HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-142-80 - TSAO & COMPANY - FIORITO / FERULLO HOTELFIORITO / FERULLO HOTEL
EPIC - 142 -80
City of Tu
Planning Division
6200 Southcenter Boulevard:,.
Tukwila, Washington 98188. :e 433 -1845
Office of Community Development
190S
Wm. S. Tsao & Co. P.S.
2367 Eastlake E.
Seattle, WA 98102
Attn: Lyle Kussman
SUBJECT: FIORITO /FERULLO HOTEL; (EPIC- 142 -80) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Following extensive review of the Environmental Checklist submitted by
your office for the hotel project we have determined in accordance
with WAC 197 -10 -355 of_the State Environmental Policy Act Guidelines
that this project will have significant impact on environmental qual-
ity, and that an Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared._. ,
In order to initiate the E.I.S. . preparation process, a "trigger
application must be filed first. Since the hotel project requires
both a Shoreline Management Permit and a Conditional Use Permit, sub-
mittal of a complete application for either one or both of these permit
actions will satisfy this requirement—,
I suggest that we set an appointment at your convenience to discuss
in detail the E.I.S. preparation process; please contact me as your
schedule allows.
M k: Caughey
Acting Director
MC /jas
Encl.
xc:
CITY OFiTUKWILA
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
gR$EIX/F I NAL
DECLARATIOil OF SIGNIFICANCE/MDOCROMME
Description of proposal 12 Story Hotel /Restaurant /Ancillary Facilities
Proponent
FioritolFerullo - % l4ni. S_ Tsao A Co_ P.S.
Location of Proposal Easterly Terminus of Southcenter Boulevard
Lead Agency City of Tukwila
File No EPIC - 142 - 80
This proposal has been determined to (have /owilmiums) a significant adverse im-
pact upon the environment. An EIS (is/* 00400) 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 Caughey
Position /Title Acting Planning Director
Date 16 ,m1 y 19Rn Signature
COMMENTS:
City of Tukw •
6200 Southcenter Bou'Erard PLANNING DEPARTMENT MP
Tukwila Washington 98188
TRANSMITTAL
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL / OOP / 8
TO: ❑ BUILDING DEPT. - --ROLICE DEPT.
FIRE DEPT. €CREATION DEPT.
'UBLIC WORKS DEPT.
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials
for the above reference project:
❑Environmental Checklist ❑Preliminary Plat
❑ Environmental Impact State- ❑Final Plat
ment
❑ Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone Request
❑ Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request
❑Conditional Use Permit ❑Other:
Application
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 use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate
sheet.
Requested response date ::g / i f /
Review Department comments:
By: Date:
City of Tukwi
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TRANSMITTAL
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL' / JUNE./ 8®
TO: ❑BUILDING DEPT. ❑POLICE DEPT.
-IRE DEPT. ❑ RECREATION DEPT.
❑ PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ❑
PROJECT: FIGgrrp }%file
LOCATION : Si, /17 CO—Eii i
The above.mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials
for the above reference project:
environmental Checklist ❑Preliminary Plat
DEnvironmental Impact State- ❑Final Plat
ment
❑Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone Request
❑ Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request
❑ Conditional Use Permit ['Other:
Application
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 use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate
sheet.
Requested response date: 3 / )UL'(/ 8 c
Review Department comments: Since this would appear to be quite an extensive
project, early contact with the Fire Dept. will be required to insure that
the developer fully understands the requirements for such items as, but not
limited to: Fire Dept. access, Fire Protection Systems (including sprinklers
and alarm systems) and Exit facilities.
The "Attachment" referred to in numerous check -list items on the Environmental
Questionare does not seem to answer the questions raised. Is there perhaps
. another attachment that should have accompanied this questionare???
By:
Date: Z‘—en
.City of Tuk
6200 Southcenter Boulevard PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Tukwila Washington 98188
'TRANSMITTAL
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL 14 /WOE/
0
PUE?uC wilv.s
CITY OF TUKWILA
CJU01 24 1980
TO: ['BUILDING DEPT. ❑ POLICE DEPT.
❑ FIRE DEPT. ❑ RECREATION DEPT.
JBLIC WORKS DEPT. ❑
PROJECT:
LOCATION: e5M. 6g„oe. sta,mo,F..„
The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials
for the above reference project:
environmental Checklist DPreliminary Plat
❑Environmental Impact State- ❑ Final Plat
ment
❑Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone .Request
❑ Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request
❑Conditional Use Permit ❑Other:
Application
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 use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate
sheet.
Requested response date: /■tLr /
Review Department comments:
FU Saf -Z11 P ACT S e o,'r c')
i) IIIG
LAINST PL r 4,11,1--
h) IMPa(TS 011 iuitkurztVa.&
�) IW To arritm4co siu(
By: Date:
*ILA
1909
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
•TRANSMITTAL
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL 24 MOM SO
TO: ❑ BUILDING DEPT. OLICE DEPT.
❑ FIRE DEPT. ❑ RECREATION DEPT.
❑ PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ❑
PROJECT: € �r
LOCATION: t°.M® a —" o 491.
The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials
for the above reference project:.
environmental Checklist ❑Preliminary Plat
❑Environmental Impact State- OFinal Plat
ment
❑ Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone Request
❑Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request
❑Conditional Use Permit ❑Other:
Application
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 use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate
sheet.
Requested response date: SI /0OL`' /
Review Department comments:
al/ 77/ g /er Ty 5 /Meciz7 eelAc £! ' g T X:Jr 77;11_4—
-77« mt C 7R /1;v61
By:
thirme-t. ,
Date: % -v2-8-0
`City of TUkvila
6200 Southcenter Bou
Tukwila Washington 98188
•PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TRANSMITTAL
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL Af' /400/
1
TO: ❑ BUILDING DEPT. ❑ POLICE DEPT.
❑ FIRE DEPT. EEREATION DEPT.
❑ PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. ❑
PROJECT: it
LOCATION:
The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials
for the above reference project:
environmental Checklist OPreliminary Plat
DEnvironmental Impact State- OFinal Plat
ment
❑Site /Development Plans ❑Rezone Request
❑ Shoreline Permit Application❑ Variance Request
❑Conditional Use Permit OOther:
Application
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 use the space provided below for your comments or attach a separate
sheet.
Requested response date: 3 / J %f /60
Review Department comments: Ste. .2-_ // 4-4/ tee 4P,,,.,elF2 4o,,,. 440r4,0°1--
L'e'o, ,-. 04r 9, f' et 't 4. ®ewe,04,' - Ax.�.oy
a_ rza i die_ /- '4-=2-e, /Y- et_ - �y At
S'-G. Zr — L/4" .2 / G.75e a .," /®' .- . - ----i/
::-.. d X4�:ai
4 a../bdo. / ®Ga. d �2fi � 4! ' is
SJr // 9 .� i a.. r- �, ��- �• / �o� se e 0/-.6� �- l
7'- / C O � / ' � ✓ , / m .wov e - -e - > 2
(;L') !--' 1 A� :� o�'�.��t -� e) dtoi.�,.s �.,�„ % (� Wt.
6d?V/ ® Ga — . i0 43.,. es- /0a--7°-Lt • Oi f de
By: ;;;:_�
. Date: 4,,,
7
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 a
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
Fiorito & Ferullo
1. Name of Proponent: c/o William S. Tsao & Company P.S.
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
2367 Eastlake East
Seattle, Washington 98102 (206) 324 -8780
3. Date Checklist Submitted: June 17, 1980
4. Agency Requiring Checklist: ii -y of Tukwila lckparhmF+nt of Pnvirianmantal
Services
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable:
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):
300 Room Hotel, 12 Stories, and Accessory uses
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):
Property is located on the South side of, the Easterly terminus of
Southcenter Boulevard and separated from the Green River by a 20'
wide Tukwila City River Trail System
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: 1983
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 X NO
(b) King County Hydraulics Permit YES X NO
(c) Building permit YES NO
(d Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit YES NO X
(e) Sewer hook up permit YESX N0
(f) Sign permit YESX NO
(g) Water hook up permit YES X NO
(h) Storm water system permit YESX NO
(i) Curb cut permit YESX NO
(j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YESX NO
(k) Plumbing permit (King County) YESX NO
(1) Other: All other permits that maybe required by other Goverment agencies
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 pro al? If yes, explain:
- Pd ✓`K f • /L,.2� if -e!Ye- Dom' w J. ‘t "/
/44,y, f
t dr7i a.-7 - A/r L„veve," ;AO' ,4,/
v+ : //
Cre d2c o- 40% .
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, describe the nature of such application form:
Variance application filed June 17, 1980 Future Filings,
Conditional use, Shoreline permit
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?
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
X
(d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features? ?<
-2-
(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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
3. 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
X
x
x
(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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
• YES MAYBE NO
x
4. Flora. Will the proposal result in:
. (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of flora? X
(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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
X
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)? x
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of fauna? X
(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? X
Explanation:
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise
levels?
Explanation:
SEE ATTACHMENT
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
Explanation:
SEE ATTACHMENT
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:
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
•
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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
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
re creational facilities?
r,' I r C/- . E' ailf N —/
dL
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
-6-
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cx)
X
(f) Other governmental services?
Explanation:
SEE ATTACHMENT
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:
SEE ATTACHMENT
YES MAYBE NO
X
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? X
(c) Water ?. X
(d) Sewer or septic tanks? X
(e) Storm water drainage?
(f) Solid waste and disposal?
Explanation:
SEE ATTACHMENT
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea-
tion of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Explanation:
X
•
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?
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation: T .`, ke -
6440- 0-, 444 o•-►.Q w�- J�..�� „`el/ fti /rC7�` 4
.�/ el / G r
woe+ - edC � _
i 7i..Yl"� f .�¢- d ✓'Gel ✓ d -iL .'— �i .i ' s� ��c..aFl!
el �,,,yc- ( o c
l.¢_. l c eti 7 S
19. Recreation. on. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of exist-
ing recreational opportunities?
