summary- - 1977 and 1978; 1979 Quarterly Air Monitoring Data Summary, Department of Ecology, State of Washington) *Based on less than 12 months data. 6. Pollutant Concentrations parts per million (ppm) Location (# on map) Puget Power Yard (4) Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen Monoxide Carbons Dioxide (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) Distance Study From Site Period 1 Hour 8 Hour 6 -9 AM Period (Mi.) (mo., yr.) Max. Max. Avg. Avg. 1.8 6 -7, 1977 3.2 2.0 0.37 0.02 3 -4, 1977 4.2 3.3 0.28 -- 10-11, 1976 8.1 6.6 -- 0.01 6 -7, 1976 2.2 1.3 0.04 (Source: Washington- State Department of Transportation 1977 Monitoring) Washington State Ambient Air Quality Standards Carbon Monoxide - 1 Hour Standard Carbon Monoxide - 8 Hour Standard Hydrocarbons - 3 Hour Average Nitrogen Dioxide - Annual Average 35 ppm 9 ppm 0.24 ppm 0.05 ppm (Source: Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency, Air Quality Data Summary, 1978) The table indicates the particulate levels are approaching but are still within the Washington State Ambient Air Quality Standards. Carbon monoxide levels are within the standards. However, other automobile related pollutants, particularly hydrocarbons, are in excess of the Washington State standards. Based on the proximity of the site to the monitoring stations, it is expected that the air quality conditions are similar to those recorded. Based on the "Simplified Analysis Technique for Establishing Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Near Highway Facilities," the maximum levels of carbon monoxide during the peak traffic 7• 3• I 1 • • SITE 1.9 .fi.126th St. • • • • %As so 00 1 South $ Center 1 1 TUKWILA 1 1 1 -1, 1 �___.e• N. 1 1 1 2 FIGURE 4 RENTON 1.8 mi I 4 so ow me _ lm 1� tim JON D. POTTER PLANNING CONSULTANT PROPOSED BEST WAY MOTOR FREIGHT TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT AIR MONITORING STATIONS i 8• movement hours created solely by the •ro•osed •ro ect will _a anima e y 0.� ppm o car on monoxi.e to the exist- ing levels along South 143rd Street. (Based on information provided in t e Traffic Engineering Report, Appendix D.) Levels will decrease with wind speeds in excess of 2 mph and with distance from South 143rd Street. (Source: EPA "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factor" with revi- sions.) These additional increments of particulates will be slight, when compared to the existing conditions. The site is currently devoid of noticeable odors except for occasional emissions from the Seattle Rendering Works, approximately 0.4 mile north of the site, and from occa- sional exhaust emissions from Skagit Valley Trucking Company trucks presently using the site. Impacts Short -term generation of particulates will occur as construc- tion commences. Dust particles would be raised by earth - moving activities. Noxious odors would be emitted by diesel powered vehicles and from asphalt paving operations. Some long -term increases in motor vehicle generated pollu- tants will also occur as local traffic levels increase. Impacts would be most severe at identified points of conges- tion and where traffic volumes are increased. Higher pollu- tant concentrations could cause air quality standards viola- tions to occur or persist longer than if no development were constructed. However, as indicated above, the addition increments of pollutants caused by this development will be slight when compared to existing conditions. Furthermore, as more stringent federal motor vehicle emissions controls take effect, there could be an overall decline in vehicle - related pollutants. Mitigating Measures a. Low - emission construction equipment shall be used when- ever feasible. b. Measures to control construction dust such as watering, cleaning and sweeping of streets at the end of hauling activities shall be performed by the contractor. c. Unnecessary motor vehicle engine idling shall be elimi- nated; engines will be shut off except when moving vehicles. 9. • • DM L. d. Motor vehicle emission control s €andards will be care- fully and closely adhered to; al practical stepsto maxi(nize emission control of the motor vehicles will be carried out. WATER Existing Conditions The property is adjacent to the Duwamish River and in its floodplain. The site is within the flood control zone. A permit for any development within the zone must be obtained from the King County Hydraulics Division. New development is only allowed with ground level and floor elevations at or above 100 year flood levels. An application for a King County Flood Control Permit has been filed with the King County Hydraulics Department and is presently being reviewed. King County's decision of acceptance or denial should be made soon. Surface water in the past has run unrestricted into the Duwamish River via sheet flow. In accordance with the direction of the Tukwila Public Works Department, storm drainage runoff will be filtered and channeled into the • Duwamish River. The present policy is to move surface water runoff, from properties adjacent to the river, into the river as quickly as possible for the purpose of draining those lands before the river reaches its flood capacity of 12,000 cfs (controlled by the Howard Hanson Dam). Through contour grading, filling and paving, on site storm water will flow into a closed storm water system. Gradual slopes of 1/2 percent will decrease the flow rates. A large grit tank will be constructed where the vehicles are washed to collect silts and oils. A precast oil /water separaor te t__ - tan ,_ hhic`h =has been accepted for use adjacent to streams by the Department of Ecology will be included in the system. The oil /water separator tank will have a built -in baffling system which not only separates out the oils but also dis- sipates the velocity of storm water flow to further settle out sands and silts before discharge into the river. The outlet will be below the 15.8 foot mean high water elevation of the river and will have a flood gate attached in order to prevent any potential backwash into the storm sewer system. (See Storm Drainage Plan -- Figure 5; and letter from Storm Drainage Engineers -- Appendix C.) 10. ft 48x4k oA. 0, .0' 88 lr0.#C4 ,ROM V N $' f[fr. /1 C Pr ,,1 oert.cr /NCO P*# CgOAI Of !AV /1///P5 "i'.!!N / oUIY,IryN Ar /YFV lufk(Y r _ N( /rP Qr odOY /l rl Astet 40 • 4 \I\ .#A-N: ke r-,i, tiLNI. '4 tre-e. t, t ,DOi Meotif O :/ fY'•"� / • • .•t..4) esAw.r / 1 opt ,fLRI1edPGe c1C74/L ,...r ,'. e • •A w *h w•jA> t \ ta C.ovr/ /yk' #r MOW TOP .0600 /N N• 6e %E AZ4') L E6TA/O P/r0001eO / /N/!N 0/owe e[,N•Ir /or -80 - ex/or COvr>,uAI f////o/ C vraaR PRMPb I4V 9en'e/0 D d7?7. 20 cove. SOS . FIGURE it4. re O « 1 11E "M PCAA Z EZ /DC TP�¢O /AV /A.! rrp /■ coo N Air //haw /Warr Afire A[Y,HP /C POR)' 406 TOP As 60 NW 0 or GI 7•. O' AA' ,:.t /r /1 40.47 ArArrON CAf('.ilrrs I.aatr 6n- /.,o s/&r /n' # /Q.oc.Y roWir A' Ts 2 coustr•ction tir11 confer. to 11. 'St.derd fp.cIflc.- LL ,ens for Ae8 lclpel•F.klic works Construct lee" rd staslderd • .ns . sdayted N the City of Toka111•. constr.ction Is *object to Inspection e1 80.1; City ` tt.nt. of Ae4lls Yorks. the Contractor shell notify. 'City of els sd..4.Ie 1n afficl.,t thee to per.lt -. ylspettloo prix to ..d M'101 •11 work. -• • ' . Tip•Mt eq•tllt /Ndl..ntaien syst• ant M •ettelle• offer to consteucttm. A. . A11 soon Nor pipe to be IlalipI AIoslns.: . • • V f A.. 0f' - Ie. ♦ .sro • . �--o»— = .rf/A� -T, � J ~— — - 7473r- 4'17 , .t« ._ 07 • tl /I N I, • le' t!' iv ` I t. A fre' • YA •. CSI STING O.OUGAOIAIO FKILITI(f NAVE atU c?OM ON 11111 M1iria fa TIM FUATO1( W ASSISTING .vA IMiTMCTON IN MATINS Mop FACILITIES 1N TN: I(80\ 111E COWKKTOA MOLL K Hs►OI%1/UI fa f4C +1ILA KNK tCCATIPI$ is 1111 FIELD MAC cocain *,lTY IAT: AGC.CUU MAT MT OWL UfOCaMOMG fs ttrLncf intro. M MOKCT II•ITI, TII( COITIACTOA FMI�" H sRitT r VMAI$tSU vas an wow re aim- "'Ail Mitt IFWD qxT$ ►11011 NIA MART IONS. f 1 i 0400 ✓ JO.. •-e+! yRr •-•4fe torilf or During the soils investi•ation, ground water was encountered at a depth of 12 feet b -low the existing ground elevation. Because of the proximi y of the site to the Duwamish River, it is likely that th ;•round water is closely related to the river levels. It is also likely that the ground water levels fluctuate seasonally. Prior to construction a temporary 12 inch high earth berm will be constructed along the river frontage. (See Temporary Erosion Control Plan -- Figure 3.) In the past, much of the surface water has