Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E99-0005 - QUIK PARK - OFF-AIRPORT PARKING FACILITYQUIK PARK OF WASHINGTON OFF -AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY 15820 PACIFIC HIGHWAY S. E99-0005 :14 1110111114111„, s1.111,'1',111 B -twelve Associates, Inc. SRO — Quick Park Buffer Enhancement Monitoring Report City of Tukwila, WA. Prepared For: Mike Lancaster Sterling Realty Organization P.O. Box 91723 Bellevue, Washington 98009-1723 December 29, 2003 Job# A0-177 B -twelve Associates, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker Street, Suite C Kent WA 98032 Phone: 253-859-0515 Fax: 253-852-4732 '0104klllll oi, B -twelve Associates. Inc. SRO - Quick Park Buffer Enhancement Monitoring Report City of Tukwila, WA. Prepared For: Mike Lancaster Sterling Realty Organization P.O. Box 91723 Bellevue, Washington 98009-1723 December 29, 2003 Job# A0-177 B -twelve Associates, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker Street, Suite C Kent WA 98032 Phone: 253-859-0515 Fax: 253-852-4732 B -twelve Associates, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker St. Kent, WA 98032-5751 (v) 253-859-0515 (f) 253-852-4732 (e) info@b12assoc.com SRO — Quick Park Buffer Enhancement Monitoring Report 2003 1.0 BUFFER MITIGATION CONCEPT AND GOALS 1.1 Mitigation Concept SRO Quick Park was developed adjacent to a small stream and wetland complex that lies along the western edge of the project. The stream is a Type 3 waterway, requiring a 15 - foot buffer under the City of Tukwila Code Title 18.45.040. A small Type 3 wetland lies along the western side of the stream near the central western edge of the project parking lot. Approximately 160 lineal feet of buffer was reduced to a minimum of 15 -feet per Tukwila Code 18.45.040.40. Approximately 1273 square feet of buffer was reduced. Where the buffer is less than 25 -feet, the buffer was enhanced as required by the above Code section; therefore approximately 4,637 square feet of buffer was enhanced. 1.2 Mitigation Goals Goals of the mitigation plan are as follows: • To enhance approximately 4,637 square feet of buffer with a diverse mix of native trees and shrubs. • To enhance the wildlife function of the buffer area through native plantings. • To protect water quality in the wetland, stream, and buffer areas by treating storm water from the new impervious surfaces of the project outside the buffers. • To ensure success of the project by monitoring the enhanced buffer area for a period of three years after installation. • To protect the mitigation area by setting aside the area in a perpetual sensitive area easement and installing sensitive area signage along the buffer at approximately 50 -foot spacing. • To protect the entire area of sensitive area by providing fencing along the western edge of the project (eastern edge of the sensitive area). 2.0 INTORDUCITON Although the success and final outcome of wetland mitigation, restoration and enhancement projects is never guaranteed, certain procedures can be utilized to increase the probability of success. One of the most important procedures for success following Re: SRO Quick Park Mitigation Area Year 1 Monitoring Report B -twelve Job #98-193 December 29, 2003 Page 2 of 4 proper design and installation is the establishment of a monitoring plan to track changes and developments within the system. Monitoring provides the opportunity to evaluate the success of planted material within the system and observe early establishment of pioneer and volunteer species. By observing the success of planted and volunteer species during the first three years of the project, it may be possible to speculate on the successional pathway taken, and general success of the project. The restored buffer area will be monitored three times over a three-year period. Monitoring will be conducted in Years 1, 2 and 3 of the monitoring period. Monitoring will be conducted using the techniques and procedure described below to quantify the survival, relative health and growth of plant material as well as the successful restoration of an area meeting buffer vegetation criteria. A monitoring report submitted at the end of each monitoring year will describe and quantify the status of the mitigation area at that time. 3.0 SAMPLING METHODS 3.1 Vegetation The vegetation monitoring will consist of inspection of the planted material to determine the health and vigor of the installation. All the planted material in the mitigation area will be inspected during each monitoring visit to determine the level of survival of the installation. 3.2 Wildlife Visual observations of all wildlife species noted during the monitoring will be recorded. 4.0 STANDARDS OF SUCCESS • Evaluation of the success of the mitigation project will be based upon the following survival rates for all planted woody vegetation at the end of each monitoring year. Year 1 — 100% survival Year 2 — 90% survival Year 3 — 80% survival • The buffer mitigation project will enhance 4,637 square feet of buffer. • Volunteer native, non-invasive species will be included as acceptable components of the mitigation. Re: SRO Quick Park Mitigation Area Year 1 Monitoring Report B -twelve Job #98-193 December 29, 2003 Page 3 of 4 • Success of the mitigation within the buffer will be determined by 80% survival of the planted material and 80%, or greater, ground cover of herbaceous vegetation at the end of Year 3. 5.0 OBSERVATIONS 5.1 Vegetation The monitoring site visit was conducted by Susan Burgemeister and Aaron Will of B -twelve Associates on December 17, 2003. A'few plants during the first year were replanted due to extraordinarily dry summer. Table 1 depicts the survival conditions at the end of the Year 1 monitoring period. The Standards of Success require 100 percent survival at the end of the Year 1 monitoring period. All dead or missing plants from the mitigation area should be replanted, please see last column of Table 1 for the number of each species to be installed. (See Exhibit A for planting details.) The majority of surviving plants appeared to be very healthy. Table 1 SRO — Quick Park Mitisation: Year 1 December 17 2003 Species # Installed # Dead # Alive % Survival # To Be Installed Trees Douglas Fir 5 1 4 80.0% 1 Western Red Cedar 6 0 6 100.0% 0 Shrubs Red -osier Dogwood 32 7 25 78.1% 7 Black Hawthorn 19 2 17 89.5% 2 Black Twinberry 24 3 .21 87.5% 3 Indian Plum 11 6 5 45.5% 6 Red -flowering Currant 31 13 18 58.1% 13 Nootka rose 37 19 18 48.6% 19 Oceanspray 5 5 0 0.0% 5 Sitka Willow 5 0 5 100.0% 0 Evergreen Huckleberry 14 0 14 100.0% 0 189 56 133 70.4% 56 * All newly installed plants should be flagged with pink, orange or blue flagging 5.2 Wildlife Songbirds were present at the time of our site visit. Re: SRO Quick Park Mitigation Area Year 1 Monitoring Report B -twelve Job #98-193 December 29, 2003 Page 4 of 4 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Due to the high mortality of the Evergreen huckleberry, we have suggested replanting with a 50/50 mix of nootka rose and red flowering currant. Since the revised planting list represents this, no huckleberry mortality is shown. We have also requested substitution of 5 dogwood stakes for the dead willow stakes, an addition of ten dogwood stakes total. Plants to be installed should be planted per the mitigation plan with respect to the locations depicted on Exhibit A. All newly installed plants should be flagged with pink, orange or blue flagging. Blackberry should be removed by hand from the mitigation area per the mitigation plan. 7.0 CONCLUSION We believe that with the completion of the above described measures the SRO Quick Park Mitigation Area meets the Year 1 monitoring requirements. Our next monitoring will be November 2004. If you have any questions or need any additional information please contact me or Susan Burgemeister in my absence at 253.859.0515, or by e-mail aaron@b12assoc.com Sincerely, B -twelve Associates Inc. Aaron Will Assistant Wetland Scientist File: aw/A0-177 SRO Quick Park mon.doc /S'e: Susan L. Burgemeister President Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director March 29, 2001 Ms. Annabelle Powers 16442 51st Avenue South Tukwila, Washington 98188-3205 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) Dear Ms. Powers: Thank you for your letter dated March 19, 2001. As you know, this project has been under review by the City since its original submittal to us on February 23, 1999. The applicant's proposal for a 1,063 space park -n -fly lot is an outright permitted use in the Regional Commercial zoning district in which it is located. The City of Tukwila is aware that the Port of Seattle is contemplating construction of a rental car terminal in the vicinity of South 160th Street, west of Tukwila International Boulevard. However (to date) the Port has not provided traffic impact information for this potential project. The City of Tukwila does not have the ability to require Quik Park to develop this information. On September 7, 1999 the City Council approved the applicant's request to vacate and realign South 158th Street. The design of the street realignment meets all City standards. Based on the City's review of the Perteet Engineering Traffic Report and our communications with the City of SeaTac, it was determined that the Quik Park project would not generate any significant traffic impacts to streets or intersections in the vicinity. As you may know, South 160th is located entirely in the City, of SeaTac. Neither the City of SeaTac nor the City of Tukwila will require the applicant to construct a sidewalk beyond the project boundaries. All surface water from the parking lot will be directed to catchment basins in the parking lot, channeling water to underground vaults for detention and treatment. Curbing will prevent sheet flow from the parking lot to Gilliam Creek. Surface water residing in these 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Ms. Annabelle Powers March 29, 2001 Page 2 detention vaults must meet certain city and state standards before being released to Gilliam Creek. The City of Tukwila determined that the Quik Park project would not create any significant adverse environmental impacts. Accordingly, a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance was issued for this project on January 17, 2001. Design Review approval of the project was granted by the Board of Architectural Review during a public hearing on February 22, 2001. The 21 -day period for appeal of the Board's decision expired on March 16, 2001. The Quik Park site is not part of Sound Transit's plans for light rail. Their current plan is to acquire the Ajax Park -N -Fly facility north of SR -518, and to utilize it as a park and ride facility and Tight rail station. I hope this provides the information you need. If not, please feel free to call me at 206- 431-3670. Sincerely, Steve Lancaster Director, Community Development RECEIVE MAR 202Bi COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Steve Lancaster Responsible Official — SEPA Compliance City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188-2544 Re: (_) Annabelle Powers 16442 51st Ave. S. Tukwila, WA 98188-3205 March 19, 2001 Quick Parks of Washington, LLC Proposed 1,063 Stall Parking Lot, Vicinity 158th/'+/liiitary'Rd: SEPA Concerns — Unaddressed Dear Mr. Lancaster: A few of us local residents who use S. 160th Street to gain access to the regional arterial network have been reviewing the documents attendant to the above referenced parking facility. Among these is the traffic study by Perteet Engineering and also some of the City .Council Public Hearing Minutes. With respect to the traffic study we have noted that there is no discussion concerning the proposed 6 -story parking arage by the Port of Seattle directly across SR -99 which also gains access at South 160 Street. Since this very large facility has not been covered in the traffic study, relied upon by City Council when making their decision to grant a street vacation of S. 158t' -Street, is it prudent to grant a Certificate of Compliance at this time? Would not such a certificate be premature given the full environmental impacts that will be developed by this project and the Port's parking garage which have not been frilly disclosed and examined? Next, when looking at the Council Agenda Synopsis of 9/7/99, page 19, it will be seen that the new right-of-way forms a right angle at S. 158th- Street immediately west of the Sunnydale Apartments. This, in turn, will produce a 90 -degree bend at the western driveway of the apartmentsalong with inadequate entering sight distance. This also is a traffic hazard not discussed in the traffic study. To continue, at the 90 -degree bend formed by the relocated S. 158th Street at its original location apposite the Laurel Estates it will be recognized that the new roadway starts off with about a negative 7'percent grade which then becomes a 3 percent grade as it approaches this right angle bend to the bottom of the side -hill. What are the traffic hazard issues under snow, ice and wet road conditions when such an adverse grade takes a very quick right angle bend? Will there be an increase in "single -vehicle -ran -off-road" /U/ -7-11i4/ )/ iVi.cv Consolidated Renta! Car Terminal yss3 ....,-."7"7--,,,,,,..• A WI �jr�tila T 1 r- r ,�a�rrraraai� 11f`� _ �S' J a i. -1'rT1 Lr t l'.�l'} S fT'I'(=T -1�1-{4-'1:1..1--r--kl--r$' c2: 116 iQu'illb il ter ,lit„„ =MI gialorm:11 III .IU�ll I r� 1r n. 11 rii r- fru .41 -._. Facilities and Operations Second Floor Operations February 28, 2001 • DA CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Project Name: Quick Park File #: Ord. 1878 E99-0005 199-0010 L99-0064 L2000-033 Date: 02.05.01 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosq Street Vacation SEPA Design Review Signage Wetland Buffer Reduction The following lists events that must occur to complete the street vacation. Projects/street vacation/3.40.53 S 158th St 1 Status/Comment Reference Action 1 Dedicate church property to SRO or City so street can be built. Need Statutory Warranty deed and Excise Tax forms 2 Ord. 1878 Relocate utilities or easement under the permit for the new S 158th St 2 Ord. 1878 Design and construct relocation of S 158th St. under the "MI" permit 3 Turnover documents for new S 158th St 3 Ord. 1878 Dedicate new S 158th St to City Need Statutory Warranty Deed and Excise Tax forms. Can be part of the turnover documents. 3 Ord. 1878 SRO owes the City compensation $147,500 (1/2 of $295,000) SRO pays when dedicates. I Completed Ord. 1878 Sterling get consensus I Completed Ord. 1878 Independent appraisal .NI Completed Ord. 1878 Present street location, X -section to Council Ord. 1878 Complete vacation. by recording turnover docs, excise tax forms, warranty deeds and ordinance Projects/street vacation/3.40.53 S 158th St 1 State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX (206) 431-3665 E-mail: tukplan(ci.tukwila.wa.us AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S) RECEIVED FEB 02 2001 DEVELOP ENT I C.Mici-tAct_ A ippeg3 6ACt! (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on JkN I g t 7-60 1 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and the other ap Iicable guidelines were posted on the property located at 36,10 SOvvi-11 5g 41\ so as to be clearly seen from each right-of-way primary vehicular access to the property for application file number ` ` COO . I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in a timely manner or within fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter. char Applicant or Project Mana• a 's Signature On this day personally appeared before me C. M(G-(?-EL A -i ;Pr j3A-c4( to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of ` J / .\ c, N . Ai 0 %, 0, ,,i s..u.o.•,.. 1 , „,,, 0 • • NOTARY PUBLIC in and fsr the State of Washington . c,`OTi AA o *e 1 0 POBL�G oti ? —A.. 98ER ?5: C? O ##:IiiOF WAS\k,o.° e eeeeeooueoo.. residing at Se14 TCL My commission expires on 2o2 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: • Notice of Public Hearing `/ Determination of Non -Significance Project Name: Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: E7? -1005 Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Mailer's Signature: ( C24 -- Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Person requesting mailing : Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __FAX To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this /? day of year 20 0 / in the P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVITLMAIL 08/29/003:31 PM • Project Name: Project Number: E7? -1005 Mailer's Signature: ( C24 -- Person requesting mailing : 4qei- P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVITLMAIL 08/29/003:31 PM • CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS WI r FEDERAL AGENCIES XU.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS () FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION () DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. `DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. () DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV j,tOEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION- ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL ' SEND CHKUSTW/ DETERMINATIONS SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT#2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSORS OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT&T CABLE SERVICES SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( ) POLICE ( ) FINANCE ( ) PLANNING ( ) BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK () HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES-SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBLIC LIBRARY () HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT () OLYMPIC PIPELINE OVAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER OISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR-LAKERIDGE SEWER1WATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT 'CITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS () CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' ' NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES () PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL ( ) DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES f achQa1 rt‘t- o �- .e‘ d? 7/21 /00 P:\wynettaforms\FORMS\CHKLIST.doc 'CITY OF TUKWILA' DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE,(DNS) DESCRIPTION OFyPROPOSALI DEVELOP ,1,063 PARKING SPACE:PARK AND;FLY LOT ON SEVEN VACANT PARCELS BOUNDARY;1_INE ADJUSTMENT AND LOT' CONSOLIDATION TO'OCCUR-PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING-PERMITSDESIGN REVIEW ALSO REQUIRED.-,., PROPONENT: STERLING RECREATION LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING ,STREET 'ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS:.- 3610 S 158 SF PARCEL NO: 222304-9027 SEC/TWN/RNG: SW 22/23/4 LEAD AGENCY.;: CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E99-0005 The City has, determined that the proposal does;rioC`have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Ari' eriv i ronmenta l impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW-43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision' was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead/ agency., This information is available to the public ori request. ************************************************************************* This determination i f ina l -:and _signed this .,�;`_ � day of _aAn1�A 2001.. . Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila, (206) 431-3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. • ADDITIONAL ADDRESSES FOR QUIK PARK PUBLIC NOTICE Ms. Katie Carlson Commercial Development Port of Seattle Sea -Tac Main Terminal Room 6432 PO Box 68727 Seattle, WA 98168 Mr. Mickey Vergillo President Extra Car Rentals & Parking 14120 Pacific Highway South Tukwila, WA 98168 Ms. Diane DeMeerleer 4024 South 158th Street #F Seattle, WA 98188 Ms. Linda Bennett 3767 South 158th Seattle, WA 98188 Ms. Pam Sanders 4004 South 158th, Apt. B Seattle, WA 98188 Diane & Robert Berrojo 3810 South 158th, Unit A-1 Seattle, WA 98188 Holly Anderson Senior Planner Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of SeaTac 17900 International Blvd., Suite 401 SeaTac, WA 98188-4236 Jed Goniu Master Park 18220 International Blvd. South SeaTac, WA 98188 • Es,Zffe,c()_ CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS Wir). FEDERAL AGENCIES >U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS () FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE () U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY () U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES ( ) OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ( ) DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. `DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELAND DIV >tDEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION' ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL SEND CHKLISTW/ DETERMINATIONS SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) FIRE DISTRICT #11 ( ) FIRE DISTRICT#2 ( ) K.C. WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIVISION ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS & REC ( ) K.C. ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ( ) TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) QWEST ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) PUGET SOUND ENERGY ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) AT&T CABLE SERVICES SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES UTILITIES CITY AGENCIES ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPT ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( ) POLICE ( ) FINANCE ( ) PLANNING ( ) BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. () MAYOR ( ) CITY CLERK ( ) HEALTH DEPT () PORT OF SEATTLE (K.C. DEV & ENVIR SERVICES-SEPA INFO CNTR K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL ( ) K.C. LAND & WATER RESOURCES ( ) FOSTER LIBRARY ( ) K C PUBUC LIBRARY ( ) HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT c�> ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE ( ) VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 ( ) CITY.OF, RENTON PUBLIC WORKS ( ) BRYN MAWR-LAKERIOGE SEWERIWATER DISTRICT ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPT ITY OF SEA -TAC ( ) CITY OF BURIEN ( ) TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ( ) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU ( ) STRATEGIC PLANNING OFFICE' ' NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL ( ) SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ( ) MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE MEDIA ( ) SEATTLE TIMES ( ) SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL AVaC c 7/21 /00 P:\wynettaforms\FORMS\CHKLIST.doc () DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE () P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES auxA CQ PUBLIC NOTICE MAILINGS FOR PERMITS SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send these documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit..must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The notice of Application for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the notice of application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date received by DOE) Department of Ecology Shorelands Section State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send these documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) — Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) 08/14/00 P:\PUBLIC NOTICE ?LALLINGS FOR PERMITS.doc JAN -10-2001 11:37 AM AI—RSBACH & ASSOC 206040337 MEMORANDUM To: Deb Ritter, Planner (206-431-3663/fax: 206-431-3662) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Quik Park Project (Off -Airport Parking Fadlity) 3610 South 158th Street L99.0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99.0064 (Special Permission - Sign) L2000-033 (Spedal Permission - Buffer reduction) Date: 1-10-2001/Wednesday Via Fax: (206) 431-3665 Re: Remaining Submitttal Items Deb, just a status update on the forthcoming documents per your request for the City's review. It looks as if I will have everything you have requested to date by this Friday. Just to confum that I have everything, please review the following list of items I will be providing to you: • 1 copy of corrected page 9, Revised Attachment A • 1 copy of corrected page 10, Revised Attachment A • 4 colored copies of freestanding sign • 3 copies of East-West Cross-sections (a north and a south cut), Sheet • 3 copies of revised landscaping plans, Sheet L-4 (adding a slope planting detail) If I've missed or misunderstood something, you can reach me at (206) 523-3764, e-mail me at aipp@prodigy.net or fax me at (206) 524-0337. Thanks, Deb! dprojectatrepublddeagnrev.dak:rittmelodoe Michael Aippersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 P.01 • Citj/ Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster Director To: Steve Lancaster From: Deborah Ritter -- Date: January 10, 2001 Re: MEMORANDUM E99-0005 (SEPA Determination) Quik Park 3610 South 158th, Tukwila Project Description: This SEPA review is for a twenty-four hour, off -airport parking lot containing 1,063 parking spaces. The proposed improvements include a 1,120 s.f. one-story office building, a 1,875 s.f. ticket canopy with ticket booth and gate lanes and a 750 s.f. maintenance structure. The project is 9.51 acres in size and is located east of Old Military Road (directly behind the Lewis & Clark Theater) and north of South 160th. South 158th Street will be vacated and relocated to run along the perimeter of the lot, just north of the Fellowship Bible Church of Riverton Heights. Several comment letters have been provided to us over the past year. In general, they have focused on the areas of traffic volumes, noise, light, glare and buffering. Staff has reviewed these comments and concluded that these issues can and will be addressed via the design review and street vacation process and well as our noise ordinance. Agencies with Jurisdiction: None. Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth The site contains Class 2 sensitive areas (primarily concentrated in the northwestern and southern portions of the project) sloping from 15% to 40% with moderate landslide potential. The site topography has a 60 feet elevation 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206-431-3670 0 Fax: 206-431-3665 E99-0005 Quik Park January 10, 2001 Page 2 • • change as it slopes downward from south to north. Soils are Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in this area with moderate erosion hazard. Approximately 25,000 cubic yards of fill material will be needed. An erosion control plan will be employed during construction. • Air Dust and exhaust emissions will be generated during construction, with watering as necessary to control dust. • Water The project requires surface water treatment which has been approved by the Public Works Department and designed to King County Surface Water Design Manual standards. At project completion, approximately 90% of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces. Gilliam Creek (a Type 3 watercourse corridor) is located outside the project's western perimeter. This type of watercourse requires a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. An associated wetland in this Creek's corridor has a Type 3 rating, requiring a standard buffer setback of 25 feet. The applicant has submitted a buffer enhancement plan for the wetland as part of a request to reduce the buffer to 15 feet. This has been reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. Project stormwater will be detained and discharged to this creek, subject to satisfaction of "HPA" (Hydraulic Project Approval, Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife) water quality and erosion control requirements. A small forested area (approximately 1,500 square feet in size) is located in the northeastern portion of the site. Although it was originally thought to be a wetland, it does not meet Federal or City wetland criteria due to a lack of hydric soils. A Wetland Analysis Report prepared by B -twelve Associates (dated November 7, 2000) documents these findings. An isolated Type 3 palustrine scrub/shrub wetland (approximately 180 square feet in size) is located in the southwestern portion of the site. This wetland is documented by a Wetland Analysis Report prepared by B -twelve Associates, dated November 7, 2000. Due to the wetland's size, isolation and low value rating, the Director of Community Development will allow it to be altered without compensatory mitigation under TMC 18.45.080(C). E99-0005 Quik Park January 10, 2001 Page 3 • Plants • • . Site vegetation consists of weeds, shrubs, blackberry bushes and scattered trees to 3 feet in diameter. A tree clearing permit will be required for removal of any tree (of 4 inches in diameter at breast height) located in a sensitive area (slopes that have gradients of 20% or greater). A tree clearing permit will not be required for those sensitive areas located in City -approved rights-of-way and easements. Animals No endangered or threatened wildlife species have been identified at the site. Energy/Natural Resources Electrical, primarily for parking lot lighting. Environmental Health Noise generated by heavy equipment will occur during construction. The hours of construction will comply with the City's noise ordinance. Upon project completion, no loudspeaker system will be employed at this site. At project completion, traffic will be generated to and from the site, at varying levels, 24 -hours per day. To mitigate the impacts created by the parking lot and associated traffic the following have been proposed: 1) a 30 -foot wide landscaped buffer and solid wood fence will be created adjoining the Laurel Estate Condominiums to the east; 2) cedar trees will be planted along the east boundary of the site adjoining Sunnydale Apartments; and 3) a landscape buffer will be created along a portion of the church property to the south. • Land/Shoreline Use The project is located in the Regional Commercial zone (RC). Properties to the west are also zoned RC. The properties to the east are zoned High Density Residential (HDR) and properties to the south are zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). State Route 518 borders the site to the north. The SeaTac City limits are at South 160th. E99-0005 Quik Park January 10, 2001 Page 4 Housing N/A Aesthetics A design review permit is required and will be reviewed by the Planning Commission during a public hearing. In additional to standard design review criteria, the following mitigation will be provided: 1) a 30 -foot wide landscaped buffer and solid wood fence will be created adjoining the Laurel Estate Condominiums to the east; 2) cedar trees will be planted along the east boundary of the site adjoining Sunnydale Apartments; and 3) a landscape buffer will be created along a portion of the church property to the south. • Light and Glare • • The exterior lighting for the project will include cut-off features and other measures aimed at minimizing light and glare impacts to the adjoining properties. The development plan proposes a one -foot candle lighting level for the parking area. Recreation N/A Historic and Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks. Transportation There will be no significant traffic impacts to streets and intersections in the vicinity. The project proposal requires the vacation and realignment of South 158th. This vacation and realignment has been approved by the City Council. The project will be accessed from Old Military Road (north of South 160th). The site is served by Metro transit with additional Metro routes on International Boulevard South. E99-0005 Quik Park January 10, 2001 Page 5 • • • Public Services No significant increase in public services is expected. • Utilities Electricity, natural gas, water and sanitary sewer services are available to the site. Recommendation: Determination of Non -Significance. • Cizy of Tukwila • Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Deborah Ritter, Associate Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: December 11, 2000 RE: Quik Park #E99-0005, #L99-0010 — Sensitive Areas Technical Review. This memo is a review of recently submitted wetland information provided by B -twelve Associates, Inc. (SRO/Republic Parking -Quick Park, Wetland Analysis Report 11/7/00). As requested, the report addresses corrections and revisions concerning sensitive areas on the project site. Also included is a revised wetland buffer enhancement plan that has been slightly adjusted to reflect changes to the wetland boundary within the watercourse corridor. This buffer enhancement plan supports the request to approve limited buffer reduction adjacent to the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek). The buffer enhancement plan, date-stamped Received 11/8/00 has now been reviewed. This memo is recommending approval of the wetland analysis and buffer enhancement plan as submitted by B -twelve Associates. Related changes to the site plan set will also need to be confirmed based on recommended sensitive area mapping and labeling. The comments listed below are minor but a part of my review. Wetland Areas The small treed area on the northeast side of the site was re -reviewed by B -twelve Associates. They had previously concluded this area does not have wetland hydric soils and it is assumed the wetland hydrology criteria would not be present. This is now referred to as `B -twelve area of concern #1" in their 11/7/00 Wetland Analysis Report. As previously stated and for better clarification, this area's soil profiles and conditions indicate the area has some seasonal drainage and is a marginal situation. Contrary to information included in the B -twelve Wetland Analysis, the GeoEngineers' site investigation (Republic Parking report 12/20/00) documented shallow groundwater in many of the test pits (Groundwater - page 3). In particular Test Pit — 6, located upslope of the "area of concern", noted moderate ground water seepage at depths of 4 to 5 feet. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Quik Park Memo December 11, 2000 Page 2 Seasonal hydrology in the form of seepage and ponding may be observed in the questioned area. However, the wetland determination criteria for hydric soil is not met because the indicators that are present are at depths just below the minimum of 10 inches. Wetland Buffer Enhancement Plan The Buffer Enhancement Plan date-stamped 11/8/00 has been reviewed and appears very complete. The only comment is to remove language under 4.1 Maintenance Work Scope that refers to barn removal in the mitigation buffer area. After the Design Review Hearing and an approved site plan, the Buffer Enhancement Plan will be revised and include the Mitigation Performance amount with a factor of 150 percent to insure its completion and success. Cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Tukwila A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: Sterling Realty Organization (SRO) PROPONENT'S NAME: Quik Park of Washington LLC. CONTACT PERSON'S NAME: Michael Aippersbach CONTACT PERSON'S ADDRESS: PO Box 95429, Seattle WA 98145 CONTACT PERSON'S PHONE: (206) 523-3764 PROPOSAL TITLE: Off -Airport Parking Facility and S. 158th Street Relocation. PROPOSAL LOCATION: The location for the proposed off -airport parking facility is north of S. 160th Street and essentially east of Old Military Road. The proposed project area currently straddles the existing S. 158th Street. (The proposed project is immediately east of the Lewis & Clark Theater at 15820 Pacific Highway South.) The existing configuration of S. 158th Street will be modified so that the proposed new alignment is just north of the Fellowship Bible Church of Riverton Heights. Please attach an 8-1/2" x 11" vicinity map which accurately locates the proposal site so that it can easily be identified in the field. GIVE AN ACCURATE, BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL'S SCOPE AND NATURE: A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Construction of approximately 1,063 stall parking lot which in addition includes several small structures. The proposed structures include: (1) a one-story office building (approximately 1,120 s.f.); (2) a ticket canopy (approximately 1,875 sf. in area and approximately 18 feet in height) with a ticket booth and lane gates; and (3) one maintenance structure (a two -bay structure, with apx: 750 s.f.) for maintaining approximately (8-10) passenger vans (buses). In addition the proposed site development will include the installation of a 2,000 gallon propane tank. The parking area will be lighted and the facility will be operating 24 -hours per day. The site perimeter will be fenced with both an 8 -foot high chain-link fence (possibly with strands of barbed wire at the top) and a wood fence for a portion of the perimeter that adjoins the Laurel Estates (condominium) development. Another component of the on-site security system includes the use of cameras and monitors. Signage for the development will include a wall sign attached to the canopy mono CITY OF TUKWILA DEC - 8 2000 PERMIT CENTER • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 of the entry structure and a freestanding sign near the entry (northwest corner of S. 160th Street and Old Military Road).. B. ACREAGE OF SITE: 9.51 acres C. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. D. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/DWELLINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: None. E. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. F. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: There are three separate structures to be located on the site: (A) an ingress/egress canopy (approximately 1,875 sf.., 18 feet in height; and approximately 75' x 25') covering one ticket booth (approximately 6' x 8') and five lanes with moveable gates; (B) a one story, pre fabricated structure (approximately 1,120 s f., 16' x 70') containing two (2) administrative offices; a storage area, a lunch room, a restroom, and a coffee bar; and (C) a one-story metal maintenance structure (approximately 750 sf. in area, 15 foot, 6 -inches high, 25' x 30') with two repair bays to service the shuttle vans (buses). One of the service bays may occasionally serve as an area to wash the passenger vans. The location of two structures will be at the western end of the site at the ingress/egress point to the site at Old Military Road and the re -aligned S. 158th Street. The other will be located north of the entry canopy and office area approximately 400 feet. G. QUANTITY OF EARTH MOVEMENT (in cubic yards): Approximately 20,800 CY cut; 45,200 CY fill. H. PROPOSED LAND USE: An Off -Airport Parking Facility. DESIGN FEATURES, INCLUDING BUILDING HEIGHT, NUMBER OF STORIES & PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS: All three structures are one story (up to eighteen feet in height for the 5 -lane ingress/egress canopy with ticket booth), approximately 9 feet in height for the office structure, and approximately 16 feet in height for the maintenance building. The office building will be clad in wood siding with flat roof, the ingress/egress-canopy will be of enameled metal, and the ;The proposed project will also include a 2,000 gallon propane tank; an asphalt parking surface; an exterior fence; exterior lighting; and video surveillance equipment. J. OTHER: None. Page 2 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 ESTIMATED DATE OF COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSAL OR TIMING OF PHASING: Spring/Summer 2001. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, please explain. Not at this time. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal? Site survey and Topographic analysis Traffic Analysis (attached) Building Plans (site plan and floor plans) Landscape plan Building Elevations Wetlands Analyses Report (attached) Water Quality report for the Gilliam Creek watercourse (attached) Civil engineering analysis Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, please explain. List dates applied for and file numbers, if known. None known. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. If permits have been applied for, list application date and file numbers, if known. Design Review.Approval, Clear and grade permit, Building permit, Fire Department permit(for propane tank), Electrical permits, Plumbing permits, and Sign permit, Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) PLEASE PROVIDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS, IF APPLICABLE TO YOUR PROPOSAL (PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX[ES] FOR EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL): [ ] LAND USE RECLASSIFICATION (REZONE) map of existing and proposed zoning. [ ] PRELIMINARY PLAT (AND/OR P.R.U.D OR P.U.D.) Preliminary plat map. [X] CLEARING & GRADING PERMIT Plan of existing and proposed grading. Development plans. [X] BUILDING PERMIT (OR DESIGN REVIEW) Site plan, Clearing &•grading plan. Page 3 • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 [) SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT Site plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General descri,tion of the site (circle one): flat rollij hill steep s o . '., mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? There are several areas of the site with slopes in excess of 40 percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Soil Survey of King County Area Washington identifies an Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in this area. The hardpan layer for this soil is usually located 20 to 40 inches below the surface. The permeability is moderate (2.0 to 6.0 inches per hour) and erosion hazard is also considered moderate for this soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not known at this time. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate sources of fill. 25,060 CY f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, in some areas of the site during construction. However, erosion and sedimentation control measures will be required by the City and the approved TGSCP will be accomplished during the construction period. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 84 percent. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: g. Page 4 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 The proposed project will use best management practice methodology as required by the City to minimize erosion and sedimentation in accordance with the approved TGSCP. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. auto and van emissions b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None proposed. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If so, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. A watercourse (Gilliam Creek) is located on the perimeter of the proposed site (west side). The watercourse is fed from flows which originate largely in the City of SeaTac, from development at the northeast corner of Pacific Highway South and S. 160th Street, and possibly north and west from airport area and a part of Pacific Highway South which then flow into Gilliam Creek. See Drainage Plan. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. The edge of the proposed development will be a minimum of 15 feet from the wetted perimeter of the watercourse. However, the watercourse noted is not included in the City's Shoreline Master Page 5 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 Program. Grading for site improvements will slope away from the water course. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not anticipated at this time. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. None required. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, wastewater will be discharged to a sanitary sewer (Valvue Sewer District) . b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn nor discharged to ground water. Stormwater will be detained and discharged to the existing drainage corridor parallel to SR 518 (Gilliam Creek) adjoining the site. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial containing the following chemicals ...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged via septic system. Sanitary sewer expected to serve approximately 6-8 employees per shift. See utility plan. Page 6 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater runoff from the proposed parking area and roofs of the building(s) will be collected through a conveyance system consisting of pipes and catch basins to a detention facility. The underground detention facility is proposed to be located behind the retaining wall on the north side of the property along SR 518. The outfall of this system will be to the existing drainage corridor (Gilliam Creek). The system of conveyance will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements for the protection of the Gilliam Creek corridor. See Preliminary Drainage Plan. The discharge of the stormwater to the Gilliam Creek corridor will require a HPA permit from the State's Fish and Wildlife Department. NOTE: Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a separate conveyance system and linked to the existing drainage system for the streets. The runoff will be detained and then conveyed to a catch basin and from there to the existing street drainage system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The proposed project will incorporate a stormwater detention facility which will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements of the existing drainage corridor (Gilliam Creek). See Drainage Plan. Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a conveyance system and routed into a detention facility which will help to preserve water quality and prevent further erosion from this proposed facility. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle etation found on the site: tr deciduous treaspen, other Page 7 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 _Z evergreen tree fi cedar, pine, other ✓ shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Almost all of the existing vegetation will be removed for both the off -airport parking facility as well as the street re- configuration. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site. Most of the existing vegetation will be removed to accommodate the project. Two undeveloped areas south of the relocated S. 158th Street will remain in natural state. The proposed project will include some additional entry landscaping to supplement the existing, perimeter landscaping and interior landscaping within the parking lot interior. Native species will be utilized as much as possible. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle songbird •, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shell -fish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known.' Page 8 • 1 City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None anticipated. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electrical, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs. Describe whether it will used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical for lighting, cooling, tools, and heating. Propane gas will also be used as a fuel for the passenger vans (buses) and to heat the office and maintenance building(s). b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None anticipated. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Police response, fire department response, or emergency medical response could be required (aid car, ambulance). 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None anticipated. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may . effect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Page 9 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 Auto and truck traffic, equipment used in nearby car wash operations (part of the car rental use), and HVAC (air conditioning) systems. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Sources of noise will be from traffic coming onto and off the site (cars and vans) and from the HVAC (air conditioning unit) system. The site will be operating 24 hours per day, however, most of the activity takes place between 6 am. and 10 pm. The average length of the parking stay is 3 days. The length of stay is unlike parking for a traditional commercial use in which the parking lot empties out each day. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Structures for the maintenance, office, and ingress/egress have been placed at the west end of the site, away from the existing residential areas to the east and south. Limit grading, construction to daylight hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjacent development includes residential (multifamily, condominiums, and detached single family), a church, and a bowling alley and a movie theater. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not in the recent past. c. Describe any structures on the site. One (1) outdoor billboard. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification for the site? • Regional Commercial (RC). f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Page 10 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 g. Regional Commercial. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, see attached wetland reports (by B -twelve Associates). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Staffing will require up to a total of 25 employees (6-8 per shift). J• Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Project approval includes a Design Review process by the City to examine issues of compatibility. The project will also comply with the City's development regulations. In addition, the location of the structures and other facilities to operate the parking lot have been located approximately a minimum of 500 feet west of the adjoining residential development on the east. The distance to the church is approximately a minimum of 250 feet and the distance from the residential development on the south side of S. 160th Street is approximately a minimum of 400 feet. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. Page 11 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Design of exterior lighting will include features to control light and glare impacts and prevent spill to adjoining properties. The street lighting will be per the City's standards. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Eighteen (18) feet for the ingress/egress canopy (Only the parking lot lighting standards will be taller.). b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Some views of the adjoining Laurel Estate will be altered. For those elevated areas south of S. 160th Street, they will view a developed area instead of an undeveloped area. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed development will include landscaping on the perimeter of the site (a 30 foot wide buffer adjoining the Laurel Estates condominiums and an 8 -foot high, site - obscuring, fence along a portion of the area separating the condominiums from the parking area) and the required interior parking lot landscaping. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The sources of lighting are the parking lot lighting and the headlights in use during the nighttime hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light and glare may effect your proposal? None. Page 12 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The exterior lighting for the proposed project will include cut-offfeatures and other measures aimed at minimizing and light and glare impacting the adjoining properties. The proposed site development plan proposes a one foot candle lighting level for the parking area. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Bowling, movies, shopping. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None needed or anticipated. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None anticipated to be needed. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The access if from Old Military Road north of S. 160th Street. (Note an additional portion of the existing Old Military Road is intended to be vacated.) Page 13 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. The site is currently served by METRO route # 170. Additional METRO routes are located to the west on International Boulevard South (Route #'s 170, 174, and 191). c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? There are approximately 1,063 parking spaces (excludes spaces for passenger vans). There are no existing parking spaces at the site that would be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. The project as proposed will require a re- configuration of the existing S. 158th Street roadway alignment and a vacation of a portion of the existing Old Military Road and S. 158th Street rights-of-way. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. See Traffic Analysis (prepared by Perteet Engineering) g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See Traffic analysis. None anticipated. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: None anticipated. 16. UTILITIES Page 14 • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Seattle City Light (power); Water District # 125; Valvue Utility District (sewer); US West (telephone). The source of heating energy for the office and maintenance buildings will be propane gas which will be brought to the site on demand. Propane gas will also be used as fuel for the passenger vans. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature Date Submitted !Z — 8 00 Page 15 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the foregoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental information provided and the submitted plans, documents, supportive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To provide an off -airport parking service for SeaTac air passengers who desire to have their vehicle near the airport for short or long stays. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Alternative means could include a location at other possible sites near the airport. 3. Please, compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action? The preferred course of action is construct the proposed facility at the location indicated in the application. The proposed use is permitted under the City's zoning designation of Regional Commercial (R -C) and normally would only require construction (building) permits, but because the proposed development is within 300 feet of a residential zone, the project requires a design review process for the design of the site, structures and other associated improvements. 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? No. The proposal does not conflict with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. However, the proposal has also addressed the City's International Boulevard (Pacific Highway South) Design Guidelines (criteria) for approval of the Design Review. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: The proposed project will comply with the City's applicable development standards and regulations. In response to comments from adjoining properties, the project proposes additional landscaping and other additional site features (berm, solid fence for a portion of the property line along Laurel estates Condominiums). In addition, the project also proposes additional landscaping (cedar trees) along the east boundary of the site adjacent to Sunnydale Apartments and additional landscaping (buffer) for a portion of the church's property along the new Page 16 • • City of Tukwila Environmental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/12-7-00 alignment of S. 158th Street. No further mitigation measures are contemplated. c/proj/republic/desgnrev.dsk:envrckl4.doc Page 1,7 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC - 8 2000 PERMIT CENTER QUICK PARK OF: WASHINGTON LLC TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT DECEMBER 2000 Prepared for: Republic Parking Northwest, Inc. Prepared by: Perteet Engineering, Inc. Civil and Transportation Consultants 10209 Bridgeport Way SW. Suite C-1 Laketsood. Washington 98499 (253) 984-7.135 / FAX (253) 559-0399 PEI Job No. 98802 QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT DECEMBER 2000 Prepared for: Republic Parking Northwest, Inc. Prepared by: Perteet Engineering, Inc. Civil and Transportation Consultants 10209 Bridgeport Way SW. Suite C-1 Lakewood. Washington 98499 (253) 984-7138 / FAX (253) 589-0399 PEI Job No. 98802 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. Project Overview 1 II. Conditions and Requirements Summary 2 III. Offsite Analysis 3 IV. Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design ..6 V. Conveyance System Analysis and Design 9 VI. Special Reports and Studies 10 VII. Other Permits 11 VIII. ESC Analysis and Design 12 IX. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant ..13 X. Operations and Maintenance Manual 14 FIGURES Fig. 1 TIR Worksheet Fig. 2 Vicinity Map Fig. 3 Drainage Basins, Sub -basins, and Site Characteristics Fig. 4 Proposed Site Fig. 5 Gilliam Creek: Basin F Fig. 6 Downstream Analysis Flow Map Fig. 7 South Fork of Gilliam Creek TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT I. Project Overview The project proposes to construct an off -airport parking facility (approximately 1060 spaces). Refer to Figure 1-TIR Worksheet. The Quick Park of Washington LLC site is located in the City of Tukwila at southwest corner of Section 22, Township 23, Range 4 East, W.M. The property is bounded on the west by Old Military Road, SR 518 on the north, and by residential areas on the south and east. Refer to Figure 2 — Vicinity Map. The project also proposes to relocate South 158th Street from the mid-portion of the existing site to the south side of the project site. The total site area for the parking facility and the street relocation is 10.5 acres. However, the total site area for the parking facility is only 9.51 acres. And of the 9.51 acres, the area for the actual parking facility for purposes of performing project drainage area analysis as measured from the fence perimeter is 8.6 acres. The remaining 1.9 acres of the site includes the landscaped buffer areas for the parking facility and the street relocation area including the landscaped and undeveloped areas south and east of the relocated South 158th Street. The relocation of South 158`h Street has been addressed by providing a detention/wet pool vault (calculations attached in Appendix C) for water quality purposes. The new drainage system is consistent with matching existing conditions for 2 -year and 10 -year peak flows. Existing Conditions The project drainage area (8.6 acres) slopes from the south to north with grades no greater than 15%, except at the northwest where a knoll slopes at grades of up to 40%. Vegetation is predominately medium to dense brush with some second or third growth trees. Tree density is slightly greater in the south portion of the site. Soils, as defined by the King County Soils Survey, are generally of the Alderwood series. The existing site is divided into two drainage sub -basins by a drainage ditch adjacent to the south side of the South 158th Street. These basins will be referred to as the existing North and South sub -basins. Refer to Figure 3 — Drainage Basins. Proposed Conditions The parking facility will occupy 8.6 -acres and will increase the amount of impervious area in the drainage basin. A Level 2 Flow Control detention/wetpool system is proposed to mitigate increased peak flow rates, to control flow durations, and to provide water quality treatment. See Section IV- Developed Site Hydrology for additional explanation of proposed stormwater facilities. All stormwater generated on-site will be discharged to the ravine located on the westerly and northerly borders of the project site. Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report King County Department of Development and.Environmental Services TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Prect Owner f IIe.NL PA2(lpr ?dee 7I4 , I0J4-• Address Phone Project Engineer Company Address/Phone Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION Subdivison Short Subdivision Grading X Commercial Other Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name () Loc l_ PA ek. OF WASu 11-1u-irt4 LL G . Location Township Range Section 2Z 23 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS DFW HPA COE 404 DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands Shoreline Management Rockery Structural Vaults Other Part 50 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community • (ILLtAM G¢GE� Drainage Basin (Pi Om F.1 ktJr-g. ( Part 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS River Stream 6iLLIA►✓1 LR -t t - Critical Stream Reach Scu-r Fc>wk Depressions/Swales Lake Steep Slopes Lip °iv Floodplain Wetlands Seeps/Springs High Groundwater Table Groundwater Recharge Other Part 7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velcoties Af KIT3 , A i,vcrcwovP MA-tni IA L. t 5 - 40 7. Additional Sheets Attached 2 T Fvo Part 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE Ch. 4 — Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attached LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT Part 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION )( Sedimentation Facilities X Stabilized Construction Entrance Perimeter Runoff Control Clearing and Graing Restrictions X Cover Practices X Construction Sequence Other MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION )t Stabilize Exposed Surface 2( Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities X Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris X Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas Other Part 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM Grass Lined Channel Pipe System Open Channel Dry Pond • X Wet Pond Tank Infiltration JY Vault Depression Energy Dissapator Flow Dispersal Wetland Waiver Stream Regional Detention Method of Analysis &R -TS Compensation/Mitigati on of Eliminated Site Storage Brief Description of System Operation VEt41u1:A(z. ;-AIcH.$tT 94.4NCF F V.„6-1, ee 1z�d,� 6 / A "'Mei 4(.1? DET,.-NTION Arlo rALIL%1`l• Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Limitation Part 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Cast in Place Vault Retaining Wall Rockery > 4' High Structural on Steep Slope Other Part 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Drainage Easement Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement Tract Other Part 13 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attachments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. Signed/Date Basin: 6III,LIAM (ea — OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Surface Water Design Manual, Core Requirement #2 Subbasin Name: F Subbasin Number: Symbol see ma Drainage; Component Type, Name;: and' Size Type; sheet flares; awale; stream; channel;'pipe, • pond; slze:dlameter, surface area • Drainage Component Description drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensattve;area, volume: Distance from. site discharge 1/4 MI :?x.1,320 ft Existing <,i . Problems Potential Problems' constrictions; under capacity, ponding, overtopping;.0ooding, habitat or organism;: destruction; scow Ing, bank sloughing sedimentation, IncIslon, othererosion Observations of: field inspector resource reviewer, or resident iributaly area, likelihood of problem overflow pathways : potential; Impacts. 3 5I71r plot oALrit: LAX to o F F 0 It4,u 3_ U41 .1b.L L "� 4A LC r . 4'iE Vi:I4l:la\11rl 0- goo' �iCt-!ti ;. ►!l 11/4.�I n -"r lit At J ti loo" CMP (J/!1I e S C 575 11ilblek A UkIck 4L %.A e 11%1 �lirL. ei( 4 t..,' •"i y.1 A/,, NA 1u JZ t. SW Ii-Gk.vILy /'¢NIoV.t,p got k- Cos:k.ivo»- 5%0 ' L -7i o.-rn-i Icrl Gjt 1..)11-114- 1.1 i L.-‘ 101J LITable.doe 11/2/92 c PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Transportation Consultants City of Tukwila Quick Park of Washington LLC Vicinity Map Figure 2 r SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E. W.M. S 160TH ST. / -� - f 1, •;://2.:164;,— --- /ire irmf,,,iir :41: /z„. 27. ,/° - - _� _ /- %� _ - ' ;�: ; . %til ,' � � . ^ _ I, � y'/�i,/•; . 0 //Hi/Pip,/ /it/ 7-1--'//'(11('111/4 1j1%71 I/(I 1~11x" ' (%lel l j Ilj�l ;'t,,((i,' I , , //N!.o 11 i • S 158 D 4D 00 SCALE IN FEET erteet Engineering, Inc. NLS emnn... S., Sl. m,. C-1. I.6...S. S. W,W (ma) 609-03115 AREA NOT ANALYZED IN REPORT w.w., -- QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC Drainage Basins, Sub—Basins, and Site Characteristics FIGURE 3 s. yr y 1 ,'<. �n�ir-`fail �o v� uxrruc4 r ITIVIT Inc TOTAL STALLS: 1063 REGULAR STALLS: 776 COMPACT STALLS 284 HANDICAP STALLS: 3 70 STALLS ME ON SIC SLOPE 993 STALLS ARE ON LESS THAN 30 SLOPE 00. 1091 Nth 114 W. Sao c -L I.mmi. UMW 921) 0..4. h Ow. .5 t&r adarwr tug mar, — rtui r.Ip Mf.w Wavier 9!00203 LLC Off—AIRPORT PARKING IFIGUR PROPOSED SITE 4 II. Conditions and Requirements Summary 1. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) : Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) Date 2 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report III. Offsite Analysis The project site is located within the Gilliam Creek Drainage Basin. Gilliam Creek, running primarily in an easterly direction, is a tributary to the Green River with its confluence within the City of Tukwila. The total Gilliam Creek watershed area is approximately 1,900 acres and is bound by the Green River on the east, South 144th Street on the north, SeaTac Airport on the west, and South 166th Street on the south. Gilliam Creek crosses City of Tukwila limits, with the lower half of the watershed within the City of Tukwila and the upper reaches lying in the City of SeaTac. In 1994, a hydrologic study of the upper reaches of Gilliam Creek was completed in order to evaluate alternative improvements in the creek reaches just upstream of 42nd Avenue South. The study is referenced in this report as Gilliam Creek: Detention and Water Quality Enhancements by Perteet Engineering, Inc.; Dated November 1994. In this report and as shown in Figure 5 — Gilliam Creek: Basin F, the upper reaches were divided into eight sub -basins labeled A to H. The Quick Park of Washington LLC lies within Sub -Basin F and will discharge into the upper reach of Gilliam Creek known as the South Fork. The South Fork collects runoff from residential neighborhoods between 42nd Avenue South and Pacific Highway (City of Tukwila) and from commercial and industrial development between Pacific Highway and SeaTac Airport (City of Seatac). The following offsite analysis describes the existing reaches of the South Fork of Gilliam Creek beginning at the southwest corner of the project site to the confluence Gilliam Creek which is more than '/4 -mile downstream of the project site. Reach 1- On the southwest corner of the site, a 36 -inch culvert conveys flows from an approximate 200 -acre basin upstream of Old Military Road. The culvert discharges into a natural ravine along the west side of the project site. The channel in the bottom of the ravine is approximately 10 feet wide and flows to the north, parallel to the project site for approximately .500 feet at an approximate slope of 1-2%. (see Figure 6 — Downstream Flow Map). The west portion of the existing North sub -basin sheets flows into this reach. Reach 2 - At the northwest corner of the site, the channel turns easterly running parallel with the north boundary line of the project site and SR 518 for approximately 1000 -feet. The channel increases in grade and is approximately 10 feet wide. The channel appears to be stable and does not show signs of erosion. Fallen trees and thick under -brush line the channel bottom and side slopes. The northerly and westerly portions of the existing North Basin enter this reach by sheet flow and channel flow. The existing ditch adjacent to 158th dividing the site into 3 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report the North and South sub -basins enters into Reach 2. This flow path is described as follows: Stormwater from the South basin sheet flows into a shallow swale running parallel to S. 158th Street. The swale runs easterly to a storm drainage system on the southwest corner of the South basin. The storm drainage system continues east on S. 158th Street in a series of culverts, pipes and catch basins. The storm drainage system continues east for approximately 300 -feet before turning north. The system connects to the drainage system of the Grande Terrace Apartments and ultimately discharges into the Reach 2 of the SR 518 channel as noted above. Reach 3 - Approximately 900 -feet from the northeast corner of the project site, the channel crosses under SR 518. The exact inlet location and size of the pipe crossing is unknown, however, a 60 -inch CM pipe outlet has been located on the north side of SR 518 and is shown on Figure 7. The end point of this reach marks the discharge point of Basin F. The catchment area is approximately 223 -acres. The 25 -year peak flow rates at this point were estimated to be 98 cubic feet per second (reference: Perteet Engineering Inc., Giliam Creek: Detention and Water Quality Enhancements, 1994) Reach 4 — The 60 -inch pipe discharges into a 360 -feet long heavily armored rock channel constructed at the toe of the SR 518 fill slope. The channel appears stable and is approximately 20 -feet wide at the bottom. Reach S — From the rock -lined channel, stormwater flows are conveyed into a well- defined base channel approximately 2' — 3' wide. The overall stream corridor broadens. Vegetation is predominately medium to dense brush with some second or third growth tress. Within this channel, remnants of three dam structures are located approximately 400 - feet, 320 -feet, and 80 -feet upstream of 42" Avenue South, respectively. Historically, ponds formed by these structures were used for fish rearing by local residents. The locations of the existing structures are shown in Figure 7 — South Fork Gilliam Creek and are described as follows: ❑ Structure 1 was a rock dam. Rocks have moved from their primary position, and no longer functions as a dam. ❑ Structure 2 is a concrete wall approximately 3 -feet in height, extends across half the width of the creek, and is missing the south bottom corner. ❑ Structure 3 is a 4 -feet high by 20 -feet long concrete dam. The entire concrete dam including a 36 -inch concrete chute is broken and damaged. The 24 -inch outlet pipe appears to be buried at the upstream end. A permanent pond exists upstream of the dam with low flows discharging continuously through the 36" 4 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report chute. High flows appear to overtop the structure but remain within the defined channel. There is evidence of significant sedimentation due to back pooling. Reach 6 - At a distance of 1500 feet from the northeast corner of the project site, the South Fork of Gilliam Creek continues to flow eastward through a 36" culvert under 42nd Avenue South. The end point of this reach marks the discharge point of Basins A through G. This is also the end of the downstream analysis for this project. The catchment area at this location is 530 -acres. The 25 -year peak flow rates at the outlet of the 36" culvert were estimated to be 228 cubic feet per second (reference: Perteet Engineering Inc., Gilliam Creek: Detention and Water Quality Enhancements, 1994). 5 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report • • • .• • Reservoir 7'7?! S 160th St IA 'RPO RT PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. rZ'r-7:1:1—:11-• . T . _........ ■ ■ ■ Sub -Basin Boundries �---�— Flow Paths City of Tukwila Quick . Park of Washington Gilliam Creek: Basin F LLC Civil and Transportation Consultants Figure 5 PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Downstream Analysis Flow Map City of Tukwila Quick Park of Washington LLC Civil and Transportation Consultants Figure 6 SOUTHWICXE APARTMENT COMPLEX SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. SCALE: 1" - 60' STRUCTURE 2 (CONCRETE WALL) STRUCTURE 3 (CONCRETE DAM) 36" CHUTE I.E. 206.78 36" CONC. I.E. 204.12 CONC. WEB: GRAVEL PARKING LOT • STRUCTURE 1 (ROCK DAM) — PROPERTY UNE (TYP.) 38" CMP CONC. WALL I.E. 248.84 .� E 2324' 5.27 18" CONC. _1 = I.E 242.34 11111' �A` \\�� 60" CMP I.E. 233.53 CONC. RETAIMNG WALL 24" CONC. I.E. 203.68 R 51 / 12" CMP I.E. 223.30 RUBBER TIRE SLOPE PROTECTION (0" GR0551NGI" SR-EXAcr-OCAIION UNKNOW/i 12" CMP RIPRAP SLOPE PROTECTION I.E. 233.67 18 I.E. 224.50-- _ SR 5I it 9 Perteet Engineering, Inc. Ft,. a. G.c.. B. - WALE QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC SOUTH FORK OF GILLIAM CREEK FIGURE 7 IV. Flow Control And Water Quality Facility Analysis And Design Existing Site Hydrology The existing site drainage is divided into two drainage sub -basins as previously described in Section I — Project Overview. Existing North Sub -Basin This area is approximately 6.4 -acres of medium to dense brush (KCRTS land use type: Till Pasture). See Figure 3. Stormwater from the northern and western portions of the site sheet flow towards the ravine on the west and north borders of the site. Runoff from the southern portion of the North sub -basin flows into a shallow ditch discharging into the northeast corner of the sub -basin. Soils are generally of the Alderwood series. Existing South Sub -Basin This area is approximately 3.1 -acres of medium to dense brush with second or third growth tress (KCRTS land use type: Till Pasture). Runoff from the southern portion of the site sheet flows north and is collected in a shallow swale running parallel to S. 158th Street and discharges into a storm drain system in S. 158th Street. Soils in the South sub -basin are also of the Alderwood series. Existing Site Analysis The two sub -basins were added together as both sub -basin flows converge within a quarter - mile downstream of the project site discharge point. The total area of the basin is approximately 9.5 -acres. The basin was analyzed for the 8.6 -acres that the proposed parking facility will occupy. The remaining 0.9 -acres will be a combination of perimeter landscape area and existing native ground cover areas. It is assumed that the proposed perimeter landscape areas will be equivalent to the existing ground cover conditions. The 8.6 -acres was analyzed as two sub -basins (East and West) of 4.3 acres each. The Peak annual flow for each basin is 0.154 cfs for the 2 -year storm and 0.447 cfs for the 50 -year storm. Developed Site Hydrology The developed site will discharge proposed flows to the ravine on the northwesterly corner of the site. The total area for the Parking Facility is approximately 8.6 acres. Refer to Figure 4 Proposed Site. The remaining 0.9 acres will be a combination of perimeter landscape area and native ground cover areas. The proposed Parking Facility was designed as two sub -basins (East and West). Each sub - basin is approximately 4.3 acres. Peak annual flows for the 2 -year storm is 1.07 cfs and the 50 -year storm is 1.87 cfs. 6 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report Water Quality and Water Quantity Control Requirements Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) Requirements The WDFW required that the Department of Ecology (DOE) Streambank Erosion Control Standard be applied for water quantity control. The standard states that the 2, 10, & 100 year proposed flows match 50% of the 2 year, match 100% of the10 year, & 100 year existing flows. WDFW believes the 98 KCSWDM Level 2 Flow Control is equivalent to this standard. The WDFW calls for the DOE manual to be used for water quality design. The WDFW has no special water quality control requirements. The basic water quality standards in the DOE manual will be applied. City of Tukwila Requirements The City of Tukwila requires Level 1 Flow Control unless after review of Level 1 Offsite Analysis downstream conditions dictate otherwise. Per Mike Cusick, City of Tukwila, a Level 2 Flow Control has not yet been required on any projects. The City of Tukwila requires the implementation of the Basic Water Quality Menu in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The City of Tukwila has no special water quality requirements. Sand filter design is not required. Proposed Water Quality and Water Quantity Control To meet water quantity control requirements, two Level 2 Flow Control facilities are proposed (East vault and West vault). The project proposes wet vaults to meet the basic water quality requirements. Due to site constraints, the underground wet vaults were chosen over the other basic water quality options. Hydraulic Analysis Calculated Target Rates Flow durations show the change in duration of all high flows. Channel scour and bank erosion rates raise proportionally with increases in flow durations. A Level -2 flow control facility requires matching predevelopment and post -development flow duration curves for all flows greater than 50% of the 2 -year flow up to the 50 -year flow. There is an allowable tolerance above 50% of the 2 -year flow; however, at 50% of the 2 -year flow there is no vertical tolerance acceptable. The developed outflow duration curve must be strictly below the target duration curve at the lower end. By maintaining existing erosion rates at predevelopment levels, the aggregate time that developed flows exceed an erosion -causing threshold (i.e., 50% of the 2 -year peak flow), a Level -2 flow control facility can prevent initiation of erosion or stream channel instability. 7 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report A "target" duration curve was created in KCRTS to support facility design. One "target" duration curve was developed for both East and West basins. Each basin is identical in area (4.3 acres) and ground cover type (KCRTS land use type: Till Pasture). The "target" flows for the existing conditions of the site are 0.077 cfs for 50% of the 2 -year and 0.303 cfs for the 25 -year (target outflows). Matching this flow duration curve controls the design of the detention facilities. Hydraulic Calculations A duration comparison analysis was done for the predeveloped and developed site conditions. A check of tolerance showed that the detention outflow met the 10% deviation between the target outflow and the design outflow. The maximum positive excursion was 0.010 cfs (6.2%) and the maximum negative excursion was 0.020 cfs (-20.6%). Therefore, the detention/wetpond systems meet requirements for sizing a Level -2 flow control facility and durations. The total volume required for detention is 64400 CF. The volume provided for detention is 70840 CF, which includes a safety factor of 10%. The project proposes a wet vault to meet the basic water quality requirements. Due to site constraints, the wet vault was chosen over the other basic water quality options. The required wetpool volume is 19725 CF and the wet pool volume provided is 27600 CF. All calculations and tables are located in Appendix A. The software program utilized for these calculations was "KCRTS Version 4.4" developed by King County. 8 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report V. Conveyance System Analysis and Design Enclosed are the typical calculations necessary for sizing the conveyance system for the project. The Rational Method and Manning's formula were used for sizing each of the storm pipes. The conveyance pipes have been sized to accommodate the 25 -year storm event at a full flow condition. 9 Quick Park of Washington LLC . Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report SRO Conveyance Pipe25 Storm Pipe Design Computations - 25 Year Conveyance m: 6.89 n• 0.539 West Vault Area Project : Republic Parking Proj. No: 98802 By: NWC Checked By. Design Storm Retum Interval: 25 YR IDF Curve: Seattle Pipe Type: LCPE Location of Pipe Tributary at Point of Concentration From Specific Areas Noted Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 'I' (in/hr) Q=CIA (Bow to next down stream CB (cfs) TOTAL 0 total flow next down stream basin) (cfs) L of Pipe (ft) Diam. of Pipe (in) Inlet Invert Elev Outfall Invert Elev ;i Slope -•of Pipe Pipe Type (n=) Pipe Q Full (cfs) 0 Check A<B, OK A>B, NG V Full (fps) Area ID Area (Acres) Runoff Factor "C 'CA' Sum "CA' Total @ Prev. Point In Pipe From Last Pt. Total at Pt. of Conc. Pipe .From To Reach Node • Node P1-2 CB1 C82 B1 0.12 0.9 0.108 0.108 0.00 0.00 10.00 1.99 0.22 0.22 61 12 352.86 352 36 0.8% 0.012 3.50 ok 4.5 P2-3 C82 CB3 B2 0.24 0.9 0.216 0.324 10.00 0.20 10.20 1.97 :: 0.43 0.64 54 12 352.36 349.45 5.4% 0.012 8.98 ok 11.4 P34 C83 CB4 B3 0.17 0.9 0.153 0.477 10.21 0.08 10.29 1.96 0.30 • 0.94 57 12 349.45 346.69 4:8% '0.012 8.52 ok 10.8 P4-5 CB4 CB5 B4 0.08 0.9 0.072 0.549 10.35 0.15 10.50 1.94 0.14 1.08 100 12 346.69 343 61 31% 0.012 6.79 ok 8.6 P5-6 CB5 CB6 85 0.15 0.9 0.135 0.684 10.58 0.08 10.66 1.92 0.26 1.34 44 12 343.61 338 85 10.8% 0.012 - 12.73 ok 16.2 P6-7 CB6 CB7 B6 0.25 0.9 0.225 0.909 10.70 0.10 10.80 1.91 0.43 1.77 95 12 33885 335 45 3:6% 0.012 7.32 ok 9.3 P7-8 C87 C88 B7 0.14 0.9 0.126 1.035 10.82 0.30 11.12 1.88 0.24 2.01 170 12 335.45 326.55 5.2% 0.012 8.86 ok 11.3 4P15.141 .4ACB15 y3 50CB142 itl B15 :,;0:51.337 'S'.E+`a0.9?y'. ;?0:459:7' 5l0:4594 i,i4.0.00,i3.- ,A0 00f lx ,',`.:10:00i r .199. 71 29l0.91.*:: 9t0.9.1246t' ".et -z48: ; v412:,.g:;'74 4332970 ';'332.452 X.y1.1%s. 2.1i0.012• -hl u' 4 03. -;'is b iK,'.Ok,a:si4 '5:1 P.144133 1010B14All areal3rismei3 mo312r0 311R 0:9 ".0:108:4 0 567,: { 5,10 003. 0'g/200.`.4 ,1 y10 20 1 11:97.4 0:21Lt,;1;131 4•+a 4 62' .lt 33.j124F)9j 3332.451.1330.21 369M _,0:012 a"& r e7:36 ; ' l:StiRbk,M1 c1-9.4' AP.,13-8 90813' 2 2=t0B8V0 ,-141313100:44131 /1.90.9 .:1:0:3963 390.963-04 '410.279. 76 0.016r8 ,-.10.28'uL. 1:96'. z r' 801781. l.1:9041 ' ..3254.4.:4Mdi320+12 1 232T.80,$ .1327..704 4:42:5 'i V' 0:0124;x. ,126:.121 11?12.01( ...,:-.7,Aw1W4 V+1113 8J ,vtCB13 A Ziltil0198k2. slued . ; ! 43: Js ' si$ a"§ vaa iA•P: _ rf"'ki a, Branch Total =1.90 ati '-X :3E�s?' "w?_ aaFi-?:1°91 _r €,: :3rE ..1 i0 'J.4°... is a P8-9 CB8 • CB9 88 '0.22 0.9 0.198 1.233 11.17 0.27 11.44 1.85 - 0.37 4 28 185 12 326.55 319.31 3.9% 0.012 7.66 ok 9.7 'iiR12-9ii8 ;iC8121 'L8.P,.12>94 ."£GB9L 4 2.91312M Z0.0.72M :4x0:9 x'0648 :;40648 X0.00:=71 7,115x7000"'; X10 0() Z.✓A1:99.a0S ga :29'15 t 41:29? 'v 1 12• X320.45: Ys319.50'4 .ati9wi 10:0127 ' ,i215:28'2i .4-"M ok4W. 0 6:7..,% rc612-A CB9:s»s4's`�''h P1 ice`-k.,a:* VA?"' ..: :z�"l1' r 'i w-'; Branch Total = 1.29': ,9.*51- + ') 9EiiaKigt9 4.0A6 •- 3:a:,r«' 2.' ? .v G: -s '4.. ti:ff?:::t' 1:;:as P9-10 CB9 C810 B9 0.30 0.9 0.270 1.503 11.51 0.21 11.72 1.83 • 0.49 6.06 122 18 319.31 315 78 2.9% 0.012 19.41 ok 11.0 P10-11 CB10 CB11 B10 0.37 • 0.9 0.333 1.836 11.75 0.09 11.84 1.82 0.61 6 67 57 18 315.78 315..38 0.7% 0.012 9.27 ok 5.2 P11 -V CB11 '• 98 VAULT B11 0.49 0.9 0.441 2.277 11.92 0.05 11.97 1.81 0.80 7 46 16 18 315.38 315 20 1:1% 0.012 12.10 ok 6.8 .1 802 Republic Park nglurainage Reports5CONVEYANCECALS.xJ5tEa$I Vau SRO Conveyance Pipe25 Storm Pipe Design Computations - 25 Year Conveyance m: 6.89 n: 0.539 East Vault Area Project : Republic Parking Proj No: 98802 By: NWC Checked By: Design Storm Return Interval: 25 YR IDF Curve: Seattle Pipe Type: LCPE Location of Pipe Tnbutary at Point of Concentration From Specific Areas Noted Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity -r (inthr) Q=CIA (flow to next down stream CB) (cfs) TOTAL 0 total flow next down stream basin (cfs) L of Pipe (ft) Diam. of Pipe (in) Inlet Invert Elev Outfall Invert Elev ' Slope of Pipe Pipe Type (n=) Pipe 0 Full (cfs) 0 Check MB. OK A>B. NG V Full (fps) Area ID Area (Acres) Runoff Factor 'C' . 'CA' Sum 'CA" Total @ Prev. Point In Pipe From Last Pt. Total at Pt. of Conc. Pipe . Reach From To Node Node P1-2 CB1 CB2 81 019 09 0.171 0.171 0.00 0.00 10.00 1.99 0.34 0.34 100 12 336.00 335.00 1.0% 0.012 3.87 ok 4.9 P2-3 CB2 CB3 82 0.40 0 9 0.360 0.531 10.00 0.34 10.34 1 96 0.70 1.04 50 12 335.00 334.15 1.7% 0.012 5.05 ok 6 4 P3-5 CB3 C85 B3 0.24 0 9 0 216 0.747 10.34 0.13 10.47 1.94 0.42 1 46 108 12 334.15 331.00 2.9% 0.012 681 ok 8.4 Z9 P4-5;.4:: 4111013411# !T.:1'01351U ^•ti'064,.;t .19-..:-t09s:P. -„0.17,1;1 :'x,0:1:71.1:4 -x:0:00? ;t4r0.00 1 zt10.00 - 31.99'91: ig,:034 _- ,�.°034;-•a ::-10311 ::r -z,!1274-9":,331-91\ A330.651 =*fit -2% , - 0.012: .428Q t :»;3ok# :� 5:4.K•.ru :r ".,.='ter :Are.;•1; ,1.-.-r":...;."=1.,,-,,r. 'f. ':,-.:',1;--7:749,..'t-'..i`=1L1 . -...;',14.4-41X > .313 ° ::14ffh'tt tthr&t.rer Branch Total = 0.34 r Y A .. ;:'�_:,_ 4 :� n, J_�, ,.*rq;a`�'ai'�,:-y`F �•C.`.� .4 :, ,t;��?'-: 91 :,Y.': cA�a':f: "k. '.$�'lr�N:_ .. s ::�"1?i'� P5-6 CB5 CB6 85 0.34 0.9 0 306 1053 10.47 0.01 10.48 1.94 0.59 2.40 3 12 329.00 328 81 6.3% 0 012 9.74 ok 12.4 P6-7 CB6 CB7 136 0.16 0 9 0.144 1.197 10.48 0.57 11.04 1 89 0.27 2.67 186 12 328.50 321.75 3.6% 0 012 7.37 ok 9.4 1F:P8Z41 ,CB8 e'% rN.4C87a 4..r88 . -11;0.39...‘k • 80938j .7:0.324_3 i4i0.3245 •,tt 0:0M $:10.0034 :' 10.00;:= 944',1'.99!•:V.. :tf.0:65: ::::,=0.65.:4•:,.1:-..•.!.90,14':'. "",..r..12..:".'8', '-'•'322.45"%, 3:321.85 <I 0.75V." '10.012R8 rasi3.1671 -:iok i'ii =€ '4.07.4 .r._ 10 9 4:=.:00..,181.13k to of -2,1 .7. ' i. l�^.t'.�:: ;�s::s �. .- •444;-06::;•,..: �:Y+ fi,v�"�a^�s;z�C Branch Total = 065 . ,i..:- .. ra .-. tit -,:.Q.,..: �ir :ym''fi _•+�.�? '�":rt .:+x,••.':3'aayam iYt. r - t`cY"'ia. P7-9 CB7 CB9 87 0.47 0 9 0.423 1.620 11.10 0.09 11.19 1.87 0.79 4.11 48 12 321 65 320.45 2.5% 0 012 6.12 ok 7.8 P9-12 CB9 CB12 89 0.23 0 9 0 207 1.827 11.18 0.10 11.28 1.87 0.39 4.50 42 12 320.45 318 95 3.6% 0.012 7.31 ok 9.3 P12-13 CB12 CB13 812 0.27 0.9 0.243 2.070 • 11.27 0.26 11.53 1.84 0.45 4.94 122 12 318.90 312 45 5.3% 0 012 8.90 ok 11.3 :P10.11: VLCB10 i 2tC81:15 Z991310.4.% :1 i0 -.31:7b ;:1.0.9-i 4 4%0279:1 .5%0.279 4:0:00.*„'t �,t0'00.'144 „'•910.00:1"'r:a1:99 3?i „f00.56;$-` -:;10.56`,::: .„:114:..*: :;ri 12: -;, 318.584 V316.94.:' o1.4% -.. <''0.012,:'.' .. 4.647 . 9.'ok:__.. ii <5.9 V-? iR1141.3 4C91:182 s3`C813 •1"•811::3 0.35141"- 41.0.915..47. 8C0.315.0 440.5944 11310:00. t 410:32fn ;r:E10,32 i..• 01.98:"' a.4.0.62.4. -:x:1.17.1, 431:.. -'+- 12 a4.3 ?:313.001 _312.40x! '+'-t1.4%rk8 (.'50.012':11.1 -2'"14.57x,'4 •F'Wok k =7'15.8:'.`" :.F.v.-s!t:I.r' -? . S;T s "�R ';',•-•-",&+i,•14: '1::x'3:,.1 t TQwS is i:: 8:1099 Pe :,.W:21.t.9i tr � -kt -�i�k:a....'�i.1 cm`R1n''''-�-?w gi Branch Total = 1.17 .zr;...a"s'.a:: :,•:s'.: 141.T4.1... ;e"_�.'191.4 aiW>.:VV.-' ,iMI.03i riaa4-:.4F���. ii1r as ::.7V:« P13-19 CB13 CB19 813 0.09 09 0.081 2.151 11.53 0.04 11.57 1.84 0.15 6.27 29 12 312.20 311.02 4.1% 0012 7.81 ok 99 14k:2!"••;.:-Z.14-0P.:W.,..i. ?;14,.-1:.hiK,:.`Yi':. er, xfib.�1Y i' c.Y.. 4:11; Rx:i•vi 7" t reCr! a `i%"ir,:may .^: 4.d' .w..4.,:. 'w .,n,....r,'• .��4"�:w55w`:. �F `l'• _ o- '4 'Fc :+,: , :���K*' P^�'� t%.� n!%P. .'i i`7 ;itis`$.. � �fi ���:. .�c.�. r0.A.,, �C� ti:;�-�t�; i J. RrL •Ns6 X11 1..'if A, -,g}; -....'`L` im..„, a.ur ,...'. �.te. i •iL,,,- 141 ..}3 �:F1 l i6 47..%14 vi -1 'Y WiS+.tgS�t'A ltW 1'}F '',e.+K{! '. ' 4.... ..��i.''N..ri:. 4.1.^41. - e ;,YR .ris'i ... ♦:.X .e :*1 ^ie�,.�n V".X.'43Rd.if .iO-SIT.. 'i,'r T* rarla'14-4:1::',A .'4.* s�vd? , 'Y .,M1w .l.' :74 L ;1":+Sr V (.'Kir; 3 q?r' '.,•.A..4 .� •' "h. f_ •r -*sf :S:'. ..;'S4S.. .:�: +t,' Y ?k° '.z'�"• 's:�•`'dsu ' .X.:4, ,i..�"3. .if'�� ;; 'if.'�ti ,`�L��. .Y.. ^.F -a: �5....5�"7'r,.'.�.... Ks .. �', a ;b;.?' a�'.-::r it "�t5i'-,:i'�i.`;ir G�;... ..ie� .:.�. ✓^u `3'J,t%S� "'i 0174n.al? °$14',4 11. "w..:fR` :•` :h c._ ;.•44'"".9.''..44".1:`:.',7141":C.1.92 :.• 1:4,4.1 n:$ kW i-3 `'eiit84ne ' -W L? i : -'5 v-7 :S °.,,1 ..R. h ";wa $'d.' i � s� - ._ �. 1' :� .1'!"4"",,.,..<4:"4- }' � i4 ' ±:3+n,.. ,+4, �y '4°'. � ai �' i i''b�V ar'iJ`r r, 74' ''..� ' E'd ,, -'.,1 t`si,°R'.te .`!.`v ' ,4`. i:9. :`' :3s,'44.14. .:.e',.:t7 ; 4'. ..t.:zgi1:t "4RU'it ,1i iL _ _ -310.20 P18-19 CB18 CB19 B18 0.52 0.9 0.468 2.619 11.60 0.04 11.64 1.84 0.86 7.12 22 18 310 50 1.4% 0 012 13.32 • ok 7.5 P19 -V CB19 VAULT 40 18 0012 :\aunuz Republic Park ng\Drainage Reports)[CONVEYANCECALS.xIs]East Vault VL Special Reports and Studies 1. Geotechnical Engineering Study by GeoEngineers, Inc. December 1999. 2. Wetlands Analysis (conducted by Shapiro) 3. Traffic Study 4. Coordination for Future Regional Stormwater Detention/Water Quality Site 5. Gilliam Creek: Detention and Water Quality Enhancements by Perteet Engineering, November 1194 6. Gilliam Creek Basin Drainage Study by KCM, Inc. June 1986. 10 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report VII. Other Permits 1. Land Use Permit 2. Reasonable Use Exemption Permit 3. Clearing and Grading Permit 4. Construction Permits 5. Fire Permit 11 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report VIII. ESC Analysis and Design Actions taken to minimize erosion and reduce the impact of sediment on the drainage system due to construction are as follows: temporary check dams and interceptor swales will help convey water to 3 temporary sediment ponds located on the northwest, northeast, and the southeast sections of the site. Sediment ponds are per 98 KCSWD Manuel. Filter fabric fence will be placed along the limits of grading. All temporary sediment pond calculations are located in Appendix B. 12 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report IX. Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Convenant To be furnished with final report. 13 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report X. Operations and Maintenance Manual To be furnished with final report. 14 Quick Park of Washington LLC Perteet Engineering, Inc. Technical Information Report Project E. F71,teuc. Parac,C, Comp By: Itwlc. Date: C)..-roecu. Z-ne, Basin Name rX Total.Acreage: 4 . KCRTS Data entry and computation sheet Region: 5 to TAL.. File Name: ..,1?_.cp z F .J -L. __ • page I of l pages Scale factor: t . o • "•"� • 1•'• --' .—..VIY 1611yU1. Pervious Land Types Soil Type KCRTS Soil Group Cover Group acreage Till forest Till pasture y , Till grass outwash forest outwash pasture outwash brass Wetland Impervious Land Types land use Acreage EIF/EIA Non effective Reverts to:/ area Adjusted Land use areas based on EIF calculations KCRTS Soil Group Cover Group added acreage Computed Acreaefor Model Till forest Till pasture Till grass outwash forest outwash pasture outwash grass . Wetland Effective Impervious Flow Path Data Total Area Check Land Use Type length slope • Notes: Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:ex.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.303 0.113 0.276 0.029 0.154 0.258 0.249 0.519 Computed Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak Peaks 2 2/09/01 7 1/05/02 3 2/28/03 8 3/24/04 6 1/05/05 4 1/18/06 5 11/24/06 1 1/09/08 18:00 16:00 3:00 19:00 8:00 16:00 4:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Rank Return Period 1 100.00 2 25.00 3 10.00 4 5.00 5 3.00 6 2.00 7 1.30 8 1.10 50.00 - - Peaks (CFS) 0.519 O .303 O .276 0.258 O .249 O .154 0.113 0.029 O .447 Page 1 Prob 0.990^ 0.960 0.900.'1 O .800 0.667 O .500A 0.231 0.091 0.980 ^ KCRTS Data entry and computation sheet Project F ---,17U 4A. t-14 Comp By: Nave- Region: 5m -rat- Date: OG-TOS'>e k "Z(.700 Basin Name PeoP Total Acreage: ti . page of 1 pages Scale factor: 1, o File Name: -,2r- _ ie. •r:u r o • Pervious Land Types Soil Type KCRTS Soil Group Cover Group acreage Till • Till _forest pasture Till grass outwash forest outwash pasture outwash grass Wetland Impervious Land Types land use Acreage EIF/EIA Non effective Reverts to:/ area Pautp44 Lal Li , 3 4, 3 Adjusted Land use areas based on EIF calculations KCRTS Soil Group Cover Group added acreage Computed Acrear for Model Till forest Till pasture Till grass outwash forest outwash pasture outwash grass Wetland Effective Impervious Flow Path Data Total Area Check Land Use Type length slope Notes: impROPlks1111111 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:prop.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 1.04 0.918 1.27 1.07 1.27 1.11 1.56 2.03 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 7 2/09/01 8 1/05/02 3 12/08/02 6 8/26/04 4 10/28/04 5 1/18/06 2 10/26/06 1 1/09/08 2:00 16:00 18:00 2:00 16:00 16:00 0:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 2.03 1 100.00 1.56 2 25.00 1.27 3 10.00 1.27 4 5.00 1.11 5 3.00 1.07 6 2.00 1.04 7 1.30 0.918 8 1.10 1.87 50.00 Page 1 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Perteet Engineering II/INCORPORATED ivil and Transportation Consultants Sheet of Project No. roject goPtPgc1L 12.4e.1uistCvi ubject VAULT pi4�lg �Xts'rtNCa GOr•►DITIONS Calc. By 1.4%,•44.Date Chkd By Date - — — ' ..D¢s�-r►or-1 06. -CA DW u IN ' V6�. `��2E _ = x `�'1R - 50! of Zye --_;_0._�14q - o•4''17 - ___ -- .9j0/. *07, OP 135 c u Toed -'- Ni OF 2y P_ = 044_. `i�3 - O t54/Z., -.a o.07'7 x o .07'7 = b . Io a - — ; --Fjeg-f RICENAL Q mAy, -- 4/3 rdout.dur Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdout.tsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDF Exceedence_Probability CFS % % % 0.004 30948 50.470 50.470 49.530 0.495E+00 0.011 4686 7.642 58.112 41.888 0.419E+00 0.019 5298 8.640 66.751 33.249 0.332E+00 0.027 4795 7.820 74.571 25.429 0.254E+00 0.034 4620 7.534 82.105 17.895 0.179E+00 O .042 3894 6.350 88.456 11.544 0.115E+00 0.050 2515 4.101 92.557 7.443 0.744E-01 0.057 1577 2.572 95.129 4.871 0.487E-01 0.065 1310 2.136 97.265 2.735 0.273E-01 0.073 982 1.601 98.867 1.133 0.113E-01 0.080 334 0.545 99.411 0.589 0.589E-02 0.088 28 0.046 99.457 0.543 0.543E-02 O .095 18 0.029 99.486 0.514 0.514E-02 0.103 16 0.026 99.512 0.488 0.488E-02 0.111 5 0.008 99.521 0.479 0.479E-02 0.118 21 0.034 99.555 0.445 0.445E-02 0.126 27 0.044 99.599 0.401 0.401E-02 0.134 25 0.041 99.640 0.360 0.360E-02 0.141 27 0.044 99.684 0.316 0.316E-02 O .149 18 0.029 99.713 0.287 0.287E-02 0.156 14 0.023 99.736 0.264 0.264E-02 0.164 12 0.020 99.755 0.245 0.245E-02 0.172 18 0.029 99.785 0.215 0.215E-02 O .179 22 0.036 99.821 0.179 0.179E-02 0.187 14 0.023 99.843 0.157 0.157E-02 O .195 13 0.021 99.865 0.135 0.135E-02 0.202 12 0.020 99.884 0.116 0.116E-02 0.210 10 0.016 99.901 0.099 0.995E-03 O .217 16 0.026 99.927 0.073 0.734E-03 0.225 9 0.015 99.941 0.059 0.587E-03 0.233 7 0.011 99.953 0.047 0.473E-03 0.240 5 0.008 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 0.248 6 0.010 99.971 0.029 0.294E-03 0.256 8 0.013 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.263 4 0.007 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 O .271 5 0.008 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 Page 1 N COO 0 N O N- O 0 N O C0 R rdout.dur TARGET.dur • O N O co O- O 0 O 0 o 0 00 ti V 0 0 -5 1 1 1 1 T11FT 1 1 1 1 11111 1 1- 1 1 11111 1 1 1 1 11111 1 1 1 1 11111 100 10-4 103 10-2 10-1 Probability Exceedence Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: ex.tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS Cutoff 0.078 0.095 0.112 0.130 0.147 0.165 0.182 0.199 0.217 0.234 0.252 0.269 0.286 Fraction of Time Check of Tolerance Base 0.89E-02 0.62E-02 0.49E-02 0.37E-02 0.28E-02 0.21E-02 0.15E-02 0.11E-02 0.78E-03 0.44E-03 0.24E-03 0.15E-03 0.65E-04 New %Change 0.61E-02 -31.3 0.51E-02 -17.8 0.47E-02 -3.0 0.38E-02 4.0 0.29E-02 3.5 O .24E-02 13.8 0.17E-02 13.0 0.13E-02 18.5 0.77E-03 -2.1 O .46E-03 3.7 O .23E-03 -6.7 O .49E-04 -66.7 0.00E+00 -100.0 Probability Base New .%Change 0.89E-02 0.078 0.074 -4.7 0.62E-02 0.095 0.076 -20.2 0.49E-02 0.112 0.107 -4.8 0.37E-02 0.130 0.133 2.1 0.28E-02 0.147 0.151 2.2 0.21E-02 0.165 0.173 4.8 0.15E-02 0.182 0.188 3.1 0.11E-02 0.199 0.206 3.5 0.78E-03 0.217 0.215 -0.8 0.44E-03 0.234 0.236 0.7 0.24E-03 0.252 0.250 -0.6 0.15E-03 0.269 0.259 -3.6 0.65E-04 0.286 0.268 -6.5 Maximum positive excursion = 0.010 cfs ( 6.2%) occuring at 0.158 cfs on the Base Data:ex.tsf and at 0.168 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.020 cfs (-20.6%) occuring at 0.096 cfs on the Base Data:ex.tsf and at 0.076 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Page 1 WET LADDER 460' INSIDE LENGTH DER IINLETr 5'.10' ACCESS DOOR WITH LOCKING DIAMOND PLATE COVERS SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. VENNLATION PIPE lai L I C \\\\ 20' INSIDEJLENGTH 138' LBAFFLE I /--DIVIDER WALL I — OUTLET PIPE 18' WITH WITH FLOW RESTRICTOR 10• AND OVERFLOW 64 WEST DETENTION VAULT PLAN VIEW UDDER OUTLET PIPE 18' WITH FLOW RESTRICTOR AND OVERFLOW — 6 LADDER CONTRACTOR PROVIDED DESIGN FOR L.I.P. CONCRETE THICKNESS & REINFORCING BY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. H-20 TOPSIAB LOADING REO. 460' INSIDE LENGTH VENTILATION PIPE 0 5'+10' ACCESS DOOR WITH LOCKING DIAMOND PLATE COVERS BAFFLE LADDER 138 INLET ti EAST DETENTION VAULT PLAN VIEW NTS NTS auP OUTLET= T INLET BAFFLE 9.5% DIVIDER WALL r= 1.9" OUTLET6 CONTRACTOR PROVIDED DESIGN FOR C.I.P. CONCRETE THICKNESS & REINFORCING BY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. N-20 TOPSLAB LOADING REO. INLET Q.5% BAFFLE •- 1.9" WEST DETENTION VAULT EAST DETENTION VAULT SECTION A SECTION B NTS NTS FOR LAND USE APPROVAL 41* 44.40. 1 Perteet Engineering, Inc. MCI 114uM4 WI A. Sit. C-1. IAlcou d. 6* AIA All) Al -760 Drown b 0*1 a Aero 1, SOU MFl AAA QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC OFF—AIRPORT PARKING MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS WIT x East/West Vaults Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Vault Facility Length: 460.00 ft Facility Width: 20.00 ft Facility Area: 9200. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 7.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 0.00 ft Storage Volume: 64400. cu. ft Riser Head: 7.00 ft Riser Diameter: 18.00 inches Number of orifices: 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 1.20 0.103 2 3.75 1.90 0.176 4.0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.01 0.01 92. 0.002 0.004 0.00 0.02 0.02 184. 0.004 0.006 0.00 0.04 0.04 368. 0.008 0.008 0.00 0.05 0.05 460. 0.011 0.009 0.00 0.06 0.06 552. 0.013 0.010 0.00 0.07 0.07 644. 0.015 0.011 0.00 0.09 0.09 828. 0.019 0.012 0.00 0.10 0.10 920. 0.021 0.012' 0.00 0.11 0.11 1012. 0.023 0.013 0.00 0.23 0.23 2116. 0.049 0.019 0.00 0.35 0.35 3220. 0.074 0.023 0.00 0.47 0.47 4324. 0.099 0.027 0.00 0.59 0.59 5428: 0.125 0.030 0.00 0.71 0.71 6532. 0.150 0.033 0.00 0.82 0.82 7544. 0.173 0.035 0.00 0.94 0.94 8648. 0.199 0.038 0.00 1.06 1.06 9752. 0.224 0.040 0.00 1.18 1.18 10856. 0.249 0.042 0.00 1.30 1.30 11960. 0.275 0.044 0.00 1.42 1.42 13064. 0.300 0.046 0.00 1.54 1.54 14168. 0.325 0.048 0.00 1.65 1.65 15180. 0.348 0.050 0.00 1.77 1.77 16284. 0.374 0.052 0.00 1.89 1.89 17388. 0.399 0.054 0.00 2.01 2.01 18492. 0.425 0.055 0.00 2.13 2.13 19596. 0.450 0.057 0.00 2.25 2.25 20700. 0.475 0.058 0.00 2.37 2.37 21804. 0.501 0.060 0.00 2.49 2.49 22908. 0.526 0.061 0.00 2.60 2.60 23920. 0.549 0.063 0.00 2.72 2.72 25024. 0.574 0.064 0.00 2.84 2.84 26128. 0.600 0.066 0.00 2.96 2.96 27232. 0.625 0.067 0.00 3.08 3.08 28336. 0.651 0.068 0.00 3.20 3.20 29440. 0.676 0.070 0.00 3.32 3.32 30544. 0.701 0.071 0.00 3.43 3.43 31556. 0.724 0.072 0.00 3.55 3.55 32660. 0.750 0.073 0.00 3.67 3.67 33764. 0.775 0.075 0.00 3.75 3.75 34500. 0.792 0.075 0.00 3.77 3.77 34684. 0.796 0.076 0.00 3.79 3.79 34868. 0.800 0.079 0.00 3.81 3.81 35052. 0.805 0.083 0.00 3.83 3.83 35236. 0.809 0.088 0.00 3.85 3.85 35420. 0.813 0.095 0.00 3.87 3.87 35604. 0.817 0.103 0.00 3.89 3.89 35788. 0.822 0.112 0.00 3.91 3.91 35972. 0.826 0.116 0.00 3.93 3.93 36156. 0.830 0.118 0.00 4.05 4.05 37260. 0.855 0.132 0.00 4.17 4.17 38364. 0.881 0.143 0.00 4.28 4.28 39376. 0.904 0.152 0.00 4.40 4.40 40480. 0.929 0.161 0.00 4.52 4.52 41584. 0.955 0.169 0.00 4.64 4.64 42688. 0.980 0.176 0.00 4.76 4.76 43792. 1.005 0.183 0.00 4.88 4.88. 44896. 1.031 0.190 0.00 5.00 5.00 46000. 1.056 0.196 0.00 5.11 5.11 47012. 1.079 0.202 0.00 5.23 5.23 48116. 1.105 0.208 0.00 5.35 5.35 49220. 1.130 0.214 0.00 5.47 5.47 50324. 1.155 0.219 0.00 5.59 5.59 51428. 1.181 0.225 0.00 5.71 5.71 52532. 1.206 0.230 0.00 5.83 5.83 53636. 1.231 0.235 0.00 5.95 5.95 54740. 1.257 0.240 0.00 6.06 6.06 55752. 1.280 0.245 0.00 6.18 6.18 56856. 1.305 0.250 0.00 6.30 6.30 57960. 1.331 0.254 0.00 6.42 6.42 59064. 1.356 0.259 0.00 6.54 6.54 60168. 1.381 0.263 0.00 6.66 6.66 61272. 1.407 0.267 0.00 6.78 6.78 62376. 1.432 0.272 0.00 6.89 6.89 63388. 1.455 0.276 0.00 7.00 7.00 64400. 1.478 0.280 0.00 7.10 7.10 65320. 1.500 0.745 0.00 7.20 7.20 66240. 1.521 1.590 0.00 7.30 7.30 67160. 1.542 2.690 0.00 7.40 7.40 68080. 1.563 3.990 0.00 7.50 7.50 69000. 1.584 5.460 0.00 7.60 7.60 69920. 1.605 6.890 0.00 7.70 7.70 70840. 1.626 7.420 0.00 7.80 7.80 71760. 1.647 7.920 0.00 7.90 7.90 72680. 1.669 8.380 0.00 8.00 8.00 73600. 1.690 8.820 0.00 8.10 8.10 74520. 1.711. 9.240 0.00 8.20 8.20 75440. 1.732 9.640 0.00 8.30 8.30 76360. 1.753 10.020 0.00 8.40 8.50 8.60 8.70 8.80 8.90 8.40 8.50 8.60 8.70 8.80 8.90 Hyd Inflow Outflow Target Calc 1 2.03 ******* 1.29 2 1.04 0.30 0.27 3 1.56 ******* 0.25 4 1.24 ******* 0.21 5 1.11 ******* 0.21 6 0.69 ******* 0.13 7 0.92 ******* 0.07 8 1.07 ******* 0.07 77280. 78200. 79120. 80040. 80960. 81880. Peak Stage 7.16 6.78 6.24 5.37 5.18 4.05 3.62 3.41 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:prop.tsf Outflow Time Series File:rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: Flow Duration from Time Cutoff Count •Frequency CFS 0.004 30948 50.470 0.011 4686 7.642 0.019 5298 8.640 0.027 4795 7.820 0.034 4620 7.534 0.042 3894 6.350 0.050 2515 4.101 0.057 1577 2.572 0.065 1310 2.136 0.073 982 1.601 0.080 334 0.545 0.088 28 0.046 0.095 18 0.029 0.103 16 0.026 0.111 5 0.008 0.118 21 0.034 0.126 27 0.044 0.134 25 0.041 0.141 27 0.044 0.149 18 0.029 0.156 14 0.023 0.164 12 0.020 1.774 10.390 1.795 10.750 1.816 11.090 1.837 11.430 1.859 11.750 1.880 12.070 Elev 7.16 6.78 6.24 5.37 5.18 4.05 3.62 3.41 Storage (Cu -Ft) 65914. 62340. 57373. 49420. 47689. 37297. 33334. 31332. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (Ac -Ft) 1.513 1.431 1.317 1.135 1.095 0.856 0.765 0.719 2.03 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 1.29 CFS at 10:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 7.16 Ft 7.16 Ft 65914. Cu -Ft 1.513 Ac -Ft Series File:rdout.tsf CDF 50.470 58.112 66.751 74.571 82.105 88.456 92.557 95.129 97.265 98.867 99.411 99.457 99.486 99.512 99.521 99.555 99.599 99.640 99.684 99.713 99.736 99.755 Exceedence_Probabi1ity 49.530 0.495E+00 41.888 0.419E+00 33.249 0.332E+00 25.429 0.254E+00 17.895 0.179E+00 11.544 0.115E+00 7.443 0.744E-01 4.871 0.487E-01 2.735 0.273E-01 1.133 0.113E-01 0.589 0.589E-02 0.543 0.543E-02 0.514 0.514E-02 0.488 0.488E-02 0.479 0.479E-02 0.445 0.445E-02 0.401 0.401E-02 0.360 0.360E-02 0.316 0.316E-02 0.287 0.287E-02 0.264 0.264E-02 0.245 0.245E-02 0.172 18 0.029 99.785 0.215 0.215E-02 0.179 22 0.036 99.821 0.179 0.179E-02 0.187 14 0.023 99.843 0.157 0.157E-02 0.195 13 0.021 99.865 0.135 0.135E-02 0.202 12 0.020 99.884 0.116 0.116E-02 0.210 10 0.016 99.901 0.099 0.995E-03 0.217 16 0.026 99.927 0.073 0.734E-03 0.225 9 0.015 99.941 0.059 0.587E-03 0.233 7 0.011 99.953 0.047 0.473E-03 0.240 5 0.008 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 0.248 6 0.010 99.971 0.029 0.294E-03 0.256 8 0.013 99.984 0.016 0.163E-03 0.263 4 0.007 99.990 0.010 0.978E-04 0.271 5 0.008 99.998 0.002 0.163E-04 ], Perteet Engineering INCORPORATED ivil and Transportation Consultants Sheet 1 of 1 Project No. 988oz jroect gEo (ee'Uglo pa * i►46f ubject VAUU $420 Calc. By mom., Date II _ "DO Chkd By Date - NO-FAOi'uz.-- - - - --)-54`rt.. 51 ... 6.3 i FA -INF -kw "1r-. For MSN ANuuAi.-- 'wn - A-4 * 0.01 Aod ) x e 18'►oB sF ` 0 = V C, eA $ = O i L'MtM O.C'.fi - 6-575 cr 1> vt, = 19725 cF Cf CA. l _ - --__ ____ • -- r_' 0,obii : Perteet Engineering INCORPORATED vil and Transportation Consultants Sheet I Project No. g8soL of 3 roject SW (ro' 4d. r) Subject vrogto,.4 Con,rieoi- CA(4! . Calc. By 14,la Date/�o�ao Chkd By Date s) `. Sue- 3-41 cif)ik I 14o,h56 lr 3.34 • tog A -e- I ' ;12 'Loloi `7r . t 1. 30 A.fi I. L3 hi/ . "di= 9-, D $ . jl 3 53&o(, 3F - SoUT1+ I3a�+IJ 2.54. fwes. _--_ INI�FIT pc CIkiof,-ntiasr row) : N14 '4 N2 .._.. to►iIweulWNii . ?Asia : IJ. I 4 IJZ QZ. .- 0.14i G.3 4Rulaio : 5A = 2 x DVo. Ooo9& 8N2FAX Alz64 JC A = Z 0./41/0.o0014) 12PP714 ("Tiler 6F t To Psoiroo Dm/Alt-wmA OQ-.SL ., A = OF Por+D) ` 3. S' 2 - : 8 sex- „ - S - - -_ _ _ - ----- As/21i)..5 Odo -- -- = X 31.00 Ts s CZx3.5)6.5 0 . L x 34,00 x_244 11,14(711.:_ } ' .002a 511 1jQU4tsD Air .4r aF otmF�ca : -- ... . U IAW1c.1k! _IF owific s. : p= 13.91 i J o D= 15 .54 ,r jETCosl - O, �o FT IR.Perteet Engineering INCORPORATED vil and Transportation Consultants IP Subject a° CaNlzvt CAS. Sheet 2 of 3 Project No. ' ' - roject LeePutvo PAez4g4/ Calc. By Date 4/i3/00 Chkd By Date ltipiiiii-r- r MD t Anc714.- 40ST f io : N 3 4 yr. az 1 1 C04TW F3uT1►I61 ..154'51N.1.f 1 a 2d bfe $ GFS -__ yr, v._ 1 c_upWeutr • - -�-- _ ........ - --i - -_-SA '-2_ A Qx • 94;. X C7,0li8 o. 000 9(. pePrlf &tor OF RIVIL -m Ben $4 OF 'PbKc) .. _ .. 3.5 t7 WATvral041 dR-1Ft : Aa - As (2h)°.s o.s 0.c x 3L 00 _Tx 9 /ko s 150 (Z X3.5r.c .L r 340 t 2/4 (32 .2)0. QuigeD - Age, )F bRiric.a ' 14,50 •D013 9F D=13.54 XC D ' 13.54 a •0013. . D•,488Fr ,'+ IR Perteet Engineering Sheet 3 of .3 INCORPORATED vil and Transportation Consultants Project No. 98802 roject Sec, (teerPu6NG rAest#461) Subject gzo34a4 GoW Ttwt. CaL,c s . Calc. By '/G. Date 4/ 3/co Chkd By Date _7 1►r1tNT•M Fro:r40. 6SbLiTµ1rke.1 fly Mb ; SisiK i • �_---_- Co►jTW Pu-nao E+�,�!{s.• '7 tTµ EA614 0.011. crs _ - QNisrD' NfzF,us -A ; i - .9A = 2 x 0.06014. sa, = Jr- -0.012 • 0,00i4L. 94 - 14i 9F 24,0 3F Clap OF PfR- To *room aF_ Pp' o) ° 3. S' DtWATritlN4 0124Flt6 : A, . As (20" o.` x3G0Tee-5 A 0 o (z t 3. s)'.c O•L X3Gea XL4 c(32.y 4 F-KRU'41, M of OPALG: 4-o' 0.00/8 =P PI/WC—Mr- Of OtuFIGG : D ' 13.54 x lav D 13.514/.i'& = ,57s1" z 7 ks111111 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:nw.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.136 0.050 0.123 0.013 0.068 0.115 0.111 0.232 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 2 2/09/01 7 1/05/02 3 2/28/03 8 3/24/04 6 1/05/05 4 1/18/06 5 11/24/06 1 1/09/08 18:00 16:00 3:00 19:00 8:00 16:00 4:00 6:00 6.11-Temviswel r•$lk4a i td.- 4 V= N 2 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - (CFS) 0.232 0.136 0.123 0.115 0.111 0.068 0.050 0.013 0.200 Rank Return Period 1 100.00 2 25.00 3 10.00 4 5.00 5 3.00 6 2.00 7 1.30 8 1.10 50.00 Page 1 Prob 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 n1 k s� Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:ne.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.277 2 0.103 7 0.253 3 0.026 8 0.141 6 0.236 4 0.227 5 0.475 1 Computed Peaks 2/09/01 18:00 1/05/02 16:00 2/28/03 3:00 3/24/04 19:00 1/05/05 8:00 1/18/06 16:00 11/24/06 4:00 1/09/08 6:00 COU T & riti4 pomp, 5v 41 yt z Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.475 1 100.00 0.277 2 25.00 0.253 3 10.00 0.236 4 5.00 0.227 5 3.00 0.141 6 2.00 0.103 7 1.30 0.026 8 1.10 0.409 50.00 Page 1 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 sEpps Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:s.tsf • .Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rate Rank (CFS) 0.180 2 0.067 7 0.164 3 0.018 8 0.092 6 0.153 4 0.148 5 0.309 1 Computed Peaks Flow Rates --- Time of Peak 2/09/01 1/05/02 2/28/03 3/24/04 1/05/05 1/18/06 11/24/06 1/09/08 18:00 16:00 3:00 19:00 8:00 16:00 4:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.309 1 100.00 0.990 0.180 2 25.00 0.960 0.164 3 10.00 0.900 0.153 4. 5.00 0.800 0.148 5 3.00 0.667 0.092 6 2.00 0.500 0.067 7 1.30 0.231 0.018 8 1.10 0.091 0.266 50.00 0.980 Page 1 U 2 a a itt 11111111e d11111p k . Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.070 0.026 0.064. 0.007 0.036 0.060 0.058 0.121 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 2 2/09/01 7 1/05/02 3 2/28/03 8 3/24/04 6 1/05/05 4 1/18/06 5 11/24/06 1 1/09/08 18:00 16:00 3:00 19:00 8:00 16:00 4:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks (CFS) 0.121 0.070 0.064 0.060 0.058 0.036 0.026 0.007 0.104 - - Rank Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Return Prob Period 100.00 25.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 1.30 1.10 50.00 0.990 0.960 O .900 0.800 O .667 O .500 O .231 0.091 0.980 IIevs Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rate Rank (CFS) 0.242 7 0.213 8 0.296 3 0.249 6 0.296 4 0.259 5 0.363 2 0.472 1 Computed Peaks Flow Rates --- Time of Peak 2/09/01 1/05/02 12/08/02 8/26/04 10/28/04 1/18/06 10/26/06 1/09/08 2:00 16:00 18:00 2:00 16:00 16:00 0:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks (CFS) 0.472 0.363 0.296 0.296 0.259 0.249 0.242 0.213 0.436 Rank Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Return Prob Period 100.00 25.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 1.30 1.10 50.00 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 -, Perteet Engineering INCORPORATED ivil and Transportation Consultants Sheet of Project No. jroiect R*Puem� p ubject VAui,-r D131- kg • ne1,7iINGt 6,0401TlOW4 Calc. By NvJ� Date Chkd By Date - D+ h+90µ ----- ;4_L-_^ l'44 ...Pair, e.)1:. �eir�c I _ --y:�3 _.X _Z y,. _.._ .._ l3 .. 0.' _ D -O `l8 D►rAviz* 2 _ i r 4 X liva De ro-✓/y T x 4 _- 3 -- _ i 51 19 29 59 190 rdout.pks in Sea -Tac • predev.pks 1 10-3 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 Cumulative Probability INLET EL. 33 FLOW SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. .0116. ROUND MANHOLE COVER MARKED OEM WRH LOC 2ND 22OL2 023 SEE SPES DWCS -O FOR SPECIFICATION. 36 -2P Du. REDUCER (TYP.) B01T0u EL 328.28 130' INSIDE LENGTH INLET EL 332.11 39' -REUOVABLE BAFFLE 18. Du. RISER—ACCESS OPENINO,' _; . - E PRECAST DETENTION VAULT DETENTION VAULT PLAN VIEW NTS • FLOW BOTTOM EL 327.78 DETENTION VAULT SECTION A NTS FOR LAND USE APPROVAL DM. Perteet Engineering, Inc. IBD/ `M9.9a9 M A. am. C -I. !Amami. 4 OW OA 964-713, ac•C JIM_ Bow. BY B, 1°0— bedwd BB /y>.'_ B, inrymmr 98812 CITY OF TUKWILA S 158111 ST. RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Facility Length: Facility Width: Facility Area: Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice # Height (ft) 0.00 3.00 1 2 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Detention Vault 130.00 20.00 2600. 4.00 0.00 10400. 4.00 18.00 2 ft ft sq. ft ft ft cu ft ft inches Full Head Pipe Diameter Discharge Diameter (in) (CFS) (in) 0.94 0.048 0.77 0.016 4.0 Stage (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.38 0.48 0.58 0.68 0.78 0.88 0.98 1.08 1.18 1.28 1.38 1.48 1.58 1.68 1.78 1.88 1.98 2.08 2.18 2.28 2.38 Elevation (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.38 0.48 0.58 0.68 0.78 0.88 0.98 1.08 1.18 1.28 1.38 1.48 1.58 1.68 1.78 1.88 1.98 2.08 2.18 2.28 2.38 Storage (ac -ft) 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.011 0.017 0.023 0.029 0.035 0.041 0.047 0.053 0.058 0.064 0.070 0.076 0.082 0.088 0.094 0.100 0.106 0.112 0.118 0.124 0.130 0.136 0.142 (cu. ft) 0. 26. 52. 78. 104. 130. 156. 182. 208. 468. 728. 988. 1248. 1508. 1768. 2028. 2288. 2548. 2808. 3068. 3328. 3588. 3848. 4108. 4368. 4628. 4888. 5148. 5408. 5668. 5928. 6188. Discharge (cfs) 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.010 0.013 0.015 0.017 0.018 0.020 0.021 0.022 0.024 0.025 0.026 0.027 0.028 0.029 0.030 0.031 0.032 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.035 0.036 0.037 • Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.48 2.48 6448. 0.148 0.038 0.00 2.58 2.58 6708. 0.154 0.039 0.00 2.68 2.68 6968. 0.160 0.039 0.00 2.78 2.78 7228. 0.166 0.040 0.00 2.88 2.88 7488. 0.172 0.041 0.00 2.98 2.98 7748. 0.178 0.041 0.00 3.00 3.00 7800. 0.179 0.042 0.00 3.01 3.01 7826. 0.180 0.042 0.00 3.02 3.02 7852. 0.180 0.043 0.00 3.03 3.03 7878. 