Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E99-0033 - MR VAN GARD SELF STORAGE - NEW 73,000 SF BUILDINGMR VAN GARD SELF STORAGE NEW SELF STORAGE UNITS 5950 SOUTHCENTER BLVD E99-0033 • City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Notice of Decision February 27, 2001 To: Steven Friedman State of Washington Department of Ecology This notice is to confirm the decision reached by the Tukwila Board of Architectural Review on Thursday, January 25, 2001. The Board of Architectural Review voted to approve the design of a 75,000 square foot office building based on the findings and conclusion in the staff report dated January 16, 2001, with the condition that landscaping shall include ground cover with 18" on center and the submittal of an irrigation plan. Revisions must be approved by the Director of Community Development prior to the issuance of a building permit. This letter is issued pursuant to the Permit Application Types and Procedures, Tukwila Municipal Code Zoning Chapter, (18.104.170) on the following project and permit approvals. Project File Number: L99-0078, Design Review Application Associated Files: E99-0033 (SEPA determination) Applicant: Steven Friedman for Gencor Development Request: Construct a 75,000 sq. ft. self -storage building. The project is subject to design review. Location: 5950 Southcenter Boulevard SEPA Determination: DNS Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to the permits are available for inspection at: Tukwila Department of Community Development; 6300 Southcenter Boulevard., Suite 100; Tukwila, WA 98188 Monday through Friday; 8:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. The planner managing the project is Rebecca Fox who may be contacted at 431-3683 for further information. This decision may be appealed to the Tukwila City Council pursuant to TMC 18.104.010 E. by filing a Notice of Appeal within 14 calendar days from the date of the issuance of this Notice of Decision (TMC 18.116.010). Information on the content of the Notice of Appeal may be obtained from the Department of. Community Development at the address noted above. c:\carol\Segale-office\notdec.doc 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 Steven M. Friedman Gencor, Inc P.O. Box 1018 Mercer Island, WA 98040-1018 November 13, 2000 Re: Mr. Van Gard Self Storage, File # L99-0078 Dear Mr. Friedman; Per our telephone conversations, I would like to confirm that the Mr. Van Gard Self Storage project is active. We are waiting for Brian Shelton's comments on whether or not additional traffic mitigation is needed and if it will affect the project's design. Once I get this information from Brian, I will contact you again in order to set a BAR hearing date. Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Phone: 206-431-3683 Fax: 206-431-3665 e-mail: rfox@ci.tukwila.wa.us 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 Steven M. Friedman Gencor, Inc 85 South Washington Street #308 October 16, 2000 Re: Mr. Van Gard Self Storage, File # L99-0078 Dear Mr. Friedman; As there has been no activity on the Mr. Van Gard Self Storage project(#L99-0078), since you withdrew the item from the Planning Commission agenda on March 15, 2000, we have closed the project file. If you wish to pursue development of this project at a later date, a new application must be submitted. Sincerely, 7-1Y>,( Rebecca Fox Phone: 206-431-3683 Fax: 206-431-3665 e-mail: rfox@ci.tukwila.wa.us 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #400 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION /, DECLARE THAT: 1)0/620 ) Project Number: L — 00 ; a. qq —00 3 3 Notice of Public Hearing Determination of Non -Significance Notice of Public Meeting Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance 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 Notice of Application Shoreline Mgmt Permit Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit __FAX __Mail: To Seattle Times Classifieds Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 / ` Other r'r� � �� I . c���� raWY1 IN Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this \t* day of hQ.tdli n the year 20 c(} P: GINAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL01/24/0011 :44 AM Project Name e eijl O( ( tic. • Project Number: L — 00 ; a. qq —00 3 3 Mailer's Signature: e ' Xi,U P: GINAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL01/24/0011 :44 AM City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director APPLICATION WITHDRAWN DATE: March 16, 2000 The applicant has requested that the following project be WITHDRAWN from consideration at this time. Accordingly the project has been WITHDRAWN from the Board of Architectural Review agenda on March 23, 2000 and project will NOT be included in the March 23, 2000 hearing. The public will be notified at such time as this project is reinstated. APPLICANT: STEVEN FRIEDMAN, ROBERT DAVEY (AGENT: FOR GENCOR INC.) LOCATION: 5950 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA FILE NUMBER: L99-0078 (Design review) E99-0033 (SEPA) PROPOSAL: 75,000 sq. ft self -storage facility with three stories over two basements OTHER REQUIRED LAND USE PERMITS: Development Permits (i.e. Building, Land Alteration, Sign Permit) Please contact Rebecca Fox of the Tukwila Department of Community Development at (206)431-3683 or rfox@ci.tukwila.wa.us .if you have questions about this project or process. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Memorandum Date: 3/15/00 To: Joanna Spencer cc: Brian Shelton From: Raid Tirhi RE: Van Gard Self Storage The Transportation Division has reviewed the revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) report dated February 4, 2000 and has the following comments: • Trip Distribution: All previous reports for this development indicated 50% to the east and 50% to the west. Since we do not have exact demographic data on the anticipated distribution and based on the fundamentals of transportation planning. The most unbiased distribution would be a fifty fifty split. • The report has indicated a LOS " F " for the access driveway during the evening peak hour. LOS of unsignalized intersections is based on the worst single movement of the intersection. Mitigation must be provided to improve the LOS. Consider providing signal warrant analysis for the driveway. • The report has indicated a high accident rate for the subject roadway segment. No feasible mitigation was offered. Instead, it has introduced a development with an access driveway that has LOS F. This will introduce an unacceptable traffic safety hazard. The developer's options are outlined in the attached TMC No. 9.48.080. • The City has no legal authority to force the existing ARCO station and the Denny's restaurant to participate in any improvements to the existing roadway system. These are old developments. They have not redeveloped to increase the trip generation. As per the Developer's Agreement File # 92-070 we can only enforce mitigation measures on new or redevelopment projects. In addition, a latecomer agreement or proportionate fair -share mitigation may be required for this development. • ARCO station has a legal right to access the North Hill Apartments driveway through a recorded easement. The easement was done through unknown internal negotiations between developers. The City has no right to request closure of that access. Instead, it must be negotiated between developers. • If property owners agreed on closing the ARCO access into the said driveway, and the driveway LOS "F" is mitigated, the City needs to know the affect on other ARCO driveways LOS. C:\vangard3.doc Dept. Of Community Development City of Tukwila AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I zeJa(, '01.0 I I HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Notice of Public Hearing x Determination of Non -Significance Notice of Public Meeting Project Name eleAr-Or Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Project Number: Egg --00?) Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Mailer's Signature: a,(,(,f,, 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 __Mail: To Seattle Times Classifieds Gail Muller Classifieds PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111 Other Was maileq to each of the addresses listed on this 03 day of latth,in the year 200U P:GINAWYNETTA/F.ORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL01/24/0011:44 AM Project Name eleAr-Or Project Number: Egg --00?) Mailer's Signature: a,(,(,f,, ' OW P:GINAWYNETTA/F.ORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL01/24/0011:44 AM • • City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steven M. Friedman Friedman Development P.O. Box 1018 Mercer Island, WA 98040 March 3, 2000 Dear Mr. Friedman: Steve Lancaster, Director Enclosed please find the Determination of Non -Significance for the Mr. Van Gard project at 5950 Southcenter Boulevard. At this point, we plan to have the Mr. Van Gard project on the March 23,2000 Board of Architectural Review meeting. Sincerely, i& ;lb? Rebecca Fox Associate Planner 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Gity of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director March 3, 2000 RE: Proposed self -storage building at 5950 Southcenter Boulevard (E99-0033) Dear Tukwila Resident: Enclosed is the Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) for the environmental review just completed for the proposed self -storage facility at 5950 Southcenter Boulevard. This DNS means that the City of Tukwila has reviewed the major aspects of the proposed project and has determined that the proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact. You are being sent this notice since you expressed an interest in this project by attending a meeting or submitting written comments. The project is scheduled for a hearing before the Board of Architectural Review on Thursday March 23, 2000 at 7 p.m. in the Tukwila City Council Chambers,, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington. The public is welcome to attend and make comments. Please contact me at (206)431-3683 if you have questions about the project or the review process. Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Associate Planner Enc. frOX 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: SEPA REVIEW FOR NEW 73,500 SQ FT SELF STORAGE PROPONENT: GENCOR LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET. ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS: 5950 SOUTHCENTER BL PARCEL NO: 359700-0202 SEC/TWN/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E99-0033 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on File with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. *************************************************************************** This determination is Final and signed this day of 2000. 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. • • CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMIT MAILINGS ( ) 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:WPS1DATA\CHKLIST ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELIND DIV DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION* OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHKLIST W/ DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION ;GING COUNTY AGENCIES c,0 P/vd- kg, k 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 MEDIA Smooth Feed SheetsTM Bonnie Brakken 15335 Sunwood Blvd., # C103 Tukwila, WA 98188 Ronae Bunger 15335 Sunwood Blvd., # C302 Tukwila, WA 98188 F. A. Cox 15335 Sunwood Blvd., # C104 Tukwila, WA 98188 Lisa Edwards 15325 Sunwood Blvd., # B202 Tukwila, WA 98188 George R. Evans 15335 Sunwood Blvd., # C201 Tukwila, WA 98188 Daniel & Sue Ann Gilmore 15325 Sunwood Blvd., # B101 Tukwila, WA 98188 Maureen Hitchcock 15345 Sunwood Blvd., # D202 Tukwila, WA 98188 Karen Strandberg 15345 Sunwood Blvd., # D204 Tukwila, .WA 98188 • V inh Huynh 15325 Sunwood Blvd., # B301 Tukwila, WA 98188 Steve S. Johnson 15345 Sunwood Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Sylvia Jones 15310 Sunwood Blvd., # F1-201 Tukwila, WA 98188 Mona Law 15335 Sunwood Blvd., # C304 Tukwila, WA 98188 Jose Domingo Maldonado 15315 Sunwood Blvd., # A102 Tukwila, WA 98188 Kristina Lowrey 15325 Sunwood Blvd., # B303 Tukwila, WA 98188 Lavada Banks 15315 Sunwood Blvd., # 201 Tukwila, WA 98188 • Use template for 5160® Ross H. Moses 13325 Sunwood Blvd., # B103 Tukwila, WA 98188 Maria Mueller 15315 Sunwood Blvd., # A304 Tukwila, WA 98188 Ed Murphy 15345 Sunwood Blvd., # D203 Tukwila, WA 98188 Donna Pan -y 15315 Sunwood Blvd., # A-02 Tukwila, WA 98188 Kathryn J. Moshel, CPA 14335 Sunwood Blvd., # C301 Tukwila, WA 98188 Marcia Ross 15350 Sunwood Blvd., # F2-202 Tukwila, WA 98188 Linda Best 15123 Sunwood Blvd., # G32 Tukwila, WA 98188 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® Ms. Rebecca Fox - Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: City of Tukwila Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Proposed Mini -storage 5600 Southcenter Boulevard Dear Ms. Fox: Christopher Brown Cn Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 February 4, 2000 RECEIVED FEB 4 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Pursuant toourmeeting of the 1st and my discussions with Mr. Rai'd Tirhi of the city traffic engineering section I am enclosing two copies of the subject report. This has been prepared with the following key elements in mind. 1. ITE "average" trip rates are used as requested. 2. New driveway traffic counts have been obtained with special attention being paid to the ARCO/North Hill Apartment driveway conflicts. 3. The gap analysis is included in the text. It is not used to imply a better -than -computed LOS although that should be understood. 4. Concerning the "arterial level of service" we have noted that there is no arterial level of service, per se. We have referenced the HCM to so note the limitation closely spaced signals impose on that concept. The LOS at the site is based on STOP control and`the availability of the 2WLTL. Even then, the HCM method for estimating LOS is compromised by these signals since gaps are not really random. Regardless, for comparison purposes we use the HCM method for simplicity. 5. The LOS at 61st/Southcenter Boulevard is re -computed with a 5 -second yellow + all red interval and with current phasing It does lead to longer queuing which is noted in the TIA. Traffic Engineers to Transportation Planners Ms. Rebecca Fox February 4, 2000 page 2 6. With a high accident rate we have noted some potential mitigation programs. Clearly the best would involve the combining of both the ARCO driveway with the North Hill Apartment/Mini-storage driveway. In turn, this leads to a very large right turn movement and, from that, the warrants for a Right Turn Lane (length of 200 feet). 7. From our field observations we have not seen queuing from Macadam Road backing up to the east past the North Hill Apartment/Mini-storage driveway. Queuing from the 61st signal likewise does not interfere with the center 2WLTL: it is limited to the eastbound RTO lanes from what we have seen. 8. We have propounded two options for dealing with access: A. Combining the ARCO/North Hill Apartment/Mini-Storage driveway and eliminating. the existing ARCO east driveway. This clearly imputes a right turn lane. It is likely not feasible given judicial restraints on the developer improving another owner's site. However, we have suggested a way that this might be brought to fruition in a jointly funded program. B. Pending 'A', above, constructing a new driveway for only the North Hill Apartments and Mini -Storage. The concept is to close -off access to ARCO from this driveway by a small landscaped barrier. Doing that (or proposing that) may provide impetus for ARCO to participate in the "combined driveway" program. 9. If the city feels that a combined driveway is appropriate we ask that the city consider using its police powers to enable the mutual fair -sharing development costs of. such an access. 10. We have also enlarged the trip distribution section so that the next phase of review, where concurrency is to be addressed, can be expedited. In closing, please feel free to -call if you have any questions. Our goal is to ensure your are'•pleased with the project as it develops. encl. cc Mr. Steve Friedman Yours truly, C. V. Brown, P.E. • Christopher Brown CS Associates 9688 12ainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for a 590 UNIT MINI -WAREHOUSE in the City of Tukwila by Gencor-Friedmen Development Company February 4, 2000 Traffic Engineers C5 Transportation Planners RECEW E® FEt 4 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 411 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Table of Contents - 590 UNIT 411 I -WAREHOUSE Study Objectives Location and Access Traffic Data Data References and Sources Trip Generation Traffic Assignment Gap Distribution Capacity Analysis Table II Notes Conceptual Driveway design Accidents Channelization/Right Turn Only Lanes Alternative Access Design LOS, Limited Access Design Alternative Recommendation Conclusions List of Figures Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure cv 1. Z,,4 3. 4 3. 5. 5. 10. 11. 13. 14. 16. 17. 18. 20. 20. 21. 1 Vicinity Map 2 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 3 Projecvt Trade Area 4 Trip Distribution in Percent 5 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Assignment 6 Possible Mitigated Driveway Design Sketch 7 Access Design for Limited Traffic List of Tables Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Appendix Trip Generation Population Distribution Peak Hour Gap Distribution Frequency P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service Enhanced Driveway levels of Service Level of Service Definitions Volumes by Driveway Limited Access Driveway LOS Site Plan DPW Average Weekday Traffic Counts Current Signals Peak Hour Counts Driveway Traffic Counts Accident Data Right Turn Guidelines, Combined Driveways Right Turn Lane Design Right Turn Guidelines, W/0 ARCO Traffic Level of Service Computations 2. 4. 7. 8. 9. 12. 19. 5. 6. 10. 11. 13. 14. 17. 20. 1. 2. 5. 7. 14. 22. 23 24. 25. • TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for a 590 UNIT MINI -WAREHOUSE City of Tukwila by • Gencor-Friedmen Development Company 4) Study Objectives The objective of this study are severalfold and includes the gathering of current traffic volume data on the abutting arterial facility serving the site and the adjacent commercial sites, identifying current traffic conflicts, estimating the trip generation of the mini -storage facility on the basis of adopted Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation publications, defining the directional distribution of site generated traffic on the basis of the year 2010 population residing within a 5 -mile radius of the site, reviewing current historical accident data and checking possible traffic safety issues, performing a level of service analysis at the access driveway intersection to Southcenter Boulevard, performing a gap analysis at the driveway, analyzing potential channelization requirements including a right turn lane or a right turn pocket on Southcenter Boulevard and propose a possible site related traffic mitigation element in consideration of observed level of service issues in concert with driveway conflicts posed by the existing ARCO gas station and mini -mart patrons using the existing driveway designed for North Hill Apartment residents. Location and Access The project is situated in the north -central sector of the City of Tukwila on the north side of Southcenter Boulevard about a block west of the signalized intersection at 61st Avenue S./'S' Line Bridge. It is immediately east of an ARCO gas station and mini -mart and will share a driveway with an existing apartment complex - the North Hill Apartments. The general site location is approximately shown on Figure 1, the Vicinity Map. -1 - Christopher brown Cn Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 IM/11 ST 27® I 2P1V ‘.? \ HIGHLINE RIYERTON COWIN( TY • HOP 451-5TA8 126 5T\ E • • —1 ,s •••• ST • • E,.., 1: I,LI.L., kil .''L.• 5 ‘5S0A111:.,.6.: PARK.; .30 S 128111 ST 1 . !?it. Sr -11 1111:1 =1. s LANGSION RD :id P 'lsS .BLAIA 1 Si 1?.4.TH s 5 . U5iti 11:1RD RIMITEN tn CREST CEA S 141ST _ .t3 yr), V MACK RIPER 14250 ST Ik RIPARIAN 144TH 14616 ,3TAL- i • ST - 4200 ST " 9M,ST 5 150TH ST S 149TH 5 MAIELNUT PARK .:,1 . LIB i ; a. FS Si d..0„), 1; 1i- s 119111 155 1S i TN ; . 05 LP I1555IL'I . 1t. r... 23 u ST S 152ND !8N0P1 ' N., 5 Aie ST TUKWILA eRit CH T(Jk SOUTHCENTER 15.16 lACK BAKER BL 0 L 1 ST r • S 167TH ST 51 CC • SOUTHCENTER PLA 26 MORITA BY MARRIOTT TRECK DR FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map —2- CORPORAT 00 44 CORPORA DR VEKIEt _ . f PARKWAY PLAZA 25 f•ror Sr. SW 33RD Christopher brown Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 1 • 1\1 Access to the site will be from a single driveway shared with the previously referenced residential development. Of some note, this existing driveway also provides access to the eastern side of the ARCO gas station and mini -mart. Peak Hour motorists using this access route are noted on Figure 2. This is discussed in a later section of this study. Last, a small fire -access driveway will be constructed about 150 feet east. This driveway will be gated or have bollards installed to limit use to emergency vehicles only. Traffic Data Current peak hour traffic data was collected at the three existing driveways serving the North Hill Apartments, the ARCO station/mini-mart, and Denny's Restaurant. The worst case observations, taken on January 26th, and for the driveways on February 2nd, 2000, are shown on Figure 2. Morning peak hour and noon hour traffic volumes were also obtained but, being much less than the p.m. peak hour, are not referenced in this study. The signalized intersection's peak hour field data is included in the Appendix along with discrete 15 -minute interval driveway data and the summation of the driveway p.m. peak hour data. Current roadway geometric conditions including the number of lanes, grades and traffic control devices are contained in the Appendix as a part of the level of service (LOS) analysis computer input. Although the three driveways do not have STOP signs, they are nonetheless treated as STOP controlled intersections. Data References and Sources Data resources used in this study include trip generation statistics published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the document, Trip Generation, 6th Edition, the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., and the computer programs SIGNAL 94 by Strong Systems and by HCS produced by McTrans, University of Florida, all being used under -3- Christopher Brown Cn Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. S. 1` Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 222-1909 North Hill Apartments 61st Avenue S. ARCO East Drive ARCO West Drive and Denny's Macadam Road N M R FIGURE 2 P. M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes -4- 'S' Line Bridge NOTE: ARCO traffic using North Hill Apartment driveway for access. See study for comments Through volumes on Southcenter Boulevard based on Macadam Road data to give the worst case. Christopher brown e5 Associates 9688 Qainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 license to Christopher Brown, P.E. In addition, accident data was provided by staff of the Department of Public Works, City of Tukwila. Trip Generation Trip generation data for the site is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (I.T.E.) Land Use Code 151 which applies to mini -warehouses of this type. The expected trip production derived from the published average trip rates, based on the number of units, is noted below. TABLE I Trip Generation Time Interval Volume A.W.D.T. * A.M. Inbound A.M. Outbound P.M. Inbound P.M. Outbound 165 vehicles per day 6 vehicles per hour 6 vehicles per hour 9 vehicles per hour 9 vehicles per hour Saturday 138 vehicles per day Peak Inbound 11 vehicles per hour Peak Outbound 11 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Traffic Volume Traffic Assignment The new traffic generated by this mini -storage development will be distributed onto the adjacent roadway system and then onto the regional transportation system. The traffic distribution -5- Christopher brown e Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. 1\ Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 • • and assignment of site generated traffic is based on the Growth - Factor Method and is established by the estimated year 2010 population forecast within a 5 -mile radius of the site. It is described in detail in Transportation and Land Development, Vergil G. Stover, 1988, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The service or site "trade area" and the respective traffic analysis zones (TAZ's) from the PSRC population forecasts are shown on Figure 3. The generalized year 2010 population forecast by name of the dominant city or neighborhood is shown below in Table II. TABLE II Population Distribution City/Local Population S. Beacon Hill 35,753 Lower Duwamish 4,451 Rainier Beach 20,599 White Center 24,142 Boulevard Park 18,172 Burien 22,779 Sea -Tac 32,545 S. Tukwila 6,218 N. Tukwila 10,881 Renton- Industrial 19,199 Renton 16,743 Renton, Highlands 17,658 Skyway 12,933 The site's traffic distribution, as a percent of all trips, based on the distribution of the population in the service area, is portrayed on Figure 4. The traffic assignment, based on Table II and its percentage trip distribution shown on Figure 4, is described on Figure 5 for the p.m. peak. This data applies to the p.m. peak hour which is the worst case consideration as noted earlier. As noted on the figure, this is an "unrestrained assignment". -6- Christopher Brown e5 Associate& 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. \\ Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909} FIGURE 3 Project Trade Area -7- ii ChriBtopher Brown IV Aeeociate8 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. (Seattle. WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-191 1 1 FJ • rr Cita` NV :q.