Explanation: --
�,✓`i a ,mow.' /(Y
c a .a 17'.14. �2 p 7`,^ d` . ,.r
Li o.1 . �7� ..✓!i o
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:
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.
ature and Title S44/4.4T//j ►r
LA14 1171 198o
Date
REPORT OF PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION
FIORITO PROPERTY
INTERURBAN AVENUE NEAR 1-405
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
for
DON KOLL NORTHWEST
• E DAt� C:. •
Don Roll Northwest
550 Industry Drive
Tukwila, Washington '98188
Attention: Mr. Byron Sneva
Gentlemen:
SCOPE
c .
June 13, 1973
Report of Preliminary Soils Investigation
Fiorito Property
Interurban Avenue Near 1 -405 _
Tukwila, Washinc:ton
We present in this report the.results of our preliminary soils
investigation of the Fiorito property located immediately east of Inter-
urban Avenue and a short distance north of Highway I -405 in Tukwila,
Washington. The site, which encompasses an area of approximately 17
acres, is shown with respect to existing features on the Plot Plan, Plate
1.
Several feet of fill have been placed on the property and it is
our understanding that existing site grades are high enough for flood
control purposes. We understand that your firm is considering purchase
of this property for development of light commercial or warehouse -type
structures.
The purposes of our investigation are to evaluate the condition
•
Don loll ft rthwest
June 13, 1973
Page -2-
of the existing fill and underlying native soils and to determine the
general feasibility of site development for lightly loaded warehouse or
commercial structures. Specifically our work includes:
1) Evaluation of the adequacy of the existing fill for
support of shallow spread footings and parking area
and roadway pavements.
2) Preliminary assessment as to whether or not surcharging •
Would be required for yard grade or carloading height
floor slabs.
Recommendations for further investigation and analytical
studies provided development of this site appears feasible.
DESIGN CONS IDER! TIONS
It is anticipated that the site will be developed at essentially
existing site grades with limited cutting and filling not exceeding one to
two feet. The arrangement and sizes of the buildings are not known at
this time. Floor grades may be established either at-yard grade, car -
loading height or a combination thereof. Structural loads are anticipated
to be relatively light with floor loads not exceeding 300 pounds per
square foot.
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
The subsurface soil and groundwater conditions were explored by
drilling four borings and excavating 11 test pits at the locations shown
•
Don Koll. Northwest
June 13, 1973
Page -3-
• on Plate 1. The borings were drilled with truck - mounted, cable tool
drilling equipment while the test pits were excavated with a backhoe.
The borings ranged from 40.to 51 feet in depth while the test pits ranged
from 12.to 13 feet in depth.
The materials encountered in each exploration were classified
in the field by visual and textural examination: A continuous •log of
each exploration was maintained. by our field engineer. The detailed
boring logs are presented on Plates 2 and 3; the test pit logs, on Plates
4 and 5. The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System which is described on Plate 6.
Undisturbed samples of the soils encountered in each boring.
were obtained with a sampler of the type illustrated on page A -1. The
number of blows required to drive the sampler a distance of one foot into
the soil with a weight of 350 pounds falling a distance of 20 inches is
shoran above the sample notations on the log of each boring. Undisturbed
soil samples were obtained in the test pits using this sane sampler driven
into the soil by means of a manually operated drop weight.
Piezometer tubes were installed in two of the borings to provide
information relative to the level.of the groundwater table.
SITE CONDITIONS
The site surface is generally covered with a moderately dense
growth of wild grass and clover. The major portion of the site is
S� ,\ 1,. 1 ♦ 1 l i f I( :) (!: l 1,
Don boll Northwest
June 13, 1973
Page -4-
essentially level and at approximately Elevation 24 to 25. In the south-
west portion, the ground rises gently up to Elevation 30 or more in the
vicinity of the
fill
southwest property line.
A substantial thickness of fill covers the entire site. The
is generally on the order of 8 to 12 feet thick but a maximum thick-
ness of 17 feet
property line.
ness at each of
of fill was observed in Boring 1 near the southwst
The existing ground surface elevation and the fill thick -
our explorations is indicated on Plate 1. The fill .
consists primarily
of silt and sandy silt with a markedly lesser amount
of silty sand. The major portion of the fill ranges from moderately
soft to moderately firm in consistency.and appears to have been placed
without engineering control. The fill in a localized area near the
southwest property line at the location of our.Boring 1 and Test Pit 11
is much finer - grained than over the remainder of the site.
The native soils which underlie the fill are almost exclusively
granular. These granular soils consist primarily of clean sand but minor
amounts of more silty sand were encountered in Borings 1 and 2 and a few
of the test pits.
moderately compact
compact with depth
For the most part the sands are moderately loose to
in the upper several feet but grade generally more
. A localized six -foot thick stratum of moderately soft
native sandy silt was encountered immediately below the fill at the
location of Boring
was
1.
The groundwater table at the time of our field explorations
observed to be at approximately Elevation 4. The groundwater level at
•
s t
Don Koll Northwest
June 13, 1973
.Page -5-
this site can be expected to vary with changing water levels in the
adjacent Green River.
LABORATORY TESTS
The compaction characteristics'of-the existing fill soils at
this site were evaluated by performing a.compaction test in accordance
with the A.A.S.H.O. Compaction Test Procedure T-180 as described on
page A-2. The results of this test are presented on Plate 7:
Moisture and density determinations were made on undisturbed .
samples of both the fill and native soils obtained from the borings
and test pits. The results of thesetdeterminations are presented adja-
cent-to'the appropriate-sample'notations on the-boring-and-test pit logs:
CONCLUSIONS AND RECO:.11KENDATIONS
Based on the results of our field explorations and limited
office.evaluations it isiour opinion that this site can be economically
developed for the proposed structures provided that:certain procedures
are followed in site preparation.
The major portion of the upper fill soils were observed to
be moderately soft to moderately firm as indicated above. A comparison
of the results of moisture and density determinations on undisturbed
samples of the fill with the results of the compaction curve confirm
this observation. Except for the localized area of firmer fill in the
vicinity of Boring 1 and Test Pit 11 the dry . density of the fill generally
ranges between 90 and 99 pounds per cubic foot. When these values are
Don Koll Northwest
June 13, 1973
Page -b-
compared with the maximum dry density from the compaction curve of
112 pounds per cubic foot, the indicated degree of compaction ranges
from approximately 80 to 88 percent, based on A.A.S.H.O. Compaction
Test Procedure T -180. The major portion of the fill has, therefore, been
placed with only limited compactive effort and in its present state is
unsatisfactory for direct support of footings unless extremely low soil
bearing pressures are used. .
The use of soil bearing pressures in the range of 2,000 to
2,500 pounds per square foot for footing design is feasible if a
procedure of over- excavation and replacement with properly compacted
fill beneath footing locations -is carried out•: "Iri- sitr.ilar situations
in Andover Industrial Park over - excavation and replacement to a depth
of 4 feet below the footings has yielded satisfactory results. The
backfill material should preferably be clean granular material compacted
to 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by A.A.S.H.O.
Compaction Test Procedure T -180. It is our opinion that use of the higher
bearing pressures indicated above in any area of this site would he
advisable only in conjunction with the over - excavation and replacement
method mentioned above. The area of apparently firmer fill near the
southwest property line may be considered a possible exception to this
requirement. We do not consider this advisable, however, since it
would be difficult and perhaps infeasible to-
precisely delineate the
area of firmer fill. Further, based on the general observed condition
• •
Don Ko11 Northwest
' June 13, 1973
Page -7-
of the fill in other areas of the site, it appears entirely possible
that zones of softer fill also exist within this generally firmer area.
Based on past experience at nearby sites we anticipate that settlement
of footings founded in the manner indicated above and for relatively
light structures of the type anticipated will be on the order of approxi-
mately one inch.
. Due to the variable nature of the existing on -site fill soils
it is our opinion that these materials will not serve adequately as a
base for direct support of parking area and roadway pavements. The
exposed fill soils in all areas to be paved should be proof rolled and
any soft zones noted during proof rolling-should be corrected by excavation
and replacement with properly compacted fill.. A base course layer
consisting of properly compacted clean sand or sand or gravel should then
be placed above the prepared subgrade. Flexible asphalt pavement could
then be placed directly on the granular base course and should provide
relatively maintenance free service.
The exposed grade in all building areas should be prepared by
proof rolling and corrected, if required, in a manner similar to that
indicated above for paved areas. Floor slabs to be established at or
close to yard grade should be underlain by a minimum 12 -inch thick pad
..7 ii .. 1 (.) i R
Don Ko l l Northwest
June 13, 1973
Page -8-
of fill preferably consisting of clean granular soil compacted to at
least 95 percent (A.A.S.H.O. T -180). All new fill placed to establish
subgrade elevation for floor'slabs at carloading height should also be
compacted to this degree during placement so as to provide an adequate
base for floor slab support.
Due primarily to the variability of the existing on -site fill
soils it is our opinion that all building sites should be prepared prior
to construction by surcharging. The major purpose of surcharging on
this property would be to reduce post construction differential as well
as areal settlement of the floor slabs. It is our opinion that building
construction on this property without surcharge preparation could easily
result in substantial differential settlements within the area of any
given floor slab with structural distress resulting. The subsurface
conditions at this site are such that effective surcharging in relatively
short periods of time c'an be achieved. The requirements for thickness'
and duration of surcharging in any building area will be primarily
related to floor grade and the magnitude of planned floor loads. Build-
ing areas where the floor loads would be relatively low and her floor
grade would be established at or close to yard grade could be effectively
prel.oaded with a limited surcharge thickness over a period of a few
Months. Somewhat greater thicknesses of surcharge would be required in
building areas with floor grades at carloading height and unposed floor
loads on ,the order of 300 pounds per square foot. In the latter case, we
:
Don Koll Northwest
June 13, 1973
Page -9-
estimate that a surcharge thickness in the range of 4 to 6 feet would
produce effective surcharging in a period of 3 to 4 months.