0.181 0.044 0.00 3.04 3.04 7904. 0.181 0.045 0.00 3.05 3.05 7930. 0.182 0.045 0.00 3.06 3.06 7956. 0.183 0.046 0.00 3.16 3.16 8216. 0.189 0.049 0.00 3.26 3.26 8476. 0.195 0.052 0.00 3.36 3.36 8736. 0.201 0.054 0.00 3.46 3.46 8996. 0.207 0.056 0.00 3.56 3.56 9256. 0.212 0.057 0.00 3.66 3.66 9516. 0.218 0.059 0.00 3.76 3.76 9776. 0.224 0.061 0.00 3.86 3.86 10036. 0.230 0.062 0.00 3.96 3.96 10296. 0.236 0.064 0.00 4.00 4.00 10400. 0.239 0.064 0.00 4.10 4.10 10660. 0.245 0.527 0.00 4.20 4.20 10920. 0.251 1.370 0.00 4.30 4.30 11180. 0.257 2.470 0.00 4.40 4.40 11440. 0.263 3.770 0.00 4.50 4.50 11700. 0.269 5.240 0.00 4.60 4.60 11960. 0.275 6.660 0.00 4.70 4.70 12220. 0.281 7.190 0.00 4.80 4.80 12480. 0.287 7.690 0.00 4.90 4.90 12740. 0.292 8.150 0.00 5.00 5.00 13000. 0.298 8.590 0.00 5.10 5.10 13260. 0.304 9.000 0.00 5.20 5.20 13520. 0.310 9.400 0.00 5.30 5.30 13780. 0.316 9.780 0.00 5.40 5.40 14040. 0.322 10.150 0.00 5.50 5.50 14300. 0.328 10.500 0.00 5.60 5.60 14560. 0.334 10.850 0.00 5.70 5.70 14820. 0.340 11.180 0.00 5.80 5.80 15080. 0.346 11.500 0.00 5.90 5.90 15340. 0.352 11.820 0.00 6.00 6.00 15600. 0.358 12.120 0.00 Hyd Inflow Outflow Peak Storage Target Calc Stage Elev (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 1 0.47 ******* 0.37 4.07 4.07 10570. 0.243 2 0.24 ******* 0.15 4.02 4.02 10450. 0.240 3 0.26 0.06 0.06 3.94 3.94 10253. 0.235 4 0.26 ******* 0.06 3.60 3.60 9350. 0.215 5 0.29 ******* 0.05 3.22 3.22 8369. 0.192 6 0.16 0.04 0.04 2.50 2.50 6499. 0.149 7 0.21 ******* 0.03 1.69 1.69 4383. 0.101 8 0.25 ******* 0.03 1.67 1.67 4352. 0.100 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor October 31, 2000 Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 VIA FAX 206-524-0337 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) L2000-033 (Special Permission — Wetland Buffer Reduction) Dear Michael: On October 5th (in response to our July 11, 2000 technical review comments), you submitted additional documentation on the above -referenced files. We have completed our detailed review of that documentation. However, certain additional information is still needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to complete our review process. We have the following comments: GENERAL COMMENTS: We recommend that you update and consolidate the various sets of plans that have been submitted since your original application in February, 1999. That resulting plan set should respond to the following technical review comments. Please provide five copies of the plan set for routing to affected departments. 1. To aid our review, please identify the locations of the latest revisions on each plan sheet. This can be accomplished by surrounding each revised area with a circle or similar visual cue. 2. There are a number of inconsistencies between the information provided in the revised SEPA checklist and the revised plan set (both submitted to this office on May 30, 2000). They are as follows: SEPA Checklist Plans Size of Project Site 396,900 s.f. (9.11 acres) 410,500 s.f. (9.42 acres) Size of Office Building 360 s.f. and 976 s.f. 1,120 s.f. Size of Canopy 1,750 s.f. 2,400 s.f. Number of Parking Spaces 1,060 spaces 1,038 spaces 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Michael Aippersbach October 31, 2000 Page 2 Please make the necessary corrections to either the SEPA checklist or the plan set, as applicable, and resubmit. SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE: Urban Environmentalist's comments Detailed comments from Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist, dated October 30, 2000 are attached for your reference. However, the following points are emphasized: 3. The wetland located on the south side of the site is exempt from regulation due to its small size (less than 1,000 s.f.) and its rating as a Type 3. Please include this wetland's boundary and size on the site plan and label it "Type 3 — Exempt". 4. A wetland analysis was prepared by B -twelve Associates (dated September 26, 2000) regarding the wetland located on the north portion of the project site. The analysis concluded the area does not meet the criteria for hydric soils and will not be considered a wetland. However, the analysis must be revised to include more accurate soil data and a discussion explaining how this relates to the 1987 Army Corp of Engineers Manual wetland determination methodology. 5. To date, your consultants' information pertaining to the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek) on the western portion of the site has been conflicting and inconsistent. Revisions and changes are required to resolve sensitive area issues and mapping problems and to make this information consistent. These revisions and changes should be addressed in one wetland evaluation report. The revised information must be submitted by one wetland consultant verifying or re -delineating all of the watercourse and wetland areas in this portion of the site. Please label the wetland and watercourse with the appropriate ratings. Planning Department comments 6. Sheet 13 provides a listing of the trees to be removed from sensitive areas (i.e., located outside of the right-of-way and on slopes 20% and higher). However, per our April 28th letter, a tree replacement table (meeting the criteria of TMC 18.54.130(3)(B)) is still required. Please add the replacement table to Sheet 13. SPECIAL PERMISSION -WETLAND BUFFER REDUCTION: Planning Department comments 7. Based upon your evaluation of the wetland, you have requested that the required 25 -foot wetland buffer be reduced by 50% to 12.5 feet. Per TMC18.45.040(C)(4)(a), the wetland buffer may only be reduced to 15 feet. As stated above, please revise all affected plans to reflect the proposed 15 -foot wide wetland buffer and relocate all fencing and hard surfaces Michael Aippersbach October 31, 2000 Page 3 outside the buffer. PLEASE NOTE: You may wish to re-evaluate the need to reduce the buffer setback before resubmitting your revised plan sets. DESIGN REVIEW: Planning Department comments 8. The Design Review Application, Exhibit A, contains numerous blanks that must be completed. 9. Sheets 8, 9 and 15 are inconsistent with Sheets L1 and L2. We have the following comments: • The area from south of the maintenance building to the area north of the propane tank. is inconsistent in these five plan sheets (parking areas versus landscaped areas). • The parking spaces on the east side of the maintenance building appear on some plan sheets and not on others. In any case, they should be eliminated as they create a conflict with the parking spaces directly south of the maintenance building. • The required fencing around the propane tank must be shown (inside of, and in addition to, the bollards) on all plan sheets. • In some plans, the bus parking is shown in front of, and blocking, passenger spaces. In other plans, bus parking is shown as a separate, striped area. 10. On Sheet 7, the number of compact stalls in the second row of cars from the north property line should be shown as 57 cars, not 47 cars. Of the total 1,038 parking spaces, please break out the number of regular, compact and handicap spaces on this sheet. 11. You have indicated that a 10 foot utility easement lies outside the north property line, running through a portion of the existing stand of trees. Please provide a copy of this easement and also locate the easement dimensions on the site plan. 12. The east elevation on Sheet 2/3 should contain the same "sunburst" architectural detail as shown on the other elevations. 13. Landscaping, where it occurs, should be reflected in the applicable elevation views on Sheets 1/3, 2/3 and 3/3. Building Official -Senior Plans Examiner comments 14. One barrier -free van -accessible handicapped parking space will be required for both the office building. and the maintenance building. In each case, the space must be located on Michael Aippersbach October 31, 2000 Page 4 the shortest accessible route of travel to the main entrance of the building it serves. Where practical, the accessible route of travel shall not cross lanes of vehicular traffic. 15. Although your proposed accommodation plan for disabled customers is probably in the best interest of Quik Park, it will not be required. The parking lot is not related to, or in support of, any building. Therefore, under Table 11f of the Uniform Building Code, handicapped parking for customers is not required. It is the responsibility of the owner to provide or not provide for customers with disabilities as it relates to the parking lot. Public Works Department comments • None. Fire Department comments • None. SPECIAL PERMISSION -SIGN: Planning Department comments 16. As we discussed, your Special Permission Sign application will be processed by the Director of Community Development, contingent upon the Planning Commission's review and approval of your design review application. 17. As required under the Special Permission Sign Application, please provide four color copies of the proposed freestanding sign. 18. The L-shaped portion of the site located at South 160th (the proposed location of the freestanding sign) should be redesigned to eliminate the irregular shape created by the 90° angle in the property line. A rectangular shape will create a more viable parcel. This can be achieved by extending a straight line from South 160th northward to the outlanes at the project entrance. This line may run at a slight angle to achieve an average width of 50 to 60 feet from the western property line to the westem right-of-way boundary along South 158th. Please make this adjustment and revise all affected plans. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: As a courtesy, we are providing you with additional information. Although this information is not required at this time, you may wish to obtain this information prior to applying for land altering and building permits. 19. The Public Works Department has identified a number of deficiencies in the plans that must be addressed prior to the issuance of the construction permits. Please contact Dave McPherson, Associate Engineer at 206-433-0179 to discuss these deficiencies. Michael Aippersbach October 31, 2000 Page 5 20. As we indicated in our April 28, 2000 letter, required fire hydrants shall be approved for location by the Fire Department, approved for purity by Water District #125 and fully in service prior to the start of construction. By line of vehicular travel, a fire hydrant must be no further than 150 feet from a structure and no portion of a structure shall be over 300 feet from a fire hydrant. If water lines are to be extended to accommodate fire hydrants, please contact Water District #125 regarding associated fees. All water lines must meet Tukwila Public Works Department standards. If you have any questions concerning this item, please contact Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief at 206-575-4404 or Mike Cusick in the Public Works Department. 21. As we indicated in our September 9, 1999 and April 28, 2000 letters, the approval and recording of any lot consolidation(s) and/or boundary line adjustment(s) will be required after issuance of the Design Review and SEPA permits and prior to the issuance of the land altering permit. Upon receipt of the items referenced in Items 1 through 18 above, we will continue processing your applications. Due to the application deficiencies stated above, public notice requirements and the Planning Commission's current schedule, a public hearing on the matter will not be held until next year. As you know, our ability to arrange for a hearing date before the Planning Commission is dependent upon the timing of your resubmission, its contents and responsiveness to the technical review comments provided in this letter, as well as availability on the Commission's agenda. At the point that your plans and associated documentation have been approved for submission to the Planning Commission, you will be advised of the number of additional copies that will be required. 'Additionally, a complete set of PMTs will be required at that time. Please contact me at 206-431-3663 with any questions. Sincerely, aer Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Enclosures cc: Brian Shelton, City Engineer Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief Jack Pace, Planning Manager Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Dave McPherson, Associate Engineer • city of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: October 30, 2000 RE: Quik Park #E99-0005, #L99-0010 — Sensitive Areas Technical Review. This memo is a re -review of wetland information combined with the recently submitted study by B -twelve Associates, Inc. (SRO/Republic Parking -Quick Park, Wetland Analysis Report 9/26/2000). In addition, a wetland buffer enhancement plan was provided by B -twelve Associates to request approval of buffer reduction adjacent to the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek). The buffer enhancement plan, date-stamped Received 10/09/00, was not thoroughly reviewed due to probable changes to the wetland boundary within the Gilliam Creek corridor. As a result of the recently submitted information, I performed a site visit on 10/20/00 and met with B -twelve Associates staff on 10/23/00. Revisions to wetland site planning are being recommended because of past wetland determination changes and mapping inconsistencies. A summary of the wetland status and sequence of events is provided as follows. This memo will update many of my review comments provided in memos dated 7/10/00 and 4/24/00. Wetland Areas Three wetland reports (10/10/97, 7/17/98, & 9/20/99) were submitted with the related investigations conducted by Shapiro & Associates, Inc. Three distinct wetland areas were identified on the site. The First wetland located on the south side of the site is exempt from regulation due to its small size (< 1,000 square feet) and rating as Type 3. It is recommended that this wetland's boundary and size be included on the site plan and labeled as Type 3 - Exempt. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Quik Park Memo October 30, 2000 Page 2 A Second small and isolated wetland was delineated on the north portion of the project site and rated a Type 2 because of a forested wetland class (Shapiro & Assoc. 9/20/99). Type 2 wetlands cannot be permanently altered unless the Tukwila Planning Commission approves an application through the Reasonable Use Exception process. Subsequently, this area was re -reviewed by B -twelve Associates (Wetland Analysis — 9/26/00). They concluded this area does not have wetland hydric soils and it is assumed the wetland hydrology criteria would not be present. The B -twelve Associates' analysis includes some soil data that was not confirmed during the field visit. The soil profiles and conditions observed indicate the area has some seasonal drainage and is a marginal situation. Hydric soil indicators are present at depths just below the wetland determination criteria for soil. Therefore, the area will not be considered wetland. It is recommended the analysis be revised to include more accurate soil data and a discussion to explain how the data relates to the 1987 Corps manual's wetland determination methodology. This information will be included in an overall wetland report for the project site. The Third wetland area is a non -isolated condition that is part of the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek) located on the western portion of the site. The wetland area, flagged by Shapiro & Associates, is located near the middle of the watercourse corridor. The boundary of the Creek and associated wetland were revised and two different flagging surveys of these areas are included in the current submittal. The watercourse rating for this portion of Gilliam Creek (# 22-3) is a Type 3. Type 3 watercourses have a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. The associated wetland, connected with Gilliam Creek, also appears to have a Type 3 rating. Type 3 wetlands have a standard buffer setback of 25 feet. There is no indication of the type of watercourse or associated wetland on the project plan sheets; however, a wetland buffer of 25 feet is shown with some encroachment into the buffer. A buffer reduction request with a buffer enhancement plan was submitted for review. The wetland buffer area in question has dominant Himalayan blackberry and is an appropriate area to reduce the buffer provided no native vegetation is removed. The current site plan must be adjusted to allow at least 15 feet of wetland buffer setback adjacent to the proposed parking lot developments. The on-site meeting with B -twelve Associates confirmed the most recent wetland/watercourse survey has an error that could affect the buffer setback zone and the proposed buffer enhancement. The buffer enhancement plan also shows a parking design revision that is not the current plan submittal. i Quik Park Memo October 30, 2000 Page 3 To resolve sensitive area issues and mapping problems, I recommend revisions/changes be addressed by one wetland evaluation report. The revised information will be submitted by one wetland consultant that will verify or re -delineate all of the wetland/watercourse areas. This complete evaluation will assist in preparing for design review and the approval of related permits. Also, please label the wetland and watercourse (Gilliam Creek) with the appropriate ratings. Cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer July 11, 2000 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 VIA FAX 206-524-0337 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) L2000-033 (Special Permission — Wetland Buffer Reduction) Dear Michael: We are enclosing a copy of the technical review comments from Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist, dated July 10, 2000. These comments pertain to the sensitive areas documentation you submitted on May 30, 2000. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Gary at 206-431-3662. As I told you last week, your wetland consultants verbally concurred with Gary's methodology during the June 30th field meeting. They were also in agreement that the 1,100 square foot wetland on the north portion of the site is a Type 2. Under the circumstances, we cannot continue processing your applications until you have informed us as to how you wish to proceed. The SEPA Determination as well as your proposal for Design Review will be affected by your disposition of the 1,100 square foot wetland. Additionally, your decision to either fill the wetland or to maintain its viability will determine whether your existing documentation must be revised or augmented. If you should have any questions, please contact me at 206-431-3663. Sincerely, "bdbcra,h, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Enclosures cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 • City of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist DATE: July 10, 2000 RE: Quik Park #E99-0005, #L99-0010 — Sensitive Areas Technical Review. I have reviewed the most recent revisions, date stamped Received 5/30/00, including previously submitted project plan sheets for the Quik Park development. The project is subject to sensitive area regulations and proposes a wetland alteration with on-site mitigation. My review is focused on the regulated wetland areas as listed below: A. Wetland Areas Three wetland reports (10/10/97, 7/17/98, & 9/20/99) have been submitted with the related investigations that were conducted by Shapiro & Associates, Inc. Three distinct wetland areas have been identified on the site. The First wetland located on the south side of the site is exempt from regulation due to its small size (< 1,000 square feet) and rating as Type 3. It is recommended that this wetland's boundary and size be included on the site plan and labeled as Type 3 - Exempt. The Second small and isolated wetland located on the north portion of the project site is now reported to be 1,100 square feet by professional survey but was rated a Type 2 because of a forested wetland class (Shapiro & Assoc. 9/20/99). Trees that are at least 20 feet in height and rooted in the wetland constitute a forested class (US Fish and Wildlife Service 1979). The majority of trees in this wetland are black cottonwood. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431.3665 Quik Park Memo July 10, 2000 Page 2 Because this wetland has more than 20 percent coverage of trees, it is rated Type 2 (TMC 18.45.020). Type 2 wetlands cannot be permanently altered unless the Tukwila Planning Commission approves an application through the Reasonable Use Exception process. Shapiro & Associates re-evaluated the wetland and reported the areal tree cover was less than Tukwila's standard of 20 percent related to a determination for a Type 2 rating (Shapiro & Assoc. 5/26/00). A field meeting with Shapiro & Associates was conducted on 6/30/00 to determine if the wetland rating should be changed to the lower rating of Type 3. The result of the field meeting included agreement that greater than 20 percent cover of trees (20 feet in height) are present within the wetland and its rating remains as Type 2. A Reasonable Use application is required to use this wetland. The current site plan shows the wetland area being filled for parking lot development. A conceptual mitigation plan is presented to replace wetland area at a ratio of 1.5 to 1.0 including the associated wetland functions. In addition, the mapped location of this wetland appears incorrect and is apparent on the aerial photograph of the site plan. The wetland boundary points are correct but the entire wetland is skewed to the west. Please correct this map error and add the Type 2 wetland labeling. The Third wetland area is a non -isolated condition that is part of the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek) located on the western portion of the site. The wetland area and watercourse was flagged by Shapiro & Associates and is located near the middle of the watercourse corridor. The boundary of the Creek and associated wetland have been revised and the actual flagging survey of these areas is now included in the current submittal (Shapiro & Assoc. 10/10/97). The watercourse rating for this portion of Gilliam Creek (# 22-3) is a Type 3. Type 3 watercourses have a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. The associated wetland, connected with Gilliam Creek, also appears to have a Type 3 rating. Type 3 wetlands have a standard buffer setback of 25 feet. There is no indication of the type of watercourse or associated wetland on the plan sheets; however, a wetland buffer of 25 feet is shown. The current site plan submittal (dated 5/30/00) shows encroachment into the 25 -foot wetland buffer. This encroachment extends to a point that only retains about 6 feet of wetland buffer (See Sheet 15). The applicant project manager has submitted a letter requesting buffer reduction with enhancement for this portion of the parking lot development (Michael Aippersbach 5/29/00). Per the SAO, a reduced wetland buffer cannot be less than 15 feet (TMC 18.45.040). . • • Quik Park Memo July 10, 2000 Page 3 The wetland buffer area in question has dominant Himalayan blackberry and is an appropriate area to reduce the buffer provided no native vegetation is removed The current site plan must be adjusted to allow at least 15 feet of wetland buffer setback adjacent to the proposed parking lot developments. Also, please label the wetland and watercourse (Gilliam Creek) with the appropriate ratings. B. Wetland Mitigation The proposed wetland mitigation is located on the ravine slope. This may be appropriate for replacing a small wetland area. However, an increased water quality improvement function would be preferred through the construction of benches and a swale to convey the water through emergent vegetation. C. Tree Replacement Per the tree regulations (TMC 18.54), trees removed from sensitive areas, except black cottonwood, are subject to replacement standards. These standards are found in TMC 18.54.130, 3. The ordinance does exempt tree removal within City -approved rights-of-way and easements. Please show the replacement table that determines the number of new trees to meet the requirement of replacing trees within sensitive areas except for those removed from the new road right-of-way (TMC 18.54.130, 3.). A detail of the tree planting can be provided after the numbers and proposed locations are approved. Please let me know if there are questions. Cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer June 28, 2000 Cizy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) L2000-033 (Special Permission — Wetland Buffer Reduction) Dear Michael: On May 30th (in response to our April 28, 2000 technical review comments), you submitted additional documentation on the above -referenced files. We have completed our detailed review of that documentation. However, certain additional information is needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to complete our review process. We have the following comments: GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. To aid our review, please identify the locations of the revisions on each plan sheet. This can be accomplished by surrounding each revised area with a circle or similar visual cue. 2. There are number of inconsistencies between the information provided in the revised SEPA checklist and the revised plan set (both submitted to this office on May 30, 2000). They are as follows: SEPA Checklist Plans Size of Project Site 396,900 s.f. (9.11 acres) 410,500 s.f. (9.42 acres) Size of Office Building 360 s.f. and 976 s.f. 1,120 s.f. Size of Canopy 1,750 s.f. 2,400 s.f. Number of Parking Spaces 1,060 spaces 1,038 spaces Please make the necessary corrections to either the SEPA checklist or the plan set, as applicable, and resubmit. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 • • Michael Aippersbach June 28, 2000 Page 2 SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE: PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT SENSITIVE AREAS ISSUES REMAIN TO BE ADDRESSED WHICH MAY REQUIRE A SIGNIFICANT REDESIGN OF YOUR PROPOSAL. Urban Environmentalist's comments 3. Technical review comments from Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist will be provided to you under separate cover. If you should have any questions regarding his comments, please contact Gary at 206-431-3662. Planning Department comments 4. Sheet 13 provides a listing of the trees to be removed from sensitive areas (i.e., located outside of the right-of-way and on slopes 20% and higher). However, per our April 28th letter, a tree replacement table (meeting the criteria of TMC 18.54.130(3)(B)) is still required. Please add the replacement table to Sheet 13. SPECIAL PERMISSION -WETLAND BUFFER REDUCTION: Planning Department comments 5. Based upon your evaluation of the wetland, you have requested that the required 25 -foot wetland buffer be reduced by 50% to 12.5 feet. Per TMC18.45.040(C)(4)(a), the wetland buffer may only be reduced to 15 feet. If you wish to pursue a reduction in the required wetland buffer, please revise all affected plans to reflect the proposed 15 -foot wide wetland buffer and relocate all fencing and hard surfaces outside the buffer. DESIGN REVIEW: Planning Department comments 6. The Design Review Application, Exhibit A, contains numerous blanks that must be completed. 7. Sheets 8, 9 and 15 are inconsistent with Sheets L1 and L2. We have the following comments: • The area from south of the maintenance building to the area north of the propane tank is inconsistent in these five plan sheets (parking areas versus landscaped areas). • • Michael Aippersbach June 28, 2000 Page 3 • The parking spaces on the east side of the maintenance building appear on some plan sheets and not on others. In any case, they should be eliminated as they create a conflict with the parking spaces directly south of the maintenance building. • The required fencing around the propane tank must be shown (inside of, and in addition to, the bollards) on all plan sheets. • In some plans, the bus parking is shown in front of, and blocking, passenger spaces. In other plans, bus parking is shown as a separate, striped area. 8. On Sheet 7, the number of compact stalls in the second row of cars from the north property line should be shown as 57 cars, not 47 cars. Of the total 1,038 parking spaces, please break out the number of regular, compact and handicap spaces on this sheet. 9. You have indicated that a 10 foot utility easement lies outside the north property line, running through a portion of the existing stand of trees. Please provide a copy of this easement and also locate the easement dimensions on the site plan. 10. The east elevation on Sheet 2/3 should contain the same "sunburst' architectural detail as shown on the other elevations. 11. Landscaping, where it occurs, should be reflected in the applicable elevation views on Sheets 1/3, 2/3 and 3/3. Building Official -Senior Plans Examiner comments 12. One barrier -free van -accessible handicapped parking space will be required for both the office building and the maintenance building. In each case, the space must be located on the shortest accessible route of travel to the main entrance of the building it serves. Where practical, the accessible route of travel shall not cross lanes of vehicular traffic. 13. Although your proposed accommodation plan for disabled customers is probably in the best interest of Quik Park, it will not be required. The parking lot is not related to, or in support of, any building. Therefore, under Table 11f of the Uniform Building Code, handicapped parking for customers is not required. It is the responsibility of the owner to provide or not provide for customers with disabilities as it relates to the parking lot. Public Works Department comments • None. Fire Department comments • None. • • Michael Aippersbach June 28, 2000 Page 4 SPECIAL PERMISSION -SIGN: Planning Department comments 14. As we discussed, your Special Permission Sign application will be processed by the Director of Community Development, contingent upon the Planning Commission's review and approval of your design review application. 15. As required under the Special Permission Sign Application, please provide four color copies of the proposed freestanding sign. 16. The L-shaped portion of the site located at South 160th (the proposed location of the freestanding sign) should be redesigned to eliminate the irregular shape created by the 90° angle in the property line. A rectangular shape will create a more viable parcel. This can be achieved by extending a straight line from South 160th northward to the outlanes at the project entrance. This line may run at a slight angle to achieve an average width of 50 to 60 feet from the westem property line to the westem right-of-way boundary along South 158th. Please make this adjustment and revise all affected plans. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: As a courtesy, we are providing you with additional information. Although this information is not required at this time, you may wish to obtain this information prior to applying for land altering and building permits. 17. The Public Works Department has identified a number of deficiencies in the plans that must be addressed prior to the issuance of the construction permits. The enclosed Public Works' memo dated June 7, 2000 addresses these deficiencies. We also enclose one set of plans and the April 2000 Perteet Technical Information Report showing Public Works' red -line comments. Please contact Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer at 206-433-0179 with any questions you may have. 18. As we indicated in our April 28, 2000 letter, required fire hydrants shall be approved for location by the Fire Department, approved for purity by Water District #125 and fully in service prior to the start of construction. By line of vehicular travel, a fire -hydrant must be no further than 150 feet from a structure and no portion of a structure shall be over 300 feet from a fire hydrant. If water lines are to be extended to accommodate fire hydrants, please contact Water District #125 regarding associated fees. All water lines must meet Tukwila Public Works Department standards. If you have any questions conceming this item, please contact Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief at 206-575-4404 or Mike Cusick in the Public Works Department. 19. As we indicated in our.September 9, 1999 and April 28, 2000 letters, the approval and recording of any lot consolidation(s) and/or boundary line adjustment(s) will be required after issuance of the Design Review and SEPA permits and prior to the issuance of the land altering permit. • • Michael Aippersbach June 28, 2000 Page 5 Upon receipt of the items referenced in Items 1 through 16 above, we will continue processing your applications. Due to the application deficiencies stated above and to public notice requirements, a public hearing on the matter will not be held on July 27, 2000. As you know, our ability to arrange for a hearing date before the Planning Commission is dependent upon the timing of your resubmission, its contents and responsiveness to the technical review comments provided in this letter, as well as availability on the Commission's agenda. At the point that your plans and associated documentation have been approved for submission to the Planning Commission, you will be advised of the number of additional copies that will be required. Additionally, a complete set of PMI's will be required at that time. Please contact me at 206-431-3663 with any questions. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Enclosures cc: Brian Shelton, City Engineer Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief Jack Pace, Planning Manager Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer From: Raid Tirhi To: Deborah Ritter Date: 5/31/00 11:56AM Subject: Quik Park The following are notes to file: The transportation division has reviewed the TIA report for the subject project. we have also looked at the letters of complaints against the project. After thorough investigation we found that the development project has no significant traffic impacts onto city streets and intersections. The distribution pattern used in the report was slightly questionable, but due to the minimal number of vehicles generated there would still be minimal impact. Frontal improvements is all we can ask for. Since the project is mostly affecting city of SeaTac, we have contacted Dale Schroeder of the city of SeaTac public works to see if they have any conditions of approval. They indicated that they have no legal authority to collect mitigation fees and therefore approved the project based on a phone conversation on May 1, 2000. CC: Brian Shelton • • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Tukwila A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: Sterling Realty Organization (SRO) PROPONENT'S NAME: Quik Park of Washington LLC. CONTACT PERSON'S NAME: Michael Aippersbach CONTACT PERSON'S ADDRESS: PO Box 95429, Seattle WA 98145 CONTACT PERSON'S PHONE: (206) 523-3764 PROPOSAL TITLE: Off -Airport Parking Facility and S. 158th Street Relocation. PROPOSAL LOCATION: The location for the proposed off -airport parking facility is north of S. 160th Street and essentially east of Old Military Road. The proposed project area currently straddles the existing S. 158th Street. (The proposed project is immediately east of the Lewis & Clark Theater at 15820 Pacific Highway South.) The existing configuration of S. 158th Street will be modified so that the proposed new alignment is just north of the Fellowship Bible Church of Riverton Heights. Please attach an 8-1/2" x 11" vicinity map which accurately locates the proposal site so that it can easily be identified in the field. GIVE AN ACCURATE, BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL'S SCOPE AND NATURE: A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Construction of approximately 1,060 stall parking lot which in addition includes several small structures. The proposed structures include: (1) a one-story office building (appro.ximately 360 s f.); (2) a 25 x 70 foot ticket canopy (approximately 1,750 s.f. in area and approximately 18 feet in height) with a ticket booth and lane gates; and (3) one maintenance structure (a two -bay structure, with apx: 750 s.f.) for maintaining approximately (8-10) passenger vans (buses). In addition the proposed site development will include the installation of a 2,000 gallon propane tank. The parking area will be lighted and the facility will be operating 24 -hours per day. The site perimeter will be fenced with both an 8 -foot high chain-link fence (possibly with strands of barbed wire at the top) and a wood fence for a portion of the perimeter that adjoins the Laurel Estates (condominium) development. Another component of the on-site security system includes the use of cameras and monitors. Signage for the development will include a wall sign attached to the canopy VED CITY OFT UKVVILA 20430 PERMIT CENTER City of Tukwila Environmenthecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility00-00 of the entry structure and a freestanding sign near the entry (northwest corner of S. 160th. Street and Old Military Road). B. ACREAGE OF SITE: 9.11 acres or 396,900 s.f. C. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. D. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/DWELLINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: None. E. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: There are three separate structures to be located on the site: (A) an ingress/egress canopy (approximately 1,750 s.f., 18 feet in height; and approximately 70' x 20') covering one ticket booth (approximately 6' x 8') and five lanes with moveable gates; (B) a one story, pre fabricated structure (approximately 976 s.f., 16' x 61') containing two (2) administrative offices; a storage area, a lunch room, a restroom, and a coffee bar; and (C) a one-story metal maintenance structure (approximately 750 sf. in area, 15 foot, 6 -inches high, 25' x 30') with two repair bays to service the shuttle vans (buses). One of the service bays may serve as a van washing area. The location of two structures will be at the western end of the site at the ingress/egress point to the site at Old Military Road and the re -aligned S. 158th Street. The other will be located north of the entry canopy and office area approximately 400 feet. G. QUANTITY OF EARTH MOVEMENT (in cubic yards): Approximately 20,800 CY cut; 45,200 CYfill. H. PROPOSED LAND USE: An Off -Airport Parking Facility. DESIGN FEATURES, INCLUDING BUILDING HEIGHT, NUMBER OF STORIES & PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS: All three structures are one story (up to eighteen feet in height for the 5 -lane ingress/egress canopy with ticket booth), approximately 9 feet in height for the office structure, and approximately 16 feet in height for the maintenance building. The office building will be clad in wood siding with flat roof the ingress/egress canopy will be of enameled metal, and the ; The proposed project will also include a 2,000 gallon propane tank; an asphalt parking surface; an exterior fence; exterior lighting; and video surveillance equipment. J. OTHER: None. Page 2 City of Tukwila Envitiental Checklist Off -Airport Parking•ility/3-10-00 ESTIMATED DATE OF COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSAL OR TIMING OF PHASING: Spring/Summer 2000. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, please explain. Not at this time. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal? Site survey and Topographic analysis Traffic Analysis (attached) Building Plans (site plan and floor plans) • Landscape plan Building Elevations Three Wetlands analyses (attached) Water Quality report for the Gilliam. Creek watercourse (attached) Civil engineering analysis Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, please explain. List dates applied for and file numbers, if known. None known. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. If permits have been applied for, list application date and file numbers, if known. Design Review Approval, Clear and grade permit, Building permit, Fire Department permit(for propane tank), Electrical permits, Plumbing permits, and Sign permit, Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) PLEASE PROVIDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS, IF APPLICABLE TO YOUR PROPOSAL (PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX[ES] FOR EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL): [] [] LAND USE RECLASSIFICATION (REZONE) map of existing and proposed zoning. PRELIMINARY PLAT (AND/OR P.R.U.D OR P.U.D.) Preliminary plat map. [X] CLEARING & GRADING PERMIT Plan of existing and proposed grading. Development plans. [X] BUILDING PERMIT (OR DESIGN REVIEW) Site plan, Clearing & grading plan. Page 3 City of Tukwila Environmentecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility) -00 [ 1 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT Site plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? There are several areas of the site with slopes in excess of _40_ percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Soil Survey of King County Area Washington identifies an. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in this area. The hardpan layer for this soil is usually located 20 to 40 inches below the surface. The permeability is moderate (2.0 to 6.0 inches per hour) and erosion hazard is also considered moderate for this soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not known at this time. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any tilling or grading proposed. Indicate sources of fill. 25,000 CY f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, in some areas of the site during construction. However, erosion and sedimentation control measures will be required by the City and the approved TGSCP will be accomplished during the construction period. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 90 percent. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Page 4 City of Tukwila EnvirOiental Checklist Off -Airport Parkingolity/3-10-00 The proposed project will use best management practice methodology as required by the City to minimize erosion and sedimentation in accordance with the approved TGSCP. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. auto and van emissions b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None proposed. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If so, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. A watercourse (Gilliam Creek) is located on the perimeter of the proposed site (west side). The watercourse is fed from flows which originate largely in the City of SeaTac, from development at the northeast corner of Pacific Highway South and S. 160th Street, and possibly north and west from. airport area and a part of Pacific Highway South which then flow into Gilliam Creek. See Drainage Plan.. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. The edge of the proposed development will be a minimum of 15 feet from the wetted perimeter of the watercourse. However, the watercourse noted is not included in the City's Shoreline Master Page 5 City of Tukwila Environment:hecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility411/0-00 Program. Grading for site improvements will slope away from the water course. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not anticipated at this time. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. None required. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, wastewater will be discharged to a sanitary sewer (Valvue Sewer District) . b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn nor discharged to ground water. Stormwater will be detained and discharged to the existing drainage corridor parallel to SR 518 (Gilliam. Creek) adjoining the site. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial containing the following chemicals ...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged via septic system. Sanitary sewer expected to serve approximately 6-8 employees per shift. See utility plan. Page 6 City of Tukwila Enviriental Checklist Off -Airport Parking•ility/3-10-00 c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater runoff from the proposed parking area and roofs of the building(s) will be collected through a conveyance system consisting of pipes and catch basins to a detention facility. The underground detention facility is proposed to be located behind the retaining wall on the north side of the property along SR 518. The outtfall of this system will be to the existing drainage corridor (Gilliam Creek). The system of conveyance will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements for the protection of the Gilliam Creek corridor. See Preliminary Drainage Plan. The discharge of the stormwater to the Gilliam Creek corridor will require a HPA permit from the State's Fish and Wildlife Department. NOTE: Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a separate conveyance system and linked to the existing drainage system for the streets, The runoff will be detained and then conveyed to a catch basin and from there to the existing street drainage system. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The proposed project will incorporate a stormwater detention facility which will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements of the existing drainage corridor (Gilliam Creek). See Drainage Plan. Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a conveyance system and routed into a detention facility which will help to preserve water quality and prevent fitrther erosion from this proposed facility. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Page 7 City of Tukwila b nvironment ecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/0-00 evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Almost all of the e.xisting•vegetation will be removed for both the off -airport parking facility as well as the street re- configuration. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site. Most of the existing vegetation will be removed to accommodate the project. Two undeveloped areas south of the relocated S. 158th Street will remain in natural state. The proposed project will include some additional entry landscaping to supplement the existing, perimeter landscaping and interior landscaping within the parking lot interior. Native species will be utilized as much as possible. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shell -fish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known. Page 8 City of Tukwila Envir•ental Checklist Off -Airport Parking•lity/3-10-00 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None anticipated. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electrical, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs. Describe whether it will used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical for lighting, cooling, tools, and heating. Propane gas will also be used as a fuel for the passenger vans (buses) and to heat the office and maintenance building(s). b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None anticipated. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Police response, fire department response, or emergency medical response could be required (aid car, ambulance). 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None anticipated. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may effect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Page 9 City of Tukwila Environmentd iecklist Off -Airport Parking Facilityil-00 Auto and truck traffic, equipment used in nearby car wash operations (part of the car rental use), and HVAC (air conditioning) systems. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Sources of noise will be from traffic corning onto and off the site (cars and vans) and from the HVAC (air conditioning unit) system. The site will be operating 24 hours per day, however, most of the activity takes place between 6 ain. and 10 prn. The average length of the parking stay is 3 days. The length of stay is unlike parking for a traditional commercial use in which the parking lot empties out each day. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Structures for the maintenance, office, and ingress/egress have been placed at the west end of the site, away from the existing residential areas to the east and south. Limit grading, construction to daylight hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjacent development includes residential (multifamily, condominiums, and detached single family), a church, and a bowling alley and a movie theater. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not in the recent past. c. Describe any structures on the site. One (1) outdoor billboard. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification for the site? Regional Commercial (RC). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Page 10 City of Tukwila Envillental Checklist Off -Airport Parking iklity/3-MOO g. Regional Commercial. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation Of the site'? None. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, see attached wetland reports (by Shapiro and Associates). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? J• Staffing will require up to a total of 25 employees (6-8 per shift). Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Project approval includes a Design Review process by the City to examine issues of compatibility. The project will also comply with the City's development regulations. In addition, the location of the structures and other facilities to operate the parking lot have been located approximately a minimum. of 500 feet west of the adjoining residential development on the east. The distance to the church is approximately a minimum of 250 feet and the distance from the residential development on the south side of S. 160th Street is approximately a minimum of 400 feet. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Page 11 City of Tukwila Environmentaecklist Off -Airport 1'arking Facility/ -00 None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Design of exterior lighting will include features to control light and glare impacts and prevent spill to adjoining properties. The street lighting will be per the City's standards. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Eighteen (18) feet for the ingress/egress canopy (Only the parking lot lighting standards will be taller.). b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Some views of the adjoining Laurel Estate will be altered. For those elevated areas south of S. 160th Street, they will view a developed area instead of an undeveloped area. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed development will include landscaping on the perimeter of the site (a 30 foot wide buffer adjoining the Laurel Estates condominiums and an 8 -foot high, site - obscuring, fence along a portion of the area separating the condominiums from the parking area) and the required interior parking lot landscaping. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The sources of lighting are the parking lot lighting and the headlights in use during the nighttime hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light and glare may effect your proposal? None. Page 12 City of Tukwila Envireental Checklist Off -Airport Parking 41111ity/3-10-00 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The exterior lighting for the proposed project will include cut-off features and other measures aimed at minimizing and light and glare impacting the adjoining properties. The proposed site development plan proposes a one foot candle lighting level for the parking area. 12. RECREATION a. What designated. and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Bowling, movies, shopping. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None needed or anticipated. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None anticipated to be needed. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The access if from Old Military Road north of S. 160th Street. (Note an additional portion of the existing Old Military Road is intended to be vacated.) Page 13 City of Tukwila Environment.ecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/0-On b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. The site is currently served by METRO route # 170. Additional METRO routes are located to the west on International Boulevard South (Route #'s 170, 174, and 191). c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? There are approximately 1,060 parking spaces (excludes spaces for passenger vans). There are no existing parking spaces at the site that would be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways'? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. The project as proposed will require a re- configuration of the existing S. 158th Street roadway alignment and a vacation of a portion of the existing Old Military Road and S. 158th Street rights-of-way. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of). water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. See Traffic Analysis (prepared by Perteet Engineering) Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See Traffic analysis. None anticipated. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: None anticipated. 16. UTILITIES Page 14 City of Tukwila Envirleental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Slity/3-10-00 a. Circle utilities.currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Seattle City Light (power); Water District # 125; Valvue Utility District (sewer); US West (telephone). The source of heating energy for the office and maintenance buildings will be propane gas which will be brought to the site on demand. Propane gas will also be used as fuel for the passenger vans. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. 1 understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature ,^ , Date Submitted M) 30 � 2060 Page 15 City of Tukwila Environmentaleecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/ OO D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental information provided and the submitted plans, documents, supportive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To provide an off -airport parking service for SeaTac air passengers who desire to have their vehicle near the airport for short or long stays. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Alternative means could include a location at other possible sites near the airport. 3. Please, compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action? The preferred course of action is construct the proposed facility at the location indicated in the application. The proposed use is permitted under the City's zoning designation of Regional Commercial (R -C) and normally would only require construction (building) permits, but because the proposed development is within 300 feet of a residential zone, the project requires a design review process for the design of the site, structures and other associated improvements. 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? No. The proposal does not conflict with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. However, the proposal has also addressed the City's International Boulevard (Pacific • Highway South.) Design Guidelines (criteria) for approval of the Design Review. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: The proposed project will comply with. the City's applicable development standards and regulations. In response to comments from adjoining properties, the project proposes additional landscaping and other additional site features (berm, solid fence for a portion of the property line along Laurel estates Condominiums). In addition, the project also proposes additional landscaping (cedar trees) along the east boundary of the site adjacent to Sunnvdale Apartments and additional landscaping (buffer) for a portion of the church's property along the new Page 16 City of Tukwila Enviteental Checklist Off -Airport Parkin ility/3-10-00 alignment of S. I58th Street. No further mitigation measures are contemplated. c/admin.dsk:envrckl3.doc Page 17 Michael Aippersbach & Associates Planning and Development Services pERMITcs_ivTe May 29, 2000 Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Community Development Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Re: Quik Park, Inc. Project (Off -Airport Parking Facility) 3610 South 158th Street L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission - Sign) Dear Ms. Ritter, Based upon your letter of April 28, 2000, I have the following informational items to include for our resubmittal in response to the City's comments: - 6 - Sets of development plans.. - 1 - Shapiro Letter (Revising prior wetland classification) - 1 - Conceptual wetland mitigation plan - 1 - Colored elevation of the freestanding sign (Sheet 1/3 of architectural drawings) -1 - Set (3) - Color Boards with building elevations - 1 - ADA Compliance memo - 1 - Letter requesting a wetland buffer reduction (to the Director) - 1 - Revised Design Review Application, Attachment A - 6 - Revised Environmental Checklists - 6 - Revised Responses to International Boulevard Design Guidelines - 1 - Aerial photo (with site plan superimposed) Specific responses to the items listed in your letter are as follows: Items # 4 - 7 - Elevations and associated information to illustrate the design treatment of retaining walls Items # 8-12 - All of these items have been addressed in the revised site/grading plan Items # 13 - 14 - Revised plans show compliance address these items Items # 15 - 19 - The landscape plans have been revised to comply with these items. Item # 20 - We have provided one (1) copy. Once the staff has accepted the drawing, we will provide the additional 3-4 copies. Item # 21 - The site plan has been revised accordingly to comply with this issue. Item # 22 - The canopy sign area has been revised on Sheet 2/3 (South elevation). Item # 23 - We have responded to those points which are appropriate at this stage of review. PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 Page 2 • • Ltr from Aippershach & Associates to D. Ritter, City of Tukwila/5-26-00 Item # 24 - These details will be satisfied for the building permit application. We have prepared for Water District # 125, two (2) separate Developer Extension Agreement applications for the relocation of existing waterlines (for the street and the site). Item # 25 - We acknowledge this comment and will respond at the appropriate point. We have added several other pieces of information for purposes of clarifying our design or responding to issues not included in your letter or which surfaced since your letter was prepared. Please note the following • A letter from Shapiro and Associates supporting our assertion that one of the wetlands associated with the project is a Type 3 rather than a Type 2 as originally thought. • A Conceptual mitigation plan to allow us replace the existing Type 3 wetland in the ravine, • A memo indicating how we propose to comply with the ADA standards, • A reduced capacity propane tank (from 5,000 gallon to 2,000 gallon) per the Fire Department, • A written request to the Director to allow for wetland buffer reduction on the west side of the site, and • An aerial photo which has the proposed site plan superimposed on it. As soon as the City has accepted the drawings, I will provide the City with reduced copies (8.5" x 11"). If you have any question regarding the above, you can reach me at (206) 523-3764 or fax me at (206) 524-0337. Thanks! Sincerely, Miiht Michael Aippers ' ach c/projects/republic/desgnrev.dsk:tukap112.doc PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 M4Y-16-2000 12:36 PM AIPPERSBACH & ASSOC 2065240337 MEMORANDUM To: Deb Ritter, Planner (206.431-3663/fax: 206.431-3662) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Quik Park Project (Off -Airport Parking Facility) 3610 South 158th Street L99.0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99.0064 (Special Permission - Sign) Date: 5-16-2000/Tuesday Via Fax: (206) 431-3662 Re: Rear and Side Yard Designation - Development Standards Deb, I have an attached site plan so that we can discuss a point by phone. Please forgive the fact that the site plan is not the most current one -- it will suffice for my question. If I understand you correctly based upon our phone conversation yesterday, the City has determined that the rear and side yard designation for the west and north perimeter of the site would be defined as noted on the attached site plan? X's for the rear yard (from the outfall location north and east) and O's for the side yard (from S.16Oth to the outfall)? Am I correct in my understanding? I will call you to discuss my clarification. If I don't get you, you can reach me at (206) 523-3764, e-mail me at aipp@prodigy.net or by fax at (206) 524-0337. Thanks, Deb! Atth. Site Plan (labeled Alt. 2) cc. Michael Lamb, Worthy & Associates dprojecishepubliddesgnrev.dIk rittme05doo Michael Aippersbacb & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145- (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524.0337 P.01 MAY -1G -2�121C3 12:3? PM AIPPERSBACH & ASSOC • 2°644°33 sI 1 IIN2 MI rep ALT. 2 H4 SPACES S 1601'Y S7'. 101 IMMO Nig habar., meg 7.14;IF ASerw • DESIGN REVIEW *Mg RVIIC arIPMPOITOILtigoor 0}74,japont wawa 24 Gillyma pm, P. 02 April 28, 2000 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 VIA FAX 206-524-0337 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) Dear Michael: We have completed a detailed review of your SEPA, Design Review and Special Permission -Sign applications. Certain additional information is needed from you to ensure that the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to complete our review process. We have the following comments: SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE COMMENTS — URBAN ENVIRONMENTALIST: 1. Technical review comments from Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist, dated April 24, 2000 are attached. If you should have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Gary at 206- 431-3662. SEPA COMMENTS — PUBLIC WORKS: 2. Technical review comments from Public Works will not be available until the week of May 1st. Jack Pace will be working with Brian . Shelton, the City Engineer, to ensure that these comments are forwarded to you as soon as possible. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS — PUBLIC WORKS: 3. Section plans must be revised to reflect terracing in walls over 6 feet in height. Please contact Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer at 206-433-0179 as soon as possible to arrange a meeting with the Public Works Department. This meeting should occur prior to your resubmission of revised documents and/or plans. C:\DEB\QuikPark\techltr.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Michael Aippersbach April 28, 2000 Page 2 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS — PLANNING: Design and Location of Buildings and Walls 4. Please submit elevations and associated information to illustrate your proposal for design treatment of walls. 5. Any retaining wall over 3 feet in height is considered a structure and must be located outside the required setback. The wall along the western perimeter of the site (running from South 160th to the northern end of the traffic lanes near the parking lot entrance) varies in height from 2 feet to 7 feet. Please relocate the wall outside the 10 foot side setback area. Alternatively, you may wish to lower the wall or provide terracing. 6. The wall and chain link fence along South 158th (front property line) are considered to be structures. For this reason, they must be relocated outside the 20 foot front setback. 7. Please resubmit applicable blueprints, a new color -materials board and revised design narrative to explain and illustrate the new design strategy for the project buildings. Parking Stalls 8. A total of 31 handicapped stalls will be required and must be shown on the site plan. 9. All two-way aisle widths in the parking lot must be 25 feet wide (current aisle widths are shown at 24 feet). 10. Proposed parking stalls are dimensioned at 8.5 feet in width. Accordingly, these parking stalls must be 19 feet long (current parking stall lengths are shown at 17 feet). 11. A maximum of 30% of the total off-street parking stalls may be permitted and designated for compact cars per the criteria set forth in TMC 18.56.090. Location and Screening of Associated Equipment and Storage 12. The location of the proposed propane tank is inside the 10 foot side setback. The propane tank enclosure must be increased in height to 8 feet per TMC 18.52.040(D). The fence shall be placed on the interior side of any required perimeter landscaping. 13. Recycling storage space shall be provided at the rate of three square feet per every 1,000 square feet of gross floor area per TMC 18.52.080(A)(2). The outdoor collection point(s) shall not be located in any required setback or landscape area. 14. The design of the collection areas for garbage and recycling containers shall meet the requirements of TMC 19.52.090. C:\DEB\QuikPark\techltr.doc Michael Aippersbach April 28, 2000 Page 3 Landscaping 15. Per TMC 18.52.040(H) all landscape areas shall be served by an automatic irrigation system. Water conservation features such as moisture sensors with automatic rain shut-off devices, automatic timers, pressure regulating devices, backflow prevention devices, separate irrigation zones for grass and planting beds, and sprinkler heads matched to site and plant conditions shall be installed. Irrigation water shall be applied with goals of avoiding runoff and overspray onto adjacent property, non -irrigated areas and impervious surfaces. Please submit an irrigation plan reflecting these criteria. 16. All shrubs shall be at least 18 inches in height at time of planting. Please revise Sheet L4 accordingly. 17. The landscaping along realigned South 158th is located along the front property line and, as such, must meet the requirements of a Type I landscape perimeter. In particular, this requires one tree for each 30 lineal feet of required perimeter excluding curb cuts. This standard has not been met on the landscape plans provided. 18. A minimum 5 foot planting strip will be required along the southern portion of the western property line (running from South 160th to the northern end of the traffic lanes near the parking lot entrance). Please provide a planting plan for this area, meeting the requirements of a Type II landscape perimeter (see TMC 18.52.030(B)). 19. Submit revised plans showing the planting plan for all terraced walls (any wall of 6 feet or greater in height). A mixture of evergreen trees and evergreen shrubs shall be used to screen blank walls. SPECIAL PERMISSION -SIGN COMMENTS - PLANNING: 20. As required under the Special Permission Sign Application, please provide four color copies of the proposed freestanding sign. You may also wish to incorporate the design, colors and/or materials of the site buildings into the design of the proposed freestanding sign. 21. As we indicated in our December 8, 1999 letter to you, the proposed location of the freestanding sign should be a minimum of 60 feet in width to create a more viable parcel. Please contact Jack Pace at 206-431-3686 regarding this requirement. 22. The proposed wall sign shown on the canopy (Sheet 2/3 South Elevation) measures approximately 48 square feet, exceeding the code maximum by 37 square feet. Given the scale provided, the canopy measures 3 feet tall by 74 feet long for a total of 222 square feet. Per TMC 19.32.140, the maximum wall sign size is 5% of this area, or 11 square feet. Please revise Sheet 2/3 according. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: As a courtesy, we are providing you with additional information. Although this information is not required at this time, you may wish to obtain this information prior to applying for land altering and building permits. C:\DEB\QuikPark\techltr.doc Michael Aippersbach April 28, 2000 Page 4 23. Comments from the Public Works Department dated April 19, 2000, attached. If you have any questions concerning these items, please contact Mike Cusick in the Public Works Department. 24. Required fire hydrants shall be approved for location by the Fire Department, approved for purity by Water District #125 and fully in service prior to the start of construction. By line of vehicular travel, a fire hydrant must be no further than 150 feet from a structure and no portion of a structure shall be over 300 feet from a fire hydrant. If water lines are to be extended to accommodate fire hydrants, please contact Water District #125 regarding associated fees. All water lines must meet Tukwila Public Works Department standards. If you have any questions concerning this item, please contact Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief at 206-575-4404 or Mike Cusick in the Public Works Department. 25. As we indicated in our September 9, 1999 letter, the approval and recording of any lot consolidation(s) and/or boundary line adjustment(s) will be required after issuance of the Design Review and SEPA permits and prior to the issuance of the land altering permit. Upon receipt of the items referenced in Items 1 through 22 above, we will continue processing your applications. Given the nature and extent of the required revisions, we have tentatively rescheduled the hearing date to June 22nd. Please submit all revisions on or before May 12th to provide sufficient time for departmental reviews. As you know, I will be out of the office May 1 through May 5. In my absence, please contact Jack Pace at 206-431-3686 with any questions you may have. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Enclosures cc: Brian Shelton, City Engineer Jack Pace, Planning Manager Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist C:\DEB\QuikPark\techltr.doc Mayor Shirley Thompson Deputy Mayor Kathy Gehring Councilmembers Gene Fisher Terry Anderson Frank Hansen Joe Brennan Don DeHan FtECEAD APR 2 8 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT "The Hospitality City" • City Manager Calvin P. Hoggard Assistant City Manager Jay Holman City Attorney Robert L. McAdams City Clerk Judith L. Cary DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT April 26, 2000 Deborah Ritter Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Proposed Quik Park development (3610 S. 148th St) SEPA File E99-0005 and Design Review File L99-0010 Dear Deborah: This letter is in follow-up to concerns raised in our earlier comment letter on the proposed Quik Park development. Traffic The following mitigations are adequate' toaddress impactsof the proposed development on the the City of SeaTac transportation network: • Traffic impact fees of $773 per PM peak hour trip per SeaTac Municipal Code Chapter 11.15. • A pedestrian sidewalk connection from the existing sidewalk on the north side of S. 160th St. (at the end of Budget Rent A Car's frontage) west to the access point of the proposed development. The following address some of the other impacts of the proposal: Light and Glare Impacts • Include cut-off shields to direct lighting downward. • Ensure lighting levels of .5 footcandles as per preliminary plans. Potential Noise Impacts • Ensure that no loudspeaker system is used. 17900 International Blvd., Suite 401 • SeaTac, Washington 98188-4236 City Hall: (206) 241-9100 • Fax: (206) 241-3999 • TDD: (206) 241-0091 • Quik Park Notice of Application Comments City of SeaTac April 26, 2000 Landscaping/Sensitive Areas Protection In addition to proposed landscaping buffers, • Where feasible, retain existing vegetation, especially trees of eight inches (8") in diameter or larger. • Protect sensitive areas and prevent erosion by retaining vegetation on steep slopes, particularly on slopes of 40% or greater. Thank you for continuing to keep us informed throughout the SEPA and design review process. Sincerely, Holly E. Anderson Senior Planner Engineering Manager Dale Schroeder Cc: Raid Tirhi, City of Tukwila Engineering Bruce Rayburn, City of SeaTac Public Works Director Don Monaghan, City of SeaTac Assistant Public Works Director Dale Schroeder, City of SeaTac Engineering Manager Steve Butler, City of SeaTac Director of Planning and Community Development Citv of °TErtd 1(.? Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Comm i / nifty Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner FROM: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist 1. DATE: April 24, 2000 RE: Quik Park #E99-0005, #L99-0010 — Sensitive Areas Technical Review. I have reviewed the current plan set, date stamped Received 3/14/00, including the related project information for the Quik Park development. The project is subject to sensitive area regulations and proposes a wetland alteration. My review is focused on identified wetland areas and comments are listed below: A. Wetland Areas Three wetland reports (10/10/97, 7/17/98, & 9/20/99) have been submitted with the related investigations that were conducted by Shapiro & Associates, Inc. Three distinct wetland areas have been identified. The small wetland located on the south portion of the site is exempt from regulation because it is less than 1,000 square feet in size and isolated (Shapiro & Assoc. 7/17/98). The small and isolated wetland located on the north portion of the project site is only 2,000 square feet but is rated a Type 2 because of a forested wetland class (Shapiro & Assoc. 9/20/99). Trees that are at least 20 feet in height and rooted in the wetland constitute a forested class (US Fish and Wildlife Service 1979). Because the wetland has more than 20 percent coverage of trees, it is rated Type 2 (TMC 18.45.020). Type 2 wetlands cannot be permanently altered unless an application for the Reasonable Use Exception is granted by the Tukwila Planning Commission. A Reasonable Use application is required. At a minimum, a conceptual mitigation plan must be presented as feasible to replace wetland area at a ratio of 1.5 to 1.0 and the associated wetland functions. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206-431-3670 0 Fax: 206-431-3665 • • Quik Park Memo April 24, 2000 Page 2 The third wetland area is a non -isolated condition that is part of the watercourse corridor (Gilliam Creek) located on the western portion of the site. The wetland area associated with the watercourse was flagged by Shapiro & Associates; however, the actual flagging survey of these areas is not included in the submittal (Shapiro & Assoc. 10/10/97). The watercourse rating for this portion of Gilliam Creek (# 22-3) is a Type 3. Type 3 watercourses have a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. However, Type 3 wetlands have a standard buffer setback of 25 feet. There is no indication of the type of watercourse or associated wetland on the plan sheets that I reviewed. It appears that the entire watercourse corridor has been delineated as wetland. Please provide the professional land survey of wetland and watercourse boundaries as flagg_edily Shapiro Associates. In addition, the site plan sheets that include the watercourse will have the watercourse/wetland edges and appropriate buffers labelled to show that the code standard is being provided. The Shapiro report indicates the associated wetland has trees as a forested class and that the entire perimeter of the drainage (creek) is Wetland A. This indicates the corridor to be rated at least a Type 3 wetland with a standard buffer of 25 feet. B. Tree Replacement Per the tree regulations (TMC 18.54), trees removed from sensitive areas, except black cottonwood, are subject to replacement standards. These standards are found in TMC 18.54.130 3. The ordinance does exempt tree removal within City -approved rights-of-way and easements. In reviewing Sheet 8 (Survey -Slopes -Trees) there is no indication of the trees that will be removed from slopes 20 percent and greater as a result of building the new roadway. Please identify the trees that will be removed from sensitive area slopes outside the approved right- of-way. Also, show the replacement table that determines the number of new trees to meet the requirement (TMC 18.54.130 3.). This information could be shown on Sheet 8. A detail of the tree planting can be provided after the numbers and proposed locations are approved. Please let me know if there are questions. Cc: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director Jack Pace, Planning Manager Mike Cusick, Associate Engineer APR -19-2000 02:56 PM A I PPERSBACH &. ASSOC 1 2065240337• • .46, MEMORANDUM To: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist (206-43 -3662/fax: 206-431-3665) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: QUI5rkProa(O-amort Parking Facility) StreetL99-0010 (Design Review) REG V ED E99.0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission • Sl ,) APR 2000 Date: 4-19-2000/Wednesday COM NITM DEVEL PMENT Via Fax: (206) 431-3665 Re: Wetland po -- 2nd Wetland found at the Site voicemessage this is a memo m response to your (and based on my rese h regarding the wetland noted below for the above project). This specific wetlansl was one of three separate wetlands that have bel identified on the sir or impactingsite. The following is from my notes: South Parcel (South of S. 158th Street, next to church). This second wetland (identified in notes from Shapiro as Type 3 but inadvertently not noted in gie formal report) is located on the vacant parcel which is currently south of S. 158thrktreet and adjoins the church on the south. This one, based on my notes and conditions (isolated, less than a 400 square feet, and of low value) could be excepted is I understand the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance with nmitigation required. The following is from the Shapi ro report: Shapiro Report Dated July 17, 1998. The last paragraph on page 2 of 3,4ind the top paragraph on page 3 of 3 contains the conclusion to the disposition of the wetland found on the site at this location and evaluated. The report notes that "Any development activities that may affect this wetland likely would not require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because it is isolated and smaller than 1/3 acre. The paragraph further notes that "the Director of Community Development has the discretion to allow exceptions to the City's wetland mitigation requirements. The compensatory mitigation standards can be waived for isolated wetland systems that are less than 1,000 square feet and are of low value according to the rating methodology used in the City's Water Resource Rating and Buffer Study. This wedand is isolated, much smaller than the 1,000 square foot threshold, and would be classified as low value (17 total points using the Wetland RatingjField Form). Question: Do you want a letter for your files from Shapiro identifying this specific wetland as a Type 3? Let me know. You can reach me at (206) 523-3764, e-mail me at aipp@prodigy.net or by fax at (206) 524-0337. Thanks, Gary! cfprojects/republiddesprev.dek:schurne03doe Michael Alppersbarh & Associates PO Box 95429 Seattle WA. 98145 - (206) 523.3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 P. 01 FILE: APPLICANT: ADDRESS: DATE: PLAN REVIEWER: • • Review Comments Public Works Department L99 0010/E99-0005 Quick Park April 19, 2000 Contact Mike Cusick at (206) 433-0179 if you have any questions regarding the following comments. 1. The plans for the relocation of S 150th St should address all other water and sanitary sewer lines proposed in the right-of-way. 2. In meetings with Brian Shelton, direction was provided limiting walls to 6 feet in height. Walls over 6 feet in height require terracing. Please revise drawing to reflect this requirement. 3. All drawings and reports are to be stamped and signed by a professional engineer. 4. Fences are required at walls when the grade difference is 30" or greater. 5. Provide slope on all cut/fill lines. 6. Please label walls in section drawings. 7. Provide information on horizontal and vertical datum. 8. Coordinate with the City of SeaTac for the required improvements to South 160th St. 9. Provide center line station and driveway widths at all proposed driveways. 10. Show revised right-of-way on the drawing at the southeast corner of South 160th Street and South 158th Street. 11. Is a paved driveway being provided for the church to South 158th Street near STA 9+34. 12. In areas of super elevation the high side curb should tip towards the low side of the street. 13. The plans should address the removal of existing underground utilities in the vacated right-of-way of South 158th Street. • • 14. Sidewalkcimprovements on the north side of South 160th Street shall be provided for the entire property frontage of quick park of Washington, L.L.C. 15. Not enough run-off length is provided between the first and second portions of super elevation per the 1993 King County Road Standards. The King County Standards require a minimum of 80' of run-off length for each portion of super elevation. Is it possible to eliminate super elevation from STA 12+64 to STA 15+92 based on a design speed of 15 MPH to 20 MPH? 16. Please shade in proposed pavement on all sheets. 17. Please provide storm report (T.I.R.) for the proposed project. 18. On sheet 3 of , for the off site portion of the project key Key Construction Note #16 was used twice; once to relocate the telephone pedestal and a second time to adjust the catch basin to grade with solid locking lid. Please revise drawing. 19. On sheet 4 of , for the off please revise A.C. pavement to Class "B". 20. Provide 2' landing at 2% at back of sidewalk before beginning 3:1 or 2:1 down slopes. 21. Provide stamped and signed calculations, drawings and details for the detention vaults. 22. Provide oil/water separation at proposed wash, storage and maintenance building. Connect to sanitary sewer. 23. Provide section, range and township on all drawings. 24. Provide spot grades in area of handicap parking. 25. Provide size of RIPRAP pad and size of RIPRAP at discharge point from on site detention vault. 26. Provide grades for on-site catch basins. 27. Provide pipe lengths and slopes for on-site storm drain pipes. 28. Plans shall include standard notes and details. (doc180) April 14, 2000 • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) Dear Michael: Thank you for submitting the sketches of the revised building designs for the Quik Park site. Please revise the applicable blueprints accordingly and provide a new color and materials board. You may wish to revise the design, colors and/or materials of your proposed signage so that it is integrated with the design of the buildings. Additionally, please revise the narratives you submitted with the Design Review application. The public comment period ended on April 7th. For your reference, we are enclosing copies of the public comments we received. If you should have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206-431-3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 City of Tukwila • • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Morrow Brian Shelton Mike Cusick Raid Tirhi FROM:Deb Ritter DATE: April 14, 2000 RE: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) As part of the public review process, the City of SeaTac recently submitted a comment letter concerning Quik Park. Although you may already be in contact with SeaTac on this project, I am providing a copy of this letter for your reference. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 .0-2000 04:59 PM AIPPERSBACH.e. ASSOC • 206524033„7 • 1 MEMORANDUM To: Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist (206-431-3662/fax: 206.431-3662) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Quik Park Project (Off -Airport Parking Fadlity) 361.0 South 158th Street L99.0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Spedal Permission - Sign) Date: 4-10-2000/Monday Via Fax: (206) 431.3662 Re: Wetland Responses Gary, this is the second memo today regarding wetlands for the above project. I thought I would put down on paper, a summary of my pertinent notes and memory regarding wetlands at the site. As you know, there are three separate wetlands that have been identified on the site. Gilliam Creek Corridor. This one is located in the Gilliam Creek corridor (to the west). No proposed development would be located closer than the required buffer feet). South Parcel (South of S. 158th Street, next to church). The second one is located on the vacant parcel which is currently south of S. 158th Street and adjoins the church on the south. This one, based on my notes and conditions stated in my earlier memo today (isolated, less than a 1,000 square feet, and of low valuee) could be excepted with no mitigation required. North Parcel (North of S. 158th Street, next to Laurel Estates). The third one is located north of S. 158th (just west of the dirt roadway) which serves the existing billboard sign at the northeast comer of the that parcel. This one would be required to be mitigated per ou'r recent conversations at a ratio of 1.5 to 1.0 (for a total of appx. 3,000 s.f.). but would also require a Reasonable Use Exemption. QUESTION: In my most recent converation with Shapiro, they suggested that the location of the mitigated area be located further downstream (near where Gilliam Creek crosses under the freeway). They indicated that although it would be noiser at that location, the habitat quality would be higher. In our converation, we talked about the higher location near the outfall at the top. Any problems with Shapiro's approach? You can reach me at (206) 523-3764, e-mail me at aipp@prodigy.net or by fax at (206) 524-0337. Thanks, Gary! o/projeetakepuhlle/desgucev.dsk:eehu me02doe Michael Aippersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 P_01 APR -10-2000 03 :40 PM AIPPERSBACH & ASSOC 2065240337 v MEMORANDUM To: Gary Schulz. Urban Environmentalist (206-431-3662/fax: 206-431-3662) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Quik Park Project (Off -Airport Parking Fadlity) 3610 South 158th Street L99.0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99.0064 (Spedal Permission - Sign) Date: 4-10-2000/Monday Via Fax: (206) 431-3662 Re: Wetland Report - 2nd wetland (south property near Church) Gary, as you know, thcrc arc three separate wetlands that have been identified on the site. The first (1) is located in the Gilliam Creek corridor (to the west). The second (2) Ls located on the vacant land which is currently south of S. 158th Street and adjoins the church on the south. The third (3) is located north of S. 158th (just west of the dirt roadway) which serves the existigg billboard sign at the northeast corner of the that parcel. !( 1 went back and reviewed Shapiro's wetland delineation report dated July 17, 1998 re arding the above wetland. In the Conclusions section, on page 3, it states that it (Shapiro) "delineated one probable wetland on the SRO site on July 8, 1998." It goes on to say: "The area appears to meet the minimum criteria to be considered a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: the presence of wetland plants, hydric soil, and indications of wetland hydrology at or near the ground surface. Any development activities that may affect this wetland likely would not require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because it is isolated and smaller in size than 1/3 acre. The City of Tukwila has regulations that pertain to the altering of wetlands, but the Director of Community Development has the discretion to allow exceptions to the City's wetland mitigation requirements. The compensatory mitigation standards can be waived for isolated wetland systems that are less than 1,000 square feet and are of low value according to the rating methodology used in the City's Water Resources Rating and Buffer Study. This wetland is isolated, much smaller than the 1,000 square foot threshold, and would be classified as low value (17 total points using the Wetland Rating Field Form). A strong justification could be made for an exception on this wetland." Looks to me, Gary, like the City could waive the requirements for mitigation (an exception) in this instance. You can reach me at (206) 323-3764, e-mail me at aipp@prodigy.net or by fax at (206) 5240337. Thanks, Gary! uproue/ae,8v.a.t:,eolaa Michael Alppersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524.0337 P. 01 Mayor Shirley Thompson Deputy Mayor Kathy Gehring Councilmembers Gene Fisher Terry Anderson Frank Hansen Joe Brennan Don DeHan "The Hospitality City" City Manager Calvin P. Hoggard Assistant City Manager Jay Holman City Attorney Robert L. McAdams City Clerk Judith L. Cary DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT April 7, 2000 Deborah Ritter Department of Community Development. 6300 Southcenter Blvd, #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Quik Park Notice of Application SEPA File E99-0005 and Design Review File L99-0010 Dear Deborah: 't., APR 1 0 2000 { nmMUNi i`( DVE OPMF NT Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Application for the proposed Quik Park Development located at 3610 S. 148th St. The project is located adjacent to an area of single family and neighborhood business in the City of SeaTac. The scale and location of the facility give rise to the following concerns which should be addressed through the SEPA and design review process: - Planning Issues • Light and Glare from the parking facility; • Noise levels during construction and after completion; • Landscaping buffers, including street trees on the new right-of-way alignment. Public Works/Engineering Issues • Traffic impacts. If the project were located within the City of SeaTac, traffic impact fees would be collected to help mitigate costs of road upgrades and repairs. How will the impact of the development be mitigated in terms of: - Increased traffic and pedestrian safety on Military Rd. S; - Increased traffic and impacts to International Blvd. at S. 160th St. • Drainage. The area along the west boundary of the proposed lot may be useful to SeaTac and Tukwila as a surface water quality feature. We would like the developer to reserve the right to Tukwila to use the area. 17900 International Blvd., Suite 401 • SeaTac, Washington 98188-4236 City Hall: (206) 241-9100 • Fax: (206) 241-3999 • TDD: (206) 241-0091 Park Notice of A i lication Comments Quik pp City of SeaTac April 7, 2000 We are aware that there will be further opportunity to comment on the application once the SEPA determination has been made, and through the design review process. Thank you for keeping us informed throughout the process. Sincerely, 40-dy adbi, Holly E. Anderson Senior Planner Cc: Bruce Rayburn, City of SeaTac Public Works Director Don Monaghan, City of SeaTac Assistant Public Works Director Dale Schroeder, City of SeaTac Engineering Manager Steve Butler, City of SeaTac Director of Planning and Community Development Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION i, 1 - g D . &Ansa. DECLARE THAT: r of cx —104/10M(1!_ HEREBY 35.g Notice of Public Hearing ,Determination of Non -Significance Project Name (j3( J{V L( Notice of Public Meeting Project Number: E9oj--- 00( 5 Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Mailer's Signature: rj ,W6- Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt Notice of Action Planning Commission Agenda Pkt Official Notice Short Subdivision Agenda )c Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __FAX _ To Seattle Times Classifieds Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this Ih_.day ofAprti in the year 20 0Q Coc_ Tutiloqed-- 1 - g D . &Ansa. Cald Qa4vvirur y 1 1 J 35.g Project Name (j3( J{V L( Project Number: E9oj--- 00( 5 Mailer's Signature: rj ,W6- P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL01/24/0011:44 AM • Cizy of Tukwila • Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED MARCH 24, 2000 The following application has been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: Michael Aippersbach, as agent for Quik Park LLC LOCATION: 3610 South 158th, Tukwila FILE NUMBERS: E99-0005'(SEPA Determination) L99-0010 (Design Review) PROPOSAL: OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Construction of a 24-hour off -airport parking facility containing approximately 1,060 parking spaces, a one-story office building, a ticket booth with lane gates and associated maintenance building. Land Altering Permits, City of Tukwila Building Permits, City of Tukwila Special Permission Sign Permit, City of Tukwila Hydraulic Project Approval, Army Corps of Engineers These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431-3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on April 7, 2000. If you have questions about this proposal contact Deborah Ritter, the Planner in charge of this file at (206) 431-3663. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 4' • LMK VF21C rW w SWMKS2ep.K .a2 CAR PORTS Wiq t4 s7 42 -xtes 32 spoe" 32 spoon P 0 BEGIN PROJECT STA 7+87.75 P.O.T 160th 100+00 UATCH EX&. SIDEWALK • ff, +00 P.0 G.s DW 50+00 P.O.T. 0 \ x g 0 40 80 SCALE IN FEET 1060 SPACES 70 STALLS ARE ON S% SLOPE 990 STALLS ARE ON LESS THAN 3% SLOPE S 1607'1-1 ST. CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING OF PUBLIC INFOR'VIATION SIGNS) State of Washington County of King City of Tukwila I M(Ct,#PtEI. AIt'?ei2 i3AC4I (Print Name) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness. I certify that on 3-.ci`1- 00 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section 18.104.110 and other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at (1 IC S . 15 -S45 -- so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way providing primary vehicular access to the property for application file numbers L'716.1 'OCA -i 9-- Ti• - I v aabk Affiant (Applicant Signature) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2d1 day of lama , BOO sssssssssssssssssss 00,0 M. 7:474. • W ' ‘4OTANy n * :* N'•oc,SOVB1IG `�t= FIA NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington residing at kin My commission a ires on 101 D1-124:0 4111 CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS 000(6 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ') DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DEPT OF COMM. TRADE & ECONOMIC DEV. DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE }FEDERAL AGENCIES ( ) U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES K.C. PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEV. BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FIRE DISTRICT #11 FIRE DISTRICT #2 K.C. WATER POLLUTION CNTRL SEPA OFFCL TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT TUKWILA LIBRARIES RENTON LIBRARY KENT LIBRARY CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY U S WEST SEATTLE CITY LIGHT PUGET SOUND ENERGY HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT TCI CABLEVISION OLYMPIC PIPELINE KENT PLANNING DEPT TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS (. ) ( ) POLICE ( ) ( ) PLANNING ( ) ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) ( ) CITY CLERK FIRE FINANCE BUILDING MAYOR PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE ( ) SEATTLE TIMES 07/09/98 C:WP51DATA\CHKLIST • ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELIND DIV bQ DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION ICING COUNTY AGENCIES LA/v..11.— r inti 1 --- Cs ct -0006 La q - 0010 ( ) K.C. DEPT OF PARKS ( ) HEALTH DEPT ( ) PORT OF SEATTLE ,' K.C.DEV & ENVIR SERVICES-SEPA INFO CNTR ( ) K.C. TRANSIT DIVISION - SEPA OFFICIAL SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ( ( HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT K C PUBLIC LIBRARY SEATTLE MUNI REF LIBRARY SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT UTILITIES ( ( ( PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT WATER DISTRICT #20 WATER DISTRICT #125 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS RAINIER VISTA SKYWAY CITY AGENCIES RENTON PLANNING DEPT CITY OF SEA -TAC CITY OF BURIEN TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION, MEMBERS TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER - DCLU SEATTLE OFFICE OF MGMNT & PLANNING* * NOTICE OF ALL SEATTLE RELATED PLNG PROJ. OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ( ) METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIV. OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL 5,000 GSF OR MORE RESIDENTIAL 50 UNITS OR MORE RETAIL 30,000 GSF OR MORE March 20, 2000 • Cizy of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) Dear Michael: Your Design Review, Special Permission Sign and SEPA applications (under the above -referenced file numbers) have been found to be complete as of March 20, 2000 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. Essentially, this means that you have supplied the required items listed on the application checklists for these types of permits. The next step is for you to install the two notice boards on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the signs with your application packet. We are enclosing two laminated copies of the "Notice of Application" as well as the site map to post on both notice boards. Per our conversation today, you will arrange to post the Notices and site maps on Friday, March 24, 2000. This is the same day that we will be mailing public notice to property owners, tenants and businesses within 500 feet of the project. After you have posted the laminated Notices on the signs, please return the signed and notarized "Affidavit of Installation and Posting" to me. We are about to commence our technical review process, which is the next phase in the processing of your Design Review, Special Permission Sign and SEPA applications. Although your applications have been found to be "complete", the items you supplied may have to be revised or amended. The City may also require that you submit additional plans and information to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City and to finalize the review process. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 206-431-3663. Sincerely, TJap' Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Mike Alderson, Assistant Fire Chief Michael Cusick, Associate Engineer, Public Works Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 MAR -15-2000 e7 :47 PM AIRSBACH & ASSOC 206040337 MEMORANDUM To: Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner (206-431-3663/fax: (206-431-3662) City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Quik Park Project (Off -Airport Parking Fadlity r -� . D 3610 South 158th Street ' '� L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Spedal Permission - Sign) Date: 3-15-2000/Wednesday viaR 1 6 2000 COMMUNITY \iEL�OFMENT Via Fax: (206) 431 - Re: Public Notice Sign - Quik Park Deborah, below are four (4) pie of information to be placed on the public notice sign. Have I got the info correct before fax it off to the sign company? Type f Action: Design Revie Project Name: Quik Park Site Address: 3610 South 158th Street Applicant: Michael Aippersbach Yi14099 T.'"fha; tJ2Qf\ S7Z-17(d e-mail me at ainnfe8nrndigv.net or by fax at (206) c/projeeu/rrpubliddeapzov.dakaittme03da Michael Aippersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 P. 01 • Michael Aippersbach & Associates Planning and Development Services March 10, 2000 Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Community Development Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Re: Quik Park, Inc. Project (Off -Airport Parking Facility) 3610 South 158th Street L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission - Sign) Dear Ms. Ritter, Enclosed per the City's letter of September 9, 1999 are the following items for resubmittal: RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA MAR 1 4 2000 PERMIT CENTER 1. SEPA Checklist Revisions. Includes a revised Environmental Checklist including the Responses to Section D of the SEPA Checklist (for all Project and Non -Project Proposals) dated March 10, 2000. (6 copies) 2. Existing Land Uses. Includes a map of existing land uses within 1,000 feet of the proposed project. (1 copy) 3. Revised Development Plans. Includes six (6) copies of : • revised site plan. • revised landscaping plans. • revised building elevations, fully dimensioned and including use of exterior materials, sign and freestanding sign details (+ sign size clarification) • tree survey 4. Reduction of Revised Development Plans. Includes one copy (1) of 8-1/2" x 11" reduction for: • site plan for public notification, 5. Revised color board (1). Includes an updated color board (1 copy). 6. Written responses to Tukwila's International Boulevard Design Guidelines manual. Includes a Response in the form of Attachment C dated March 10, 2000 (6 copies) PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 Page 2 . Ltr from Aippersbach & Associates to D. Ritter, City of Tukwila/3-10-00 7. Special Permission application. Includes the following: • Special Permission Application fee ($ 200.00), • A written request to consolidate the Special Permission Application with the Design Review Application. (1 copy) • Revised Attachment B dated March 10, 2000 -- Response to item # 1 on the Special Permission Application form (1 copy) 8. Additional Mailing Labels. Includes two (2) sets of additional mailing labels. 9. Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA). Included is a letter dated March 10, 2000 regarding the BLA (1 copy). If you have any question regarding these materials, you can reach me at (206) 523-3764 or fax me at (206) 524-0337. Thanks! Sincerely, n114:14at ale/AIL, Michael Aippersbach c/projects/republic/desgnrev.dsk:tukap104.doc PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 • • Michael Aippersbach & Associates Planning and Development Services RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA MAR 1 4 2000 PERMIT CENTER March 10, 2000 Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Community Development Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Re: Quik Park, Inc. Project (Off -Airport Parking Facility) 3610 South 158th Street L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission - Sign) Dear Ms. Ritter, As the representative for Republic Parking Northwest, it is our intent to process a Boundary line Adjustment (BLA) application for the above project either concurrently with the Design Review or if more appropriate upon completion of Design Review process and the details of the approved design. If you have any question regarding this request, you can reach me at (206) 523-3764 or fax me at (206) 524-0337. Thanks! Sincerely, we _ Michael Aippersbach c/projects/republic/desgnrev.dsk:tukap107.doc PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 city of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director February 8', 2000 Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 VIA FAX 206-524-0337 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) Dear Michael: Since our conversation a few weeks ago, I have been in contact with Brian Shelton, the City Engineer and Jack Pace, the Planning Manager. We have reviewed the remaining steps that must be taken in connection with the street vacation and the City Council's final approval of same. As you know, following the Council's approval, you will be able to submit the outstanding items for the SEPA, Design Review and Special Permission applications (see our September 9, 1999 and December 8, 1999 letters to you). Once these files. have been determined to be complete, technical review and public notice procedures must be followed before we can proceed to a public hearing with the Planning Commission. Taking all of these steps and the public notice requirements into account, the project will not be ready to present to the Planning Commission on March 23rd. We have tentatively rescheduled you to appear before the Planning Commission on April 27th. If you have any questions about this rescheduling, please contact me 206-431-3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 8, 1999 Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 VIA FAX 206-524-0337 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0010 (Design Review) Dear Michael: This letter is in response to your December 8, 1999 memo regarding your proposed freestanding sign. As we discussed earlier, a freestanding sign must be located on the same property as the business it is advertising. Signs may not be located on easements. For this reason, we are proposing that you consider expanding ,the boundaries of the Quik Park project to include frontage on South 160th, your desired location for a freestanding sign. The following information is based on your assumption that the proposed sign will be approximately 8 feet high and 5 feet wide. Of this area, approximately 16 square feet (of each side of the sign) will be devoted to actual message area and the remainder will serve as the sign base. You have asked for clarification regarding the amount of street frontage required for such a freestanding sign as well as the associated setbacks. Calculation of Required Street Frontage on South 160th Per TMC 19.32.060, no freestanding sign may be located within 100 feet of a multiple -family or single-family zone. The following describes how this distance will be measured. Upon realignment of South 158th, a triangular shaped area will be created. This area is situated immediately north of South 160th and east of realigned South 158th. At realignment, It is my understanding that this old right-of-way will be vacated and donated to the Fellowship Bible Church (the adjacent property owner). As a result, the boundary line of the Low Density Residential ("LDR") zone will move to the eastern edge of South 158th's new right-of-way boundary. This is per TMC 18.08.040, as follows: Where a public street or alley is officially vacated or abandoned, the regulations applicable to the abutting property to which the vacated portion reverts shall apply to such vacated or abandoned street or alley. The 100 foot sign setback distance referenced above, would be measured from the boundary line of the LDR, westward. As the South 158th right-of-way is 50 feet in width, the freestanding sign must be setback an additional 50 feet to the west. Additionally, given the sign height of 8 feet, the sign must be setback 8 feet from the south and west property lines of the project. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates December 8, 1999 Page 2 The frontage distance along 160th must incorporate these distance requirements. Assuming that the sign will be 1 to 2 feet deep, the total frontage would have to be at least 60 feet in length. This represents the sum of 50 feet from your eastern property line at realigned South 158, plus 2 feet of actual sign width, plus 8 feet from your western property line. This minimum 60 foot width should be retained from the south property line northward to create a more viable parcel. Sign Size and Design Any business with less than 200 feet of linear frontage on a dedicated street may have a freestanding sign face up to 50 square feet in size (per sign face). You have estimated that the message area of the sign will be 16 square feet. However, if you choose to illuminate the sign base as well as the message area, the entire 40 square feet of area will be considered to be the sign face. Per TMC 19.32.120(D), all freestanding signs in commercial zones facing single-family zones must be approved as a Type 2, Special Permission application. You have indicated an interest in having the Planning Commission review this application at the same time they hold the Design Review hearing. Under TMC 19.32.120(D) these type of "permits may be approved if the effect of the proposed sign would not contribute to a cluttered or confusing condition nor would generally degrade the physical appearance or character of the street or neighborhood." The Commission will review the sign's design, color and brightness, its relationship to the project's building design and its impact on the adjacent residential areas. Public Notification If you wish to propose an adjustment in the project boundaries to include frontage on 160th, this adjustment would be formalized via a Boundary Line Adjustment ("BLA") application. As we have indicated to you earlier, the approval and recording of any BLA will be required after issuance of the Design Review and SEPA permits and prior to the issuance of the land altering permit. Revision of the project boundaries will affect the geographic area that receives public notification. For this reason, once the revised project boundaries have been determined, you will need to submit additional items. Please be advised that these items are formal amendments to my September 9, 1999 letter of incompleteness for the Design Review, SEPA and Special Permission Sign files. Please provide these items when you submit the other items required in that letter. 1. King County Assessors Maps showing the location of each property within 500 feet of the subject property. 2. Mailing labels listing the owners of record for all property within 500 feet of the boundaries of the site. 3. Mailing labels listing the residents and businesses of any property within 500 feet of the boundaries of the site if they are different from the landowners. • Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates December 8, 1999 Page 3 As you will be on vacation soon, please contact me at your earliest convenience so we may discuss these requirements. I can be reached at 206-431-3663. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner cc: Jack Pace, Planning Manager Port of Seattle DATE; TO; Title: Address: Address: City, ST Zip: PHONE: FAX; 11/30/99 FAX Deb or Gina 4110.1 -aa D = = 1999 rt�'i ?J T Total Pages (including cover sheet): 2 FROM; Department of Community Title: Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 431-3670 431-3665 Katie Carlson Address: Port of Seattle Address: Sea -Tac Main Terminal, Room 6432, PO Box 68727 City, ST Zip: Seattle, WA 98168 PHONE: 439-6635 FAX: 431-4985 or 988-5515 *If any pages are not legible, or there is a problem with transmission, please call the "from" contact shown above. Dear Deb or Gina: As we discussed this morning, here is the Request for Public Records for the Republic Parking application on the Sterling Recreation (Lewis & Clark Theater) property on South 158. We would very much appreciate receiving copies of the applications filed to date on this project. It is my understanding that#his would include an application for Design Review and a SEPA checklist, at least. We would also very much appreciate it if you could mail copies to us. Please let me know. Thank you very much for your help and for your helpful information, Deb! I will probably be in touch with you as this project progresses. Katie Carlson 439-6635 Oh, the file numbers ou gave me are L99-0010 and E99-0005. Thanks again. T-,-1 8701 -f11J c1CT AN -1-111141C Jf1 I >Jf1.J LIHQ*i • G1T R T . MP- - Anki 11V v Z41 ' 7`J 1W: 18RM 11JKWILA DCD.PW P. 22 DATE: CITY OF TUKWILA REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS IfIce‘tc it/30/14 NAME: KAri E A,5ojJ mAILINGPo�-r' 8� EArri.E — �o r� DEV. ADDRESS: r(I r• PHONE: FAX #: 181 v S µ39 - to 6 35 LI 31- 14 9i5 oR 988-015 TYPE OF RECORDS YOU ARE REQUESTING: ❑ Building Permit Date Range: Permit #: ❑ Building Plans ' Date Range: Permit #: ❑ Other ❑ Mechanical Pent* Date Range: Permit #: ❑ Utility Permit Date Range Permit #: ❑ Utility Plans Date Range: Permit #: Land Use File Date Range: Permit #:_ Lq .0010 : NamdOc gEpikeLie- PARKING' Orig. Bldg. cupant. Current Tenant Name: sinADDREsS: i dTERt i oisJm. 