•S I, Ir [n5 N/ S. 7 rale., F. . • g- 83A00Nr E••••—r, I.• Ar H18t ' N Via,.; v:v2/ +.i N N_ {9 s altoaltoiF 4 n?% I S �nr gi �' tAV HIB[ Ei ;x S AYxmi HUE^ S _ �, S ,AY N1SC •• .n t xl EI I C H100 Ar! 1411C I —AV HLSE H11S1 "}n+ SAY HISC N, (, °-('Ins �1at[ :.?!.:11A1 I MS. .�9 '?NCII 000[l/r: .:I ' g8" Y,i x - Z S ArT� WC ,►.r I = 6 4 5 Y. Ill\ 1 : ii,l -.! m IEi5 8 FIGURE 4 Trip Distribution in Percent -8- A AV L= „i0l Christopher Brown Cn Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1910 North Hill Apartments • SITE O 61st Avenue S. ' O-r(C) ARCO East Drive ARCO West Drive and Denny's n O fn Macadam Road FIGURE 5 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Assignment -0- 'S' Line Bridge NOTE: The traffic assignment of this figure is an unrestrained assignment. Peak hour diversion due to LOS issues is not assumed. Christopher brown fS Associates 9688 11ainier Ave. 8. Seattic, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 Gap Distribution The use of an unrestrained traffic assignment, as noted in the foregoing, is based on the availability of adequate gaps within the existing traffic stream. This may be seen from some of the sample data taken over a ten minute interval during the typical p.m. peak hour. These are shown below. TABLE III Peak Hour Gap Distribution by Frequency Gap Fx. Gap Fx. 3 seconds 4 4 seconds 0 5 seconds 2 6 seconds 3 7 seconds 1 8 seconds 4 9 seconds 1 10 seconds 2 11 seconds 0 12 seconds 1 13 seconds 0 14 seconds 1 15 seconds 1 16 seconds 1 Fx. = Frequency In terms of the left turn movement from the site's access driveway there should be a gap of at least 6.0 to 6.5 seconds so that the motorist may readily enter the center 2WLTL before merging with the through eastbound traffic stream. From the above table it will be seen that there were 15 gaps that would fit this acceptable gap requirement in the sample3 ten minute interval. Over the peak hour it is anticipated that there would be in the order of 90 or so acceptable gaps for the exiting left turn movement. In the next section the level of service (LOS) is described. In this regard it will be recalled that the LOS at STOP controlled intersections, such as these various driveways, is predicated on the random distribution of gaps within the traffic stream. But, the presence of signalized intersections within a block of the site's driveway makes this kind of analysis unusually biased. -10- Christopher brown CS Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 Capacity Analysis Capacity analysis is in accordance with the recently published (1994) Highwav Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board. As noted earlier, the LOS analysis was performed with the computer programs SIGNAL 94 by Strong Systems and by HCS produced by McTrans, University of Florida. The results of the analysis are noted in Table IV. It will be noted that the Dennv's driveway, the North Hill Apartments driveway and the signalized intersections at 61st Avenue S. and Macadam Road are reviewed for their typical p.m. peak hour performance. However, note in the following table the LOS at the site's access driveway is based on the closure of the adjacent (east) ARCO driveway and the assignment of the ARCO driveway's traffic volumes to a single but expanded driveway that will serve all three uses - ARCO, the North Hill Apartments, and the mini -storage. That potential driveway configuration is sketched on Figure 6 on the following page along with the design hourly volumes (DHV). TABLE IV P.M. Peak Hour Levels of Service Intersection/Driveway LOS Delay Max. Queue @ Site 61st Ave. S. Macadam Road C 21.2 secs. 517 feet B 8.1 secs. 527 feet Mini -Storage Drive without RTO Lane E 36.7 overall See Notes, pg 13 Mini -Storage Drive with RTO Lane E 36.7 overall See Notes, pg 13 No arterial level of service was performed for the section of Southcenter Boulevard between 61st Avenue S. and Macadam Road since the Highway Capacity Manual, at page 11-2, Urban Streets, Applications, notes that, "The methodology does not address arterial capacity, which is generally determined by the capacity of signalized intersections ..." -11- Christopher Brown Cn Associates 9688 rainier Ave. S. 1\ Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 !b 052ISS 93 35_ FIGURE 6 Possible Mitigated Driveway Design Sketch -12- c3 7C 737111 £/ Z!'/» eOv/ (o 79 )✓/hYC/ ,7 Cc-e-r'J' /INV Al/,/ /9/'1/ �xro Christopher brown f?S Associates 9688 rainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 Table II Notes Withe the DHV shown on Figure 6, Table II sets out the overall LOS at the site's driveway under two scenarios: without a right turn lane on Southcenter Boulevard and with a right turn lane. In both cases it is assumed that the eastern ARCO driveway has been closed and its traffic, in combination with both the mini -storage site and the North Hill Apartments traffic, is included on this reconstituted and enlarged driveway. Table IV describes the "overall LOS" at the driveway. It is at LOS 'E' since it falls within that HCM definition. However, when reviewing the Appendix it will be seen that the enhanced or expanded driveway has individual LOS characteristics as shown below in Table V. TABLE V Enhanced Driveway Levels of Service Driveway & Channelization LOS Average Delay Without RTO Lane on Arterial Southbound Left Turn F <45 seconds Southbound Right Turn C 10.1 seconds Eastbound Left Turn F 47.1 seconds With RTO Lane on Arterial Southbound Left Turn F <45 seconds Southbound Right Turn B 9.5 seconds Eastbound Left Turn F 47.1 seconds It will be seen, then, that the addition of a Right Turn Only lane (RTO) will not alter the LOS for the eastbound movement on Southcenter Boulevard. It will stay at 'F' although it is only marginally at LOS 'F' since the cut-off is at 45 seconds. Likewise, the addition of an RTO lane has no effect on the outbound or southbound left turn movement from these sites. They remain at LOS 'F', regardless. -13- Christopher brown Cn Associates 9688 rainier Ave. S. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 The only possible benefit seems to be with the outbound right turn movement from the site onto Southcenter Boulevard. With the addition of an RTO lane the LOS changes from 'C' to 'B' with the average delay improving by 0.6 seconds. This improvement in delay for some 33 vehicles in the p.m. peak hour does meet any benefit analysis criteria. When reviewing the LOS results of Table IV, the HCM definitions may be of interest. They are described below for reference purposes. TABLE VI Level of Service Definitions Signalized Intersections Level of Service Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds) A Under 5 seconds B 5 - 15 seconds C 15 - 25 seconds D 25 - 40 seconds E 40 - 60 seconds F Greater than 60 sec. Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Total Delay (Seconds per vehicle) A Under 5 seconds B 5 - 10 seconds C 10 - 20 seconds D 20 - 30 seconds E 30 - 45 seconds F Greater than 45 sec. Conceptual Driveway Design Figure 6 on page 12 was derived on the basis of current observations of peak hour traffic at the ARCO gas station and -14- Christopher Brown Cn Associates 9688 12ainier Ave. 8. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 mini -mart. During the peak hour demand for both gas pumps and access to the store was sufficient that on-site queuing prevented inbound traffic, particularly from the west, from using the regular gas station driveway. Often, these drivers by-passed this access in favor of the driveway further east. When the normal ARCO driveway was plugged, the eastern driveway provided a convenient alternative access. Furthermore, the more eastern driveway allowed these drivers to form queues facing west. Similarly, this driveway also allowed some to by-pass the pumps and drive around the back of the gas station to avoid congestion in the front of the mini -mart. At times, drivers also pulled up to the two telephone kiosks and parallel parked at the kiosks. This kind of parking between two closely spaced driveways is not conducive to safe operations. Conflicts between motorists destined to either the ARCO site or to the North Hill Apartments did not appear to be significant. This is because the apartments are not a significant traffic generator. More germane, entering traffic speeds are low and visibility is open so conflicts are avoided. Because of the periodic congestion at the regular ARCO (east) driveway, the conceptual design as derived with combined ARCO, North Hill Apartments, and Van Gard mini -storage p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. Note that the p.m. peak hour volumes for the latter site are based on the ITE data of Table I. The basic driveway design parameters assume two, separate outbound traffic lanes so that left and right turn movements can function independently. Further, minimum storage for the exit lanes is at least 30 feet in length behind the curb face. This will allow storage for at least one vehicle behind the sidewalk. In addition, the entry lane should be at least 13 feet in width. This will allow more convenient access when the ARCO station is being refueled by tanker tractor -trailer rigs as well as provide a more visually acceptable entrance for motorists. As a part of the design it is also assumed that the telephone kiosks are removed. With the ARCO station and mini -mart congested during the p.m. peak hour this kind of ancillary site usage is inappropriate at or near any driveway. Finally, it should be well noted that the conceptual design is not a result of the traffic imposed by the Van Gard mini - storage facility. It is a consequence of existing traffic operations. -15- Christopher brown fn Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 Accidents Accident data was provided by the Department of Public Works extending from 1995 to about half way through 1999 - the time when complete files were available from the WSP records center. The total accident data shows the following. o 56 intersection accidents at 61st Ave. S. o 32 intersection accidents at Macadam Road S. o 51 mid -block accidents between 61st & Macadam Rd. Over the time interval for which accident records are available the annual average accident rate was computed at: o 51/12.603 million vehicle miles of travel. With an annual accident rate of 4.05/MVM, and contrasting this against the typical rate for all state highways in King County of 2.27/MVM, it would appear that the mid -block accident rate is somewhat higher then might be expected. However, from the data at the 61st Avenue S. signal it was noted that the following accident types prevailed on its west leg. Rear end accidents Sideswipe accidents Angle type accidents 94 percent 3 percent 3 percent At the Macadam Road intersection, for its east leg at least 100 feet away, that is not at the intersection per se but rather as a mid -block type, there were 26 accidents with the following classes. Rear end accidents Sideswipe accidents Angle type accidents 54 percent 12 percent 35 percent The difference in the angle type of mid -block accidents that show up on the Macadam Road record versus 61st Avenue S. is, most likely, associated with its proximate driveways, namely the Denny's/shared ARCO station mini -mart west driveway. Christopher Brown CSS Associates -16- 9688 ]2ainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 • • The reason for the higher incidence may be due to the respective volumes in addition to their proximity to each other. For example, consider the following. TABLE VII Current Volumes by Driveway Time Dennys/ARCO ARCO North Hill Apts. A.M. 37 60 14 veh./hour Noon 143 58 27 veh./hour P.M. 87 64 28 veh./hour More precise analyses is not possible without more detailed accident descriptions. For example, while the accident data for each incident indicates "Right Angle" or "Approach Turn" it does not indicate who hit whom or what the respective directions of travel were of those involved. For vehicles leaving the site, were they turning left or right? Nonetheless, based on the volumes alone, as shown in Table VII, there is no doubt that the proposed site access driveway, with its historically lower volumes, is probably far better suited for access if the site driveway is not reconfigured. With a reconfigured access design, especially one that allows separate left and right exit turns, and also removes queuing traffic from close proximity to the ARCO gas pumps and store, it is possible that there may be a reduction in access -involved accidents. However, before any conclusions can be made in this regard it is first necessary to separate accidents that are random from those that are non- random at a pre -defined probability level. Channelization/Riqht Turn Only Lanes A review of the WSDOT Design Manual, Figure 910-11, Right -Turn Guidelines, indicates that the volume of right turning traffic at the proposed re -configured access driveway serving not only -17- Christopher brown fn A& ociates 9688 Rainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 the combined ARCO and North Hill Apartments traffic but also the ITE generated Van Gard mini -storage p.m. peak hour traffic will be some 81 vehicles per hour. This volume of right turning traffic is high enough to push the recommended right turn lane guidelines above the "Pocket" design and into a regular "Right Turn Lane" design. Of some concern, the latter design includes a 50 foot long taper section and a full width 150 foot long right turn lane. This is shown on the WSDOT Design Manual, Figure 910-12b, Right -Turn Lane, in the Appendix. Since the combined traffic volumes of the ARCO gas station and mini -mart along with the North Hill Apartments and Van Gard mini -storage are significantly high, enough so to suggest the construction of a standard right turn lane with taper covering 200 lineal feet of Southcenter Boulevard, a second alternative may be considered. This is described in the next section. Alternative Access Design Considering that the major traffic generator in the immediate area is the ARCO gas station and mini -mart and that its peak hour traffic is of concern with respect to traffic operations and possibly traffic safety, the removal of that traffic from the proposed access driveway serving the North Hill Apartments and Van Gard mini -storage will remove internal conflicts and, at the same time, eliminate the need for both the above referenced Right -Turn Lane and Right Turn Pocket. An alternative design to prevent traffic congestion and/or conflicts is a recognized traffic mitigation measure. Figure 7, Access Design for Limited Traffic, is similar to the design shown on Figure 6, page 12, with the notable exception being the construction of a barrier segregating ARCO site traffic from the North Hill Apartments and Van Gard mini -storage traffic. By segregating ARCO traffic from the other two land uses the volume of right turning traffic is reduced and, in turn, the necessity for a Right -Turn Lane or a Right Turn Pocket is eliminated since the access volume is about 70 percent of the required threshold volume. As shown in the Appendix and described next, the LOS on this driveway is similarly improved. -18- *Li Christopher brown (S Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. (Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 FIGURE 7 Access Design for Limited Traffic —19— Chri8topher brown (S ABsociate8 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. Seattle. WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 fax (206) 722-1909 • • LOS, Limited Access Design Alternative By eliminating access between the ARCO site and the North Hill Apartments and Van Gard mini -storage sites by means of a positive barrier, perhaps a low, emergency vehicle access mountable but landscaped barrier, traffic volumes will be significantly reduced. The design hourly volumes shown on Figure 7 apply to such a design. With no necessity for a Right -Turn Lane or a Right Turn Pocket but with a design wide enough to segregate exiting right and left turning traffic, there are enhanced levels of service. These are shown below. TABLE VII Limited Access Driveway Levels of Service Driveway & Channelization LOS Average Delay Southbound Left Turn F <45 seconds Southbound Right Turn B 9.5 seconds Eastbound Left Turn E 34.0 seconds The overall intersection LOS is within the 'B' range. Only the outbound left turn movement is shown at LOS 'F' but the presence of gaps within the traffic stream against such a small volume does not suggest untoward traffic operations. Delay for his movement applies only to the exiting movement and any queuing that results will be on site. Further, with a separate right turn lane that will not inhibit exiting left turning traffic. Recommendation While it is recognized that the combined traffic movements for the ARCO gas station and mini -mart site along with the North -20- Christopher brown Cn ABsociate8 9688 Rainier Ave. 8. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 • Hill Apartments and Van Gard mini -storage site, in concert with the elimination the existing (east) ARCO driveway, may lead to improved arterial traffic characteristics, there are judicial restraints that would impede such a construction program. The improvement of another party's access at the sole cost of this developer is likely fraught with issues of equity. The primary beneficiary of such a design, as shown on Figure 6, page 12, is the ARCO gas station and mini -mart site. This is the dominant traffic generator and the site whose traffic has also been observed using the existing North Hill Apartments driveway. The ARCO site is also the main traffic contributor that pushes the implementation of a Right -Turn Lane per the WSDOT Design Manual, Figure 910-12b. The first recommendation would clearly involve discussions with the regional office of ARCO to see if their support could be gained for such a design/improvement program. The design would include the following key elements. o Construction of a full right turn lane. o Construction of an enhanced driveway serving all three sites. o Removal or relocation of the 2 telephone kiosks away from the driveway. o Possible relocation of the ARCO sign and site lighting. To assist in obtaining an affirmative response and participation in the project the city may wish to advise ARCO that their east driveway will be limited to Right Turn In and Right Turn Out .(RI/RO) only. This would be accomplished under the city's police powers. In the interim, and to allow the Van Gard mini -storage site to move ahead, immediately adopt the design concept of Figure 7, page 19, using the internal landscaped barrier to prevent the mixing of ARCO site related traffic with Van Gard mini -storage site and North Hill Apartments traffic. By doing this the project will not be faced with unnecessary delays. Conclusions With the implementation of the Gencor-Friedmen Development -21- Christopher Brown CS Associates 9688 rainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 • Company's 590 unit mini -warehouse the following conclusions may be drawn. 1. The project will generate about 165 vehicular trips per day with about 12 of these being in the morning peak hour and 18 during the p.m. peak hour according to national ITE standards. 2. About 71 percent of the site's traffic will be oriented to the west, some 11 percent over the 61st Avenue S. bridge, 15 percent to Grady Way, and the balance locally to the north and northeast. 3. The signalized intersections at 61st Avenue S. and Macadam Road on Southcenter Boulevard have adequate levels of service with current signal phasing and with 5 second yellow + all -red intervals. 4. The maximum queue length extending westward from 61st Avenue S. is about 517 feet while the queue extending eastward from Macadam Road is about 527 feet. 5. The Highway Capacity Manual does not recognize arterial levels of service between closely spaced signalized intersections. 6. Over the p.m. peak hour there are about 90 acceptable gaps in the 6.0 to 6.5 second range at the site. 7. In practice the selection of a minimum gap acceptance of 5.5 seconds for the left turn movement at a driveway served by a center 2WLTL is common practice. 8. During the p.m. peak hour about 37 vehicles per hour use the North Hills Apartments driveway to gain access to the ARCO site. This is about 30 percent of its demand from the eastern side of the site. 9. Due to the close juxtaposition of the ARCO and North Hills Apartments driveways there is some conflict between their respective turning movements. No clearly defined hazard relationship has been computed. 10. Accidents on Southcenter Boulevard appear to exceed the average rates published by WSDOT, 4.05/mvm versus the county's average of 2.27/mvm. -22- Christopher brown Cn Associates 9688 12ainier Ave. 8. \` Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909} 11. The higher incidence of driveway accidents appears to be a function of driveway volume which tend to suggest the shared Denny's/ARCO driveway may have the higher experience. 12. More precise cause and effect relationships are not possible with the data on hand since no information is available on directions of travel of those involved. 13. There is a marked shift in the kinds of accidents when comparing the 61st Avenue S. signal versus the Macadam Road signal. The former has a very high percent of rear end accidents while the latter has a significant number associated with angle types. 14. Recognizing that certain efficiencies are possible by combing the existing ARCO and North Hills Apartments driveways a schematic design was.produced along with a traffic forecast. 15. A combined driveway per §14 above would in turn warrant a Right Turn Lane on Southcenter Boulevard. The lane would include a taper of 50 feet and full lane width for 150 feet. 16. The combined driveway would include separate outbound left and right turn lanes with clear storage behind the sidewalk for a single vehicle and a 13 foot wide inbound lane. The design would also remove or relocate two existing telephone kiosks. 17. The level of service for such a combined driveway with the RTO lane on Southcenter Boulevard would be: LOS F for the southbound left turn LOS B for the southbound right turn LOS F for the eastbound left turn 18. While the combining of two driveways leads to some efficiencies by removing conflicts near the arterial it may not be financially feasible or lawfully possible. 