SUPPLEMENTARY INVESTIGATION
If it is decided to proceed with development of this property .
we recommend that a supplementary investigation be carried out. The
purpose of this work would be to provide additional information relative
to the condition of the existing fill and to develop specific require-
ments for surcharging commensurate with finalized plans for development.
We envision that this work would include a number of shallow borings,
laboratory testing oriented primarily at evaluating the consolidation
characteristics of the existing trill and appropriate engineering analyses.
We estimate that our fee for this additional work would be on the order
of $2,500 to $3,000.
We trust that the foregoing infor::iation will serve your present
needs. Please contact us if there are any questions or if we can be of
further assistance as deveLopment.plans for this site are finalized.
Yours very truly,
Ji:T -AAII: ms
3 copies submitted
\ /NT
f0,
60,
TOP OF
BANK - -+
BORING 3
Q 2 5.0
6.0'
TP -.6
24.41
6.5'
TP -7
24 9,
7.5'
TP -11
53.7,
i3' +'
BORING 4
0, 25.8
12.0'
TP -8 .
28.57
12 +
BORING /
32_6
17.0'
TP -I
25.0%3'
4,0'
TP -5
• 23.8,
10.5
TP -9
25,A,12.
13 +
PROPERT,
LINE
TP -10
29. 6 1
\, 10.0'
\.
4
PLOT PLAN
F CET
TP -2
22.71°
110'
BORING 2
24,3
12.5'
TP -4
24.1
8.5'
TP -3
24.2 %I
9.5'
9
EY1
2
• q 24.5 BORING
12.5'
TP -2
. (ELEVATi0N1 -22.7 ,P TEST PIT
(illL TNICKNES51 -11.0' •
35
BORING 1
BORING 2
ELEvAT:':sN 2%
ELEVATION 32.6 t
IciGNI Ei
...-'....4.
: liit.IL
“ 1
1
. I i
(1
! I
i ■
i
' :
I
I
!
--,..-
i l
■
. a
ML
•
i
1
■:•...
'■'',:
L -
SP
.,,.
-...,,
SW
.•,.
•..
...
.i:
1 ...,
I .‘...*.
...:
...
...
1 ,,.
NTTISR C,,.AY SILTY FiN: TO :OARSE
,A) AN) ;RAVEL 0400EPA7ELY CCT:R1:7)
FILL)
AY SAN3Y SILT wiTH PO:F.ETS OF
I LTY FINE TO CC4RS( SAN) AND zqviEt.
iRn) (FILL)
OCCASIO%Al LAY'S OF SOFTER SILTY
SOIL.
Aowu 5.%)1 SILT (; OOE?ATELY SOFT;
ROgNISH C.2.RY SILTY ru,. SAO
(MODERATELY SOF! TO MERATELY
FIRM)
- •
CROUN3 .TER LE'vEL
RAY FINE 70 S-..)
(vODEPATSLY LUSE :0 K)ERATELY
CGAPACI)
OCCASIONAL LENSES OF SILTY PEAT
AN) sANiY
,RAY FINE TO,E0ARiE S. vitui ORAvEL
(Ko0Esatur
CORING coxFLETE) 5-21-73
FIELD OiSiRvE) ri.LOW '.Cere NOT
CONSIOERE) REPRESENT:JIVE. •
LOG OF BORINGS
'THE DISCUSSION ts TPE TEXT CF 11-IS PEPORT
IS niCESSARY 10 A PROPER LUT)EAST.'-N)IN; Cr
THE NATO( OF TIE sues:Ivan
KOISTLR( 7
CO..!ENT/
77 r—,-97
:ENIITT
1% rCr
s?Av sA.;)v SILT WIT, FOC,.ETS OF
07(A-SICNAL 7?.10:ENTS
mC)E7TA1ELY FiR3
SUTER LCNE”
----
12.61-105
20
I50.3Z-73
! *
11.3/-94
15
' 9.r-50
10
tt 5
z
0
> 0
27.37-92
BORING 3
2.
13
a
35
11
22
20
13
2
3
•
ELEvATiO1 23.1 :
! 1! 1AL
i d
i 1 •
1
11 1
11 1
1 IlimAIIER
9-1NNIS,-. C?:..•1 .:E.'■ SA%r.:Y :ILI dlIM
OCCAStONAL ?COI; .L%i LEiSES CF
11:::: SANo tyvi,....-.LLy ,›-T TO
mOOEPATELY FIR: 1.111.1.1
•
LENSES AU) LAYERS OF ORGANIC
;nog% FINE 52.*.: .,IT-: LE%sEs OF
SILT (gC3(?...7:1 GmPACT)
•
GRA)ES (OR :0 FIN.E 70 •!E01.21
SA.43 •
sr,
_ .
%. sw
Dlo-4.1 111.5 TO C0:.51 34%3 0.2,DEPAti
COmPACI)
....%
• A
.,....
. •
LAYERS: 0F, F1NE.SANO w!T. stur
co.:.oss TO GRAY II COLO? 4%3
•
COMPACT
''.
.
.
.
CA0U%3 'ro:TER L(';Ei, NOT G?SER4E0
1.1
30
25
20 •
23.6.'99
21,2-92
16.2-63
10
S
25 C-99
15
z
z
P
>3
-5
-ID
30.3:*-89
BORING 4
EkEvr.y.n.; 2c.;
:00 hit_ c.-.% 511.1 ,;1;,. ...-.%2 t%) occastcN:o.
:1111: ,.C.05 (m..--:...E.q.17€1f sur) (iALL)
HIV .
siLT .17/- r PIE 5L,0 ^"
1 1
lk'
. 00510'.L. C..:1 (moo!P.ar(iv soc,1
12 1,
to :10E-ILLY 114.m) (1 iLL)
13
u jil ■
jp,
U .1;11'
23 -11:1-
ri
9
17
13
15
n •
16
23.3.-33
21
-15 26.7.'-97
23
a
-20.
19
2 a
25
LOG OF BORINGS-
BORING
ORINGS
....
...... •
• • • • .
••••.",f_:
SP
5w
SP
9R0•:1 vEPr FILE S!.%7‘ .411.1 5111
1,1MR:JE1Y :.C)SP.AIELY
CGM,A:F)
LAYERS OF SILTY FINi
C3ES 10 CP,:v cl%!: TO MEOlvm
,sANO • .
GRAY FINE TO (CARS( SA%0 wIT
LAYERS OF FINE 10 mE)IuM S-60
WODERAiELY CC:-:T.ACT)
•
CORING CO:1?LE1E0
sRo)No L5'i1 %01 CUERvE
•
TEST PIT I
2S
z
10
25
20
z
0
15 —
25
o-
w
▪ 20
15
10
48.5 I
•
FLEvATiO.: 25.c.
sit.;
CE.›..*.Elr Serf
rc .90:!ER4rEL1
STU (MGOER.ITELY
5!:;1; re=iC,L)
s:Lri (0-.1ERITELle
fl? Sv4D wiT:t SILT
i:::,DEoATZL,. LOOSE :o mODEUTELY
rEs;' PIT COLETE0 5-24-73
.0 00u
ENCOonrEREO
TEST PIT 2
fir.q.!,10•1 22.7 ±
rtV. S4%)
Sir tSEs
(”0)iRATELY CCe:P4CT) (ILL)
sltr A:0 SANDY SILT WITH
li%iES or slut Fft.E 540 4%) 0RG4%1C
(:IC:F.447ELY S0,1' TO MODERATELY
1;m; (FILL)
.1 •
••
(TIODEFU7E1.7 LOOSE TO
TES! P17 ECILET(0 5-2=-73
ccoL;,;) Ev.C,...%TERED
TEST PIT 3
ELE'.%:71.
r,,Lv SILT 4!:3 FAOWN
sic: ri%E sort
1Z:27:.'ATZLr ;1R1-
! (TILL)
SILT wITH
P,.Z:Ti Cr CP:,A%fE mA1TER
SC:; TO tiODETIATELY
:(P,; 1,11.1)
T'i%E 54%E' f•.'03:741EL7 1035E
'C
TEST 717 :C:17,3 5-21-73
OFIE;VED AT D(771, OF 6'
w41.15 ::47) SL,RFACE A%0
DEPT', 0 5'
TEST PIT 4
25
10
25
"- 20
z
z
> • 15
10
25,
24.2*-92
;4 •
Mt.
SM
ELEW.I;c: 2%.Ir
s:LT 8%0 SILT wlim
0::AS:C.%41 C=.1',EL (I.:C;CRATELY S
TC Mi4r,1 (FILL'
SILTY 71%1: SAW.) tmO)ERAIELI
71=.m)
Frsr pi! :CTIPLE7E3
110 h1ER Ev.CvnTEPED
W4LIS (EM(EN E'EFTH Or
4' 4U) E'
TEST PIT 5'
20
18.6 '-e.9
P • 53.3/.67 (2
a
10
ELEy:Tlo'. 23.5
(,RLY 5111 cf.) S41.:2Y 5117 WITN
0:5ISIC!;41 C4/(L (7'-i 1U
Fo3r) (mo3ERATELy:sorr)
GRADES FIRMER
?.)T1 vERi TInE St.•.0 wITH SILT
(-L-.:iPAIELY LOOSE TO mOOEPATELY
TEST P17 EG'IPLETED 5.25-23
nO ,,ATER ENCOvuTERED
WALLS EAvE0 7E1wEE:1 DEPirl OF
4' AND 8'
TEST PIT 6
LOG OF TEST PITS
ELEVATION 24 4
G:Ay 5410Y SILt 4:1) SILT
WITH T!,1% LE'TSES OF 53. TtnE
SA%) (rwERATELt TIRm) (TILL)
OCC45i0n41 SOFTER ZONES
v.r. 77 fInE 547.) wiTH 5711
(mODERAFELY comrACT lo CONPACT)
TEST PiT c0mr15773 5.-25-71
NO GROi.;%) WITER ENCOUNT(RE),
• ELEVATION IN FEET
ELEVATION IN FEET
ELEVATION IN FEET
25
20 ----
15--
10
25
20
15
10
30.