drained into the groundwater. Contaminants presently include nutrients from vegetation, and oil based pollutants from existing operations. Impacts The potential of increased storm ater ff volumes will be generated by the covering of an estimated 85 to 90 percent of the site with impermeable surfaces. However, storm water runoff, for the first time, will now be controlled b a closed.storm water sewer system. Potential adve. e e ects from silts and oils entering the river w ..hlmb-:_ fir. ' . e• b the use of the filtering mechanisms. _ 10C4$ Paving of the site will limit much percolation. However, due to the proximity of the site to the river, changes in the level of ground waters after the paving are expected to be slight. Percolation of pollutants into the ground water will be pre- cluded due to impervious surfaces. Mitigating Measures During construction the following measures shall be taken by the Proponent:....sJ 0mme DoIrn)i vice/POST CooSTIR . a. Where possible, natural vegetation for silt control shall be maintained. b. Temporary siltation and detention ponds shall be con- structed by placing straw bales across swales. c. All temporary siltation and detention ponds shall be maintained in a satisfactory condition until such time • that cleaning and /or construction is completed and the permanent drainage facilities are operational. 12. • • P0'DIM� `� �C� • 3 v10/- e Siltation control areas shall be returned to original conditions. e. Rip rap base (both sides) of bales shall be positioned as required for erosion control. f. A minimum 12 inch high earth berm shall be constructed along the river frontage. VOROL Good construction practices shall be used to reduce litter, debris and other po lutants from entering the drainage. h. Cleaning of streets and parking areas shall be under- taken whenever necessary. i. Grading operations should be limited to periods of normally dry weather. J FLORA Frequent maintenance of the storm water system should be provided. Existing Conditions Much of the site has long been cleared of vegetation. Approximately 10 to 15 percent of the site remains vegetated. The tree cover of the site consists of cottonwood and willow along the river as well as cedar, fir, locust, hemlock, pine, spruce, cherry and apple trees scattered along the southern edge of the site. Blackberry, sedges, perennial grasses,, cattails and other riparian understory are situated along the river bank. All vegetation within 40 feet of the mean high water line will be left undisturbed in accordance with the shoreline management program. Impacts The proposal would cause the removal of the vegetation located between the proposed shop and office /warehouse. Mitigating Measures The project architects devoted a significant amount of time and energy in the design of the site configuration to avoid removal of vegetation. Different arrangements were attempted in the placement of the office /warehouse and shop buildings. 13. However, no configuration could be developed which assured that the trees would not obstruct vehicular movement. (See letter from the project architects -- Appendix F.) To mitigate the loss of existing vegetation, the project OA 41 Vue- architects developed a landscaping plan. (See Landscap RiW Ply and Figure 6.) Landscaping with vegetation w pro- vided along the property lines to screen the terminal from y)atoWE oW adjoining uses and maintain a "green" and attractive environ- ment. The 40 foot segment along the river will not be developed and will remain in its existing vegetated state. FAUNA Existing Conditions The site provides approximately a 40 foot wide strip of riparian habitat along the river. The present use of the site for trucking has precluded revegetation on the major portion of the site. Although no census of species has been conducted on this site, a variety of birds and small mammals are known to. inhabit the valley in habitat similar to that existing on the site. Small mammals such as weasel, muskrat, shrews, mice, rats and squirrels can be expected to be found on the site. Birds such as blackbirds, goldfinch, sparrows, king- fishers, juncos and robins may be found on the site. The site is within the Pacific Migratory Waterfowl Flyway. However, migratory birds can be expected to roost in less developed areas. The Aleutian Canada goose, American and Arctic peregrine falcons and the northern bald eagle whose range includes the Green River Valley are on the official list of endangered species. However, the Soil Conservation Service reports that no sightings have been made in the lower Green River Valley. OF MOM seau (Z) The Green River supports fish runs of Coho, Chum and Chinook salmon, steelhead, cutthroat, Dolly Varden trout, whitefish and stickback. Out migration occurs. from March to June. Chinook begin returning to the river at the end of September. 14. FIGURE 6 8 3 8 AA; Z� y) LONtXN RAN 71212E a, -oW'O.G. L. am. re' ' 143 rci � �T la • — — — • — — • • • Pollution on the valley floor from industry, septic tanks and removal of riparian vegetation have contributed to degradation of water quality and overall environment for fish production in the Green - Duwamish River systems. Presently, there is no pollutant filtering of the water runoff which enters the river at this site. Impacts Development of the site for the proposed use would result in the removal of many of the major trees. The number and diversity of wildlife species that could use the developed site would be limited, with the possible exception of the landscaped areas. However, the wildlife along the river f.gontaae should not be significantly impacted-by ted-by the develop- ment. T • Runoff from the site will be filtered and channeled into the Duwamish River. The plan shall meet Tukwila Public Works Department and Department of Ecology's standards for water quality control. Therefore, water quality and fish life should not be significantly affected. (See letter from Storm Drainage Engineer -- Appendix C.) Mitigating Measures a. Retention and intenanceof the habitat along the river frontage. b. Mitigating measures as described for FLORA. too; way? c. Temporary erosion control measures as described in EARTH section. d. Storm drainage control measures as described in WATER section. NOISE Existing Conditions The predominant source of noise affecting the site and adja- cent areas is traffic from Interurban Avenue. Intermittent high levels of sound emanate from the subject site and Oak Harbor terminal when there is trucking activity, aircraft and train traffic. 16. and Maule mower, aircraft Ave. " Interurban 12:40 PM 7/2/80 61 56 53 Itraffic, Oak Harbor trucks " Interurban 8:10 PM 7/2/80 61 56 51 traffic, air - craft, train 17. Interurban 2:07 AM 7/8/80 51 47 45 traffic, Skagit Valley refriger- ation trailer Middle of Interurban 7:25 AM 7/2/80 64 55 53 Site traffic, Skagit Valley trucks, train 1, Interurban 12:20 PM 7/2/80 60 53 49 traffic, Skagit Valley trucks, train Interurban 7:45 PM 7/2/80 62 46 43 traffic, air- craft, train Skagit Valley 1:40 AM 7/8/80 61 60 59 refrigeration trailer View Crest Interurban 4:20 PM 7/3/80 63 57 54 Apartments traffic Interurban 9:05 PM 7/2/80 57 54 50 traffic, aircraft Interurban 2:32 AM 7/8/80 50 43 42 traffic, wind in trees (Source: Readings were taken by Jon D. Potter, using General Radio 1565 -D sound level meter with attached windscreen. The sound level meter was calibrated with General Radio 1987 calibrator before and after each set of measurements. One of the sites - -the View Crest Apartments - -is located in the residential area overlooking Interurban Avenue, and in that part of the residential area which is most likely to be exposed to noise from Interurban Avenue. From the data presented, it can be seen that the noise levels are slightly lower at the View Crest Apartments than the other sites. Distance from Interurban Avenue and the tree buffer on the north hillside between Interurban and the apartments reduce the noise levels. Viewcrest Apartments • th FIGURE 7 JON D. POTTER I NOISE MONITORING PROPOSED BEST WAY MOTOR PLANNING CONSULTANT FREIGHT TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT STATION 19. • • There were a number of standards for noise assessment which can be used for comparison purposes. The Federal Highway Administration recommends a design noise level (L10) of 70 dBA for outdoors in residential areas. The U. S. Environ- mental Protection Agency (EPA) Region X guidelines recommend that for adequate speech communication, the median noise level (L50) should not exceed' 55 dBA. The EPA does not have regulatory standards.' The noise level measurements taken for the project are generally below the levels recommended by the Federal Highway Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. Only during rush hours is EPA L50 levels for View Crest Apartments slightly exceeded. The other two monitor- ing sites meet or exceed the L50 level during rush hour. Impacts Ambient noise levels will be increased as a result of short - term construction activities and the additional trucking activity. Construction equipment can generate noise peaks in the range of 85 to 95 dBA. The following tables present maximum anticipated maximum noise levels from construction equip- ment, and immediate abatement potential of construction equipment noise level. 