19. An interim solution would include a new driveway serving the proposed Van Gard mini -storage site and North Hill Apartments designed with the same geometry as noted in §16 above and incorporate a barrier between these uses and the ARCO site. -23- ii Christopher brown CS Associates 9688 Rainier Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909 0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS • APPENDIX Table of Contents Site Plan 1. DPW Average Weekday Traffic Counts 2. Current 61st Avenue S. Peak Hour Counts 5. Current Macadam Road Peak Hour Counts 6. Driveways - 4:15 - 5:15 Peak Hour Volume 7. Driveways - 4:00 - 4:15 Peak Hour Volume 8. Driveways - 4:15 - 4:30 Peak Hour Volume 9. Driveways - 4:30 - 4:45 Peak Hour Volume 10. Driveways - 4:45 - 5:00 Peak Hour Volume 11. Driveways - 5:00 - 5:15 Peak Hour Volume 12. Driveways - 5:15 - 5:30 Peak Hour Volume 13. Accident Data 14. Right Turn Guidelines, Combined Driveway Traffic 22. Right Turn Lane Design 23. Right Trun Guidelines, Site & Apt. Driveway 24. Level of Service Computations 25. Current P.M. LOS 25. Southcenter Blvd./61st Ave. S. 28. Southcenter Blvd./Macadam Road P.M. LOS with Mini -storage 31. ARCO/Site/N. Hill Apts. Comb. Driveway W/O RTO 34. ARCO/Site/N. Hill Apts. Comb. Driveway W/RTO 37. Site & N. Hill Apts. Only, Driveway W/0 RTO STO-C3P STO-C3P STOR-P2PCNR.HCO STOR-P2PC.HCO STOR-P2MA.HCO ii Christopher brown Cn Associates 9688 12ainier Ave. S. \\ Seattle, WA 98118-5981 (206) 722-1910 Fax (206) 722-1909} -O EXISTING GONG O 1 a EXISTING FIRST HILL APAR, EXISTING EASEMENTS TO BE RELEASED \ LIMITS ZONING EXISTING WOOD FENCE EXISTING TREES VEGITATED HILLSIDE TO /SEE CIVIL I/1 REMAIN UNDISTURBED 0 0 4r" .REMOVE• EXISTING ROCKERY J X 121 X 2 X Lu RAISED ASPH OH PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY W/ PAINTED STRIPES 3 STORY MINI STORAGE 3 FLRS • 2 BSMTS AT 15000 = 15000 SF 52000 SF N = 590 UNITS./ - C.0 COE550O FOR W AI CONDITIONER A OFFICE Y EASEMENT ,5, EGRESS 4 UTILI 31' EXISTING NID FFENGE m J 0 ASPH FEATHER I0• S a SITE PLAN SCALE I"=20' Fk/Sr/A� DRQ 7' is, \\ FR 8 EXISTING TREE RET WALL DUMPSTER ENCLO W/ GONG FLR RET WALL NEW LANDSCAPING • Location : Southcenter Blvd w/o 61st Brdg City : Tukwila, WA Counter : 11 a1 W13 tri Lombined Day: I hursday b..h AM PM AM PM AM PM Traffic Data Gathering 11410 13th Stree SE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 • Site: Date: 99-101-03 12/16/99 12:00 48 149 335 1,480 28 88 523 2,009 76 237 858 3,489 12:15 45 370 26 488 71 858 12:30 42 386 18 493 60 879 12:45 14 389 16 505 30 894 01:00 24 85 386 1,482 22 76 428 1,828 46 161 814 3,310 01:15 25 364 18 438 43 802 01:30 20 370 9 513 29 883 01:45 16 362 27 449 43 811 02:00 17 53 386 1,606 9 42 458 1,757 26 95 844 3,363 02:15 12 409 9 428 21 837 02:30 12 404 8 438 20 842 02:45 12 407 16 433 28 840 03:00 12 37 402 1,664 9 51 442 1,924 21 88 844 3,588 03:15 12 405 12 500 24 905 03:30 8 428 14 468 22 896 03:45 5 429 16 514 21 943 04:00 17 61 484 1,832 14 117 532 2,079 31 178 1,016 3,911 04:15 13 439 23 488 36 927 04:30 19 456 42 550 61 1,006 04:45 12 453 38 509 50 962 05:00 15 150 472 1,794 42 ,312 532 2,136 57 462 1,004 3,930 05:15 39 450 51 528 90 978 05:30 44 450 93 566 137 1,016 05:45 52 422 126 510 178 932 i 00 58 380 377 1,366 111 647 522 1,849 169 1,027 899 3,215 66:15 94 340 143 464 237 804 06:30 100 334 188 436 288 770 06:45 128 315 205 427 333 742 07:00 118 563 310 1,154 174 993 382 1,465 292 1,556 692 2,619 07:15 130 298 238 395 368 693 07:30 166 276 257 368 423 644 07:45 149 270 324 320 473 590 08:00 157 621 266 1,091 264 1,129 288 928 421 1,750 554 2,019 08:15 168 283 274 230 442 513 08:30 146 253 253 206 399 459 08:45 150 289 338 204 488 493 09:00 167 741 250 960 316 1,320 172 618 483 2,061 422 1,578 09:15 170 249 316 165 486 414 09:30 190 220 298 155 488 375 09:45 214 241 390 126 604 367 10:00 186 892 229 724 376 1,543 122 365 562 2,435 351 1,089 10:15 232 170 365 100 597 270 10:30 238 146 418 75 656 221 10:45 236 179 384 68 620 247 11:00 260 1,102 158 425 391 1,908 68 205 651 3,010 226 630 11:15 278 119 524 55 802 174 11:30 298 82 476 44 774 126 11:45 266 66 517 38 783 104 Totals - 4,834- 15,78 8:226- 177 1-63 - -13 060 - -_ _ 32T41 - `-- S" '% 37.0 47.6 63.0 52.4 r rig., Totals 20,412 Day Splits 44.6 55.4 25,389 45,801 Peak Hour 11:00 04:00 11:00 05:00 11:00 04:45 Volume 1,102 1,832 1,908 2.136 3,010 3,960 Factor 0.92 0.95 0.91 0.94 0.94 0.97 Data i e : LOLU3 --Page : l • Location : Southcenter Blvd w/o 61st Brdg City : Tukwila, WA Counter : 11 Traffic Data Gathering 11410 - 13th Street SE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 lo�erval w13 tB EZ.;) AM PM AM PM AM PM =z:00 18 60 282 1,115 18 63 316 1,210 36 123 598 2,325 12:15 14 281 14 287 28 568 12:30 10 258 14 308 24 566 12:45 18 294 17 299 35 593 01:00 10 35 289 1,196 13 37 291 1,120 23 72 580 2,316 01:15 8 279 5 259 13 538 01:30 8 292 13 282 21 574 01:45 9 336 6 288 15 624 02:00 10 42 300 1,368 6 58 279 1,286 16 100 579 2,654 02:15 13 388 14 310 27 698 02:30 10 336 19 345 29 681 02:45 9 344 19 352 28 696 03:00 10 61 360 1,475 23 118 325 1,429 33 179 685 2,904 03:15 13 368 24 348 37 716 03:30 17 351 33 390 50 741 03:45 21 396 38 366 59 762 04:00 21 133 365 1,334 42 306 375 1,439 63 439 740 2,773 04:15 37 348 66 365 103 713 04:30 39 312 113 381 152 693 04:45 36 309 85 318 121 627 05:00 66 299 244 1,025 129 610 260 1,099 195 909 504 2,124 05:15 60 278 133 307 193 585 05:30 85 251 184 269 269 520 05:45 88 252 164 263 252 515 ^5:00 89 443 212 833 178 806 240 848 267 1,249 452 1,681 .15 112 200 185 213 297 413 06:30 121 199 254 213 375 412 06:45 121 222 189 182 310 404 07:00 111 496 194 776 165 774 163 556 276 1,270 357 1,332 07:15 125 199 202 150 327 349 07:30 122 193 206 141 328 334 07:45 138 190 201 102 339 292 08:00 116 510 188 645 190 906 84 315 306 1,416 272 960 08:15 135 186 222 97 357 283 08:30 123 137 255 64 378 201 08:45 136 134 239 70 375 204 09:00 154 712 73 253 244 1,114 47 185 398 1,826 120 438 09:15 173 78 256 58 429 136 09:30 176 54 302 47 478 101 09:45 209 48 312 33 521 81 10:00 207 938 50 158 330 1,332 48 124 537 2,270 98 282 10:15 222 47 346 26 568 73 10:30 243 29 324 28 567 57 10:45 266 32 332 22 598 54 11:00 265 1,101 28 94 331 1,270 30 75 596 2,371 58 169 11:15 269 18 306 10 575 28 11:30 277 28 319 20 596 48 11:45 290 20 314 15 604 35 Totals 4,830- 10,2/2 /,594 -9.:68-6- 12,224- 19,9.)8 Split% 39.5 51.5 60.5 48.5 • Site: 99-101-03 Date: 07/15/99 Lombined Day: 1 hursday (. fotals bay Splits 15,102 17,080 32,182 46.9 53.1 Peak Hour 11:00 03:15 10:15 03:30 11:00 03:15 Volume 1,101 1,480 1,333 1,496 2,371 2,959 Factor 0.95 0.93 0.96 0.96 0.98 0.97 "-Data File : LOC3- --Printed : 7/29/99 -- -Page : 1 : JANUS File: 99101001 & 99101011 Site Code: 99-101-001 Start Date: 11/22/99 Start Time: 0:00 Location: 61st Avenue Bridge Counters: 11 & 30 Date Interval Combined Interval Combined Begin AM Begin PM 11/22/99 0:00:00 35 89 12:00:00 613 2488 11/22/99 0:15:00 25 12:15:00 565 11/22/99 0:30:00 20 12:30:00 634 11/22/99 0:45:00 9 12:45:00 676 11/22/99 1:00:00 14 54 13:00:00 632 2378 11/22/99 1:15:00 9 13:15:00 610 11/22/99 1:30:00 11 13:30:00 604 11/22/99 1:45:00 20 13:45:00 532 11/22/99 2:00:00 13 52 14:00:00 528 2239 11/22/99 2:15:00 22 14:15:00 519 11/22/99 2:30:00 4 14:30:00 597 11/22/99 2:45:00 13 14:45:00 595 11/22/99 3:00:00 16 60 15:00:00 582 2379 11/22/99 3:15:00 12 15:15:00 590 11/22/99 3:30:00 19 15:30:00 601 11/22/99 3:45:00 13 15:45:00 606 11/22/99 4:00:00 16 90 16:00:00 635 2492 11/22/99 4:15:00 17 16:15:00 593 11/22/99 4:30:00 20 16:30:00 617 11/22/99 4:45:00 37 16:45:00 647 11/22/99 5:00:00 26 295 17:00:00 653 2479 11/22/99 5:15:00 62 17:15:00 655 11/22/99 5:30:00 90 17:30:00 593 11/22/99 5:45:00 117 17:45:00 578 11/22/99 6:00:00 112 647 18:00:00 552 2069 11/22/99 6:15:00 139 18:15:00 561 11/22/99 6:30:00 168 18:30:00 476 11/22/99 6:45:00 228 18:45:00 480 11/22/99 7:00:00 199 1043 19:00:00 442 1596 11/22/99 7:15:00 260 19:15:00 388 11/22/99 7:30:00 236 19:30:00 394 11/22/99 7:45:00 348 19:45:00 372 11/22/99 8:00:00 280 1098 20:00:00 331 1152 11/22/99 8:15:00 261 20:15:00 286 11/22/99 8:30:00 264 20:30:00 305 11/22/99 8:45:00 293 20:45:00 230 11/22/99 9:00:00 268 1338 21:00:00 266 920 11/22/99 9:15:00 311 21:15:00 230 11/22/99 9:30:00 377 21:30:00 237 11/22/99 9:45:00 382 21:45:00 187 11/22/99 10:00:00 424 1753 22:00:00 146 391 11/22/99 10:15:00 433 22:15:00 77 11/22/99 10:30:00 444 22:30:00 98 11/22/99 10:45:00 452 22:45:00 70 11/22/99 11:00:00 508 2334 23:00:00 78 197 11/22/99 11:15:00 583 23:15:00 43 11/22/99 11:30:00 592 23:30:00 42 11/22/99 11:45:00 651 23:45:00 34 Page #: 1 of 7 Day Totals: 8,853 20,780 TOTAL DAY: 29,633 Day Splits: 29.9% 70.1% Peak Hour: 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM 4:30 - 5:30 PM Volume: 2,334 2,572 Factor: 0.90 0.98 T RAF F I C VOLUME SUMMAR`f r7w.uJ&'_T / j•mi..f - ,5 OATF .2S'v, / 2C(2' DAY _/ti c INTERSECT ICN CF: ANO ja'r v/c_ .5— T S T IME TO tet) P= PEAK HOU R TIME L 5 40, -tel/f 1 •/,--2(7` 1 a s Fri LI sit L 1 I I 1 1 1 /0/I /egg 1 /' /5) 11 ^i/ 1 18 /c%Y 2/V 1 /5- I /// 1121 1 . /2 I /y'/ /c2 ,2TPI M- 168 2y$ 2.?- 1 /Fill /5S i- 1 I ( I 2 I c T2s 1 p 575- i=.5n,(6?) I /27'7'1 12/ I, I I '.F3 I I 1I 1 1 I I /i /IiI 1-'1 I I� I 1 210101 19I • TOTALS 1 ' I% of 7OTALI 1 TRAFFLC VOLUME SiJM =R7 INTERSECTION DATE T 1M E �e) TO DAY Or/ OF: fl/I aCCCb/V A N D ,faaJ"i7/(201 P=: PEAK HOUR TIME L S pis ,tiJGr--*n .tC r;G RILIS R S v14� tcs:rc: 1 c P+n ; L i 5 I R �a4 14/3= 5Y) 140 1 15,6'1,y1 Igo I //0 50 I •GP 4/ I 1701 179V-1 /15-1 • ?2 I I 'D eel ilfe- 0 t797/1- //f A091 1 1//I I /Z1M z/ 1 /y o 6 I /040 22's I ; /0928 // f/2 ,z-1- • 7z 101 5(r s o Z s6f, Rsmis TIME INTERVAL Start' SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD End February 1, 2000 Tuesday ) Apartments Access Drive C /////// / //////� ARCO Mini -Mart • • 24'9 I(*k, ‘JeJ TIME INTERVAL UD Start • Erid SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD 2 2 0' [?1t?i February 1, 2000 Tuesday [V Apartments Access Drive C ) / /////// / /////// ARCO Mini -Mart • ▪ G3 1/4° - o • • p 700 N ti • 7 O� p, N1/4Uc " n /"C- TIME STIME INTERVAL Start End— February 1, 2000 Tuesday SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD • Apartments Access Drive C C ) q ;/////// / /////// ARCO Mini -Mart /3 g. a � o �"�-o P .7) -0 E '0 . Q O� 0' �nj N '- g 0 G. C:„.„ „ell RJ TIME INTERVAL Start* SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD ys End February 1, 2000 Tuesday 6 3 D � � Apartments Access Drive C J C > /////////////// ARCO Mini -Mart • yS TIME INTERVAL Start' SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD End February 1, 2000 Tuesday • Apartments Access Drive 3- C ) C ) //////////////// ARCO Mini -Mart 1/ 0l7 TIME INTERVAL Start %=5-7 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD End February 1, 2000 Tuesday • • Apartments Access Drive c C //////// /////// ARCO Mini -Mart • Z D V • S— _ JPO TIME INTERVAL Start .� SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD 2 H < > End J February 1, 2000 Tuesday D Apartments Access Drive B / /////// / //////✓ ARCO Mini -Mart 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1/21/00 _i?: _, Ori ii i;iHj4: it:i RefStreet lt' aseNii ateOfC- ;ti j€r: a'°` �C p :��, i� _,i% LocDesc ...�;;:►;;.If;;n„elM.Ty . eOfCollfslorr iSa'm:OfPDOISum:OfNuiiiliifiSuiil 0 Ot NumFat 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV '957159 7/20/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV '958438 8/23/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Right Angle -1 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 951590 11/24/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV :Right Angle -1 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !SOUTHCENTER BLV 951554 11/24/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Sideswipe -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV 965563 6/30/96'61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV :Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV '966892 8/13/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Approach Tum' -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV :968352 • 9/20/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV 968782 10/11/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Right Angle -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV :968857 . 10/13/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV .969073 10/21/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 9610739 ! 12/9/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Approach Tum 0 3 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV .970512 1/16/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Approach Tum 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV .971387 , 2/13/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 973158 ' 4/10/9761 AVE S (S -LINE), 40 FT S of SOUTHCEN !Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;SOUTHCENTER BLV 973503 4/22/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV '973760 4/30/97.61 AVE S (S -LINE), 10 FT S of SOUTHCEN !Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV .973931 5/6/9761 AVE S (S -LINE), 75 FT S of SOUTHCEN !Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV .974626 5/29/97.61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV !9707931 9/16/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV iApproach Tum 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !SOUTHCENTER BLV 977931 ' 9/16/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV iApproach Tum -1 0, 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV .979008 10/21/97,61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV iRight Angle -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV '9709031: 10/22/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV 979031 ; 10/22/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV '.Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 9709230 110/28/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV ;Rear End 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) .SOUTHCENTER BLV 979230 10/28/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV ;9709308 10/31/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV iRear End 0 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :SOUTHCENTER BLV ;979308 10/31/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 970052 11/22/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S-LINE).SOUTHCENTER BLV 970481 12/5/9761 AVE S (S -LINE), 50 FT S of SOUTHCEN :Sideswipe -1' 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV .970850 12/15/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Approach Tum -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 9800756 1/24/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved 0 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 992607 3/31/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV •Rear End -1' 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 983561 4/23/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Sideswipe -1 0. 0 Page 1 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1/21/00 ., . tfinn l)) 1l jf5s 1 -dk 1!RefStreet '.y; rlil ICaseNu',pateOfC l: s:; i;l i - F.::.:.: j i LocDesc '3.3,' t,14.4:,;;:e;TypelDfCollision ii ;{Sum Of P.DOISum"Of Niiminj iSum-Of NumFat 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV ,9803735 4/29/98:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 01 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER BLV 983835 5/2/9861 AVE S (S -LINE), 750 ft. S of SOUTHCEN Sideswipe 1 -11 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 9806876 8/11/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 0. 1! 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !SOUTHCENTER BLV 9807885 9/15/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 0! 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV '988599 10/8/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Other 1 01 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER BLV ;988734 10/12/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Right Angle 01 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !SOUTHCENTER BLV '989491 11/6/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 0' 1! 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) iSOUTHCENTER BLV ;9810186 11/29/98,61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 01 0', -1j 0, 11 0; 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 9810430 12/7/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV ;Fixed Object/Parked Vehicll 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 9810566 12/11/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Fixed Object/Parked Vehiclj 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 19810986 12/26/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End 01 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;SOUTHCENTER BLV 1499522 1/18/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 01 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV '990837 1/30/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Right Angle -11 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) jSOUTHCENTER BLV :9901339 2/18/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 1 01 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 19901514 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 993619 2/24/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Right Angle 4/5/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV ;Rear End 1 I j -11 01 01 -11 0 -11 0! 11 0' 0: 1; 0! 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER BLV •9903394 4/26/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Sideswipe 1SOUTHCENTER BLV ;9934715/1/99!61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 1,994014 1 5/22/99;61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Rear End 6/25/99161 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV :Rear End 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV ;994918 1 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER BLV 1997485 9/22/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Sideswipe 01 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER BLV 1997683 9/29/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 01 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 19907861 1 10/5/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE), 75 ft. SOUTHCENTER .Rear End 01 1! 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 998044 1 10/11/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Rear End 01 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BLV 998311 j 10/23/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV !Approach Tum 01 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ,SOUTHCENTER BLV 9909639 ; 12/9/99':61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV :Approach Tum 01 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER BLV !999709 1 12/11/99'61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV 'Right Angle 0! 0! 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER BLV 1999788 12/14/99;61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 01 01 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;SOUTHCENTER BLV 9910091 12/24/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER BLV Right Angle 01 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER PKW 1961512 I. 2/16/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER PKWApproach Tum -11 -11 0; 01 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'SOUTHCENTER PKW 961757 2/24/96:61 AVE S (S -LINE), 40 FT W of SOUTHCEN Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl1 61 PVE S (S -LINE) ISOUTHCENTER PKW '962362 i 3/13/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER PKWApproach Tum 1 01 11 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1SOUTHCENTER PKW ;9710052 1 11/22/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER PKWRight Angle 1 01 01 0 Page 2 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1/21/00 x . -Eri; Ori.i + ;-1 I i RefStreet i ICaseNu IDateOfC.fit? (F I:j ;. c ,,; L"ocDesc,_.#i` lili ;ndfai :TypeOfCollision (Sum'Of;P.DO Sum.Of Numinj Sum Of NumFat 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;SOUTHCENTER PKW ;992011 ; 3/12/99;61 AVE S ;S -LINE) at SOUTHCENTER PKWRight Angle -1 0; 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) SR 181 !9902534 i 3/29/99;61 AVE S (S -LINE) at SR 181 Sideswipe -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !STRANDER BLVD 1951504 ' 11/22/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at STRANDER BLVD Approach Tum -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) STRANDER BLVD 19909799 ' 12/15/99:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at STRANDER BLVD !Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;TUKWILA PKWY ;957201 ; 7/21/95161 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY (Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1959072 ' 9/12/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY ;Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !TUKWILA PKWY j950544 10/25/95(61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY 1951621 : 11/25/9561 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1963449 ; 4/17/9661 AVE S (S -LINE), 100 FT N of TUKWILA PIRear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY 1966157 7/20/96(61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Right Angle -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !TUKWILA PKWY 1966773 8/9/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !Approach Tum 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1967613 9/4/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !Rear End 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;TUKWILA PKWY 1968540 10/4/9661 AVE S (S -LINE), 25 FT N of TUKWILA P iRear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !TUKWILA PKWY 19611058 12/18/9661 AVE S (S -LINE), 15 FT N of TUKWILA P !Backing -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1972761 ! 3/28/97161 AVE S (S -LINE), 30 FT N of TUKWILA P Rear End 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1973879 5/4/97161 AVE S (S -LINE), 100 FT S of TUKWILA PIRear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1974770 6/3/97:61 AVE S (S -LINE), 500 FT N of TUKWILA P(Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY :975585 7/1/97161 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY Approach Tum -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1977295 8/27/9761 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1977653 9/7/97:61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY 1979833 11/16/97161 AVE S (S -LINE), 30 FT E of TUKWILA PK'Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1TUKWILA PKWY 19802711 3/26/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY iRear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1983606 4/24/98'61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY :Rear End 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) (TUKWILA PKWY 1984502 1985369 5/24/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY .Sideswipe 6/20/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY ,Sideswipe 0 -1 0 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !TUKWILA PKWY 1986058 7/14/9661 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1986611 8/1/98.61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Right Angle 0! 1' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY :9807022 8/16/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY Rear End -1. 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 987023 . 8/16/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY 9810802 12/18/9861 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY Sideswipe -1 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY :993497 5/2/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End 0 1, 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1994811 6/21/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY :Right Angle -1 0' 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY '995520 7/17/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY :Backing -1 0 0 Page 3 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1/21/00 lit!: Oniia: �4 I. i-:1:4;:IJ ; RefStreetir-V- PaseNu. IDateOfC i::l tiri <t[ :. LocDesc' :i 4j .I.lifCi 1J '='.i TypeOfCollisioi tlaiSum;OfpDO Sum Of NumInJISum Of NumFat 61 AVE S (S -LINE) iTUKWILA PKWY 19906236 8/11/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !!Approach Tum 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ITUKWILA PKWY !990676 8/29/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;TUKWILA PKWY :997016 9/6/99'61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Rear End 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'TUKWILA PKWY '9907451 9/21/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY 'Approach Tum 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :TUKWILA PKWY 1997579 ' 9/25/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !Rear End 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1997720 ' 9/30/99'61 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY iRear End 0 0 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 997760 : 10/1/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY !Right Angle 0 1 0 61 AVE S (S -LINE) TUKWILA PKWY 1998422 10/25/9961 AVE S (S -LINE) at TUKWILA PKWY :Sideswipe 0 0 0 PACIFIC HWY SO. X61 AVE S (S -LINE) '9900245 ; 1/8/99 PACIFIC HWY SO., 150 ft. E of 61 AVE S (S !Approach Tum 0 1 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 960428 1/14/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT W of 61 AV (Rear End 0 2 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 1.61 AVE S (S -LINE) '961977 3/1/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 250 FT W of 61 AV !Approach Tum -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :963301 4/13/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 FT W of 61 AV 'Rear End 0 2 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) '964137 5/11/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 100 FT W of 61 AV !Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1964326 5/18/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 FT W of 61 AV !Rear End 0 3 0 SOUTHCENTER BL .61 AVE S (S -LINE) :967354 8/27/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 FT W of 61 AV (Rear End 0 2 0 SOUTHCENTER BL .61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1967427 8/29/96SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 FT E of 61 AVEIRear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) !968853 10113/96'SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 75 FT W of 61 AVE (Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1969297 10/22/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 20 FT W of 61 AVE !Rear End 0 1 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) :969854 11/12/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT W of 61 AV (Rear End 0 1' 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1969985 11/16/96SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 1000 FT W of 61 A !Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 9610015 11/17/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 1000 FT W of 61 A !Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 19610252 ' 11/24/96'SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 FT W of 61 AV ;Rear End 0 3 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 971365 , 2/12/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 250 FT W of 61 AV :Sideswipe -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL `61 AVE S (S -LINE) :971481 i 2/16/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 FT W of 61 AV :Rear End -1 -1 0; 0 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL :61 AVE S (S -LINE) ,971963 i 2/22/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 20 FT W of 61 AVE Rear End SOUTHCENTER BL 161 AVE S (S -LINE) 971788 2/26/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 FT W of 61 AV iRear End -1 0; 0 SOUTHCENTER BL :61 AVE S (S -LINE) 972051 3/6/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 100 FT W of 61 AV 'Rear End -1 0; 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;973425 4/19/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 FT W of 61 AV ;Rear End 0 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL .61 AVE S (S -LINE) :973518 4/22/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT W of 61 AV :Rear End 0 1! 0 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 974462 5/24/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 5000 FT W of 61 A 'Rear End -1 0 01 01 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;9711140 12/23/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 ft. 61 AVE S (S -:Rear End SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) '971140 12/23/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 FT W of 61 AV !Rear End -1 0 0� 0 1! 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) .9802134 3/9/98 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 ft. W of 61 AVEIRear End Page 4 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ' ..:.:,On ,}__;_1:=iz, RefStreet _ ICaseNu •pateOfC I p i..,:IEi':ir; ii : i,LocDesc 3 � 1.'_.,-#.e:i-r:_!..1,:' TypeOfColllslon =llaiSui 'Of PDO]Sum Of NuminjISum Of NumFat SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) .98004024: 5/9/98SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 30000 ft. W of 61 A Rear End -1i 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ,9805242 6/16/98SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 5280 ft. W of 61 AV Rear End 01 1! 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 989312 11/1/98 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End O 1i 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 991839 3/7/99SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 ft. W of 61 AVE Rear End -1! 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;9903051 4/16/99 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 900 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End 0: 1! 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 1998043 10/11/99SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 100 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End 1998810 11/8/99SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End 0: 0; 1! 0! 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL '61 AVE S (S -LINE) SOUTHCENTER BL 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 9908920 11/13/991SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End 0: 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL ;61 AVE S (S -LINE) 999716 12/12/99SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 ft. 61 AVE S (S -Rear End 0 0 0 SOUTHCENTER PK X61 AVE S (S -LINE) 962646 3/22/96 SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 100 FT W of 61 AV Rear End -1, 0' 0 SOUTHCENTER PK 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 965479 6/27/96SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 30 FT E of 61 AVE .Sideswipe -1; 01 0 SOUTHCENTER PK 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 968593 10/5/961SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 200 FT W of 61 AV!Sideswipe -1; 0 0 SOUTHCENTER PK 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 970122 1/5/971SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 100 FT SW of 61 AApproach Tum -1: 01 0 SOUTHCENTER PK '61 AVE S (S -LINE) 975513 6/29/97!SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 70 FT W of 61 AVE:Fixed Object/Parked VehiclI -1' a 0 SOUTHCENTER PK '61 AVE S (S -LINE) 977400 8/31/97SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 150 FT W of 61 AV'Approach Tum -11 0! 0 SOUTHCENTER PK 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 984144 5/13/98'SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 500 ft. 61 AVE S (S:Right Angle 0! 01 0 SOUTHCENTER PK 161 AVE S (S -LINE) 9907442 10/8/99SOUTHCENTER PKWY, 125 ft. 61 AVE S (S'Right Angle 01 -11 0' 0: 0 0 TUKWILA PKWY 161 AVE S (S -LINE) 967369 8/28/96iTUKWILA PKWY, 60 FT E of 61 AVE S (S-LI!Sideswipe TUKWILA PKWY 161 AVE S (S -LINE) 9610307 ; 11/26/961TUKWILA PKWY, 25 FT W of 61 AVE S (S-L.Rear End 01 11 0 TUKWILA PKWY ;61 AVE S (S -LINE) 975625 1 7/2/971TUKWILA PKWY, 100 FT W of 61 AVE S (S- Sideswipe -11 01 0 TUKWILA PKWY '61 AVE S (S -LINE) ,988234 9/27/98TUKWILA PKWY, 300 ft. W of 61 AVE S (S-LSideswipe 01 0' 0 TUKWILA PKWY 1.61 AVE S (S -LINE) 19808480 , 10/4/981TUKWILA PKWY, 200 ft. W of 61 AVE S (S -L Right Angle -1 01 0 TUKWILA PKWY 161 AVE S (S -LINE) 989088 j 10/24/98!TUKWILA PKWY, 500 ft. 61 AVE S (S -LINE) ;Right Angle 01 0: 0 TUKWILA PKWY '61 AVE S (S -LINE) 9810365 j 12/5/981TUKWILA PKWY, 200 ft. W of 61 AVE S (S -L Right Angle -11 01 0 TUKWILA PKWY ,61 AVE S (S -LINE) 9907791 i 10/3/991TUKWILA PKWY, 150 ft. 61 AVE S (S -LINE) 'Sideswipe 01 0! 0 Page 5 1/21/00 • MACADAM RD .. .:On'!uiliit;illRefStreet'is:,ijICaseNu;IDateOfColi1!lei iie,` ;rn,;LocDesc * ';; : itlkti;Type0fCo11is1on:A ISumiOfPDOISif-Of NumirijISum0fNiiinFat MACADAM RD ,SOUTHCENTER 13'957550 7/31/95:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Right Angle -1 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 8:958803 9/4/95.MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl -1' 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B'960682 1/22/96 MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End -1 01 0 CADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B•962013 3/2/96!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Approach Tum 01 11 0 1! .CADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B!963804 4/30/96 MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Approach Tum 0! 2! 0 ,ACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 8!964368 5/19/96:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD :Right Angle -1 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 966489 ' 7/30/96!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Approach Tum 0 1! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 968040 ; 9/18/96'MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD !Sideswipe 1Right Angle -1 -1 01 0' 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 969984 11/16/961MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 9610148 11121/96,MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Approach Tum -1 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 8973431 j 4/19/971MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD (Rear End -1 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 973753 4/30/97IMACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD :Right Angle -1 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 974774 6/3/971MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End 01 11 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 975709 7/5/97!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End -1 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 9708485 10/3/971MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD ;Rear End 01 11 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 979647 i 11110/97'MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD !Rear End -1 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 985493 2/24/98!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD !Right Angle 01 11 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 983647 4/26/981MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Approach Tum 0 21 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 983739 4/29/98'MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Rear End 01 21 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 9804022 5/9/98:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Rear End 0 2! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER BI984563 5/26/981MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Rear End 0' 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B'985370 6/20/98!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD :Rear End 0 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 8 988448 10/3/98!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Right Angle -11 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 61991645 2/28/99 MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End 01 11 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 131992253 3/20/99'MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Right Angle -1 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 8,992697 4/4/99:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved -1 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 81992701 4/4/99!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End -1 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B1992721 4/5/991MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 'Rear End 0' 11 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 81998502 10/28/99:MACADAM RD, 100 ft. SOUTHCENTER 8 •Sideswipe 0 0! 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 81998922 ' 11/13/99!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End 0, 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER BI999236 11/24/99:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End 0 21 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B'999334 11/28/991MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD 11/29/99!MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD ;Rear Enc 1Sideswipe 0 0 01 01 0 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 819909358 Page 1 1/21/00 MACADAM RD 1/21/00 =.1 .DI::. On , - ° .1 ; 4 RefStreet ;; 1CaseNu :1DateOfColl : 3::11 ` a: _ „LocDeac' _ : n:::1li :: ;;i TypeOfCollistohTi.'-' ISunrOf:P.DO]Sum"Of NumInj 'Sum Of NumFat MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER 81999616 , 12/8/99 MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Approach Tum 0 0 0 MACADAM RD ;SOUTHCENTER B'9909664 12/10/99:MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Rear End 0 01 0 MACADAM RD SOUTHCENTER B 999882 12/18/99 MACADAM RD at SOUTHCENTER BLVD Other 01 11 0 S 137 ST 'MACADAM RD 969116 10/22/96 S 137 ST, 100 FT E of MACADAM RD '.Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl -11 0' 0 S 137 ST :MACADAM RD 975989 7/14/97'S 137 ST, 20 FT W of MACADAM RD Other -1 01 0 S 152 ST 1MACADAM RD 967765 9/9/96 S 152 ST, 20 FT W of MACADAM RD Approach Tum -1j o: 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 961742 2/23/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 FT E of MACA'Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved 0 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 963102 4/6/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 20 FT E of MACA :Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 966140 7/19/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT E of MACARear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 967886 9/13/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 FT E of MACA Rear End -1 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 969273 10/27/96 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 FT E of MACARear End 0 1! 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 970046 1/2/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 50 FT W of MACA !Rear End 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 970565 1/17/971SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 FT E of MACARear End -1 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL ;MACADAM RD 972294 3/14/97ISOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 FT E of MACARight Angle -1 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL :MACADAM RD 973511 4/23/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 FT E of MACARear End -1, 0, 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 973541 4/23/97SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 FT E of MACA1Rear End SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT E of MACAISideswipe 01 -11 1j 01 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 973853 5/3/97 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 973914 5/5/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 0.1 FT E of MACA !Rear End -11 0: 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 974160 5/13/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 1000 FT W of MA 'Fixed Object/Parked Vehicl -1 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 974526 5/26/97SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 FT E of MACA.Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved -11 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 970461 5/28/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 25000 FT W of MA'Pedestrian/Cyclist Involved 01 1; 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 974821 6/5/97'SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 FT W of MAC Head On 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 978485 10/3/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 75 FT E of MACA Rear End 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 979162 1 10/26/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 FT E of MACA'Rear End -11 0; 0 SOUTHCENTER BL ;MACADAM RD 979551 11/7/97 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 500 FT E of MACARear End -11 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 985493 2/24/981SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 325 ft. E of MACA ,Right Angle 1 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL `MACADAM RD 9806190 7/18/981SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 ft. E of MACA ;Right Angle 1 01 0! 0 SOUTHCENTER BL `;MACADAM RD 986296 7/21/98 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 ft. MACADAM (Sideswipe I 01 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 980594 12/12/98 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 230 ft. W of MACAiRight Angle 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL ;MACADAM RD 9810935 12/24/98 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 150 ft. W of MACAIFixed Object/Parked Vehicl 1 -11 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL ;MACADAM RD 992251 3/20/99 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 ft. MACADAM 'Rear End 1 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 9903164 4/20/99 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 ft. MACADAM 'Approach Tum 01 -11 01 01 0 0 SOUTHCENTER BL 'MACADAM RD 1993492 1 5/2/99!SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 400 ft. E of MACA (Rear End Page 2 MACADAM RD TrriaidliOn;}r; }Mil.'RefStreet::u` ICaseNtiVatOOfColljrail ;'aalkeocDesc 1}Off#f' 1tittiiii;l f€ Type0fCo111sionllifuiSum'Of PDOISum'Of Nu'minjiSuin Of NumFat SOUTHCENTER BL ;MACADAM RD 994826 6/22/991SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 200 ft. E of MACA ;Right Angle ! 01 11 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 996223 ; 8110/99ISOUTHCENTER BLVD, 50 ft. MACADAM :Rear End I 01 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL MACADAM RD 9908410 10/25/99 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, 75 ft. MACADAM !Rear End Oj 01 0 SOUTHCENTER BL !MACADAM RD 9910250 ' 12/31/99ISOUTHCENTER BLVD, 300 ft. MACADAM! Approach Tum 01 01 0 Page 3 1/21/00 0 100 v w 80 J 0 60 1-- = 40 cc cc CD 20 Li CL RIGHT -TURN LANE GUIDELINES r - Right -Turn Pocket or Taper (Figure 910-12a) Recommended Right -Turn Lane —(-F-i gur e 910-121)1 Recommended Radius Only Recommended ( Figure 910 - 7 ) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 PEAK HOUR APPROACH VOLUME (DDHV)* • For two lone highways, use the peak hour approach volume (through + right turn). For multilane, high speed (posted at 45 mph or above) highways, use the right lane peak hour approach volume (through + right turn). Note: When alt three of the following conditions are met, the ✓ ight turn DDHV is reduced by 20 VPH. 1. Posted speed 45 mph or under. 2. Tight -turn volume greeter than 40 VPH. 3. Total approach volume less than 300 VPH. Right -Turn Lane Guidelines Figure 910-11 (Metric) intersections At Grade Design Manual Page 910-26 August 1997 15 m M I N 45 m MIN Deceleration lone length (See table) '-Edge of through -Ione ol er Taper not steeper D than 4:1 :3.6 m Design shoulder width For right turn corner design see Figure 910-7 Minimum Deceleration Lone Length (m) Highway Turning Traffic Design Design Speed (mph) Speed (mph) 1.2 Stop* 15 20 30 70 60 50. 40 100 85 80 50 130 120 115 60 165 155 145 70 190 180 175 * For use when the turning traffic is likely to stop before completing the turn. (for example - where pedestrians are present.) Adjustment Multiplier for Grodes Greater Thon 3% Percent Grade Upgrade Downgrade 3% to less thou 5% 0.9 1.2 5% or more 0.8 1.35 Right -Turn Lane Figure 910-12b (Metric) Intersections At Grade Page 910-28 Design Manual August 1997 0 100 W = 80 J O 60 1- 1- 40 cr 20 0- • RIGHT—TURN LANE GUIDELINES Right -Turn Pocket or Taper (Figure 910-12a) Recommended Radius Only Recommended r Figure 9L0 - 7 1 Right -Turn Lane (Figure 910-12b) Recommended /4711711 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 PEAK HOUR APPROACH VOLUME (DDHV)* • For two lane highways, use the peak hour approach volume (through + right turn). For multilane, high speed (posted at 45 mph or above) highways, use the right lane peak hour approach volume (through + right turn). Note: When all three of the following conditions are met, the right turn DDHV is reduced by 20 VPH. 1. Posted speed 45 mph or under. 2. Tight -turn volume greater than 40 VPH. 3. Total approach volume less than 300 VPH. Right -Turn Lane Guidelines Figure 910-11 (Metric) Intersections At Grade Design Manual Page 910-26 August 1997 • Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/6*st Avenue S./'S' Line Bridge Current P.M. Peak Hour w/Current Phasing File STO-C3P SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA LOSTTIME LEVELOFSERVICE NODELOCATION NONCBD 3.0 C S 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS GRADES PEDLEVELS PARKINGSIDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS Movement Parameters MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS LANES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS GROUPTYPES SATURATIONFLOWS N .0 0 NONE 0 0 0 RT TH LT 0 0 0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 0 .00 .00 .00 .0 .0 .0 1.00 3 NO 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES PERMISSIVES OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS EXCESS 1.00 3 NO 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 1.00 3 NO 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 E .0 4 NONE 0 1 0 RT TH LT 0 738 111 .0 24.0 12.0 0 2 1 .00 .00 .00 .0 .0 .0. 1.00 3 NO 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 12 NO NO NO YES YES YES 110 120 10 21.65 11.05 62.30 5.00 5.00 5.00 8 6 11 0 .85 3 YES 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 3792 .85 3 YES 5.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 1805 NO YES S 1.0 0 NONE 0 0 0 RT TH LT 21 0 1203 .0 24.0 .0 0 2 0 .00 .00 .00 .0 .0 .0 .80 1.00 .80 3 3 3 YES NO YES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM NORM NORM 0 3595 0 LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME 02/03/** 13:33:34 W .0 0 NONE 0 0 300 RT TH LT 1452 692 0 24.0 12.0 .0 2 1 0 .00 .00 .00 .0 .0 .0 .85 .85 .90 3 3 3 YES YES NO 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM NORM NORM 3230 1900 0 NONE NONE .00 1 .0 0 Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/6;st Avenue S./'S' Line Bridge Current P.M. Peak Hour w/Current Phasing File STO-C3P SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 12 Phase 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 **/** North <* ++++ * v <++++ G/C= .197 G=. 21.6" Y+R= 5.0" OFF= .0% G/C= .100 G= 11.0" Y+R= 5.0" OFF=24.2% G/C= .566 G= 62.3" Y+R= 5.0" OFF=38.8% 02/03/** 13:33:05 C=110 sec G= 95.0 sec = 86.4% Y=15.0 sec = 13.6% Ped= .0 sec = .0% MVMT TOTALS Param:Units AdjVol: vph Wid/Ln:ft/# g/C Rqd@C:% g/C Used: % SV @E: vph Svc Lvl:LOS Deg Sat:v/c Avg Del:s/v Tot Del:min # Stops:veh N Approach RT TH LT E Approach RT TH LT S Approach RT TH LT W Approach Int RT TH LT Total 0 0 0 0 911 131 27 0 1579 1531 814 0 4993 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 24/2 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 0 0 0 0 31 20 0 48 0 50 48 0 0 0 0 0 73 12 0 21 0 83 58 0 0 0 0 0 2770 198 0 773 0 2671 1111 0 7523 A D .00 .00 .00 .00 .33 .61 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.6 51.4 0 0 0 0 21 28 0 0 0 0 81 31 E .00 2.08 .00 .0254.7 .0 0 1704 0 0 401 0 A B .57 .73 3.9 19.2 25 65 126 148 .00 .0 0 0 C 1.04 88.6 1843 787 Max Que:veh 0 0 Max Que: ft 0 0 0 0 15 7. 0 0 188 176 0 245 0 3067 0 16 21 0 304 0 203 517 0 3067 APPR TOTALS Param:Units N Approach AdjVol: vph Svc Lvl:LOS Deg Sat:v/c Avg Del:s/v Tot Del:min # Stops:veh Max Que:veh Max Que: ft E Approach 0 1042 S Approach 1606 Int W Approach Total 2345 4993 .00 .0 0 0 B+ .37 11.4 49 112 E 2.08 254.7 1704 401 B+ .63 9.2 90 274 C 1.04 88.6 1843 787 0 0 22 188 245 3067 37 304 517 3067 Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/6/st Avenue S./'S' Line Bridge Current P.M. Peak Hour w/Current Phasing File STO-C3P 02/03/** 13:32:58 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 1.04 Vehicle Delay 21.2@ Level of Service C @ expect more delay due to extreme v/c's (see EVALUATE) Sq 12 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 **/** / \ North <* ++++ * v * <++++ G/C= .197 G= 21.6" Y+R= 5.0" OFF= .0% G/C= .100 G= 11.0" Y+R= 5.0" OFF=24.2% G/C= .566 G= 62.3" Y+R= 5.0" OFF=38.8% C=110 sec G= 95.0 sec = 86.4% Y=15.0 sec = 13.6% Ped= .0 sec = .0% 1 Lane (Width/1 g/C Service Rate Adj l HCM L 190% Max Group Lanes Reqd Used @C (vph) @E Volume v/c Delay S Queue S Approach 52.8@ E ILT+TH+RTI 24/2 1 .477 1 .215 1 389 1 773 1 1606 12.078 1 52.8@I*E ( 963 ftl E Approach 7.2 B+ TH LT l 1 24/2 2/1 1 .197 .307 l .119 .730 l 27701 l 2198 l 131 l 770 .612 911 .329 1 33.3 3.4 l*D A 1 176 ft8 1 W Approach 5.8 B+ 1RT TH 1 12/1 1 .4779 1 .585 1 1049 l 1111 1 1814 1 .733 1 12.5 (*B 1 517 ft Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/Macadam Road Current P.M. Peak Hour SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Summary Intersection Parameters METROAREA LOSTTIME LEVELOFSERVICE NODELOCATION NONCBD 3.0 C S 0 0 Approach Parameters APPLABELS GRADES PEDLEVELS PARKINGSIDES PARKVOLUMES BUSVOLUMES RIGHTTURNONREDS Movement Parameters MOVLABELS VOLUMES WIDTHS LANES UTILIZATIONS TRUCKPERCENTS PEAKHOURFACTORS ARRIVALTYPES ACTUATIONS REQCLEARANCES MINIMUMS IDEALSATFLOWS FACTORS DELAYFACTORS NSTOPFACTORS GROUPTYPES • SATURATIONFLOWS N -1.0 0 NONE 0 2 5 RT TH LT 39 0 130 11.0 .0 11.0 1 0 1 .00 .00 .00 .0 .0 1.0 .70 1.00 .98 3 3 3 NO NO NO 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 1900 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM NORM NORM 1556 0 1736 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES PERMISSIVES OVERLAPS CYCLES GREENTIMES YELLOWTIMES CRITICALS EXCESS File STO-C4P of Parameter Values RT 175 12.0 1 .00 .0 .88 3 NO 4.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 1606 13 NO NO NO YES YES YES 100 120 10 11.18 15.74 61.08 4.00 4.00 4.00 3 12 5 0 E .0 10 NONE 0 0 0 TH LT 1744 0 24.0 .0 2 0 .00 .00 1.0 .0 .92 1.00 3 3 YES YES 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM NORM 3762 0 NO YES S 1.0 0 NONE 0 0 0 RT TH LT 0 0 0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 0 .00 .0 1.00 3 YES 4.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 .00 .0 1.00 3 NO 4.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 0 .00 .0 1.00 3 YES 4.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM LEADLAGS OFFSET PEDTIME 0 01/27/** 09:16:51 W .0 5 NONE 0 0 0 RT TH 0 2035 .0 36.0 0 3 .00 .00 .0 .0 1.00 .93 3 3 YES YES 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 1900 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM NORM 0 5700 LT 136 12.0 1 .00 2.0 .68 3 NO 4.0 5.0 1900 1.00 1.00 1.00 NORM 1770 NONE NONE .00 1 .0 0 Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/Macadam Road Current P.M. Peak Hour File STO-C4P SIGNAL94/TEAPAC(V1 L1.4] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 13 Phase 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 **/** / \ North <+ * * ++++ *> <A+ ++++ <**** G/C= .112 G= 11.2" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= .0% G/C= .157 G= 15.7" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=15.2% G/C= .611 G= 61.