25 _
20
15
10
J
25.0-93
n
TEST PIT 7
1 :
!II I
:II
I '
11
lo 1
.%1L
SP
(LEvf,T104 2.9
vcA% SzN)r SU, 4\0 SILT
Wirk ;RI.VEL 0.1%E P.cors
I% UP,CR TO)F) (m0)ERATE(Y FIR4 TO
TIR) (FILL)
C:CASION:t 5Cri( l [0\E5
vEPY S.:N) .I lit SILT
(:%';:1E,IATELY LO.:SE ro vO)ERA:ELY
COmPACT)
TEST PIT COmPtEIED 5-z5-73 -
NO GROUND wAIER EN:Cu:JERE°
TEST PIT 8
ELEVATION 24.5
BR)wN AN) !;,.7AY SA:;)y SiLT AND SiLT
wITH OCCASIO:.AL GPAvEL (rINF ROOTS
IN uPPER IY) (mCDERATELY SOFT TO
HODERAT(LY'FIRM) (FILL)
GRADES SO=TER
TEST PIT COMPLETED 5-25-73
NO GR0LN:0 wAfER (NCOuNIEREO
TEST PIT 9
ML
ELEVATION 2c.A
ow-1 AN) GR.:), SAN)Y SiLT ANO SILT
wIrq GAVEL (FINE ROOTS
IN 0PPER I (:0DERATELY SOFT TO
moN.D.:,r(Ly ;IRm) (rm.)
usT Pit COmPLETE0 5-25-73
NO GROUND .44TER
ELEVATION IN FEET
1-
3C_.
25--
20- -----
15
30
z
0
21.0.f-106
25--
20
LOG OF TEST PITS
TEST PIT 10
C1-,.Tic- % 23.6
.LRAsFL SU(
TO NOYERAT(LY FiRm) (TILL).
POCKETS OF .7.RAY SANDY SALT
TRACES e NGANiC vATTER
SA0'..N SILTY. Fiz,E SAND (PODERATELY
FiRm)
TEST Pi( CO4PLETED 5-25-73
NO GROnD WATER ENCC0NFERED
TEST PIT I I
SM
ML
ELEVATION 33.7 ±
BACwuiSH GRAY SILTY FINE SA%0
(Elam)
CRAY SANOY SILT AND SILT WITH
TRACE or cP.:vEL (m0)EIRATELY
FIRm TO FiRm) (FILL)
GRADES SAND/E1 WITH INCREASING
GRAVEL CONTENT
rEsT PIT COmPLETED 5-25-73
NO GROUND WATER ENCOuNTEREO
MA✓OR DIVISIONS
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
IAORC TnAM 50 Y,
Or MATERIAL 11
IA RG,�R T ..04 40
230 $.(v( 012(
FINE
6RAI /IED
SOILS
034E TO•4 50 •^
Of MATERIAL ■5
4LII-L T..AN *0
200 SI(V( S12(
GRAVEL
AND
GRAVELLY
SOILS
CLEAN GRAVELS
,LITTLE OR 80
118(5)
800( TnAM 50 •4,
Or COARSE r, AC. GRAVELS WITH FINES
T10M REIAh•a IARRA(C145L( LYOVMT
OM MO • 5,(YE Or rIMESI'
SAND
AND
SANDY
SOILS
L'O•E TI.IM 50•.',
Or C0 44S( /RC-,
1104 LA..S SI.Yi
h0 • 5.E •E
CLEAN SANG
11.ITTl( OR 40
TIMES
•
•
SANDS WITH FINES
c■>••(Cro4L( 140,41
Or fl*(SI
- 1' :. r..
SILTS
AND
CLAYS L015 Tr1AM 50
UOVIO LI WIT
. SILTS
AND
CLAYS
LIOV10 IIVIT
utt_tati Tn4M 50
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
•
•
rye
•
LETTER
SM1.901 TYPICAL DES CR/P riays
' G 15/
GP
*ELL -GRACED V•E5D G•••(LS-
5•*5 1 T '•4 04 , LITiIC OR
MC 11805
10.:,1•- GRACIE a 11(11- 01IV(1.-
S4hD I11i TYRES, 1.1101.1 0R
h0 1V■ (
GM
GC
SW
SP
511TT C?LVEL S. G•A.EL -5043-
31LT • 114144(5
CLMMET GRAVEL 5, C•.,(1-3443-
CIA1 AI.!UR ES
•
*ELL - CA .OED SO43S, :R•YELLT
52405. Llr%l( C• 4D nh(s
100.11 -GR AOCD 5IND5, C•AVCLLT
0•805, LITTLE C■ 41 114(5
S M
SC
M L
CL
OL
f *t H
CH
OH
SILT S•505, SAND-7.,..T ...(TVA(%
CI ATET S0M35, SAND-CELT MIin:AL5
1804:•410 Ah
S:t TS •04 •(•' r
SIDS. •3 :0 rl :.•. S:LTT OR
C:AT(r 114( SL *JS .• CL ay Er
5.05 rah 51.10.2
IMOR2AN■C CL A*5 or LC• :3 0(01,4
1LASTICIT A, GI A'l(:LT CLOTS,
541.3* CLL*S, SIL*r C_LTS, LEAR
CL•r5
040•410 1.115 A43 Cr :ARIC
SILT, CLAYS Cr LO• •_A51101TT
IMORCAh,0 51145. w0000:.3 04
Or0T00ACEOVS 114E Saes OR
SILTT 53145
14044 *1.,C CL 445 07
II*511(110• f1T Ci*•5
O•CANIC Ct. 445 07 4E21-.-• TO 01..4
1l A5TICTT, ORCAV.0
PT
PEAT, h00ps, s.A4f 50.5
•I TM 41011 0408!10 '- ,-,,TUTS
1OTC OVAL 5T050L5 ARE V500 TO I40:CATE OOROCRLIME SOII CL SSIIIC4TI0h5.
SOX CLASS L. TCATX® i' C.;� .-5
�j�,S
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIEICATIO"N SYSTEM
150
140
IL- 130
•D
-J
•EST PI T 9.
SAMPLE NO.. . DEPTH . ELEVATION 19...QTO '19.5'
SOIL_P,RM.:i 42 CiRAY SA.NDY SILT
LOCATIONF.IORI T TUj LA, -11A 1:1
- OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT__
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY±LPCF
METHOD OF CON1PACTIONkA.._.ft.g...,:i11.1.80._.(1:1ETHOD___A)
MOISTURE CONTENT IN % OF DRY WEIGHT
5 •
0 15
20
25
120
100
90
COMPACTION TEST DATA
DRIVING OR PUSHING
M ECHANIS/A
WATER OUTLETS
NOTCHES FOR
ENGAGING
FISHING TOOL
_ NEOPRENE GASKET
NOTE:
•HEAD EXTENSION' CAN
• BE INTPODVCEO BET+EEN
'HEAD' A.NJ'SPLIT BA;.REL'
I I
417.9 (5 -68)
SPLIT BARREL
(TO FACILITATE REMOVAL
OF CORE SAUPLE)
BIT
I I 1 1 �_ CORE- RETDEVICE
AINING
� sss RETAINER RING
RETAINER PLATES
(; (INTERCHANGEA3LE wITH
` _ I OTHER TYPES),
•
SOIL SAMPLER TYPE U
FOR SOILS DIFFICULT TO RETAIN IN SAMPLER
CHECK VALVES
CORE - RETAINER
R1N.S S
(T1/)' U.D. BY 1' LONG)
ALTERNATE ATTACHMENTS
SPLIT BARREL,.
LOCKING
RING
SPLIT
FERRULE
THIN -WALL EO
SAS.■PLING TUBE
'(INTERCHANGEABLE
•
LENGTHS)
•
- CORE-RETAINING
DEVICE
A -2
■f ETIIOD OF PERFORMING COMPACTION TESTS
(STANDARD AND MODIFIED A.A.S.II.O. METHODS)
IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT
WHEN COMPACTING EFFORT IS HELD
CONSTANT, THE DENSITY OF A
ROLLED EARTH FILL INCREASES
WITH ADDED MOISTURE UNTIL A
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY IS OBTAINED
AT A MOISTURE CONTENT TERMED
THE "OPTIMUM MOISTURE CON-
TENT," AFTER WHICH THE DRY
DENSITY DECREASES. • THE COM-
PACTION CURVE SHOWING THE RE-
LATIONSHIP BETWEEN DENSITY AND
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR A SPECIFIC
COMPACTLNG EFFORT IS DETER-
MINED BY EXPERIMENTAL METHODS.
TWO COMMONLY USED METHODS ARE
DESCRIBED IN THE FOLLOWING
PARAGRAPHS.
FOR THE "STANDARD A.A.S.II.O."
(A.S.T.M. D693 -53T & A.A.S.1I.0.
T99 -57) METHOD OF COMPACTION A
PORTION OF THE SOIL SAMPLE
PASSING THE NO. 4 SIEVE IS COM-
PACTED AT A SPECIFIC MOISTURE
CONTENT IN THREE EQUAL LAYERS
IN A STANDARD COMPACTION CY-
LINDER HAVING A VOLUME OF 1/30
CUBIC FOOT, USING TWENTY -FIVE
12-INCH BLOWS OF A STANDARD 5 -1/2
POUND RAMMER TO COMPACT EACH
LAYER.