20. TABLE III ANTICIPATED MAXIMUM NOISE LEVELS FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Phase and Duration Equipment Used Noise (dBA) Maximum at 50 feet* At 100 Feet* Phase I: Clearing and Demolition Phase II: Excavation Phase III: Foundation Phase IV: Frame,. Roof and Skin Phase V: Finishing Dump Truck Bulldozer Vibrating Grader Backhoe Bulldozer Dump Truck Concrete Truck Dump Truck Saw Concrete Truck Generator Concrete Vibrator Crane Dump Truck Air Compressor Welding Generator Concrete Truck Concrete Pump Dump Truck Air Compressor Saw Jackhammer 80 -90 80 76 - 85 • 85 80 91 85 91 78 85 78 76 83 91 81 78 85 82 91 81 78 88 85 74 70 79 79 74 85 79 85 72 79 72 70 78 85 75 72 79 76 85 75 72 82 *(Source: Dash Point Heights DEIS, King County) 21. TABLE IV IMMEDIATE ABATEMENT POTENTIAL OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVEL IN dBA AT 50 FEET Equipment Present With Feasible Noise Controll Important Noise Sources2 Usage3 Earthmoving front loader backhoes dozers tractors scrapers graders truck paver Materials Handling concrete mixer concrete pump crane derrick Stationary pumps generators compressors Impact pile drivers jack hammers rock drills pneumatic tools Other saws vibrator 79 75 E C F I H 40 85 75 E C F I H 16 80 75 E C F I H 16 80 75 E C F I W 40 88 80 ECF I W 40 85 75 E C F I W 8 91 75 E C F I T 40 89 80 E D F I 10 85 75 E C F W T 40 82 75 E C H 40 83 75 E C F I T 16 88 75 ECF I T 16 76 75 E C 100 78 75 E C 100 81 75 E C H I 100 101 95 W P E 4 88 75 PWEC 10 98 80 W E P 4 86 80 PWEC 16 78 75 W 4 76 75 W E C 40 lEstimated levels obtainable by selecting quieter procedures or machine and implementing noise control features requiring no major redesign or extreme cost. 2In order of importance: T Power Transmission System, Gearing C Engine Casing E Engine Exhaust P Pneumatic Exhaust F Cooling Fan W Tool -Work Interaction H Hydraulics I Engine Intake 3Percentage of time equipment is operating at noisiest mode in most used phase on site. (Source: Dash Point Heights DEIS, King County) Noise impacts due to additional trucking activity will also occur, although it appears the impacts will not be signifi- cant. The average daytime noise level recorded at a point 50 feet from a passing truck traveling along Interurban Avenue at 35 mph is 73 dBA. The predominant noise of truck traffic lies in the low frequency range, a well known char- acteristic of the truck exhaust noise. By way of comparison, the following table gives levels of common noise sources: TABLE V dBA LEVELS OF COMMON NOISE SOURCES Source of Noise Noise Level dBA Jet takeoff 120 (200 feet) Auto horn (3 feet) 115 Riveting machine 110 Jet takeoff 105 (2,000 feet) Garbage truck Heavy truck (50 feet) Pneumatic drill (50 feet) Alarm clock Freight train (50 feet) Freeway traffic (50 feet) 100 90 85 80 75 70 Air - conditioning unit 60 (20 feet) 23. Light auto traffic 50 (100 feet) Living room Bedroom Library 45 40 35 (Source: Dash Point Heights DEIS, K.C.) Given a dB computation of loudness for annoyance level, the loudness or annoyance doubles for each 10 dB increment in level. The traffic report (Appendix D) estimates the volume of traffic on Interurban Avenue to be approximately 18,000 vehicles per day for two -way traffic. The report also estimates maximum "worst case" vehicle trips to and from the proposed project to be approximately 275 vehicles per day. This represents an increase of only 1.5 %, which is relatively insignificant. Furthermore, this small addition of vehicular traffic will not significantly increase the decibel level of noise. A property of the decibel scale is that the sound pressure levels of two separate sounds are not arithmetically addi- tive. For example, if a sound of 70 dB is added to another sound of 70 dB, the total is only a 3 dB increase (to 73 dB). If two sounds are of different levels, the lower level adds less to the higher as this difference increases. For ex- ample, adding a 60 dB sound to a 70 dB sound only increases the total sound pressure level less than 1/2 dB. Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. does not own or use trucks which have exceptionally noisy characteristics. For ex- ample, Best Way has no trucks with Jacob brakes which are engine - controlled and are particularly noisy. Although they once used Jacob brakes, Best Way has discontinued their use due to high maintenance costs. In addition, Best Way does not operate refrigeration trucks which are particularly noisy. 24. �K tw� � � 6� 0°15‘ ' uT AGO yr1 wM�aT i) ego ,�c � v4µ`1'. Mitigating Measures 411)ftMO + a� WA�� a. Operations which generate the most noise should be scheduled near the middle of the day. b. Noise producing construction equipment should be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible. c. Electric equipment should be used in preference to gas or deisel powered, when available. Hydraulic or elec- tric impact tools should be used when available, in preference to pneumatic tools, which require very noisy exhausts and compressors. Berms, fences or walls should be used along the peri- meter of the site to deflect noise. e. Truck arrivals and departures should be scheduled to reduce vehicle congestion. f. Truck idling once the truck is parked should be pro- hibited. g- Jacob brakes (engine - controlled) should not be used on the trucks. h. Refrigeration trailers should not be used on the site. RISK OF UPSET Existing Conditions Presently, there are no hazardous materials on the site. Impact The proposal calls for underground gas and diesel tanks as well as up to two 55- gallon motor oil drums used in the shop. The tanks and drums will be constructed and installed in a standard manner. The Tukwila Fire Department has reviewed the preliminary plans and has no objection. Presently the only hazardous material Best Way Motor Freight carries is oil based paint'and aerosol goods destined for grocery stores. Other hazardous materials are not trans- ported by Best Way Motor Freight due to the high cost of transporting such goods. 25. Mitigating Measures None are required. TRANSPORTATION Ken Cottingham, a transportation engineer, has prepared a detailed transportation report, which is Appendix D. The report concludes that the proposed Best Way project should not cause traffic safety deficiencies or capacity deficien- cies, and existing traffic control features will not require modification. There will be some increase in traffic levels .at the intersection of South 143rd and Interurban Avenue, but not enough to create deficiencies. There will be an increased need for maintenance of South 143rd. However, South 143rd already requires maintenance and any use of the proposed site will require further maintenance. PUBLIC SERVICES Existing Conditions The Tukwila Police Department services this area. Response is from vehicle patrols or from the police station in City Hall, just over one mile from the site. Impacts (See traffic report concerning projected increase in traffic and safety -- Appendix D.) The proximity of the proposed development to surrounding industrial establishments (Alaskan Camper Manufacturing, Bertwell Industries and Oak Harbor Freight Lines) will not • make an appreciable increase in police patrols necessary. Mitigating Measures a. A locked fence will enclose the employees parking lot. b. Low intensity lighting will be used to light the building. ARCHAEOLOGICAL /HISTORICAL Existing Conditions An archaeological survey was undertaken by the University of Washington Archaeology Department on the site. There is no 26. indication from the survey of any archaeologically signi- ficant artifacts on the site. (See Report, Appendix E.) Impacts Potential uncovering of archaeologically significant finds during construction. Mitigating Measures Work activity will cease on the site if any archaeologically sictnifican —find is uncovered during construction and the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia will be immediately notified. WN0 %P b? 27. REFERENCES AIR -- Eastside Green River Watershed Draft Environmental Impact Statement, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, November, 1978 - -Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency, Air Quality Summary- -1977 and 1978, 1979 Quarterly Air Monitoring Data Summary -- Washington State Department of Transportation 1977 Monitoring - - Washington State Department of Ecology, 1979 Quarterly Air Monitoring Data Summary, February 25, 1980 FLORA - -Site Plan for the Proposed Office /Warehouse /Shop for Best Way Trucking Company, Stradling and Stewart, Architects, April 8, 1980 FAUNA -- Eastside Green River Watershed Draft.Environmental Impact Statement. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Services, November, 1978 - -Data Inventory: Tukwila Planning Area, City of Tukwila, 1975 NOISE - - Protective Noise Levels, Condensed Version of EPA Levels Document, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, November, 1978 - -Dash Point Heights Draft Environmental Impact Statement, King County TRANSPORATION - - Topics Study by Stevens, Thompson & Runyan, Engineers, Seattle, by K. E. Cottingham - -1979 Traffic Study by Entranco Engineers 28. APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDICES Letter from Mark Caughey, Tukwila Planning Department indicating items to be addressed in expanded environmental checklist. Soils Report Letter from Drainage Engineer concerning storm water drainage Traffic Report Archaeological Report Letter from Stradling & Stewart concerning vegetation and landscaping 29. • 1908: City uf Tukwila APPENDIX A Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development 20 May 1980 Bestway Motor Freight, Inc. 1765 6th Ave. So. Seattle, WA. 98134 Re: Threshold Determination, Environmental Checklist EPIC - 133 -80 In accordance with Section WAC 197- 10 -300of the State Environmental Policy. Act Guidelines, we have reviewed the Environmental Checklist submitted in support of your application for Shoreline Management Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a truck terminal on South 143rd Street. The information contained on the checklist, and the environmental concerns raised by the City Council during their 19 May1980 review of your Waiver Application (80 -11 -W) lead us to conclude that we do not have sufficient information upon which to assess the environmental impact of your proposed development. Therefore, in accordance with Section WAC 197 -10 -330 of the SEPA Guidelines, we are requiring you to supply further information on the topics listed below. The information should be provided in reasonably- sufficient detail for the City of Tukwila, as lead agency, to determine the environmental significance of your project. Information should be formatted in a manner which discusses the source and magnitude of each potential impact, and then identifies possible mitigation measures and feasible alternatives to offset that impact. - Checklist Section I -9: Required permits -- justify "no" response. regarding "hydraulics" permit; provide written confirmation from King County that permit is not needed. Checklist Section II -1: Earth -- provide a preliminary site grading study to include surface drainage pattern and riverbank protection strategy. Indicate cut /fill areas and estimate import material quanti- ties, if any. - Checklist Section 11-2: Air -- provide a quantitative air quality impact analysis measuring the influence of your project on the Tukwila community. This study should include pollution impacts from sta- tionary and point sources associated with your project, as well as an assessment of your project's incremental effect upon ambient air quality in the Interurban Avenue Corridor area. Checklist Section II -3: Water -- provide a quantified hydrology study describing the on -site drainage method, a description of run- off products and method by which such will be impeded from entering the Green /Duwamish Watercourse. Also provide calculations for asses- sing on -site storm water rentention capacity. Discuss,_too,_the impact7 of site paving upon ground -water recharge. •� •. (iii) alternatives to the proposed action; (iv) the relationship between local short -term uses of man's envi- ronment and the maintenance and enhancement of long -term pro- ductivity; and. (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources . which would be involved in the proposed action should it.be implemented;" Accordingly, the information requested in this letter must be forwarded to, and accepted as adequate by, the Tukwila Planning Department before processing of the Conditional Use Permit or Shoreline Management Permit can go forward. We will be pleased to lend guidance as needed to you or your consultants in completing the required research. Thank you for your cooperation. TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. Mark Caughey Acting Director MC /mkb REPORT OF SOILS INVESTIGATION PROPOSED FREIGHT TERMINAL TUKWILA, WASHINGTON for BEST WAY MOTOR FREIGHT, INC. APPENDIX B DAMES & MOORE 11875- 001 -05 May 12, 1980 SUITE 500,'NORTHGPTE E<= CUTIVE CENTER 155 N._. 00" STR =ET PTTLE,•./, : -i`0T5 9 =;25 (2061 523 -0560 CABLE: OPMEMO6E T•.P /X:• 910.44 = -202; May 12, 1980 Best Way Motor Freight 1765 6th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98134 Attention: Mr. William J. Dahl Gentlemen: We are pleased to present three copies of our "Report of Soil Investigation, Proposed Freight Terminal, Tukwila, Washington, for Best Way Motor Freight, Inc." The investigation was verbally authorized by Mr. Landsem of Jalco, Inc. in a telephone conversation with the writer on April 3, 1980. Mr. William J. Dahl of Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. provided written authorization for our services by signing our confirming proposal dated April 7, 1980. That proposal contains a description of the scope of our services as developed during telephone conversations between Mr. Landsem and the writer. We appreciate the opportunity to serve you on this project. Please contact us if you have any questions regarding the information contained in the attached report. HGL:WJE:ss 3 copies submitted Yours very truly, DAMES & MOORE By Henry G. Landau, Ph.D. Senior Engineer REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED FREIGHT TERMINAL TUKWILA, WASHINGTON for BEST WAY MOTOR FREIGHT, INC. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our soil investigation at the site of a proposed freight terminal in Tukwila, Washington for Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. The site is located on S. 143rd Street between Interurban Avenue and the Duwamish River. As shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1, the boundaries for the roughly triangular site extend west from the Duwamish River approximately 620 feet, then northward approximately 500 feet back to the Duwamish River. The proposed freight terminal will include a 36 x 133 foot one -story warehouse, a 50 x 42 foot two -story office building immediately adjacent to the warehouse, a covered fuel island, and a 60 x 60 foot one -story shop building. The locations of the proposed facilities are shown on Figure 1. We understand that the terminal area will be entirely paved. The warehouse floor is to be constructed on a dock -high fill; otherwise, general site filling is not planned. We understand that the warehouse will not contain interior columns. For the purpose of our investigation, we have assumed that floor slab loads will be on the order of 500 pounds per square foot. SCOPE The purpose of our investigation is to explore soil conditions at the location of the proposed buildings and provide recommendations for site preparation and foundation support. Specifically, the scope of our services includes: 1. Evaluating moderately deep subsurface soil and ground water conditions by drilling two borings. 2. Evaluating near - surface soil conditions by excavating 6 test pits. 3. Evaluating the pertinent engineering properties of the foundation soil by performing laboratory tests. 4. Providing recommendations for the most appropriate types of foundation support for the proposed structures and providing design criteria for the foundations. 