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=34.9$ C=100 sec G= 88.0 sec = 88.0% Y=12.0 sec = 12.0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach Param:Units AdjVol: vph Wid/Ln:ft/# g/C Rqd@C:% g/C Used: % SV @E: vph Svc Lvl:LOS Deg Sat:v/c Avg Del:s/v Tot Del:min # Stops:veh Max Que:veh Max Que: ft APPR TOTALS Param:Units AdjVol: vph Svc Lvl:LOS Deg Sat:v/c Avg Del:s/v Tot Del:min # Stops:veh Max Que:veh Max Que: ft E Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT 49 11/1 14 32 497 0 133 199 1991 0/0 11/1 12/1 24/2 0 17 21 54 0 12 77 62 0 198 1241 2336 S Approach RT TH LT 01/27/** 09:15:46 Ped= .0 sec = .0% W Approach Int RT TH LT Total 0 0 0 0 0 2407 200 4979 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 36/3 12/1 0 0 0 0 0 44 20 0 0 0 0 0 82 17 0 0 0 0 0 4664 288 9224 C+ .10 24.3 5 9 D+ .00 .63 .0 48.2 0 27 0 32 A B .16 .85 3.2 17.7 3 147 13 401 .00 .00 .0 .0 0 0 0 0 A D+ .00 .00 .00 .52 .68 .0 .0 .0 3.2 44.9 0 0 0 32 37 0 0 0 189 47 B+ .64 12.1 251 691 2 0 6 3 42 46 0 163 63 527 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Approach E Approach 182 2190 S Approach 0 0 24 9 86 0 203 234 527 W Approach Int Total 2607 4979 D+ .49 41.8 32 41 B .79 16.4 150 414 .00 .0 0 0 A .53 6.4 69 236 B+ .64 12.1 251 691 8 45 163 527 0 0 33 234 86 527 Van Gard Storage Southcenter Boulevard/Macadam Road Current P.M. Peak Hour File STO-C4P 01/27/** 09:15:40 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[V1 L1.4] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) .64 Vehicle Delay 8.1 Level of Service B+ Sq 13 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 **/** / \ North + * + * ++++ <+ *> <A+ ****. ++++> A ++++ <**** G/C= .112 G= 11.2" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= .0% G/C= .157 G= 15.7" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=15.2% G/C= .611 G= 61.1" Y+R= 4.0" OFF=34.9% C=100 sec G= 88.0 sec = 88.0% Y=12.0 sec = 12.0% Ped= .0 sec = .0% Lane g/C Service Rate Adj HCM L Max Group 1Width/ Lanes Reqd Used l @C (vph) @E lVolume! v/c Delay S 190% Queue i N Approach 26.9 D+ RT 11/1 LT 11/1 i .136 .168 l .319 .122 ( 385 7 l 497 198 l 49 133 l .099 .630 l 15.5 31.1 l*D+l 46 163 ft E Approach 11.3 B IRT 63 ftTH l 12/1 24/2 l .543 1 .210 1 .621 l 2320 i 2336 l 1991 l .852 l 12.2 l*B 1.773 1231 1241 199 .160 1.9 A 1 527 ftl W Approach 4.0 A I TH LT l 12/1 1 .199 I .167 1 4134 l 4288 l 2200 l .676 l 29.4 1 *D+l 234 ftl Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 **************************************************************** File Name STOR-P2PCNR.HCO Streets: (N -S) Site/ARCO/Apts. (E -W) Southcenter Blvd. Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst C. V. Brown Date of Analysis 2/3/0 Other Information P.M. Peak Hour W/Mini-Stor/ARCO & Apts. W/O RTO Combined Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE ' s Eastbound L T R 1 2< 0 N 37 703 0 .95 .95 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Westbound L T R 0> 2< 0 N 0 2078 81 .95 .95 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Northbound L T R 0 0 0 0 Southbound L T R 1 0 1 18 33 .95 .95 -3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 Eastbound through movement halfed to account for 50 percent usage of center 2WLTL. • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 **************************************************************** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: 1080 393 393 0.91 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -free State: 703 719 719 1.00 3800 1900 1.00 2159 119 119 0.64 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 2858 16 0.64 0.64 0.64 10 • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 **************************************************************** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App SB L 19 10 * F * SB R 35 393 10.1 C EB L 43 119 47.1 F 2.4 Intersection Delay = 36.7 * The calculated delay was greater than 999.9 sec. • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 **************************************************************** File Name STOR-P2PC.HCO Streets: (N -S) Site/ARCO/Apts. (E -W) Southcenter Blvd. Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst. C. V. Brown Date of Analysis 2/3/0 Other Information P.M. Peak Hour W/Mini-Stor/ARCO & Apts. W/RTO Combined Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Eastbound L T R Westbound L T R 1 2< 0 0> 2 1 N N 37 703 0 0 2078 81 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 Northbound L T R 0 0 0 0 Southbound L T R 1 0 1 18 .95 33 .95 -3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 Eastbound through movement halfed to account for 50 percent usage of center 2WLTL. • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 **************************************************************** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: 1039 412 412 0.92 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -free State: 703 719 719 1.00 3800 1.00 2159 119 119 0.64 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 2858 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 16 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0.64 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.64 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.64 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 10 • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 **************************************************************** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App SB L SB R EB L 19 10 * F * 35 412 9.5 B 43 119 47.1 F 2.4 Intersection Delay = 36.7 * The calculated delay was greater than 999.9 sec. • Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 1 **************************************************************** File Name STOR-P2MA.HCO Streets: (N -S) Site/ARCO/Apts. (E -W) Southcenter Blvd. Major Street DirectionEW Length of Time Analyzed60 (min) Analyst C. V. Brown Date of Analysis 2/3/0 Other Information P.M. Peak Hour W/Mini-Stor & Apts. Only, W/O RT Two-way Stop -controlled Intersection No. Lanes Stop/Yield Volumes PHF Grade MC's (%) SU/RV's (%) CV's (%) PCE's Eastbound L T R 1 2< 0 N 11 716 0 .95 .95 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Westbound L T R 0> 2< 0 N 0 2145 14 .95 .95 .95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Northbound L T R 0 0 0 0 Southbound L T R 1 0 1 3 13 .95 .95 -3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road Right Turn Minor Road Through Traffic Minor Road Left Turn Minor Road 5.50 5.50 6.50 7.00 2.10 2.60 3.30 3.40 Eastbound through movement halfed to account for 50 percent usage of center 2WLTL. Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 2 **************************************************************** WorkSheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: 1080 393 393 0.96 Step 2: LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Movement Capacity: (pcph) Prob. of Queue -free State: TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue -free State: 716 707 707 1.00 3800 1900 1.00 2159 119 119 0.89 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) Potential Capacity: (pcph) Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: Adjusted Impedance Factor: Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements Movement Capacity: (pcph) 2879 15 0.89 0.89 0.89 13 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation HCS: Unsignalized Intersection Release 2.1 Page 3 **************************************************************** Intersection Performance Summary FlowRate MoveCap SharedCap Avg.Total Delay Movement v(pcph) Cm(pcph) Csh(pcph) Delay LOS By App SB L SB R EB L 3 13 355.5 F * 14 393 9.5 B 13 119 34.0 E 0.5 Intersection Delay = 11.7 * The calculated delay was greater than 999.9 sec. • • Preliminary Technical Information Report Mr. Van Gard Storage 5950 Southcenter -Blvd. Tukwila, WA for Gencor By: Bush Roed & Hitchings, Inc. 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, Washington (206) 323-4144 (206) 323-7135 Fax BRH Job No. 99242.01 January 20, 2000 E99- O033 L`19 -O078 D JAN 2 5 2000 MKWRAPusuc rD(PEREs 02/02/ Drainage Narrative: The storm drainage facilities designed for this project are based on the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The stormwater detention system is sixed per the KCRTS sizing method for a "level 1" analysis. Calculations for these facilities are provided in the following pages. A complete technical information report will be provided at the time of building permit submittal. A downstream analysis has already been performed and is attached below: Offsite Drainage Analysis The Site The site is undeveloped property located at 5950 Southcenter Boulevard just east of the existing Arco Gas Station and south of the North Hill Apartments. It is King County Parcel no. 359700-0202-09. Preliminary information regarding existing surface water drainage near the site was provided by City staff and confirmed by field inspection on August 27, 1999. Upstream Drainage System Upstream, the piped drainage system originates at the Arco Gas Station to the west. The upstream tributary drainage area includes the adjacent portion of Southcenter Blvd.. The piped system drains by gravity along the north curb of Southcenter Boulevard, in front of the subject site, and flows to the east. Downstream Drainage System Downstream, the piped system discharges at two points on the south side of Southcenter Blvd. into an existing waterway running along the north side of Interstate Hwy. 405 (Gilliam Creek). The Creek appears to drain eastward towards the Green River, however, due to inaccessibility, this was not confirmed by field inspection. City staff, however, confirmed that Gilliam Creek flows easterly approximately one half mile and discharges into the Green River. BUSH, ROED & HI TCHINGS.F. CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND VEYORS �,. 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 (206) 323-4144 B R H (206) 323-7135 * Fax JOB SHEET NO OF DATE CHECKED BY DATE SCALE CALCULATED BY TV" XIzT S. _ 5 z •,/C__ c4-17.6 61.4~.: i rr 66/4 -Le GAL-ra2 0 iIli 74 -e: 6 -x(. 57i. Cl God yiT1D �,. It li - 43,4,B -f-7, X42 Q$o --3 4) C 6,'t 5' Gtr4- g q FP/z- ►ov c At6.0 - O$C- "ipelP rv_vs" _ 57 /p1PEv imPc-evious: .3,...4 .5F 0..071aAie 1,074 � e ✓6 -cP6i Co, 2'i Tw IS MA/0 r m PE 4/'Q 54,4-46-5 -GAS. -- us E 7"l..4, - 67(2-43 C-4/0/24./ FaR._. PC viot.? .ifi8 s -' ....5"/.�()Se '1Pc-iv vus " Fa2_ Po -o l .. P4✓e► ' hoPettviou5 = Z 5, 7 5= 0. 5,/, r 'a-E-fat� � : t�✓C-2 / llGnl ✓E y�GE _ Poi �G�E �°✓ 4414 t - SE Pc ---5/6/1-1). . . PR000CT 201-1 (Single Sheets) 205-1(Padded) (Ar -ha (Ar-haInc.. Groton, Mass. 01471. To Order PHONE TOLL FREE 1-800-28-6380 SECTION 111 • • Figure III -2. Rainfall Regions and Scale III -4 infr top KCRTS User's Guide October 20,1995 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:predev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac • ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.117 0.067 0.147 0.040 0.066 0.121 0.109 0.268 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 4 2/ 9/ 1 6 1/ 5/ 2 2 2/27/ 3 8 8/26/ 4 7 1/ 5/ 5 3 1/18/ 6 5 11/24/ 6 1 1/ 9/ 8 2:00 16:00 7:00 2:00 8:00 16:00 3:00 6:00 kc.cz-�s C.,�c t ST I A)C-, CO..) D r T, 0r) Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - (CFS ) 0.268 0.147 0.121 0.117 0.109 0.067 0.066 0.040 0.228 - Rank Return Prob 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 TAR-61er 7;16oi/tarve R-�/4Pres 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac • ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.196 0.153 0.237 0.159 0.193 0.207 0.231 0.403 Computed Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 5 8 2 7 6 4 3 1 Peaks 2/ 9/ 1 1/ 5/ 2 2/27/ 3 8/26/ 4 10/28/ 4 1/18/ 6 10/26/ 6 1/ 9/ 8 2:00 16:00 7:00 2:00 16:00 16:00 0:00 6:00 Kc (LA Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks (CFS) 0.403 0.237 0.231 0.207 0.196 0.193 0.159 0.153 0.348 - - 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 Prob 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 • • Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Tank Diameter: Tank Length: Effective Storage Depth: Stage 0 Elevation: Storage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: Number of orifices: Orifice # Detention Tank „� 5.00 ft ('L90 150. ft 4F-- : l &t -7-41,bc 1.4.7.167-H 441u.occ 0 5.00 ft jaiE 'V"v cemiFa.OL i►7oWitot-t< $6,"1,re VOL. 100.00 ft r 2938.00 cu. ft A 41...,Ff c,' 1 x 7,o % S'28.276f 12.00 inches 8,10 v F ( "0 pn.W.)k 15. cto4c�FT' 2 Full Head"__._. _ __ Height Diameter Discharge (ft) 1 0.00 2 4.30 Top Notch Weir: None Stage (ft) 0.00 0.10 0.60 1.10 1.60 2.10 2.60 3.10 3.60 4.10 4.30 4.80 5.00 5.10 5.20 5.30 5.40 5.50 5.60 5.70 5.80 5.90 6.00 6.10 6.20 6.30 6.40 6.50 6.60 6.70 6.80 6.90 -/5ci3Oc (in) (CFS) %�`j�iJ 1.34 0.109 CIF 0.73 0.012 g 18%, 3 t;F r_1c/ . 5 LF I.5/1(,110 nitre i 11, 6,54 CFAr 3444 0 C104'3 R it eer, 64,► Discharge Percolation � (ac -ft) (cfs) ACir 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.015 0.00 = )501.- 9.5 0.005 0.038 0.00 LF, �,r.,_ 0.011 0.051 0.00 �: Elevation (ft) 100.00 100.10 100.60 101.10 101.60 102.10 102.60 103.10 103.60 104.10 104.30 104.80 105.00 105.10 105.20 105.30 105.40 105.50 105.60 105.70 105.80 105.90 106.. 00 106.10 106.20 106.30 106.40 106.50 106.60 106.70 106.80 106.90 Routing Hydrographs (cu. Storage ft) 0. 14. 200. 479. 810. 1171. 1544. 1913. 2264. 2578. 2688. 2898. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 2938. 0.019 0.062 0.00 0.027 0.071 0.00 0.035 0.079 0.00 0.044 0.086 0.00 0.052 0.092 0.00 0.059 0.099 0.00 0.062 0.101 0.00 0.067 0.117 0.00 0.067 0.121 0.00 0.067 0.431 0.00 0.067 0.996 0.00 0.067 1.730 0.00 0.067 2.520 0.00 0.067 2.800 0.00 0.067 3.060 0.00 0.067 3.300 0.00 0.067 3.520 0.00 0.067 3.720 0.00 0.067 3.920 • 0.00 0.067 4.110 0.00 0.067 4.280 0.00 0.067 4.450 0.00 0.067 4.620 0.00 0.067 4.780 0.00 0.067 4.930 0.00 0.067 5.080 0.00 0.067 5.220 0.00 0.067 5.360 0.00 • Hyd Inflow Outflow Target Calc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.40 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.24 0.12 0.15 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.10 CT7577) 0.07 0.06 Peak Stage Elev 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.99 3.82 2.25 1.77 1.51 105.00 105.00 105.00 104.99 103.82 102.25 101.77 101.51 • Storage (Cu -Ft) (Ac -Ft) 2938. 2938. 2938. 2935. 2402. 1284. 934. 748. P- -6-5 Yithr-G,11 b‘ 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.055 0.029 0.021 0.017 BUSH, ROED & HITCHING , NC. CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 '''"e". (206) 323-4144 FAX (206) 323-7135 H 1-800-935-0508 JOB - SHEET NO OF CALCULATED BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SCALE O, 07 C S (G' 2 v69--(2- „.4 69 •Fob A . r.4 1 a, L..p/-off' �..�..:- of %� �'!'� 1? aN :, A� - es'” !err,-� � �-� ��" / a Fc2'F1_01,3 //rn fDs 71 0/4_,/✓I4-2_ S4-P/m�i�,e- /S g'p, _ % of 7' fc_J�✓ or /75,7 cr FF -0,1 14%,-/7' Gi A-. /7y G)/1 L- fix' Tta,✓ /aijDm • ,1 /4a''. W % -b /" Oa�rr' T o, /l�✓/4;-�2 56~-192_ �iC i6�i / v✓ S y�T L- - ,ATE G�T� 75/PD 12_ C -GS � - �"eA.. 4r 1 <. s. 1--C--emit-f--01--C--emit-f--01--C--emit-f--0 45 SDE S� �� it l'��-1�.�, � f �ofc-��.0 a - P !C- S O F ?Df� O E r✓14r�l+)k -. = Q r� _ 4z. c4c4,-, � E A -P 0, 033 k/,h4 , 0, 03k/Apte. /�- 12-,3 5F if /45 {e2 LJr►i - ►r� t'fl of 7 /� Er.TE� Pt4rE A. PM. 7/ $" /6 444 5F. CI -006#0(4 Titres , r A 4r4v47-, 11-1 (Single Sheets) 205-1(Padded) /As%® Inc., Groton, Mass 01471 To Order PHONE 001E FREE 1800-225.6380 660 -CPS OIL/ WATER SEPARATOR 788 SQ. FT. - EFFECTIVE COALESCING AREA 415 GPM - MAXIMUM PROCESS FLOW 6'-8" FIBERGLASS HOLD-DOWN CHANNEL FINISH GRADE EL. PLAN VIEW — U.V. Co. 2-342P DIAMOND PLATE COVERS OIL RETAINING BAFFLE \%\\j\\\j/\\\ INLET I.E. INLET PIPE WITH ELBOW BY OTHERS f / INLET WEIR 1 D 0 D n v 4'.0" WATER DEPTH •0 • 0 c D 0 • n COALESCING MEDIA SECTION AA STRUCTURAL NOTES: 1. CONCRETE: 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH f'c = 4500 psi 2. REBAR: ASTM A-615 GRADE 60 3. MESH: ASTM A-185 GRADE 65 4. DESIGN: ACI -318-83 BUILDING CODE ASTM C-857 'MINIMUM STRUCTURAL DESIGN LOADING FOR UNDERGROUND PRECAST CONCRETE UTILITY STRUCTURES' 5. LOADS: H-20 TRUCK WHEEL w/ 30% IMPACT PER AASHTO GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL BAFFLE/ WEIR PLATES TO BE MILD STEEL, GALVANIZED 2. WATER DEPTH = 4'-0" 3. CONTRACTOR TO: GROUT IN ALL PIPES SUPPLY & INSTALL INLET & OUTLET PIPES (INCLUDING PIPE ELBOW & SAMPLING TEE) FILL w/ CLEAN WATER PRIOR TO "START UP" OF SYSTEM VERIFY ALL BLOCKOUT SIZES and LOCATIONS 4. REFERENCE U.V.Co. CATALOG MODEL 660 -LA 123.1 0 0 () vn OUTLET WEIR 0 io — OUTLET PIPE WITH SAMPLING TEE BY OTHERS OUTLET I.E. INFORMATION NEEDED: INLET PIPE SIZE - OUTLET PIPE SIZE - GRADE ELEVATION - INLET INVERT ELEVATION - OUTLET INVERT ELEVATION - BASIC DESIGN INFORMATION: INFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS - OIL SPECIFIC GRAVITY = .83 OPERATING TERMERATURE = 45' INFLUENT OIL CONCENTRATION = 100 ppm MEAN OIL DROPLET SIZE (MICRONS) =130 FLOW EFFLUENT RATE QUALITY 1125 GPM C10 ppm COVER No. 64-2-342P 1,200 Ibs. 4'-8" 660 -CPS OIL / WATER SEPARATOR 788 SQ. FT. - EFFECTIVE COALESCING AREA 415 G.P.M. - MAXIMUM PROCESS FLOW 6'-8" OUTLET PIPE WITH SAMPLING TEE BY OTHERS BASE ASSEMBLY No. 660 -CPS 6,300 Ibs. OUTLET WEIR OIL RETAINING BAFFLE Copyright 1992 FIBERGLASS HOLD-DOWN CHANNEL 6'-0" 6'-0" COALESING MEDIA J INLET WEIR J 4'-0" INLET PIPE WITH ELBOW BY OTHERS * ITEMS SHOWN ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. FOR DETAILS SEE REVERSE SIDE. 123 Issue: April, 1992 • • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN • Baffle height to depth ratios of 0.85 for top baffles and 0.15 for bottom baffles The separator is first sized for depth using the equation: Depth = (Q/2Vh) 1/2 where: Q = design flow (cfm) Vh = design horizontal velocity (fpm) = 0.50 (15 times 0.033) Calculate the width using the above ratios (i.e., 0.3 to 0.5 depth -to -width ratio). Then calculate length using the equation: Length Depth Rise Rate * Vh (Q/2Vh) 1/2 (Q/2Vh) 1/2 * 0.50 = 0.033 0.066 ©( L-/ QAr#.vG�i1h2.9 VL S ad,* - PeL Di) E v� �B►� t. . Calculate the projected (horizontal) surface area of plates required using the following equation: Q Rise Rate Where Ap = projected surface area of the plate (ft.'-); note that the actual surface area, Aa = Ap * cosine H H = angle of the plates with the horizontal in degrees, usually varies from 45-60 degrees. Q = design flow (cfm). Rise rate - recommend using 0.033 ft/min. Manufacturers of plate packs provide standard size packages which are rated at a particular flow (usually in gpm). However, as the manufacturer's flow rating is for conditions different than used above, the engineer must compare the plate surface area with the above calculation. Do not confuse the protected plate area with actual plate area (see Figure III -7.4). The width, depth, and length of the plate pack and the chamber in which the plate pack is placed is completely flexible and is a function of the plate sizes provided by the particular pack manufacturer and standard size vaults that are available for small sites. III -7.3 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE Construction Specifications There are no special construction considerations. III -7-5 FEBRUARY, 1992 • BENCH MARK D SQUARE AT N.E. R•OF POWER VAULT ELEVAMON X77.53 (2) ELECTS: VAULTS THREE STORY MOOD MANE CONDOMINIUM BUILDING . �I ,o o .. 3--11-- WI Ti i �t. ..,'• E. ACE WALL tSl-�' W. aryl rA THREE STORY WOOD FRAME CONDOMINIUM BUILDING v' ey. _• _ s ` =WCOD -ENC . _y = CO Trp •7F. 51069 • gt(142-02 L-A •)< 15 j 1�i U � i M P IOU i Aiae A' W i TH I N L-o'v i QUI c,T7-.121'c( HALF 01-4L4 - .1 S4+-4 SFS 122d17>-iztt( A ize ) 1N ( 4 (y r712 -c? ;, C-rEr) 1z— rLT-1 2GR METAL ROOFING til 1 __TcKA(1 IMP���17u E. FACE 'NAIL 15 COP i z Ns .. e 69 o9s b O . 69.•, 1/.,CQ%T,,' \\T'? E' ,Z cq c. • 4,•7•4•.,sIB!A c _ �V J \ c s.w aVF l o ti• e 6 ,MGT, 111E ., -44r S. G 4r•,..5 SECTION EAST SIDE 1 r FE - 12-V io t,i :C(Er2.0 r2) 4'17 T1 ��`�� E ►� I = ci/ D�7F (0. 2-0q �G) TTS = 21e a2 sr (o.5? R -c-) - 43, 4-3°- 3 SF Cr Pc�bYJEr-'-'2'-ref 4R —2 I` 5 .021 INie tz/ie`ci%ki - p j 546.,, S SF (c-(rrre PP.ci c z, ) (67 jl"li'�2.vro�S � (0-93.4c) ® � (i.owziZ PRo 2r -r /414 + r � CT .A -2€a = f g43g, 3 1 7 L42- opo. 4ZoOo. 3 5e) pkv 2/e2 SF Iike. A -S : (SL.PGr P,av`: 4P-ev2 --- --- -159'f9)5•*I2,_ 5.95SFS -- /�'(-(e-Alza4lll/// City of Tukwila • • John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATE: JANUARY 7, 2000 The following applications have been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community Development for review and decision. APPLICANT: STEVEN FRIEDMAN. AGENT: ROBERT DAVEY , FOR GENCOR INC. LOCATION: 5950 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA FILE NUMBER: L99-0078 (Design review) E99-0033 (SEPA) PROPOSAL: To build a self -storage facility with four stories over one basement including approximately 600 cubicles in 75,000 square feet OTHER REQUIRED LAND USE PERMITS: Development Permit 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 January 21, 2000. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on February 24, 2000. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Department at (206) 431-3679 to ensure the hearing is still scheduled for this date. ` — If you carlxiott submit comments in writing by the cutoff date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and give your comments on the proposal before the Planning Commission. If you have questions about this proposal contact Rebecca Fox, Planner -in -charge of this file. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision by the Planning Commission on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department of Community Development at 431-3670. A decision from the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. The Department will provide you with information on appeals if you are interested. (over) C:\My Documents\Mr. van gard--notice of application letter.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • • C Report Geotechnical Engineering Services Mr. Van Gard Self -Storage Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington December 15, 1999 For Friedman Development DRAFT G e o En gine e r s File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 G e o E n g i n e e r s i File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121699 G e o E n gin e e r s ii File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121699 G e o E n g i n e e r s 1 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 01/31/00 MON 14:33 FAX 425 108050 GEO ENGINEERS From: 2062645412 Page: 3 • DRAFT completion. We are also providing recommendations for soldier pile walls, should they be necessary in other site areas. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of our geotechnical engineering services is to evaluate the previous geotechnical reports completed for the site as a basis for developing recommendations for site preparation, shoring, grading, drainage, and other aspects of project construction. Previous geotechnical reports completed for the site include "Tukwila North Hill Office Building", by James Eaton, P.E., dated July 12, 1989 and "Tukwila Apartment & Office Project" by James Eaton, P.E. dated June 24, 1987. In addition, we completed new borings at the site to better identify native soil conditions for the proposed 15- to 40 -foot -deep cuts planned for construction. Our ipecific scope of services includes the following tasks: 1. Review the subsurface information and recommendations in the previous geotechnical reports listed above. This includes an evaluation of the proposed new building configuration and completing additional explorations as necessary. 2. Complete a detailed site reconnaissance to observe exposed cut surfaces and slope stability, evaluate drainage and near -surface seepage, and to excavate shallow explorations with band tools. 3. Drill three borings to depths ranging from 18.5 to 54 feet. 4. Evaluate pertinent physical and engineering characteristics of the site soils from the results of laboratory tests performed on samples obtained from the explorations. In particular, we completed moisture and density tests, grain size analyses and triaxial tests. S. Based on field evaluations and the previous explorations completed by others, develop a description of subsurface conditions as they relate to site development. 6. Provide recommendations regarding earth retention systems, including lateral soil pressures, temporary shoring walls and 'permanent subgrade walls. This will include an evaluation of soil nail walls, soldier pile and tieback walls, conventional concrete walls, and others which may be appropriate for the final configuration of the development. 7. Evaluate site ground water conditions and provide recommendations regarding temporary and permanent drainage requirements. 8. Present recommendations for seismic design based on correlations with index soil properties. 9. Provide recommendations for site grading, including fill placement and compaction criteria for utility trench backfill and backfill against retaining walls. Also provide our evaluation of the effects of weather, excessive moisture, and construction equipment on the on-site soils. 10. Evaluate the foundation parameters used in the design including allowable soil bearing pressures, and support of slab -on -grade floors considering the subsurface conditions encountered in field explorations. 11. Submit a written summary report documenting our findings and recommendations along with supporting site plan and other applicable figures. G e o E n g i n e e r s 2 File No. 7810.001-00-1130/121399 0002 G e o E n g i n e e r s 3 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • DRAFT encountered in our borings are primarily fine-grained with only occasional gravel. However, based on the geologic deposition and site topography, it is likely that cobbles and boulders may also be encountered during excavations made at the site. Ground WaterConditions Ground water was measured in the borings 48 hours after drilling at a depth of 10 to 22 feet below the ground surface (near Elevation 80 feet in the low area of the site and as high as Elevation 109 feet in the higher area). We expect that the ground water is the result of the upland surface water runoff percolating through the cleaner sand layers and traveling downgradient toward Southcenter Boulevard. Geologic depositions of this nature will often develop a perched ground water condition overlying the siltier, less permeable zones. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the results of our study, we conclude that the site may be developed as planned. Building foundations may be supported on shallow spread footings bearing on very dense deposits, provided post -construction settlements are tolerable. Soil nail walls or tieback and soldier pile walls are suitable for supporting excavations. We anticipate that ground water seepage during construction will be relatively minor and likely can be controlled using sumps and pumps. If feasible, open cut excavations may also be used in areas of the site where the building setbacks are a sufficient distance from the property line. Most of the native soils that will be encountered are moisture sensitive and will not be workable during wet weather. Winter construction will likely require use of a layer of crushed rock as a working surface over the base of the excavation. This layer would also serve as part of the drainage blanket below the floor slab (recommended in a subsequent section of this report). Detailed recommendations for design and construction are presented in the following sections. SITE PREPARATION AND EXCAVATION Site development will require removal of all existing pavements, and any other buried utilities or structures present at the site. Significant excavation over a majority of the site will be necessary to obtain the finished floor elevation. We would expect that all of the soils encountered across the site could be removed with conventional excavating equipment. However, the sandstone was found to be very dense in our explorations. It may be necessary to use ripping or hydraulic breaking equipment to facilitate excavation. Occasional cobbles (and possibly boulders) may also be encountered in the soils. We recommend that if abandoned utilities are found, they be removed within the new building area. Where backfill is needed to replace excavated materials, it should be placed and compacted as structural fill per the recommendations in this report. G e o E n g i n e e r s 4 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • DRAFT G e o E n g i n e e r s 5 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 01/31/00 MON 14:33 FAX 425 8050 GEO ENGINEERS From: 2062645412 Page: 4 • DRAFT • Surface water flow should be diverted away from all excavations. • The general conditions of the slopes be observed periodically by a geotechnical engineer to identify potential stability or sloughing problems. Since the contractor has control of the construction operations, he should be made responsible for the stability of cut slopes, as well as the safety of the excavations. All shoring and temporary slopes should conform to applicable local, state and federal safety regulations. We recommend a maximum permanent slope configuration of 2H:1V in the existing fill soils or in structural fill placed in accordance with our recommendations presented later in this report. We recommend a maximum permanent slope of 1.5H:1 V in the very dense native soils. Permanent slopes should be hydroseeded or otherwise protected from erosion. Temporary erosion control measures may be necessary until permanent vegetation is established. SHORED EXCAVATIONS General Temporary shoring will be necessary to support the majority of the perimeter cut faces where the depth of the excavation and space limitations restrict the use of open cuts. Recommendations presented in this section address the uses of soil nail walls and soldier pile walls during construction and as long-term retaining structures. Permanent retaining walls for use where open - cut excavations are feasible are addressed in a later section of this report. Excavations ranging from about 15 to 40 feet will be required for the planned 5 -story structure (with a lowest finished floor elevation of about 72 feet). In our opinion, soil nail walls will be the most cost-effective option for excavation support, based on the subsurface conditions encountered at the site. Special construction techniques, including flash coating, staggered excavations and berming, may be required in order to control spelling within the cleaner sand and gravel layers expected in the excavation. These techniques are discussed in greater detail below. The City of Tukwila and WSDOT do not allow ground anchors (either soil nails or tiebacks) from permanent retaining walls fo extend into their right-of-way. Also, we understand that the City of Tukwila does not allow temporary ground anchors within the right-of-way. Therefore, ground anchors need to be fully within the site property at this site. If a temporary wall is constructed, a permanent wall is constructed in front of the temporary soil nail wall. In this situation, the wall cannot gain lateral support from the anchors left in place. For permanent ground anchors to provide lateral support, the anchors will need to have double corrosion protection. Soil Nail Walls Soil nail walls are composed of an array of reinforcing members that are grouted into the soil mass (the soil nails), combined with reinforced shotcrete panel facing. Like tieback walls, soil nail walls are installed using top-down construction; that is, the wall is completed as the excavation proceeds from the top down to the base of the proposed structure. The benefit of a soil nail wall is that they are typically lower cost than conventional tieback walls. OeoEngincere 6 Fila No. 7810-001-oa1130/121599 e003 G e o E n g i n e e r s 7 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 G e o E n g i n e e r s 8 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • • DRAFT G e o E n g i n e e r s 9 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 G e o E n g i n e e r s 10 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 G e o E n g i n e e r s 11 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • • DRAFT surrounded by structural fill. The allowable passive resistance for structural fill assumes that the structural fill is compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density and extends out from the face of the foundation element for a distance at least equal to two times the height of the element. Passive pressure resistance should be calculated from the bottom of adjacent floor slabs or below a depth of 1 foot where the adjacent area is unpaved, as appropriate. Frictional resistance may be evaluated using 0.4 for the coefficient of base friction against footings and the building slab. The above values incorporate a factor of safety of about 1.5. FLOOR SLABS Slabs may be supported on -grade providing the subgrade soils are prepared as recommended under "Site Preparation and Earthwork." We recommend that the slab be founded on a drainage blanket layer as discussed below. The drainage blanket should consist of a minimum thickness of 1.5 feet of free -draining crushed rock or well -graded sand and gravel compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The material should have a maximum particle size of 6 inches, between 50 to 75 percent passing the'/4-inch sieve, 25 to 40 percent passing the U.S. No. 4 sieve, 15 to 30 percent passing the U.S. No. 10 sieve, less than 10 percent passing the U.S. No. 40 sieve and less than 3 percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. Perimeter drains should consist of perforated pipe surrounded on all sides by a minimum thickness of 6 inches of the material specified for the slab underdrain. Basement walls should be drained through the use of Miradrain 6000 or a similar product installed between the shoring and the formed concrete walls. Ground water from the drainage material should be collected in perimeter drains at the base of the walls. All collected ground water should be routed to permanent sump pumps and be pumped into the storm sewer system. Provisions for relief valves or other mechanisms should be provided to protect the slab from uplift pressures in the event of sump pump failure. SEISMICITY General The Puget Sound region is seismically active and lies within Seismic Risk Zone 3 with a Seismic Zone Factor (Z) of 0.30 as classified by the Uniform Building Code (ICBO 1997). We recommend the project site be classified as Soil Profile Type Sc, as defined in the Uniform Building Code. Seismicity in this region is attributed primarily to the interaction between the Pacific, Juan de Fuca and North American plates. The Juan de Fuca plate is subducting beneath the North American Plate. Each year 1,000 to 2,000 earthquakes occur in Oregon and Washington. However, only 5 to 20 of these are typically felt because the majority of recorded earthquakes are smaller than magnitude 3. Because of the thick overburden of glacial sediments, no active surface faults have been discovered. Also the distribution of the recorded seismic epicenters is scattered and does not define a mappable fault zone. G e o E n g i n e e r s 12 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • • DRAFT In recent years, two large earthquakes occurred which resulted in some liquefaction in loose alluvial deposits and significant damage to some structures. The first earthquake, which was centered in the Olympia area, occurred in 1949 with a Richter magnitude of 7.1. The second earthquake, which occurred in 1965, was centered between Seattle and Tacoma with a Richter magnitude of 6.5. Liquefaction Potential We conclude that the very dense sand deposits below the ground water surface have a very low potential for liquefaction. Liquefaction refers to a condition where vibration or shaking of the ground, usually from earthquake forces, results in development of excess pore pressures in saturated soils and subsequent loss of strength in the deposit of soil so affected. In general, soils which are susceptible to liquefaction include loose to medium dense clean to silty sands which are below the water table. The evaluation of liquefaction potential is complex and is dependent on numerous site parameters, including soil grain size, soil density, site geometry, static stresses, and the design ground acceleration. Typically, the liquefaction potential of a site is evaluated by comparing the cyclic shear stress ratio (the ratio of the cyclic shear stress to the initial effective overburden stress) induced by an earthquake to the cyclic shear stress ratio required to cause liquefaction. We have evaluated the earthquake -induced cyclic shear stress ratio at this site using an empirical relationship developed by researchers for this purpose. A design earthquake with a magnitude of 7.5 on the Richter scale and a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.3g (acceleration due to gravity) was used for our analysis. The cyclic shear stress ratio required to cause liquefaction was estimated using an empirical procedure based on standard penetration test (SPT) results obtained during sampling in the test borings. This method relates the cyclic shear stress ratio required to cause liquefaction to the SPT value and the fines content of the soil. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The exposed subgrade in pavement areas should be proofrolled or otherwise evaluated to detect areas of unsuitable, soft or disturbed soils as discussed previously under the "Site Preparation and Earthwork" section of this report. Soft or disturbed areas which develop in the subgrade should be removed and replaced with structural fill compacted as recommended to provide adequate pavement support. We recommend that the design pavement section in automobile parking areas consist of 2 inches of Class B asphalt concrete, 4 inches of crushed rock base course, and at least a 6 -inch - thickness of subbase consisting of clean, structural fill. In truck traffic areas, the thickness of Class B asphalt concrete and crushed rock base course should be increased to 3 inches and 6 inches, respectively. The crushed rock base course and subbase should both be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density. G e o E n g i n e e r s 13 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 • • DRAFT Our recommendations for the thickness of subbase fill beneath new pavement are based on • dry weather construction conditions. If the pavement areas are constructed during extended periods of wet weather, a thicker layer of subbase may be required. It is also important to pavement performance that backfill in utility trenches be compacted as specified for structural fill. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS We expect that perched water will be encountered in other areas of the excavation in the cleaner sand and gravel layers. We anticipate that this water can be temporarily handled during construction by ditching and sump pumping, as necessary. All collected water should be routed to suitable discharge points. We recommend that the permanent building walls and perimeter footings be constructed with drains. The drainage blanket should be constructed as recommended previously in the "Floor Slab" section. All roof drains should be connected to tightlines that discharge into the storm sewer disposal system. The roof drains should be kept separate from the underslab drainage system. We recommend that all surfaces be sloped to drain away from the proposed building area. Pavement surfaces and open space areas should be sloped such that surface water runoff is collected and routed to suitable discharge points. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for use by Friedman Development and other members of the design team in design of a portion of this project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding or estimating purposes, but our report, conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. When the design has been finalized, we recommend that we be retained to review the final design drawings and specifications to see that our recommendations have been interpreted and implemented as intended. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. Variations in subsurface conditions are possible between the explorations. Variations are also possible as soil and subsurface water conditions change over time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and schedule. Sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided by our firm during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes should the conditions revealed during the work differ from G e o E n g i n e e r s 14 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 GeoEngineers 15 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 5T , O t` o U ��� i 10N. z,w =1•. .' 77W R41"IN .. M.! RI F. L3 s rt R. b \SgTH C'1� '21_ - 4 R' _ S.l 1 .L 1 II. lir �tF I I ! �� ts\ ' M n E \` :: ,, L. ! `'% ,r �• FEN`• �, '/' 0. + . =':) ) � 1+ ,�:.- d\ I: I -- •JE. Fwni s 7,1 I Q I sl1 � • .1.••5 ,r`9' = 1�- S \ �?sr s s •.- S 6,� ,.,• sa s CAC04, to 1 1 St �� 1/.. t� L" < _ J' iW -5 lam `,i _ r Vin,., - ;' S ' ars III 5 g` L., , ' tiT '' 176- 's' � � •�, \ t"-4 St m 2T SIJ 1201 H <�'. D RIVER= "'•' i ,' num - �\ � . . TR / , s7 -- \- al 5 nl'Y1L'2: 24 N VLSI S 30Y„ �• JS !1^ "_j MI5 ,7zL s fg �%. nslE S "i�AN01—C_ 1 . — El _••iY--___- IMIIINIC " ' s 133.1 ST •599:r�\.Q� --___,,,-,./0 n� SI °`I i , All NS ■ <.. . r, ;j.. ._;_i:'. '.,- ':; I n.'" 4�,7;,./„.5 133RD -.�5 311,., Si a s $ < �.... _ 13578 ''' ST' M; .il, .s % .;l ,. 44('�' 'QR 'F1- :: Kri!'' , 1• , _•'�'• 1. •e„,....1.+Ni'L• , ljf \\ Cl?' �\ Ale, �, I \\ ,,/G ,1a� >; --12.4.1 S 1351f1 Li_ Sr IB > c a g a' Nal _a. .” Ti. , + s' d' �i ..:'.: t; Eag\\\s i - // `I(�hI qa. W i_!'\ Yl'. 0A, SI 1.� ---- IF i :Ir c 1. : 138TH 2 - - '141 ^ l/1 S C a �w :. >yJ •' _ _ l cJ , -BpC .,. ' �. - \ > • q �. \Q i S- .1138 ; - • • 1! ;Z /�j, •100 II $t S S 13911 SI ,t• Ut 1• -< i ' `'.142,..., s 7r _ 1 ,s?,,tl, \\\ , ..: J: A�'`- S s. .� •', (.. ••.' -i �ti+11 IS? \`\.%\ �.\ ' ---- M 5 1,011 $Try !!�"• .,.' : �l�J ,lel*,!!]'\_ • 1••• .Ty"'(_ ; I tel^ 1"'. — Ills• ' p l''". �.' .'" t, :•-•;•$ I L l' "-_ 1 \ 1 ',•� • � Ir i -� ..•.;.: ' r'�'•/`6..3.,(�'�..,� �', \\\\`G�'/V,,�[�tl I; Sr - , .'. . .. •�++rr.,..f. ..p. •�'L•R t,, i_,"t..%.�"N°2400 .r 3 • I: - S �jffzSDD t R a 1il 2 i n f 144TH 142ND -' �: I'.:ST ' LI• ° g 5 : 99 ti1�'� Se i . r FOSTER ` 142 . 144 ,f.. D.Siw -` MIO ■ ST _ '® _< ; ,. ;.:• n '\:,�. p1, r—' ......,,)0); ?,, 1 3R0 $T•., Q• .'n ST ��`RD p `Nseop"I F is 54 i7N _3 �.\\\ 141,, ?1e, "'' i i ,} ,tslf,.. :• d . « ,••q �' 1- . , , iiiiiitilliwzni 146TH, ST.. 11011 -� t : " lit PARK• `, tT' \\ •Q� LIB '.`, . • . s J:gp::\,1, 4'',•� NIl HE v I Ja®F WII , '4� 1200 ' s <' •s 149T4 s �4• ... •�!. ✓', ? ''. ORA it �Ia F1 6I ' -21 S �risu� -150TH : . < IhST 1. ILI '< R S52 - . as . <3':. ' ' :: z 5 15151 619TH sT' 22 + sT ., s 150TH ST , - 7 s 1 . . _ 23.' ••••••• <' 151 \ \ R� . sT 'SLrt',•4Y/V• \ ` i C; 1 A . _ "1' \�., S , ,n 1. FS . �, $ n ' • Pb ®' TH n� . �' HgcR DY K 52ND sr... �. ,. ' G i I 15200 y_ \ -• , '��• 'ST • r-- S 152ND P..;.;•1,1 ; ., ,'.. tlSi _ � .s 4d .�'-_ SM `, _ •.,.. ___ Nr\44i�`��� �: ® Q',�7E:. 518.1♦lITDI�11\ --- 3 ii: SITIE „"" ! 1111b _,_-� ,...1.<1,116511 , A77LE S' - 1��N NI�� vT;1• 4COMA ERNATIONAL �' 5 •159TH • s•f(ij: ;,r?' ^S t 's ' .. 158TH 3 ��,`�.. i. y r I' l�, ! AIRPORT * ST '4.' S . .. -„ 160TH ST ' - ¢� I 3 ;1,, I e 4' , O/ r+,. I,�/ Tokio qq SONlIICENTER ', ,. � PKWY \ ft ) " ! �` W Erre 5 S7 s . 15T 57 i ,ti 9• S s7 ��•]l•��ll• 9P/ .. . .,. < 's t � - �/ b. 0 , O 1111 N4LL nwa BAKER BL = W D tr 1 s .s '.------:17„/ / i / R 1117/0 L!e m e ` GI X L : 2 slum STRANDER '- BLVD, 2r2 F OTM< �r v N sl�dfl •:F q;- 1^ 7litrigfi S 167TH ST I H C, SWTNCENTER P . TRECK INDp� r • 1 '` S 681' � - ssTli: ' sr mown '•' = y s I j' 'Y " S '",'-g•t!iiiI KE cei TS .. ':- L _ 041'4 .4,,'. N ',:,,tV'•. `�1 -$ < 31100 - 5100 •. j Meat X25 o. ..' •0 41E ,gry \•\ '°' l R G " 17, mo � - t': S` _ : .. ..: ,• 172ND® ' . - '' • • .:ST . .:• col N 1 -• .. CORPORAT I. . 'DR N rr .. '101 1h0 •Oil 33RD > ST. < • =11 ��:; =, 5'^ 172t1D PL : CpRPORAT?�' �� \'H,. lar .v•.' ' 173RD < 5T F- j, MINK ' DR s•BLVD 4. _ 1244, A SW .2 s 115TH'• ST <LP , 5 PARKNAr ' / 1 O g 176TH ' - aH^ ST �I' PEAU NI ST. • ,' I— R SEATTLE 6 AIRPORT 3 DD R SEATTLE : s r - .. i - - � • Z RUTIN SEA AIRPORT•. e. '. ` S 1 TTN 51 QDD ''aloe 1 - o u, :PK;178TH I M _.l. i •1 TDR 1 .RE7(i0r� I 6 ;1:7 LLA - __eN • :. lit 1711111 ST t10M _ •, TRT ' 1 1 • _ j `NERAIDS A= fib s ' ,•, �:tall TM Sp o tl :• J:: 10 0 2000 4000 1 SCALE Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS. It is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part IN FEET N MAPS. This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. thereof, whether for personal use or resale, without permission. 1 VICINITY MAP Geo Engineers FIGURE 1 ca Mg vAw GArzc, 7044Jiz-4 S 144th ST 7.2 tn souTHCEti S 160th ST <9 SITE . t • .0,...-- cott,..0 \N'ILL2;141fflibmniiii--- )';sr.,56i:Zi \\s,s vz, STRANDER BLVD VICINITY MAP NO SCALE =a =ma Inn 11111111 mem mime [11111' 1111111 szinav • 1111 1 1,1•002•1 1==1EIN, 11111R MimE 1111M TIR SOUTH ELEVATION (FRONT) -L -1___ - J EAST ELEVATION (116NT SIDE) NORTH ri-evATION ntrAN —• J NEST ELEVATION herr wow • • — ^".• --••!==*____ .....,'"' ______,------- .... -L -1___ - J EAST ELEVATION (116NT SIDE) NORTH ri-evATION ntrAN —• J NEST ELEVATION herr wow • • 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 073N tL cn 0 0 0 NT-.RFc,S F Note: The locations of all features shown are approximate. Reference: Drawing entitiled "Architectural Site Plan, Southcenter Self Storage, Tukwila, WA," by Davey Associates Architect, October 18, 1999. t 11T11 1 c r rn. 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET Geo Engineers FIGURE 2 0001A.DWG co N. 0 Q 0 O O 0 cO r` >- 0 0 0 140 A 120 — 100 — 80 - CD Z 0 Q w 60 — Existing 40 — 20 — R Existing Elevation (Approximte) I Notes: 1. The subsurface conditions shown are based on interpolation between widely spaced explorations and should be considered approximate; actual subsurface conditions may vary from those shown. 2. Refer to Figure 2 for location of Subsurface Profile A—A'. 3. Figure to be used in conjunction with report text. 1 L Approximate Limit of West Building Wall u) 0 a) N a) 40 7 m 50/5" - 50/2" - 50/3" - 50/3" - Light brown & gray fine to medium sand with silt (very dense) (sandstone) Proposed Lower Floor Elevation = 72 feet B-2 (c 50/4" 45 - 42 - 50/2" - 50/5" - 50/4" - 50/5.5" - 50/4" EXPLANATION: Boring 50/4"-I Blow Count Ground Water Seepage Measured in Open Hole 48 Hours after Drilling Sensiti DRAFT — 140 — 120 — 100 SCALE: 1" = 20' — 80 — 60 — 40 — 20 — 0 Geo Engineers INTERPRETED SUBSURFACE PROFILE A -A' WEST BUILDING WALL FIGURE 3 Cf) Cr) N P:\7810001 \CAD\7810001 B.DWG 0 B 140 — 120 — 100 — 80 — 60 — 40 — 20 — 0 — • TP -3 (offset 98' west) Approximate Limit of East Building Wall Existing Elevation (Approximte) Hard/Very dense at 4.6ft. depth Proposed Lower Floor Elevation = 72 feet Notes: 1. The subsurface conditions shown are based on interpolation between widely spaced explorations and should be considered approximate; actual subsurface conditions may vary from those shown. 2. Refer to Figure 2 for location of Subsurface Profile B—B'. 3. Figure to be used in conjunction with report text. TP -2 (offset 20' west) 7 Light brown & white (very dense) Very dense at 2ft. depth silty fine sand (sandstone) EXPLANATION: M Boring 50/1" Blow Count Ground Water Seepage Measured in Open Hole 48 Hours after Drilling 0 -3 (offset 29' • DRAFT 38 44 62 ? —73 50/1" 100/7" 150/2" 158/5" 200/5" 50/5" N a 1 - Light brown sand with silt, gravel, cobbles and occasional boulders (very dense) Test Pit Completed By Others SCALE: 1" = 20' B' — 140 — 120 — 100 — 80 - 60 — 40 — 20 — 0 Geo Engineers INTERPRETED SUBSURFACE PROFILE B -B' EAST BUILDING WALL FIGURE 4 Final Grade Base of Excavation 2' D H �— 400D—....--40 (H+D+2') Passive Pressure Active Pressure (psf) (psf) NOT TO SCALE 0 Notes: 1. Earth pressures are given in terms of equivalent fluid pressures. 2. Passive pressures are assumed to oct over 2 times the soldier pile diameter or pile spacing, whichever is less. 3. Active pressures ore assumed to act over pile spacing above base of excavation and over soldier pile diameter below base of excavation. 4. Passive pressures include Factor: of Safety := 1.5. Geo Engineers EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM CANTILEVER OR SINGLE ROW•OF TIEBACKS FIGURE 5 H Final Grade 1 2 Base of Excavation 7 1.5 �- - 400D NOT TO SCALE Passive Active Pressure Pressure (psf) (psf) v Notes: 1. Earth pressures ore given in terms of equivalent fluid pressures. 2. Passive pressures are assumed to act over 2 times the soldier pile diameter or pile spacing, whichever is less. 3. Active pressures ore assumed to act over pile spacing above base of excavation and over soldier pile diameter below base of excavation. 4. Passive pressures include Factor of Safety = 1.5. Geo Engineers EARTH PRESSURE DIAGRAM MULTIPLE TIEBACK LEVELS FIGURE 6 APPENDIX A • ' • • DRAFT G e o E n g i n e e r s A-1 File No. 7810-001-00-1130/121599 W 7.7. SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM . MAJOR DIVISIONS GROUP SYMBOL GROUP NAME COARSE GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Retained on No. 200 Sieve GRAVEL More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Retained on No. 4 Sieve CLEAN GRAVEL GW WELL -GRADED GRAVEL. FINE TO COARSE GRAVEL GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL GRAVEL WITH FINES GM SILTY GRAVEL GC CLAYEY GRAVEL SAND More Than 50% of Coarse Fraction Passes No. 4 Sieve CLEAN SAND SW WELL -GRADED SAND, FINE TO COARSE SAND SP POORLY -GRADED SAND SAND WITH FINES SM SILTY SAND SC , CLAYEY SAND FINE GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Passes No. 200 Sieve SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit Less Than 50 INORGANIC ML SILT CL CLAY ORGANIC OL , ORGANIC SILT, ORGANIC CLAY SILT AND CLAY Liquid Limit 50 or More INORGANIC MH SILT OF HIGH PLASTICITY, ELASTIC SILT CH CLAY OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAY ORGANIC OH ORGANIC CLAY, ORGANIC SILT HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT NOTES: SOIL MOSTURE MODIFIERS: 1. Field classification is based on visual examination of soil in Dry - Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch general accordance with ASTM D2488-90. Moist - Damp, but no visible water 2. Soil classification using laboratory tests is in general accordance with ASTM D2487-90. Wet - Visible free water or saturated, usually soil is obtained from below 3. Descriptions of soil density or consistency are based on water table interpretation of blow count data, visual appearance of soils, and/or test data. 0 GeoEngineers ‘‘\ei SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FIGURE A-1 f:\soila-l.doc LABORATORY TESTS AL CP CS DS GS %F HA SK SM MD SP TX UC CA Atterberg Limits Compaction Consolidation Direct shear Grain size Percent fines Hydrometer Analysis Permeability Moisture Content Moisture and density Swelling pressure Triaxial compression Unconfined compression Chemical analysis BLOW COUNT/SAMPLE DATA: Blows required to drive a 2.4 -inch I.D. split -barrel sampler 12 inches or other indicated distances using a 300 -pound hammer falling 30 inches. Blows required to drive a 1.5 -inch I.D. (SPT) split -barrel sampler 12 inches — or other indicated distances using a 140 -pound hammer falling 30 inches. "P" indicates sampler pushed with weight of hammer or against weight of drill rig. • SOIL GRAPH: 22 1 ► 12® 17 0 10 26 m SM nnAn Soil Group Symbol (See Note 2) Distinct Contact Between Soil Strata Gradual or Approximate Location of Change Between Soil Strata Water Level Bottom of Boring Location of relatively undisturbed sample Location of disturbed sample Location of sampling attempt with no recovery Location of sample obtained in general accordance with Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586) procedures Location of SPT sampling attempt with no recovery Location of grab sample NOTES: 1. The reader must refer to the discussion in the report text, the Key to Boring Log Symbols and the exploration Togs for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 2. Soil classification system is summarized in Figure A-1. Geo i Engineers KEY TO BORING LOG SYMBOLS FIGURE A-2 r, a cc 0 W 0 0. 0 S 0 0 0 co J LU z 0 0W Project - Friedman Development Job Number • 7810-001-00 Location Southcenter Blvd Date 10//99 Drilled Logged KPC By Contractor Subterranean Drill Method 4" Mud Rotary Equipment Mobile FN60 Track Rig B t11 SampleHammer Method 300" hammer/30" drop Data X-coordinate: Not Determined Y-coordinate: Not Determined Total Depth (ft) 18.5 Elevation (ft) 90 _System: Datum: Not Determined Not Determined NCA) N 0 N 0111111111111111111111_11111, I. N o DEPTH IN FEET % Recovery Sample No. Blow Count 1 a, f Graphic Log USCS Group Symbol Material Description Moisture Content (%) I Dry Unit Weight I (pcf) Other Tests And Notes 1 1 1.111111T-1-11111111111111IIIIIi1 N O 01 O N O O DEPTH IN FEET 100 100 100 1 2 3 4 50/5"111 50/2" 50/3" IN 50/3"Becomes Note: M L100 See !. '. S0110.2 SM SM feet sod Brown - _ - _ — _ — — 18 110 GS TX - silty fine sand with organic matter (dense, moist) _(topsoil) Light brownish gray silty fine sand (very dense, moist) - (poorly cemented sandstone) _- - light gray Figure A-2 for explanation _ Boring completed at 18.5 feet on 10/23/99 No ground water encountered during drilling due to — drilling with mud _ Ground water measured at a depth of 10.0 feet in open hole 48 hours after drilling — —— — of symbols Geo ��Engineers LOG OF BORING B-1 FIGURE A-3 0 U W U a 0 0 0 0 0 z 6! 0 co -J CC w z W Project IP Friedman Development. Job Number 7810-001-00 Location LAA'ALr Southcenter Blvd Da Dried 10/23/99 ll LoggedgKPC v Contractor Subterranean Drill Method 4" Mud Rotary Equipment Mobile FN60 Track Rig B Yll SampleHammer Method 300" hammer/30" drop Data X-coordinate: Not Determined Y-coordinate: Not Determined Total Depth (ft) 38.5 - Elevation (ft) 109 Datum: Not Determined System: Not Determined INDEPTH IN FEET 1 W W N 01 O N0 N 0 01 O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I% Recovery d z F co IBlow Count w u) Graphic Log USCS Group Symbol Material Description Moisture Content (%) Dry Unit Weight (pcf) Other Tests And Notes 1 1 1 1 , 1 T 1 I 1 1 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UI 0 V1 O 31 O O DEPTH IN FEET 67 78 100 100 100 100 109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10/51 50/4" 45 42 50/2"111 50/5" 50/4" Note: • • AC SM SM SP -SM SP -SM J 1.5 inches as halt gown - - ~ — 11 23 113 103 GS TX .' . . silty fine to coarse sand with fine to coarse gravel (dense, moist) (fill) Light brown gray silty fine sand (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) - Light brown fine sand with silt (dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) White and orange fine to medium sand with silt (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) - Becomes white r See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols Geo�OEngineers LOG OF BORING B-2 FIGURE A-4 GEI GENERAL BORING LOG 7810001.GPJ GEI_CORP.GDT 12/16/99 7810-001.00 Proj W W LL S w O 35 ct N 0 U d CC • Friedman Development z G E n C 0 U O m 0 5_ E f0 0) 0 J U 0. to e5 100 100 40- 0- 45- 45- 50- 50- 55- 55- 60- 60- 65- 65- 70- 70- 75- 75- 9 50/4".1 0. O O (7 0 c co SP -SM Job Number 7810-001-00 Material Description Location C 0 0 O o N cn 0 I / f Southcenter Blvd 0 E - D 0 Note: See Figure A-2 for exp White and orange fine to medium sand with silt (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) Boring completed at 38.5 feet on 10/23/99 Ground water not encountered during drilling Ground water measured at a depth of 22.0 feet in open hole 48 hours after drilling lanation of symbols Other Tests And Notes F W W LL z 2 1- a u) O —35 —40 —45 —50 —55 —60 —65 —70 —75 Geo \� Engineers LOG OF BORING B-2 (Continued) FIGURE A-4 m 0 D. 0 0 U W U U 0 0 0 z 0 m J w Z W. Project IP Friedman Development Job Number . 7810-001-00 Location Southcenter =' �L, i.) ;J Blvd Date 10/23/99 Drilled Logged KPC Contractor Subterranean brill Method 4" Mud Rotary Equipment Mobile FN60 Track Rig B till SampleHammer Method 300" hammer/30" drop Data X-coordinate: Not Determined Y-coordinate: Not Determined Total Depth (ft) 54 Elevation (ft) 124 Datum: Not Determined System: Not Determined W W N N 1� 0 01 0 01 O (11 0 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 t 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I _1_ 1 , I 11 1 t DEPTH IN FEET % Recovery z a, cu co IBlow Count 1 a) g Material 0) Graphic Log USCS Group Symbol Description Moisture Content (%) Dry Unit Weight (pcf) Other Tests And Notes 1 1 1 1 1 t-- - I 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U1 0O 0 01 O DEPTH IN FEET 67 44 67 72 57 29 63 1 2 _ 4 5 6 7 n50/2' 38 44 62 73 50/1" noon'- Note: MI 1. • SM —\0.1 foot forest duff , - - - = — —• 8 108 GS GS TX SP -SM SM SM Brown silty fine to coarse sand with fine to coarse gravel - and occasional wood (medium dense. moist) (fill) ight brown fine to medium sand with silt, coarse sand - and fine to coarse gravel (dense, moist) Light brown silty fine to medium sand with occasional fine gravel and organic matter (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) - _ Light brownish silty white fine to medium sand (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) - _ r See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols ��„ Geo Engineers LOG OF BORING B-3 FIGURE A-5 MIR GE! GENERAL BORING LOG 7810001.GPJ GEL CORP.GDT 12/16/99 7810-001-00 Project Friedman Development Job Number 7810-001-00 Location Southcenter Blvd ., DEPTH IN FEET cri 0 0 aI c O 0 0 m a) >_ 0) J 0 to a 0 40- 0- 60 60 45- 45- 50- 50- 55- 55- 60- 60- 65- 65- 70- 70- 75- 75- 8 58/5'. 9 200/5' 10 50/5" a 0 c 0a 0u) SM Material Description a) 0 0 U --- a) � 5 Other Tests And Notes Light brown silty fine sand with occasional medium to coarse sand, fine gravel and organic matter (very dense, moist) (poorly cemented sandstone) Boring completed at 54.0 feet on 10/22/99 Ground water level not encountered during drilling Ground water measured at a depth of 14.7 feet in open hole 48 hours after drilling Note: See Figure A-2 for explanation of symbols w LI' DEPTH IN FEET —40 —45 —50 —55 —60 —65 —70 —75 Geo Engineers LOG OF BORING B-3 (Continued) FIGURE A-5 7810-001-00 DCO:MBB:mbb 11/17/99 (Sieve.ppt) 9-V 3211101A S1111S321 SISA1VNV 3/01S 100 90 - 80 - 0 70- >- 60 m 50 (1) 40 6 0K0 30 20 10 - U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 3" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8' #4 0 1000 100 #10 #20 #40 #60 #I00 #200 10 1 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL DEPTH (ft) SOIL CLASSIFICATION SAND B-1 SILT OR CLAY COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SYMBOL BORING NUMBER DEPTH (ft) SOIL CLASSIFICATION 6 B-1 3 Light brown -gray silty fine sand (SM) B-2 5 Light brown -gray silty fine sand (SM) • 2 B-3 B-3 3 13. Light brown fine to medium sand with silt (SP -SM) Light brown silty fine to medium sand (SM) • City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 10, 1999 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION December 10, 1999 Mr. Robert Davey Davey Associates, Architects 385 Front Street N Issaquah, WA 98027 RE: Mr. Van Gard Self Storage L99-0002, E99-0033 Dear Mr. Davey: Thank you for submitting the property.owner declaration, lighting plan, slop plan, sign drawings, site plan with retaining walls, cross section, site survey and pages for the SEPA checklist. These materials complete the design review and environmental review applications, for the purposes of meeting state -mandated time requirements. The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to prepare and install the sign with your application packet. If u need another set of those instructions, you may obtain them at the Department of Community Development (DCD). Also, you must obtain a laminated copy of the Notice of Application to post on the board. Please call me 3 days prior to installing the notice board to arrange the pick up of the laminated Notice of Application. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, please return the signed Affidavit of Posting to our office. The complete Design Review and SEPA applications will now be circulated to staff. Additional comments will be provided after other departments have an opportunity to conduct substantive review of the proposed self -storage facility. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 • • Robert Davey Mr. Van Gard Self Storage December 10, 1999 This determination of complete application does not preclude the City from requesting additional plans or information if, in our view, such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. It appears that there will be several substantive comments from staff regarding the proposed project. The January 2000 hearing date appears unlikely at this point. We will try for the February 2000 Planning Commission, but that date is dependent on the amount of anticipated substantive comments and your responsiveness. I will be contacting you once I have received comments from City staff. If you wish to speak to me sooner, feel free to call me at 206-431-3683. Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Associate Planner cc: Reviewing City Departments C:\My Documents\mr van gard--completeness letter.doc CITY OPTUKWILA • Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 0 3 1999 PERMIT CENTER SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR. STAFF. USE: 0NLY: P[anner�`{ Receipt Ntirriber ;:Cross-referenc':files App(fcantnotfied'agnc-Ompletaa�� licati r A" licant n of ed"ofcoriipfete appIicat o Notica`of applicatror s -issued A: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Mg V4W X7 TeW/L,- B. LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (address and accessors parcel number(s)) 5-'15 soj7--le,Ei / 1E7e- 23c -vi, Quarter: •-e),.7.1- Section: 'Z 3 Township: Z3 I' Range: 4E- 14)A4 (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 3 STy .cvE2 Z e3.1,14 7 SL -/ ' ST C+C'SLD6 D. APPLICANT: NAME: ADDRESS: 25S s 5M,-1 GTz/ J - 3a0 - . 'l-rri PHONE: Zeto 11-4.7 9556 SIGNATURE: 8037- 04v DATE: / / - ,' /43 CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 DESIGN REVIEW INFORMATION The Tukwila Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan provide for design review• of certain types of development. The purpose of the design review process is to promote "well designed developments that are creative and harmonious with the natural and manmade environments" (TMC 18.60.010). When is design review required? "Development" is the construction, reconstruction, alteration or relocation of any structure requiring a building permit. Design review is required for the following categories of development: A. NEW DEVELOPMENT 1. All multi -family development, of any size. 2. All mobile/manufactured home parks. 3. All commercial and industrial development (e.g. hotel, office, retail, warehouse, manufacturing uses) in the following zones of the following size: MUO 0 RCC NCC RC > 5000 s.f. & all with multi -family units > 5000 s.f. —any size- -any size— > 5000 s.f. and all hotels, motels RCM > 5000 s.f. & all with multi -family units TUC > 2500 s.f. & all with multi -family units CLI > 10000 s.f. TVS > 10000 s.f. 4. All commercial and industrial development, of any size, located within 300' of a residential zone. 5. All development (except in LDR zone), of any size, located within Shoreline Overlay District (e.g., within 200 feet of the Green/Duwamish River). B. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT For grandfathered developments without a BAR approved design: Any exterior repairs, alterations or improvements to an existing commercial or industrial building with more than 10,000 s.f., that exceeds 10% of the assessed valuation of the building, in MUO, 0, RCC, NCC, RC, RCM, TUC and CLI districts. For developments with a BAR approved design: Minor changes are allowed with Department approval. All other changes require further Board review. What is the design review process? Within 28 days of receiving your application, City staff determines if it is complete. If not, you will be mailed a letter outlining what additional information is needed. The project will be scheduled for a public hearing before .the Board of Architectural Review once the application is determined to be complete. The hearing date will be no sooner than 60 days from the determination of a complete application. During this time staff will review the application; meet with you as needed, and formulate a recommendation to the Board. The Board meets at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Thursday of the month. Environmental review is required on every design review application. : A "Determination" on the environmental impacts must be issued by the City prior to the Board's public hearing. The Board's decision is final unless appealed to the City Council. DESREV.DOC 12/12/96 • • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Control No. Epic File No. Fee 325 Receipt No. s4 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: U 2. Name of ap p l i c an t:`%•K. 4P.o`— V P 3. Ad ress and phone number of applicant and contact person: so , 4-6.7 `IS -S.0 VPouca:z L'�'�� bS S 4. Date checklist pr -pared: //—/—y% 5. Agency requesting Checklist: 17y 352 G5zL City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (ir1cluding phasing, if applicable): Spwri 2-o7 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be pre•.red directl related to this p oposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.. iL( 10. List any government approvals or perm'ts that will 'e needed for your proposal. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete • description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized her 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tio s related to this checklist. l � 'r9 rj fi • ''I C.n_ itA— _a,s 40-1_ Ak41.67 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? /•-/ O -3- • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 8.' ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. General description . the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? -4-o° +� 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 p ime farmland. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. NO e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grding proposed. Indicate source of fill. f.,f Zoo'D�y f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, constructs n, r use? If so, gener lly descrie. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 57 o -4- • • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: (41....,4 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 quan ities if known. Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. JG,i,, c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. NO • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. NO 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. NONE 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if kngwn. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. /%/O 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. m2 -6- • • b. Ground: Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. NO 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. /Jv 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 oth-r waters? Iso, i4e...t' -7- • • 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If descr'b ._ Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, grqund, nd unof water impacts, if any: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: >C deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other >4 evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other >4 shrubs < grass _ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. 'What kind and amount pf v gets ion will oalter d? ')A4,44,11. GL+.Q-cam_ rem° ed c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. ND//E -8- • • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve o en ance vegetati•n •n the • site, if any: fir-- k 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, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endanger d cies known to be on or n -.r t e site. spe�_ r c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. /40 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: AtO E Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, color) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be use 4 for heating, a ufacturing, etc. 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 ed ce or control energy impaAr, s, if any: �, ;��� AL1 �. ..ti/r!5 . .. C[ ',P „„,....„4., 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. /.'V 1) Describe special emergency service that might be required. a.�...� 2) Proposed measures to reduce or ontrol environ- mental health hazards, if any: rh� 4 - ,• i 007,111 -10- '1 b. Noise • • 1) What types of nose exist in the areas which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? g 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? 54.01%t tvvipt_, �, 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: 8 Land and shoreline use a. What us the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 7&..ti.-, , 44L-- b. as the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: 4t4L.'t_ c. Describe the structures on the site: 11 • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification f the site? IZCIF f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? .e.__ g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master programdesignation of the site? h. - Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. NO i. Approximately how many people w4ul/dDres de or work in the cam 1 ted project? 2 b� ""�-t� j - Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? .1.19— k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:_ Ar)...e„, 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:,, %?��-L.. ,.- 41 -12- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? -69— b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicatg, whether high, middle, or low- income housing. -�7"" c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materia (s) proposed? 4r n ., b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? /12irK.t c. Proposed measures ^t,,o re'uce nor control aesthetic impacts, i f any: -13- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety az rd or interfere with vievs? c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? /•/D d. Proposed measures to r duce or co trol lig t o glare impacts, if any: 12. Recreation. a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? NaNL 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: -14- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. is/ONE b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A1E c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: IVA 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street y tem. how o, site plans, if a y b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How ma y would the project gliminte? ih.0r = /3 ,L Z -15- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). /10 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. /./O f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, i dicate when peak volumes would occur. �,�� ' , G8 g. Proposed measures to reduce' or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: /Jo.UE 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. �. 4� hrz. 1 - - 4 !/wvV b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direc impacts •n public services, if any. /1w- -16- • • 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently (Tectricit) (natural gas,) (telephone, sani ary sewer septic ilable at the site: refuse service) other. system, 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 whigh might be neede C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. -17- Evaluation for Agency Use Only TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLIC • E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objectives a cru -.e -.