•
SOME APPARATUS FOR PEPFOR:11110 COMPACTION TESTS.
Shows, from left to right, 5 -1/2 pound rammer (sleeve•
controlling 12" height of drop removed), 1/30 cubic -
foot cyl inder with removable collar and base plate,
and 10 pound rewer within sleeve.
IN THE "MODIFIED A.A.S.11.0." ( A.S.T.M. D- 1557 -53T Y< A.A.S.I1.O. T 180 -57) METHOD OF COMPACTION
A PORTION OF THE SOIL SAMPLE PASSING THE NO. 4 SIEVE IS COMPACTED AT A SPECIFIC MOISTURE
CONTENT IN FIVE EQUAL LAYERS IN A STANDARD COMPACTION CYLINDER HAVING A VOLUME OF
1/30 CUBIC FOOT, USING TWENTY -FIVE 18 -INCH BLOTS OF A 10- POUND RAMMER TO COMPACT EACH
LAYER. SEVERAL VARIATIONS OF THESE COMPACTION TESTING METHODS ARE OFTEN USED AND
THESE ARE DESCRIBED IN A.A.S.H.O. A.S.T.M. SPECIFICATIONS.
FOR BOTH METHODS, TIIE WET DENSITY OF TIIE COMPACTED SAMPLE IS DETERMINED BY WEIGHING
THE KNOWN VOLUME. OF SOIL; TIIE MOISTURE CONTENT, BY MEASURING THE LOSS OF WEIGHT OF A
PORTION OF THE SAMPLE WHEN OVEN DRIED; AND TIIE DRY DENSITY, BY COMPUTING IT FROM THE
WET DENSITY AND MOISTURE CONTENT. A SERIES OF SUCH COMPACTIONS IS PERFORMED AT IN-
CREASINGMOISTURE CONTENTS UNTIL A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF POINTS DEFINING THE ;.1OISTURE.-
DENSITY RELATIONSHIP HAVE BEEN OBTAINED TO PERMIT TIIE PLOTTING OF THE COMPACTION
CUR \'E. THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR THE PARTICULAR COM-
PACTING EFFORT ARE DETERMINED FI:O\I THE COMPA(:TIOi•; CURVE.
•
•
S'
4�y.
•. i 4J
•• hi 1:44 Or
449
9
1.1.10.,
PIFOI'05Ct2 HOTEL_
roll_
rPRIto r- muLLO - - --
1.129L2ILLA. {.1ANiIMS1011 -
WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO., P. S.
ENGINEERS 8 ARCHITECTS
2307 EASTLAKE AVENUE EAST
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 00102 U.SA (200) 2240700
1
H p i
61 4
friOR0e-v-Fro Tr-1-
manly rercu-o
wwMM9Tort
WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO.. P. S.
ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
2367 EASTLAKE AVENUE EAST
SEAM WASHINGTON 66102 U.SA (266) 224 -6766
ft
3
i;
P' POW HOT 5-13-
-
_ riorirro et. FrrilJU-€2____
Ivn$40.4A, - - — wAtortersai '
WILLIAM S. T SAO & CO., P. S.
ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
23117 EASTLAKE AVENUE EAST
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 18102 U.S.A. QOM 324.8700
N.
.tv.11.0•
froPO5 7 Ho -
fr r�
F i'7 3i f O 4 F - UL LO
WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO., P. S.
ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS
2367 EASTLAKE AVENUE EAST
SEATTLE WASHINGTON 08102 U.SA (2061 324 -8760
d
651
I
A
6•
,.,.,o.,
010 r r-v Nafa-
NT1
PIOP I1O 4 I IiU1-.O
Tm+k u� µAC:11ry512t
WILLIAM S. TSAO & CO., P. S.
ENGINEERS 8 ARCHITECTS
2261 EAITLAEE AVENUE !AST
IEATTIE. WASHINGTON 66162 U.L& • (toe) 314 8780
1-
1111011110PIPIRMINNIRMINMINIEMISVEMIZelORRAMMI
NIMAIRVININICRIVEENESSEllarntilliMMititalarailealaVIENSIM
IMIEMOREITVEMMISIMMIMMAIMMPIEWISHMAVO
IINSURIPOI PONAM IPAINIA 1a9 IA Ili' lina11 3i16E4ta61f1 llialedisiRNVIl
117 ERI$IM 'Pla idg 9"A=4.119 =E'i llittNiIPME ?IE3JI
1CIMA9MIU X991; ISI= i11 9N IS'iE!iNAINPRlM11MIK
AMINEAE-#MMAittiltaPAIMMXIMV13,114101111MMINARMI
eVeMitektINERNIEVEIMIntallifielffikiiinIBSRIBUSITEMIRCIRMIER
e cult aK IMMild tlIMPA M cILIt f1r
�;
■
:
'p,
2
o
Z
2
t
PROPnsrn • frpTeL' .: :._
-
WILLIAM S. TS. O & CO., P.S.
ENGINEERS R ARCHITECTS
*.. HI/ 1ASnul 111111 LIST
$(*Ifll �ISIIItT01 11102 I.S.A. (201) 101 -i111
lei
, _ FLOfitr ¢ PCRLlL:G4 "'
. juiovaA . .. NAVirnGTON.__
EXPLANATIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
1. (b) Earth Overcovering of existing soils will occure on 54.76 %
of the gross site area. This percentage is based on the required parking
and driveways for the proposed hotel.
A review of the existing soils information reveles
that the overcovered soils range from brown and gray sandy silt and silt
with occasional gravel at depths of 10' on the Western end of the parking
area, to, mixed gray sandy silt and brown silt and fine sand at depths of
4' on the Eastern end of the parking lots. The soils underlying the park-
ing area is all moderately soft to moderately firm fill material that was
placed on the site as a disposal area when the freeway was being con-
structed.
In an effort to mitigate the overcovering of surface
soils, the design of a high rise structure was selected, thus allowing
more "open area" that will be landscaped, the percentage of open area
is 38.54 % of the gross site area.
2. (a) Air The proposed hotel and accessory uses as designed
would require, by Tukwila Zoning Code, 560 Parking stalls. However in
reality, and based on other hotel operations, the need for this number of
parking stalls is in excess of the actural need. Because of the proximity
of the Airport we feel that fully•33 % of the room guests will come by
means other than autos.
In an effort to assess the affect of the Air Quality in
the Green River Valley near the subject site we have compiled the follow.`.
ing Trip- Generation Projections. The bases of these projections are;
1. The Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation Manuel.
2. Past Experience of William S. Tsao & Co. P. S.
3. .Other Hotel Operations in the area.
TRIP GENERATION PROJECTIONS
Rooms 300 Avg. Occupancy 75 % = 225 Rooms Occupied
225 Rooms X 3.9 Trips
(Note: The multiple arrivals and departures of room
guests by other modes have not been deducted
from the above.)
Restaurant max. occupants 215 persons
11:30 to 1 :30 Lunch Occupancy avg. 70 % = 150 Persons
20 % of occupancy from hotel guests
80 % by off site persons
Avg. 2.4 persons per auto
50 autos X 2.1 trips
= 30 persons
= 120 persons
= 50 Autos
7:30 to 10 :30 Dinner Occupancy Avg. 90 % = 194 Persons
Avg. turn -over every 1 % hours
therefore total occupancy load = 388 Persons
20 % of occupancy from hotel guests
80 % by off site persons = 310 Persons
Avg. 2.9 persons per auto = 107 Autos
107 Autos X 2.1 trips
AWDVTE
878
105
225
do
Coffee Shop max. occupants 123 persons
6:30 to 8:30 Breakfast Occupancy Avg. 80 % = 99 Persons
Avg. turn -over 1 hour
Therefore total occupancy = 198 persons
60 % of occupancy form hotel guests
40 % by off site persons = 79 persons
Avg. 1.6 persons per auto = 126 Autos
126 Autos X 2.1 trips
11:30 to 1:30 Lunch Occupancy Avg. 80 % = 99 Persons
Avg. turn -over 1 hour 20 min.
Therefore total occupancy = 131 persons
25 % of occupancy from hotel guests
75 % by off site persons = 99 persons
Avg. 2.7 persons per auto = 36 Autos
36 Autos X 2.1 trips
6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Dinner Occupancy Avg. 60 % = 74 Persons
Avg. turn -over 1 hour 15 min.
Therefore total occupancy = 94 persons
60 % of occupancy by hotel guests
40 % by off site persons = 38 persons
Avg. 2.8 persons per auto = 14 Autos
14 Autos X 2.1 trips
Lounges max. occupants 185 Persons
12 :00 noon to 1 :30 Occupancy Avg. 35 % = 65 Persons
25 % of occupancy by hotel guests
75 % by off site persons = 48 persons
Avg. 2.4 persons-per auto = 20 Autos
20 Autos X 2.1 trips
4:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Occupancy Avg. 75% = 139 Persons
80 % of occupancy by hotel guests
20 % by off site persons = 28 persons
Avg. 2.4 persons per auto = 11 Autos
11 Autos X 2.1 trips
7:30 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. Occupancy Avg. 20 % = 37 Persons
Avg. turn -over 1 hour 45 min.
Therefore total occupancy = 126 persons
15 % of occupancy by hotel guests
85 % by off site persons = 107 persons
Avg. 3.7 persons per Auto = 29 Autos
29 Autos X 2.1 trips
Banquet Rooms max. occupants = 147 Persons
7:00 to 10:00 p.m. Occupancy Avg. 65 % = 345 Persons
20 % of occupancy from hotel guests
80 % by off site persons = 277 persons
Avg. 3.0 person per auto = 92 Autos
64 Autos X 2.1 trips
266
76
28
42
24
61
194
• •
Meeting Rooms max. occupants = 147 Persons
11:30 to 2:00 p.m. Occupancy Avg. 75 % = 110 Persons
20 % of occupancy from hotel guests
80 % by off site persons = 88 persons
Avg. 1 .3 persons per auto = 68 Autos
68 Autos X 2.1 trips
8:00 to 10 :00 p.m. Occupancy Avg. 25 % = 37 Persons
20 % of occupancy form hotel guests
80 % by off site .persons = 30 persons
Avg. 1 .3 persons per auto = 23 Autos
23 Autos X 2.1 trips
EMPLOYEES max. projected employees = 202 Persons
7 :00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 49 % == 99 employees
Avg. .1 .2 persons per auto = 82 Autos
82 Autos X 2.0 trips
3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. 45 % == 91 employees
Avg. .1 .2 person per auto = 75 Autos
75 Autos X 2.0 trips
11:00 p.m. to 7 :00 'a.m. 6 % == 12 employees
Avg. 1 person per auto = 12 Autos
. 12 Autos X 2.0 trips =
Service
8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. 12 Trucks
12 Trucks X 2.0 trips =
143
48
164
150
24
24
Total
2,452
Check by Trip Generation Manuel Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Hotel, ITE Land Use Code 310
Avg. Trip Rate 11.3 Per Employee
202 Employees X 11.3 = 2,282
Hotel, ITE Land Use Code 310
Avg. Trip Rate 10.5 Per Occupied Room
225 Avg. Occupied Room X 10.5 = 2,362
• •
The following chart is a tabulation of the number of vehicles that
can be expected to terminate or start a trip on the subject site under
Maximum Utilization of the proposed hotel and accessary uses.
The Chart reflects the maximum vehicles on an hourly bases, for
the various uses, and futher reflects the maximum condition of total
check -out and total check -in of the occupied hotel rooms.
SEE PROJECTED TRIP GENERATION CHART
The last two charted items, arrivals from and departures to, have
been derived from the following projections.
In these projections:
(1.) North is assumed to be North on Interuban Ave.
and to some degree I -5 or onto Marginal Way
or S. R. 99
(2.) East is assumed to be Renton, or Bellevue by
way of I -405 or to a lesser degree Grady Way
(3.)
South is assumed to be the Greater Kent Valley
area with its office parks, warehouses and resident-
ial areas and also the Andover Office, warehousing
area.
(4.) West is assumed to be the Greater Seattle area
" By Way of I -5 and also the Sea -Tac Airport
area by way of S.R. 518
SEE CHARTED ARRIVALS AND DEPARTURES
ri ,i -rte rFl t ►- 1z-.06.-ri N r
lk ,
5:
h
Q-:3,
6 :5,
G ;3o
1:30
8 ;30
1:30
1030
II ;4o
IPM
.1:39.2;
. _
.
3;
1-t30
5,'3�
..
G.
"1::7
e:&
1;301v:�
II;,
I (
.A,M,
MI'
-
2;30
1'o
.-Ic I .- •
<j
g
- g
4
2f,
EMFLo ._ •
.
-
82
_It
..
.-
.. -_
-115
.82
..
1Z
1s
-
38
riWr 461
72
II
24
11 1
eof-14111" F-.,w•r.,It . .
.
_ .
.
__
_
..
17
l7
.
11*
tot1,
- Al.
'LI _-
.. - _
IZ
I
. 30
31
127
.d-Ee, .1-1,..
- -
-
- Gi
133
44
-
He
20
-38-
.
7
19'
7
37a4
47-099-0 am` 1 -
•
35
35
33
. -
75
-7s
40
35
330
Forot* -
--.1-1W-K-- 114
-
. _:
- Io
4,5
_ 20
• Z.o
30
_ 46
. 35
- .
22-5
K -enir
-
25
-I,d
-Go
:.
-
.. .
_
M1.
20
-
P
45
-..
20
4h
5
15
a
40
1,a
42r
-- ouw-%( "taus
•vr'02.4 h -
-
-_ -
.00.
lb
170
111.
88
p
1095
I oo
1.17
2
32
11
033
170
be
I SG
21
I°
A.1
2,'}52
. ftv
. .
Jo
123
•73
'I--
-16
£
1210
50
_
1 .11
. G5
32.
32
I3,i-
155
elo
4,0
_
2i
lo
It ztto
rre-prziLle.es
.
la
46-11
130
70
-14
col.
50
14
15
b2
20
10
80-
xf0
156,
-
. -f5
4o
' 1
1, Z Z
.
el• ,ToW.L.
e.4lo►-11
= _ -1-la ule-vy faTi.4-s - _- _
?IA L' .
,6100,/, Ftzr'1 •
Is'. 11
T+i
- _--
:..
1'49
-22.2
I a2.:
7,4-
-_3 2-
_5,2
1Z,a
.•11;o
-o.o
$5.5
11.7
5.7
.5,7
t4-,Z
-40,0
.140,2
..2
v,o
4
'5.4.
0,o
I.b
?.2-
940'
ES7 .
, -.
21
35,7
2I.I
11;1
5,22
0,4
.310,5
.14-,5-o,.0.
4,#1
-IS.g
',2
1,2
5,,41
Ifs,
2‘,I
II.ly
O,o
is
8.7
a,o
2,1
354.
2,9,04
SoilTI-1
-.
•
'2,0
?1:z,
14.6,
8,.2 -.
-27.40
543
.?i✓,2
1aa
o,o.
ZB,t
13,0
_40.!t
_G,'1-
.26,8
31,o
.I0,0
8,o
0,0
5,4
6,0
0.o
Z,o
046,
- 32,1 1
.µt�s1
...
3,2
X0,3
a3,q
.I3,,1-
5,1
1,5
1,3
IL3
mo
4f0,2
Z1.5.10:4
1.0.4
43,1
.5o.8
v1$
13,1
0,0
S8
°l,a
o.0
3,Z
402
11. 11 -
- Noe-TN.
i _
...
I-1
-g;G
IB,S
m,-1.
13.Ai
S,'1'
13.2 .
,5
IB,o
_ 2,b
15,7
AO
AO
• 3,b
Ik`1
15,3
167
M,1
..a0
14:3
1.6•
5,°1
235
�' ro
27,1a
'T
..
. 2,7
12;5.27,1
aG.3
.:Iej,s
12,3
I1.3
I'�,i
ZG.3
41
22,1
"o
0,0
5,5..
�LI.b
22,3
11.1
43.40
o.0
041
11. 1
O.G
343
•
111,41
Uri -
.
II
'g,7
18.1
.7f.3
I3:ly
» .s
13,4
1,7
1$.3
-2/
151
-?90
0.0
.3,e
.152
153..1.7
34.1
mo
144
17
40,0
Z3oj
33.'.34,
Val .
-...
. -
S.
I5.0
si,3
43,3
-?3,3
Ilia
23,0
16,4
31,3
.5,o
27.3
.tea
o,o
G,L_
2.4,0
26,40
13,3
52,0
D,o
At
13.3
Ia. 3
4-41
USE
SERVICE
EMPLOYEES
MEETI NG
ROOM
BANQU ET
ROOMS
LOUNGES
COFFEE SHOP
BREAKFAST
LUNCH
DINNER
RESTAURANT
LUNCH
DINNER
ROOMS
CHECK —IN
CHECK —OUT
MISC. TRIPS -
NUMBER
OF 222 356 246 402 ' 343 239 409
VEHICLES
• •
ARRIVALS FROM DEPARTURES TO
NORTH EAST SOUTH WEST NORTH EAST .SOUTH WEST
% NO. I/o NO.
38
32
45
30;
30
10
45
159
64
PERCENTAGE 18.11 29.04. 20.06 32.79 19.17 27.98 19.49 33.36
• •
Now that we have determined the number of new vehicles that can be
expected from the development of the proposed hotel, we may now assess
the effect on Air Quality.
We have researched the availible data from Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Agency and find that they have had Three Atmospheric Sampling
Stations in the general area. They are located at, S. E. Dist. Health Ctr.
12015 S..E. 128th in Renton, South 2nd St. and Lake Ave. S. in Renton
and Southcenter at 401 Andover Park East in the city of Tukwila.
However the first two of these stations sample only Suspended Par-
ticulates thru the high volumn process. The third station at, Southcenter,
is equiped to sample the following:
(a) Suspended Particulates (Hi -Vol)
(b) Suffur Dioxide (S02)
(c) Suspended Particulates (COH'S) (HAZE)
(d) Wind Speed and Direction
The results of their sampling indicate the Suspended Particulates in
the test area were 48 in 1977 ( by Geometric Means) and had reducted to
a level of 46 in 1978. The Puget Sound Region Ambient Air Quality Stand-
ards have set the maximum Suspended Particulates level at 60 by the
Annual Geometric Means. All of the above level numbers are in Milro-
grams per cubic meter.
In Conversation with the Puget Sound Air Pollution, Agency they have
indicated that the level will continue to drop at these stations.
The sulfur dioxide level of .007 ppm was uptained at the Southcenter
station. The Puget Sound Region Ambient Air Quality Standard has been
set at .02 ppm.
As can be seen both of the above pollutants are well below the stand-
ards set. Even with the addition of the vehicles resulting from the new
hotel the pollution levels will not be materially affected because vehicles
are not the primary cause of this type of pollution. The primary pollutant
resulting from vehicles is carbon monoxide (CO).
To assess the effect of additonal carbon monoxide on the existing Air
Quality we had to resarch other availible data to obtain samplings or re-
corded data on carbon monoxide levels in the area. We did obtain this
information from a report that was prepared by Loren McPhilles of EPA
in 1974 for the Washington State Department of Transporation. The test-
ing time did enclude the Dec.. 1973 Holiday traffic in the Southcenter area.
The reported Carbon monoxide level at that time was 6 PPM (parts
per million). The primary testing area was within 4 blocks of the subject
site.
We have obtained from the Department of Transportation that the ADT
at the time of testing was at 93,700 vehicles on the adjacent roadways,
and freeway.
We have futher obtained from the Washington State Department of
Transportation that the 1978 ADT on adjacent roadways and I 405 Free-
way was 100,200 vehicles. Mr. Bill Carter of that department states
that the annual increase is running between 2 % to 3 % per year.
Therefore the 1980 projection for ADT will be 106,200 vehicles and
factored ahead for 1982, the projected date of hotel completion, the ADT
will be 112,000 vehicles.
Mr. George Hofer of the Environmental Protection Agency has in-
formed us that the Auto Emmission Standards in 1974 were 99.8 grams
of (CO) carbon monoxide per vehicle mile traveled. These standard
have been reducing on a yearly bases so that the 1980 standard is now
78.6 grams of CO per vehicle mile. The 1982 standard, at time of
projecteted hotel completion, will be 64.7 grams of carbon monoxide
per vehicle.
One additional item must be considered and that is the idle emiss-
ions of autos in the parking lot areas. This number has been calulated
as follows:
• • `
_64.7 Grans per Vehicle Mile X 19.6 MPH
60 minutes /hour
= 21.12 Grams
And the average idle time being 1.5 minutes per trip end.
Therefore with the above information the following ratio maybe set up
to determine the projectected level of carbon monoxide in the air after the
proposed hotel is completed.
Carbon Monoxide Level 1974 Carbon Monoxide Level 1982
•
' 74 ADT X 1974 Emission Standard ADT ' 82 X Emission St'd +Park'g Lot
Emission
6 PPM Carbon Monoxide " X " PPM Carbon Monoxide 1982
93,700 ADT X 99.8 Grams Co • (112,000 ADT + 1226) X 64.7 Grams Co +
(21 .13 Grams Co X 1 .5 minutes) X 2456
6 PPM "X "PPM
9,351,260 Grams Co • 7,325,722 Grams Co + 77,842 Grams Co
6 PPM
9,351,260
•
It X
7,403,564
= 9,351,260 " X " = 44,421,384
" X " = 44,421,384
9,351,260
„ X „
4.75 PPM
As shown above the projected level of carbon monoxide in 1982 after
completion of the proposed hotel and it's accociated vehicles have been added
the level will be 4.75 PPM. The National Standard and the Puget Sound Region
Standard have been set at 9 PPM. The_projected level 'is approximately one
half of the standard,therefore the Air Quality in the proximity of the proposed
hotel will not be materially affected.
In 1982 the .projected CO pollution level without the hotel is 4.65 PPM.
As shown above, with the hotel the level is 4.75 PPM. The increase due to
the hotel is .10 PPM or an •increase of only 2.1 %.
3 (b) & (d) WATER
The proposed hotel project may have some minor affect on the recharge
or absorption of surface water into the underground water table. However
drops of any measurable amounts will not occure. The bases for that stat-
ment can be obtained by a careful review of the enclosed soils report, that
was prepared by Dames and Moore, on the subject site and also on the pro -
perty adjacent to the North.
Boring no. 1 near the entrance to subject site indicates ground water
encountered at elevation 4 feet or approximately 28 feet below the surface
elevation of 33 feet. Also boring no. 2 indicates ground water was encount-
ered at elevation 4.3 feet or approimately 20 feet below the surface elevation
of 24.0. feet. The location of this boring is very near the Eastern end of the
proposed hotel and approximately 400 feet Westerly of the Green River Chan-
nel. Borings no. 3 and 4 did not encounter the ground water level. These
facts have lead us to believe1at the ground water table is•not feeding the
Green River but in fact the Green River is feeding the ground water level.
This conclusion is further reinforced by the total lack of ground water
being encountered in any of the test pits.
In regard to the change in absorption rate we have elected to propose
_a high rise hotel that will allow more " Open Space" on site then would be
allowed if the hotel were to be limited to four stories. The proposed pro-
• •
ject will allow for 38.54 % of the gross site area to be left in " Open Space ".
These areas will be developed as landscaped area an thus the absorption rates
will be enhanced.
As for the 190,620 Sq. Ft. of paved area ( parking and drives) the coll-
ection of surface run -off and assocated pollutants will be collected in the
normal engineering manner and then channeled thru a series of engineered
structures to separate the various pollutants ie, oils, chemicals, part-
iculates and etc.
After the various separations have been completed the water, now re-
latively free of pollutants, will be handled in one of two manners. The
first option that will be explored, from an engineering. -stand point, is that
the collected surface waters will be recharged into one of the following;
directly into the Green River or thru a recharge perulation system into the
ground water aquifer. If both of the above recharge options prove to be
unaccessible then the second disposal manner will be engineered and is the
discharge of the run -off water thru a controlled release structure into the
city of Tukwila's existing storm drainage system.
4 & 5 Flora /Fauna
The natural botanical population on the site was destroyed some time
ago, though a few small remmants still exist at the Eastern end of the site
near the steep river embankment. Trees and shrubs are absent on the
balance of the site. However thro the landscaping to be developed on site
it is our intention to re- introduce to the site the trees and shrubs that were
native to the site. With this re- introduction of trees and shrubs it can be
expected that the habitat, lost some time ago, will be sufficient to attract
birds and the small animals species presently using the general area.
6 Noise
There will be an increse in both the temporary construction .noise and
to some degree long term increases in area background noise levels. The
temporary construction will be limited to the normal working hours and
controlled so as not to affect the normal day time activities in the general
area.
As to the long term affects of the added noise, it is our opinion that
few people will notice the additional noise generated by the additional ve-
hicle trips to and from the proposed hotel. A review of the Projected Trip
Generation Chart showes the total projected trip ends as 2,456 trips,
spread accross a time span of 19 to 20 hours, and by far the largest no.
occuring the normal acceptible hours. When the new trip ends are compar-
ed to the existing vehicle traffic in the area it can be seen that the increase
is only 2.19 %. With the fact that noise decibel readings are logarithmic.
the 2.19 % increase will not be detectible to the human ear. We feel that
the King County Parks Department must agreed with their statement --
"Anticipate No Significant influence of this project on adjacent Fort Dent
Park".
7 Light & Glare
The use of light reflecting building materials will be very much limited
so as to eliminate the un- wanted glare and reflections. The use of outdoor
lighting will be. Limited to the newer lighting fixtures that have the capability
of "Low Cut Off" and "Source Directing" so again, off site glare will be
none, but ample lighting will be available for security and safety.
12 Housing
There maybe some need for additional housing in the greater Tukwila
area because of the projectected 200 "New" employment opportunities.
• •
However at the present time a survey of two developers that own approximately
2,300 rental units around the greater Tukwila area showes a vacancy rate of
approximately 6.7 %. If the present economic condition continues the need for
additional housing units will not be required.
13 Transportation
The proposed hotel project will result in the .addition of 2,456 new trip ends
at the subject site. (See Projected Trip Generation Chart). However as can
be seen from the chart the hotels major traffic volumns occure at times other
then the peaks occuring on the adjacent roadways.
For more detailed analysis of intersections, peak hour volumes, freeway
ramp demands and freeway volumes please refer to area roadway drawing and
the following detailed analysis of the 17 locations of availible information.
OThe 1978 ADT at this location was 9,450 vehicles. When
factored ahead for 1982 the ADT will be 10,580 vehicles the hotel will add
235 ADT for an increase of 2.2 %.
The ,peak a.m. volume, 1978 was 790 vehicles-at 7:00a . m .
The 1982 peak will be 885 occuring at approximately 7:00 a.m. The hotel
will add 14 vehicles or 'a 1.5 % increase.
The p.m. peak-in 1978 was 1,340 occuring at 5 :00 p.m.
The 1982 factored volume will be 1500 vehicles, peaking at approximately
5:30 p.m. The hotel projections shows no added vehicles at this time.
The 1978 ADT at this location was 9,450 vehicles. The
projected 1982'ADT will be 10,580. The hotel projections will add 222 veh-
icles per day, an increse of 2.1 %.
The 'peak a.m. volume is projected as 1,400 vehicles
occuring at 7 :17 a.m. The hotel can be expected to add 18 additional veh-
icles, 1.2 %. of the peak.
The p.m. peak occuring at approximatley 5:15 p.m. can
be 'projected at 830 vehicles with an 'additional 6 autos generated by the hotel.
This is only 0.7 % of the peak total.
OThe 1978 actural count of ADT at this location was 18,600
vehicles. With the Washington State Department of Transporation's avg.
increase of 3 % per year the 1982 ADT is 20,830 plus the projected 457 ADT
assocated with the hotel for 'a 2. 1 % affect because of the proposed hotel.
The design capacity of this roadway is 86,400 ADT.
�Very little information could be found for Southcenter
Blvd. The ADT has been determined to be 3,400 in 1978. The hotel will
have little or no affect on this roadway in 1982 when the ADT is projected
at 3,800.
OThe West bound exit ramp from I 405 had an ADT of 5,610
in 1978. By 1982 this ramp will have an ADT of 6,280 with the addition of
356 ADT from the proposed hotel. (5.3 % increase ) the a.m. peak occures
at 7 :30 a.m. with 960 vehicles. The 1982 a.m. peak will still occure at
approximately 7:30 a.m. with approximately 1,075 vehicles plus 21 vehicles
assocated with the hotel. r The hotel increase is 1.9 % of the peak.
The p.m. peak occures at 3:45 p.m. and the 1978 ADT
was 340. The 1982 peak p.m. count will be approximately 380 vehicles. The
hotel will add 3.5 % or 14 vehicles at the p.m. peak.
The West bound entrance ramp to I 405 had an ADT in
1978 of 3,230. The 1982 projection is for 3,620 ADT with the hotel adding
409 vehicle trips, this amounts to an percentage of increase of 10 %. The
a.m. peak in 1978 occured at 11 :00 a.m. with 250 vehicles. The 1982 a.m.
peak can be assumed at 280 vehicles plus 23 additional from hotel operation.
•
2-D P% ►SIC T
02 The North bound traffic on S. R. 181, South of I 405, in 1978
was counted at 9,070 ADT. The 1982 projection is for 10,150 ADT. With the
hotel adding 246 ADT. 2.3 % increase because of the hotel project.
The a.m. peak, in 1978, was 760 vehicles at 7:OOa.m. When
projected for 1982 it is 850 vehicles plus 19 vehicles going to the hotel. ( 2.1 %)
The .p.m..peak occuring near 5:00 p.m. was 1,290 vehicles
in 1978. In 1982 1,445 vehicles are expected plus 7 vehicles :because of the hotel
(0.4 %0).
03 At this location in 1978 the ADT count in both North and South
bound directions was 21,800 ADT. The 1982 projection is for 24,420 ADT plus
485 trip because of the hotel. This is 1 .9 % of increase in volume because of the
hotel project.
14 The East bound traffic on I 405, East of the Interurban Inter-
change, was counted in 1978 as 38,000 ADT. The Washington State Department
of Transportation projections for 1982 are for 42,560 ADT. To this the hotel
will add 343 or 0.8 % increase by the hotel project.
The a.m. peak, in 1978, was 3000 vehicles occuring at 7:OOa.m.
for approximately 1 hour. The 1982 peak is projected to last for approximatley
1.5 hours even with the 20 additional vehicles from the hotel. (0.4 % increase )
The p.m..peak of 3,500 vehicles recorded in 1978, occured at
3:45 p.m. to 5 :15 p.m. the projections for •1982 is for the peak time to last from
3:30 to 6:00 p.m. during that time 7,500 vehicles can be expected to pass this
location. The hotel will add only 23 vehicles to this volume ( 0.3 % ).
15 The West bound traffic on I 405, East of the Interurban Inter-
change, in 1978 was counted at 40,200 ADT and projected for 1982 at 45,000 ADT.
The hotel can be expected to add 356 vehicles to this total count. This is appox.
0.7 % of the .total volume.
The a.m. peak of 3,500 vehicles in 1978 occured for appox.
1 .25 hours. The 1982 projections indicate the peaking time will last from 7:00
a.m. to 8:30 a.m. during this time the hotel will expect 21 vehicles to arrive
from the East or 0.04 % affect on the volume.
The p.m. peak, in 1978, was 3,550 vehicles and lasted from
4:30 to 5:30 p.m. The projections in 1982 indicate the peak time to be from
3:30 to 5 :30 p.m. and during this time span the hotel will add approximately only
14 vehicles. (0.2 % affect) .
16 Very little information is availible for this location (Monster
Road and Grady Way ). The 1978 ADT was 3,110 vehicles and projected for 3,490
ADT in 1982. We forsee little or no affect on this volume.
17 The proposed hotel project will have the biggest affect on this
600' of. roadway. (From Southcenter Blvd. South to the on ramp, off ramp of the
freeway and the North bound, South bound traffic on S. R. 181.)
In 1978 this section of roadway had an ADT of 22,000 vehicles
per day. The 1982 projections show this will increase to 24,640 ADt without the
hotel project. The hotel will add 7.5 % to this volume total. However this road-
way has a design capacity of 86,400 ADT. The 1982 projection with hotel volume
will use this roadway to 30 % of capacity.
The a.m. peak at this location is not availible , however the
peaking times and loadings will be very similar to that found North and South of
this location on S.R. 181 and the same is true for the p.m. peaks.
The North bound a.m..peak will be approximately 870 vehicles
with the hotel adding 64 vehicles or 6.8 % to the a.m. volume. The South bound
a.m. peak will be approximatley 1.535 with the hotel adding 57 vehicles or 3.5 %.
The North bound p.m. peak will be approximately 980 vehicles
and the hotel adding 3.6 % or 37 vehicles. The South bound p.m. peak will be
approximatley 1020 and the hotel adding 50 vehicles or 4.6 %.
From the above analysis it can be seen that the proposed hotel and it's pro-
jected traffic in 1982 will have little affect on the surrounding roadways and
A 7.5 % affect from the hotel.
The p.m. peak of 380 vehicles, in 1978, occured at 4 :15 p.m.
when projected for 1982, 425 vehicles can be expected plus 27 vehicles assocated
with the proposed hotel (5.9 % of peak volume) .
0 I 405 West bound, West of the Interurban Interchange, had an
ADT of 37,820 for both lanes. The 1982 projections show an ADT of 42,430 plus
409 ADT from the hotel project. The percentage of increase is 0.9 % .
The a.m. peak on this section of freeway occured, in 1978,
at 7:00 a.m. with a loading of 3,500 vehicles per hour . The peak loading lasted
for approximately 1% hours. The 1982 a.m. peak can be projected to last app -
roximately 2 hours the hotel will be adding 23 vehicles to the approximately
5,900 vehicles using the freeway during this a.m. peak. ( Approximately 0.3 %)
The p.m. peak in 1978 occured between 4 :30 p.m. and 5:30
p.m. with peak loading of 3,550 vehicles per hour. The 1982 p.m. peak can be
expected to last for approximately 2.5 hours and during that time pass appro;<i-
mately 8,750 vehicles. The hotel will add 27 vehicles to this total or approxi-
mately 0.3 % .
0 The East bound traffic on I 405, West of the Interurban Inter-
change, was avg. 37,470 ADT in 1978. The 1982 projections show the ADT to be
41,965 plus the addition of 402 vehicles because of the hotel. (0.9% )
The 1978 a.m..peak occured at 7:00 a.m. with 3,000 vehicles.
The 1982 projections indicate the a.m. peak will last approximately 1.5 hours and
have approximately 3,360 vehicles . The hotel will add 24 vehicles during this a.m.
peaktime. (0.7 % )
The p.m. peak, in 1978, occured from 3:45 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
and had 3,500 vehicles per hour. In 1982 the 'p.m. peak will last approximatley
2 hours and pass 6,000 vehicles. During this time the hotel will add 16 vehicles
or only 0.2 % of the volume.
The East bound exit ramp from I 405, in 1978, had an ADT of
4,810. When factored ahead for 1982 we expect the ADT to be 5,390. The hotel
will add 402 vehicles or approximately 6.9 %.
The a.m. peak in 1978 occured at 7:15 a.m. with 640 vehicles.
The 1982 a.m. peak can be expected to be 720 vehicles occuring at approximately
the same time. During the a.m. peak the hotel will add 24 additional vehicles
(approximately 3.2 % )
The p.m. peak, in 1978, was 350 vehicles at 4:OOp.m. In
1982 400 vehicles are expected at approximately the same time. The proposed
hotel will add 16 vehicles during the p.m. peak a 3.8 % increase in volume.
The •East bound entrance ramp to I 405 in 1978 had an ADT of
4,280. In 1982 the ADT is projected at 4,800 plus the addition of 343 vehicles
because of the hotel project. The percentage of increase because of the hotel
is 6.6 %.
The a.m. peak, in 1978, occured at 11 :00 a.m. with 210 vehicles.
The 1982 projections are for 235 vehicles plus 20 vehicles from the hotel devel-
opment.
The p.m. peak of a much higher volume was 810 vehicles occur -
ing at 4:00 p.m. in 1978. The projections for 1982 are 910 vehicles plus 23
vehicles from the hotel during the p.m. peak ( 2.4 % increase ).
NOTE: The volumes for locat ions 11 and 12 were collected
near the intersection of Strander Blvd. The turn -off
traffic to and from So. 158th St. was not considered.
11 The South bound traffic on S. R. 181 (West Valley Road) in
1978 was 11,250 ADT. In 1982 it is projected to be 12;600 ADT with the hotel
adding 239 ADT ( 1 .8 % increase ).
The a.m. peak, in 1978, was 1,490 vehicles at 7:00 a.m.
In 1982 it is projected at 1,670 vehicles plus 14 vehicles from the hotel. (0.8 %)
In 1978 the p.m. peak occuring at 4:00 p.m. was 990 vehicles
and increasing to 1,110 vehicles in 1982. The hotel is not expected to add any
vehicles during this p.m. peak time.
• •
freeway ramps. The affects that the hotel does have on roadways and freeway
ramps will occur mostly when they are not at peak volumes.
Of the 112,200 Avg. Daily Vehicle Trips thro the I 405/ Interurban crossing,
only 2,452 vehicle trip ends are the result of the hotel project and then only if all
of the hotel accessory functions are in full use at the same time. Rarely will that
kind of intence useage be found.
The percentage of hotel trip ends to total vehicle volume in the area on a
daily bases is 2.19 %.
The percentage of hotel vehicles using roadways at peak times to projected
1982 vehicles using roadways at peak times is only 0.61 %.
14. Public Services
We feel that thru the use on new and advanced security systems and fire sens-
ing systems the demand for additional or new fire or police governmental services
will be mitigated.
15 and 16 Engergy/ Utilities
The building has been designed with very high thermal resistance valuse for
walls and roof area. In addition, consideration is being given to a solar collection
system to supply the hot water heating required for the proposed hotel and swim-
ming pool. The developer is also reviewing the economics of other energy saving
devices and energy sources for incorporation into the proposed hotel structure.
20 Archeological / Histroical
As can be seen from the enclosed soils report the subject site, has been filled
to depths ranging from 5 feet to 16 feet. There for any significant artifacts that
may exist are deeply buried.