5. Estimating settlement behavior of the structures. 6. Providing recommendations for site preparation. FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING The soil conditions at the site were explored by drilling two . borings to depths of 25 -1/2 and 30 -1/2 feet and by excavating six test pits to depths ranging from 11 to 12 -1/2 feet. The locations of these explorations are shown on Figure 1. The logs of the explorations are shown on Figures 2 through 4. The soils are classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System as described on Figure 5. A truck - mounted power auger was used to drill the borings; a rubber tired backhoe was used to excavate the test pits. The field.investigation was coordinated by a member of our staff who located the borings and test pits, observed the drilling and excavating operations, maintained complete logs of the conditions encountered, and obtained representative samples of the soils encountered. The samples were returned to our laboratory for further examination and appropriate testing. Laboratory testing was performed to evaluate strength characteristics and moisture - density relationships of the soils encountered. Strength characteristics were evaluated by direct shear testing. Moisture- density testing was performed on all samples tested for strength characteristics, as well as on several selected samples from the borings. The results of -2- the direct shear tests are presented on Figure 6. The method of performing the direct shear tests is explained on Figure 7. The results of the moisture- density testing are shown opposite the appropriate sample notations on Figure 2. SITE CONDITIONS The site is presently used for truck and trailer parking. As shown on Figure 1 there are 3 existing buildings on the site, 2 old houses near the planned location of the shop and a steel -frame building near the planned location of the warehouse. A concrete slab is located immediately west of the steel -frame building and we understand that a buried gasoline tank is located adjacent to the south side. A north -south oriented fence is located approximately 70 feet west of this building. It is not known whether utility services extend to the existing buildings. However, buried heating oil tanks may be present near the two existing houses. The site lies on the generally level terrain of the Duwamish River floodplain. According to a topographic map* provided us, the ground surface slopes slightly downward toward the Duwamish River. We understand that ground surface elevations shown on the map are referenced to mean lower low water (MLLW). The site is generally clear of vegetation but some brush is present in the central portion of the site and along the Duwamish River. Several piles of miscellaneous fill material, rubble, and debris are located in the central brushy area of the site. Much of the remainder of the site has been filled with material of variable quality. The filled areas in the northwest corner and west side of the site are currently used as truck parking areas. A small dirt road leads from S. 143rd Street near the Duwamish River across the site to the parking area in the site's northwest corner. Access to the west side truck parking area is available from S. 143rd Street. * Drawing titled "Proposed Office /Warehouse /Shop for Best Way Trucking Co., Seattle, Washington" by Stradling & Stewart Architects, dated April 8, 1980. -3 - Fill material was encountered at the ground surface in all of our explorations except Boring 1. Where encountered, the fill ranged in thickness from 6 inches in Test Pit 6 to 5 feet in Test Pit 5. It is generally granular and of moderately good quality. The relative density of the fill varied widely from loose in the majority of the explorations to dense in Test Pit 3. Debris in the fill was encountered only in Test Pit 3, but some debris may be present in the fill in other areas of the site. The uppermost layer of native material, encountered in all of our explorations, consists of loose to medium dense slightly silty to silty fine sand. In some of the explorations, this layer contained occasional interbedded lenses or zones of clean fine sand. Where observed, the thickness of this layer ranged from 8 feet to 12 feet. Test Pits 1, 3, 4, and 5 did not completely penetrate this layer. In general, this layer appears to increase in thickness with closer proximity to the Duwamish River. In Borings 1 and 2 and Test Pits 2 and 6, a layer of loose dark brown and dark brownish gray fine sand with some medium sand was encountered immediately beneath the uppermost native layer. This layer extended to the final depths of Boring 1 and Test Pits 2 and 6. In Boring 2, it contained a higher percentage of medium sand and graded to medium dense at a depth of approximately 28 feet. It also contained a thin layer of loose rust brown medium to coarse sand at a depth of 20 feet. Ground water was encountered in Borings 1 and 2 at a depth of 12 feet below the existing ground surface. No ground water was encountered in any of the test pits. Because of the site's close proximity to the Duwamish River, it is likely that the ground water level is closely related to the river levels. Also, ground water levels can be expected to fluctuate seasonally, and may be somewhat higher in the winter than those encountered during this investigation. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the results of our investigation, it is our opinion that the soils at the site are satisfactory for support of the proposed freight terminal. Shallow spread footings may be used for support of the structures and the existing fill is generally suitable for pavement support. Settlement can be expected to occur rapidly and should be light to moderate for the loads anticipated. SITE PREPARATION In preparing the site for construction of the proposed freight terminal, all existing structures, including their foundations, should be demolished and removed from the area to be developed. Additionally, the buried tank just south of the existing steel -frame building and any buried oil tanks adjacent to the existing houses should be removed. Any live utilities to these structures should, of course, be deactivated prior to demolition. All vegetation within the area to be developed and the rubble piles in the central portion of the site should also be removed. Following removal of the existing structures, buried tanks, vegetation, and rubble, any necessary cutting to rough grade should be accomplished. Excavations resulting from the removal of buried tanks should be filled with clean granular material. The fill should be clean sand or sand and small gravel with less than 10 percent by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. For wet weather placement the fill should be cleaner; i.e., with less than 5 percent by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. The fill should be placed in lifts approximately 8 to 10 inches in loose thickness and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density as determined by the ASTM D -1557 compaction test procedure, except within 2 feet of the planned final grade where a minimum of 95 percent compaction should be achieved. -5 - present under the existing fill. It should also extend laterally at least 1 foot farther than the footing edge. Based on the thicknesses of existing fill encountered during our investigation, overexcavation of 3 to 6 feet below existing site grade should be expected. If desired for the warehouse, the footing subgrade preparations may be completed prior to the placement of the dock -high fill. For isolated footings at least 3 feet in least plan dimension founded in the manner described above, an allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used. We recommend that a bearing value of 1,500 psf be used for design of continuous footings and isolated footings less than 3 feet in least plan dimension. These values apply to the total of all long -term dead and live loads and may be increased by one -third for consideration of short -term loads, such as wind and seismic loading. All footings should be at least 18 inches in width. Backfill consisting of the same material used for the dock -high fill should be placed behind the completed footing stem walls which will surround the dock -high fill. The backfill should be compacted to approxi- mately 95 percent of the previously given criteria. Overcompaction should be avoided so that excessive