--"e of the proposal? Evaluation for Agency Use Only i Vias •I lsLI • l� . L • 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? T Q 3. Please.compare the alternative preferred course of action: means and indicate the 6 -72- • • • 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land se Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of th- Plan? i Evaluation for Agency Use Only Proposed measur s to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: /ho -23- ,(x(12 V' . &Ago .SELF= s r-cavt June 24, 1987 Mr. Leon Grundstein 11801 Northeast 160th Street, Suite G Bothell, Washington 98011 Re: Tukwila Apartment and Office Project Dear Mr. Grundstein: With your authorization, I have investigated the subsurface conditions as they relate to proposed construction of 57 apartment units and an office building in. Tukwila We met at the site on 14 May, at which time you showed me several preliminary site plans and the approximate ground li.mits. ofthe property. I sent you a proposal dated 18 May, and on the same day summarized the proposal to you by telephone and informed you that it was my intention that the office -site be included in the scope of work covered by the proposal, although the document did not specifically say so. You gave verbal authorization to proceed on 28 May, and. I received .your written proposal on 30 May. On 1 June I picked up additional site plans at your. office; these provided ground control points fromwhich field measurements couldbe made. Field access preparation and subsurface exploration were accomplished on 1 and.2 June. This report describes the property the project proposed,the investigative. procedures and .summarizes conclusions and recommendations applicable to site grading, subgrade drainage, foundation and retaining wall design, and mitigation of earth -related hazards, whether those hazards are the result of development or not. •Considering the steepness of terrain, generally favorable conditions were. found. Exception is in the vicinity of Building "A"; there a combination of steep terrain, shallow groundwater, and erosion-cavitatedsand which require that Building "A" be supportedon augercast.piles Surface -- evidence suggests that there has been a continuing problem of poor surface. drainage, sloughage and erosion in that vicinity, especially toward :the.. west end of the property. The pile -supported building will be as secure as those on flatter terrain and more favorable subgrade conditions and to some minor degree, will bring about improvement of downslope surface flow and sloughage.. JAMES EATON, PE • (206) 682-6942 • RECEIVED' • CITY'OF TUKW LA NOV. 0 3.1999 GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Box 126 • Hobart, WA 98025 PERMIT CENTER Mr. Grundstein. June 24, 1987 Page Two I.am also advising you that have:an accurate' topographic suvey..made a.s a logical next step.and that you and your architect consider'.revisions in -the. site and grading plan. With this letter are three copies of my report of findings.. Yours very truly, EARTH SCIENCE es N. Eaton 0431 JNE/rlb. Enclosures INTRODUCTION The property slopes 'moderately to steeply to the south and southwest; elevation differential is in the order of 100 feet. It lies north and east of theintersection of Macadam Road and Southcenter Boulevard Vour south . property line represents the approximate toe -of -slope and common property line with penny's Restaurant and. the ARCO AM -PM Market. It -appears that the lower..reaches of the slope were artificially steepened beyond their natural grades at some time in the past.: This is especially the case behind the AM -PM market and around the north and east peripheries of the trapezoidal parcel proposed for office development. Page nineof this report was prepared from a 22 May 1987 site plan prepared by AzariaRousso/Architects and from an 18 June. 1986.office site plan prepared by Mithun-Bowman-Enrich Group, P.S. Note that page nine consists of two separate plans,each to different scale; one is of the residential. portion and one applies to the office portion; An earlier undatedsite plan study prepared by Milbrandt Architects was used for its location of .. the existing apartmentsto the north. Some of the test locations plotted on page nine were measured from a demolished house which, for field purposes only, was scaled from a 1"=100 partial top sheet which you provided. Presently, the only improvements on the property are the basement floor and walis of the aforementioned house, the driveway which served the house,and several rockeries along or near the toe of the slope. A variety of trees exist -:..in: clusters at various parts of the property. The areasbetween." clusters support a dense growth of blackberry bushes and other. brush. Part. of that brush, especially in the vicinity of Building "B" and "C", was removed in preparing access for test equipment. At the time of field work, a spring emerged from the toe -of -slope area ' immediately north of your proposed office building. It ponded in a small artifictially created depression nearthe northeast corner of that .build.ing, area. Water was also noted emerging from the south of Building "A" location and north of Denny's. This water appears. to originate as spring water from the general area around and north,ofBuilding "A". It appears that shallow groundwater and associated surfacedrainage has been a problem for the existing apartments to the north since construction there.. Several small ditches undermine the perimeter footings and transect the yard areas all directed -to an asphaltic -cement lined Swale: which Parallels your common property line. Some of the small ditches carried water when last observed less than.a.week-ago and it can be presumed that flow varies seasonably, but. that it continues to some degree through :the 'summer. Asnow proposed, the 57 units would be divided among five buildings.. :'The present grading plan shown as before and after contour shows Buildings "A",_ "B", "E", and part of Building "C" on cut with an apparent net removal _of borrow from the site The apartment buildings will be ofwood frame construction with slabs on grade. The office building will consist of • three stories of wood .frame construction .with a first floor slab,on grade • • SUBSURFACE. CONDITIONS Page nine shows the approximate locations at which 12 test pits were dug using a rubber -tire minted construction backhoe. Log descriptions of conditions at each location were 'maintained from direct examination of the freshly exposed strata. With recording of soil descriptions` and groundwater conditions, the pits were backfilled in the interest of .safety. Summaries of the test pit conditionsare presented on pages ten to twelve. The stratigraphically lowest material found and of relevance to development is sandstone bedrock, which was found essentially at the surface of locations one andtwo, representing the north portion of the office. building. The sandstone is fine grained,friable, and varies in color froni white to gray or. yellow-brown. It grades increasingly hard with depth, and within .a yardof its upper surface it could be further penetratedonly by repeated raking with the bucket teeth under the full weight of the backhoe. It appears that the uppermost one to two feet within the general area of the off,ce building have been disturbed or artificially modified in association with unknown past utilization.. To the depths explored, the entire residential areaand part of the office - area are underlain by glacially associated .soils. These soils are, highly variable acrossthe property, but range from clean sand or gravelly sand. in the bank behind the AM -PM market and at locations 9, 10 and 12 to silt :;or. clay hardpan at locations 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and .12. Most of the. test `:pits exhibited layering of more than one type ofglacial soil. Between the extremes of granular and find -grained are loam and nrixtures of courseand. fine-grained soils; some of these mixtures include cobbles and boulders. In general, the glacially associated soils exhibit moderate to high bearing strength and good slope stability. Exception is in the very shallow range of depth --generally less than on yard --where weathering androot action have diminished the . soi l's strength and where the granular or partially.. granular sails are saturated either by surface or subsurface flow. Also in general, after wasting the topsoil and root -ladened soils, the excavated borroWwill be ..suitable for compaction either.on:: this site or on another. .Most of the: borrow` generated will: contain a sufficient fraction of fine-grained soil to place serious seasonal restrictions on compaction and tosome degree on fresh. cuts. Where 'there are alternating layers of permeable andhighly impermeable soils as on ,youir site, there is potential . to . accumulate thin '.layers of saturationeither seasonably or at more -or -less random. locations. Groundwater was observed at locations 8,10and 11. The number 11 location. was significant. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS •Conditionsare favorable for conventional footing support of Buildings "B "C", "E", and the office building. A., deep foundation is advised for.. Building "D" because of the proximity to a steep slope and .the. highly erosive nature of the soil. Unfavorable soil and hydrologic conditions were found in the vicinity of Building "A", and terrain there appears steeper than shown by the topographic map. Because of the steep slopes and the erosive nature of ; the soil., unusual .measures should be taken with respect to surface drainage and pressurized utilities. In its . present condition, these are. risks of falling rocks and accumulations of sediment or sloughage on downslope properties; surface evidence suggests that debris removal. is routine, especially on the Denny's parking lot. Due to . the considerable earthwork involved in this project and.' -the potential risk to neighboring properties, especially those downslope, review of appropriate plans and conscientious inspection during construction are imperative aspects of development. Office Building The foundation along the north side of the building will,. necessarily, bear on sandstone. At a depth of about two feet below existing grade in that area, the . sandstone is sufficiently hard to support conventional ;:spread footing, yet it can be excavated by means of an ordinaryconstruction backhoe or tracked Loader.. Moving south across the building area, the sandstone gets deeper and it becomes overlain by over -consolidated glacial silt. '.Considering the relatively high structural loads and the desirability of having all footings bear on generally similar .material, I recommend that all footings beexcavated either into hard sandstone or glacial hardpan; this would require excavating to 4.6 feet at .location. three. Allowable soil bearing pressures of 5 ksf are advised, subject to inspection of the bearing surfaces.- The 5 ksf figure could. be :increased -by one third to accommodate seismic and similar loads. Those areas whichare to support slabs must also be graded down to firm native soil, subject to good judgment and common sense. • Near the toe of the slope behind the office building, granularglacial deposits. rest on relatively impervious silt and. sandstone_:. This permeable/impermeable relationship is the cause of spring ernergence in that area. .The footing drain should be laid with its invert at least one foot. below slab grade; the drain :andits granular washed backfill should be shrouded in .filtering fabric, and along the west and north .sides of the .. building the backfill should rise to finished grade. A similar drain; should.. follow the toe -of -the -slope andshouldparallel the east edge of the parking lot to insure that the paving does not fail because of softening subgrade. A six-inch thick or greater layer of sand or pea gravel should separate the flow slab from natural soils. You: or your architect should provide me with a copy of the foundation, grading and drainage plans for review when they are complete. .1-may.advise removal of some of the existing rockeries, the collapse of which... could damage the building. You mentioned the possibility of raising grade an the office building parcel using borrow generated from the residential area. If that is' done, I recommend that the building still be supported by footings which bear on hardundisturbed natural earth. Fill which is. to support paving. -or any otherimprovements should be placed and systematically compacted under inspection to assure quality. Topography and Grading, Residential It appears that the contour maps on which the site plans to date have been imposed was constructed from air photos and, in some cases,- the' contour lines do not accurately describe actual. conditions. I recommend that a ground survey be conducted early on and that revisions be made in the site: :and grading plans based on the better information. There might be advantages to making major site plan revisions to avoid situating buildings. near the sides of steep bluffs and thereby, eliminating the need for drilled or unusual foundations. It appears that Building "D" and at least part of _ Building "C" are nowproposed to rest on structural fill: 1 recommend that either floor grades be adjusted or that building locations be shifted to .. place all buildings on cuts. In view of the severe topographic as well as subsurface restrictions at Building "A",:I:am assuming that no. part of. the construction area will be filled and that no significant. part of. the 'building area willbe cut below existing grade. 'Adjusting of -locations may., or .may not necessitate additional testing or explanation.. From the onset of earthwor.k,you are advised to contain all -construction-related runoff within the property :until it is control --released into ':the public stormwater system. Generally similar containment applies to the post -construction period.. • In accordance withusual good construction practice, the areas which are to support improvements of any type must be stripped of organics, topsoil, `. filis,or soft. materials. It appears that.. there willbe some filling. in connection with parking lots. No unretained finished fill surface should slope at steeper than 21:1 and then only if it is compacted to at least 95... percent as defined by ASTM D1557. Compliance withthis necessarily.requires engineer inspection beginning with the stripped, unfilled surface.: 'tut slopes through any of the soil types described herein should be secure: at 1#:1. Existing slopes steeper.. than that and falling outside the. construction area areto beleft as they are. The basement wills Of the demolished house must -be removed and the. basement and surrounding area should be' reshaped to a saucer -'shaped section to facilitate placement of fillin feather -edged lifts; this, of course,'; applies only if grade is to be raised above the existing basement floor level. Septic tanks,. buried fuel tanks and similar voids if they exist: are to be similarly removed, shaped, and filled under inspection. • . Slope Stability The,site is believed .stable.with respect to deep or shear-type sliding.. that generality applies to the: effectively. unweathered and :nominally : weathered. soils.. below the depths of dense. roots. With respect:. to surface. • ra.vel.ing, sloughage under adverse climatic conditions, and erosion,. those slopes .which are . now steeper than about 350 are no more than marginally stable under present conditions. . It' appears that both sandy sediment. and rocks•gravi:tate onto the existing parking lots,. particularly the.Denny'.s lot • from time to- time. -The. Only w.ay in which human -activities. are:. seen to contribute- is that. the -toe of .the slope appear's to°.have •been steepened in. association with past: commercial •development. .=An asphaltic -cement lined 'shallow ditch appears to be effective at intercepting surface runoff from . .neighboring. property. to the north and .to..all.appearances , the present. hydrologic,condition.is.either.na:tural or slightly. drier than natural: kith :implementation of all_: recommendations herein, the. following : objectives will be accomplished: • There will be no slope. movement beneath foundations, parking lots, or other' artificial surfaces; under natural conditions these soils will be retained, confined, or graded to'safe inclines. -With respect 'to . unnatural . conditions, these are .:seen. as _ • incursions of surface water from offsite or from breached.. pressurized underground lines either onsite or offsite to the: north: • Both. categories of water' wi11'.or .would be directed to and:. ..confined. within .subtle; swales'.designedinto the . asphaltic :. surfacing ,:,where it.. would be directed :to..a relatively harmless location along or near Southcenter•Boulevard. The steepest slopes will_ be unaffected by development, :except that they will be slightly desiccated' by the upslope.artificial surfaces. and that hazardous -sized rinks .and other materials which might roll..or slide toward: the south, property line would.=be intercepted .by a chain link ..fence. The slight •desiccation.,woul.d translate to a slight improvement in stability. During the construction -period, runoff from altered 'surfa,ces:.wi.11 not be ..permitted to enter unaltered surfaces. It wil 1 -either- be' contained and pumped' from temporary basins or. sumps ..w.ithi.n.: the 'improved areas or it will. be directed to a holding pond On -the office building parcel. Underground Utilities Earlier:refer.ence.was made to unnatural contributions. to. slope instability, and. it .was. explained that this included accidental:breaches of .pressurized; piping. For practical' purposes this refers to water lines. but .:could: include sewers if., they 'are pressurized and effectively have infinite reservoirs. .: The imaginable ways in which breaching might occur.include, but are not' necessarily limited to, faulty materials, faulty workmanship, seismic induced strain,. impact •by drilling or excavating . equipment, and water hammer or pressure surges caused by. human carelessness Or equipment malfunction. • Several design alternatives have been considered in designing protection against any of the above mishaps. .. Those include location of the _largest... pressurized lines. at unusual depth .of .burialor at plan locations where some of the causal factors could be partially mitigated, using particularly flexible or :durable materials, arid using concrete orother conduits or -barriers. No one would provide protection all causal conditions. I recommend that the water system be so designed that the sail at depth is protected from both saturation and scouring by an impermeable synthetic barrier in the form of a trench lining and that the force of leaking.water be directed to the surface where it .can be contained in subtle; open channels in the parking lot and. driveway. I would expect to coordinate details of design with your . civil engineer. Necessarily, the largest diameter` lines, would have to fall outside or near -the edges .of paving. Small diameter pipe might be exempt from location restrictions but would confine and channel leakage with the synthetic barrier: Apartment Foundations Building. "A" will `require -an augercast pile foundation. For now I ;am assuming that this building will be terraced and underlain by crawl space. Terracing the building . is not intended to mean terracing the slope. I anticipate that there will be no retaining walls for -reasons we discussed. I will: coordinate with your structural engineer about lengths, vertical capacities and horizontal design. Depending on .the: outcome, of your,' topographic survey, other units including "D" will require deep foundations to afford protection against undermining,' which might! be associated with. encroachment of the nearby high angle bluff. To determine the proper foundation type._ for:. each building, I.. recommend that a .20 -foot. horizontal -distance be maintained between the• foundation and daylight, measured through native soil.: Judging from existing topographic data, conventional. spread footings; will be appropri.ate. for. most of the buildings With the diversity of ,soil type from point to point, I recommend that: all footings be. sized to building code specifications or to 2 ksf soil bearing pressure. If, after topographic mapping and revision of the site plan, the_'20-foot condition`cannot practicably be met using 'spread footings, I will provide your architect with parameters for pile .design. '.These :would derive capacity from. both friction and end bearing.; it would be assumed- that there was no friction through fill or through erosion or slide susceptible soils: The piles would bein the order of 14 to 16 inches in diameter and .'would penetrate beyond the depths exploredfor this project. For either type of foundation, inspectionduring excavation is essential to'. verify compliance with the intent of these recommendations and .to confirm :' 'continuity of soil. conditions between and outside the test areas. In general footings will be poured on stripped soil .in place. Undersome circumstances, it would be acceptable to support-footingson compacted fill, and the recommended 2 psf aliowable pressure is within generally accepted limits for such fill. It appears that, even after anticipated site plan revisions, it will not be necessary for any foundations tobear on .fill. Retaining Walls All of the soil types found within the residential area .are types which would exert late,ral.wail pressures of magnitudes within a commonly assumed range for this locality: Silt and silt -containing' soils found at various locations across the site would . exert pressures well beyond the assumed range if used as backfill.. Selectively, the cleanest of onsite spoils generated would be satisfactory as retaining wall. backfill. For walls which are free to deflect sufficiently to assume an active condition, for which the backslope angle does not exceed 20°, and which the full height backfill is free draining, I recommend that P be taken as 35".pcf. P as. 300. psf,. and that the coefficient.of friction between :soil and concrfte be taken as 0.5.` For the nonyieldable case, p would increase `to ,55:: Neither the 35 nor the 55 figure includes any,surcharge load other than the assumed 0-20° backslope angle. Your structural engineer should .. coordinate with me about other parameters and assumptions. I,.anticipate that daylight basement walls will be .of reinforced,concrete`and that cantilever timber bulkheads would be more practical in exterior areas. R.ockeri es, where used, will be limited to 4 feet .height by City ordinance and they, of necessity, will not and cannot be engineered. Property Line Hazards Several unlikely but potential hazards could transcend property lines where. 'the property bounds are . in general proximity to steep slopes. In some cases they represent natural hazards, such as gravity movement . of earth materials across. natural slopes, and in other cases they could include, collapse of already existing rockeries along thesouth edge. of your' property.•or the effects of a breach ina water main such .as the one that.is understood to run parallel to but outside your north property line. Oneof the objectives of this report is to provide recommendations for development without creating new.. hazards. To some degree both natural and unnatural existing hazards will be reduced by development. The amount of water which. percollates into: the soilacrossthe property :will be greatly ' reduced, having a positive effect on spontaneous sloughage and superficial slope .instability. Plumbing mishaps from upslope properties, if not controlled by the existing asphaltic-linedditch, would becomecontained by the paving, curbs, and gutters of this project, designed specifically .for, such purposes.. The fence recommended for protection of the Denny's and ARCO properties. would be installed prior to any grading above:: Hopefully ..itcan be:. installed along the edge of existing paving irrespective of .whether it coincides with the property line. The fence is not intended as a retaining wall but as a catcher. Debris which assimulates behind the fence must be periodically removed to preserve the effectiveness of the fence. LIMITATIONS AND USE This .report was prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee and his design teams for use on the specific residential and office projects described herein: It is not public information and is not to be used by. real estate agents, lenders, future owners, or neighboring owners: In case .of significant revisions of the types of construction, finished grades, or building locations, the findings andrecommendations of this report may be inappropriate: The undersigned should be consulted about the implicati:.ons. of any revision.' Partly in recognition of the potential for. creation. of hazardous conditions by not strictly followingthe intent of the recommendations herein,. inspection of ali earthwork and related construction is imperative. Another reason for close inspection during construction is that the Undersigned assumes no responsibility for work performedat variance with the , recommendations of ' this report or which is of .uncertain compliance:; with foundations and earthwork it is usually not possible to determine compliance after the fact. The only express or implied warrant carried by this report is. that the professional efforts in developing and presenting the information in it were performed conscientiously, in good faith, and to recognized standards of engineering practice as understood by the engineering community ;in this area and at this time. 24.June 1987 James .N. Eaton,. PE • TUKWILA APARTMENT & OFFICE • PROJECT Dark brown topsoil and organic matter (soft) Yellow-brown severely weathered clayey standstone (soft to medium) ' White to yellow weathered sandstone, (hard) Completed and backfilled June 2,',.19873 no groundwater' encountered; dug with difficulty.beyond-4" Brown silt associated with ,past excavation and rockery ,. construction (soft) Yellow brown severely weathered clayey sandstone .(soft to.. medium). White to .yellow weathered sandstone .(hard) Completed and backfilled June 2,'1987;.:no groundwater encountered; dug with difficulty beyond 3.5' Brown silty fine to medium sand' (dense) Brown fine to medium sandy silt (stiff to hard) Gray clayey silt with. sandstone inclusions (hard Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater encountered Brown loam with ,fine roots throughout (soft) Brown fine sandy silt with occasional.. sandstone cobbles and small boulders throughout:(.medium to *stiff) -10- #5 Gray to tan clayey silt (hard) 8.8':- Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987; no groundwater: encountered 0.9' - Brown slightlyorganic topsoil with roots (soft) Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) Brownsilty clay (hardpan) 7.4'. Completed and backfilled June encountered • Brown loam with fine and course roots. throughou Brown fine sandy silt .with _occasional roots in upper 5',. sandstone and hardrock cobbles and boulders :.throughout (medium dense) Completed and backfilled June encountered... 'Brown loam topsoil with roots (soft)' _ Brown silt (soft to medium stiff). 2.1.' - Brown thinly bedded: silt,.(hardpan) Completed and backfilled June .2; 1987; no groundwater' encountered . • Brown sandy loan topsoil with roots .(:soft) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) Brown slightly clayey silt (hardpan) Completed. and backfilled June 2, 1987; slight groundwater seepage. from 1.9 feet -11- .. #9 #10 Brown gravelly loam•topsoil with fine roots (soft) 0.7 - •Brown silty fine to coarse sand with .sandstone and hardrock gravel, cobbles and boulders (loose"at 0.7''to dense at 4') 5.9' - Completed. and backfilled June 2, 1987;- no groundwater. • encountered .. OS Brown sandy loam topsoil. with roots (soft) 0.8' - ... Brown fine to coarse sand (medium dense) 4.8''- -Brown fine sand with trace of.sil.t (medium dense) 7.6' Completed•and backfilled June 2, 1987; minor groundwater; flow from, 4/8' Brown sandy loam with roots .Brown fine sand with thin silty strimers :(medium to dense) Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987;::: moderate. to severe : groundwater flow from 3:5' to 55:' depths '.Brown fine' to medium sand.(medium;dense) Brown thinly bedded silt (hardpan) Brown fine to medium sand (medium dense) 6.3' - Completed and backfilled June 2, 1987;: no groundwater encountered; surfacewater across Steep slopein near.:.. vicinity. /4/95 Symbol Section 23 / 2 Date Ordinance . 12/4/95 1758 Adoption of Zoning Legend Sensitive Area Class 2 Arel slope betwet relatively pe Class 3 Area include area: underlain by also include ; Class 4 Area sloping areas also include 4 Note: Class 4 Areas of pot( and a shallov 1 2 3 Public Recre: • Wetland Wetland Clan Watercourse