131..v . PLEASE DESCR E IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR O; NEED COPIES OF: IP IP .g. ESl GN RV(EW) YOUR REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS WILL BE RESPONDED TO WITHIN FIVE WORKING DAYS.(RCW42.17.320) (There wilt be a ,15 cant Per page charge, ovented keen will be aliened additional fees.) RCw 42.17.260 Date Received: 7' d F7171'nki Staff Initials: 9SI Ad 3111d3S AO 160d Wd90:0T 666T'0E'AON • Michael Aippersbach & Associates Planning and Development Services November 10, 1999 Jack Pace Planning Manager Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila WA 98188 Re: Quik Park Facility 3610 S. 158th Street L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission - Sign) RECEIVED NOV 121999 DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr. Pace, I have a question regarding the determination of parcel boundary lines for a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application. We are getting to the point in our proposed development where we would like to draw some fixed boundary lines. After a brief conversation with Deb Ritter, she suggested I contact you for some guidance. As you probably know the BLA is part of the proposed Quik Park development and is an important integral part of the project. Here are some brief facts: • Sterling Realty Organization (SRO) is the underlying property owner for both the theater/bowl and the proposed Quik Park project. • The proposed re -alignment of S. 158th Street will leave two smaller unusable parcels of land isolated from the main portion of the existing vacant land (on the south. side of the new roadway). • The zoning on the two parcels is Regional -Commercial (R -C) with no minimum lot size. • The larger parcel (apx. 11,531 s.f.) which directly abuts the Sunnydale apartment and the church properties although of suitable size for development is unusable because of it's steep topography and difficult (perhaps even improbable) access to the new revised S. 158th Street. • The smaller parcel (5,531 s.f.) while topographically better related to S. 158th Street for access purposes, is nonetheless too small and badly configured for any future development and thus unusable. • The re -alignment of S. 158th Street will provide a transition between the commercial land use designation on the SRO property and that of the residential designation to the east (Sunnydale apartments) and south (Fellowship Bible Church). The Sunnydale apartment owners are in favor of that proposed separation and the church also supports our request. • To provide a free right turn at the intersection of Old Military road and S. 158th Street, the existing Old Military Road roadway will need to be moved to the west. PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 • • Page 2 Ltr from Aippersbach & Associates to J. Pace, City of Tukwila/11-10-99 The shifting of the roadway is necessary to minimize the impacts to the existing driveway from the manse (garage) to Old Military Road. The accompanying map shows our preliminary layout for the BLA. In addition to the shift to the west of the existing ROW for Old Military Road, some frontage on S. 160th Street for the Quik Park development is essential. It is also our desire to combine the two triangular lots as a separate tax parcel. At least one of the criteria for the BLA appears to be in conflict with some of our intent. Do you have any suggestions or guidance? I have a second question regarding BLA approval criteria (which I did not discuss with Deb Ritter). The handout I received for a BLA (or Lot Consolidation) lists some specific criteria which the application must address. The criteria on the first page of the information handout appear to be similar in some respects to the criteria contained in Paragraph C, Section 17.08.030 Preliminary Approval of the City's Title 17, Subdivision and Plats (page 17-4). Similar, but not the same. Are we expected in our application to respond to both sets of criteria? Jack, I look forward to talking with you regarding these questions. If you need me to come to the City and meet with you or other staff I would be happy to do so. Also I have other information (e.g., a site plan, an aerial photo, etc.) which could be of assistance. You can reach me at (206) 523-3764 or by Fax at (206) 524-0337. Thanks! Sincerely, 04.0RA Michael Aippersbach encl. Preliminary Layout of BLA request (8-1/5" x 11" map) c/projects/republic/boulnadj.dsk:tukw1e01.doc PO Box 95429 - Seattle, Washington 98145 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 EXHIBIT (-Ross/ 4,6 (00„..,,,ior Srq n—# _e_r _ — ROUTE SI GN—= a— r.fo 'ACCESS BILLBOARDS 110 Ac:. rt. 23 1.48 Ac 6?/..5.5 . /58TH 1: 5 Ac. ti ti S6 I_ 'r .G , 10 80 Ac BOWLING ALLEY ' (PARKING) RESTAURANT .0 *I' OAST TO COAST Ac. HARDWARE �si3N ���1:i84§ �I� STERLING THEATRES CO. NNYD 1 26/ s 216 J & C AUTO ..d • �'<ir*��` STERLING yLIG /zo „1,,0""THEATRES CO. � DOLLAR RENT -A -CAR . 1.00 Ac. 1.71 AC. • CHURCH HEIGHTS PRESB. CHURCH • t CORP ol�.r000°S:ac�o ��QEgaT l� 2 v�000 o ••• o.rp 000 a{ • ti Prepared by Michael Aippersbach & Associates :umuiIii 1wu U11,csi11 F &icw db • 1 n 1 c N v 00 1 J 1 1 r LIMIT "' = ©o �3� c4°o a =Ire i I -cf p ": • -/64T1-/• .—•; ST —....'" 1 \ oiler Way Seanle,^WA 98104 el phone: 06.624.9190 @shap.com September 20, 1999 Mr. Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach Associates P.O. Box 95429 ' Seattle, Washington 98145 Re: Wetland delineation of the SRO Tukwila site Dear Michael: SHAPIRO S ASSOCIATES, INC. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA MAR 1 7 2000 PERMIT CENTER At your request, Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) performed a delineation of wetlands on the SRO Tukwila site at the location you indicated on your July 14, 1999 memo to Marc Bou1e (Figure 1: Vicinity Map). The area of concern is located along the western side of the dirt road -just west of the Laurel Estates Condominiums (Figure 2: Wetland Sketch Map). A wetland investigation of this area was performed on September 10, 1999. This letter describes the methods used for the field study and SHAPIRO's findings. Methods In accordance with the City of Tukwila's Critical Areas Ordinance (1991) the study area was examined using methods and criteria described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Manual, 1987) and the Washington Department of Ecology Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual. (WDOE, 1997). Pursuant to the Clean Water Act and through the Section 404 permitting process, the U . S . Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been given the responsibility and authority to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters and adjacent wetlands of the United States (Federal Register, 1986). The Corps and other federal agencies use the following definition of wetlands for administering the Section 404 permit program (Federal Register, 1980, 1982): "Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted_for life in saturated soil conditions." Wetlands are defined by three parameters, hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and a. hydrologic component. According to criteria presented in the Manual and WDOE, all -three parameters must be met for the area to be considered a wetland. Vegetation is characterized by its wetland indicator status. Plants that are found almost entirely in wetlands are considered obligate (OBL). Plants frequently found in wetlands are facultative wetland (FACW). Plants that may occur equally in wetland and upland areas are facultative (FAC). Plants that are generally found in upland areas are facultative upland (FACU). Plants found almost entirely in uplands are upland (UPL). Areas with a predominance of FAC to OBL vegetative species (50% or greater) would meet the wetland vegetation criteria. Mr. Michael Aipplikach September 20, 1999 Page 2 Soils are characterized by their color, hue, and chroma. For example a soil with a 10YR 4/2 designation describes the color (10YR), hue (4), and chroma (2). Soils with a chroma of 2 and mottling or that have a chroma of 1 are considered to be hydric (wetland). Loam soils with a chroma of 2 without mottles or a chroma of 3 or higher, with or without mottles, are considered to be non -hydric. The most influential factor for an area to be considered a wetland is the hydrologic component. A water regime, as determined through inundation or saturation of soils, is required within a major portion of the root zone (usually within 12 inches of the surface) during the growing season (generally March through October) for the area to meet the hydrologic criteria for wetlands (Manual, p.38; WDOE, p.32). Results Review of the National Wetland Inventory map (Des Moines, Washington quadrangle; 1987) shows no wetlands on the property. The 1973 King County soils map does not describe soils within this area because of its highly developed urban nature (commercial and residential properties). Soils immediately east of the site are described as Arents Alderwood series (non -hydric). The area investigated is a shallow depression that is approximately 2,000 square feet in size. Vegetation within this area consists of young (18 to 45 feet high and 4 to 8 inches in diameter, breast high) black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) (FAC) trees with a scrub - shrub and herbaceous layer understory. The scrub -shrub layer is dominated by Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) (FACU) intermixed with Douglas' spirea (Spiraea douglasii) (FACW). The herbaceous layer is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) with a few field horsetail (Equisetum arvens) (FAC) and Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvense) (FACU-). Soils within the depression were predominantly dark brown (10YR 4/2) to dark yellowish brown loams with 10YR 4/6 mottles. The low chroma (2) with the presence of mottles is indicative of frequent saturation and wetland conditions (hydric). Upgradient from the depression, soils were a 10YR 3/3 without mottles (non -hydric). A water regime, as determined through inundation or saturation of soils within 12 inches of the surface, was not observed at the time of this study. However, evidence of dried algal mats suggests that this area would be inundated for an extended period of time during the early portion of the growing season. Discussion and Conclusions The depression area meets wetland criteria based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and indicators of hydrology (see attached Field Data Forms). The attached wetland sketch map depicts the general area and wetland flag locations. Locations of the wetland flags are approximate and should not be used for planning or permitting purposes. Mr. Michael Aipptach September 20, 1999 Page 3 Impacts to wetlands may require Corps notification and approval along with a Section 401 water quality certification from the Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE). For purposes of Section 404, the Corps makes the . final determination as to whether wetland impacts require Corps permitting. In any case, the Corps -should be consulted about permit requirements. The City regulates wetlands through their Sensitive Areas Ordinance found in Chapter 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. Regulated wetlands are described as ponds or lakes thirty acres or less and those lands subject to the "Wetland" definition..." The City rates wetlands into three types: 1, 2, or 3. Wetland Type Description' Type Description • Presence of species listed by the federal government or state as endangered, or threatened, or the presence of critical or outstanding actual habitat for those. species; 1 • Wetlands having 40% to 60% permanent open water in disperse patches with two or more classes of vegetation; • Wetlands equal to or -greater than five acres in size and having three or more wetland classes, one of which may be substituted by permanent or open water. • Wetlands greater than one acre; • Wetlands equal to or less than one acre in size and having three or more 2 wetland classes; • Wetlands equal to or less than .one acre that have a forested wetland class Comprised of at least 20% coverage of total surface area; or • The presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees. • The presence of native plant association of infrequent occurrence. 3 • Wetlands which are equal to or less than one acre in size and that have two or fewer wetland classes. City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO) (1991) According to the SAO definition, the onsite wetland would be rated as a Type 2 wetland because of the forested component that comprises 100 percent of the canopy. The City requires a 50 -foot buffer for Type 2 wetlands. Conditions within the SAO generally do _ not permit impacts to Type 2 wetlands except for maintenance; non-destructive education and research; passive recreation; impacts to public health and safety; construction of new streets, roads, right-of-ways, and utilities; selected surface water discharges; enhancement or other forms of mitigation; or through an approved reasonable -use exception (SAO Section 18.45.080.A; B; and H). Mr. Michael Aippilkach September 20,.1999 Page 4 Gary Schultz from the City of Tukwila assessed this location in late March and suggested 'it may be a wetland. At that time, there was 100% soil saturation and standing water at the site. This area could be considered a Class 2 forested wetland, however it is very small and isolated. Gary said that under discretion of the City of Tukwila, this could be considered a candidate for relocation or removal with out -of -kind mitigation. Any impact to the wetland may require notification to the Corps and compliance with specific regulatory conditions by the City. The regulatory implications are based on our understanding of federal and local regulations in force at the time of this report. The final determination of wetland boundaries, classifications, buffers, setbacks, and potential mitigation measures are made by federal and local jurisdictions following review of a site- specific wetland report. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any questions about this material, or we can be of further assistance on this other projects, please do not hesitate to call me or Marc Boule. Sincerely, SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. G•�,y�v 2/ C�Q'Gs�X-'rte James H. Carsner Environmental Scientist Mr. Michael Aippe ach September 20, 1999 Page 5 REFERENCES City of Tukwila, 1991. City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas ordinance. City of Tukwila, Washington Ordinance No. 1599. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist, 1996. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. Munsell Color, 1990. Munsell Soil Color Charts., Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Newburgh, NY Reed, P.B. Jr.; 1997. Revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands. Department of the Interior, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 1990. Washington Hydric Soils List. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. Prepared in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987. National Wetland Inventory map. Des Moines, Washington, 7.5 minute quadrangle. S 136th St SEATTLE V TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Source: Thomas Guide, 1998 FIGURE 1 0 2400' ,,A Approximate Scale in Feet VICINITY MAP lowir S H A ASSOCIATES, I R O INC. SRO ru w 6971064.2 09.20.99 4 NOT TO SCALE & ASSOCIATES. INC. FIGURE 2 WETLAND SKETCH MAP SRO TUKWILA 6971064.2 09.20.99 DATA FORM 1 WETLAND DETERMINATION Applicant,/ Application Project Name: /%A• /f35 .G. Number: Name: SRO State: (v 4 County: /LI Pt, Legal Description: Township: 33NRange: 1 E Date: 9•/0' • f f Plot No.: / Section: slj ��K " ZZ Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)]. Indicate species with observed morphological or known physiological adaptations with an asterisk. Indicator Indicator Species Status Species Status Trees Herbs 1. a134 FAC 7. P A-2 • 2. 8. 3. 9. Saplings/shrubs Woody vines 4. 5PO FA -C 10. 5. to c...4 D T F.4 C.U. 11. 6. 12. Z of species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 41. Other indicators: Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes p/ No Basis: >5-07; PJr , e., Soil Series and phase: A2E,,Ts hydric soils list? Yes ; No L./. Mottled: Yes .i; No Mottle color:/0'0-Y/C; Matrix color: joYte.- L Gleyed: Yes No f Other indicators: Hydric soils: Yes vi No ; Basis: r 4.044 � Ace, ?7'7 er Hydrology Inundated: Yes ; No ✓ . Depth of standing water: Saturated soils: Yes ; No ,/ . Depth to saturated soil: Other indicators: bk.-let 4ieva Ac dt7 • Wetland hydrology: Yes ,/ ; No Basis: Atypical situation: Yes ; No ,/ Normal Circumstances? Yes No Wetland Determination: Wetland Comments: ; Nonwetland Determined by: B2 DATA FORM 1 WETLAND DETERMINATION Applicant Application Project Name: 4, /1SSr'C Number: Name: 5',e.d, jto .44e€.%fre State: 44,14 County: /L/tiG-'Legal Description: Township: 9.3A/Range: .t./6 -- Date: 41. /0 • `f' f Plot No.: Z Section: S'LJ'/9 — ).1 - Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)]. Indicate species with observed morphological or known physiological adaptations with an asterisk. Indicator Indicator Species Status Species Status Trees Herbs 1. 7. P r4-1-71- FAT. ea, 2. 8. 3. 9. Saplings/shrubs Woody vines 4. EL u b i •tGK 10. 5. 11. 6. 12. % of species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC:. Other indicators: /� Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes f No Basis: 50 47s Fky — /k .1-41 /•ccs{; Soil Series and phase: 4/LGJs /4-1-desw•weltn hydric soils list? Yes ; No ✓. Mottled: Yes ; No ✓ . Mottle color: ; Matrix color: /00-{ R ilk Gleyed: Yes No b/ Other indicators: Hydric soils: Yes No i/ ; Basis: C 6,d.oc 2 3 Hydrology Inundated: Yes ; No „0/'. Depth of standing water: Saturated soils: Yes ; No / . Depth to saturated soil: Other indicators: Wetland hydrology: Yes ; No Basis: Atypical situation: Yes ; No ,/ . Normal Circumstances? Yes f No Wetland Determination: Wetland ; Nonwetland Comments: Determined by: B2 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director ptember.9, 1999 Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, Washington 98145 Re: Quik Park 3610 South 158th L99-0010 (Design Review) E99-0005 (SEPA) L99-0064 (Special Permission — Sign) Dear Michael: This response letter incorporates our letters and communications to you dated March 22nd, June 29th, June 30th, July 16th and August 20th. As we have indicated to you in those communications, your applications have been found to be incomplete. This determination of incompleteness is based on our review of all of the materials and communications directed to us from the time.of your original submittal on February 23, 1999 to the present. As you know, the ordinance granting your petition for a street vacation was reviewed and approved by the Tukwila City Council on September 7th. All of the following must occur before we can commence substantive review of your Design Review and SEPA applications: 1. The Director of Public Works determines that all the conditions of the street vacation ordinance have been satisfied. • 2. All outstanding items in connection with your Design Review and SEPA applications are submitted to the Department of Community Development. 3. Your Design Review and SEPA applications are deemed to be complete upon our review and approval of the outstanding items referenced in Item 2 above. As a courtesy, we are providing a listing of those outstanding items at this time, in anticipation that you will satisfy the ordinance conditions. Although some of the items listed below have already been provided, you have presented them piecemeal and in a -variety of formats.. Please be advised that the revisions indicated below are to be consolidated and resubmitted at one time. Do not submit these items prior to the satisfaction of the ordinance conditions. SEPA APPLICATION: 1. Six copies of Pages 22 and 23 of the Environmental Checklist (Supplemental Sheet for all project and non -project proposals). DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION: 2. Surrounding area map showing existing land uses within a 1,000 foot radius from the site's property lines. The area map you submitted to us on March 8, 1999 only provided existing zoning (6 copies). 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates September9, 1999 _- -- - Page2 3. Six copies of the site plan, modified to include the following: a. All existing and -proposed property lines and dimensions; lot sizes and names of all adjacent roads. b. Gross floor area of existing and proposed structures with setbacks. - c. Location and classification of any watercourses or wetlands including the required buffer width per the City's Sensitive Areas Ordinance. d. Notation of slope areas in excess of 20%. f. Location of closest existing fire hydrant; location and size of utility lines; location and size of utilities or street/sidewalk easement or dedications. Relevant structures or features, such as rockeries, retaining walls and fences, including typical elevations for each. 4. Six copies of the landscape plan, modified to including the following: a. Landscaping requirements for the Regional Commercial Zone as shown in TMC 18.24.080 and as shown in Chapter TMC 18.52 (attached). b All existing trees over 4 inches in diameter by size and species. All trees to be saved shall also be indicated. 5. Six copies of the building elevations, modified to include the following: a. Provide dimensions for all building facades and major architectural elements (including canopy faces). Elevations on Sheets 2/3 and 3/3 were only partially dimensioned. b. Provide notations of materials to be used (incorporating the information on the "Envisioned Building Materials" sheet submitted July 8, 1999). 6. A high quality 8-1/2" x 11" inch reduction of the revised site plan. Once your applications have been determined to be complete, this reduction will be included in the public notification. 7. Complete, high quality 8-1/2" x 11" inch reductions representing all of the plan sheets to be revised. This set of reductions must be provided prior to the public hearing; ___ _ 8. A revised colors and materials board showing colors and materials to be used on all buildings (incorporating the information on the "Envisioned Building Materials" sheet submitted July 8, 1999). • 9. Please provide your written response to the design guidelines provided in the Tukwila International Boulevard Design Manual (dated January, 1999). 10. A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of the Department determining that a complete application has been received. SPECIAL PERMISSION — SIGN: 11. Special permission sign application fee of $200.00, payable to the City of Tukwila. • • Michael Aippersbach___ Michael Aippersbach & Associates September 9-1999 - - Page 3 12. A written request that your. Type 2, Special Permission Sign Application be consolidated with your Type 4, Design Review Application. Please Note: a separate Sign Permit Application (and $50 feel will be required for both signs prior to their installation. - 13. Six copies of Sheet 1/3, corrected to reflect the following: a. Your proposed revisions to the freestanding sign design, submitted on July 8, 1999. The revised elevation must be completely dimensioned and scaled. b. The site plan shall be revised to show the proposed location of freestanding sign. As indicated in our March 22, 1999 letter to you, the freestanding sign maynot be located in an easement. - c. The site plan shall be dimensioned so as to indicate the distance (setbacks) of the freestanding sign from all property lines. The setback from each property line may not exceed the height of the sign, which in turn, may not exceed the height of the building. -- - 14. Color copies of the elevation of the proposed freestanding sign. 15. The proposed wall sign shown on the canopy south elevation (Sheet 2/3) measures approximately 32 square feet, exceeding the code maximum by 19.05 square feet. Given the scale provided, the canopy appears to be 3.5 feet tall by 74 feet long for a total of 259 square feet. Per TMC 19.32.140, the maximum wall sign is 5% of this area, or 12.95 square feet. Per Item 5(a) above, this elevation must be completely dimensioned and scaled to verify these requirements. Please submit six corrected copies of Sheet 2/3. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: As a courtesy, we are providing you with the following information. Although the items listed below are not required at this time, you may wish to begin collecting this information. A. more complete listing of items will be provided to you during our substantive review process. 16. Lot Consolidation/BLA application. Approval and recording of any lot consolidation(s) and/or boundary line adjustment(s) will be required after issuance of the Design Review and SEPA permits and prior to the issuance of the land altering permit. 17. As indicated in our March 22nd letter to you, the design of the proposed structures do not appear .to comply with the design guidelines for Tukwila International Boulevard (referenced in Item 9 above). In particular, given the size and extent of the retaining walls you may wish to modulate the surface, add texture or create terraces for plantings. In regard to the design of the proposed buildings, you may wish to consider more permanent building materials such as masonry, again employing texture, detailing and/or modulation in building walls and rooflines (see the "Building Elements, Details and Materials" section of that design manual for guidelines). Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates September 9, 1999 ------- Page 4 -�� If you should have any questions regarding the withn, please do not hesitate to contact me at 206-431-3663. �°~ Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner_ Enclosures cc: Jim Morrow, Director, Public Works Jack Pace, Planning Manager Nick Olivas, Fire Department Gary Schulz, Urban Environmentalist BobAbbott, Tukwila Police • Rear W None • Rear; if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR '10 feet Recreation space 200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Recreation space, senior citizen housing 100 sq. ft. per dwelling unit Off street parking: • Residential (except senior citizen housing) 2 per dwelling unit • Accessory dwelling unit See Accessory Use section of this chapter . Office 3 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum. Retail 2.5 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum • Manufacturing 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum' • Warehousing 1 per 2,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum • Other'uses, including senior citizen housingSee TMC 18.56 Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. - Performance Standards: Use, activity and operations within a structure or a site shall comply with (1) standards adopted by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control. Agency for odor, 'dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2)TMC 8.22, "Noise", and, (3) adopted State and Federal standards for water quality andhazardous materials. In addition, all development subject' to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C, shall be evaluatedto determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. Section 5. Ordinance 1758 §1 (part) and Ordinance 1865 §31, as codified at Section 18.24, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.24.080 Basic development standards. , Development within the Regional Commercial district shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards. In the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor, there are circumstances under which these basic standards may be waived (see -TMC 18.60.030). Certain setback and landscaping standards may be waived by the director of Community Develop- ment as a Type 2 decision when an applicant can demonstrate that shared parking is provided. If a project requires- a- Type 4. approval process, certain setbacks and, landscaping may be waived by the BAR when an. applicant can demonstrate that the number of driveways is reduced; efficiency of the site is increased, joint use of parking facilities is allowed or pedestrian oriented space is provided. Landscaping and setback standards may not be waived on commercial property sides adjacent to residential districts. See the Tukwila International Boulevard Design Manual for more detailed directions. See also Chapter 18.50, Supplemental Development Regulations. RC BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area per unit (multi -family, except 2,000 sq. ft. senior citizen housing), minimum Where the height limit is 6 stories: 622 sq. ft. Where the height limit is 10 stories: 512 sq. ft. Setbacks to yards, minimum: • Front • Second front • Sides • Sides, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR When 3 or more stories • Rear • Rear, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR When 3 or more stories A -Landscaping 6/3/99 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet Ratio of 1.5:1 setback (for every 1.5 feet of bldg. height, setback 1 foot from property line) with a minimum of 10 feet and a maximum of 30 feet 30 feet 10 feet Ratio of 1.5:1 setback (for every 1.5 feet of bldg. height, setback 1 foot from property line) with a minimum of 10 feet and a maximum of 30 feet 30 feet 5 Height, maximum • 3 stories or 35 feet • - Landscape•requirements (minimum) • See Landscape, Recreation,._Recycling/Solid — - Waste Space requirements chapter for further requirements. Front(s) 10 feet Sides 5 feet Sides, if any portion of the yard is 10 feet within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR Rear None Rear, if any portion of the yard is 10 feet within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR Recreation space 200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Recreation space, senior citizen housing 100 sq. ft. per dwelling unit Off street parking: • Residential 2 per dwelling unit • Office 3 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum. Retail 2.5 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area -minimum Manufacturing 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum • Warehousing 1 per 2,000 sq. ft. usable floor area minimum • Other uses, including senior citizen housing. See TMC 18.56 Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. Performance Standards: Use,, activity and operations within a structure or a site shall comply with (1) standards adopted by the. Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency for odor, dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2) TMC 8.22, "Noise", and, (3) adopted State and Federal standards for water quality and hazardous materials. In addition, all' development subject to.. the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C, shall be evaluated to determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. Section 6. Ordinance 1830 §19 and Ordinance 1758 §1 (part), as codified at Section 18.26, are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.26.080 Basic development standards. Development within the Regional Commercial Mixed Use district shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: RCM BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area per unit (multi -family), minimum 3,000 sq. ft. Setbacks to yards, minimum: • Front - • 20 feet • Second front 10 feet • Sides 10 feet • Sides, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR - 1st floor 10 feet - 2nd floor 20 feet -3rd floor -. "30 -feet — • Rear 10 feet • Rear, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR - 1st floor - 2nd floor - 3rd floor Height, maximum Landscape requirements (minimum) • Front(s) • Sides • Sides, if any portion of the yard -is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR A -Landscaping 6/3/99 10 feet. 20 feet - 30 feet 3 stories or 35 feet See Landscape, Recreation, Recycling/Solid Waste Space requirements chapter for further requirements. 10 feet 5 feet: 10 feet Performance Standards: Use, activity operations within a structure or a site shaemply with. (1) standards adopted by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency for odor, dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2) TMC 8.22, 'Noise', and, (3) adopted State and Federal - standards for water quality and hazardous materials. In addition, all development subject to the requirementsof the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C, shall be evaluated to determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. Section 14. TMC Chapter 18.52 is hereby amended to read as follows:' Chapter.18.52 LANDSCAPE, RECREATION, RECYCLING/SOLID WASTE SPACE REQUIREMENTS Sections: 18.52.010 Purpose.. . 18.52.020. Perimeter landscaping requirements by zone district. 18.52.030 Perimeter landscape types. 18.52.035 Interiorparking lot landscaping requirements. 18.52.040 General landscaping and screening requirements. 18.52.050 Landscape plan requirements. 18.52.060 Recreation space requirements. 18.52.065 Lighting. 18.52.070 Recycling storage space for residential uses 18.52.080 Recycling storage space for non-residential uses. 18.52.090 Design of collection points for garbage and recycling containers.- 18.52.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish minimum requirements for landscaping to promote safety, to provide screening between incompatible land uses, to mitigate the adverse effects of development on the environment, and to improve the visual environment for resident and nonresident alike. 18.52.020 Perimeter landscaping requirements by zone district. In the various zone districts of the City, landscaping in the front, rear and side yards shall be provided as established by the various zone district chapters of this title. These require- ments are summarized in the table below. Perimeter Landscape Requirements Zoning Districts Front Yard (Second front) Landscape Type for Fronts Side Yard Rear Yard Landscape Type for Side/Rear MDR 15' Type I 10 10 Type I HDR 15 ' Type I 10 10 Type I MUO 15 (12.5) Type I' 5' - 5 3 Type I 6 0 15 (12.5) Type I' 5' 5' Type 16 RCC 20 (10) 2 Type .I6 5' 10 Type II NCC 5' Type I' 0' 0' Type II RC 10 ` Type I 5' 0' Type II' RCM 10 Type I 5' 0' Type II' TUC 15 2 Type I 5 0' 0' Type IY' C/LI 12.5' Type I s. 5' 0' Type II' LI 12.5 Type II 0' 0' Type III HI 12.5. Type II . 0' 0' Type III MIC/L 5' Type II 0' 0' Type III MIC/H 5' .._ Type II 0' 0' Type III . TVS 15 2 Type II 0' 0' Type III A -Landscaping . 6/3/99 13' Notes: 1. Minimum required- front yard landscaped areas in the MDR and HDR zones may have up to 20% of their required landscape area developed for pedestrian and transit facilities upon approval as a Type 2 special permission decision. 2 Required landscaping may include a mix of plant materials, pedestrian amenities and features, outdoor cafe -type seating and similar features, subject to approval as a Type 2.. special permission decision. Required plant materials willbe reduced in proportion to the amount of perimeter area devoted to pedestrian oriented space. - 3 Increased to 10 feet if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 4 Increased to 15. feet if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 5 Increased to -Type. II ifthe front yard contains truck loading bays, service areas or outdoor storage. 6 Increased to Type II if any portion -of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. 7 Increased to Type III if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR or HDR. The landscape -perimeter may be averaged if the total required square footage is achieved, unless the landscaping requirement has been increased due toproximity to LDR, MDR ,or' HDR. Landscape perimeter averaging may be allowed as a Type 2 special permission decision if allof the followingcriteria are met: 1.__Plant:material.can be clustered to more effectively screen parking areas and blank building walls. 2. Perimeter averaging enables significant trees or existing built features to be retained. 3. Perimeter averaging is used to reduce the number of driveways and curb cuts and- allow joint use of parking facilities between neighboring businesses. 4. Width of the perimeter landscaping is not reduced -td the point that activities on the site become a nuisance to neighbors. - 5. Averaging does not diminish the quality of the site landscape as a whole. 18.52.030 Perimeter landscape types. A. Type I landscape perimeter. 1. Purpose is to enhance Tukwila's streetscapes, provide a light visual separation between uses and zoning districts, screen parking areas, and allow views to building entryways and signage. 2. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. One tree for each 30 lineal feet of required perimeter excluding curb cuts; b. One shrub for each 7 lineal feet of required perimeter excluding curb cuts or a planted berm at least 24 inches high; and c. Living groundcover to cover 90% of the landscape area within three years. B. Type II landscape perimeter. 1. Purpose is to enhance Tukwila's streetscapes, provide a moderate visual separation between uses and zoning districts, screen blank building walls and parking areas, and allow views to building entryways and signage. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. One tree for each 20 lineal feet of required perimeter excluding curb cuts; and A -Landscaping 6/3/99 14 b. One shrub for each heal feet of required perimeter excluding S cuts; — — c: Living groundcover to cover 90% of the landscape area within three years. C.- Type III landscape perimeter. 1. Purpose is to provide extensive visual separation between industrial areas and nearby residential areas. 2. Plant materials shall consist of the following: a. One tree per 20 lineal feet of required perimeter excluding curb cuts; and. b.. Shrubs to provide a solid planting screen with a height of five to eight feet or a solid wooden fence or masonry wall to be approved by the Community Development Director; and c. Living groundcover to cover 90%.of the landscape area within three years. D. Plant material requirements. 1. A mix of evergreen trees and evergreen shrubs shall be used to screen blank walls: 2.. Deciduous trees shall be used to allow visual access to entryways, signage and. pedestrian use areas. . 3. Evergreen 'shrubs shall be used to screen parking lots along street frontages. 4. In perimeters located adjacent to residential zones 75% of trees and shrubs shall be evergreen. 5. Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of 6 feet in height at time of planting. 6. Deciduous trees shall have at least a 2 inch caliper at time of planting, determined according to the American Standard for Nursery Stock. 7. Shrubs shall be at least 1.8 inches in height at time of planting. 8. Existing vegetation may be used to meet the requirements of this chapter. All significant trees located within any required perimeter Landscaping area which are not dead, dying, or diseased and which do not pose a safety hazard as determined by the Community Development Director shall be retained. 9. The classification of plant material as trees, shrubs and evergreens shall be as listed in the Hortus Third, A Concise Dictionary of Plants Cultivated in the U.S. and Canada. 18.52.035 Interior parking lot landscaping requirements. Landscaping within parking areas shall be provided as shown below. 1. Requirements for each distinctly separate . parking area within the MDR and HDR zones: a. For areas with up to 20 parking stalls per parking area, no interior landscaping is required. b. For areas with 21 - 40 parking stalls per parking area, 7 square feet of interior landscape area is required for each parking stall. . :A -Landscaping 6/3/99 - 15 c.' For areas with morn 40 parking stalls per parking area, 12 squfeet of interior landscape areais:required for each parking stall (see Multi -Family Design Guidelines, Site Planning Section, No. 31. for the normal 15 square feet to be provided). d. All parking areas shall have a perimeter landscape strip a minimum of 2 feet wide with an average width of.5 feet. • 2. Requirements for parking lots within the 0, MUO, RCC, and NCC zones: a. For lots with up to 20 parking stalls, no interior landscaping is required. b. For lots with 21 - 40 parking stalls, a minimum of 10 square feet of interior landscape area is required for each parking stall over 20. - c. .For lots with more than 40 parking stalls, a minimum of 200 square feet of interior landscape area plus 15 square feet for each parking stall over 40 -is required. For areas placed behind buildings or otherwise screened from streets, parks and City trails the interior landscape requirement is reduced to a minimum of 200 square feet plus 10 square feet for each parking stall over 40. 3. Requirements for parking lots within the RC,..RCM, TUC, C/LI and TVS zones: a. For areas adjacent to public or private streets, a minimum of 15 square feet of landscaping is required for each parking stall. / b. For areas placed behind- buildings or otherwise screened from streets, parks and City trails a minimum of 10 square feet of interior landscape area is required for each parking stall. 4. Planting Standards: a. Interior landscape islands shall be distributed to break up expanses of paving. Landscaped areas shall be placed at the ends of each interior row in the parking area with no stall more than 10 stalls or 100 feet from a landscape area. b. The minimum size for interior parking lot planting islands is 100 square feet.. c. Planting islands shall be a minimum of 6 feet in any direction and generally the length of the adjacent parking space: d. Raised curbs or curb stops shall be used around the landscape islands to prevent plant material from being struck by automobiles. e. A minimum of 1 evergreen or deciduous tree is required per landscape • island with the remaining area to contain a combination of shrubs, living groundcover and - mulch. 18.52.040 General landscape and screening requirements. A. Appropriate plant materials. New plant materials shall include native species or non-native species that have adapted to the climatic conditions of the Puget Sound Region. Drought resistant species are encouraged, except where site conditions within the required landscape areas assure adequate moisture for growth. Grass may be used as a groundcover where existing or amended soil conditions assure adequate' moisture for growth. Landscape perimeter trees should be selected for compatibility with existing plant material or street trees. B. Coverage standards. All landscaped areas in the- MDR and HDR zones (including shrub beds) shall achieve 90% live ground coverage in three years and all areas not occupied by a building (including surface parking areas) shall achieve 40% horizontal tree coverage in ten years. :A -Landscaping 6/3/99 16 IlkC. Visibility:: The landscaping shall. not. obstruct view from or into the eway, - sidewalk or street. Landscape design shall—allow for surveillance from streets and buildings and avoid creating areas that. might. harbor_criminal_activity. No shrubs shall-beplanted or - allowed to grbw over two feet .in height within thirty feet of intersecting curblines or pavement edges.(see TMC. 11.36.040). No tree maybe planted within two feet of.'a sidewalk or pavement edge. D. Outside storage areas. Outdoor storage shall be screened from abutting public and private streets and from adjacent properties. Such screens shall be a minimum of eight feet. high and not less than 60% of the height of the material stored. Said screens shall be specified on the plot plan, and approved by the Community Development Director. Except in the MDR and HDR zones, where outdoor storage shall be fully screened from all public roadways and adjacent parcels with a sight obscuring structure equal in height to the stored objects and with a solid screen of exterior landscaping. A top screen covermay be exempted if the item(s) has a finished top and an equivalent design. quality is maintained. The screening structure shall reflect building architecture as determined by the BAR to be appropriate. E. Ground level mechanical equipment and garbage storage areas shall be screened with evergreen plant materials and/or fences or masonry walls. R Fences. All fences shall be placed on the interior side of anyrequired perimeter landscaping. G. Lighting. Trees shall not be planted in locations where they would obstruct existing or planned street or site lighting. H. Automatic irrigation. All landscape areas shall be served by an automatic irrigation system. Water conservation features- such as moisture sensors with automatic rain shut-off devices, automatic.timers, pressure regulating devices, backflow prevention devices, separate irrigation zones for grass and planting beds, and sprinkler heads matched to site and plant conditions shall be installed. Irrigation water shall be appliedwith goals of avoiding runoff and overspray onto adjacent property, non irrigated areas and impervious surfaces. I. Utility easements. Utility easements and other similar areas between property lines and curbing shall be landscaped and/or treated with dust and erosion control planting or surfacing such as evergreens, groundcover, shrubs, trees, sod or a combination of similar materials. In areas of overhead transmission lines, no shrubs or trees over 20 feet at maturity will be allowed. Trees should not be planted within 10 feet of underground water, sewer or storm drainage pipes. 18.52.050 Landscape plan requirements. A. A Washington State licensed landscape architect shall prepare and stamp the land- scape plans inaccordance with the standards herein. Detailed plans for landscaping and screening shall be submitted with plans for building and site improvements. Included in the plans shall be type, spacing and location of plants and materials and the location of irrigation systems. - B. Installation of the landscaping and screening shall be completed and a Landscaping Declaration submitted by the owner or owner's agent prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. If necessary due to weather conditions or construction scheduling the installation may be postponed to. the next planting season if approved by the Community Development Director and stated on the building permit. A performance assurance device equal to 150 percent of the cost of the labor and materials must be provided to the City before the deferral is approved. The property owner shall keep all planting areas free of weeds and trash and replace any unhealthy or dead plant materials for the life of the project in conformance with the intent of the approved landscape plan and TMC 8.28.180. ' 18.52.060 Recreation space requirements. In all MDR and HDR zoning districts, any proposed multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide on the premises and for the use of the occupants a minimum amount of recreation space according to the following provisions: A -Landscaping 6/3/99 - - - 17 •• ` 1. Required Area. a. For each proposed dwelling unit in the multiple -family development, a minimum of 400 square feet (100 square feet for senior citizen housing). of recreation space shall be provided. Any multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide a minimum of 1,000 square feet of total recreation space. b. The front, side and rear yard setback areas required by the applicable zoning district shall not qualify as recreation space. 2. Indoor or Covered Space. a. No more than 50% .of the required recreation space may be .indoor or covered space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing must have at least 20% indoor or covered space. b. The Board of Architectural Review may grant .a maximum of -two square feet of recreation space. for each one square foot of extensively -improved indoor recreation space provided. Interior facility improvements would include a full range of weight machines, sauna, hot tub, large screen television and the like. 3. Uncovered Space. a.. A minimum of 50% of the total required recreation space shall be open or uncovered, up to 100% of the total requirement may be in open or uncovered recreation space -in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing allows up to 80% of recreation space to be outdoors and has no minimum outdoor space requirement. b. Recreation space shall 'not exceed a 4%slope in any direction. unless it is determined that the proposed space design clearly facilitates and encourages -the anticipated .. use as endorsed by the Director. - - c. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum credit of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of outdoor pool and surrounding deck area. 4. General Requirements. a. Multiple -family complexes (except senior citizen housing) which provide dwelling units with two or more bedrooms shall provide adequate recreation space for children with at least one space for the 5 -to -12 -year old group:, Such space shall be at least 25% but not more than 50% of the total recreation space required under TMC 18.52.060.1, and shall be designated, located and maintained in a safe condition. b. Adequate fencing, plant screening, or other buffer shall separate the recreation space from parking areas, driveways or public streets. c. The anticipated use of. all required recreation areas shall be specified and designed to clearly accommodate that use. 18.52.065 Lighting. A. Parking and loading areas shall include lighting capable of providing adequate . illumination for security and safety. Lighting standards shall be in scale with the height and use of the associated structure. Any illumination, including security lighting, shall be directed away from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way. B. In the MDR and HDR zones, porches, alcoves andpedestrian circulation walkways shall be provided with -low level safety lighting. Pedestrian walkways and sidewalks may be lighted with lighting bollards. A -Landscaping 6/3/99 - - 18 18.52.070 Recycling storage sp or residential uses. Apartment and condominium developments over sixunits shall provide 1-1/2 square feet of recycling storage space per dwelling unit and located in collection points as follows: 1. No dwelling unit within the development shall be more than 200 feet from a collection point. . 2. Collection points shall be located so that hauling trucks do not obstruct 'pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site, or project into any public right-of-way. 3. Collection points shall not be located in any required setback or landscape area. 18.52.080 Recycling storage space for non-residential uses. A. Recycling storage space fornon-residential uses shall be provided at the rate of at least: 1. Two square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area in office, medical, professional, public facility, school.and institutional developments. 2. Three square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross : floor area in manufacturing, industrial and other non-residential uses not. specifically mentioned in these requirements. 3. Five square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area in retail developments. B. Outdoor collection points shall not be located in any required setback or landscape area. C. Collection points shall be located in a manner so that hauling trucks do not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site, or project into any public right-of-way. 18.52.090 Design of collection points -for garbage and recycling containers. Residential and non-residential collection points shall be designed as follows: 1. An opaque wall or fence of sufficient size and height to provide complete screening shall enclose any outside collection point. Architectural design shall be consistent ..with the design of the primary structure(s) on the site. 2. Collection points shall be identified by signs not to exceed two square feet. 3. Weather protection of recyclables and garbage shall be ensured by using weather-proof containers or by providing a roof over the storage area. Section 15. Ordinance 1819 §1 (part); as codified at Section 18.70, is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.70.090 Nonconforming landscape areas. A. Adoption of the landscaping regulations contained in this title shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape improvements for any legal landscape area which existed on the date of adoption of this title, unless and until a change of use or alteration of the structure requiring Board of Architectural Review approval is proposed (see TMC,18:60). • B. At such time as a change requiring approval by the Board of Architectural Review is proposed for a use or structure, and the associated premises does not comply with the landscape requirements of this title, a landscape plan which conforms to the requirements of this title shall be submitted to the Board of Architectural Review for approval as a Type 4 decision prior to issuance of a building permit. The BAR may modify the standards imposed by this title when, in their judgment, strict compliance with the landscaping standards of this A -Landscaping 6/3/99 .. 19 code would create substantial prac difficulties, the existing and proposed •tional Landscaping and screening materials together will adequately screen or buffer possible use incompatibilities, soften the barren appearance of parking or storage areas, and/or adequately enhance the premises appropriate to the use district and location of the site. Section 16. Repealer. Ordinance 1758 §1 (part) and Ordinance 1830 §29, as codified at TMC 18.52, are hereby repealed. Section 17. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reasonby a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality -shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining'portions of this ordinance or its application to anyy other person or situation. Section 18. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. - PASSED BY THE "CITY COUNCIL OF. THE CITY TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this a/ S day of , 1999. t,) W. Rants, Mayor Al 1 EST/ AUTHENTICATED: . _74. e E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By, Office of the City`Attomey /8-p FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: -/7- PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 6-.,2 %• .. PUBLISHED: (o - a s F EFFECTIVE DATE: 6 - 30 - / 7 ORDINANCE NO.: / 8 7 a A -Landscaping 6/3/99 -20 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor . Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director August 20, 1999 Michael Aippersbach PO Box 95429 Seattle WA 98145 Subject: Quik Park L99-0010 E99-0005 Dear Michael: Deb Ritter, who can be reached at 431-3663, will now be handling this project for the City. As I transfer the project to Deb, I wanted to summarize where we are in establishing completeness for the project and specifically for the two applications above. The time limitation for establishing completeness, (TMC 18.104.070) has been suspended awaiting submission of the following items. As we discussed, it seemed to make senseto complete revisions upon a final decision on the street vacation by the -City Council. Please include your,items as a packet of revisions rather than piecemeal., - The City is awaiting the following from you. E99-0005 Pages 22 and 23 of the Environmental Checklist L99-0010 Modified site plan showing the following: • the "type" and the required buffer width for the wetland per the City's sensitive areas ordinance; • the new property line in the vicinity of the entrance and canopy; and* • existing trees over 4" in diameter, whether they are to be saved or not. (It appears that there are trees that meet our criteria of 4" or greater on the site including the areas outside of the proposed future right of way.) *Your current site plan shows no internal property lines, which presumes that a lot consolidation will be proposed as shown. We prefer that you show existing lines as well as proposed lines. The existing should be dashed if they are to be removed or changed. If the City Council approves the street vacation/realignment, then lot line modifications will result. Upon agreement with the Tukwila Public Works Department on the S. 158 St. right of way realignment, we request that you submit a boundary line adjustment/lot 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 consolidation application. This application may be processed administratively and not consolidated with the other land use applications. Elevations showing the following: • Typical wall elevations Special permission fee - $200 - for "sign facing residential areas." Please let us know in writing if you would like the special permission review, type 2 decision, be consolidated with your design review request, a type 4 decision. Respectfully, Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner Cc: Deb Ritter Joanna Spencer Jim Morrow Brian Shelton Moira Bradshaw - Re: handicap stalls Pagel j From: Ken Nelson To: Moira Bradshaw Date: 6/30/99 10:30AM Subject: Re: handicap stalls The number of spaces required by U.B.C. table 11-F 22, 3 of the 22 must be van stalls. Should they not wish to provide accessible parking to that number, they must identify in documantion an alternate means of parking. From KEN »> Moira Bradshaw 06/29/99 11:28AM »> There will be 1,197 stalls. How are required to be handicap and what type of documentation do you need? Thanks Moira HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 2200 Sixth Avenue Suite 601 Seattle Washington 98121 (206) 441-9080 FAX 441-9108 322 NW. Fifth Avenue Suite 307 Portland Oregon 97209 (503) 228.4301 FAX 228.3373 206-441-9108 41ORRERA ENUIR CONS. 40 918 P02/06 MAY 20 '99 15:40 May 20, 1999 Phil Fraser City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Subject: Preliminary evaluation of stormwater management potential for the proposed Quik Park site near South 158' Street Dear Phil: As we discussed at our meeting last week, Mike Giseburt and I have performed a brief evaluation of the stormwater pond volume that could be created in the ravine through the proposed development site. This evaluation provides an indication of the potential for a regional stormwater management pond facility on or near the site. This letter and the attached memorandum from Mike Giseburt sumxnarize our findings. The proponents of the Quik Park development have estimated the stormwater treatment and detention volumes needed to manage runoff from a 400,000 square -foot parking facility. As discussed in the attached memo, a large stormwater management pond could be created by damming the north end of the ravine and excavating some of the eastern side slope of the ravine. The volume available for treatment and detention of runoff in such a facility would be roughly two to three times the volume needed for the Quik Park development. The remaining storage volume could be used to control runoff from other areas in the tributary drainage basin upstream of the ravine, but the pond would not necessarily be a "regional" facility as typically conceived. A large pond in this area would primarily be a detention facility due to excessive depths that would not be conducive for wet pond treatment. Stormwater treatment pond design depths are conventionally kept to less than 6 to 8 feet to prevent adverse water quality consequences that can occur with deeper, stagnant water. A permanent pool 6 to 8 feet in depth would fill in the lower (north) end of the ravine impoundment. The remainder of the pond volume could be used for detention in high flow events. The treatment volume needed for the Quik Park runoff would probably use up most of the available storage volume in the lower 6 to 8 feet. Therefore, the pond would not provide significant water quality benefits for runoff from other areas in the drainage basin, but could provide detention benefits for a larger area. There would be space near the southern (upper) end of the ravine for additional water quality treatment facilities to enable some "regional" treatment. However, the slopes in this area are not favorable for additional wet pond storage. It would be possible to 0 prelim sro site pond evaluation 206-441-9108 ORRERA ENUIR CONS. • 918 P03/06 MAY 20 '99 15:40 Phil Fraser May 20, 1999 Page 2 place a few large biofiltration swales in this area, or vault -type treatment facilities could be buried in the side slopes. We have not attempted to quantify how much. tributary drainage area could be served with these types of facilities. I hope this information suits your purposes at this point in the discussions with the Quik Park proponents. Please give me.a call if you need additional information or if you would like us to analyze this in more detail. Sincerely, Mark Ewbank attachment prelim sro sitc pond evaluation 206-441-9108 ORRERA ENUIR CONS. FACSIMILE, Page 1 918 PO4/06 MAY 20 '99 15:41 1i'vi' Jj t'E E K To: Mark Ewbank • Herrera Environmental Consultants Fax: 441-9108 • Phone: 441-9080 From: Mike Giseburt Phone: 206-695-4607 Date/lime: Pages (Including cover): Cost Account: Transmission Questions: Message: 5/19/99/ 4:26 PM 2 11-00515-10000-0002 mci 114427 Reception Desk / (206) 696-4581 As requested by you and the City of Tukwila, we have taken a preliminary look at the storage requirements in Subbasin 14. This is in response to a development proposal, Quik Park, which is currently being reviewed by the City. The City had .requested that we provide a preliminary estimate of the storage needed in this subbasin as well as the storage that could be proided by a regional stormwater pond in an existing gully north of S 158thStreet and east of the Theater. At this point in our investigation, .we have not completed any KCRTS hydrologic modeling and thus it was agreed with the City in our meeting on May 11 that we should use a very preliminary approach to estimate the storage volume required in the subbasin. This was done by calculating the detention and treatment storage required per impervious acre (d/impervious acre) for the Quik Park development and applying this storage per impervious acre to the entire Subbasin 14. This likely reflects a conservative estimate for the basin because it would mean that the City would be providing stormwater treatment/storage for "all" impervious areas (i.e., retrofitting for all uncontrolled land uses). 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500, Seattle, WA 98154 Phone (206) 695-4700 Fax (206) 695-4772 206-441-9108 'RRERA ENUIR CONS. - 918 P05"06 MAY 20 '99 15:41 • FACSIMILE, Page 2 Based upon the information provided bythe proponents of Quik Park, the proposal includes 9.2 acres of impervious area and they have estimated the required stormwater treatment/detention storage to be approximately 79,000 cf (or 8587 cf/impervious acre). The estimate of the impervious area of. Subbasin 14 was taken from the 1986 Basin Plan hydrologic analysis information and was found : to be 98 acres. Applying the 8587 cf/impervious acre to the 98 acres gives the total volume of approximately 840,000 cf. We also prepared a preliminary estimate of the storage that could be provided in the proposed location of the stormwater pond.. Attached is a sketch that illustrates how a pond could be formed by construction of a berm at the north end of the gully.. We estimate that the pond volume could be somewhere between 170,000 cf to 270,000 cf depending on the height of the berm. The sketch shows the height of the berm to elevation 325 corresponding to a storage of 170,000 cf. If the height were raised an additional three feet, the volume could be increased to 270,000 cf. These volume estimates assume that some excavation on the east side of the site would be done to increase storage volume. A few permitting issues were noted about the proposed pond. Stormwater ponds with heights in excess of 6 feet must be permitted through the Department of Ecology Dam Safety Section. An existing wetland lies within the gully. Therefore, environmental permits would be required due to impacts of the pond. An HPA would also be required. Please give. me a call at 695-4607 if you have any questions. 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2500, Seattle, WA 98154 Phone (206) 695-4700 Fax (206) 695-4772 206-441-9108 RERA ENUIR CONS. 0 918 P06/06 MAY 20 '99 15:41 iti NI� ` r STREAM SAMPLING LOCATION • March 5, 1999 Rebecca Riesen S.R.O. P.O. Box 91723 Bellevue, WA 98009-1723 L ' g- oa/o. SHAPIRO & ASSOCIATES. INC. Re: Water quality monitoring of the Republic Parking Site in Tukwila, Washington. Dear Rebecca: At your request,. Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) continued its water quality monitoring of the watercourse running through the site at .15820 Pacific Highway South in Tukwila, Washington. Our scientist visited the parcel on January 5, 1999 and January 14, 1999. These dates were much later than originally anticipated because our objective was to sample base flows during a dry period and then to sample storm flows. Because of record steady rainfall this fall and winter, it took a while for a dry period to occur. The purpose of these visits was to provide additional data on pollutant concentrations during base flow and storm flow in the unnamed stream passing through the site. The site is immediately south of SR 518 on the east side of Pacific Highway South and directly east of the existing Lewis and Clark movie theater and bowling alley (Township 23N, Range 4E, Section 22)., SHAPIRO conducted a similar evaluation of pollutant concentrations at the site in September and October of 1997. Methods Duplicate water quality samples were taken from the stream near the downstream and upstream boundary of the site during base flow on January 5, 1999 and during storm flow on January 14, 1999. At the downstream boundary of the site, samples were collected from a pool located approximately 25 feet south of the chain-link fence demarcating'the northern boundary of the site. At the upstream boundary of the site, samples were collected from the pool below the 60 -inch culvert (erroneously marked as a 36 -inch culvert on the base map we were provided) where the stream enters the site. The attached map shows upstream and downstream sampling locations. Grab samples were collected from the stream by submerging laboratory -cleaned; pre -labeled sample containers below the water surface at mid -depth. When appropriate (i.e., when collecting water for analyses other than oil and grease or fecal coliform bacteria), the sample bottles were rinsed once with sample water prior to filling. Sample containers were sealed and immediately placed on ice in a cooler. In-situ measurements of dissolved oxygen and temperature also were made at the time the water samples.were collected using a pre - calibrated, portable meter. The grab samples were analyzed for fecal coliform bacteria; total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); oil and grease (FOG); dissolved copper; dissolved lead; dissolved zinc; hardness; total phosphorus; ammonia; nitrate+nitrite nitrogen; total suspended solids (TSS); turbidity; biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5); and pH. MAR 2 2 ;1::',E2 • • Rebecca Riesen Page Two March 5, 1999 When adequate discharge and water depths were present, estimates of stream discharge were made at each of the sample collection locations using a portable flow meter. Results The unnamed stream passing through the site is considered Class A because it is an unclassified surface water that is not a tributary to a Class AA water (WAC 173-201a-120). Applicable Class A water quality criteria for surface waters in the state of Washington (WAC 173-201a-030) are presented in Table 1 along with water quality statistics for streams in the Seattle metropolitan area. Class A water quality standards for dissolved metals vary depending on water hardness. Class A water quality standards for ammonia vary depending on both pH and temperature. Discharge measured at the upstream station during the base flow sampling was 0.022 cubic feet per second (cfs). No discharge measurement was made at the downstream station during the base flow sampling because shallow water made the use of the portable flow meter impractical. Discharge at the upstream and downstream stations during storm flow was 0.17 and 0.39 cfs, respectively. The results from the water quality monitoring during base flow and storm flow at the upstream and downstream stations are presented in Table 2. Results from the water quality monitoring conducted in 1997 are presented in Table 3 for comparison. Data flags (J) indicate when samples failed to meet Class A water standards. Water quality results are summarized below. • During base flows, water temperatures were slightly lower downstream (6.9° C versus 8.5° C). Temperatures were nearly identical (9° C) at both sample locations during storm flows. This would be expected. Also as expected, temperatures were lower during the winter of 1998-1999 compared to the fall of 1997: • Dissolved oxygen concentrations were much lower downstream (9.4mg/L) than upstream (14.7 mg/L) during base flows and were about the same during storm flows. • During base flows, pH values were slightly lower downstream (6.7 versus 7.3). Values were nearly identical (6.8 versus 6.7) at both sample locations during storm flows. • FOG and TPH were detected in all samples except the two collected from the downstream station during base flow. Concentrations of both TPH and FOG • generally decreased from upstream to downstream during both base flow and storm flow. • Rebecca Riesen Page Three March 5, 1999 • Concentrations of fecal coliform decreased from upstream to downstream during both base flow and storm flow. This was much more evident during base flows (4,000/100 ml versus 5/100 ml). During storm flows, the difference between upstream (average of 370/100 ml) and downstream (average of 241/100 ml) was much less. • TSS were 14 times higher (25-32 versus 1.3-2.8 mg/L) during storm flow compared to base flow. Turbidity was about four times higher (20-24 versus 4.9-6.5 NTU) during storm flow compared to base flow. Parameters were slightly less downstream than upstream. Samples collected in 1997 showed an opposite trend, with turbidity and TSS substantially higher in base flow samples. • BOD was very similar (about 2 mg/L) for all samples. • Ammonia concentrations were highest at the upstream station during base flow, with concentrations decreasing substantially from upstream (0.38 mg/L) to downstream (0.11 mg/L). Storm flow concentrations of ammonia showed only a slight decrease from upstream to downstream (0.07 versus 0.06 mg/L) and were much lower than base flow levels. • Nitrate + nitrite concentrations were highest during base flow (0.23-0.27 versus 0.15- 0.16 mg/L) and exhibited no substantial decrease from upstream to downstream during either base flow or storm flow. • Total phosphorus concentrations decreased substantially from upstream to downstream during both base flow (0.13 versus 0.03 mg/L) and storm flow (0.15 versus 0.07 mg/L). • During base flow, hardness was lower downstream (49 mg/L) compared to upstream (61 mg/L). Hardness was about the same (13 mg/L) during storm flow. • The highest dissolved copper and lead concentrations were measured at the upstream station during base flow (0.0054 and 0.0013 mg/L, respectively). The highest dissolved zinc concentrations were measured at the downstream station during base flow (0.069 mg/L), while other samples ranged from 0.021 to 0.032 mg/L. Conclusions Dissolved oxygen concentrations met Class A water quality criteria (Table 1) at all stations during both base flow and storm flow, and BODS concentrations were generally low in all samples collected. The Class A water criteria for temperature were met in both the stream and downstream stations during base flow and storm flow. The Class A water criteria for pH were met in both the stream and downstream stations during base flow and storm flow. • • Rebecca Riesen Page Four March 5, 1999 Fecal coliform concentrations exceeded the Class A water quality criteria in six of the eight samples. The two samples that met Class A water quality criteria were both collected at the downstream station during base flow. The samples collected in 1997 showed a similar trend. 1999 base flow fecal coliform concentrations at the upstream station were higher than the concentrations typically observed in Seattle area streams (Table 1). Storm flow concentrations at both the upstream and downstream stations were lower than the concentrations typically observed in Seattle area streams. In general, turbidity levels and TSS concentrations were similar to those found in other Seattle area streams for both storm flow and base flow (Table 1). Base flow and storm flow ammonia concentrations at all stations were generally higher than the ammonia concentrations typically observed in Seattle area streams (Table 1). Nitrate+nitrite concentrations in all the samples collected were generally lower than the nitrate+nitrite concentrations typically observed in Seattle area streams (Table 1). Base flow total phosphorus concentrations measured at the upstream station were generally higher than the mean concentration for Seattle area streams (Table 1). Hardness measured during storm flows was less than the mean concentration for Seattle area streams (Table 1). Dissolved copper concentrations exceeded Class A water quality criteria in two of the eight samples collected. Dissolved lead concentrations exceeded Class A water quality criteria in one of the samples collected. Dissolved zinc concentrations exceeded Class A water quality criteria in five of the eight samples collected. Storm flow concentrations of copper and lead were generally similar to the mean concentrations for Seattle area streams, while storm flow concentrations of zinc were slightly higher (Table 1). Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you require additional assistance on this or any other project, please do not hesitate to call Calvin Douglas or me. Sincerely, SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark G. Pedersen Vice President saa•3o'Sa'W 345. DOWNSTREAM SAMPLING LOCATION `J10 Table 1. Washington water quality criteria and water quality statistics for streams in the Seattle metropolitan area during base flow and storm flow conditions. Storm Flowb Base Flow` Parameter Class A Criteria' Mean Minimum Maximum Median Minimum Maximum Temperature (C) < 18.0 10.6 8 13.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) > 8.0 7.5 6.9 8.2 pH 6.5-8.5 10.4 5.8 11.4 Hardness (mg/L) 47.8 19.8 90.0 Turbidity (NTU) increase < 5 11 0.3 272 1.8 0.7 17 Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 24 1.2 1092 3.4 1.6 13 Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.121 0.006 0.985 0.048 0.013 0.150 Ammonia (mg/L) 5.6/1.3 0.037 0.010 1.700 0.015 < 0.005 0.190 NO3+NO2 (mg/L) 0.638 0.160 1.900 0.63 0.073 3.000 Dissolved Copper (mg/L) Dissolved Lead (mg/L) Dissolved Zinc (mg/L) Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml) 0.0089/0.0077 0.005 < 0.001 0.014 0.0301/0.0012 0.002 < 0.001 0.007 0.064/0.058 0.019 < 0.004 0.068 100 1,992 2 14,700 100 7 900 Souce: WAC -173-201A (11/18/97). Acute/chronic criteria for ammonia assume a worst-case condition of pH (8.0) and temperature (20 C). Acute/chronic criteria for metals assume a hardness of 50 mg/L. "Storm flow statistics are based on 8 grab samples collected from 23 streams stations in the metropolitan Seattle area; mean values are geometric means (Metro. 1994. Water quality of small lakes and streams. Western King County 1990 - 1993. King County Department of Metropolitan Services, Seattle, WA). Base flow statistics are based on 23 grab samples collected from 50 streams stations in the metropolitan Seattle area (Metro. 1994. Water quality of small lakes and streams. Western King County 1990 - 1993. King County Department of Metropolitan Services, Seattle, WA). Table 2. Water quality monitoring results for base flow and storm flow samples collected in 1999. Parameter Base Flow 1/5/99 Upstream Downstream Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Storm Flow 1/14/99 Upstream Downstream Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Temperature (C) 8.5 8.5 6.9 6.9 8.9 9.2 8.9 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 14.5 14.8 9.6 9.2 12.5 10.2 11.5 11.8 pH 7.40 7.28 6.76 6.73 6.88. 6.74 6.66 6.64 Oil and Grease (mg/L) 0.46 0.40 0.25 U 0.25 U 1.2 1.7 0.69 0.89 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/L) 0.33 0.28 0.25 U 0.25 U 1.0 1.4 0.58 0.71 Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml) 4200 J 3800 EJ 8 E 2 E 480 J 260 EJ 220 EJ 262 J Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 2.8 2.8 2.0 0.50 36 28 21 29 Turbidity (NTU) 4.5 8.5 5.5 4.2 25 23 18 23 BODS (mg/L) 2.88 2.26 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U Ammonia (mg/L) 0.395 0.366 0.111 0.107 0.077 0.069 0.050 0.056" N0,+NO2 (mg/L) 0.242 0.274 0.232 0.232 0.154 0.168 0.157 0.144 Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.096 0.162 0.025 0.025 0.128 0.171 0.063 0.080 Hardness (mg/L) 60.1 62.7 48.4 48.6 11.3 13.9 13.7 12.7 Dissolved Copper (mg/L) 0.0053 0.0054 0.0040 0.0045 0.0032 J 0.0028 J 0.0026 0.0024 Dissolved Lead (mg/L) 0.0010 U 0.0015 0.0014 J 0.0011 0.0010 U 0.0010 U 0.0010 0.0010 Dissolved Zinc (mg/L) 0.027 0.029 0.077 J 0.062 J _ 0.032 J 0.021 0.025 J 0.022 3 U analvte not detected at snecified detection limit E estimated value J exceeds water quality criteria for Class A freshwaters Table 3. Water quality monitoring results for base flow and storm flow samples collected in 1997. Parameter Base Flow 9/11/97 Upstream Downstream Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Storm Flow 10/30/97 Upstream Downstream Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Duplicate 1 Duplicate 2 Temperature (C) 17.5 14.0 12.7 12.8 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 4.5 J 3.2 J 9.5 9.3 pH 6.76 6.79 6.40 6.38 .6.73 6.82 6.52 6.51 Oil and Grease (mg/L) 1.4 1.3 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U 1.0 U Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/L) 1.4 1.2 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U 0.25 U Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml) 1840 EJ 140 EJ 440 J 2 U 460 J 520 J 360 EJ 320 El Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 15 14 14 58 3.6 3.6 7.2 6.8 Turbidity (NTU) 21 20 36 58 6.6 6.8 7.6 7.7 BOD5 (mg/L) 28.50 28.20 2.56 2.56 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U 2.00 U Ammonia (mg/L) 0.012 0.034 0.136 0.133 0.043 0.036 0.010 U 0.012 NO3+NO2 (mg/L) 0.025 0.041 0.07 0.064 0.124 0.127 0.117 0.119 Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 1.52 1.53 0.145 0.378 0.068 0.06 0.058 0.058 Hardness (mg/L) 44.7 44.7 57.4 57.1 9.38 10.5 11.2 11.6 Dissolved Copper (mg/L) 0.0184 J 0.0182 J 0.0019 0.0021 0.0053 J 0.0068 J 0.0068 J 0.0082 J Dissolved Lead (mg/L) 0.0022 0.0026 0.0051 0.0052 um 0.0032 0.0062 J 0.0089 J Dissolved Zinc (mg/L) 0.012 0.016 0.128 J 0.119 J 0.040 J 0.072 J 0.050 J 0.078 J U analvte not detected at specified detection limit E estimated value J exceeds water quality criteria for Class A freshwaters • • • LABORATORY DATA • • AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY & CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH. SEATTLE. WA 98103 PHONE: (206) 932-2715 FAX: (206) 632-2417 s:uioa,.a.SHAo 1 e ;CASE FILE NUMBER: SHA001-08 PAGE 1 ;REPORT DATE: 01/25/99 'DATE SAMPLED: 01/05/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/05/99 FINAL REPORT. LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES CASE NARRATIVE Four water samples were received by the laboratory in good condition. No difficulties were encountered in the preparation or analysis of these samples. Sample data follows while QA/QC data is contained on subsequent pages. SAMPLE DATA pH SAMPLE ID FOG (mg/I) PECAL COLIFORM (#/100m1) TSS (mg/1) TURBIDITY (NTU) BOD5 (mg/I1 SRO UP -1 7.40 0.46 0.33 4200 2.8 4.5 2.88 SRO UP -2 7.28 0.40 0.28 est 3800 2.8 8.5 2.26 SRO DOWN -1 6.76 <0.25 <0.25 est 8 2.0 5.5 <2.00 SRO DOWN -2 6.73 <0.25 <0.25 . est 2 0.50 4.2 <2.00 DISSOLVED METALS AMMONIA NO3+NO2 TOTAL -P HARDNESS SAMPLE ID (mg/11 (mg/l1 (mg/1) (mg/1) COPPER LEAD ZINC (mg/1) (mg/11 (mg/1) SRO UP -1 0.395 0.242 0.096 6Q.1 0.0053) oc ji 1 <0.0010 :.:;:... 0.027 0 SRO UP -2 0.366 0.274 0.162 62.7 0.0054 0,r0gc, 0.0015 :) . h., 0.02 0. SRO DOWN -1 0.111 0.232 0.025 48.4 0.0040 e 00.6 0500 r4 .. :• , 0:07 a SRO DOWN -2 0.107 0.232 0.025 48.6 0.0045 O (»(, 0.0011 o •ot %% 0. 62 r AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY & CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH, SEATTLE, WA 98103 PHONE: (208) 832-2715 FAX: (208) 832-2417 SNAI007.23sSttA00I0B CASE FILE NUMBER: SHA001-08 REPORT DATE: 01/25/99 DATE SAMPLED: 01/05/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/05/99 FINAL REPORT. LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES PAGE 2 QA/QC DATA QC PARAMETER METHOD DATE ANALYZED DETECTION LIMIT DUPLICATE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL DUPLICATE RPD SPIKE SAMPLE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL SPIKED SAMPLE SPIKE ADDED % RECOVERY QC CHECK mg/1 FOUND TRUE % RECOVERY BLANK RPO • RELATIVE PERCENT DIFITRENCE. NA • NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE. NC • NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO ONE OR MORE VALUES BEWO BELOW THE OCTECI ON OR • RECOVERY NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO SPIKE SAMPLE OUT OP RANGE OR SPIKE TOO LOW RELATIVE TO SAMPLE CONCENTRATION. PH FOG TPH FECALOOLTFORM TSS TURBIDITY (mg/1) (mg/1) (#/100m1) (mg/1) (NTU) BOD5 (mg/1) EPA 150.1 01/05/99 0.10 EPA 413.2 01/24/99 0.25 EPA 418.1 01/24/99 0.25 sM 18 9222D 01/05/99 2 EPA 160.2 01/07/99 0.50 EPA 180.1 01/06/99 0.10 EPA 405.1 01/06/99 2.00 NA NA NA SRO OOWN•2 est 2 est 4 NC BATCH 68.0 74.0 8.45% sRo DOWN -2 4.2 4.2 0.00% NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 33.8 33.9 I 99.71% 1 33.8 33.9 99.71% NA 9.4 10 94.00% 8.5 8.0 106.25% 3.87 4.62 83.77% NA <0.25 <0.25 < 2 <0.50 NA <2.00 RPO • RELATIVE PERCENT DIFITRENCE. NA • NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE. NC • NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO ONE OR MORE VALUES BEWO BELOW THE OCTECI ON OR • RECOVERY NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO SPIKE SAMPLE OUT OP RANGE OR SPIKE TOO LOW RELATIVE TO SAMPLE CONCENTRATION. • AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY & CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH. SEATTLE. WA 98103 PHONE: (208) 632-2716 FAX: (208) 632-2417 B11AIOo7.Im$RA0o10e CASE FILE NUMBER: SHA001-08 REPORT DATE: 01/25/99 PAGE 3 DATE SAMPLED: 01/05/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/05/99 FINAL REPORT. LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES QA/QC DATA QC PARAMETER METHOD DATE ANALYZED DETECTION LIMIT DUPLICATE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL DUPLICATE RPD SPIKE SAMPLE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL SPIKED SAMPLE SPIKE ADDED % RECOVERY QC CHECK mg/1 FOUND • TRUE % RECOVERY BLANK BLANK SPIKE %R AMMONIA NO3+NO2 TOTAL -P HARDNESS COPPER LEAD ZINC (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) EPA 350.1 EPA 353.2 EPA 365.1 EPA 130.2 EPA 220.2 EPA 239.2 EPA 200.7 01/15/99 01/15/99 01/18/99 01/11/99 01/21/99 01/26/99 01/20/99 0.010 0.010 0.002 2.00 0.0010 0.0010 0.003 BATCH BATCH SRO DOWN -2 SRO DOWN -2 SRO UP -1 BATCH SRO UP -1 0.056 0.144 0.025 48.6 0.0053 <0.0010 0.027 0.059 0.144 0.023 48.6 0.0054 <0.0010 0.035 4.86% 0.21% 8.3796 0.0096 1.8796 NC 25.81% BATCH BATCH SRO DOWN.2 SRO DOWN -2 SRO UP -1 BATCH SRO UP -1 0.056 0.144 0.025 48.6 0.0053 <0.0010 0.027 0.286 0.361 0.080 68.5 0.0180 0.0199 1.10 0.200 0.200 0.050 20.0 0.0125 0.0250 1.00 114.90% 108.80% 111.00% 99.44% 101.20% 79.72% 107.30% 0.529 0.976 0.090 39.8 0.0243 0.0258 0.972 0.499 0.933 0.093 40.0 0.0250 0.0250 1.00 106.0516 104.61% 96.7716 99.4496 97.20% 103.2096 97.2296 <0.010 <0.010 <0.002 <2.00 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.003 101.00% 111.0016 NA NPD • RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE. M • NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE. NC • NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO ONE OR MORE VALUES BEING BELOW DIE DETECTION LAIIT. OR • RECOVERY NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO SPICE SAMPLE OUT OF RANGE OR SAUCE TOO LOW RELATIVE 70 SAMPLE CONCENTRATION. Laboratory Director *Aquatic Research Incorporate 927 Aurora Ave. N / Seattle, WA 98103 06) 632.2715 • CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD SHEET t . OF CLIENT: �‘0%.;,yr%ro od r;-tt SAMPLING DATE: r/s j ei 5C SAMPLERS: SAMPLE INFORMATION PROJECT ID: CASE FILE NO.: 5N4.cD1-05? DATA RECORDED BY: SAMPLE ID DATE/TIME COLLECTED PARAMETERS B T # I/511, NOTES 4- A 1� `- 1/41 %.,i5 0 ISgg i I S f 4J r , S S , o„� {1 ,di,, /, ,r, -.:r, A 0 y kke uA. - t 11.'141 1917z`›c )c)T >'k'�C k xk‘<. xjc (D PN -7 LK" 14(0 13:tiC)‘k)Cxk Kx*Kk *k)CI (, / = 2_8 SVw cam,,,1, - t Ile" 1y'3° x < >< k n )(5‹ )« `C < 6 6.'? 4 4%0 � la Z 113111 Ikl;LI31Y ,<,<,C < 174 �6 ><-.)6e 6 ?_ pf� z- 6. � 3 , w%" —_. _... ----4--- '---- .. _.. ... ._ _._ _._.--•r Printed Name Signature Affiliation Relinquished By sem, DatelTl e Received B •4 o 1,4- DatelTlme czo 7 -- l (k!'M s:t+ 0 Relinquished By Printed Name • Signature Affiliation DatefTime F-- S Received By Date/Time • ,1 • Miscellaneous Notes (Hazardous Materials, Quick tum -around time, etc.): Foy /VW- Pis (;i els/sic • AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY & CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH. SEATTLE. WA 98103 PHONE: (206) 632-2715 FAX: (206) 632-2417 5RAICQ7.36.Ztuo310o CASE FILE NUMBER: SHA001-09 REPORT DATE: 01/28/99 PAGE 1 DATE SAMPLED: 01/14/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/14/99 FINAL REPORT. LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES CASE NARRATIVE Four water samples were received by the laboratory in good condition. No difficulties were encountered in the preparation or analysis of these samples. Sample data follows while QA/QC data's contained on subsequent pages. SAMPLE DATA . pH FOG WH FECAL COLIFORM TSS TURBIDITY BODS SAMPLE ID (mg/1) (mg/1) (1/ loom') (mg/1) (NIU) (mg/1) SRO UP -1 6.88 1.2 1.0 480 36 25 < 2.00 SRO UP -2 6.74 1.7 1.4 est 260 28 23 < 2.00 SRO DOWN -1 6.66 0.69 0.58 est 220 21 18 < 2.00 SRO DOWN -2 6.64 0.89 0.71 >262 29 23 < 2.00 DISSOLVED METALS AMMONIA NO3+NO2 TOTAL -P HARDNESS SAMPLE ID (mg/11 (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) COPPER LEAD ZINC (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) SRO UP -1 0.077 0.154 0.128 11.3 0.0032 O 00c).. <0.0010 0.032 SRO UP -2 0.069 0.168 0.171 13.9 0.0028 0, 0.i p <0.0010 0.021 SRO DOWN -1 0.050 0.157 0.063 13.7 0.0026 o.cd(, <0.0010 k025 SRO DOWN -2 0.056 0.144 0.080 12.7 0.0024 a,0 -)Z(, <0.0010 0.022 ,.a • • AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY & CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH. SEATTLE. WA 98103 PHONE: (208) 832-2715 FAX: (208) 832-2417 BHAROLn.m5HMO0I00 '3ASE FILE NUMBER: REPORT DATE: DATE SAMPLED: SHA001-09 01/28/99 01/14/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/14/99 ?fl'(AL REPORT. LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES PAGE 2 QA/QC DATA QC PARAMETER METHOD DATE ANALYZED DETECTION LIMIT DUPLICATE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL DUPLICATE RPD SPIKE SAMPLE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL SPIKED SAMPLE SPIKE ADDED % RECOVERY QC CHECK mg/1 FOUND TRUE % RECOVERY BLANK pH FOG TPH FECAL OouFORM TSS TURBIDITY BODS (mg/1) (mg/1) (#/100m1) (mg/1) (NTU) (mg/1) EPA 150.1 01/14/99 0.10 EPA 413.2 01/24/99 0.25 EPA 418.1 01/24/99 0.25 SM 18 9222D 01/14/99 2 EPA 160.2 01/21/99 0.50 EPA 180.1 01/15/99 0.10 EPA 405.1 01/15/99 2.00 NA NA NA SRO DOWN -2 > 262 > 274 NC SRO DOWN -2 29 27 5.41% SRO DOWN -2 23 23 0.00% SRO DOWN -2 < 2.00 < 2.00 NC NA NA NA NA NA • NA NA NA 33.8 33.9 99.71% 33.8 33.9 99.71% NA 9.3 10 93.00% 85 80 106.25% 4.33 4.62 93.72% NA <0.25 <0.25 < 2 <0.50 NA <2.00 • (RELATIVE PERCENT OLFPERENCE. t. . NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE. • NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO ONE OR MORE VALUES BEING BELOW THE DETECTION EMIT. • RECOVERY NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO SPU¢ SAMPLE OUT OF RANGE OR SPITZ TOO LOW RELATIVE TO SAMPLE CONCENTRATION. • AQUATIC RESEARCH INCORPORATED LABORATORY 8c CONSULTING SERVICES 3927 AURORA AVENUE NORTH, SEATTLE; WA 98103 PHONE: (206) 832-2715 FAX: (206) 632-2417 SHAI007.,0.3HA00107 CASE FILE NUMBER: SHA001-09 REPORT DATE: 01/28/99 DATE SAMPLED: 01/14/99 DATE RECEIVED: 01/14/99 FINAL REPORT, LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PARAMETERS ON WATER SAMPLES FROM SHAPIRO ASSOCIATES PAGE 3 QA/QC DATA QC PARAMETER METHOD DATE ANALYZED DETECTION LIMIT DUPLICATE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL DUPLICATE RPD SPIKE SAMPLE SAMPLE ID ORIGINAL SPIKED SAMPLE SPIKE ADDED % RECOVERY QC CHECK mg/1 FOUND TRUE % RECOVERY BLANK BLANK SPIKE %R AMMONIA NO3+NO2 TOTAL -P HARDNESS COPPER LEAD ZINC (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) EPA 350.1 EPA 353.2 EPA 285.1 EPA 130.2 EPA 220.2 EPA 239.2 EPA 200.7 01/15/99 01/15/99 01/18/99 01/26/99 01/21/99 01/26/99 01/20/99 0.010 0.010 0.002 2.00 0.0010 0.0010 0.003 SRO DOWN -2 SRO DOWN -2 BATCH SRO DOWN -2 BATCH BATCH BATCH 0.056 0.144 0.025 12.7 0.0053 <0.0010 0.027 0.059 0.144 0.023 12.5 0.0054 <0.0010 0.035 4.86% 0.21% 8.3796 1.6096 _ 1.5096 NC 25.8196 BATCH BATCH BATCH SRO DOWN -2 BATCH BATCH BATCH 0.056 0.144 0.025 12.7 0.0053 <0.0010 0.027 0.286 0.361 0.080 32.1 0.0180 0.0199 1.10 0.200 0.200 0.050 20.0 0.0125 0.0250 1.00 114.9096 108.80% 111.00% 97.4396 101.60% 79.72% 107.3016 0.529 0.976 0.090 40.2 . 0.0243 0.0258 1.00 0.499 0.933 0.093 40.0 0.0250 0.0250 1.00 106.05% 104.61% 96.77% 100.5096 97.2096 103.20% 100.2096 <0.010 <0.010 <0.002 <2.00 ] <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.003 101.0096 111.0096 NA • RELATIVE PERCENT CUTERENCE. • NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT AVAILABLE. • NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO ONE OR MORE VALUES SENO BELOW THE DETECTION WET. • RECOVERY NOT CALCULABLE DUE TO SMILE SAMPLE OUT OP RANGE OR SMILE TOO LOW RELATIVE TO SAMPLE CONCENTRATION. Sub tted B . St ven Lazo Laboratory Director 5E11 strod ' An AD r -'l 1,I "'1 'b dt�J .� of QQ- --L. -Jr) 6'8- o °44 � c-Bn -21 bb 11 "1k c—(d ►rbH 1 G( 77`11 V � pwm 10'20 0 po 11k Temp c1,0 BC " 99-0 Cr►, t /1-7c4n 12'►�� � r n OW ©.69. .l .2r v (jr )aw,�� 4 -t -)%t •'ru ao AA et 2 - r a ?�•�.�-r .. Vn� .curve - :1I • Aquatic Research Inco ated • 3927 Aurora Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98103-7801 USA Voice: (206)632-2715 Fax: (206)632-2417 Sold To: Shapiro and Associates 101 Yesler Way Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 • Invoice Invoice Number: 105236 Invoice Date: Feb 5, 1999 Page: 1 Customer ID Customer PO Payment Terms SHA01 Net 30 Days Sales Rep ID Case File ID VTSR: Due Date LSB SHA00109 1/14/99 3/7/99 Quantity Item Description Unit Price Extension 4.00 W150.1 Water pH 5.00 20.00 4.00 W413.2/418.1 FOG/TPH - Water 60.00 240.00 4.00 W9222D Fecal Coliforms - MF 20.00 80.00 4.00 W160.2 Total Suspended Solids 15.00 60.00 4.00 W180.1 Turbidity - Nephelometric 5.00 20.00 • 4.00 W405.1 Bod5 - Water 30.00 120.00 4.00 W350.1 Ammonia 15.00 60.00 4.00 W353.2 Nitrate + Nitrite - N 15.00 60.00 4.00 W365.1 Total - P 15.00 60.00 4.00 W130.2 Hardness - Titration 15.00 60.00 . 4.00 MFILT Metals Filtration 5.00 20.00 4.00 ICP ICP / Element 10.00 40.00 8.60 GFAA GFAA / Element 20.00 160.00 Check No: Subtotal Sales Tax Total Invoice Amount Payment Received 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 TOTAL 1,000.00 Aquatic Research Inc orated 3927 Aurora Avenue RI Seattle, WA 98103-7801 USA Voice: (206) 632-2715 Fax: (206)632-2417 Sold To: Shapiro and Associates 101 Yesler Way Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 • Invoice Invoice Number: 105218 Invoice Date: Jan 28,' 1999 Page: 1 Customer ID Customer PO. Payment Terms SHAO1 Net 30 Days Sales Rep ID Case File ID VTSR: Due Date LSB SHA00108 1/5/99 2/27/99 Quantity Item Description Unit Price Extension 4.00 W150.1 Water pH 5.00 20.00 4.00 W413.2/418.1 FOG/TPH - Water 60.00 240.00 4.00 W9222D Fecal Coliforms - MF 20.00 80.00 4.00 W160.2 Total Suspended Solids 15.00 60.00 4.00 W180.1 Turbidity - Nephelometric 5.00 20.00 4.00 W405.1 Bod5 - Water 25.00 100.00 4.00 W350.1 Ammonia 15.00 60.00 4.00 W353.2 Nitrate + Nitrite - N 15.00 60.00 4.00 W365.1 Total - P 15.00 60.00 4.00 W130.2 Hardness - Titration 15.00 60.00 4.00 MFILT Metals Filtration 5.00 20.00 8.00 GFAA GFAA / Element 20.00 160.00 4.00 ICP ICP / Element 10.00 40.00 Check No: Subtotal Sales Tax Total Invoice Amount Payment Received 980.00 980.00 0.00 TOTAL 980.00 59l- CPA 001-0 '1 *Aquatic Research Incorporated 3927 Aurora Ave. N I Seattle, WA 98103. 6) 632-2715 CHAIN-OF-CUSTO.aDY aECORD CLIENT: Sham `o a. Az. • SAMPLING DATE: YV SAMPLERS: c (kV, r. Oov(51�J c� SAMPLE INFORMATION SAMPLE DATE/TIME COLLECTED • PARAMETERS SHEET OF PROJECT ID: CASE FILE NO.: DATA RECORDED BY: • 0 0 va b C 4 B O T T Ik x 24 x, x ix x x x x n K x XX k X, X X 6 6 NOTES ,b1= 6.22 pli= 6,7 pH= (,.64 Printed Name Signature Affiliation Printed Name Signature Affiliation Relinquished By Relinquished By DatelTime Miscellaneous Notes (Hazardous Materials, Quick turn -around time, etc.): Received By Date/Time ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Tukwila A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME: Sterling Realty Organization PROPONENT'S NAME: Quik Park of Washington LLC. CONTACT PERSON'S NAME: Michael Aippersbach CONTACT PERSON'S ADDRESS: PO Box 95429, Seattle WA 98145 CONTACT PERSON'S PHONE: (206) 523-3764 PROPOSAL TITLE: Off -Airport Parking Facility and S. 158th Street Relocation PROPOSAL LOCATION: The location for the proposed off -airport parkingfacility is north of S. 160th Street and east of Old Military Road. The proposed project area currently straddles the existing S. 158th Street. (The proposed project is immediately east of the Lewis & Clark Theater at 15820 Pacific Highway South.) The existing configuration of S. 158th Street will be modified so that the proposed new alignment is just north of the Fellowship Bible Church of Riverton Heights. Please attach an 8-1/2" x 11" vicinity map which accurately locates the proposal site so that it can easily be identified in the field. GIVE AN ACCURATE, BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL'S SCOPE AND NATURE: A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: Construction of approximately 1,195 stall parking lot which in addition includes several small structures. The proposed structures include: (1) a one-story office building (approximately 360 sf.); (2) a 25 x 70 foot ticket canopy (approximately 1,750 sf. in area and approximately 18 feet in height) with a ticket booth and lane gates; and (3) one maintenance structure (a two -bay structure, with apx: 750 s.f.) for maintaining approximately (8-10) passenger vans (buses). In addition the proposed site development will include the installation of a 5,000 gallon propane tank. The parking area will be lighted and the facility will be operating 24 -hours per day. The site perimeter will be fenced with both a wood fence in the portion of the perimeter adjoining the Laurel Estates (condominium) development with the remaining perimeter using 8 -foot high chain- link fence (with possibly strands of barbed wire at the top). Another component of the on-site security system includes the use of cameras and monitors. Signage for the development will FEB 23 1999 COMMUNITY DEVr1 C7,4.7NT City of Tukwila Environmentaaecklist Off -Airport Parking Faculty//99 include a wall sign attached to the canopy of the entry structure and a free-standing sign near the entry. B. ACREAGE OF SITE: 9.11 acres o 396, 900 s.f. (excluding new 50,6 °< portion of S. 158th Street -1.06 acres or 46,125 sf.) . C. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. D. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS/DWELLINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: None. E. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED: None. F. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS TO BE CONSTRUCTED: There are three separate structures to be located on the site: (A) an ingress/egress canopy (approximately 1,750 s.f., 18 feet in height; and approximately 70' x 20') covering one ticket booth (approximately 6' x 8') and five lanes with moveable gates; (B) a one story, pre fabricated structure (approximately 976 sf., 16' x 61') containing two (2) administrative offices; a storage area, a lunch room, a restroom, and a coffee bar; and (C) a one-story metal maintenance structure (approximately 750 sf in area, 15 foot, 6 -inches high, 25' x 30') with two repair bays to service the shuttle vans (buses). One of the service bays may serve as a van washing area. The location of the three structures will be at the western end of the site at the ingress/egress point to the site Old Military Road and S. 158th Street). G. QUANTITY OF EARTH MOVEMENT (in cubic yards): Approximately 20,800 CY cut; 45,200 CY fill. H. PROPOSED LAND USE: An Off -Airport Parking Facility. DESIGN FEATURES, INCLUDING BUILDING HEIGHT, NUMBER OF STORIES & PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS: All three structures are one story (up to eighteen feet in height for the 5 -lane ingress/egress canopy with ticket booth), approximately 9 feet in height for the office structure, and approximately 16 feet in height for the maintenance building. The office building will be clad in MeVetitliiiAitikflatkoof, the ingress/egress canopy will be ofen ame'l'ed:.me al, and the ;The proposed project will also include a 5,000 gallon propane tank; an asphalt parking surface; an exterior fence; exterior lighting; and video surveillance equipment. • J. OTHER: None. ESTIMATED DATE OF COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSAL OR TIMING OF PHASING: Page 2 City of Tukwila Envireiental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Olity/2-21-99 Early Fall 1999. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, please explain. Not at this time. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal? Site survey and Topographic analysis Traffic Analysis (attached) Building Plans (site plan and floor plans) Landscape plan Building Elevations Two Wetlands analyses (attached) Water Quality report for the Gilliam Creek watercourse (attached). Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, please explain. List dates applied for and file numbers, if known. None known. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. If permits have been applied for, list application date and file numbers, if known. Design Review Approval, Clear and grade permit, Building permit, Fire Department permit(for propane tank), Electrical permits, Plumbing permits, and Sign permit uor{al PLEASE PROVIDE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS, IF APPLICABLE TO YOUR PROPOSAL (PLEASE CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX[ES] FOR EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL): [ ] LAND USE RECLASSIFICATION (REZONE) map of existing and proposed zoning. [ ] PRELIMINARY PLAT (AND/OR P.R.U.D OR P.U.D.) Preliminary plat map. [X] CLEARING & GRADING PERMIT Plan of existing and proposed grading. Development plans. [X] BUILDING PERMIT (OR DESIGN REVIEW) Site plan, Clearing & grading plan. [ ] SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT Site plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Page 3 City of Tukwila Environmenttiecklist Off -Airport Parking FaciIIty-99 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): flat hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Soil Survey of King County Area Washington identifies an Alderwood gravelly sandy loam in this area. The hardpan layer for this soil is usually located 20 to 40 inches below the surface. The permeability is moderate (2.0 to 6.0 inches per hour) and erosion hazard is also considered moderate for this soil. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not known at this time. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate sources of fill. 25,000 CY f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, in some areas of the site during construction. However, erosion and sedimentation control measures will be required by the City and the approved TGSCP will be accomplished during the construction period. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 90 percent. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: The proposed project will use best management practice methodology as required by the City to minimize erosion and sedimentation in accordance with the approved TGSCP. Page 4 1 7 lo City of Tukwila Enviripental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Silty/2-21-99 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. auto and van emissions b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None proposed. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If so, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. A watercourse is located on the perimeter of the proposed site (west side). The watercourse is fed from flows which originate in the City of SeaTac, development at the northeast corner of Pacific Highway South and S. 160th Street, and possibly north from airport area and parts of Pacific Highway South which then flow into Gilliam Creek. See Drainage Plan. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. The edge of the proposed development will be a minimum of 15 feet from the wetted perimeter of the watercourse. However, the watercourse noted is not included in the City's Shoreline Master Program. `Grading for site improvements will slope away from the water course. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that Page 5 City of Tukwila EnvironmentaSecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/99 would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not anticipated at this time. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. None required. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, wastewater will be discharged to a sanitary sewer (Valvue Sewer District) . b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn nor discharged to ground water. Storm water will be detained and discharged to watercourse adjoining site. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial containing the following chemicals ...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged via septic system. Sanitary sewer expected to serve approximately 6-8 employees per shift. See drainage plan. c. Water runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Page 6 City of Tukwila EnvirSental Checklist Off -Airport Parking Slaty/2-21-99 Stormwater runoff from the proposed parking area (both locations) and roofs of the building(s) will be collected through a conveyance system consisting of pipes and catch basins and outfall to a wetpond. The existing drainage corridor west of the site will be enhanced to function as a wetpond to treat the runoff. The wetpond will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements. See Drainage Plan. Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a conveyance system and routed into a water quality and erosion control facility. This facility will be independent of the parking lot's storm water system. Runoffs from the proposed alignment will eventually outfall into the existing drainage corridor parallel to SR 518. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The existing drainage corridor west of the site will be enhanced to function as a wetpond to treat the runoff. The wetpond will be designed to satisfy water quality and erosion control requirements. See Drainage Plan. Runoff from the new alignment for S. 158th Street will be collected through a conveyance system and routed into a water quality and erosion control facility. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle t • _ _ of - etation found on the site: deciduous tre. ald aple, aspen, other evergreen tree: a pine, other V shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Page 7 City of Tukwila Environmentalltecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/4)-99 Almost all of the existing vegetation will be removed for both the off -airport parking facility as well as the street re- configuration. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site. Most of the existing vegetation will be removed to accommodate the project. Two undeveloped areas south of the relocated S. 158th Street will remain in natural state. The proposed project will include some additional entry landscaping to supplement the existing, perimeter landscaping and interior landscaping within the parking lot interior. Native species will be utilized as much as possible. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, ongbirdjother: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shell -fish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None anticipated. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electrical, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs. Describe whether it will used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical for lighting, cooling, tools, and heating. Propane gas will also be used as a fuel for the passenger Page 8 City of Tukwila Envideental Checklist Off -Airport Parking lity/2-21-99 vans (buses) and to heat the office and maintenance building(s). b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None anticipated. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Police response, fire department response, or emergency medical response could be required (aid car, ambulance). 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None anticipated. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may effect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Auto and truck traffic, equipment used in nearby car wash operations, and HVAC (air conditioning) systems. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Sources of noise will be from traffic comin; onto and off the site (cars and vans) and from t e HVAC (air conditioning unit) system. The site wt Page 9 S City of Tukwila Environmentecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility/0-99 operating 24 hours per day, however, most of the activity takes place between 6 am.. and 10 pm. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Structures for the maintenance, office, and ingress/egress have been placed at the west end of the site, away from the existing residential areas to the east and south. Limit grading, construction to daylight hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjacent development includes residential (multifamily, condominiums, and detached single family), a church, and a bowling alley and a movie theater. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not in the recent past. c. Describe any structures on the site. One (1) outdoor billboard. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification for the site? Regional Commercial (RC). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. Regional Commercial. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, see attached wetland reports (by Shapiro and Associates). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Page 10 City of Tukwila EnvirSental Checklist Off -Airport Parkinglity/2-21-99 Staffing will require up to a total of 25 employees (6-8 per shift). J• Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None required. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Project approval includes a Design Review process by the City to examine issues of compatibility. The project will also comply with the City's development regulations. In addition, the location of the structures and other facilities to operate the parking lot have been located approximately a minimum of 500 feet west of the adjoining residential development on the east. The distance to the church is approximately a minimum of 250 feet and the distance from the residential development on the south side of S. 160th Street is approximately a minimum of 400 feet. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Design of exterior lighting will include features to control light and glare impacts and prevent spill to adjoining properties. The street lighting will be per the City's standards. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Page 11 City of Tukwila EnvironmentLlecklLst Off -Airport Parking Facility/ -99 Eighteen (18) feet for the ingress/egress canopy (The parking lot lighting standards will be taller.). b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Some views of the adjoining Laurel Estate will be altered. For those elevated areas south of S. 160th Street, they will view a developed area instead of an undeveloped area. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed development will include landscaping on the perimeter of the site (a 30 foot wide buffer adjoining the Laurel Estates condominiums and an 8 -foot high fence separating the condominiums from the parking area) and interior parking lot landscaping. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The sources of lighting are the parking lot lighting and the headlights in use during the nighttime hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light and glare may effect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The exterior lighting for the proposed project will include cut-off features and other measures aimed at minimizing and light and glare impacting the adjoining properties. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Bowling, movies, shopping. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Page 12 City of Tukwila Envir1ental Checklist Off-Alrport Parking Slaty/2-21-99 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None needed or anticipated. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None anticipated to be needed. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The access if from Old Military Road north of S. 160th Street. (Note an additional portion of the existing Old Military Road is intended to be vacated.) b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Approximately 1,195 parking spaces (including spaces for employees and van spaces). No existing parking spaces would be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. The project as proposed will require a re- configuration of the existing S. 158th Street roadway Page 13 City of Tukwila Environmente►ecklist Off -Airport Parking Facility -99 alignment and a vacation of a portion of the existing Old Military Road and S. 158th Street rights-of-way. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. See Traffic Analysis (prepared by Perteet Engineering) Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See Traffic analysis. None anticipated. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: None anticipated. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or'in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Seattle City Light (power); Water District # 125; Valvue Utility District (sewer); US West (telephone). The source of heating energy for the office and maintenance buildings will be propane gas which will be brought to the site on demand. Pro ane as will also be used as fuel for the passenger vans. * . C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Page 14 City of Tukwila Envi> ental Checklist Off -Airport Parkingallity/2-21-99 Signature ayu�e pyye,,ip,,,L Date Submitted 2-22- 99 c/admin.dsk:envrcklt.doc Page 15 CITY Oi- TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 RECEIVED FEB 2 3 '1999 COMMUN uy DEVELOPMENT SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR STAFF USE.ONL Y Receipt:Number:..: z. aoa- File"Number: T-ocosifY408- Cross-reference files•• Applicantnotified'ofiincomplete application::: Applicant' notified.of.`.complete application:.: Notice of. application' issued:. A. NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Pft{24: of WAS (NF TZN L� B. LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (address and accessors parcetnumber(s)) 155 'Io Pi3G4 f i G f4-wf wAYsoori2223 - . 22- 4 0 4 t+v Ng. cOP.P► 6F 5. I * aT it ow M U. Y pap Quarter: 5-U Section: 22 Township: '2 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: O#f- At12-Porr 1711/4tzg(N4 FAClLETV C t(G5 3T -t ,3 Phi ?Os at) D. APPLICANT: NAME: t t A IPP1RS I3AC4 ADDRESS: Po BOX 9.5 4.249l 5r-krrt-g. W A 95/45- 7424 PHONE: ( 204) 52 37(4 l ( 266) 524- 6337 FAX SIGNATURE: file,i AD"'L DATE: 2 - �3- 99 CITY OOTUKWILA 1 Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 RECEIVED FEB 23 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SEPA) APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS To submit for SEPA review, provide the items listed above to the Planning Division at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Room 100. 6 copies of the completed and signed environmental checklist. You may use the City's pre-printed form or you may re -type the questions on your computer. If you choose to re -type the form into your computer, be sure to do so accurately. Mistakes or omissions will increase the review time. 6 sets of the full size plans needed to clearly describe the proposed action. ❑ One set of plans reduced to 8.5" x 11". 0(C To S c1RM-t (7 Got 761C., C -L. 2 (Z3 Four copies of supporting studies. One copy of the checklist application. TOne set of mailing labels for all properties 500' from the subject property. (See address label worksheet.) ❑ $325 filing fee. COMPLETING THE CHECKLIST The checklist contains several pages of questions which you are asked to answer. It covers a comprehensive set of topics. As a result, several of the questions may not apply to your project. If a particular question does not apply, simply write N/A underneath. HOWEVER, be aware that many questions apply despite appearing not to. Care needs to be taken in reading and answering the questions to ensure the appropriate response is provided. It is important that accurate and clear information be provided. You may not know all of the answers. Answer each question to the best of your ability. If we find an answer to be insufficient, the City may contact you to ask for more information. Sometimes, after reviewing the checklist, the City will ask you provide additional studies or information. Commonly requested information includes traffic analysis, site topography, soils studies and tree surveys. D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit approval) will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the property prior to issuance of any construction permits. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct. EXECUTED at 3 1/A(J� (city), l/141 (state), on "2-11g , 199.. 5I ' cel • 5g-61 b/ zJ 6. (Print Name) / r f box &doe 6/J Pu f -1.13 (Address) -(zC (Phonq'Numbe (Signature) Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures. • Perteet Engineer., Inc. December 23, 1998 Mr. Gary Beck - - President, Republic Parking Northwest, 5221 Ballard Avenue NW Seattle, WA 98107 Re: Traffic Impact Analysis for the Proposed SRO/Republic Park and Fly Perteet Engineering Project No. 98802 Dear Mr. Beck: RECEIVE FEB 2 3 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELCPMENT This letter summarizes the traffic impacts for the proposed SRO/Republic Park and Fly in Tukwila, Washington. The report addresses the trip generation, distribution, level of service, site access, and mitigation requirements identified for the development in accordance with the City of Tukwila traffic analysis guidelines. Project Description and Site Access - The proposed site for the SRO/Republic Park and Fly is located in the northwest corner of the South 158th Street and Old Military Road intersection. The project site will provide access to the adjacent street system with.a driveway located on Old Military Road. Although this project _proposes to realign South 158th Street east of Old Military Road, no derivation in traffic flow patterns is anticipated. Figures 1 and 2 depict the project site vicinity and plan, respectively. The Park and Fly is planned for completion and operation by the year 2000. The site provides 1,000 spaces for long term parking with a projected average stay of 3.5 days. The Park and Fly provides shuttle bus service to and from the airport from the site. An estimated five shuttles per hour (five shuttles in and five shuttles out) -will service the site. Existing Conditions The primary arterial routes that serve the proposed development include SR -99 and South 160th Street. SR -99 is a four -lane principal arterial with a center left -turn lane. It serves as a primary north -south route through Tukwila along the west side of I-5. SR -99 has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and carries approximately 26,400 vehicles per day in the project site vicinity. 2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 • 425-252-7700 • Fax 425-339-6018 • www.perteet.com • 1-800-61i-9900 Mr. Gary Beck December 23, 1998 Page 2 • • South 160th Street is a two-lane east -west minor collector arterial and widens into a four -lane road with a center left -turn lane as it approaches SR -99, just west of the site access. It carries approximately 8,400 vehicles per day and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Transit facilities in the site vicinity include a total of six bus routes currently servicing SR -99 and one route servicing South 160th Street in the site vicinity. Trip Generation and Distribution The trip generation of the proposed SRO/Republic Park and Fly was estimated using information provided by Norman Ennis (November 17, 1998, memo to Gary Beck, Republic Parking System). The proposed site is to include 1,000 car spaces with an average stay of 3.5 days. Therefore, approximately 300 passenger cars per day will both enter and exit the lot (yielding 600 trips) during the hours of operation of 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. With a total of 600 average daily trips (ADT) during seventeen hours of operation, an average of 35 cars per hour will enter or exit the lot (35 trips per hour). During the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, the site generated traffic is expected to increase to 40 trips per hour. In the a.m. peak hour, the inbound volume is estimated at 65% of the hourly traffic (26 inbound and 14 outbound). In the p.m. peak hour, the outbound volume is estimated at 65% of the hourly traffic (14 inbound and 26 outbound). Shuttle bus servicewill be provided to caravan the park and ride patrons to the airport. In addition to the passenger car traffic, an estimated 150 bus trips per day will be generated by the site with an average of 8 to 10 shuttles per hour. During the a.m. and p.m. peak hour, the site generated bus traffic is estimated at 10 trips per hour (5 inbound and 5 outbound). Therefore the Park and Fly is estimated to generate a total of 750 ADT of which 50 trips would occur during the a.m and p.m. peak hour. The estimated trip generation values are summarized in Table 1 for the daily, a.m., and p.m. peak hour periods. Table 1 Trip Generation Summary J: \UserAgoong\Pa rkn FI/SROTIA. DOC ADT AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips In Out Total In Out Total Passenger Car Park and Fly Shuttle 600 150 26 5 14 5 40 10 14 5 26 5 40 10. Total 750 31 19 50 19 31 50 J: \UserAgoong\Pa rkn FI/SROTIA. DOC Mr. Gary Beck December 23, 1998 Page 3 1 .The trip distribution of project generated traffic is based on existing_traffic volumes as published in the 1997 WSDOT Annual Traffic Report and the primary access routes to the project site. Figures 3 and 4 depict the projected generated trip distribution and assignment, respectively. Level of Service Congestion is generally measured in terms of level of service (LOS). In accordance with the Updated 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, facilities are rated with any value between LOS A and F, with LOS A being free flow and LOS F being forced flow or over capacity conditions. The level of service at all intersections is calculated in terms of seconds of delay per vehicle. Geometric characteristics and conflicting traffic movements are taken into consideration when determining LOS values. All LOS calculations follow the methodology outlined in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board and HCM support software developed by McTrans, University of Florida Transportation Research Center and the Federal Highway Administration. The locations identified by the City of Tukwila for review are two signalized intersections along SR -99 at South 154th Street and at South 160th Street. A LOS analysis was also conducted at the intersection of the Military Road and South 160th Street. Due to the low volumes at the Military Road/South 158th Street intersection, the Military Road/South 160th Street intersection functions as the first critical access point to the arterial system. The Military Road/South 160th Street intersection is a two-way stop with a stop control on Military Road. Level of service analyses were conducted for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours at the Military Road/South 160th Street intersection and at the two study intersections under 1998 existing conditions and future 2000 conditions with and without the project generated traffic. Noon peak hour traffic volumes along SR -99 and South 160th Street are less than p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. Therefore, LOS analyses were not conducted for the noon peak hour. The LOS analyses for the a.m. and p.m. are summarized in Table 2. JAUserAgoong\ParknFly SROTIA.DOC Mr. Gary Beck December 23, 1998 Page 4 Table 2 Level of Service Summary Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 1998 Existing 2000 No Action 2000 w/ Project 1998 Existing 2000 No Action 2000 w/ Project Unsignalized Intersection Old Military Rd. @ S. 160th St. A (1) A (1) A (1) A (1) A (1) A (1) Signalized Intersection SR -99 @ South 154th St. SR -99 @ South 160th St. B (12) B (11) B (12) B (12) B (12) B (12) C (19) C (18) C (23) C (22) C (24) C (22) Note: Intersection delay is reported in parenthesis in seconds. The LOS analyses indicate that the intersection of Old Military Road/South 160th Street will operate at LOS A in year 2000 during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with the site generated traffic. The signalized intersections of SR-99/South 154th Street and SR-99/South 160th Street currently operate at LOS B and C in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, and will continue to do so with the proposed site development. Since LOS D and E are the City of Tukwila's adopted LOS standard for South 160th Street and SR -99, respectively, no improvements are needed or recommended at these intersections due to the Park and Fly development project. Site Access Analysis The site access driveway will access Old Military Road north of the realigned South 158th Street intersection. Based on the existing and projected traffic volumes, level of service operations at both the driveway and South 158th Street intersection with Old Military Road would meet City Standards by inspection. Proposed Mitigation The City of Tukwila's mitigation policy requires a contribution to the City for the development's proportionate share cost of future transportation improvements. Since the City of Tukwila's mitigation fee contribution is based on the adopted 1996 Ordinance 1769 and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the contribution would be based on the number of peak hour trips generated by the proposed development. Since the SRO/Republic Park and Fly project does not impact the intersections listed on the CIP list, no mitigation for off-site improvements is required for this development. J:\Users\goong\ParknFly\SROTIA.DOC Mr. Gary Beck December 23, 1998 Page 5 We -trust that this traffic impact analysis provides the City of Tukwila with adequate information to complete their review of traffic impacts and mitigation for the proposed SRO/Republic Park and Fly. Please_ call us if you -have any questions or comments regarding the information documented -herein. - - - = Sincerely, PERTEET ENGINEERING INC. Sherman D. Goong, P.E. Project Manager Attachments J: \Users\goong\Parkn Fl y\SROTIA.DOC CITY of TUKWILA SEATTLE TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Transportation Consultants SRO / Republic Park -n -Fly Vicinity Map Figure 1 ilaiu111111111111111j1111111111111 REPUBLIC PARKING S 160TH ST. PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Transportation Consultants SRO / Republic Park -n -F/ y Site Plan Figure 2 • S 144th ST S 146th ST N W SEATTLE TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Transportation Consultants Legend OPercent Trip Distribution SRO / Republic Park -n -Fly Project Trip Distribution Figure 3 n:\traffic\reports\98802.dgn Dec. 23. 1998 241h AVE S S 144th ST S 148th ST S 146th Si Y b S 150th ST. 5 (3) SEATTLE TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 3 112 (5) S 152nd ST S 154th ST /4 (2) i/ 98 2 (4) CITY of TUKWILA 18 S 161st ST 6 4 (4) (6) 150 _ 2 (3) 68 - 3 (2) PERTEET ENGINEERING, INC. Civil and Transportation Consultants 720 30 -.18 (18) (30); S 160th ST ..01-11.- 6 ► S 162nd ST 292 7 12 (12) (7) 5 158th ST =19 (31) 31(19)750. 1 (1). 301(1) S 164th ST S 160th ST 9JJ Legend X X Average Daily Traffic X X PM Peak HR. Volumes (X) (X) AM Peak HR. Volumes SRO / Republic Park—n—Fly Project Generated Trips Figure 4- • CO lft m tr o-; N U CU c Cr. N CO CO 01L 0 •.— co L • July 17, 1998 Ms. Rebecca Riesen SRO 606 106th NM. Bellevue, WA 98004 RECEDE u FEB 2 3 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: Wetland delineation of SRO property in Tukwila, Washington Dear. Ms Riesen: SHAPIRO 6. ASSOCIATES. INC. At your request, Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) visited the SRO property in Tukwila, King County, Washington on July 8, 1998. The purpose of the visit was to identify and delineate wetland boundaries. The site is south of SR 518 on the east side of Pacific Highway South. The site is bounded by South. 158th Street to the west and north, Military Road S. to the west, and by residential homes and a church on the east and south (Township 23N, Range 4E, Section 22). Methods Wetlands on the site were identified and their boundaries estimated using methods described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Dept. of -Ecology, 1997). Wetland boundaries were marked in sequential order with bright orange flagging labeled "WETLAND BOUNDARY." Sample. plots were established at the site. Soil was characterized by digging a hole to a depth of at least 18 inches below the ground surface. Soil layers, or horizons, were described with regard to the. soil texture, color, presence or absence of redoximorphic features (such as mottling or gley color formation), and organic matter content. All herbaceous plant species within a 5 -foot radius of the soil pit were identified, and the percent of the ground each covered was estimated. All shrubs, saplings, and trees within a 30 -foot radius of the soil pit also were identified and their cover. estimated. Data collected at each of these sample plots were recorded; data forms are attached. Results A review of existing literature, including the National Wetland Inventory, Des Moines, Washington Quadrangle (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987), and the King County Wetlands Inventory (King County Environmental Division, 1990), indicates that the site was not identified as a wetland at the time of the surveys. The King County Wetlands Inventory does not map wetlands less than 1 acre in size. The site is not included within the study .area of the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (United States Department of Agriculture: Soil Conservation Service, 1973). mot The investigated parcel is approximately 3 acres in area and is enclosed on the north and west by roadways. Residential homes and a church establish the eastern and southern Ms. Rebecca Riesen • Page 2 of 3 July 17, 1998 border of the site. The vegetative habitats at the site include forested, scrub -shrub, and grassland. Non-native invasive plants are prevalent throughout the site. The topography is relatively level while the ground surface is typically uneven. The soil is compacted material that is likely fill material. Conditions at the site indicate areas of the parcel have been disturbed. Garbage and debris occur throughout the site. Access within the site was limited to grass patches and trails through blackberry brambles. A probable wetland was identified at the southwest area of the site. Based on the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance (City of Tukwila, 1991) this area could be classified as a Type 3 palustrine scrub/shrub wetland. This wetland was designated Wetland A and flagged from Al to A4 in a continuous loop. Wetland A is approximately 180 square feet in area (Figure 1). An evaluation of the wetland was conducted using the Wetland Rating Field Form for the City of Tukwila (Jones and Stokes, 1990). This method rated the delineated wetland in the lowest category with a point total of 17 (See attached Wetland Rating Field Form). Sample Plot One was established approximately 200 feet south of the trail entrance on South 158th Street. Creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) are the dominant vegetation. Scouler willow (Salix scouleriana), red alder (Alnus rubra), Robert geranium (Geranium robertianum), and Orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata) also occur. The calculated percent cover of FAC, FACW, or OBL species is 50 percent which is at the cut off between classifying the vegetation community as hydrophytic or upland. There is a prevalence of invasive species (classified FAC, FACW, and FACU) that make the classification of hydrophytic vegetation questionable. The soils are brown to light brownish gray (10YR 4/3 to 10YR 6/2) gravely sandy loams. Strong brown mottles (7.5YR 5/6) occur below 8 inches. The soil is hard pan at 11 inches. The hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils parameters are met at Sampling Plot 1, but chroma of 2 with mottles is the only indicator of wetland hydrology. Surface soil was dry during the field visit. Sample Plot Two was established in an upland area approximately 50 feet north of Sample Plot one. Several attempts to dig below four inches were necessary due to the fill like conditions of soil at the site. Himalayan blackberry is the dominant vegetation. Scouler willow, black cottonwood (Populus balsimifera var. trichocarpa), Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), Orchard grass, bentgrass (Agrostis sp.), and common yarrow (Achillea millefolium) also occur. The soils are brown (10YR 4/3) gravely sandy loam to nine inches with no mottles. Hard pan occurs below nine inches. No hydrological indicators were observed. Hydric vegetation is the only wetland parameter met at Sample Plot Two. Conclusions SHAPIRO delineated one probable wetland on the SRO Site on July 8, 1998. The area appears to meet the minimum criteria to be considered a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: the presence of wetland plants, hydric soil, and indications of wetland hydrology at or near the ground surface. Any development activities that may Ms. Rebecca Riesen Page 3 of 3 July 17, 1998 affect this wetland likely would not require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because it is isolated and smaller than 1/3 acre. The City of Tukwila has regulations that pertain to the altering of wetlands, but the Director Dept. of Community Development has the discretion to allow exceptions to the City's wetland mitigation requirements. The compensatory mitigation standards can be waived for isolated wetland systems that are less than 1,000 square feet and are of low value according to the rating methodology used in the City's Water Resource Rating and Buffer Study. This wetland is isolated, much smaller than the 1,000 square foot threshold, and would be classified as low value (17 total points using the Wetland Rating Field Form). A strong justification could be made for an exception on this wetland. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you require additional assistance on this or any other project, please do not hesitate to call me or Mark Boule. References City of Tukwila, 1991. City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance. City of Tukwila, Washington, Ordinance No. 1599. Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Jones and Stokes, 1990. Water Resource Rating and Buffer Recommendation. King County Environmental Division, 1990. King County Wetland Inventory. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987. National Wetland Inventory, Des Moines, Washington, Quadrangle. Washington State Dept. of Ecology, 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Dept. of Ecology, Publication #96-94. Sincerely, SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. alvin Kelly Douglas Ecologist AfAL- Naomi SI-IAPIRO 6 ASSOCIATI FIGURE 1 GENERAL WETLAND MAP TUKWILA 7/98 WETLAND DETERMINATION INI EDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064.2 Field Investigator(s): CD, RP Sample Plot #: 1 Date: 7/9/98 ASSGT SHAPIIATESa Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank rare Ranunculus repens FACW 40 4 38.0 1 gero Geranium robertianum FACU" 20 3 20.5 2 dagl Dactylis glomerata FACU 15 2 10.5 Sum of Midpoints: 69.0 Dominance Threshold: 34.5 Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank rudi Rubus discolor FACU 60 5 63.0 1 sasc Salix scouleriana FAC 30 4 38.0 2 alru Alnus rubra FAC 10 2 10.5 Sum of Midpoints: 111.5 Dominance Threshold: 55.8 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Sp Code Trees Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 50% Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Comments: disturbed site, rudi dominant throughout To determine dominants, first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order anti 50% of total for as species (dominance threshold) Is immediately exceeded. M species o�trbut are marked cumulative a� plus any others having 20% o the total midpoint Species that do not appear on the National list (Reed. 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat Information from the literature. WETLAND DETERMINATION Alt RMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE METHOD • SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064.2 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CD, RP SCS Mapping Unit: Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? SOILS Date: 7/8/98 Sample Plot #: 1 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? Yes Is soil gleyed? No Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Occurrence Gley Organic Color of Mottles Color Content A A 0-8" 8"-11" >11" gravelly sandy loam gravelly sandy loam hard pan 10YR 4/3 None None 10YR 6/2 7.5YR 5/6 c, m None low None low Landform/Topography: disturbed site, garbage, invasive weeds, most area unable to dig below 4" due to fill characteristics Comments: Hydric Soils? Yes Basis: chroma, mottles Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? No Depth to free-standing water in pit: None HYDROLOGY ❑ Yes ® No -Oxidized root zones ❑ Yes IN No -Water marks ❑ Yes No -Drift lines ❑ Yes ® No -Water-bome sediment deposits Comments: No evidence of hydrology Wetland Hydrology? No Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: None ❑ Yes ® No -Water-stained leaves ❑ Yes ® No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage pattems ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Basis: no hydrologic indicators SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes Disturbed area? Yes Basis: invasive species prevelant, soil has fill characteristics Problem area? No Basis: No evidence Comments: garbage throughout site, glass and metal located 4 inches deep in soil pits, most of area unable to dig below 4" due to fill characteristics Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Is the hydric soil criterion met? Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? Yes Yes No Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision: Based on soil and vegetation, wetland conditions are marginal, parcel< 200 square feet WETLAND DETERMINATION • INT EDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064.2 Sample Plot #: 2 Field Investigator(s): CD, RP Date: 7/9/98 IIAIES&a Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank agsp Agrostis sp. FAC 10 2 10.5 2 acmi Achillea millefolium FACU 5 1 3.0 dagl Dactylis glomerata FACU 20 3 20.5 1 Sum of Midpoints: 34.0 Dominance Threshold: 17.0 Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank rudi Rubus discolor FACU 50 4 38.0 1 sasc Salix scouleriana FAC 20 3 20.5 2 cysc Cytisus scoparius UPL" 10 2 10.5 Sum of Midpoints: 69.0 Dominance Threshold: 34.5 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Trees Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank potr Populus trichocarpa FAC 10 2 10.5 1 Sum of Midpoints: 10.5 Dominance Threshold: 5.3 % of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 60% Hydrophytic Vegetation? Yes Comments: disturbed site, rudi dominant, scots broom present To determine dominants. first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order uml SO% of total for al species (domimartce threshold) is immediately exceeded M species contributing to this midpoint value marked with anasterisk.a aastetive ririsk. plusal any others hating 20% d the tical " species that do not appear on the National List (Reed. 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat information Iron the literature. WET 1 ERMEDIATE LAND -LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064.2 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CD, RP SOILS SCS Mapping Unit: Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? Date: 7/8/98 Sample Plot #: 2 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? No Is soil gleyed? No Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Color Occurrence of Mottles Gley Organic Color Content A A 0-9" gravelly sandy loam >9" hard pan 10YR 4/3 None None None low Landform/Topography: disturbed site, garbage, invasive weeds, most area unable to dig below 4" due to fill characteristics Comments: Hydric Soils? No Basis: high chroma, no mottles Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? No Depth to free-standing water in pit: None ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes HYDROLOGY No -Oxidized root zones ® No -Water marks ® No -Drift lines No -Water-bome sediment deposits Comments: No evidence of hydrology Wetland Hydrology? No Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: None ❑ Yes No -Water-stained leaves ❑ Yes ® No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage patterns ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Basis: no hydrologic indicators SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes Disturbed area? Yes Basis: invasive species prevelant, soil has fill characteristics Problem area? No Basis: No evidence Comments: garbage throughout site, glass and metal located 4 inches deep in soil pits, most of area unable to dig below 4" due to fill characteristics Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes Is the hydric soil criterion met? Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? Rationale for jurisdictional decision: Soil and hydrology parameters not met No No No Figure 2. WETLAND RATING FIELD FORM FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA Wetland # Date UL Food Chain Support 75-100% of WL covered w/ emergent vegetation Score = 3 50-75% of WL covered w/ emergent vegetation Score = 2 25-50% of WL covered emergent vegetation Score =al Score Nutrient Transport WL associated w/ perennial watercourse Score = 3 WL associated w/ ephemeral watercourse Score = 2 Isolated WL (closed depression) Score = Score 1 - Buffer Buffer (barrier function) (consider area w/in 50 feet of wetand edge) Dense forest or shrub = 75-100% Score = 3 Dense forest or shrub = 50-75% Score =2 Dcnse forest or shrub = 25-50% Score =1 Score 2` Habitat Diversity: 3 or more WL classes, one of which is Open Water Score = 4 1 WL class Score ,Size of wetland: >7 acres Score = 5 >5 to 7 acrcs Score = 4 3 WL classes w/ no Open Water or 2 WL classes w/ Open Water Score = 3 >3 to 5 acres Score = 3 0 to 1 ac Score For total score, multiply sub -score for diversity by sub -score for size. 2 WL classes w/out Open Water Score = 2 Sub -Score 1 1 to 3 acres Score = 2 Sub -Score 1 1 Total Score pg.2 Habitat (cont.) percentage of Forested Wetland: 75- 100% of WL is forested Score = 4 50- 75% of WL is forested Score = 3 25-50% of WL is forested Score = 2 Score Puffer Habitat (consider area within 100 feet of wetland edge) Total of all relevant scores (check those that apply): A. Diverse forest or shrub =75-100% score = 4 = 50-75% score = = 25-50% score = 2 = 10-25% score = 1 13. Open forest or grass with occ. shrub C. Pasture/herbaceous = 75-100% = 50-75% = 25-50% score = 3 score = 2 score = 1 = 75-100% = 50-75% score = 2 score = 1 Score 3 Surrounding land use: (outside of WL buffer, w/in 100' feet. Multiply percentage of area in each category.) a. forested b. shrub unrnaintained grassland c. active agriculture/grass Score = 3 Score 2 Score =1 d. urban: residential/maintained lawns Score = -1 a and or b total 90% Score = 3 c. urban: industrial/commercial Score = -2 a and or b total 50-90% Score = 2 Score Z' a and or b total 25- 50% Score =1 Score 7 -- Union features (in wetland): (check those appropriate) raptor nest structures Snags >= 10 inches dbh, >20 feet tall Snags <10 inches dbh or beaver or muskrat lodges Fallen logs Perches Score = 3 for each Score = 2 if present Score = 1 for each Score presence of water: Permanent Score = 3 Seasonal Score �2 If permanent water is greater than 2 feet deep during driest season, add 2 points Score •. Water Storage Functions Location in watershed: (If wetland has no inlet or outlet, (Score = 0) middle third upper thir Score = 3 Score = 2 lower third O Score = 1 Score Storage: Is surface water stored in this wetland? Yes Score = 3 Size of wetland: >7 acres Score = 5 0to1�c, Score 1 >5 to 7 acres Score = 4 >3 to 5 acres Score = 3 For total score, multiply sub -score for storage by sub -score for size. Sub -Score 0 1 to 3 acres Score = 2 Sub -Score 1 - Total Score 1 Water Quality Residence Time; No outlet Score �3 inovcmcnt in outlet but no movement evident in wetland Score = 2 Score 3 Vegetation Density: 75-100% of WL covered w/ 50-75% of WL covered w/ 25-50% of WL covered emergent vegetation emergent vegetation emergegetation Score = 3 Score = 2 Score 1 , Score 1 +0-63( 1-7 pg .3 vu -i- Yto evie(ePtc.e.. • Pre-i'�plication Chettlist CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division -Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 PRE -APPLICATION FILENO `1`' PRE98-036' The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. ENVIRONMENTAL 1) Watercourse #22-3 crosses the site east of the existing parking lot. According to Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance (Tukwila Municipal Code - Chapter 18.45), the on-site watercourse is rated Type 3 with a standard buffer setback of 15 feet. The standard buffer may be reduced to 10 feet with an approved enhancement plan. 2) Permitted uses related to sensitive areas are allowed by TMC 18.45.080 Sections (a), (b), & (h). TMC 18.45.080 (d) specifies that watercourses may be rerouted, diverted, or enhanced using mitigative measures. Watercourse alterations are permitted by the DCD Director with an approved mitigation plan. 3) A wetland/watercourse study was conducted for the parcel on the north side of 5.158th Street (Shapiro & Assoc. 1997). The study identified a wetland area within the watercourse corridor. Please update the study to include the rating of the wetland and verify the rating of the watercourse. The wetland may be considered forested and a Type 2 wetland with a 50 -foot standard buffer setback. Please verify that the wetland/watercourse flagging was professionally land surveyed. The drainage corridor should be mapped as the edge of Ordinary High Water Mark or wetland edge, which ever is greater. The Shapiro study mapping does not match the site plan mapping of the watercourseiwetland corridor. 4) Because the property south of S. 158th Street has a significant cover of willows and other wet tolerant vegetation, a wetland reconnaissance study will be required. Wetland areas were not positively identified; however, this site is large enough to warrant a study for SEPA review. (4 , /- l/ //' !'% Pre-Aplication Chec list . CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division -Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 REPD"BLIC4'PARICJ r25=981akt The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Doors: Doors should have quality locking mechanisms with minimum one inch deadbolt locks. All exit doors shall be operable from the interior without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. The Crime Prevention Unit should be contacted for information regarding correct hardware usage at 242-8084. 2. Orientation of Windows: Windows should be located so that the parking lot area can be easily surveyed by individuals inside the building. 3. Graffiti Prevention Program: It is important to win the war against the graffiti "artist" and keep your building attractive. New non-stick anti -graffiti water-based or wax like coatings are now available to make an effective barrier against graffiti or other potentially staining substances. Contact the crime prevention unit for further information. 4. Landscaping: Plant materials should be placed and maintained so to provide visibility and prohibit hiding places for unauthorized people around ground level door and window areas. Sticker shrubs may discourage crime activities. Low shrubs and umbrella trees (where the canopy is maintained above five(5) feet from the ground) will allow surveillance opportunities, hence reducing the potential for criminal behavior. Lighting: Energy efficient security lighting is a relatively low-cost, yet extremely effective way to protect the building and its visitors. By providing sufficient lighting in the parking lot and around your building you will discourage burglars and vandals who don't like light, preferring the cover of darkness for their dirty work. Also the lighting will provide a legitimate sense of security for the employees and the visitors. Care should be taken to coordinate landscaping with lighting so that trees don't grow up and block the lights. 6. Identity: Addresses for each individual office/storage building should be visible, both in daylight and during darkness. Site development which does not properly identify buildings will delay emergency responses by police, fire, and aid units. 7. Security Alarm: Recommend installing a security alarm system during construction that would report a burglary in progress when the business is closed. Checklist prepared by T. Kilburg (242-8084) 6/22/98 P LI/Ippliccil con C,1' cklisC CITY OF TLIKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division -Permit Center 6300 Soullicenler Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 PRE-APPLICATION.FILE NO, YIZC9�' d36" T�PUI�LIC AitK ' N FLY LOT MEETING DATEIT'IME 6-2s' �s '@, 2.30 'h�i ' ..'......: :: SITE'ADDRESS: :3610 S „158 s.r '�h`� foflnwin enmmonth Addltidn l Inforntntlan.mnV.bo hcadedo :4githor raquirenientstregulutlans mai► tifiiid. bd in0 // ,2 %y PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 4,714-c_ :-2 i'rn LL's 44% 1wJ'&G,/, 2osly‘-a-, l��>1����. o✓ 'eMez.,p7/- 7.‘.);,1.e&(/ ,--_5s142.5- ,;4- ss s `-p,6- j7-19-71‘.› i. S / / -ee---'l Ka -c-:,174-97-1 / o l72 A Ppt-1 .9. ci) ge:d 0,17- 7/ , _ e / / /'tel c�✓✓.el� . � 1‘)- �� ,�>�� r1 �l I 5 C.--t2-/-gli viten Wakv /ate: / C -r /0 Ci. /`'f i/`7 Ve- Cor/ %/ .--v4 -&, .5 /1 0 a 4) J'e/%1?iu-6fZ /207 �� a—/4Z/Me/ On I S/ 74'_ 6W/rig—tit a 4. Wcher ,a -4-/L- /e)le7 Oarei /02s- 5 . Stw-er at, -t1.041 t l € Z' c e,fru cD/ s fig. 6 Tum^"" jt • i1 es yi2cznali. o e �j�01 e s — t I,'/' 7; es s J a2 be l(c�de.'/ a! /� i. ..I h. CJL es . u,061P,►y'roUr nde. e Ithe Sctbitc.tprvi 66Lck ecit9 5 102--0 he nieA selocaly (c-fdaw-e-e web of s- avtaA w mom- 8 . rrvnfat i m provem er fs ca re tare C r see. ae6f2, •4 TM C l/. 6 a ui PGc) std Ss lr' ;p-3 `:r • • • All plans shall be drawn to scale (maximum size of 24" x 36") and shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature, and extent of the proposed work. The plans shall contain sufficient detail to show that all provisions of the standards, laws, and codes will be met. R.3.2 FRONTAL IMPROVEMENTS. Frontal improvements are required for all development, except a single family residential home, with no -protest agreement, or improvements which do not meet the criteria for substantial remodeling. Frontal improvements may include: installation, relocation or modification of sidewalk, curb and gutter; street drainage; street lighting; traffic controls; utilities; landscaping; street widening; pavement markings and street signs. R.3.3 UTILITIES - UNDERGROUND INSTALLATION, All new and rebuilt utilities, including telephone, telegraph, cable television, and electrical power, are to be installed underground per TMC 13.08. Joint trenches shall be used where practical. R.3.4 SIGHT DISTANCE. The sight distance for all horizontal and vertical curves, intersections and access points shall be noted on the plans, and sight -line setbacks shall meet AASHTO standards. R.3.5 GRADE, The maximum grade for all roadways and driveways shall be fifteen percent (15%). Grades over 15% require approval of the City Engineer. R.3.6 LANDSCAPING. Trees and landscaping shall meet all zoning and TMC requirements, and: 1. No tree shall be planted within two feet (2') of a sidewalk or pavement edge. No landscaping shall be planted or allowed to grow over two feet (2') in height within thirty feet (30') of intersecting curblines or pavement edges (refer to TMC 11.36). R-3 Pre -plication CheAlist CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development Building Division -Permit Center 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 MEETING DATE/TIME;..6=25-98 @ 2:30 PM ;:SITE'ADDRESS. : 3610 s 158.ax The following comments are based on a preliminary review. Additional information may be needed. Other requirements/regulations may need to be met. PLANNING DIVISION - Land Use Information 1. Comply with Tukwila Municipal Code (zoning, land use, sign regulations, etc.) ❑ 2. Obtain the following land use permits/approvals: ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment/Lot Consolidation ❑ Binding Site Improvement Plan O Comprehensive Plan Amendment O ,'Conditional Use Permit Design Review Design Review -Interurban Environmental (SEPA) O Planned Mixed Use Development O Planned Residential Development O Rezone O Shoreline Management Permit O Tree Permit O Short Subdivision O Sign(s) O Subdivision O Unclassified Use O Variance O Other: 3. Zoning designation: 2.C- Site located in sensitive area? Yes 0 No 5.(-c l8,.24-, c &O Fol CormA Se r?ACK S 4. Minimum setback requirements: Front: Side: Side: Rear: 5. Maximum Building Height: 3. Height exception area? tifes 6. Minimum parking stalls required: \f /AHandicap stalls required. — 7. No more than 30% of required parking stalls may be compact. No landscape overhangs into compact stalls are permitted, although no wheel stops prior to hitting the curb will be required. sem' is24O�p, G —r/eA c -r4 -P/A'C 05 TO 8. Minimum landscaping required: Front: Side: Side: Rear: C.�2 /'/ N Acro 18 ,Sa,03v, 9. Landscape plans must be stamped by a Washington State licensed landscape architect. All landscape areas require a landscape irrigation system (Utility Permit Required). 10. Roof -top mechanical units, satellite dishes and similar structures must be properly screened. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. 11. Trash enclosures and storage areas must be screened to a minimum of 8' in height. Provide elevations and construction details as part of building permit application submittal. rte-' 12. Building permit plans which deviate from that already approved by the Board of Architectural Review may require re-application for design review approval. - /" ° CP C S S °w ^r X- 13. LA t\rD Scii PCi (Cc n(7)S- A cor•rC Cu F'S T 512K/r.r G Sr?? l PS 14. / (w, A(SC. c,J(77 /s 2f- —2 Qrfc PyC&c ❑ 15. 7"Yf)) ( 0-f C (8 . S6,o'G� F(c, (8 —6 ) e. 16. FCe-(C WO(/Ac) r✓% .-Cliff"/G(."Z).C. c'671AC.ZS, AW 70 Cbz /tit2 . ❑ No 17. Com/ /(-7-7/\( G 're C. r e ffr(av G o ❑ 18. -7 O e2„, ,^4 /m17e A -cc 7" op F -s7 e / G L [} A4 (rn.%A 770 ❑ 19. 6y Ax L(G ff 7 C. E'V? L 0 PAO Pt22.7Y G ('V C-' (5a F.7' -.God r/� [ e 1 . (ti 20. Coo -1P (1,1-4( AN A-6- g iv976(71M1007.) Co1<(Cc3r . ) J c- v Tfo P., r Mu57" /7& Co PI PGCE%GsP. k Ph -2 -r aF VA -c7 i(oi,/ iec--G2u 77 ?� ZI 7.2(6s" 2cA L 4-- 8— la' k r, c6Y --o A Cfffv0" 70 Z c 0v67( iff3(115.. Checklist prepared by (staff): Date: December 19, 1997 Rebecca Riesen S.R.O. P.O. Box 91723 Bellevue, WA 98009-1723 RECEReED FEB 231999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT *WOW SHAPIRO & ASSOCIATES, INC. Re: Water quality monitoring of the Republic Parking Site in Tukwila, Washington Dear Rebecca: At your request, Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) visited the parcel at .15820 Pacific Highway S. in Tukwila, Washington, on September 11, 1997 and October 30, 1997. The purpose of these visits was to establish baseline levels of water quality parameters during baseline flow and after a storm event in the unnamed watercourse passing through the site. The site is immediately south of SR 518 on the east side of Pacific Highway S. and directly east of the existing Lewis & Clark movie theater and bowling alley (Township 23N, Range 4E, Section 22). Methods Duplicate water quality samples were taken from the watercourse near the downstream boundary of the site and then near the upstream boundary of the site during baseline flow on September 11, 1997, and after a storm event on October 30, 1997. At the downstream boundary of the site, samples were collected from a pool located approximately 25 feet south of the chain-link fence demarcating the northern boundary of the site. At the upstream boundary of the site, samples were collected from the pool below the 36 -inch culvert where the watercourse enters the site. The attached map shows upstream and downstream sampling locations. Samples were analyzed for human fecal coliform bacteria; total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); fats, oil, and grease (FOG); dissolved copper; dissolved lead; dissolved zinc; hardness; total phosphorus; ammonia; nitrate+nitrite nitrogen; total suspended solids (TSS); turbidity; biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5); dissolved oxygen; pH; and temperature. Water samples analyzed for fecal coliform, TPH, FOG, and BOD5 were collected directly from the watercourse by lowering a sample container below the water surface. Water samples analyzed for metals, nutrients (i.e., total phosphorus, ammonia, and nitrate+nitrite nitrogen), TSS, hardness, pH, and turbidity were poured from a composite sample. A composite sample was collected for each duplicate by lowering a 1 -gallon container below the water surface. Pool depth was recorded, and temperature and dissolved oxygen were Ms. Rebecca Riesen Page 2 December 19, 1997 measured at mid -depth in the pools using portable instruments. Rough estimates of the flow rate leaving the culvert at the upstream boundary of the site were made by visual observation. Results Results from the two sampling dates at the upstream and downstream locations are presented in Table 1. Flow was approximately 30 times greater after the storm event than during baseline conditions. The unnamed watercourse passing through the site is considered Class A because it is an unclassified surface water that is not a tributary to a Class AA water (WAC 173-201a- 120). Class A water quality criteria for surface waters in the state of Washington (WAC 173-201a-030) are also presented in Table 1. Not all parameters measured in this study have Class A water quality criteria. When evaluating dissolved metals, a unique numeric acute standard was calculated for each sample because metal toxicity increases with decreasing water hardness. The unique dissolved metal water quality criteria for each sample based on its respective hardness is presented at the bottom of Table 1 below the sample to which it applies. Water monitoring results are summarized below: • Fecal coliform concentrations exceeded the Class A water quality criteria in seven of the eight samples. Because of the high variability of fecal coliform concentrations, it is not possible to compare sample locations or flow conditions. • TPH and FOG were detected only in flow at the upstream station during baseline flow conditions. • Dissolved metal (copper, lead, and zinc) concentrations in the watercourse often exceeded Class A water quality criteria. Dissolved copper exceeded criteria at the upstream station during baseline flow and at both stations after a storm event. Dissolved lead exceeded water quality criteria at the upstream station after a storm event. Dissolved zinc exceeded criteria at the downstream station during baseline flow and at both stations after a storm event. • During baseline flow conditions, total phosphorus concentrations were about 2.5 times higher than after the storm event with concentrations at the upstream station greater than those at the downstream station. 'Ammonia concentrations were greatest at the downstream location during baseline flow. After the storm event, upstream ammonia levels were slightly higher than during baseline flow, while downstream levels were Ms. Rebecca Riesen • • Page 3 December 19, 1997 much lower than baseline flows. Nitrate + nitrite concentrations were greatest after a storm event. • Turbidity and TSS were 3 to 7 times higher during baseline flows than after a storm event. Downstream samples were slightly higher than upstream samples during both sampling periods. • During baseline flow conditions, dissolved oxygen did not meet water quality criteria at both stations, and the BODS level was elevated at the upstream station. • Temperature met the established criteria on both dates at both locations. • pH levels in the watercourse varied between 6.3 and 6.8. These values are on the acidic end of the water quality criteria range. The pH was slightly below the criteria in water leaving the downstream station during baseline flows. Conclusions SHAPIRO established baseline water quality levels during baseline flow conditions and after a storm event at the upstream and downstream boundaries of the site. During baseline flow, fecal coliform, dissolved copper, dissolved zinc, dissolved oxygen, and pH levels did not meet Class A water quality criteria in the watercourse. After a storm event, fecal coliform, dissolved copper, dissolved lead, and dissolved zinc did not meet Class A water quality criteria in the watercourse. Potential pollutant sources in the area include runoff from commercial sites and roadways. During baseline flow, low dissolved oxygen levels resulted from stagnant water and higher biological oxygen demand in the watercourse. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you require additional assistance on this or any other project, please do not hesitate to call me or Mark Pedersen. Sincerely, SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Ingrid Wertz Water Resources Engineer Table 1. Water Quality Monitoring Results and Class A Water Quality Criteria Parameter Baseline flow - 9/11/1997 Dup. 2 Post storm event - 10/30/1997 Class A Water Quality Criteria Upstream Dup.1 Dup. 2 Downstream Dup.1 Upstream Dup.1 Dup. 2 Downstream Dup.1 Dup. 2 Fecal Coliform (#/100m1) est. 1840 est. 140 440 <2 460 520 est. 360 est. 320 100 TPH (mg/L) 1.4 1.2 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 FOG (mg/L) 1.4 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Dissolved Copper (mg/L) 0.0184 0.0182 0.0019 0.0021 0.0053 0.0068 0.0068 0.0082 variable * Dissolved Lead (mg/L) 0.0022 0.0026 0.0051 0.0052 0.0020 0.0032 0.0062 0.0089 variable * Dissolved Zinc (mg/L) 0.012 0.016 0.128 0.119 0.040 0.072 0.050 0.078 variable * Hardness (mg/L) 44.70 44.70 57.40 57.10 9.38 10.50 11.20 11.60 Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 1.52 1.53 0.145 0.378 0.062 0.06 0.058 0.058 Ammonia (mg/L) 0.012 0.034 0.136 0.133 0.043 0.036 <0.010 0.012 Nitrate + nitrite (mg/L) 0.025 0.041 0.070 0.064 0.124 0.127 0.117 0.119 TSS (mg/L) 15 14 14 58 3.6 3.6 7.2 6.8 Turbidity (NTU) 21 20 36 58 6.6 6.8 7.6 7.7 BODS (mg/L) 28.5 28.2 2.56 2.56 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 <2.00 Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 4.5 3.2 9.5 9.3 >8.0 pH 6.76 6.79 6.40 6.38 6.73 6.82 6.52 6.51 6.5 - 8.5 Temperature (C) 17.5 14.0 12.7 12.8 <18 Estimated Flow (cfs) <.01 0.3 Pool depth (ft) 2.5 0.5 4 1.5 * Class A Water Quality Criteria - Acute Dissolved Copper (mg/L) 0.0072 0.0072 0.0091 0.0090 0.0016 0.0018 0.0019 0.0020 Dissolved Lead (mg/L) 0.0201 0.0201 0.0277 0.0275 0.0028 0.0032 0.0035 0.0036 Dissolved Zinc (mg/L) 0.053 0.053 0.065 0.065 0.014 0.015 0.016 0.017 • s5I.30'6I'w 545. X DOWNSTREAM SAMPLING LOCATION • 101 Mosler Way Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: 206.624.9190 Facsimile: 206.624.1901 E-mail: shapiroeshap.com • October 10, 1997 Mr. Michael Aippersbach Michael Aippersbach & Associates P.O. Box 95429 Seattle, WA 98145 RECt-IiOED FEB 2 3 1999 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1011111 1111011 SHAPIRO S ASSOCIATES. 1 N C Re: Wetland delineation and steep slope characterization of the Republic Parking Site in Tukwila, Washington Dear Michael: At your request, Shapiro and Associates, Inc. (SHAPIRO) visited the Republic Parking property in Tukwila, King County, Washington on October 6, 1997. The purpose of the visit was to identify approximate wetland boundaries, mark the watercourse centerline, and characterize steep slopes. The site is immediately south of SR 518 on the east side of Pacific Highway South and directly east of the existing Lewis & Clark movie theater and bowling alley (Township 23N, Range 4E, Section 22). Methods Wetlands on the site were identified and their boundaries estimated using methods described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), commonly referred to as the 1987 Manual. Wetland boundaries were marked sequential order with bright orange flagging labeled "WETLAND BOUNDARY." Sample plots were established at the site. Soil was characterized by digging a hole to a depth of at least 18 inches below the ground surface. Soil layers, or horizons, were described with regard to the soil texture, color, presence or absence of redoximorphic features (such as mottling or gley color formation), and organic matter content. All herbaceous plant species within a 5 -foot radius of the soil pit were identified, and the percent of the ground each covered was estimated. All shrubs, saplings, and trees within a 30 -foot radius of the soil pit also were identified and their cover estimated. Data collected at each of these sample plots were recorded; data forms are attached. The watercourse centerline was identified and marked in sequential order with bright orange flagging labeled "WETLAND BOUNDARY." Steep slopes we're characterized using topographic maps according to the guidelines of the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance (1971). Results A review of existing literature, including the National Wetland Inventory, Des Moines, Washington Quadrangle (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987), and the King County • Mr. Michael Aippersbach Page 2 October 10, 1997 Wetlands Inventory (King County Environmental Division, 1990), indicates that the site was not identified as a wetland at the time of the surveys. The King County Wetlands Inventory does not map wetlands less than 1 acre in size. The site is not included within the study area of the Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington (United States Department of Agriculture: Soil Conservation Service, 1973). The investigated parcel is adjacent to the east side of the existing Lewis & Clark parking lot, is approximately 6 acres in area, and is enclosed on the south, east, and west by access roadways and parking areas. The northern border of the site is a forested area that buffers the south side of highway SR 518. A chain link fence demarcates the property boundary with the highway right-of-way and the Republic Parking Site. The vegetative habitats at the site include forested, scrub -shrub, and grassland. The topography is a ravine with slopes that rise from the banks of mouth -to -north trending creek that bisects the site. The slope on the west side of the creek is approximately 100 feet wide and forms the western perimeter of the site. There is a small hill approximately 100 feet east of the creek. The hill slopes north for approximately 350 feet. The eastern boundary of the site is approximately 450 feet from the hilltop and the southern boundary is approximately 150 feet from the hilltop. Access within the site was limited to trails that have been recently cleared of blackberry brambles. Entering the site from the south is a south -to -north trending creek, approximately 300 feet long, that bisects the site. The creek enters the site from a 36 -inch -diameter reinforced concrete pipe. At the time of the site visit, the creek was approximately 1 to 2 feet deep and varied from 1 to 4 feet in width. The western and eastern banks of the creek vary in height from several inches to several feet. The center line of the creek was flagged and numbered sequentially from S1 at the south border where the creek enters the site to S 11 at the north border where the creek exits the site. Vegetation along the creek consists of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), black cottonwood (Populus balsimifera var. trichocarpa), and red alder (Alnus rubra). A wetland was identified at the site at the base of the ravine along the length of the creek. This wetland would likely be classified as a palustrine grassland and palustrine forested wetland. This wetland was designated Wetland A and flagged from Al to A28 in a continuous loop. Wetland A is approximately 550 feet long and varies from the width of the creek to small pockets that extend up to 20 feet on either side of the creek. Wetland A is approximately 0.20 acres in area (Figure 1). Mr. Michael Aippersbach Page 3 October 10, 1997 Sample Plot one was established approximately 5 feet east of the creek and 200 feet north of the culvert. The dominant vegetation is reed canarygrass. Along the periphery of sample plot one is Himalayan blackberry and red alder. The soils are black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam to silt loam. There is a high density of decomposing reed canarygrass in the soil top layer. There are frequent oxidized root channels and no mottles. The soil was saturated at the surface and standing water existed at 15 inches. The three wetland parameters of hydric vegetation, soil and hydrology are met at Sample Plot one. Sample Plot two was established approximately 100 feet south of Sample Plot one and 30 feet west of the stream bank. Himalayan blackberry is the dominant shrub vegetation. Trace amounts of reed canarygrass exist within the understory of the Himalayan blackberry. The soils are very dark grayish brown to dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/2 to 10YR 4/4) sandy loam to sandy clay loam. Dark gray (10YR 4/1) mottles that are few, medium, and faint exist below 10 inches. No hydrological indicators were observed. None of the three wetland parameters are met at sample plot two. Sample Plot three was established approximately 100 feet north of Sample Plot four and 30 feet east of the stream bank. Himalayan blackberry is the dominant shrub vegetation. Trace amounts of common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) and reed canarygrass are present within the understory of the Himalayan blackberry. The soils are brown to light olive brown (10YR 4/3 to 2.5Y 5/4) silt loam to clay loam. No hydrological indicators were observed. None of the three wetland parameters are met at Sample Plot three. Sample Plot four was established approximately 100 feet north of Sample Plot one and 10 feet west of the creek. The dominant vegetation is reed canarygrass. Along the periphery of sample plot one is Himalayan blackberry. On the east side of the creek is a stand of black cottonwood. The soils are black (10YR 2/1) sandy loam to silt loam. There is a high density of decomposing reed canarygrass in the soil top layer. There are frequent oxidized root channels and no mottles. The soil was saturated at the surface and standing water existed at 14 inches. The three wetland parameters of hydric vegetation, soil and hydrology are met at Sample plot one. Wetland A forms a perimeter of the creek that traverses the site. Some areas of Wetland A are only as wide as the creek while some pockets extend approximately 20 feet from the creek. The largest wetland pocket is approximately 200 feet north of the culvert, approximately 180 feet long, 40 feet across at it's widest point, and is approximately x©.10 acre in size. :1 Mr. Michael Aippersbach Page 4 October 10, 1997 The area of the site outside of the creek is upland. The site is dominated by dense patches of Himalayan blackberry with some patches of reed canarygrass and Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum). The black cottonwood and alder trees are primarily located on the creek bed or on the perimeter of the site. The east section of the site has a few small pockets less than 100 square feet that demonstrate wetland hydrology and vegetation. These areas were not delineated due to their limited size and isolation. Steep slopes were characterized using topographic maps according to the guidelines of the City of Tukwila Sensitive Areas Ordinance (1971). Slopes are identified as less than 15%, greater than 15% and less than 40%, and greater than 40% (Figure 2). Conclusions SHAPIRO delineated one wetland on the Republic Parking Site on October 6, 1997. The wetland appears to meet the minimum criteria to be considered a jurisdictional wetland by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: the presence of wetland plants, hydric soil, and hydrology at or near the ground surface. Any development activities that may affect these wetlands likely would require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition to applicable federal andstate regulations; the City of Tukwila has regulations that pertain to the altering of wetlands. Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you require additional assistance on this or any other project, please do not hesitate to call me or Mark Bou1e. Sincerely, cam. .9- 6 SHAPIRO AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Calvin Kelly Douglas Wildlife Ecologist PARKING LOT AAL 103 5ed..- Fre �mm SHAPIRO woo. eiwr... .rc MAR revalorcryposs ueu POSA liock swormmi luol 1i.obpnHod6.,, FIGURE 1 WETLAND MAP TUKWIIA SENSITIVE AREAS TOPOGRAPHIC SLOPE MAP • WETLAND DETERMINATION 411 INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CD SOILS SCS Mapping Unit: undetermined Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? undetermined Date: 10/6/97 Sample Plot #: 1 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? No Is soil gleyed? No Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Color Occurrence of Mottles Gley Organic Color Content A A 0-6" 6"-18" sandy loam silt loam Landform/Topography: bank of creek, base of a ravine Comments: 10YR 2/1 None 10YR 2/1 None Hydric Soils? Yes Basis: chroma, saturation HYDROLOGY Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? Yes Depth to free-standing water in pit: 15" Yes 0 No -Oxidized root zones ❑ Yes ® No -Water marks ❑ Yes ® No -Drift lines ❑ Yes ® No -Water-borne sediment deposits Comments: Wetland Hydrology? Yes None None None high None med Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: at surface ❑ Yes IN No -Water-stained leaves ® Yes 0 No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage patterns ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Basis: saturation, standing water SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Disturbed area? No Basis: No evidence Problem area? No Basis: No evidence Comments: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision: All three parameters met • WETLAND DETERMINATION 410 INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD. SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CD SOILS SCS Mapping Unit: undetermined Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? undetermined Date: 10/6/97 Sample Plot #: 2 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? Is soil gleyed? No Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Color Occurrence Gley Organic of Mottles Color Content 0-9" sandy loam 9"-18" sandy clay loam Landform/Topography: slope of a ravine Comments: Hydric Soils? No 10YR 3/2 None None 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/1 f, m, f Basis: mottles below 10 inches Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? No Depth to free-standing water in pit: None Comments: HYDROLOGY ❑ Yes ® No -Oxidized root zones ❑ Yes ® No -Water marks ❑ Yes ® No -Drift lines ❑ Yes ® No -Water-borne sediment deposits Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: None None low None low ❑ Yes ® No -Water-stained leaves ❑ Yes ® No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage patterns ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Wetland Hydrology? No Basis: No indicators SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Disturbed area? No Basis: No evidence Problem area? No Basis: No evidence Comments: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? No Is the hydric soil criterion met? Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? No No No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: None of the parameters met WETLAND DETERMINATION INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CD SOILS SCS Mapping Unit: undetermined Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? undetermined Date: 10/6/97 Sample Plot #: 3 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? No Is soil gleyed? No Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Occurrence Gley Organic Color of Mottles Color Content 0-10" silt loam 10"-18" clay loam Landform/Topography: slope of a ravine Comments: 10YR 4/3 None 2.5Y 5/4 None Hydric Soils? No Basis: no characteristics HYDROLOGY Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? No Depth to free-standing water in pit: None ❑ Yes ® No -Oxidized root zones ❑ Yes ® No -Water marks ❑ Yes ® No -Drift lines ❑ Yes ® No -Water-bome sediment deposits Comments: Wetland Hydrology? No Basis: No indicators SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Disturbed area? No Basis: No evidence Problem area? No Basis: No evidence None None Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: None None low None low ❑ Yes ® No -Water-stained leaves ❑ Yes ® No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage pattems ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Comments: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? No Is the hydric soil criterion met? No Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? No Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision: None of the parameters met WETLAND DETERMINATION INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD SOILS, HYDROLOGY & SUMMARY Project Number: 6971064 Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas Field Investigator(s): CO SOILS SCS Mapping Unit: undetermined Field Identification: No Is soil on hydric soils list? undetermined Date: 10/6/97 Sample Plot #: 4 Is soil a histosol? No Histic epipedon present? No Is soil mottled? No Is soil gleyed? 'b Horizon Horizon Depth Texture Matrix Color Mottle Occurrence Gley Organic Color of Mottles Color Content A 0-6" sandy loam A 6"-18" silt loam Landform/Topography: bank of creek Comments: Hydric Soils? Yes 10YR 2/1 None 10YR 2/1 None Basis: chroma, saturated soil Is ground surface inundated? No Is soil saturated? Yes Depth to free-standing water in pit: 14" ® Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes Comments: HYDROLOGY ❑ No -Oxidized root zones ® No -Water marks ® No -Drift lines ® No -Water-borne sediment deposits Wetland Hydrology? Yes None None None high None med Surface water depth: None Depth to saturation: at surface ❑ Yes ® No -Water-stained leaves ® Yes 0 No -Surface scoured areas ❑ Yes ® No -Wetland drainage pattems ❑ Yes ® No -Morphological plant adaptations Basis: saturation, standing water SUMMARY Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Disturbed area? No Basis: No evidence Problem area? No Basis: No evidence Comments: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Is the hydric soil criterion met? Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Is the vegetation unit or plot wetland? Rationale for jurisdictional decision: All three parameters met Yes Yes Yes Yes WETLAND DETERMINATION INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064 Field Investigator(s): CD Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes PHAR Phalaris arundinacea Sample Plot #: 1 Date: 10/6/97 ASSEIATES2 Indicator % Areal Cover Status** Cover Class Midpoint Rank FACW 100 7 98.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 98.0 Dominance Threshold: 49.0 Indicator `Yo Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank RUDI Rubus discolor FACU 5 1 3.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 3.0 Dominance Threshold: 1.5 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Sp Code Trees ALRU Alnus rubra Indicator % Areal Cover Status** Cover Class Midpoint Rank FAC 5 1 3.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: 3.0 1.5 % of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Hydrophytic Vegetation? Comments: minor presence of RUDI To determine dominants, first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order until 50% of total for all species (dominance threshold) is knmediately exceeded. All species contributing to this cumulative total plus any others having 20% of the total midpoint value are marked with an asterisk. 66% Yes ^ Species that do not appear on the National List (Reed. 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat information from the literature. • WETLAND DETERMINATION • INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064 Sample Plot #: 2 Field Investigator(s): CD Date: 10/6/97 Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes PHAR Phalaris arundinacea IIATOE.,S2 Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank FACW 2 1 3.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 3.0 Dominance Threshold: 1.5 Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank RUDI Rubus discolor FACU 98 7 98.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 98.0 Dominance Threshold: 49.0 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status** Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Sp Code Trees Indicator % Areal Cover Status** Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: % of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 50% __ Hydro phytic Vegetation? No Comments: minor presence of PHAR To determine dominants, first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order until 50% of total tor alt species (dominance threshold) is immediately exceeded. All species contributing to this cumulative total plus any others having 20% of the total midpoint value are marked with an asterisk. Species that do not appear on the National list (Reed, 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat information from the literature. • WETLAND DETERMINATION • INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/SIte: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064 Sample Plot #: 3 Field Investigator(s): CD Date: 10/6/97 SHAPIRO& Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank PHAR Phalaris arundinacea FACW 1 1 3.0 1 TAVU Tanacetum vulgare NI 1 1 3.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 6.0 Dominance Threshold: 3.0 Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank RUDI Rubus discolor FACU 100 7 98.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 98.0 Dominance Threshold: 49.0 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Sp Code Trees Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 33% Hydrophytic Vegetation? No Comments: minor presence PHAR To determine dominants. first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order until 50% of total for all species (dominance threshold) is immediately exceeded. All species contributing to this cumulative total plus any others having 20% of the total midpoint value are marked with an asterisk " Species that do not appear on the National List (Reed. 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat information from the literature. • WETLAND DETERMINATION • INTERMEDIATE -LEVEL ONSITE METHOD VEGETATION UNIT SAMPLING PROCEDURE Project/Site: Tukwila Sensative Areas, 6971064 Sample Plot #: 4 Field Investigator(s): CD Date: 10/6/97 Sp Code Herbs & Bryophytes PHAR Phalaris arundinacea SHAPIRO& Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank FACW 100 7 98.0 1 Sum of Midpoints: 98.0 Dominance Threshold: 49.0 Indicator % Areal Cover Sp Code Shrubs Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank RUDI Rubus discolor FACU 10 2 10.5 1 Sum of Midpoints: 10.5 Dominance Threshold: 5.3 Sp Code Saplings Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: Sp Code Trees Indicator % Areal Cover Status" Cover Class Midpoint Rank Sum of Midpoints: Dominance Threshold: % of Dominants that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Hydrophytic Vegetation? Comments: Minor presence of RUDI, black cottonwood patch outside periphery To determine dominants, first rank species by midpoints. Then sum midpoints in order until 50% of total for all species (dominance threshold) Is immediately exceeded. M species contributing to this cumulative total plus any others having 209E of the total midpoint value are marked with an asterisk. 50% Yes Species that do not appear on the National List (Reed, 1988) may have been assigned an indicator status based on field observations and habitat information from the literature. Desi �Review ApplicationQui* Park of Washington LLC City of Tukwila February 19, 1999 EXHIBIT A Legal Descriptions Tax parcels: (1) 222304-9022 (2) 222304-9027 (3) 222304-9034 (4) 222304-9076 Legal Descriptions: Tax parcel # 1 222304-9022 The east 392.5 feet of Unplatted Tract # 74 of Sunnydale Gardens,Division #1 in the south 1/2 of SW 1/4 of Section 22, Township 23, Range 5 E.; also beginning at the SW corner of Tract # 119, Sunnydale Gardens, Division # 1; thence north 89.49.00 west, 158.75 feet; then south 67.19.42 west, 51.49 feet; thence north 89.49.00 west, 186 feet to the point of beginning; thence south 89.40.00 east, 186 feet; thence south 67.19.42 west, 130.60 feet; thence south 46.16.32 west to a point south 00.11.00 west of the point of beginning; thence north 00.11.00 east to the point of beginning. Tax parcel # 2 222304-9027 The east 392.5 feet of the west 1641.75 feet of the north 499.5 feet of the south half of the SW 1/4 lying east of Old Military Road less the State Highway. Tax parcel # 3 222304-9034 Portion of SW 1/4 of Section 22, Township 23, Range 4 E. lying south of County Road # 1, lying easterly of Old Military Road and north of line beginning west line of Tract 100 Sunnydale Gardens, Division # 1, 423 feet south of NW corner; thence north 89.52.11 west less 206 feet and less west 60 feet of east 266 feet of south 60 feet. Tax parcel # 4 222304-9076 The east 206 ft of the following: Begin 424 feet south of the NW comer of Tract 100, Sunnydale Gardens # 1, then north to the NW corner, thence westerly along southerly line of S 158th Street to northeasterly margin of Old Military Road, thence south 39.38.00 east 154.44 feet, then south 89.52.11 east 450.51 feet to beginning less south 60 feet. c/proj/republic.dsk:legalsOl .doc Page 1 Prepared by Michael Aippersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145-2429 - (206) 523-3764/Fax: (206) 524-0337 Channellzatlon/StrlpIng/SlgnIng Curb Cut/Access/Sidewalk Fire Loop/Hydrant Flood Zone Control Hauling Land Altering/Grade & Fill Landscape Irrigation Moving an Oversized Load Sanitary. Side Sewer Sewer Main Extension • Storm Drainage Street Use Water Main Extension Water Meter - Permanent UTILITY PERMITS Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Permit 50.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Permit Plan Ch'ck Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Inspection 20.00 Hook-up Plar, Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plar. Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 Plan Check 10.00 Inspection 15.00 • 000/345.830 000/342.400 000/345.830 000/342.400 000/3.45.830 401/3.42.400 000/322.400 000/345.830 000/342.400 000/322.100> ejJ b/ V art , 000/3.45.833 000/345.830 401/342.400 000/345.830 000/342.400 402/342.400 402/388.102 000,•'245.830 402/32.400 000/345.830 412/342.400 000/3.45.830 000/342..400 000/35.830 401/32.400 Reg. Conn. Installation Charge Deposit Plan Check Inspection Turn On *Size 401/388.102 401/386.520 000/345.83 , 401/342.400 .401/343.405 3/4' 60.00 150.00 10.00 1' 100.00 175.00 15.00 25.00 5* 2..''5.00 10.00 15.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 15.00 2 2' 400.00 • 1,000.00 5.00 3' 900.00 � 10.00 ,. i 5.00 25.00 1,350.00 10.00 4' 1,600.00 2,050.00 15.00 25.00 6' 3,600.00 3,550.00 10.00 15.00 25.00 8' 6,400.00 15.00 25.00 10.00 ; 5.00 25.00 10' 10,000.00 12' 14,400.00 ,.t 10.00 15.00 25.00 10.00 15.00 25.00 Special Connection Charge 401/388.101 Total Depostt 260.00 325.30 625.00 1,450.00 "30.00 3,700.00 7,200.00 111 IV Water'Meter - Temporary Deposit ttic n rAA 0,7.0,7'1.,I Size 401/386.510 3/4' 2.5' yc; Fees are variable based on each project. Variable tee per Ordinance No, 1297 - will be estimated by the Public Works Department. 8 gi g,Co zx5 ran PV1 STA •• 8+50 PYFELEV7.-374-.98-8 K 18.113 375, fri --- -------- 362.5! 350; 13+00 FM STA .0 10+50 _ PVrE ... LEV359-.98— I- A.D. 3.48 K 0. 28.71 RECEIVED CRY ovnixwn DEC 0 1 1999 PERMIT CENTER • 0 -4 PVI ELEV 339.89 A.D. .0 1.02 X 0. 98.34 +a. la! FI0R12: " 20' VERT: 6' ------ L___ 32a : 17+00 4.111111MI 8+0013+00 14+00 15+00 16+W 9+00 10+00 11+ 12+"18+00 (GRADE REDUCTION FOR CONNECTION 0 S. 158TH ST.) I! 370 9+50 360 L -- -60 -40 -20 370 360 • ROW 1 I M:370 I I --- ----- O 20 40 60 80 100 9+25 360 - 60 -40 -20 O 20 9+00 1 40 60 80 100 :;iI' I• l - i n n 370 360 370 360 120 ROW 370 360 - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 8+75 ROW II St 1.-... - I -----^u: : Kul :! I 1 _----- I I--- In n u1 j 1 j -I'1 I n n .• . - 60 -40 -20 O 20 9+00 1 40 60 80 100 :;iI' I• l - i n n 370 360 370 360 120 ROW 370 360 - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 8+75 ROW II St 1.-... - I -----^u: : --1--- t _......i ... I /' j (o I I ' . n!n 03 it__ LO tr) el el 380 , 370 360 - 80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 8+50 40 60 80 100 120 140 370 360 160 370 360 350 10+75 ROW RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 0 1 1999 PERMIT CENTER -100 -80 -60 -40 370 - I 360• 350 - 20 0 20 40 10+50 ROW._ -- 60 80 370 360 350 100 --- 370 • 360 350 • cr: M -40 20 ROW -100 -80 -60 370 360 - 20 0 10+25 40 60 80 100 1_- 370 ROW 380 350 m N n n - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 8+25 370 - f o n n 380 370 m nen 1360 350 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 10+00 370 ROW 370 360 360 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 360 =-1 ROW -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 350 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 380 370 370 360 360 350 220 240 9+75 20 40 60 80 11 : -- ---1------ t _......i ... I /' j (o I I ' . 03 it__ LO tr) el el -100 -80 -60 -40 370 - I 360• 350 - 20 0 20 40 10+50 ROW._ -- 60 80 370 360 350 100 --- 370 • 360 350 • cr: M -40 20 ROW -100 -80 -60 370 360 - 20 0 10+25 40 60 80 100 1_- 370 ROW 380 350 m N n n - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 8+25 370 - f o n n 380 370 m nen 1360 350 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 10+00 370 ROW 370 360 360 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 360 =-1 ROW -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 350 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 380 370 370 360 360 350 220 240 9+75 20 40 60 80 360 350 100 370 360 350 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 GRADE REDUCTION 1 ! -- ---1------ 7 I...41_ ' �' I j (o I I ' . 360 350 100 370 360 350 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 GRADE REDUCTION 370 360 350 340 —7- T , i ---- ' .. .... l -q ---!----T ! ! 3 -, 1 ' . ROW F -T -1 - ; ; 1 ---1- I „ ...I' --. 1 1 I .1 ;', L ' . : . ! ,_- - a- I I I , ,• , , • 1 -....... ..... • I ____, I i .. . _ . , I ..,...„ t ; 1 t.0 cn .. . 1 _..J. Pi 01 , r•-•-•- . : . 1 ; ; i 1 ; traltn .... ....--;,.0 CO , I T. - • ! i 1 1 I Io n o 1 n j WI el I In •••1 : , ; I : -100 -80 -60 370 360 350 340 - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 -40 -20 0 20 11+50 40 • 60 80 ROW 370 370 360 360 350 350 340 12+75 ROW f i 7 ' ; I : • I . . -4- . . , ...1 i - • . . . 1 • I• . 1 ---1- I „ ...I' --. 1 - I .1 ;', L ' -.- _ ,_- - a- — I I , ,• -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 12+50 ROW 340 : 7 : 1- 1 • '. • I ' 370 - '7-1—T- 1- ! T ; ' !!-- . 1 i ; [. if 1 370 360 11 : • 1---7-- ; —7 . • — -- I ---j 1 ; : 370 370 360 360 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA DEC 0 1 1999 PERMITCENTER 13+75 C I ROW 3503501 340 340r1 1 40 60 80 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 13+50 100 _.. f i • 7 , `r. I ___; i— . • . , I 1 i - 7 i . 1 //1 I , -.- _ I I t — I I • 1 -....... ..... • I T7 I i .. . ---- - ; ..,...„ t 1 0 t.0 cn I . 1 _..J. Pi 01 , -- . 1 ; ; 370 360 350 40 60 . ; 360 350 1 . I cn g; 1 ; • “•) .7) ; 350 340 - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 340 80 100 370 370 360 • • .-- ROW i , `r. ; ___; i— . • I • I I 1 i I : 1 1 ---1 I I . 1 //1 I , _.... _ I i I I t I I • 1 I . I i ; ..,...„ t ' • . I . 1 _..J. I _ 1 !---!--- 1-_-_--=i -- . 1 ; ; i 1 ; traltn .... ....--;,.0 CO , I T. - • ! 1 1 I Io n o 1 n j WI el tel PI - 100 - 370 360 350 -60 -40 -20 0 20 11+00 40 60 ROW 80 360 350 350 340 100 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 -370 360 350 12+25 1 1 370 370 360 360 ROW. 1 I i 350 350 1 : I I • --- 1,--J.- ---- I VTh I ; 1 I 340 340 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 : t— i" , . -1 • 1 _ ' , `r. ; ___; i— . • I • I I --1 . ..... : 1 1 ---1 I I . 1 //1 I , _.... _ I i I I I 1 I . I i i_ ..,...„ ' • . I . -- . , _..J. I _ 1 !---!--- 1-_-_--=i -- . 1 ; ; i 1 ; traltn 1- -- ::-- ,___...._ 1 I n _ -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 -370 360 350 12+25 1 1 370 370 360 360 ROW. 1 I i 350 350 1 : I I • --- 1,--J.- ---- I VTh I ; 1 I 340 340 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 : t— i" , . -1 • 1 _ ' , i.R0YI • . ..... : 1 1 ---1 I I ; 1 //1 , f . ---- i I i I 1 I I i i_ ..,...„ r ! I 1 I I -- . , , _ 1 !---!--- 1-_-_--=i -- . 1 ; ; i 1 ; ! 1- -- ::-- ,___...._ I n C" ! 1 1 I i LI WI el tel PI ; I : - 100 -80 -60 370 360 350 340 -40 -20 0 20 40 I 60 370 370 360 360 350 350 340 340 0 13+25 20 40 60 ROW 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1;▪ 1 80 100 -100 0 20 40 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 370 370 360 360 350 350 340 340 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 13+00 ROW , . i.R0YI ; 1 //1 . ---- ; I i I ; i_ ..,...„ r ! I 1 --T ..-r -- . , , 1 1 !---!--- 1-_-_--=i -- .• • . L_L 1 ; ; -12_ 1 ; ! . ,___...._ ! ! 0 20 40 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 370 370 360 360 350 350 340 340 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 13+00 ROW -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 GRADE REDUCTION 60 , . ; 1 //1 -- . , . 1 1 1 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 GRADE REDUCTION 60 360 • 350 i 15+00 1 ROW I i 1 0 7-4 340 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 14+75 360 350 340 100 -80 -60 -40 20 40 60 360 350 340 ROW 370 360 350 340 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 -20 0 14+50 i i 20 40 60 370 360 350 0 20 14+25 80 ROW 370 40 60 80 • V—= 17+00 340 I I I i_ I YL1L I ;_ 330' S I I �^ n -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 16+75 _ c ROW -_ 340 i �--_�- -- ROW 340 330 80 33-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 16+50C-03 ROW I I �I I I I340 340 --------- I - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 16+25 ROW IWC I i II _ n I- 7 Ij 340 _ — i r { • I ^ ' / 340 - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 360 16+00 --- 350 r -! -- --- I I w n� I/ 340 4 co I I I � ��• .^ t' t 40 60 340 I 1 340 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 14+00 370 360 350 340 40 60 80 100 ROW -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 15+75 ROW 70 350 ---i s J 1-T; I I o 60 340 1 1 n n I - -80 350 340 330 34 33 340 -40 -20 18+00 ROW RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWIL4 DEC 0 1 1999 PERMIT CENTER 4.--1-2-j.-1"*.- n� I I 1 i I I I � '-1 I - i I NO I1....-!" 1 _L 1 m ' mIr- ___ - i ve v i ; n n II L-L__L_i— L -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 15+75 ROW 70 350 ---i s J 1-T; I I o 60 340 1 1 n n I - -80 350 340 330 34 33 340 -40 -20 18+00 ROW RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWIL4 DEC 0 1 1999 PERMIT CENTER 0 20 40 17+75 60 ROW 80 340 330. - 100 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 50 15+50 32 ROW 40 350 120 370 360 350 340 100 340 1 4.--1-2-j.-1"*.- n� -�- 1 1 1 T I e "fi1�N n i Pli NO 0 20 40 17+75 60 ROW 80 340 330. - 100 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 50 15+50 32 ROW 40 350 120 370 360 350 340 100 340 1 n� I' __--i--1 i T I e NO - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 15+25 350 340 40 60 - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 350 340 350 340 340 - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 17+50 ROW nom, 3• 301 340 330 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 GRADE REDUCTION . . TI IC _ 34( II n rni - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 17+25 60 80 331 n� I' __--i--1 i T I e - 100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 350 340 350 340 340 - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 17+50 ROW nom, 3• 301 340 330 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 GRADE REDUCTION . . TI IC _ 34( II n rni - 60 -40 -20 0 20 40 17+25 60 80 331 SHEETS S. 158TH ST. RELOCATION PLAN & PROFILE ROADWAY SECTIONS MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS CHANNELIZATION & ILLUMINATON QUICK PARK GRADING PLAN PAVING & SITE PLAN WALL DETAIL SURVEY -SLOPES -TREES LOT LINES BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN LANDSCAPING PLAN ARCHITECTURAL PLAN QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC TUKWILA, WA OFF -AIRPORT PARKING FACILITY 1 - 3 4 5 6 7 8-9 10-13 14 15 16-17 VICINITY MAP ® Engineering, Inc. er.eet ION Deldeporl •q A. Yb C- I. Ialww� Y RIM (N) W PROJECT INFORMATION a. ZONING: RC b. SITE AREA: 414,400 S.F (9.51 ACRES) c. NEW STREET AREA: 45,982 S.F. d. AREA OF STREET TO BE ABANDONED: 46,399 S.F. e. BUILDING AREA 1. OFFICE: 1,120 S.F. 2. CANOPY: 1,625 S.F. 3. MAINTENANCE BUILDING: 750 S.F. f. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA (PARKING): 354,700 S.F. g. PROPANE TANK: 2,000 GALLONS h. LANDSCAPED AREA 1. PERIMETER: 23,956 S.F. 2. INTERIOR: 20,693 S.F. 3. ROADWAY RELATED: 27,437 S.F. TOTAL STALLS : 1063 REGULAR STALLS : 776 COMPACT STALLS - 284 HANDICAP STALLS <0 0 t' FT: =-1 -11 W az) r-� 0 A• ' \ , ' SW .1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, • R 4 E, W.M. C1 8+40 51' LT ROPERT1 LINE • f BEGIN CUM k CUTTER 4/1 i 1 31.5' L 11 11.`11 9 MOTH 9973.84770 100+00 C 111162894 SCE GENERAL MOTE 2. 160TH 100+71 86601 DEW BEGIN CURD - CUTTER 00 90 1 SONE M FEET 0974111AY SOIEOLM.E Oa ! OFFSET WDMgYoro APPROIW MX 9420, 9 ' R1 24' ASPIMLI CCG OTA 9+71, 14' LT 28' ASRMLT CCK. STA 10408 14' 11 30' ASPWILI CONC. 1601H C10I1R1+B34 22UT'LT.) 6ayttiN1 ER 7 8' CHNNL1NK FENCE IN C00R-• 091411ON 1411H FELLOWSHIP . BIBLE CHURCH FOR LAND 14 9937.8164 E 12631276 NOWT 9010 BASS OF 8766011 66838190 8E060E8SW COINER OF SECTION 22 k I/4 COINER TO ME EAST VCR: TEI8ORARY 9EM01 MARK ON DR MORIN 8MI OF 5964 /260 REV -393.71 M.109411481 E-11386.0738 LOCUM ON NORTH WPM' Cr + 01EC1 USE APPROVAL I TTA 8+42.70 380 _ 8EL0N TRANSITION RI_ C PROFILE GRADE k PTAI POINT I . -0.02'/Fi. LT. k RT, EDGE OF PAVEYEHf SJ_ 360 8 \ gA VPI STA 8+40. ELEV 374.862 • AA CURVE LEN -80.00 Ew-07480 - f 8+00 ,000 +0.02'LFL L EDGE OF PAVEMENT 380 370 ____ STA. 9+34,50 P,C4 PROPOSED Q PROFILE GRADE -0.02'/R. RT. EDGE OF PAVEMENT 5T0 9+5070 BEGIN FULL SUPER 9+00 Perteet Engineering, Inc. I•• — Pr Mr. 14701 •149 1 041 It Ida C-1 Wooled. 6A ISM 0811 M-11 P OD CONSTRUCTION NOTES 0 SAwCUI OCONSTRUCT CEMENT CONC. DRNEWAY APPROACH O AM CONSTRUCT ALT. CURB RP PER STD. 3 DEAN F-3. DESIGN 0 4OCONSTRUCT ASPHALT +0EWALK RAMP, SEE DETAIL SHEET OREMOVE AND RELOCATE SIGN ORENDVE AND RELOCATE FENCE/GATE OEXISTING UTILITY TO BE RELOCATED/ 7 ADJUSTED BA' OTHERS © INSTALL TYPE I CATCH BASIN OINSTALL TYPE 0 CATCH BASIN 10 REMOVE TREE 11 CONSTRUCT MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL 17 EXTRUDED CURB TYPE 6 PER STD. PLAN F-26 18 ADJUST CATCH BASIN 10 GRADE WITH SOLID LOCKING UD. ORELOCATE MAILBOX. COORDINATE LOCATION t 9 141114 POST OFFICE QCHAIN LINK CATE PER CITY a TUKYA1 0 FIRE CODE FOR ACCESS 4'//, REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT ( BEYOND ROADWAY EXCAVAT0N) NEW ASPHALT CONCRETE PER ROADWAY SECTIONS SHEET 4 GENERAL NOTES; 0. XISTING UNDERGROUND UIRRIES IN THE VACATED RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH 158TH 5T SHALL BE REMOVED. 2. NAL WATER UNE DE5X08 TO BE APPROVED BY WATER DISTRICT DISTRICT 125 PER DEVELOPER EXTENSION AGREEMENT WITH PACE ENGINEERS AND WILL MEET CITY OF 1UKwRA STANDARDS. WATER UK SHOWN ON PLANS K A PRELIMINARY 00011. CURVE DATA P.C. STA P.I. STA P.T. STA A R S 9+34.50 9+97.88 10+51.12 5541'067 120' 63.38' 116.62' 0.02'/11. 51 I + 1 1 P T. +0.01'LFT. L1. EDGE OF PATIENT + ��- 370 360 250 350 WI 510 10+10.11+ .-0.02'/FT. R1. EDGE a RW9ENT ELEV 360,100 CURVE 161-100.00 • E-0.5183 R0P0SED Q PROFILE .GRADE -3.83; 10+00 10+00 5.O.a TSTA 10+24 (21' RT) CO TYPE 1 RIM - 360.32 IE - 357.16 (E) bw 41 GN, JIM– SGNE1.-p Amp.. herr IOWJ'J STA; 11494.10 END FULL SUPER 11+00 CRY OF TUKWILA S 158TH ST. RELOCATION PLAN d6 PROFILE 350.'" 12+00 END / UNE PROPERTY 0' CIWNUNK FENCE 94 COOR- DINATION WITH FELL BIBLE CHURCH STA 12CEDErt60800, $1A. 12+41.36 P.T. • SJA. 1246685 P.0 40 60 152022 SCALE N FEET 5+41.12- --- CONSTRUCTION NOTES 0 SAWCUT OCONSTRUCT CEMENT CONC. DRIVEWAY APPROACH gPLOUT445T1-3. 0(5760 0 RAMP PER STD. 4 CONSTRUCT 0551411 SIDEWALK RAMP. W= DE1ML SHEET OREMOVE 400 RELOCATE SIGN OREMOVE 400 RELOCATE FENCE/GATE ORELOCATE EXISTING UTILITY INSTAII OINSTALL 7YPE II CATCH BASIN 10 REMOVE TREE 11 CONSTRUCT MOOULAR BLOCK REIMNING WALL 12 CONSTRUCT 100'610'X8' COMBINED WET/ DETENTION VAULT. SEE DETNL, SHEET _-_ TYPE I CATCH BASIN GENERAL NOTES; 1. EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN THE VACATED RICHT OF WAY OF SOUTH 158TH ST 5HAL1 8E REMOVED. 2. FINAL WATER UNE DESIGN TO BE APPROVED BY WATER DISTRICT 125 PER DEVELOPER EXTENSION AGREEMENT WITH PACE ENGINEERS 4240 WILL MEET CITY OF TUKWILA STANDARDS. WATER LINE SHOWN ON PLANS 5 A PRELIMINARY DRAFT. P.C. 510 NEW ASPHALT CONCRETE PER ROADWAY SECTIONS SHEET 4 P.I. STA CURVE DATA P.T. STA A R S 11+55.02 11+98.87 12+41.36 2414'or 200' 43.85' 86.34' 0.02'/11. 12+86.85 14+58.47 15+52.52 9715'14' 165' 171.62' 265.67' 0.02'/11. .345 STA 15450 (14' LT.1� RIM' . 339.74 E 336.57 (6) 14911 W11Yrw1 b SC 9.9. 6-1. 1.9....1 9A WS (011111-11SE (G►146 I2 OA 11.1. NSA JIM_ 0411-W- 2..wN 9r NORM: AS5UME0. 87915 OF 86006 58830154E BETWEEN A WRIER OF SECTION 22 • 1/4 OZR EN TO THE EAST VERT: TEMPOMRY KNOT MARL ON M NORM RN OF SAN /260 03.75' N.109 N.10)61.901 6.11366.0730 LOCATED ON NORM BOUNORA OF PROJECT FOR LAND USE APPROVAL WALL -Ps ALr.7c CITY OF TUKWILA S 158TH ST. RELOCATION 4.2244 1660 PLAN & PROFILE / SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. STA 17+90.2 (20.5 LT)_ BEGIN WALL l 44 FS TA 1:+ 18.5 L EGIN TAPER / Cp Pi • 19.03.66 'YO F iF,,pp� TA 19+19 'W SIDEWALK TAPER 'Woe, 158TH +24 12' L NI U':, SIDEWALK MATCH EXI51R4G ENO SAWCUI (\. sss14 1016C A9SIAQL MS OF MAW Oaf NMI RETIED A COMER a SECTOR 22 a 1/4 9(94COMERTO THE MT l IRC EI7ORTIW Q01 MARK 01 ITC FORTH API Of SSW 1780 ES.TM38175' N.lI 6' K t- 7 1138807J8 Loom 011 1801 801AORY Of PI T. 18+85.04 NEw ASPHALT CONCRETE PER ROADWAY SECTIONS SHEET 4 DRNEwAY SCHEDULE STA 16+53.76 wATERTAL SIA & OFFSET *10TH BEYONOO APPROACH STA 17+36, 14' U 20' ASPI44.1.1 CONC. STA 17+95, N' R1 30' ASPHALT CONC. STA 1e+38. 14' L1 26' ASH4,1 CONC. STA 19+00, 16' R1 14' ASPHALT CONC. END PROJECT \\\ \ STA 19+65 X 420X00 N N SCALE 47 FEET GENERAL NOTES; 1. EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN THE VACATED RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH 15879 5T SHALL BE REMOVED. 2. FINAL WATER LINE DESIGN TO 8E APPROVED BY WATER DISTRICT 125 PER DEVELOPER EXTENSION AGREEMENT WITH PACE ENGINEERS AND WILL MEET CITY OF lUKWSA STANDARDS. WATER UNE SHOWN ON PLANS 15 A PRELIMINARY DRAFT. I CURVE DATA P.C. STA P,7. .STA P.T. STA R 16+59.08 17+57.66 18+08.68 94.51.33 90' 97.98' 149' 0.81'/8. 18+86.41 18+65.01 19+03.66 02'50'15 750' 18.63' 37.25' 340 335 FOR LAND USE APPROVAL '324 AN, SIDEWALK MATCH EXISTING Kt55,l gg::GG r 11 ,5/I3• STA 17+98.78 • CTA 18+0969 P 1 CONSTRUCTION NOTES OSAwCUT CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONC. DRIVEWAY APPROACH OCONSTRUCT ALT. CURB RAMP PER STD. } PLAN F-3, DESIGN 0 OREMOVE AND RELOCATE SIGN (SEE SHEET ___) OREMOVE AND RELOCATE FENCE/GTE 0 RELOCATE EXISTING UTILITY OINSTALL TYPE 1 CATCH BASIN OINSTALL 117E 11 CATCH BASIN 10 REMOVE TREE • 11 CONSTRUCT MODULAR BLOCK RUNNING WALL 12 CONSTRUCT 1001,10103' COMBINED WET/--_ OE7ENTION VAULT. SEE DETAIL, SHEET CONSTRUCT 100'010'58' COMBINED WET/ 14 ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE IS ADJUST VALVE BOX TO GRADE 16 RELOCATE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL EXTRUDED CURB TYPE 6 PER STD. PLAN F -2R e18 ADJUST CATCH BASIN TO GRADE WITH SOLID LOCKING 110. 19 RELOCATE MAILBOX 20 CHAIN LINK GTE PER CITY OE TUKWIILA FIRE CODE FOR ACCESS 21 INSTALL SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE 22 INSTALL _ - CONC SANITARY SEWER PIPE REMOVE EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURE ABANDON DRAINAGE PIPE IN PLACE AND PLUG 1 PIPE ENDS WITH CONCRETE PLUGS. 25 ADJUST WATER METER TO GRADE 26 ADJUST UTILITY VAULT TO GRADE STA 16+69.58 ENO CULT. SUPER STA 16+53.76 BEGIN FULL SUPER +003'(•R. LT. EDGE OF PAVEMENT STA 18+32 END 1RANSIIION Ll. & RI. _--.�• �� --�- - cn:1l f GIRNK t P�T PpN1 I I --�_ J •_ . i I i -90'R.' OP 'STA t7+b 11' -•.02/01. 11. & R1. EDGE 01 PAVEMENT OFI •AVER I I I 1 I I 1 ' CB TYPE 9 IB + , I SIA 19+16 (1C RT) 7n917/. , : IES 16L7 .• IE -331.00(9) I VPI STA 18+00;017 > RNJJ0.9TYPE I 1 (W) LEV J]e. 76 �F1R>ti� • • 0.47, - •3" �. Il CU JLEN 76 00.00 E•0.2JN • ---- _ 1.12%__ lir: IE 327.70!lE) ST • RIM i�. 17+00 r.W [SiPerteet V. Engineering, Inc. IMO 51�,d b w. W bL 1•Y+l 17 IIHM (043104-7136 18+00 19+00 A 19+65 (16171) • 330.17 327.00 (w) 0.9. 94 OH• 1cNE ems- _L 7R MX 8'• .' A -� A,.*«.16, H,m •M 4.994 46402 CITY OF TUKWILA S 158TH ST. RELOCATION PLAN & PROFILE 3 R/W r VARIES VARIES SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. VARIES 6' UNOSCAPINCSIDEWALK 0.5'" 14' VARIES SEE PUN r 2x VARIES 2 4_ VARIES ------ 0.5 6' SIDEWALK OWN LINK FENCE 8' HIGH PROPOSED 1.5' )X T ROADWAY SECTION A S 158TH ST. STA 7+67.75 TO 10+33 • REVERSE GUTTER CROSS SLOPE TO HUTCH SUPERELEVATION (MINIMUM 2%) AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: STA 8+98.70 TO STA 10+43 LT 20.5' EANOS.UINC =SI0EWAL. 2'F 0.5' 5p;1 2)L x mat STA. 10+13 LT. 10 12+00 LT. (SEE WAIL DMA.) 1 1 6' SIDEWALK 2' 50"! •• STA. 9+60 TO 10+40R7. 39.50' VARIES STA 12+29 TO 13+40 RR/ve CHAIN LINK FENCE 8' NIGH —I — 1 frpiONSGEO IDEWAL — VARIES — I — - VARIES ROADWAY SECTION B 5 156TH ST. STA 10+33 TO STA 16+00 • REVERSE GUTTER CROSS SLOPE TO MATCH SUPERELEVATION (MINIMUM 25) AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: STA 10+43 TO STA 12+26.11 LT STA 12+64.10 TO STA 15+41.12 RT STA 15+92.50 TO STA 16+00 LT 5 8/5 J- 1 10' •• LANDSCAPING 6/W 2' 20.5' `- } 39.50' VARIES STA 16+60 TO 18+50 f VARIES STA 16+60 7P 18+50 I 6. SIDEWALK 0.5' r 14' 14' a VARIES VARIES —9---- ——_L 0.5'- ) 6' SIOEWALK T. 1 •• STA. 16+00 TO 16+60 R/W ••• STA.17+90 TO 18+23 33' ROADWAY SECTION C 5 158TH ST. SIA 16+00 TO 51A 18+50 • REVERSE GUTTER CROSS SLOPE TO MATCH SUPERELEVATION (MINIMUM 25) AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS: STA 16+00 TO STA 17+98.78 LT MATERIALS IDASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT CLASS 8 EiASPHALT TREATED 815E �S CEMENT CONCRETE CURB AN0 CUTTER OCEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK 4' THICK 5❑ CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 27' I I I I I FOR LAND USE APPROVAL WALL STA 12+20 RT. 10 15+40 RT. (SEE WALL MAL SHEET) Perteet Engineering, Inc. Sao H 8 . IOWA ildpperl b IA. Pita C -I, I.r+a II INN (2n) M -ITT HOT TACK ISEAL 11' 6' SIDEWALK 20 90, ✓,1 R/W 1 ROADWAY SECTION _ D S 1581+ 50. 5TA 18+50 TO STA 19+03.66 r CONTRACTNO wA4 IOC P•.M Mon.. 1888) CITY OF TUKWILA S 158TH ST. RELOCATION ROADWAY SECTIONS 8 8* 4 SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. INLET EL. 332.11 ROW 130' INSIDE LENGTH INLET EL. 332.11 Ii 39' REMOVABLE ACCESS l: 1/ETAL BATTLE 18. DU. RISER OPENING ._ •_ 11 .. CT •_ ROUNNQp 4.441101C COVER MARKED DRN1! WITH LOCKING BOLTS. SEE KCRS OWLS. 2-022, 2-023 FOR SPECIFICATION. 38- -24" DIA REDUCER (M.) ROW 007104 EL 325.28 `PREfASf OETENIION VAULT DETENTION VAULT PLAN VIEW NTS INLET EL. 332.11 l�� MP,MMMM REMOVABLE METAL BATTLE B OX BOTTOM EL 327.78 DETENTION VAULT SECTION A z Perteet Engineering, Inc. Oft 1„r ti 1® 1141aAa b IC. W C -L WM./ q 11111 CCM) 101-/111 NTS OW MM wr.w 11102 FOR LAND USE APPROVAL CITY OF TUKWILA S 1 58TH ST. RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS SKIT 5 0 158TH +90 04vRON) 158TH 9+75 END 180 -NAY LER DAN STRIPE (0' & 11' R1.) EIE01N 00UBLE YELLOW CENTER STRIPE (11' R1.) 158TH 9+60 158111 10+30 Li. 1 •TH 10+50 LT. SW 1/4. SEC 22. 1WP 23. R 4 E. W.Y. •. cHEVRON) N r 158111 8+20 158114 8+35 DEOIN TWO-WAY LEFT TURN STRIPE (0' & 11' RT.) 158TH 8+80 RT.) PEED UYR 25) yy 158TH 17+25 (11.) rd1ARON) 158TH 13+20 R7. CHEVRON) •.��. 158TH 13+70 RT. TTI \ (CHEVRON) �\ 158TH 1++00 (kT: CHEVRON) 0 158TH 17+05 158TH 17+65 HEYRON) 5 158TH 7+87.75 P.0.T.. 5 160114 100+00. P.O.T. • 1581H 17+75 L1 1700 'Nil' - ,• CHEVRON)) �q 401 \ ss.,.: \.\\ * \ 16+80 11.) (S EEO CANT 25) 158TH 19+03 CENTER STRIPE MATCH E0151046 114,4 (3 QCHEVRON) 4 i 14+65 RT CHEVRON) 14+35 R1 CHEVRON) r1 Pertpet E En meering ,Inc. 8 MN, Im06 9111uW+ b w. I. bL I.8....t u 11111 005 161-7121 0 30 60 90 SCALE M EEET \ 6•.. S. 9.1. eirli R91 JIM._ 1.v.•.1 fir SCALI __ n.,.. NSW CITY OF TUKWILA S 158TH ST. RELOCATION CHANNELIZATION & ILLUMINATION MQT 6 riattstfiCtad (N MINS • MUM W NIf5 -S-t58T ST. •1 � I • L.. S 160TH ST. 0 •0 "eo SCALE IN FEET TOTAL STALLS: 1063 REGULAR STALLS: 776 COMPACT STALLS 284 HANDICAP STALLS: 3 70 STALLS ARE ON 5% SLOPE 9DWI 393 % SLOPE ARE ON LESS aw rrr ti erteet Engineering, Inc. M61 I.94)RfY 4L I.Yowd It! MN (pp 1110-yK delang- '122 — PRELIMINARY DESIGN REVIEW ,_ro QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON I LC'a' sqn M.... veem OFF -AIRPORT PARKING GRADING PIAN 0 SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET 9 1041 10.1 151 t 110114710 ` 105111}. 10105710 31.13 A0. C .7311 11 10302.1517 [ 111)13590 3* 10313/102 t 100511 00e 71.1117 AY 11272. 17 0 10350.1013 / f 172310301 0 103533756 1 11274173/ 140251.1121 1 112573 02 L.: 710¢• qpt !705 t -f t 11.111155531 —1851-- 7.l.24077310.3740\ •AI~ -11E 75• 171• 1 . 1 FOR memos 1Ct SKID -- O 107717157 C 110511515 0 10331.3017 C 11059.1150 • 1 101111121 t 11100.7236 1 177 15011 1040.00 30 60 SCALE 01 KV .7 1z1 Perteet `I Engineering, Inc. 10701 111125A1 M WE 1411A 1-1. 1•10•444. C7 /159 012) M-7131 13021 FOR LAND USE APPROVAL 0•«+ Or a1. 07 9C.. Y-]0 w.p1 Maw 10002 QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC OFF—AIRPORT PARKING PAVING AND SITE PLAN UQ, a MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET 8 115;555400 90 SCALE PI MT, Pertp.et Engmeenng, Inc. Oft 41. lax Mowed so st Ia. CA. WA MO NH -7131 FOR LAND USE APPROVAL Wm. .7 Id. Wru, W ad;n1 M Uwowd ft =MI '-.30 1.4.W1 Id - 96002 QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC OFF—AIRPORT PARKING PAVING AND SITE PLAN 9 SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. • PNIKIC TaslllO PAWING WALL SECTION OA Nis S. ISSN SI WALL SECTION NTS STOCTUU( 1ANOSCAPING FOR LAND USE APPROVAL • STA 164.00 TO 164.60 WALL SECTION NTS 5, Perteet I tJ Engineering, Inc. mes 6rlip•m1 b -. W C -I. I+...i Y US OSL IM -nal CONTRACT NO. o.. S D_ X1@0_ �6— moo_ MM - 961,07 CITY OF TUKWILA QUICK PARK OF WA. LLC WALL DETAIL sa, . N(ICC CDNCRETC / mci, DI PI UW CA SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. WALL SECTION OF NTS WALL SECTION -3% NTS PAVEMENT Wi t ill&TYBARRIER 19' 11 O, FOR LAND USE APPROVAL M AN. fzl Perteet Engineering, Inc. taco owerot b of. aro a4 61...4 aA os pay WH -71 CONTRACT NO. 11613 Q F 3IASa_ 1..1Pc1 IaE07 ae. CITY of TUKWILA QUICK PARK OF Wk LLC WALL DETAIL aP 9l SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. 19' GO WALL SECTION HTS PA 16' Cd4PAC T /IIS\OBI SIP6.."41.11.5,-711111111(51 1%1 a I. 19' 1.1 ."41111014m..._ loos '= ���MEMMEMmg 16_ ss1 CAST N PACE WRIER/ 9N I1 ME MOVE SUMER 10 r7S' PAIEKNT MEM WALL SECTION 2' + E�RSEWE 5�0 N' R PrE/ O _-2�•r. WALL. SECTION NTS NTS FOR LAND USE APPROVAL z Perteet Engineering, Inc. 1® irmiw t .q NI. W C -I. 1 to 1l.N pay IN-na N Down F O• • CONTRACT NO. YxA NOTE Mr , w.•. fOOO! CITY OF TUKWILA QUICK PARK OF WA. LLC WALL DETAIL SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. 0+00 1+00 SECTION 7.00 380 . 360 340 320 300 3.00 4+00 U U U 11II 1111 I. Of!I��; 0111,; !I�11 j �Illilli 1!I:1 1 UIIII�11. 011li:' J11.11 5.00 III,jJ�J! 0 0 Ull!ullil 0 I! n�n0!Wifr;11 „;i01iiiii:„0 =1r r • PLAN VIEW Or IVY w Perteet Engineering, Inc. mlt TITIN b. . c-4 I d 4 IMM 00 114-11E r -1164— "., CONTRACT NO iwa w JIA3- 4 > 514.1. Propel 1!!01 CITY OF TUKWILA QUICK PARK OF WA. LLC WALL DETAIL 13 340 320 W S 2 N mier 51+00 21+00 SW 1/4, SEC 22, TWP 23, R 4 E, W.M. ------------------ 340 13. -a1 M r ua� warm IDM1 EHORR: 1' - 20' VERT : 1' - 20' 26+00 51+00 SECTION NORTH PA ram wi rad • ( r0134, aaro 22+00 LAUREL ESTATES 340 27+00 • : CM to ire,:; ... ..... .. ... .. Omr. marc • 52+00 55+00 MU: 1' - 20' VEER : Y - 20' SECTION Q SOUTH 56+00 FMKK a wwao 53+00 23+00 PROP0SE0 S. 156114 ST. ..STA 16,23...... 57+00 2++00 320 w Lai x Z N N Q ~ M N 25 CO 1 °" ^ °"• sum „mY„ AS -.h" ...... 1972 CITY OF TUKWILA 'a' 1 3A e Perteet Engineering, Inc. „� QUICK PARK OF WA.LLC SECTION VIEW NORTH & SOUTH Me Wpm( M. �. a tr� n DM IM -TIM CONTRACT NO. Yi A.* Pr Am. tam-L . RsA ...� . -Milli_ t S 158TH ST. 5' 160TH ST. MEM ACK YORE TN/JI 202 • TREE TO BE REMOVED BE1'ONO RAV FROM SENSITIVE AOPE TREE RDAOYAL TREES ON ACP( MORE TRW 20X (WTSOE RIONf—OF—TGY) Woo .1 evel mom LANDSCAPING PUN FOR LOCATION. S 160TH ST. i®rYopirt M 111.1. 4-1. I 41.nw Rol 6-7430 SCALE 1N FEET FOR LAND USE APPROVAL QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC OFF—AIRPORT PARKING SURVEY — SLOPES — TREES Mf[t 14 0 SW 1/4, SEC 22, PNP 23, R 4 E, W.M. N66.77 . W MP le, 1' / PROPOSED R/W Did "'STIRS R/W PROPERTY LINE 5 NEW PROPER1Y UNE / S 160TH ST. SCALE: r - 60' • Nxx.3tE • • Perteet Engineering, Inc. 162,• 6rMgNL Vol A. DRY C -I. b6...LL V ■116 033) 661.71311 6.Y • G / 0 $%(3.65aQ / /o�po// / / ,6 / ,_ / S�osq. s°' `p,T 9' NMI 4T• Q 8. a.a. ffQQ9q�` , Q �5 ' M I•T35•11 •• 16fQ)6'IrW tg 120.1! — , MT"' 16,.05• 17-76' TM BASED ON SURVEY N77'ST " tR REID MIOOIETON • ASSOC.. FOR pNERER R\ OOEON CORP. MTEO 6/16/!7. NO 0/0EP4QENT BOUNOART SURYEYNC WAS PERFORM') FCR TNS TOPOC WRIC SURVEY. VERTICALMR6L; i\. &Y. NORTH RIM Of SSNH 760 "y-\ REV. -.30.1.73 PER TOPO 5AVVY PROMO TO US. ORbCM & DATE U,RC„ONIA I X •••••••• FOJLAND n•3rP 21.t9' S 158TH ST. S 160TH ST. USE APPROVAL 0'-0, ON. Ckad 01 err- -�°0- AAAA. u..w Teem CRY OF TUKWILA QUICK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC OFF -AIRPORT PARKING LOT LINES SKIT 15 11111111M—UM-111m.— SOLE 2EY swiss essb.ssimsNSM, '1/4V NI b jElj�l C C C C C , C C C C C C C CONIFEROUS TREE PWIT,IO OETAL '000 Cal RAMO O t T ON)Y RANI 0.0.0 92E SPACING e O.N.. 11. e..r.Ne mem*: ..stern Pod Gar tiP O se sece•n es nevem 9iNeS O )1 eN-ewr Ooy.eee e6e c. CrNn aleMw O IS Sec. Ita.lnnn w shown • eels despas: TS 0ece I.:..rry ) Vee 06ec. UK.. ...cr. ® to •.:n w.r..l>�. 5 er. w ...n O 10 Red -newrk0 Crrnt N-76 Uwe .36es. ve .ena.k.r• © }e n ews )A-56 56ec. O II SI4 ...en M .e Pawn babas eeclrri. O )) AEve 23-56 56 e.. MITER MEA SITIO IR (AA taller oreoe disturbed doing coral.) 25e Eit Impose MPr.720 o Imo.. C,.e Cod., Id.romis Tss Pad !alnico,c,a Seating rate: 31141000 Notes: I. 10eo onicely clear oll blockberry within enhancement oreo. 2. Wetland edge to be pr0lacled by sediment control fencing during clearing 001 planting. IfffllU 1 111 811/0 SQ 1016 QNle 1 ®c shoed end r pas. 0w el alb mks lag loO. redo.SO peel erieirben be. le Y nye Wm* hen pew. 0..a.i.N.n sign .r r pined N P. 0w., Www g0 Sera Mee M, Sdeed< Ma cer Seleed. Ind M Po &Meg S.11ed Pea O.eion ws r — bl a wry 150 S.1' Mw Dna end 04 be 00adol In PpulM0. woad Ia. Sys gm" a In ...el der a lames KUNO 2 9QI OETAL W. rra••e. Vm4 ter= F .••• SHRUB RARING DETAIL Note: Bose dra.ing provided by Perteel Engineering. M. B—t.1M Asloddto. Inc. 110 a sr. 51.4 OA 0 0.4 A mL -SISI 255-61-045 1. abra-o 0 hM w. AQ -1)) Gauped 0ro.n es Crosses of DSc it/7/00 SHEET OF NOTE: ALL LANDSCAPE BEDS TO RECEIVE FULL AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. TYPICAL ALL 31 C ILLIQ. c c c C C CC C C o C C C C C C C C C C CCCCCC CC C C _�: `.9 CC C C CC C C C C s0; n SEE SHEET L4 FOR PLANT LIST, NOTES AND DETAILS ec^ripe. IaI 1 0' Im' 20' M MATCFn1€ SEE SIFT L2 DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL 00. WORTH ANDASSOCIATESmmumMe QUIK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC 8R0 BITE M�aA W.YaDM MOIS Preliminary Landscape Plan LI Sao IOW TEMPORARY IRRIGATION SYSTEM DURING PLANT ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD. SEE SHEET L4 FOR PLANT LIST, NOTES AND DETAILS TEMPO IRRIGATI DURING ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD. ORAL NOTES l OMONEPMCIfY 0E1tfm1 PLANS MO ORE O OP100 MALI Oa ORONOIf1 TO TIE AT7MK71 Q TIE OOIFI• R PPENENTATM PRIOR 10 RR 000141 LOCAs ALL UTLITIEE PRIOR TO FltlC7®Nl L ALL P1.4RW ARIA* TO DV RLLT DATED UM AS AUTOMATIC DR0 OR *PRAT CIRCUITS. RR OTT OP TO: LILA [437040) MD OMR* srecrocAncre, PRIOR TO PLMRW IIN I AT ON OTONDI MLALL DE 71LLT OP!RAT70NAL flbNOEDiLT WATER AU. PLANTED MEA* IM'EDIATILT APITDR PLAHTN0. MpAT10N OT*191 SHALL USE A0OHAT1C RAM DMJT•OfP DEYKEL L LAYOUT OP ALL PLAM TIAEMNAL TO b AP9R0110 DT OWER* REP1E*DITATM MOM TO INSTALLATION. 4 ALL DOIDMKN* FO R PR.ANT HEIGHT. @ EAD NO CALIPER APE Ma RECO a@SOO. L COVER ALL 1TOOL 314410 AND OICUO COVER AMA. 11114 TEN !L * 6 TITL MED MEL ►EDEN COMM DA IK TtlLl/ A. ALL rums NJROERY OROUN NOT PR7OII pi= 00.LZCTCD. t RE`LACEME fT EEE* PM 71gLA LOMHO COW E104U0 PA/RMRAPM lD ®. IV' 20' 40' DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL twin QUIK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC 8R0 BTTR PLAxrnvd NOTYS 1 AAL P.O.* POR FLAW MORT. /19040 410 CAL104.1101 0U11 0 1 4 4/0 0441 COMM TO an O 055.A 1746CtN COOL L 001000 41000 no Dew LN CO TIO 4100710 MU T71•1114Ia III• IPIIITAL CM MOI TO DOW= IOOT► P A ROOT • 1.14001 OR OR. 111111116 OT CM 4014167. P 715 OR PLOT* r Dia 01110•4111‘17114T Tia MOI TIM W 4PPP0N0 MONO PA,N. • ALL ,556)* 41.40 TO OE iTLIAPII0 O ALL hear MICA 50 1.04 /Acct TIMM. lEI.AON0 TOGq 1'1.571 41101'010571 TO Ala •A \ RLL TIO 010/0 CONK ATO OHU)1.144 APTLY TO =MAN 17 OSI+ OAK Mid 44 LATOO 54444.74.5411747065.7055440.155r MAO 01110IlNO•5174054 PAWN 10 407.541101 i 05 CONTRACTOR 04441 OL 10105Ola POP 0111'0510 O ALL OEMS AO 0000. 57 TWO 0 L OCCAMO0D IM�CT. • 0010* Cm 000®1 RM* .50 /0t 700(110• WALL MI BROOM TO T! 07751701 OPT. 01456 MOW T71R>®14) • 1110 LOCATION O Ml 001*4 PROM TO 00/604704 M OWL, TO AITION 640040 1.1.41 TO RAT DOT ALA.& MOON 54.4054445100401000ORION (r) 011LO4 tar O 000/ MT PAHO N 1Ra4o COMM AO SROM AMY TO ALCM IOT6 TSO 1000 00407LLCK L 10504? 7106 PIM 1100\0 0010 COOL 40404 P4l)6AT17D M4 LOG10D d 05 C=ON 6475 O M71111IQT. LEL OMIT L4 •5T 1.170T15A1JL 06001 I )574 mow 01405 r 051774 *4104 /1104 PAVEMENT/ CLEC 5005 \AA /TY OGROUNDCOVER SPACING NOT TO OCA4-12 IQIOYE TOP LS 015417 SWO E PL.A GNC, 04000. 44.0050 70050*. ©SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO ESOA.L. TO T7 1750170 LO6ot1 RODS • NOM. U ALL TIES AMD 64/006 ON SL.OPS• G04ATER THAN 44 44..01•L 7)) WARES ASO 7 TIED TYPICAL 11'90.01 V WI 4 TM TOM.. TRS! Tile •PL44TIC 04424o0t LOOCN• mew 11011150) MAL TO STARE. 10'-0' SVC TREATED 0TAI04 (7 MR TIES) OMAN TO 10001101. MO UNDIMMED 1140401. MR N• 0017171 657 411101445 017414 1 1461 AEON ORAD0 )• OITN DARK 1.11.10.1 (7 04151040 &worn APIA CH.TI 101054 TOP 20 0' WRAP OR UR! S4N0T COMPLETELY BEFORE PLAM)0 samaau. W 0710000 TOPSOIL TREE STAKING 10'.00 TREATED P50 IR CO1t• PTI STAKES 0/01194 TO 141144. INTO 1100175050 10606. 1215/3011.1.04 74• CORN 611 OMSK& CROW 1 6014 ADO'S WOOS 64/1051/ TOPSOIL ONOT To *CALF. 324 w ROOIOALL 441* 1'7 6 4 115 0 6104 004106. TAT • St*' PER TREE NOT TO SCALE MONAL01AD5 1010M0 Ll O WRAP OR ALL CP 10411 SANQT CONTAINER !WORE PLANTI O CONIFER PLANT1NG ON SLOPE 1741.50101 PLNNML 0710/105 0606164 CONK. TATTER 11774 • •TAPLE6 POM TIES MW PLANT LIST SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME EVERCsREEN TREES T I% PNN fli1E8R tu4A 3,eI, TP • T4UY 1.510..70 COf M'IGN NM1E 6IZEir-CNIDITIOJS SPACING& CN•0050R* oeaIO,MS .W .i •V DECIDUOUS TREES 61M1615 CEDAR 4.417.11)561 SLACK P4 4147044 RED CEDAR I' M. 6' 141. 1' 47. O' 141. 194. leniporwruA 4017014 44/10010 0150600717450 LAT7.A01 55754/4 077016612 1'10, 0 K7.mit e' M. .41 64401)4 A6 1+0114 ,AG& SHAW Al NCW4 AO 444444 AO 144044 AA 641011 O- 0/50/44141 RiCk:..M'4 M 0704SLOW' 454 1 SLO LIGIED 4! ULL 6TTTCLU 16061R 1AITID1ATA• ACM MEOW *CAPLET /edtal!L• SNRUBS v17 14PLE MD MAPLE AMERICAN WELT GUM SKT MoOET CMC •UILET 6101168. MOSE I N• CAU) TR/K MN) )• CAL.114 7" CAL PIK 7• CAL MW 7" CAL MIN H 441074 Al 6410464 46 140114 A6 /1401)4 46 111101)4 O'Demme1440104 50* may O 00TIR4A61ER DM141 Q COMA ILEA 16I15EO0A' • COMA* 6TOLON050A ruvw.A�A' © 0)1411.0 A -.ATA 0QTACTA' 6 11A40/1A ACUPOLUI 0GTTACTA' . ® 1741071455 450010 O PO.TDTiou i M14T11 • PIN* LAIROCP.RAOR 'OTTO-LUTTCEN e VACCINE/1 41.01)41 O' 7000009006 1 UORA 41747!W O 11011511 DAVD11 ® 410146057 774* 0 I R)LA 4.4)44141404 ® 1.16.1O16 £..4UTOCIR40n Z4Sl1W44' A PA104AlOC114* 7701*PDA1A 111'104 0 LPOPIN0:0 GROUNDCOVER 111111 111 4414460 OAST EI10 SEABEE 011' COTQlA5TER 17014. 70105104 0404000 TLLLOO.11I10 32004,000 COMPACT OLINNO 81644 COMPACT OREGON 014175 JAPANESE 7001714 MORD RTW ORO -5117084 LAUREL !11550604 IA 00_ESE1r 7040DOD9O30// 0440 415511411 LAIR10T1416 Po114riAL LAUREL ZASQ LAUREL 0061014 TIT 1740170 4017 1117071.5 0" M. No 4. OC. O" -e" 6P. TTN 4. OC. 34"-30" 4T. Iva 6. OL. 14•-10` Ni. nN V Oa 74"45" NT. 1114 D' OG 71.74' 41. MN. 2' 0L 71.74" 4R. M7 V OL OL W'-117 OR MN, 4' OG *"-01 sp. IM 4. OC. 71•'-74" 617, 111a 4. OC. v" -e• 617.1114 )D' OC. 71-74• M.111a 4. OG 11•-74' M. MK 4' OC. 111-71. 4T. MN 4. OC. 7 OA. COD. 4' CO. n7. 05REE *151116 AT MN b' L9tli4\ )•• 41'. MN 6' 0.0. ERICA GOINEA 01005070 UMW 0417/1150 4440140 5506401 GONDOL MOM 141074 1" OP. 1131. 0"•0. OP. /114. 0. 04. 0. 0L DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL IMMO 1.1111.11. WORTHY AND ASSOCIATES MA MAN Ail.= SIINT• QUIK PARK OF WASHINGTON LLC SRO SITE 11161x0"5 w4R171I01ON Preliminary Landscape Details 14®7151 L4 PROPERTY LIN SITE SIGN S 160TH ST. SITE. PLAN Kra 12" OneMen. ........... ........... SIGN ELEVATION METAL FRAMED SIGN CAP COURSE INTERLOCKING MASONRY UNITS L•111114•141 1l[II,tKtAt NOM 11.1 1111W KEY INDD( QUIK PARK OFF•AIRPORT PARKING FAOUTY 1 110T1. • OTD PAVTAVI RC, 7L* WAS NG1OH ENTRY SIGN imo WNW 1/3.: ROCKERY ASPHALT SHINGLES BEVELED SIDING ■■ n ■■ 'i■--'■■ z .10AII VALE.”n� rings mti wiu i.,r=uii , I rh i� iaii.i,ii�7 lui w;tiiii�u u,i��: !ailir,.r tuooD RAILING 14/4 CONCRETE RETAINING WALL EAST ELEVATION •c -ALL N•. r -O' OFFICE SIZE 16' X 10' (1,120 SF.) BEVELED SIDING BEVELED SIDING SOUTH. ELEVATION SCALE. uv • r-.' ASPHALT SHINGLES FOIA BEVELED SIDING NORTH. ELEVA '.ION BEVELED SIDING 42' HIGH WOOD RAILING SITE PLAN ,ars CONTROL BOOTH SIZE: 6•X 8' (48 SF.) CANOPY SIZE: . 25 X 65' (1,625 SF.) BEVELED SIDING WEST ELEVATION •CALE, VY. M.O. klii METAL SIDING EAST ELEVATION OC.Le. Mb' . r - 0• ASPHALT SHINGLES METAL SIDING RECYCLING ENCLOSURE SOUTW ELEVATION _—Y ASPHALT . SHINGLES NORTI-4 E.LEY4TION S'-0' HIGH CHAIN LINK 1Y-0' HIGH CHAIN LIMO FENCE IW SLATS FENCE UY SLATS FRONT ELEVATION SIDE ELEVATION PROPANE TANK ENCLOSURE ROCF OVERHANG RECYCLING ENCLOSURE FLOOR PLAN • SCALE, VO'.. r - J WEST ELEVATION OULL 1$ • I. - to 'd remove burlap from top,t/2 off'bon ' lburlop, o ba r noble) Top. 16 . i'. . :CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL'. WETLAND SIGN NOTES . • Gibs sign to 1/2=prow; and. Oath to C cwr aster or premie bested pat with 5/16•07 lag balL. Sat pat minimum 7 baba mode... . Wetlarat sign to NI al approximately Note: Base drawing provided by , Perteet. Engineering,. Inc. WETLAND SIGN DETAIL -• Job Na. A0-1TF Designed Br Omen Sr Checked by: Dab: 9/30/01 SHEET OF .. 1