lateral pressures are not developed. For backfill placed in this manner, we recommend that the stem walls be designed using a rectangular lateral pressure distribution of 1/3g, where g is the sum of the warehouse floor dead and live loading in pounds per square foot, or 40H pounds per square foot, where H is the stem wall height in feet, whichever is larger. Floor slabs may be founded directly on the dock -high fill and, in other areas, on 6 inches of sand or sand and fine gravel compacted to 95 percent of the previously given criteria. No vapor barrier is necessary if the floor slabs are founded in this manner. Settlement occurring as a result of the freight terminal construction is estimated to be light to moderate and will probably occur rapidly, essentially during construction. We estimate that the dock -high fill -7- will induce settlement of approximately 1 -1/2 inches, with approximately 50 percent of that being differential. The anticipated relatively light building loads and floor slab are estimated to result in approximately 1 inch of settlement with about 50 percent or 1/2 inch of differential settlement. In the office - warehouse building area, this . would be in addition to the settlement induced by the dock -high fill. However, if the site is prepared according to the recommendations provided in this P P 4 P report, settlement from the dock -high fill should be essentially complete before construction of the footings and buildings. -000- The recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumptions that soil conditions do not vary appreciably between boring ' and test pit locations and that the locations of the proposed buildings are consistent with those shown on Figure 1 of this report. The subsurface information presented herein does not imply that the soil conditions away ' from the boring and test pit locations can be directly interpolated or extrapolated or that subsurface conditions different from those described ' in this report will not be encountered. Because proper installation of the dock -high fill and footings is very important to the satisfactory long -term performance of the proposed facility, we recommend that a qualified geotechnical consultant be retained to monitor the placement and compaction of the fill and the preparation of the footing bearing material. We would be pleased to The following figures are attached and complete this report: Figure 1 - Site Plan Figure 2 - Log of Borings Figure 3 - Log of Test Pits Figure 4 - Log of Test Pits Figure 5 - Unified Soil Classification System Figure 6 - Summary of Direct Shear Tests Figure 7 - Method of Performing Direct Shear and Friction Tests // LAN • 11875- 001 -05 May 12, 1980 Respectfully submitted, DAMES & MOORE By iie4477 ,cj 14".4 --- Henry G. Landau, Ph.D. Senior Engineer And 14404.- J. e.14,LOU William J. Enkeboll Project Engineer as 1 W Z J PROPERTY ASPHALT PAVING 4.TP-4 EXISTING FENCE - -�X (APPROXIMATE) 8 -2 `4`,p. +TP -3 KEY 8-1+- BORING LOCATION AND NUMBER TP -I 4 TEST PIT LOCATION AND NUMBER EXISTING STEEL (''..---FRAME BUILDING (APPROXIMATE) TP -2I ASPHALT PAVING 60 SITE PLAN 30 0 30 60 TP- I �-- TTPP- -5 L_ I EXISTING MOUSES (APPROXIMATE) SHOP PROPERTY LINE REFERENCE: DRAWING ENTITLED "PROPOSED OFFICE/ WAREHOUSE /SHOP FOR BESTWAY TUJCKING CO., SITE FLAN' BY STOOLING & STEWART, ARCHITECTS, BELLINGINM, WASHINGTON. DRAWING DATED 4-8-80. S. 143rd. STREET diAMini A MOOBRME 0 5 10 9.2% -85 4.6% - 90 BORING I W 15 • 27.9% -87 Z_ c 20 DEPTH IN FEE1 KEY: 30 0 5 31.5% - 67 22.4 % - 79 10 26.6% - 80 15 26.5 % -91 20 19.7% -97 25 29.4% - 89 30 30.9% -90 35 15 ■ ELEVATION 19* BROWNISH -GRAY SLIGHTLY SILTY TO SILTY FINE SANO WITH OCCASIONAL ROOTS (LOOSE) DARK BROWN FINE SANG WITH A TRACE OF SILT AND OCCASICNAI MEDIUM SANG (LOOSE) GRADES TO MEDIUM DENSE BORING COMPLETED 4-9-80 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT DEPTH OF 12 FEET BORING. 2 ELEVATION 19 • BROWN SILTY GRAVELLY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (MEDIUM DENSE)F11.1) LIGHT BROWNISH -GRAY SILTY FINE SAND (LOOS E)(V ERY SILTY AND WITH ROOTS IN UPPER 6 INCHES) GRADES WITH OCCASIONAL VERY FINE SILT LENSES DARK BROWNISH -GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL COARSE SAND AND A TRACE OF SILT (1005E) RUST BROWN MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND WITH A TRACE OF FINE SAND (LOOSE) DARK BROWNISH -GRAY FINE SAND WITH A TRACE OF MEDIUM SAND (LOOSE) GRADES TO MEDIUM DENSE BORING COMPLETED 4-9-80 GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT DEPTH. OF 12 FEET BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE SAMPLER ONE FOOT MOISTURE rWEIGHT - 320 LBS., STROKE 18 INCHES. CONTENT 5 4.6% - 90 a INDICATES OEPTH AT WHICH UNDISTURBED DAMES 6 MOORS DRY SAMPLE WAS EXTRACTED. DENSITY IN PCF NOTE: THE DISCUSSION IN THE TEXT OF THIS REPORT 15 NECESSARY FOR A PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE NATURE OF THE SUBSURFACE MATERIALS. GAMES 8 11414001411 FIGURE 2 On ME 946.7 (REV. 6 -61) TEST PIT 1 ELEVATION 19 + 0' - 2' ML /SM) MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY SANDY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL (MEDIUM DENSE)(FILL) 2' - 11' (SM) INTERBEDDED BROWN SANDY SILT AND SLIGHTLY SILTY TO SILTY FINE SAND WITH A TRACE OF MEDIUM SAND (LOOSE) TEST PIT COMPLETED 4 -10 -80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 1,5, AND 9 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT 2 ELEVATION 19 + - 2' (SM) MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL COARSE SAND,(LOOSE) (FILL) 2' - 10' (SM) LIGHT BROWN AND BROWNISH -GRAY SILTY FINE SAND WITH OCCASIONAL ZONES OF SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND AND CLEAN FINE SAND (LOOSE) 10' - 111' (SP) DARK BROWN FINE SAND (LOOSE) TEST PIT COMPLETED 4-10 -80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 1, 61, AND 111 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT 3 ELEVATION 19 + 0' - 4' (SM) MOTTLED GRAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL COARSE SAND AND MISCELLANEOUS DEBRIS (DENSE)(FILL)(CRUSHED ROCK SURFACING IN UPPER 6 INCHES) 4' - 121' (SM) LIGHT BROWN SILTY FINE SAND AND SANDY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL THIN LAYERS OF CLEAN FINE SAND (LOOSE) COLOR GRADES TO BROWN AT DEPTH OF 8 FEET TEST PIT COMPLETED 4 -10 -80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 2,6, AND 11 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED LOG OF TEST PITS D �s 8 MOORS FIGURE 3 MO EMI 946. =61) TEST PIT 4 ELEVATION 18 + 0' - 4/' (SM) BROWN SILTY GRAVELLY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL COBBLES (LOOSE)(FILL) 4}' - 11' (SM/ SP) DARK BROWN FINE SAND (LOOSE)(OCCASIONAL SILTY. ZONES I N UPPER 31 FEET) TEST PIT COMPLETED 4 -10 -80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 2, 7, AND 11 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT 5 ELEVATION 19 + 0' - 5' SM /ML) BROWN SILTY FINE SAND AND SANDY SILT (LOOSE)(OCCASIONAL ROOTS IN UPPER 4 FEET)(FILL) 5' - 12' (SM /SP) BROWN FINE SAND WITH A TRACE OF SILT (LOOSE) TEST PIT COMPLETED 4 -10-80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 2, 6, AND 12 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED TEST PIT 6 ELEVATION 19 + 0' - 1' (SM) BROWN SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL COARSE SAND (LOOSE)(FILL) - 10' SM /SP) INTERBEDDED BROWN SILTY FINE SAND AND SLIGHTLY SILTY TO CLEAN FINE SAND (LOOSE) 10' - 12' (SP) DARK BROWN FINE SAND WITH A TRACE OF SILT (LOOSE) TEST PIT COMPLETED 4 -10-80 DISTURBED SAMPLES OBTAINED AT DEPTHS OF 2, 7, AND 11 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED LOG OF TEST PITS OAMas 8 MOOR1• FIGURE 4 MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH SYMBOL LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS Coarse Grained Soils More than SOZ of material is LARGER than No. 200 sieve size. Gravel and Gravelly More than 50$ of coarse fraction RETAINED on No. 4 sieve. �•.,..,/y,•.• Clean Gravels (Little or no GW Well- graded gravels, gravel - sand mixtures, little or no fines. f i nes :• 1 ■ •:�;.!• :�.• :•� +., GP Poorly- graded gravels, gravel - sand mixtures, little or no fines. ■ 1� Gravels with Fines I �J GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand- silt mixtures. (Appreciable amount of fines) `W 1.40 •clay dr 4,0 G C Clayey gravels, gravel -sand- mixtures. Sand and Sandy Soils More than 50% of coarse fraction PASSING No. 4 sieve. 0 •e 0 e • e e • .O O o • Clean Sand e • j . O • SW Well- graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. (Little or no fines) SP Poorly- graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Sands with Fines (Appreciable r ■� t. ' • SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures. amount of fines) SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures. Fine Grained Soils More than 50% of material is SMALLER than No. 200 sieve size. Silts and Clays ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. Liquid Limit LESS than 50 CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. OL Organic silt and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Silts and Clays Liquid Limit GREATER than 50 MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand or silty soils. j CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. O H Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. Highly Organ i e Soils PT Pea[, humus, swamp soils with high organic contents. ilial4 Note: Dual symbols are used to indicate borderline soil classifications. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM o■M•s 8 MOORIM PLATE 5 — „— — 8Y ` DATE 4 .2 `-) REVISIONS CHECIO BY FILE // /5 • CA-Df BY DATE BORING DEPTH SOIL TYPE MOISTURE CONTENT /o OF DRY WEIGHT DRY DENSITY LBS. /CU. FT NORMAL PRESSURE LBS. /SQ. FT. YIELD SHEAR STRENGTH LBS. /SQ FT. 1 31-' SLIGHTLY SILTY TO SILTY FINE SAND 4.6 90 400 190 1 10' FINE SAND 9:2 85 800 425 2 10' SILTY FINE SAND 26.6 80 1200 625 2 15' FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 26.5 91 1800 1050 SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA 1 8 2 ■ Figure 7 40. APPENDIX C Reid, Middleton & Associates, Inc. Engineers • Surveyors • Planners June 18, 1980 File No. 80 -064A Mr. John Potter 2911 - 25th Ave. W. Seattle, Washington 98199 Re: Bestway Motor Freight Project Site, Tukwila Dear Mr. Potter: Pursuant to your request for the supplemental information regarding storm water runoff for inclusion to your environmental checklist, we submit the following: 3. Water a. No b. Yes c. No d. Yes e. No f. No g. No h. No i. No Explanation: The existing site use is presently used as a truck freight terminal with no control of storm water discharge to the Duwamish /Green River. Existing silts, sediments, oils and other pollutants associated with similar facilities, therefore, are'discharged in an uncontroled manner into the City storm sewer or directly into the. river via sheet flow. This proposal, through contour grading, filling and paving, will direct and channel all on -site storm water flow to a closed storm water system which. has incorporated shallow sloping lines to decrease the flow rates, a large grit tank where the trucks are washed to collect silts and heavy oils and a precast oil /water separator tank which has been accepted for use adjacent to streams. The baffling system within the oil separator tank not only separates out the oils, but also dissipates the velocity of storm water flow sufficiently to further settle out fine sands and silts before final discharge into the river. The outlet being below the 15.8 -foot critical elevation of the river will have a flood gate attached, which will prevent any potential backwash into the storm sewer system. Due to the nature of this proposal being an enhancement of the existing facility, storm water runoff will increase but because the site is located adjacent to the river, and the project design includes a closed storm sewer system, the storm water runoff will now be controled and the potential adverse effects from silts and oils entering the river have been mitigated. The hydraulic capability of the river is, sufficient to handle the increased flow created by the proposed improvement. 121 5th Avenue North, Suite 200. Edmonds, Washington 98020 (206) 775-3434 June 18, 1980 File No. 80 -064A Mr. John Potter Page 2 If you have any questions please contact our office. Very truly yours, REID, MIDDLETON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Allan R. Morgan Project Engineer ARM /ejj • COTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 701 PLAZA 600 BUILDING 6TH AVENUE AT STEWART STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 447 -9977 June 18, 1980 BESTWAY FREIGHT PROPOSED LOCATION TUKWILA, WASHINGTON LOCATION DISCUSSION APPENDIX .D The proposed site on the east side of Interurban Avenue South at South 143rd Street will be served entirely by Interurban Avenue, by northbound and southbound traffic flows. This major arterial was constructed to a five lane roadway section in the last 10 years beginning on the north end at the I -5 interchange ramps and southerly to the I -405 interchange. TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PREVIOUS In 1973 the volumes of traffic on Interurban Avenue were counted at 17,000 vehicles per day and projected at that time to be 24,000 per day (ADT) in 1978. The peak hour maximum volume was counted in 1973 at 1020 vehicles per hour on the southbound approach to Southcenter Boulevard and was calculated at 9% of the ADT for the same section of roadway. No 1978 estimate was made for the future peak -hour but based on the 9% of ADT, would fall at approximately 2160 vehicles per hour on the same southbound approach to Southcenter Boulevard. (Source: TOPICS study by Stevens, Thompson & Runyan, Engineers, Seattle, by K. E. Cottingham) TRAFFIC VOLUMES - 1979 -1980 Studies done in 1979 show traffic volumes in the ranges as follows for the peak hour of travel: 7 to 8 a.m. 930 northbound 590 southbound TOTAL: 1420 in the AM Peak -Hour 3:45 to 4:45 p.m. 780 northbound 1020 southbound TOTAL: 1800 in the PM Peak -Hour Utilizing 10% as the percent in peak -hour of daily traffic (ADT) calculates , to an ADT of 18,000 for two -way traffic on Interurban Avenue in the vicinity of South 143rd Street for the year 1979. Prelominary traffic information in the area shows a slight increase for 1980 and the 18,000 will be used for this analysis. (Source: 1979 Traffic Study by ENTRANCO ENGRS) Page 1 of 7 Traffic and Transportation Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance, Accidents, Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. COTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING COMPOSITION OF TRAFFIC A breakout of cars, trucks, and gasoline powered vehicles for this area shows the following: 93% Passenger Cars and Pickups 4% Diesel Trucks 3% Gasoline Trucks 100% TOTAL TRAFFIC COMPOSITION With the trend toward diesel powered vehicles somewhat checked by the high price of diesel fuel and diesel engines, it is expected that these percent- ages will remain relatively constant for the near future. VOLUME GROWTH ANALYSIS Traffic and Transportation Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance, Accidents, Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. COTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING INTERSECTION OF SOUTH 143RD STREET Traffic service to the proposed development will all be through the inter- section of Interurban Avenue South with South 143rd Street. The lane arrangement on Interurban Avenue is two lanes each way with a centerlane for left turning in each direction (5 lanes total). The lane arrangement on South 143rd Street is one lane in each direction, (2 total). All traffic to and from the BESTWAY development will utilize this inter- section. Based on generated traffic with full development of the site, two -way traffic volumes calculate to 275 vehicles per day with about 1/2 of these as trucks and the other 1/2 as passenger cars and pickups. This assumes maximum volume generation and will normally result in lower traffic volumes than these. The 275 breakout into all traffic turning at the Interurban Avenue inter- section. Under the assumption that 2/3 will be "to and from" the south and 1/3 will be "to and from" the north, the following schematic of daily traffic flow will occur from the BESTWAY proposed development. BESTWAY TRAFFIC ONLY - DAILY The maximum peak hour for these movements will be based on 50% employees arriving in the same peak hour but only 25% of the trucks included in the same peak hour with 1/3 -2/3 split. 50% Employees = 66 25% Trucks = 36 TOTAL PEAK TRAFFIC: 102 (TWO -WAY) BESTWAY TRAFFIC ONLY - PEAK HOUR Traffic and Transportation Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance, Accidents, Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. 102. • • COTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING COMBINED BESTWAY AND EXISTING TRAFFIC Since total peak -hour traffic is the basis for analysis of capacity and safety, the following combined traffic flow schematic shows the anticipated traffic after development of BESTWAY Terminal. (The Alaskan Camper and Skagit Valley traffic are deleted since they will no longer be in operation.) 84 84 PEAK -HOUR TOTAL OF ALL TRAFFIC GENERATORS With this breakout of traffic for a. maximum peak -hour, the conflicting movements show exiting 56 vehicles in one -hour crossing over the northbound Interurban Avenue traffic. This is approximately one vehicle every one minute; a volume that presents easy turning without delay to other vehicles and a movement that can be done safely under the present roadway geometrics for large trucks turning at low speed, as well as passenger vehicles. Based on the "acceptance gap" theory of traffic flow, a side street entering volume (100) and a main street volume (1400) with an acceptance gap of 7 seconds between vehicles on the main street will prove comfortable at unsignalized intersections. With only 56 vehicles entering from the side street, the acceptance gap is larger and the main street volume is also higher and approaches 1700 vehicles per hour in one direction. Clearly capacity and safety are available now and in the foreseeable future based on this analysis and anticipated traffic volumes of 56 on the side street entering and corssing 1020 vehicles on the main line, which is the highest peak direction 1979 traffic count on Interurban Avenue South. Page 6 of 7 Traffic and Transportation Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance, Accidents, Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. • • tCOTTINGHAM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING II1 MAINTENANCE OF SOUTH 143RD STREET All roadway surfaces are in fair to good condition although some paving will be required in the near future. With the relatively high water table in the area and the higher ground West of Interurban Avenue, the moisture content of the underlying base for roadways in this area will always be high. This condition, combined with freezing conditions in the winter, could cause frost boils in the pavement that would require digging out and repairing over granular compacted base. Since regular cycles of freezing combined with high moisture content under the pavement are not a regular occurrence in the Puget Sound area and cannot be predicted, only remedial reconstruction after the pavement loss can be economically justified. Therefore the existing paved surfaces are judged adequate for existing and proposed traffic volumes and composition of vehicle type. As pavement deteriorates, paving ovArlays should be construction commensurate with good engineering principles. SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC OPERATIONS PROPOSED The BESTWAY FREIGHT proposed construction should not cause traffic safety deficiencies or capacity deficiencies based on this traffic analysis and based on my knowledge of traffic flow in the Tukwila vicinity ranging over the last 14 years of regular surveillance. Traffic control features existing will not require modification for the proposal, considering BESTWAY and other freight operators utilizing South 143rd Street. The new signal immediately to the north provides sufficient gaps for all turning traffic, to and from S. 143rd St. Page 7 of 7 Kenneth E. Cottingham, P.E. Traffic and Transportation Planning, Design, Operations, Maintenance, Accidents, Volumes, Signals, Intersections, Pedestrians, Bicycles and Surveillance. UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98195 Jim', 214, 1980 Institute for Environmental Studies ,Office of Public Archaeology Engineering Annex, FM -12 Best Way Motor Freight Service, Inc. 1765 6th South Seattle, Wa. 98134 Attn: Mr. William Dahl APPENDIX E RE: Archaeological reconnaissance of the proposed Best Way Freight Service facilities at Tukwila, Washington. Dear Mr. Dahl The following report, in letter format,concerns the results of this office's recent archaeological assessment of the proposed freight terminal in Tukwila, Wasington for Best Way Motor Freight, Inc. More specifically, the site is located on South 143rd Street between Interurban Avenue and the Duwamish River. The boundaries for the approximately triangular site extend west from the Duwamish River about 620 feet, then northward about 500 feet back to the Duwamish River. The fieldwork necessary for this assessment was conducted on June 17, 1980, by Mr. Paul Buck and Ms. Sarah Campbell of the Office of Public Archaeology. Fieldwork at the proposed facility consisted of an on- the - ground surface reconnaissance of the entire area of the project, and limited subsurface coring. The area of the proposed facility, is of course, heavily disturbed, and is currently being used as a truck parking area. The two frame houses described in the soils report dated May 12, 1980, (Dames and Moore) had since been torn down and the area leveled, and the only thing remaining of the steel frame building west of these structures was the concrete foundation. A large concrete slab is located immediately west of the foundation, and a north -south oriented fence line is located about 70 feet west of the remains of the steel frame building. The proposed facility is bounded on the northeast by the Duwamish River, and the river bank in this area appears to have been built up with debris and rubble. This area between the perimeter road and the river is heavily overgrown with brush. As one might expect due to the disturbed nature of the site, no cultural resources were noted, with the exception of debris left over from the removal of the framed structures such as glass and ' asphalt shingles, etc. In an attempt to identify the existence t t® Recycled Paper Best Way Motor Freight Service, Inc. Page Two .lane 24, 1080 of sub- surface cultural materials, 9 cores were taken from the project area. This attempt was not entirely successful, however, since both the previously mentioned soils report and inspection of the ground -, surface indicated anywhere from 6" to 5' of fill had been placed over the original ground surface sometime in the past. The hand -held, small diameter corer used by the Office of Public Archaeology can penetrate to a depth of about 6 feet. The cares taken from the project area ranyed from .53 meters to 2.05 meters in depth, with a mean of 1.27 meters or 4.17 feet. Three cores were taken in the relatively undisturbed northwestern corner of the site, 3 were taken in the general area of the wood frame structures, one was taken near .the southeast corner of the property, and two were taken from the center of the project area, near the compacted truck parking area. This area is characterized by very compacted gravelly fill, at least -two frvt thick, and corinq wrrrilrl have hen Irnpo.,•,ihle if there had not I'(n w;ishout:, of the 1111 at '.cvcr,rI lr >cati!,w,. In general, the soils recovered in the cores were all silty sands - sand /clay mixtures, and inorganic silts and very fine sands. No cultural material was noted in any of the cores - there were no indications of charcoal or midden debris. To summarize, neither the surface reconnaissance nor the sub - surface coring revealed any indications of cultural materials in the project area. We therefore recommend that the project be allowed to proceed. However, in the event that cultural materials are discovered during any phase of the subsequent construction, work should be stopped and the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia should be contacted without delay. A qualified archaeologist should then be allowed to assess the significance of the find before resumption of work in the area. This report should not be considered permission to proceed with the project in question. It contains professional opinions on cultural resources which might be affected by the proposed development. This report should be submitted to the appropriate review agencies for their comments prior to the beginning of any further ground disturbing activities. Best Way Motor Freight Service, Inc. Page Three .Dine 24, 1980 We appreciate your concern for the cultural resources of the region and are happy to assist you in identifying and protecting such resources. If you have any questions regarding this report or our recommendations please feel free to contact this office at your convenience. Sincerely, Paul E. Buck Staff Archaeologist PFB:dh cc Jeanne Welch, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer