The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA E96-0035 - SOUTHCENTER BP - GAS STATIONSOUTHCENTER BP CONSTRUCTION OF NEW GAS STATION INCLUDING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS 16200 WEST VALLEY HWY E96-0035 AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, 5;40111\ MC( J _ hereby declare that: fl Notice of Public Hearing LI Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet fl Board of Appeals Agenda Packet LJPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit L1Shoreline Management Permit flDetermination of Non- significance KMitigated Determination of Nonsignificance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice fJ Notice of Action LI Official Notice 0 Other Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of ProjectiteNTT File Number Eft& - 0035 Signature 2-z-7-97 Ms. Charlotte Payton 16010 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Vincent Clemons 16024 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant 160382. W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Taco Bell Restaurant 16350. W. .Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Best Western-Southcenter 15901 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila,WA 98188 7 -Eleven 680 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Northwest Dental Care 664 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Teriyaki Wok 654- Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Sudden Printing 646 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Ms. Judy Jones 16012 W. Valley•Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Darrell Fair 160242 W. Valley Hiway Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant 16113 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Jack-in-the-Box 16400 W. .Valley 1-Iwy. Tukwila, WA. 98188 Embassy Suites Hotel 15920. W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Insurance Express 674 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Sunway Services, Inc. 660 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Signs Now 652 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Express Station 640 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Ms. Dorothy Rice 160122 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Occupant 16038 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Barnaby's 16401 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Marriott Residence Inn 16201 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Group Health Credit Union 690 Strander; Tukwila, WA 98188 Southcenter 1 Hour Cleaners 672 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Ideal Tanning & Hair 658 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 South End Locksmith 648 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Liu Shuh-Wen & Kin-Luan Chen c/o 15901 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Ms. Helen B: Nelsen 15643 W. Valley Hwy. Tukwila, WA 98188 Ms. Janene Siers c/o Foodmaker Inc. P.O. Box 783 San Diego, CA 92123 Puget Sound Power & Light P.O. Box 90868 Bellevue, WA 98009 KOAR-SeaTac Partners LP 911 Wilshire Blvd #2250 Los Angeles, CA 90017 City of Renton Public Works Dept 200 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98055 • Tukwila Retail Partners LP c/o Sunway Services 660 Strander Tukwila, WA 98188 Taco Bell #9425 17901 Von Karman Irvine, CA 98714 OWRR&Nay. Co. c/o Union Pacific Rail Road I P.O. Box 2500 i Broomfield, CO 80020 Metro Environmental Ping Dept 821 2nd Av Seattle, WA 98104 Roger 011enburg 515 116th Ave NE - Ste 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 City of Renton Planning Dept 200 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98055 XRCM of Seattle P.O. Box 58670 Tukwila, WA 98188 Tukwila Hotel Associates P.O. Bpx 3646 Bellevue, WA 98009 Mr. Stuart McLeod 213 Lake Street Kirkland, WA 98033 Seattle Water Dept 710 2nd Ave - 10th Flr Seattle, WA 98104 AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I , 341-=V 1A4 McM -I-e-N\ hereby declare that: fl Notice of Public Hearing fl Determination of Non- significance O Notice of Public Meeting OBoard of Adjustment Agenda Packet LI Board of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet Mitigated Determination of onsignificance ODetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice f Notice of Action Official Notice LI Short Subdivision Agenda fl Other Packet O Notice of Application for fl Other Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit was.fid to each of the following addresses on `2 -7-6 -91 13Prv-bA<Zik C RItk►`bo n� S A1TL� TI,MaS Lt/e`i - zsgz Name of ProjectGOGT4 `SP Signature File Number L - OO 6 c— EVAelul2A, 410 CITY OF TUKWILA MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF A GAS STATION/CONVENIENCE STORE PROPONENT: ROGER OLLENBURG LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS: 16200 WEST VALLEY HY PARCEL NO: 000580-0038 SEC/TWN/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E96-0035 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. The conditions to this SEPA Determination are attached. This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for days from the date below. py{s,42cM (2.,159" � — 2 2_6- S' Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila. (206) 431-3680 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98138 Date Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. CITY TUKWILA CONDITIONS Address: 16200 WEST VALLEY HY Applicant: Permit No: E96-0035 Type: P-SEPA DNSC Location: Parcel #: 000580-0038 Zoning: ****•k*•k k•k*******•k*****•k******************* k***** 1. ONLY TWO ACCESS POINTS WILL BE ALLOWED PARCEL, AFTER SHORT PLAT, PURSUANT TO R W.A.C. 468.52 PRIOR TO APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. Status: ISSUED Applied: 12/02/1996 Approved: 02/26/1997 ** k k*****k****•k**•k** k***k** FOR THE ENTIRE .C.W 47.50 AND BOARD OF CHECKLIST: •RONMENTAL REVIEW/SHORELINE PERMDMAILINGS ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE FEDERAL•AGENCIES ( ) U.S.. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( ) U.S. DEPT OF H.U.D. WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT DEPT NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DEPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT OF FISHERIES & WILDLIFE ( ) DEPT OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV. ( ) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS (>4) DEPT OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION/ ( ) OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL * SEND CHECKLIST WITH DETERMINATIONS * SEND SITE MAPS WITH DECISION KING COUNTY AGENCIES K.C. PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEV. BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FIRE DISTRICT #11 FIRE DISTRICT #2 K.C. WATER POLLUTION CNTRL SEPA OFFCL ( ) S CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARIES ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) CITY OF SEATTLE LIBRARY ( ) U S WEST (•.) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( ) HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT () SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMEN ( ) TCI CABLEVISION ( ) OLYMPIC PIPELINE KENT PLANNING DEPT TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) PUBLIC WORKS ( ) FIRE ( ) POLICE ( ) FINANCE ( ) PLANNING ( ) BUILDING ( ) PARKS & REC. ( ) MAYOR K.C. DEPT OF PARKS HEALTH DEPT PORT OF SEATTLE BUILDING & LAND DEV DIV SEPA INFO CENTER 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 / (o4;) PUGET SOUND' POWER & LIGHT// ( ) VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( ) WATER DISTRICT #20 ( ) WATER DISTRICT #125 (;04.4. CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS/ ( ) RAINIER VISTA' ( ) SKYWAY CITY AGENCIES / `IC RENTON PLANNING DEP CITY OF SEA -TAC CITY OF BURIEN TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF SEATTLE - SEPA INFO CENTER SEATTLE OFFICE OF MGMNT PLANNING OTHER PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL P.S. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY SW K C CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE ( ) DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE ( ) VALLEY DAILY NEWS 2/10/97 C:WP51DATA\CHKLIST 1 ( ( ( ( ( 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 ( ) HIGHLINE TIMES (tel SEATTLE TIME City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO:. Project File e96-0035, Southcenter BP FROM: Michael Jenkins, Assistant Planner RE: SEPA review - staff evaluation of Environmental Checklist received December 2, 1996 DATE: February 25, 1997 Project Description: Site is located at 16200 West Valley Highway, at the former Andy's. Tukwila Station Restaurant.. Project includes the development of a 2,288 sq. foot convenience store, a pump area covered by a 5700 sq ft canopy, a 3,331 sq. ft. carwash and the installation of "3 underground tanks with a combined storage capacity of 40,000 gallons. The project will also include numerous site improvements, the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalks, impervious surfaces for parking and traffic circulation. Agencies with jurisdiction: • Seattle Water Department • City of Renton • Puget Power Comments to SEPA checklist: Pg. 4, section 1: A geotechnical report, with soils analysis, will be required prior to the issuance of any building permits, in support of city's Sensitive Areas Ordinance, TMC 18.45, Pg. 5-8, Section 3: A storm drainage analysis is required, designed to King County Surface Water Management and City of Tukwila requirements. Also required will be an agreement with Seattle Water Department indicating that the development will not adversely impact their system. An easement assuring vehicular access for maintenance of city sewers is also required. A latercomer agreement for future storm drainage mitigation may be required, oer King County Recording Number 9112110767. Pg. 11: A Flood Control Zone permit from the City of Tukwila may be required. Pg. 15: Applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis, per City Requirements. Only 2 access points are allowed, after short plat, for the entire site, per WSDOTclassification standards 6300 Southcenter Boulevar4 Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 SEPA review - E96-0035 • • BP Station - 16200 West Valley Highway. February 25, 1997 Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth Approximately 800 cubic yards will be excavated with backfill (sand/pea gravel) of approximately 250 cubic yards. Approximately 90% of site will be impervious surfaces, with erosion control standards per City of Tukwila standards implemented. • Air During construction, equipment exhausts will be present. Following construction, additional vehicle exhausts and fuel vapors will be present, due to nature of use. All fuel vapors will be controlled pursuant to Federal and State regulations. • Water Closest distance to shoreline from Northwest corner of property is 250 feet. No work to occur within shoreline area. No fill or dredge removed from surface water or wetlands. Project may lie within a 100 year floodplain and may require a City of Tukwila Flood Zone Permit. Project will not discharge waste materials to surface waters. Ground water will not be withdrawn. Stormwater 'runoff will be collected in catchbasins and conveyed through underground pipes. An easement assuring vehicle access for maintenance of city sewer is required. Prior to discharge, water will pass through either bioswale or oil/water separator. Discharge to occur in Seattle Water Department, City of Renton and City of Tukwila drainage systems, upon permit approval from each agency and/or jurisdiction. Dispensing islands will drain to an oil/water separator. Fuel pumps have sump devices that allow for leaked fuel to return to tank. Underground tanks are surrounded by containment devices that will discharge leaked fuel back to tank. Spilled fuel may enter runoff system and fuel could enter ground water if underground tanks or piping leaks. Prior to the issuance of any engineering or building permits, a Storm Drainage analysis will be required, approved by the City of Tukwila. A latercomer agreement or similar agreement may be required for future stormdrainage mitigation. • Plants Maple and Cedar trees are found on-site with other miscellaneous shrubs. Most vegetation will be removed including three significant trees, to be replaced by a total of 24 deciduous and evergreen trees. Eight existing trees will be retained along parcel perimeter. • Animals No threatened or endangered species have been observed on-site. 2 SEPA review - E96-0035 • • BP Station - 16200 West Valley Highway. February 25, 1997 • Energy/Natural Resources Electric energy will be used for HVAC equipment and other on-site equipment. All construction will be in accordance with Washington State Energy Code requirements, with energy efficient lighting used and buildings well -insulated. • Environmental Health There is a risk of fuel spill, fire or explosion due to any major disturbance to fuel dispenser or overfilling of vehicle tanks. Breakaway check valves are anchored to concrete islands, allowing valve to separate and close so fuel will not be spilled. Dispenser nozzles are designed with a shut-off system to stop flow of fuel near top of fill tube. Bulk of noise will be generated by additional traffic. Short term construction noise will occur from vehicles and equipment. Long-term noise associated with the project will be associate with automobiles using gas station, convenience store and car wash. • Land/Shoreline Use Site includes a vacant wood -frame building and railroad cars, surrounded by asphalt paving. Adjacent uses include a fast-food restaurant and other commercial uses. Public trail and railroad lines are located to the east of property. Existing structures will be demolished, with permit from City required. Property is zoned TUC and lies in a Flood Control Zone. Project went through a pre -application conference with Tukwila staff. An approved Short Plat is required prior to final building permit approval. • Housing No impact • Aesthetics Tallest height of any structure will be 20 feet. Exteriormaterials will include masonry, stucco, metal, glass and concrete. Project must receive approval from Tukwila's Board of Architectural Review. • Light and Glare Exterior lighting will be used at night, with -all on-site lighting designed to control glare off- site. Street lights are located immediately off-site. • Recreation A public trail is located immediately to the east of the parcel. Project will include access to public trail with on-site pedestrian links between trail and store. 3 SEPA review - E96-0035 • BP Station - 16200 West Valley Highway. February 25, 1997 • Historic/Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks. • Transportation The parcel abuts West Valley Highway, a WSDOT classified State Route (SR 181). Site currently has 44 parking spaces, with the final project requiring 31 parking spaces. Curb, gutter and sidewalk will be constructed on West Valley Highway. An approved traffic study is required. New driveway access will be constructed and approved pursuant to Tukwila standards. Pursuant to WSDOT access standards in R.C.W. 47.50 and WAC 486.52, only 2 access points for the entire parcel, after shortplat, are allowed. • Public Services There are no anticipated increases in Public Services needed as a result of this project, other than those already indicated. • Utilities Water and sewer will be provided by City of Tukwila. Electric Power will be provided by Puget Power Recommendations: MDNS, with one condition: 1. Only two access points will be allowed for entire parcel, after Short Plat, pursuant to RCW 47.50 and WAC 468.52. c: \m s o ffi ce... \S E PA\e 96-003 5 4 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION February 13, 1997 Roger 011enburg 515 - 116th Ave., N.E. Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Application for Design Review, with SEPA checklist, for BP Station, 16200 West Valley Highway. Dear Mr. 011enburg: Your application, on behalf of your client BP, for a Design Review, with SEPA checklist, located at 16200 West Valley Highway has been found to be complete on February 13, 1997 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The project has been assigned to Michael Jenkins and tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on March 27, 1997. 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 install the sign with your application packet. If you 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 and Notice of Threshold Determination to post on the board. These notices are available at DCD. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to the our office. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. I will be contacting you soon to discuss this project. If you wish to speak to me sooner, feel free to call me at 433-7142. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins, Assistant Planner cc: Reviewing City Departments c:\msofce...letters\9679comp.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 4313665 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaste, Director February 6, 1997 Roger 011enburg 515 - 116th Ave N.E., Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 Re: Southcenter BP, 16200 West Valley Highway, File Number L96-0079 (Design Review) E96-0033 (SEPA) Dear Roger: Thank you for the submission of plans, a traffic study and other supporting documentation on January 30, 1997. These materials are in response to the Notice of Incomplete Application dated December 30, 1996. We intend to have a response to you by February 13, 1997 indicating whether the application will be deemed complete or if further revisions will be required, pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.104.070. While we are in the process of determining if your application is complete, it does not appear that the tentative date of February 27, 1997 for the Board of Architectural Review hearing still applies to this project. The reason for the delay in hearing this matter rests on the scope of the changes since your original application, the determination by staff if the application is complete and, if determined complete, the public notification process that we must adhere to under Tukwila Municipal Code 18.104, et seq. The following is a review of the issues pertaining to the SEPA application and the Design Review of the project: SEPA In regard to the outstanding issues on the SEPA application, the issues of access/curbcuts onto West Valley Highway has not been fully addressed. Your plans indicate and have always assumed three access points onto West Valley Highway. As indicated by Public Works in our meetings, only two curb cuts for access are allowed for the entire parcel. Accordingly, the SEPA will be issued as an MDNS, with the condition that only two access points are allowed. As an MDNS requires a 2 week comment period and 2 week appeal period, the SEPA will not be resolved until well after the scheduled February 27 hearing date. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 February 6, 1997 Roger 011enburg Re: Southcenter BP, 16200 West Valley Highway • • DESIGN REVIEW As I had indicated in my January 3 letter and again in subsequent meetings with you on January 13 and January 21, there are a number of outstanding design issues, including: • Incorporating landscaping along proposed south parcel line to provide visual and traffic separation while maintaining some open circulation ♦ Increasing the overall landscaping as a tool to manage on-site traffic, including increasing the size of landscaping along the front middle portion of the parcel and along the exit for the carwash • A unified architectural expression through use of common building materials, architectural elements (roofline, window size), common color schemes and other similar design techniques Based upon the status of the SEPA and unresolved Design Review issues, the hearing on this project has been rescheduled to the next Board of Architectural Review hearing, currently scheduled for March 27 at 7:00 p.m. I hope to meet with you soon to discuss the changes that need to occur prior to the issuance of the staff report. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner c:\msoffice...Ietters\9679 issu.doc January 22, 1997 Mr. Roger 011enberg Roger 011enberg/Architect 515 - 116th Avenue NE, Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, RECEIVED JAN 301997 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: SOUTHCENTER BP SERVICE STATION TRAFFIC STUDY INC. .41; ,±..;:: Avenue S. E. Bellevue. Washington 98005 Tel: 2:6.455.357i Fax: 2c6.455.3o61 Dear Mr. 011enberg: This letter report summarizes the trip generation estimate, trip distribution, and traffic assignment for the proposed BP service station located at 16200 West Valley Highway in the City of Tukwila. It also compares the trip generation resulting from the proposed BP service station with that of the previous land use - Andy's Restaurant. The City has requested that this analysis be prepared to address traffic -related impacts associated with the proposed gas station. Project trip generation is also compared with the impacts of restaurant trip generation. The specific scope of this study was determined in coordination with the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. Project Description The new service station would include 12 vehicle fueling positions, a 2,288 square foot convenience store with a drive -up window, and a conveyor system car wash. Two 35 -foot -wide driveways would provide access to the station from West Valley Highway (SR 181). At some point in the future, there is a possibility that the southern driveway would be shared with the site to the south. The project would be completed by 1997. Trip Generation - Proposed BP Service Station Daily, AM, and PM peak hour trip generation estimates for the project were based on the trip rates for Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market and Car Wash (Land Use 846), as described in Trip Generation: Update to the 5th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, February 1995). Total daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation estimates are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Service Station Trip Generation (Total Trips) Time Period In Out Total AM Peak Hour 66 vph 65 vph 131 vph PM Peak Hour 74 vph 75 vph 149 vph Daily 874 vpd 874 vpd 1,748 vpd Trip generation estimates for the project should reflect the effects of pass -by trips. Pass -by trips are those trips that are already located on the street that abuts the site, and rather than passing the site as they did before the development was in place, they turn into the site. These trips are not new to the street system. However, the trips are new at the project driveways. It is estimated that 54 percent of the AM peak hour site -generated trips Outstanding Professionals ... Outstanding Quality E S T AIR • • DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, Mr. Roger 011enberg January 22, 1997 Page 2of4 INC. and 58 percent of the PM peak hour site -generated trips would be pass -by tripsl. A pass -by rate of 54 percent is a conservative estimate of the daily pass -by trip rate. Net new trips are those trips that are new to the street system, in other words, the difference between the total trips as pass -by trips. Table 2 summarizes the net new daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation estimates. Table 2: Service Station Trip Generation Time Period Total :Trips Minus;Pass-by Trips Net>New:Tnps AM Peak Hour 131 vph 76 vph 55 vph PM Peak Hour 149 vph 86 vph 63 vph Daily 1,748 vpd 1014 vpd 734 vpd Trip Generation - Previous Land Use (Andy's Restaurant) This property was previously the site of Andy's Restaurant. From the Boundary and Topography Survey of the site, done in 1995, it was determined that the size of the restaurant was approximately 11,200 square feet. Daily, AM and PM peak hour trip generation estimates have been made for the restaurant, based on the trip rates for High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurants (Land Use 832), as described in Trip Generation: Update to the 5th Edition. The total daily, AM and PM peak hour trip generation estimates for the restaurant are shown in Table 3. The number of pass -by trips generated by restaurants is considered to be negligible. Table 3, therefore, represents the total new traffic which would have used SR 181 to access the restaurant. Table 3: Restaurant Trip Generation Time Period In Out Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily 85 vph 81 vph 996 vpd 81 vph 64 vph 996 vpd 166 vph 145 vph 1,992 vpd Table 4 provides a comparison between the trips generated by the previous and proposed uses of the site. As shown in Table 4, the restaurant generated more traffic than is expected to be generated by the proposed service station. The amount of traffic which is expected to be added to SR 181 due to the service station should therefore not be any greater than the amount of traffic which used SR 181 to access the restaurant. 1 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, An Informational Report 5th Ed. (Washington, D.C.): 1365 Outstanding Professionals ... Outstanding Quality McER SITIAIR r. Mr. Roger 011enberg January 22, 1997 Page 3of4 • • Table 4: Trip Generation Comparison (Net New Trips) ICgEi INC. Time Period Previous Use Proposed Use % Change (Andy's Restaurant) (BP Service Station) AM Peak Hour 166 vph 55 vph - 67 % PM Peak Hour 145 vph 63 vph - 57 % Daily 1,992 vpd 734 vpd - 63 % Trip Distribution and Traffic Assignment The distribution of project -generated trips was based on traffic volumes on the adjacent roadway, SR 181. These traffic volumes are shown in Figure 1. In the AM peak hour, approximately 42 percent of the traffic is northbound, while approximately 51 percent of the traffic is northbound during the PM peak hour. It is assumed that the site generated trips will follow this same distribution: i.e., 42 percent of the generated traffic will come from the south in the AM peak hour, and 51 percent will come from the south in the PM peak hour. Future improvements to SR 181 may result in restrictions to permitted turning movements at the site driveways. Therefore, both divided (restricted access) and undivided (full access) scenarios were examined. Figure 2 shows the expected distribution of traffic, assuming the highway remains undivided. Figure 3 shows the distribution in the event that the highway becomes divided, which would result in right in/right out access only. It is assumed for both distributions, that 80% of the traffic will use the northern driveway, which allows sole access to the service station. The remaining 20% is expected to use the southern driveway, which provides joint access to the northern (potential BP Service Station) and southern (potential restaurant) portions of this site. Figures 2 and 3 show the expected new trips, pass -by trips, and the total project generated trips. It is assumed that both the new and pass -by trips will have similar travel patterns, and therefore are distributed and assigned as described above. • • Mr. Roger 011enberg January 22, 1997 Page 4 of 4 INC. Thank you for this opportunity to provide you with transportation engineering services. We look forward to working with you again in the future. Please feel free to share this letter with agencies from whom you are seeking permits. We are available to further discuss project trip generation and other issues if you or the permitting agencies have any questions. Sincerely, DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Kerensa L. Swanson Transportation n: eer oris Transportation Engineer FJV:KLSW:dml Enclosure IEXPIRE8 1 / 21 19p' I p:\o\oevt0005\tt\doc\ltr_rpt.doc OEVT0005 SOUTHCENTER BP 1996 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 1 O" OEV f0005. [ 1 SITE North NOT TO SCALE = $R181 West Valley Highway - 13 (18) 31 C•1••• J atN o+ AM PEAK HOUR INC. LEGEND New Trips (Pass -By Trips) ® Total Trips SOUTHCENTER BP PROJECT GENERATED DRIVEWAY VOLUMES (No Turn Restrictions) FIGURE 2 INC. LEGEND New Trips (Pass -By Trips) I I Total Trips SOUTHCENTER BP PROJECT GENERATED DRIVEWAY VOLUMES (With Left Turn Restrictions) FIGURE 3 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director January 3, 1997 Roger 011enburg 516 - 116th Ave., N.E., Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 Re: Southcenter BP, L96 -0079/E96-0035 Dear Roger: It was a pleasure meeting with you today regarding the Southcenter BP project. The following is a list of the design and site planning issues that we discussed today. As I mentioned in the meeting, I find this helpful for keeping outstanding matters on the "front burner" to ensure that we resolve any outstanding issues prior to the Planning Commission hearing. These issues include: 1. Introduction of more 'urban' elements (brick work, CMU, improved window treatment, etc.) into the design of the building while maintaining corporate identity 2. Examining if the canopy can be broken up and replaced with individual canopies over each island or introducing more skylights to proposed canopy 3. Introducing more landscaping areas along south lot line area, to break up parking along the proposed easement 4. Increase in amount of landscaping as a tool towards managing on-site traffic 5. Removing the proposed drive-through for the convenience store and replacing it with additional parking, to improve on-site traffic movement 6. Improving pedestrian links and landscaping elements between Interurban trail and site 7. Addressing joint but visually distinct parking between project and proposed parcel to the south 8. Relocating underground tanks to allow for increased landscaping 9. •Resolving signage issues, including applying;for Special Permission Signage, reviewed by the Director of Community Development If you have any questions about these or other issues discussed at our meeting, please feel free to contact me at 433-7142. As we discussed, we will continue to assume a February 27, 1997 hearing date for this application. Sincerely, /16;44, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner • 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION December 30, 1996 Roger 011enburg 515 - 116th Ave., N.E., Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: Southcenter BP, File L96-0079 (Design Review) and E96-0035 (SEPA) Dear Mr. 011enburg: Your application for Design Review with a supporting SEPA checklist, located at 16200 West Valley Highway has been found to be incomplete. In order for this application to be determined as complete, the following must be submitted to the Department of Community Development: PUBLIC WORKS a. A traffic report, including number of trips, speed of traffic, and; b. A revised traffic circulation plan that includes : 1. Access to and from West Valley Highway 2. Safe, on site circulation of vehicles and pedestrians arriving from off site 3. No impacts to safety on Interurban Trail c. Copies of all existing easements DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT a. A revised plan for the Bioswale, in compliance with King County SWM Design Manual, located a reasonable distance away from the proposed structures. Please note that a Bioswale will not be allowed inside a utility easement. If a Bioswale is not feasible, a coalescing plate may be used instead. b. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, a Short Plat application for the site must be approved by the Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Far (206) 431-3665 December 30, 1996 Roger 011enburg Re: L96 -0079/E96-0035 Page 2 c. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, an updated Geotechnical report must be submitted, reflecting the change in development proposal from Restaurant to Gas Station, including a discussion on possible impacts to the utilities located on site. d. A revised site plan after subdivision, providing for internal traffic divisions for 2 businesses. Please note that only 2 driveways will be allowed for the entire site, including any development that may occur after the parcel had been subdivided Upon receipt of these items, the City will re -review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. These applications will expire if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). A hearing is currently scheduled on this application before the Board of Architectural Review on February 27, 1997. To ensure that this spot is held, the traffic study and other materials that may alter the site plan must be submitted prior to January 13, 1997. If these materaisl have not been received by this date, you most likely will be rescheduled for a hearing in March or April of 1997, depending on availability. In addition, I would like to schedule a meeting with you as soon as possible to discuss the proposed design. Please contact me at 433-7142 to arrange a meeting. Any questions related to the scope of revisions from the Public Works Department may be directed to JoAnna Spencer at 433-0179. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins, Assistant Planner cc: Reviewing City Departments a:\current\9679incmdoc • • ROGER OLLENBURG/ARCHITECT 515 1 l6th Avenue NE, Suite 202 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone 206 451-1232 Fax 206 451-1841 rogeroAnwlink.com November 27, 1996 TO: City of Tukwila RE: Southcenter BP 16200 West Valley Highway Design Guidelines Response I. Project Outline: This project is on the site of the former Andy's Tukwila Station. Subject property is slightly less than two acres. The development has four main stages: A. Demolition of the wood frame former restaurant building. B. Short plat the existing lot into two portions. A new lot line will be created 140 feet north of the south lot line. There will be mutual cross-over easements for each lot to the other lot. It is intended that there be a driveway approach at this new lot line for use by both lots. C. Development of a new BP gas station on the large north lot. This station will include a fueling area with six dispensers, a retail convenience store and a conveyor system car wash. D. Development of a fast food restaurant on the smaller south lot. Documents submitted as part of the current design review application are for the first three stages. Details of the fast food restaurant will be submitted at a later date. II. Design Review Guidelines: A. Relationship of Structure to Site: 1. The site is planned with two access approaches from the street. This allows unimpeded traffic flow from the street through the site and returning into the street. The streetscape will be enhanced with landscaping 15 feet wide along the frontage. This area will be planted with a combination of trees, shrubs and ground cover. Other landscaping will be provided within the site. Planning provides for convenient pedestrian movement throughoutthe site. 2. Parking is provided primarily toward the rear of the site. Service areas for trash and deliveries will also be at the rear. 3. This is a large site quite adequate for this use. The three structures vary in height and blend together visually. There will be a pleasant open feeling due to the covered space under the fueling canopy. • • ROGER OLLENBURG/ARCHITECT Southcenter BP 16200 West Valley Highway Design Guidelines Response Page 2 B. Relationship of Structure and Site to Adjoining Area: 1. Three main materials except window areas to be used are aluminum composite metal, stucco and concrete masonry. Structure masses will be harmonious and the round metal "columns" throughout provide a consistent visual theme. 2. There is existing landscaping along the south property line. Landscaping along the north property line will be installed as part of a bio-swale system. 3. This is a commercial neighborhoodwhich this development will become a part of. 4. The on-site circulation patterns provide efficient movement of vehicles through the site. There will be safe and convenient pedestrian walkways around the buildings. Service vehicles will primarily circulate behind and beside the retail building. 5. Circulation from and back into the street will be efficient due to the adequate and efficient space for internal circulation. C. Landscape and Site Treatment: 1. This is a nearly flat site presently covered with a building and extensive asphalt paving. The streetscape landscaping will be increased from the existing width. Other landscaping will be included in the vicinity of the buildings. 2. The trash area will be at the rear of the site, screened with a fence and landscaping. 3. Interior pole lights will be minimized. The pole lights used will not cause glare into the street or into the street. D. Building Design: 1. Three main materials except window areas to be used are aluminum composite metal, stucco and concrete masonry. There will be two main colors used on buildings, green and silver grey. Graphics are generally yellow on a green background. Structure masses will be harmonious and the round metal "columns" throughout provide a consistent visual theme. Maximum height of structures will be approximately 20 feet. This is compatible with other commercial buildings in the neighborhood. 2. Mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened. • • ROGER OLLENBURG/ARCHITECT Southcenter BP 16200 West Valley Highway Design Guidelines Response Page 3 III. Design Review Policies: 1. This project will use quality materials and will be a visually attractive addition to this neighborhood. Streetscape landscaping will be attractive and there will be smooth flow of vehicles into and out of the site. 2. A portion of the City of Tukwila trail network is directly adjacent on the.. east property line. Access from the trial into the site will be provided. 3. Parking provide will be adequate for the use. Site lighting will provide safe light levels without producing glare into the street or on adjoining properties 4. There will be interior circulation between the BP Station and the fast food restaurant. IV. Conclusion: This project has been designed to be in accordance with the City of Tukwila Design Review Guidelines and Policies. Streetscape landscaping is enhanced and transition of traffic into and out of the site is efficient and safe. Only quality materials are used throughout. A pleasing and harmonious design is achieved well adapted to the surrounding neighborhood. Pedestrian circulation is safe within the site and provides complete access from the street sidewalk. When complete this project will be an asset to the city of Tukwila. Rog -r 011enburg r - LOr • W .sr rNo Single Family & ' Duplex Residences 111 1.• , , 2V. .7' 1,', It! IT, '7)( Marriott ..; LOT 1 I KLA Office Residence Inn"" 000100 ,,,L9 • T.'.3; 1 Buildingsr Retail . 4A 1 r‘. ;.. 1 , \P, ... 0 .,..- • :v. tr. 2 11 '"'''• Barneby's , -....m. Park <--- 'Restaurant . 'alitl..1•• e MN ' V.I... ' . : • )......,' ' .' \,...'' ' ''fi-- V..t1/4•1\ Puget Warehouse y ..:'„,•,--, ',..A • .,..., .• .. Power , \ Undeveloped ,-, ....' ..,,,_,\______i • : II ' l' 0 La. C 7 ..; • . i 1 47... c I 1•• = '! , 5 :PACT 1 ;.:!.. 0:3010 i racimr4-4 :,::: Cli0:7•04"" •1::::::'-'. ANDOVER INDUSTMAL * RK :,10.4 .:,. I i: ii i sraa,:t, gl Undeveloped t 1 \\ q;, 4.00 d I 5.hrl ' • I •• I i Surrounding Area Map - Land Uses Within 1000' Radius 4"...E!`• e....e• dm. .tedo CITY OtTUKWILA Departmen of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST anner FOR STAFF USE. ONLY 'Receipt Number:.:.• Applicant notified of incomplete application: File Number:. Cross-reference files: L-4 lc-0ej-71 {Applicant :notified of complete' application: ENotice:of application issue A. NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: B. LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (address and accessors parcel number(s)) 16200 West Valley Highway Quarter: NW Section: 2 5 Township: 23 Range: 4 E.W.M. (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a new service station to include the following: (1) Gas station with 6 dispensers. 3 underground storage tanks with maxinim rapacity of 4(1f100 rgallon5, and an overhead canopy of 5,700 sq.ft.. (2) Convenience store building of 2,288 sq.ft. and (3) Car wash building of 3,133 sq ft A part of this prnjoct will include a short plat create a new lot on the south 140 feet of sub'e • •.- D. APPLICANT: NAME: Roger 011enburg ADDRESS: 515 = 116th Avenue NE , Suite 202 Bellevue. WA 98004 PHONE: 206-45 -1232 FAX 24. - SIGNATURE: DATE: 11/22/96 • • Control No. Epic File No. E'b .po33 Fee $ 325 Receipt No. ENVIRONMENTAL. CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of applicant: Roger 011enburq Southcenter BP 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 515 - 116th Avenue NE, Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 4. Date checklist prepared: 11/22/96 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction start: Spring 1997 Construction complete: Sumner 1997 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. hprp i` prnpn 1 t" P SOI 40 feet of subject property. --,-.-.-_._ e+�el � a fast food restaurant �n the � � This development will be a separate application in accordance with Tukwila nrdinanres 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Subsurface Exploration dated August 14, 1995. 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. No. -2- • • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. .1 .. .•1 . ....- ... .•- .. . 0-.11 11_ -•• tanks and piping inrluding PSAPCA and WA DQE signs desa;n reuiewrfirp warm system, • - . • 1'.1. Y 11- • . _ I I • al 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. —r's _site is oneJ .t containing approximately 83,626 sq,ft.ith approximately 341.87-lineal-fd:. of frontage on West Valley Highway- Construction of a new servirp station to incl t}j (1) Gas station with_6 dispensers, 3 underground storage tanks with maximal rapacity of T CIg- gallons. and an overhead canopy of 5,700 sq_ft. (2) rnnvenienre store huilding of 2,288 sq ft (3) car wash building of 3,133 sq ft.. A part of this project will inrlude a Short Plat to rreate a new lot on the south 140 f of s,hj t p y Requirac � ion of approximately 5,347, soft building. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this checklist. . 11 • . . e.0 — LegaLdescription..aite plan and vicinity jp attached. u 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes. Flood Control Zone. -3- -TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth • Evi ation for Agency Use Only a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 7%, except ditrh in NW corner_ c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Unknown. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Nn e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Excavate approximately RO O ru_ yds for rnnctructinp_ Rackfill with sand nr pea gravel approximately 250 ru_ydc__ Rarkfill rrmterialc nhtained frnm apprnved snurra f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 90% -4- • • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: nuring construction. Best Mana0ement Practices in accordance with City of Tukwila standards 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During construction: Equipment exhausts. After construction: Vehicle exhausts. fuel vapors. Quantity unknown. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Nn control of vehicle exhausts. Fuel vapors will be controlled per federal apdztate regulations. 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. The Green (White) River is in the near vicinity west. Closest distance from NW corner of site is approximately 250 feet. -5- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • •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. Nn_ 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 known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Unknown Research to bo conducted for flood zone permit_ 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. -6- b. Ground: 1 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. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Snurra of runnff is stnrm water, quantity unknown at this ting_ WactP will hP rnllPrtPd in ratrh hacinc and cnnvPyed in underground pipes_ Prior to discharge, water will pass through either hio-swale(s) system nr. coalescing plate oil/water separator_ ficcharge will ha approved by City oLTukwila_ -7- • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Spillcd fuel could enter the runoff system Fuel rniild round tanks or piping -• - leaked. ••-r• d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: See page R supplement_ 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir,D pine, other grass — pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Most existing vegetation will he removed_ c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. -8- Page 8 Supplement 3.d. • • 1. Entire storm water runoff system will be designed and installed as required by City of Tukwila storm water ordinance. This will control quality of water discharged underground. 2. Dispensing areas are under an overhead metal canopy. Surfaces surrounding the concrete dispenser islands are concrete. This area will be sloped to a drain system which is conveyed through an oil/water separator, discharging to the sanitary sewer system. 3. Underground tanks fill connections are surrounded by containment containers. Any fuel trapped in container can be discharged into the tank. 4. Underground tanks fill and vent systems are designed to stop the flow into the tanks at a predetermined level below the top of the tank. This is a prevention system. 5. Underground tanks are a double wall system with an inert outer wall. Should the inner tank leak, fuel will enter the interstitial space between tanks, activating an electronic alarm system. 6. Tank mounted pumps are installed within sumps attached to the tanks. All product and vent pipes connect to these sumps. 7. All product pipes are double-wall design and slope downward from the dispensers to the tank sumps. Should the product pipe leak, fuel would enter the outer pipe and be conveyed to the tank sura. 8. Inert containers will be installed under all dispensers. These containers will trap any fuel which might leak at the dispenser area. 9. Electronic equipment will be installed to monitor the tank inter- stitial spaces, tank sumps and dispenser containers. Fuel vapors in any of these spaces will activate an alarm. • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: LnrnxintP1 v 1 O pf the rlavcl n.,a+ — — Idle a rea c wi l l hP dsapecl p1r7Clted with trPPe ]p�� chriQun= rnvar aHyl Hyatt 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: None. fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. -9- 1 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, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Flectric energy will he used for heating, cooling, refrigeration syctep1s, coo k„�}lights, and motors far ginnment and, pum s_ b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: All construction will be in accordance with Washington State energy code minimum standards. Energy efficient lighting will be utilized and the buildings will be well -insulated ti]rougho. 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. See page 10 supplement. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire department response to spill, fire or explosion. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: See page 10 supplement_ -10- Page 10 Supplement 7.a. There is a risk of fuel spill and fire and explosion due to any of the following: 1. Vehicle hitting a dispenser, breaking it's anchoring bolts and the product piping. 2. A customer driving away from the dispenser with the hose nozzle in the fill spout. 3. A customer overfilling the vehicle tank. 7.a.2 1. All product piping terminates at the dispenser with "breakaway" check valves rigidly anchored to the concrete islands. In the event a vehicle should hit a dispenser and sever the product pipe, the check valve will close, stopping the flow of fuel. 2. Dispenser hoses attached will contain "breakaway" check valves. Should a vehicle leave with nozzle in fill tube, the valve will separate and close, stopping the flow of fuel. 3. Dispenser nozzles are designed with a shut off system to stop the flow of fuel near the top of the fill tube. • • b. Noise Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. There will be short term noise during construction created by vehicles and equipment. Long term noise is associated with vehicle traffic in adjacent streets. Car wash equipment and vacuums will create noise. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction hours will be as required by Tukwila ordinances. All car wash equipment will be within a building structure with sound being attenuated. Noise from vacuums will also be attenuated. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Site contains wood framed building, formerly used for a restaurant, surrounded with asphalt paving and landscaping. Adiacent: south is Taco Bell• north is residential; west across West Valley Highway is commercial; east is public trail, rail- road and power lines. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. Wood frame building. part of a restaurant which included old rail cars. -11- •Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Y. Wood frame structure will he demolished_ e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Tukwila Urban Center f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Flood Control Zone. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Rpsidp_ 0 Work: 16 Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. J• k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Research with City of Tukwila codes. Pre -application meeting with Tukwila staff. Processing of a Design Review application. -12- • • 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Nnne c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None• 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? TalleSt height of structures will be 2fl feat Fxtarinr materials will include metal sturrn and rnnrrete nicnnry b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. -13- Evaluation for Agency Use Only • •valuation 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? Fxtprinr lighting will hp used at night. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Street lights. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: On-site light fixtures will be designed to control glare off-site. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? Public trail iffnediately adjacent east. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. -14- • • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. Nn b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. West Valley Highway ahuts site_ b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Unknown. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Completed: 31 Eliminated: 44 -15- • valuation for Agency Use Only d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including drive►•ways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Curti, iittPr, sidwkalk and pnccihla ctnrm watar cnntrnl will ha rnnstrurtad nn Wast Valley Hi0hway e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Hnknown. Traffic study in progress. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: New driveway accesses will he constructed per Tukwila standards as part of improvements on West Valley Highway. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. -16- 16. Utilities • ities -&tl ay.' able at he sit. refuse service, septic system, otYrer. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water and sewer: City of Tukwila Electric power: Puget Power Natural gas: WNG rn_ 1,1111 . • 1 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 yts decis'gn.� Signature: GC loge 011enburg / 11/22/96 Date Submitted: PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. -17- • Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Vicinity Map 0`• SOUTH CENTER SOUTHCENTER SITE Legal 11) escription THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 2 AND 11 OF HENRY MEADER DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 46, ALL IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST OF W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY, ALSO KNOWN AS STATE ROAD NO. 181, WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 210 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11, AND ITS WESTERLY PROLONGATION; THENCE SOUTH 8747'19" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 40.76 FEET TO THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID HIGHWAY AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 0651'30" WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY HIGHWAY MARGIN 808.08 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE'S BOW LAKE PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE SOUTH 8718'12" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 273.28 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF A 100 -FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYED TO PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY AUDITOR'S FILE NOS. 2629432 AND 2644020, FORMERLY KNOWN AS PUGET SOUND ELECTRIC RAILWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE SOUTH 01'13'24" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 791.76 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 210 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11; THENCE NORTH 8747'19" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 165.55 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING SOUTH OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 5 FEET NORTH, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE HENRY MEADER DONATION CLAIM NO. 46 AND THE CENTERLINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 181 (WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY); THENCE NORTH 0652'29' WEST A DISTANCE OF 48.98 FEET ALONG SAID HIGHWAY CENTERLINE; THENCE SOUTH 85'30'26" EAST 41.14 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF SAID HIGHWAY AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESCRIBED LINE; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 85'30'26" EAST 227.79 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID PUGET SOUND ELECTRIC RAILWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE TERMINUS OF THIS DESCRIBED LINE. AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8506141047 b • 140. _TT 4 AI EI 0C 1.22. Y 33. 0' SETBACK -V 41 41 41 r 41 Iri ' �p 30 -0 I4� 0' 53'-5 41 t* .�•�I •►• BIKE . ® + f �' CAR WASH �� ii�i/iiii�iiii�iia/iii�ii�iiiiiv�i i . ♦ 4' (30 x 100) `� ' (I I I/iiiiiiiiiii/iiii%�i�i////iiia%� � ► o 4 F 41 ', -,� , 23'-4'ii F41 bWV Iv i 1 I I I I w I63 I I I I in._FrUTURE FAST FOOD 1 I 1 I b I I I I (. I IN I3 10 1 0 1i I 1 CONVENIENCE STORE 52' X 44' 23'-4' r 3KY-Kr 30' -Hr F 92'-V 24.7 154'-0' 0 O O 0 0 MATCH EXISTING SIDEWALK K DE T. C8 0 0 o 35' 0E640 xr 24.0' 25.0' c6- PROPERTY UNE ESTABLISHED BY STATE HIGHWAY (s 'Fav U�ES1 � CONCRETE CURB AND CUTTER SITE PLAN 1' 30' 1b' 3b' 40' • BP SERVICE STATION RETAIL DEVELOPMENT DRAFT SURFACE WATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT RECEIVED JAN 301997 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tukwila, Washington Prepared for: Roger 011enburg/Architect 515 116th Avenue NE, Suite 202 Bellevue, WA 98004 Prepared by: David Evans and Associates, Inc. 415 -118th Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98005 OEVT-0005 December, 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # SECTION I Overview 1 SECTION II Preliminary Conditions Summary 5 Core Requirements 5 Special Requirements 5 Sensitive Areas Ordinance Requirements 6 SECTION III Off Site Analysis 9 DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS 9 SECTION IV Water Quantity and Quality Control 11 SECTION V Conveyance System Analysis and Design 13 SECTION VI Special Reports and Studies 15 SECTION VII Basin and Community Plan Areas 16 SECTION VIII Other Permits 17 SECTION VIII Other Permits 17 SECTION IX Erosion and Sedimentation Control Design 21 SECTION X Bonds 19 SECTION XI Maintenance and Operations Manual 20 Conventions and Abbreviations 21 Definitions 22 Tables and Figures Figure 1 - Technical Information Report Worksheet 2 Figure 2 - Vicinity Map 4 Figure 3 - Drainage Basins and Site Characteristic's 7 Figure 4 - Soils Map 8 Precipitation values 11 Site Subbasin and Hydrologic Data 11 Figure 5 - Site Plan, Facility Improvement Map 14 SECTION I Overview This Storm Water Technical Report (TIR) provides storm water requirements and design calculations for the new BP Service Station Retail Development in Tukwila, Washington. The project is located at 16200 West Valley Highway, in the Green River Basin, Section 25, Township 23 North, Range 4 East (see Figure 2). The project consists of developing a new service station with underground tanks and overhead canopy, a convenience store building, a conveyor system car wash, paved circulation and parking areas, and landscape planters. Proposed frontage improvements along West Valley Highway include curb, gutter and a 6' sidewalk and a storm drain system. The area is primarily commercial. The site is bordered by a hotel to the north, a restaurant to the south, the Union Pacific Railroad to the east, and West Valley Highway to the west. The site is relatively flat, sloping gently to the northeast. EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND PROBLEMS The existing site consists of a restaurant building and asphalt paved parking area with landscaped planters. Existing site runoff is collected in two catch basins located near the middle of the parking lot. Flow is conveyed via a 6" pipe and an 8" pipe to the west edge of the property where it is discharged. Off-site flow along the West Valley Highway sheet flows to the Targe vegetated depression located near the northwest corner of the site. PROPOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM The drainage system will consist of catch basins and a closed pipe system that discharges on-site flows to a biofiltration swale that will discharge to the existing catch basin and pipe at the northeast corner of the site. This pipe discharges flow to the existing ditch on the east edge of the property. Runoff from frontage improvements to West Valley Highway will be collected in catch basins and conveyed via a pipe system to the depression at the northwest corner of the site. VARIANCES and EXCEPTIONS The proposed drainage system is designed to meet the 1990 Surface Water Design Manual and no variances are necessary. Overview 1 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART1 PROJECT OWNER'AND PROJECT ENGINEER . Project Owner �'�%� � �� e /es Address 600 kV( c Al • fru /"/r Phone (206) 623- 35/ 7 Project Engineer Ca /ht.- ,i c Company .Duvhd Ela/hs Z /45sOC, Address Phone 4'7' //87'h Ave SE 8c -005 98/09 2asa, P.E. zo .) 4.55- 357/ PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION n Subdivision n Short Subdivision El Grading Commercial 0 Other Page 1 of 2 Project Name 8P Scrv'c c S/ h'o,i ,ec tG / / Location /3rvc / 010 m cr Township 2-3 nl. Range 4 E. Section 25 Project Size / - / 0 AC Upstream Drainage Basin Size ///A AC PART4 OTHER PERMITS D DOF/G HPA 0 COE 404 Cl DOE Dam Safety El FEMA Floodplain 0 COE Wetlands 0 Shoreline Management CI Rockery fl Structural Vaults O Other O HPA PART 5.. SITE COMMUNITY'AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Ch./i o/ rok,„v, /' - Drainage Basin intern l2hvrr 8eis/n Q River 0 Stream El Critical Stream Reach Depressions/Swales Lake 0 Steep Slopes El Lakeside/Erosion Hazard Floodplain Q Wetlands El Seeps/Springs El High Groundwater Table 0 Groundwater Recharge El Other • PART 7:: SOILS Soil Type Gly -i,. Slopes /n -s- /iia n 2 % El Additional Sheets Attatched Erosion Potential s/,="A 1 Erosive Velocities 11,417 1/91 Page 2 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET REFERENCE El Ch. 4 - Downstream Analysis Additional Sheets Attatched LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT Non& PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS a MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION Sedimentation Facilities Stabilized Construction Entrance Perimeter Runoff Control Clearing and Grading Restrictions Cover Practices Construction Sequence Other 6�1c a a MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION Stabilize Exposed Surface Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of NGPES Other PART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM • ® Grass Lined Channel Pipe System Open Channel Dry Pond El Wet Pond Tank a Infiltration Vault a Depression ED Energy Dissapator El Flow Dispersal Wetland a Waiver El Stream a Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation will be con vt y /d in Facility Related Site Limitations Reference Facility Runo'f Lt /used Method of Analysis 58u)-+ Compensation/Mitigation of Eliminated Site Storage will h• /oli,cFt4 n r�ifrh b s','c f * (4 /.44 /7C,P4 '5 4.0 a h%41 J /DI p[ Limitation 51_154 an(' low 51nX l c . Ti Additional Sheets Attatched PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS (May require special structural review) El Cast in Place Vault a Other FT Retaining Wall El Rockery > 4' High Structural on Steep Slope PART12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS fl Drainage Easement Il Access Easement Native Growth Protection Easement n Tract Other I I PART 14 • SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attatchments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. ei,i.G1I,..c ,�� /2/21/96 Sipewd'Dah 1/90 N;IOIOEVT00051T1IDWGIFIG2.DGNFUP 12.23.96 SECTION II Preliminary Conditions Summary This section will address the requirements set forth by the King County Surface Water Management Design Manual Core and Special Requirements listed in.Chapter 1. King County Surface Water Management Design Manual Core Requirements 1. Discharge at a natural location (1.2.1): Flow from the site currently discharges to the east via two pipes. The developed site will discharge via the catch basin at the northeast corner. 2. Off-site Analysis (1 .2.2): A level 1 downstream analysis was performed for the downstream tributary. A complete summary of the off-site analysis can be found in Section III. 3. Runoff Control (1 .2.3): A. Peak Rate Runoff Control: No detention will be provided as this project does not increase the flow in the 100 year event by 0.5 cfs or more. The site is currently paved, and the developed condition will not increase impervious area significantly. B: Biofiltration: Biofiltration facilities have been designed to meet DOE water quality requirements for site impervious surfaces subject to traffic through the use of a swale. 4. Conveyance Facilities (1.2.4): Closed pipe systems used to convey on-site runoff will be designed to carry the 25 -year event flow and provide a minimum of 0.5 feet of freeboard between the hydraulic grade line and the top of the structure. 5. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan (1.2.5): Erosion control measures are outlined in Section IX. 6. Maintenance and Operation (1.2.6): Maintenance and Operations are covered in section X. No special maintenance will be necessary. 7. Bonds and Liability (1.2.7): This issue is covered in section XI. King County Surface Water Management Design Manual Special Requirements 1. Critical Drainage Areas (1.3.1): This project does not lie within a critical drainage area. 2. Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan (1 .3.2): The project is located within the Tukwila Nelson Place/Longacres Way Sub -basin which lies within the Green River Basin. This project complies with improvements identified in the Tukwila Nelson Place/McLeod/Boeing CSTC Storm Drainage Study Technical Report. 3. Conditions Requiring a Master Drainage Plan (1.3.3): The project does not require a master drainage plan. Conditions Summary 5 4. Adopted Basin or Community Plans(1 .3.4): The project drainage report and plans were prepared in conformance with the City of Tukwila Surface Water Standards Ordinance No. 1755 and King County Green River Basin Plan. 5. Special Water Quality Controls (1.3.5): The project will not increase impervious area subject to vehicular use by one acre or more the drainage basin. Therefore, no special water quality controls are required. 6. Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separators (1.3.6): The project will not increase impervious area subject to vehicular use by five acres or more within a given drainage basin. Therefore, no coalescing plate oil/water separators are required. 7. Closed Depressions (1.3.7): The project is not tributary to a closed depression. 8. Use of Lakes, Wetlands or Closed Depressions for Peak Rate Runoff Control (1 .3.8): The project will not use a lake, wetland or closed depression for peak runoff control. 9. Delineation of 100 Year Floodplain (1.3.9): The project is not located within any FEMA designated floodplain. 10. Flood Protection Facilities for Class 1 and 2 Streams (1.3.10): There are no Class 1 or 2 streams within the project area, therefore, no flood protection facilities are proposed. 11. Geotechnical Analysis and Report (1.3.11): The Geotechnical Analysis for the site has not yet been completed, and will be included in the final TIR. 12. Soils analysis and report (1.3.12): The soils underlying this project have been mapped by the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. The maps, issued in November, 1973, identify the soils as "Urban," which is classified as a variable soil type. Sensitive Areas Ordinance Requirements According to the Sensitive Areas Map Folio, there are no sensitive areas located within or adjacent to this project. Conditions Summary 6 Figure 3 - Drainage Basins and Site Characteristic's - Show tributary basin boundaries, location of outfalls and indicate future outflow, detention and water quality facilities, show and indicate longest length of travel to R/D facility, 500 foot stationing, streams, wetlands Conditions Summary 7 01LS I-1pp SECTION III Off Site Analysis This section identifies the tributary basin areas upstream of the project site, and evaluates upstream and downstream drainage system problems. The intent of this section is to demonstrate the proposed project will neither aggravate existing problems or create new drainage problems. DOWNSTREAM ANALYSIS Standard Requirements (based on Design Manual and SAO) 1. Analysis shall extend to a point where the project site constitutes no more then 15% of the basin but in no case less then 1 /4 mile (1.2.2-1). 2. Level 1 Analysis shall show on a map downstream pipe sizes, channel characteristics and a narrative of problems (1.2.2-2) 3. Level 2 Analysis is required if it is found there is a lack of capacity; overtopping, scouring, bank sloughing, or sedimentation; flooding of structures, road access, or septic fields; significant destruction of aquatic habitat. Analysis shall be performed at each problem site for the 2, 10, and 100 year events; using mannings equation and with tape and hand level measurements. Evaluate problem for existing and proposed conditions. (1.2.2-3) 4. Level 3 Analysis is require where the proposed project site constitutes 15% of the flow. Analysis must be done using licensed survey and standard step back water methods (1.2.2-2) 5. Solution of Problem - It must be shown that either the project will neither aggravate an existing problem or cause a new one. Where the project will aggravate a problem then mitigation must be provided. (1.2.2-3) 6. Discharge at Natural location is required and produce no significant impacts to the downstream property (1.2.1-1). Special Requirements (based on P -suffix, basin or community plans, and critical designations) None Upstream Analysis There are no upstream basins tributary to the site. Runoff from West Valley Highway will continue to discharge to the large vegetated depression located near the northwest corner of the site. It appears this depressed area is connected with a pipe to a depressed area directly across West Valley Highway. However, no pipe was found due to the thick vegetation. The depressed area on the west side of West Valley Highway then drains directly to the Green River. Level 1 Downstream Analysis Field Inspection A field review was performed for the subject property by David Evans and Associates, on Tuesday morning, December 24, 1996. The weather was overcast with a temperature of approximately 40 degrees. The results of the field review are noted below. No problem areas were identified that needed to be specifically looked at for assessment. Drainage System Description and Problem Screening Level 1 - Field review Runoff from the site will be discharged via the existing 6" pipe connected to the catch basin located at the northeast corner of the site. This pipe discharges to the existing ditch located Off Site Analysis 9 along the west side of the Union Pacific railroad embankment and flows north for approximately 1,000 feet. The ditch has a bottom width of 3 to 4 feet, 3 feet of available depth with 3:1 side slope to the west and 2:1 side slope to the east. A 24" corrugated black plastic pipe picks up the flow from the ditch behind the Embassy Suites parking lot and conveys it north for approximately 150 feet. An 50' long open ditch section, approximately 4' wide at the bottom, 2' high with 3:1 side slopes carries flow from the 24" pipe to another section of 24" corrugated black plastic pipe. This pipe is roughly 30 feet long and ties into a drainage structure at S 158th Street. At this point a 4'-8" x 1'-10" high box culvert provides the east -west conveyance from S 1 58th Street to the BNSF Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. The analysis was terminated at the railroad tracks which is over 1/4 mile from the discharge point of the BP Service Station. The ditch along the Union Pacific Railroad did not show signs of overtopping or erosion. According to the Nelson Place/McLeod Boeing CSTC Storm Drainage Study the 24" pipe at Embassy Suites and the box culvert on S 158th Street were sized to accommodate flow from the entire sub -basin which includes the proposed BP Service Station site. There are no signs of erosion at the pipe intakes or outfalls. Level 2 and Level 3 analysis were not performed for the project, and additional review of the downstream drainage does not appear to be warranted. Mitigation Mitigation includes providing water quality treatment for the impervious surface area subject to vehicular traffic. Water quality will be provided in an on-site biofiltration swale. Off Site Analysis 10 SECTION IV Water Quantity and Quality Control SITE HYDROLOGY (parts A & B) Calculations for this section are contained in the appendix. Preci itation values used in H drologic Analysis (in/24-hours) 2yr 10yr 25yr 100yr 2.0" I 2.9" 3.4" 3.9" Part A - Existing Site Hydrology The majority of the existing site hydrology is building and pavement areas with landscaped planters. Flow from the site is collected in catch basins and discharged via a pipe system to the east side of the site. Part B - Developed Site Hydrology The developed site hydrology includes construction of a paved parking and circulation area for a service station, car wash and convenience store with landscaped areas. The roof area for the car wash, building and canopy is 11,184 SF (0.26 Ac) and is discharged to the sanitary sewer system. The developed site impervious area subject to vehicular traffic is 27,450 SF (0.63 Ac). Site Subbasin and Hydrologic Data, (Area in acres, Tc in Minutes) Existing Proposed Basin Area CN Imp. Area Tc Pery Area CN Imp. Area Tc 0.11 85 0.99 8.97 0.21 85 0.89 8.43 The new drainage system will collect surface runoff in catch basins and carry the water via underground pipes to a biofiltration swale located at the northeast corner of the site. PART C - DETENTION PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS Standard Requirements (based on Design Manual and SAO) 2. 3. 4. 5. Flow rate must release flow at or below existing 2 and 10 year peak rates, the volume to reduce flow to these rates will be increased be 30%. The system will then be evaluated at the 100 year level and if adverse impacts occur addition mitigation may be required (1 .2.3-2&3). Existing condition are those that were present in May 1979 (1.2.3-1) Detention ponds are to be open ponds unless there is no practicable alternative and may be combined with wetponds (1.2.3-3) Retention facilities must be evaluated for the 7 day 100 year event and downstream over flow path evaluated (1.2.3-4) (1.3.7-1). Wetland shall not be used for detention unless there is no alternative, it is a type 3 wetland with its only major function is storage, and the facility is regional in nature. (54191.C)) Flow control is not required if there is less than 5,000 s.f. of new impervious surface, flow increase is less than 0.5 cfs for the 100 year event, or discharges to the Cedar, Green, Duwamish, Sammamish, Skykomish, Quantity and Quality 11 Snoqualamie, White or Stuck rivers; or Lake Sammamish or Washington; or to Puget Sound (1.2.3-5). Flow control is also not required if discharging to a lake, wetland, or closed depression if the increase of floodplain is less than 0.1 feet and permission is secured form affected property owners, water quality treatment is provided before discharge, and if there is an outlet it may need to modified to retain existing 2, 10, and 100 year flow rates (1.3.8- 1) 6. Bypasses may be permitted is discharge is to the same subbasin and flow rate is compensated for at the detention facility (1.2.3-6) 7. Off-site flow greater then 50 percent of the 100 year on-site flow must be carried in a separate system around the detention facility (1.2.3-6) Special Requirements (based on P -suffix, basin or community p/ans, and critical designations) None, see preliminary conditions, section II. PART D - WATER QUANTITY CONTROL As can be seen in the calculations in the appendix, the flow from the site in the proposed condition will not increase by 0.5 cfs in any of the three major design storm events. The flow rates are as follows. Existing Flow (cfs) Developed Flow (cfs) 2yr 10yr 100yr 2yr 10yr 100yr 0.47 0.72 0.85 0.45 0.69 0.82 Based on these findings, no peak rate runoff control is proposed for the site. WATER QUALITY Standard Requirements (based on Manual) There are four levels of water quality facilities defined in the 1990 Surface Water design Manual, each level is additive and they do not overlay or replace lower level facilities. These levels are as follows: 1. OiI/Water Separation - required in all pipe conveyance systems serving paved areas. (1.2.4-3) 2. Biofiltration Facility - required in addition to Oil/Water Separation when the new impervious area subject to vehicular use exceeds 5000 s.f. (1.2.3-1) 3. Water Quality Pond - required in addition to the biofiltration facility when the new impervious area subject to vehicular use or chemical storage exceeds one acre. (1.3.5) 4. Coalescing Plate Separators - required in addition to Water Quality Pond if there are 5 acres or more of new impervious surface subject to any of the following: 2500 ADT, chemical or petroleum storage, heavy equipment use. (1.3.6) Special Requirements (based on P -suffix, basin or community p/ans, and critical designations) None, see section II Due to the fact that impervious area on the site that is subject to vehicular use is being cut in half, this site is not subject to standard requirements for water quality. However, the proposal calls for the installation of a biofiltration swale for the parking lot and circulation area. Sizing of this facility is based on the 6 -month storm event. See the appendix for sizing calculations for this facility. Quantity and Quality 12 SECTION V Conveyance System Analysis and Design Standard Requirements (based on Design Manual and SAO) 1. Facilities must convey 100 year flow without overtopping crown of roadway, flooding buildings, and if sheet flow occurs it must pass through a drainage easement. (1.2.1-3) 2. New pipe systems and culverts must convey the 25 year flow with at (east 0.5 feet of freeboard. (1.2.4-1) 3. Bridges must convey the 100 year flow and provide a minimum of 2 feet of varying up to 6 feet of clearance based on 25% of mean channel width. (1.2.4-2)(4.3.5-6) 4. Drainage ditches must convey the 25 year flow with 0.5 feet of freeboard and the 100 year flow without overtopping. (1.2.4-2) 5. Floodplain Crossings must not increase the base flood elevation by more than 0.01 feet 141(83.C(] and shall not reduce the flood storage volume (37(82.A) 41183.A11. Piers shall not be constructed in the FEMA floodway. 141(83.F.1(1 6. Stream Crossings shall require a bridge for class 1 streams that does disturb the stream bed or banks. For type 2 and 3 stream open bottom culverts or other methods may be used that will not harm the stream or inhibit fish passage. 160(95.B)1 7. Discharge at Natural location is required and produce no significant impacts to the downstream property (1.21-1). Special Requirements (based on P -suffix, basin or community plans, and critical designations) None The Facility Improvement Map at the end of this section shows a schematic of proposed improvements. Detailed information and calculations are contained in the appendix. OFF-SITE CONVEYANCE There is no off-site conveyance. ON-SITE CONVEYANCE The design of both open channel and closed conduit systems are based on the Rational Formula Methodology. Because the SBUH hydrology method uses rainfall information developed on hourly averages, the Rational formula has been used to develop peak flow rates for conveyance facilities where the time of concentration is less than 30 minutes. Although the Rational Formula make many simplifying assumptions it's rainfall data base is more closely related to smaller times of concentration. Peak flows developed for impervious surface using the rational formula, with times of concentration less then 30 minutes are more conservative then those using the SBUH method. Calculations showing the sizing of the system are included in the Appendix. Conveyance System 13 Figure 5 - Site Plan, Facility Improvement Map - show location and sizing of conveyance, crossings, R/D, and water quality facilities. Conveyance System 14 SECTION VI Special Reports and Studies Sensitive areas within, adjacent, or significantly affected by a project shall require a special study unless there is a substantial showing that the project will not affect the area contrary to the goals of the Sensitive Area Ordinance 9614 [815)1. There are no special reports or studies for this project. Special Reports 15 SECTION VH Basin and Community Plan Areas BASIN PLAN (1.3.4-1) The project lies within the City of Tukwila South CBD Basin Plan. The drainage report and plans were prepared in conformance with the basin plan and the requirements outlined in the City of Tukwila Storm Drainage Ordinance No. 1755. COMMUNITY PLAN (1.3.4-1) The project does not lie within an identified Community Planning Area. The plans were prepared in conformance with the City of Tukwila development standards. MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN (1.3.2-1) This project does not require a Master Drainage Plan. CRITICAL DRAINAGE AREAS (1.3.1-1) This project does not lie within an identified Critical Drainage Basin. Basin and Community Plan 16 SECTION VIII Other Permits Permits required for this project include: CLEARING AND GRADING PERMIT, City of Tukwila Other Permits 17 SECTION IX Erosion and Sedimentation Control Design Standard Requirements (based on Design Manual and SAO/ Erosion/Sediment Control Plan shall include the following: 1. Facilities required include; rock quarry pad construction access, sedimentation pond, and filter fabric fencing in smaller areas (1.2.5-1) 2. Timing - For the period between November 1 through March 1 disturbed areas greater than 5,000 s.f. left undisturbed for more than 12 hours must be covered with mulch, sodding or plastic covering. A construction phasing plan shall be provided to ensure that control measures are installed prior clearing and grading (1.2.5-1). 3. Planning - Plan shall limit tributary drainage to an area to be cleared and graded. Delineate dimension, stake, and flag clearing limits (1.2.5-1). 4. Revegetation - Revegitate areas to be cleared as soon as practicable after grading. (1.2.5-1) Special Requirements /based on P -suffix, basin or community plans, and critical designations) DRAFT Erosion control measures will include silt fences, straw check dams, catch basin inlet protection and ground cover practices. Silt fences will be placed at the downstream edges of all disturbed areas. The plans ill include details and notes for the use and maintenance of straw check dams, catch basin protection and ground cover practices. DRAFT Erosion and Sediment Control 18 SECTION X Bonds The bond quantity worksheet will be included in the appendix of the final TIR. Bonds 19 SECTION XI Maintenance and Operations Manual DRAFT, NOT INCLUDED AT THIS TIME STANDARD MAINTENANCE Facilities will be maintained by standards set forth in the King County Surface Water Design Manual. SPECIAL MAINTENANCE None Maintenance and Operations 20 Conventions and Abbreviations Reference Conventions Use of brackets [ ] indicates reference to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance; [page#(section#1] Use of (] indicates reference to the Surface Water Design Manual; (section#-page#1 Abbreviations Ac - Acres CF - Cubic feet CFS - Cubic feet per second COE - United States Army Corp of Engineers DDES - King County Department of Development and Environmental Services DOE - Washington Department of Ecology EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM - Flood Insurance Rate Map FPS - Feet per second SF - Square feet SWM - King County Surface Water Management TIR - Technical information report Tc - Time of concentration WDF - Washington Department of Fisheries WDW - Washington Department of Wildlife Conventions and Abbreviations 21 Definitions Base flood - 100 year event, 1% chance of occurring in a given year. (17(21)] Compensating Storage - equivalent storage, providing equal volume at 1 foot increments. (19(29)] Flood Hazard Area - Areas flooded during base flood associated with streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands, and closed depressions.[21(37)] Landslide Hazard Area - 15% slope with silt or clay soils and have ground water seepage; or areas shovving.movement since the Holocene epoch (10,000 year ago); or unstable area adjacent to rapid stream incision or erosion; area on an alluvial fan that may inundated by debris flow. (44(47)] Steep Slope Hazard Area - inclination of 40% within a vertical change of 10 feet or more. [29(681] Stream - (30(691] Class 1, inventoried as shorelines of the State; Class 2, streams that flow year around or are used by salmonids; Class 3, intermittent or ephemeral during years of normal rainfall. Drainage and irrigation ditches shall not be considered streams unless the are used by salmonids. Wetlands - (32(75)] Class 1, Unique and Outstanding rating #1, supports endangered or threatened species, 40% open water with two classes of vegetation, greater then 10 acres with 3 classes of wetland including open water, presence of infrequent plant associations; Class 2, Significant rating #2, greater than 1 acre, Tess than 1 acre with 3 or more wetland classes or classified as forested wetland, contains heron rookeries or raptor nesting sites; Class 3, Lesser concern rating #3, less than 1 acre with up to 2 wetland classes; Where vegetation has been removed an area may be classified as a wetland if there is presence of hydric soil with documentation of previous existence of a wetland. Zero Rise Floodway - Floodway necessary to contain base flood without causing a rise of greater than 0.01 feet. Boundary of floodplain on Flood Insurance studies shall be considered as boundaries of zero rise floodway. (22(37.D)] Definitions 22 EXISTING AND PROPOSED HYDROLOGY OE ✓7'COOS I� /} C . Ros- ICoT/- SP 5-0,./t, c »y- 12-//8/96 S%'i.n: C0,7 Ci‘ /1S %r,%/1 S, rc fr/ = 47, 9'95 SC (/.!o Ac.) /= (/G3)'Xis ,)1('z'X'B') (1,)(zoo)+(/a)(45) t (3 o ') + (i go •%(3 ") = ¥L & 3 5F /. /0 11-6. - o.1/ = 0.99 ALC. (0,�.�.) Z0) • S7 0 Oi' 7Z •0 — 21-/ 678 O b"/ '1/ (-74/ •o(,oz)', LF) 4- (,OBX,oF) • 'r'?/4 '7J (•-r/ 50.0) 88Z'2 = (,44-/.Z5) JJ°I( J7✓I!u741../o1 (.7i? _e ) 5t'S = (,Ei'jz6): (O 2(5*) airr> ror, 7 ('W' 10 ?�/J UCS' ` �C•fvO,/ "V 6B"0 -V /Z'O ( /z o) ds Z ('r/ o/'l ? 's 866 'ti /Z)? — 711/ O/ 1 c ' SCL/.'cl 7/ 1 J / ed S/ 002/ 50 5 ZOZ) 7/ _ vi ft/ �c 1 p o) so c/oid 12/23/96 3:18:34 pm David Evans & Associates Inc - Bellevue page 1 BP SERVICE STATION RETAIL DEVELOPMENT WATER QUANTITY CALCULATIONS BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: Al NAME: 2 -YEAR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.00 inches AREA..: 0.11 Acres 0.99 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00. 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.97 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0100 impTcReach - Channel L: 155.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.47 cfs VOL: 0.15 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A2 NAME: 10 -YEAR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.90 inches AREA..: 0.11 Acres 0.99 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.97 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0100 impTcReach - Channel L: 155.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.72 cfs VOL: 0.23 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A3 NAME: 100 -YEAR EXISTING SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.90 inches AREA..: 0.11 Acres 0.99 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.97 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 180.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0100 impTcReach - Channel L: 155.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.99 cfs VOL: 0.32 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min :L2/23/96 3:18:34 pm David Evans & Associates Inc -- Bellevue page 2 BP SERVICE STATION RETAIL DEVELOPMENT WATER QUANTITY CALCULATIONS BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: A4 NAME: 2 -YEAR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.00 inches AREA..: 0.21 Acres 0.89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.43 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 150.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0080 impTcReach - Channel L: 100.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.45 cfs VOL: 0.15 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A5 NAME: 10 -YEAR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 2.90 inches AREA..: 0.21 Acres 0.89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.43 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 150.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0080 impTcReach - Channel L: 100.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.69 cfs VOL: 0.22 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A6 NAME: 100 -YEAR DEVELOPED SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 1.10 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.90 inches AREA..: 0.21 Acres 0.89 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.43 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 150.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0080 impTcReach - Channel L: 100.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.96 cfs VOL: 0.31 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min 12/20/96 2:47:49 pm David Evans & Associates Inc. - Bellevue page 1 EP SERVICE STATION RETAIL DEVELOPMENT WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: Al NAME: 6 -MONTH EVENT SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 0.84 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 1.33 inches AREA..: 0.21 Acres 0.63 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.43 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 150.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0080 impTcReach - Channel L: 1.00.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.20 cfs VOL: 0.06 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min BASIN ID: A7 NAME: 100 -YEAR EVENT SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA 0.84 Acres BASEFLOWS: 0.00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE KC24HR PERV IMP PRECIPITATION 3.90 inches AREA..: 0.21 Acres 0.63 Acres TIME INTERVAL 10.00 min CN 85.00 98.00 TC 5.00 min 8.43 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0.20 impTcReach - Sheet L: 150.00 ns:0.0110 p2yr: 2.00 s:0.0080 impTcReach - Channel L: 100.00 kc:42.00 s:0.0070 PEAK RATE: 0.72 cfs VOL: 0.23 Ac -ft TIME: 480 min PROJECT: • DESCRIPTION: BEGIN LOCATION: END LOCATION: LENGTH CHANNEL DESIGN FORM BP Southcenter Biofiltration Swale 200 LF The above indicates the design for biofiltration function for the 6 -month event. Ercc bzocci OCS i jr WGTC r Sv/' uCG CI.3'+ 2(t)1(z a) = -74.o 5F EC.bVuiVCAI rni- V\11,1 -Cr SvrCG 100' SO'.071' 4 I/'CSi1;, D*01 ° 0.33' 1,7 TYPICAL SECTION Input Output FREEBOARD DEPTH (FT) f = 1 WATER DEPTH (FT) y = 0.33 Velocity = 0.23 SIDE SLOPE 1 = (1/H) H1 = 3 Flow, CFS = 0.20 SIDE SLOPE 2 = (1/H) H2 = 3 Top Width = 9.68 BOTTOM WIDTH IN FEET b .= 1 .7 MANNINGS VALUE n = 0.35 SLOPE OF CHANNEL FT/FT s = 0.02 The above indicates the design for biofiltration function for the 6 -month event. Ercc bzocci OCS i jr WGTC r Sv/' uCG CI.3'+ 2(t)1(z a) = -74.o 5F EC.bVuiVCAI rni- V\11,1 -Cr SvrCG 100' SO'.071' 4 I/'CSi1;, D*01 ° 0.33' 1,7 TYPICAL SECTION PROJECT: DESCRIPTION: BEGIN LOCATION: END LOCATION: LENGTH CHANNEL DESIGN FORM BP Southcenter Biofiltration Swale 200 LF The above indicates the swale conveyance and stability calculations. The actual swale slope and Mannings "n" value are used. The swale has the capacity to conveys the 100 -year design flow of 0.72 cfs and maintain a freeboard of 1 foot with a velocity of less than 1.5 ft/sec. TYPICAL SECTION Input Output FREEBOARD DEPTH (FT) f = 1 WATER DEPTH (FT) y = 0.33 Velocity = 1 .00 SIDE SLOPE 1 = (1/H) H1 = 3 Flow, CFS = 0.89 SIDE SLOPE 2 = (1/H) H2 = 3 Top Width = 9.68 BOTTOM WIDTH IN FEET b = 1.7 MANNINGS VALUE n = 0.04 SLOPE OF CHANNEL FT/FT s = 0.005 The above indicates the swale conveyance and stability calculations. The actual swale slope and Mannings "n" value are used. The swale has the capacity to conveys the 100 -year design flow of 0.72 cfs and maintain a freeboard of 1 foot with a velocity of less than 1.5 ft/sec. TYPICAL SECTION CONVEYANCE CALCULATIONS , 7o c/ 0//r., ) J 13P SoQ74i7,�'Cnf•n • C0nvcyGf^4-e CU (CS ) /, / 4c'• .5 (o. Z' + (a. 89 /4.y.90) /-/o = 0,82 C we/d.0 �o 1- 2$ = Z•/5 "Yi7, (Gram fee, fT/. - r vr .lion Z,45 /1„/„,, e -7-- Al 0.92(2./5 //•1) ▪ Z•o/ Cfs Pio° = e 7 = 0. 02 (245)0,0 ▪ 2, 2./ cis .tr-71. 7 (;GCs 0'• Pos'— / /z/z 3/2 /9 -ss 5/174 //(if = 5.5 mom• rn -s'%"r to e ,s /2" = 0.5,0 , n'•O�3 /.491/'5t .: n4 R _ 1.49 Zia L - ,o/3(?5,.Z5)(Uo5) ▪ 2.51 cls 2.5/ CIS 7 2, 0/ c is 2. 21 cks = 71(•591 = o. 755 s� A .785 �5 BY PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. z SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION and FOUNDATION ANALYSIS Proposed Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Tukwila, Washington PSI File No. 712-50081, Revised NCSC File No. 880-55204, Revised Nom■ rv�■ August 14. 1995 Mr. Joe Fard, P.E. Darden Restaurants, Inc. 5900 Lake Ellenor Drive Orlando, Florida 32859-3330 Professional Service Industries, Inc. Re: Revised Report of Subsurface Exploration Proposed Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 16200 West Valley Highway Tukwila, Washington PSI File No. 712-50081, Revised NCSC File No. 880-55204, Revised Dear Mr. Fard: Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) is pleased to submit three copies of this report of subsurface exploration for the referenced project. The report has been revised because information regarding the type of structure has been changed and because the depth of the basement beneath the existing building has been determined. In general, these changes have not affected the foundation recommendations that were presented in the original report. Included in this presentation are the results of the exploration and recommendations concerning the design and construction of the foundations and pavements. as well as general site development. We appreciate the opportunity to have provided you with our geotechnical engineering services and look •forward to participation in the construction phase of this project. If you have any questions concerning this report or if we may be of further service in any manner, please contact our office. Respectfully submitted, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC. Richard A. Bergquis District Manager r 7400 Third Avenue South • Seattle, WA 98108 • Phone: 206/762-4664 • Fax: 206/763-2936 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Recommendation Summary 1 INTRODUCTION 2 Project Authorization 2 TESTING PROCEDURES 2 Field Operations 2 Laboratory Testing 4 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4 Site Description and Topography 4 Subsurface Conditions 5 Ground Water Conditions 6 STRUCTURAL INFORMATION 7 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 8 Foundation Selection Criteria 8 Footing Foundations 9 Floor Slabs 10 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 10 Site Preparation and Fill Requirements 10 Excavations 12 Drainage & Groundwater Considerations 12 Weather Considerations 13 PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 13 GENERAL COMMENTS 16 APPENDIX Vicinity Diagram Boring Location Diagram Boring Logs Volatile Organic Vapor Scan Photographs Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -2- INTRODUCTION Project Authorization PSI has completed a subsurface exploration for the proposed Red Lobster Restaurant # 95R200. This work was authorized by Mr. Joe Fard, P.E. of Darden Restaurants on June 15, 1995. The exploration was performed in general accordance with PSI Proposal No. 880- 5105 dated June 16, 1995. The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface conditions at the site to enable an evaluation of possible foundation and pavement systems for the proposed restaurant. This report briefly outlines the testing : procedures, describes the site and subsurface conditions, and discusses the foundation and pavement recommendations. This report supersedes PSI's original report dated July 12, 1995. The scope of services did not include any environmental assessment for the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, ground water or air, on, or below or around this site. Any statements in this report or on the boring logs regarding odors, colors, unusual or suspicious items or conditions are strictly for the information of the client. Prior to purchase or development of this site, an environmental assessment is advisable. TESTING PROCEDURES Field Operations Ten soil test borings were made at the site at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Diagram presented in the appendix of this report. The boring locations and depths were chosen by Darden Restaurants and were shown on a drawing provided to us. All borings were located in the field by our staff engineer by pacing distances from known reference points. The actual locations of some of the borings were off -set from the Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -3- planned locations because of interference with the existing structures on-site. Elevations of the ground surface at the boring locations have been interpolated from the land survey map prepared by Touma Engineers in June of 1995. The elevations shown on the boring logs are reported to the nearest foot and are presumed accurate to within one-half foot. The structure borings (B 1 through B4) were advanced into the ground using hollow stem augers. At regular intervals throughout the boring depths, relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained with a 1.4 inch I.D., 2.0 inch O.D., split spoon sampler. The split - spoon sampler was first seated 6 inches to penetrate any loose cuttings and then driven an additional foot, where possible, with blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler each six inch increment is recorded in the field. The penetration resistance, "N -value", is defined as the number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot and, when properly evaluated, is an index to cohesion for clays and relative density for sands. The split -spoon sampling procedures used during this exploration are in basic accordance with ASTM Designation D 1586. The pavement borings (B5 through B10) were advanced into the ground surface using hollow -stem augers with a drilling plug. Relatively disturbed soil samples were obtained from the auger flights and auger cuttings at obvious changes in the soil strata. Records of Subsurface Exploration (boring logs) which 'include soil descriptions, stratifications, penetration resistances, and locations of the samples are included in the appendix. Water level information obtained after completion of the drilling is also shown on these records. The stratification shown on the boring logs represents the soil conditions at the actual boring locations. Variations may occur between the borings. Lines of demarcation represent the approximate boundary between the soil types, but the transition may be gradual or not clearly defined. Upon completion of the subsurface exploration, all borings were backfilled with a mixture of bentonite chips and the excavated soils. The surface at each boring location was then patched with asphaltic concrete. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -4- Laboratory Testing The soil samples obtained during the field exploration were transported to the laboratory and examined. The samples were visually classified using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Representative samples of the subsurface soils were tested in the laboratory. The laboratory analyses included determining the natural moisture content of all soils. Additionally, Atterberg limit tests and washed sieve analyses were performed on selected samples. All test procedures were in basic accordance with the applicable ASTM Designations or with other accepted laboratory practice. The laboratory test results are shown on the Records of Subsurface Exploration. Those samples which were not altered by laboratory testing will be retained at our office for 60 days from the date of this report and then discarded. As requested by Darden Restaurants, PSI also performed a limited scan for volatile organic vapors on all soil samples using a Photoionization Detector (PID). The initial readings ranged between 0 and 17 parts per million. The results of the volatile organic vapor. scan are presented in the appendix. Based on our interpretation of the limited scan, there is no apparent elevated levels of petroleum contamination. There are, however, indications of odoriferous soils in borings four (B4) at a depth of 11.5 feet and five (B5) at a depth of 2.5 feet. PID readings on these samples were 17 ppm and 14 ppm, respectively. The odor in these samples was reminiscent of some type of solvent or paint thinner. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Site Description and Topography As shown on the Vicinity Map in the appendix, the site for the proposed Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 is located at 16200 West Valley Highway in Tukwila, Washington. At the time of this exploration, the site was occupied by an operating restaurant (Andy's Tukwila Diner). This restaurant uses several diner -type railroad cars resting on rail tracks on the north and south sides of a wood -framed building. The existing building has one level Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. • -5- above grade and one basement -level partially below grade. Based on the surveyed elevation (28.8 feet) of the suspended floor of the existing building and the measured distance (6 feet) between the bottom of the suspended floor and the floor of the basement, the basement floor is at approximate elevation 22.8 feet. The entire area around the restaurant facilities is covered with asphaltic concrete pavement. The existing building and pavement do not show signs of distress. In general, the site is fairly level, there being only minor slopes in the pavement surface to facilitate surface runoff into catch basins for storm drains. Surrounding structures include a Taco Bell restaurant on the adjacent property to the south and residential structures on the adjacent property to the north. Photographs of the site are presented in the appendix of this report. Subsurface Conditions A typical profile of the subsurface soils identified by the ten borings indicates that the site is covered with 2 to 6 inches of asphalt concrete pavement over 2.5 to 7 inches of aggregate base course. Beneath the pavement materials, very loose, brown silt to silt with sand (ML) exists to a depth of 6.5 feet. Underlying the silt soils, very soft, brown lean clay (CL) soils extend to a depth of 10 feet. Beneath the clay soils, very loose, fine to medium sand extends to a depth of about 15 feet. At or around the 15 -foot depth, very soft, grey elastic silt was encountered to the termination depth of the borings. The subsurface soils are described in more detail in the following paragraphs. The silt to silt with fine sand (ML) soils exhibited N -values ranging from 2 to 4 blows per foot, indicating very loose relative density. The natural moisture content of this stratum ranges from 7.6 to 19.6 percent. This soil exhibits a maximum dry density, as, determined by ASTM D 1557, of 125.3 pounds per cubic -foot (pcf) at an optimum moisture content of 9.0 percent. This soil, molded to a dry density of 95% of the maximum dry density, has a laboratory determined CBR value of 18. The lean clay (CL) soils exhibited N -values ranging from the weight of the hammer to 5 blows per foot, and zero tons per square -foot pocket penetrometer readings indicating Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -7- STRUCTURAL INFORMATION At the time of this exploration, only limited structural information regarding the proposed Red Lobster Restaurant was available from Mr. Joe Fard, P.E. of Darden Restaurants. Based on recently obtained information, we understand that the new construction will consist of a 9,100 square -foot, single -story, wood framed structure with exterior wood -panel siding. Maximum column and wall loads are expected to be on the order of 60 kips and 2 kips per linear foot, respectively. Floor slab loads of less than 150 psf are assumed. Employee and patron parking will be provided on all four sides of the building. Two driveways off of West Valley Highway will provide access to and from the property. Trash receptacles (dumpsters) are planned in the northeast corner of the property. A grading plan for the site has not been furnished, therefore, the amounts of cut and fill within the building area are not known. Based on the elevations of the adjacent properties and the elevation of West Valley Highway, we have assumed that the finished floor elevation of the new construction will be within a foot or two of the existing grades. To the best of our knowledge, the new building will not have a basement. The Boring Location Diagram provided in the appendix of this report was prepared from a plan provided by Darden Restaurants and a copy of the land survey map provided by Touma Engineers. The recommendations provided in this report are based on this building location. If any of the above information should change significantly or be in error, it should be brought to our attention so that we may review the recommendations made in this report. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -8- FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Foundation Selection Criteria The type and depth of foundation suitable for a given structure depends on several factors: the subsurface conditions, the function of the structure, the loads it may carry and the cost of the foundation. Additional considerations may include acceptable performance criteria set by the owner; architect, or structural designer with respect to vertical total and differential movements that the structure can withstand without damage. The design considerations affecting the choice of foundation type for this site are summarized as follows: 1) The project is in a Seismic Zone 3 according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code. 2) The relative density of the subsurface materials at the desired shallow foundation elevation is veryloose and these soils are susceptible to P liquefaction during a seismic event of historic and expected magnitudes. 3) Approximately 65„percent of the new building as proposed, lies over the basement of the existing building. 4) The proposed building will not have a basement. Based on the design considerations discussed above, we recommend that the proposed building be supported on conventional spread and continuous wall footings founded entirely on structural backfill. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -9- The foundation recommendations presented below assume that the site preparation and grading are performed in accordance with the "Construction Considerations" section which follows. Footing Foundations Spread footings for building columns and continuous footings for bearing walls should be designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf based on dead load plus design live load. All footings should be supported on a minimum three-foot thick soil mat consisting of properly compacted structural backfill, the properties of which are described later in this report. Minimum foundation widths for column and strip footings should be 24 inches and 18 inches, respectively, even if the bearing pressure is less than the recommended values. Foundation bottoms should be constructed at least 18 inches below the adjacent surface grade to provide for frost protection. Lateral loads transmitted to the foundation will be resisted by friction between the footing and the bearing soils, and by the passive earth pressure against the footing edge. For this project, use a friction coefficient of 0.40 or a passive earth pressure equal to an equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pounds per cubic -foot. If friction and passive earth pressures are used together toresist lateral loads, reduce each of the above recommended values by one-third. - The placement and compaction of all structural backfill and the excavations for all foundations should be inspected by a representative of Professional Service Industries prior to steel or concrete placement to assess that the foundation materials are capable of supporting the design loads. Consolidation testing was considered beyond the scope of this exploration. Based on the known subsurface conditions and site geology, laboratory testing and past experience, we anticipate that properly designed and constructed footings supported on the recommend - Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -10 - ed compacted structural backfill could experience total settlements in the range of one (1) to two (2) inches due to the compressible soils beneath the recommended structural backfill. Differential settlements of 3 inches may be expected. A portion of the anticipated total settlement will occur during construction. The allowable soil pressure given above is based on settlement consideration and includes an adequate factor of safety against a bearing capacity failure. Floor Slabs On -grade floor slabs supported on the recommended structural backfill may be used for this structure. We recommend that a minimum four -inch thick free draining sand be placed with a level flat surface beneath the floor slabs to enhance drainage and provide smooth surface for the underside of the slab. Polyethylene sheeting should be placed on top of the granular mat to act as a vapor barrier. The floor slabs should have an adequate number of joints to reduce cracking resulting from any differential movement and shrinkage. Floor slabs should not be rigidly connected to columns, walls, or foundations. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS It is recommended that PSI be retained to provide observation and testing of construction activities involved, in the foundation, earthwork, and related activities of this project. PSI cannot .accept any responsibility for any conditions which deviate from those described in this report, nor for the performance of the foundation if not engaged to also provide construction observation and testing for this project. Site Preparation and Fill Requirements To prepare for the site for construction, the railroad cars, rails and ties, and landscaping materials will need to be removed from the site, and the existing restaurant building will need to be razed. The basement walls of the existing restaurant building Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -11 - should be removed to the elevation of the basement floor, however, any concrete in the floor of the existing basement may remain if it does not interfere with planned utilities of the new structure. If the basement floor concrete is left in place, it should be broken to minimize perching of water. PSI recommends that the new building be supported on a properly compacted, three- foot thick, structural soil mat of uniform thickness. To facilitate this, we recommend that the existing basement excavation be extended vertically to a depth of three (3) feet below the proposed footing elevation and horizontally to at least five feet beyond the edges of the proposed footings. The excavation should be performed to make a relatively flat, level surface. Upon completion of the excavation, the structural backfill can be placed. The backfill material should be free of organic matter, granular in nature with less than 15 percent fines, and have a maximum particle size of three inches. It should be compacted in maximum eight -inch loose lifts and each lift mechanically compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum laboratory dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Compaction by water flooding should not be permitted. Due to the very soft soils encountered, some difficulty in moving equipment around in the bottom of the excavation should be expected. Additionally, some difficulty in achieving the recommended percent compaction in the first lift or two should be anticipated. To help minimize these problems, the contractor should consider initially using light equipment in the excavation and placing a lift of single -size, large (3" to 4") rock over the bottom of the excavation to form a working surface. Any topsoil and near surface landscaping materials encountered during the excavation should be stripped from the site and either wasted or stockpiled for later use in any proposed landscaped areas. Depths of topsoil in our borings ranged from 2 to 5 inches in thickness. The depth of removal should be determined by a representative of the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction. Any existing utilities in construction areas should be located and rerouted, as necessary. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -12 - Excavations In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October 1989), the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P". This document was issued to better insure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by this federal regulation that all excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement excavation or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new OSHA guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if they are not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties. The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926," should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations. We are providing this information solely as a service to our client. PSI is not assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. Drainage and Groundwater Considerations Water should not be allowed to collect in the excavation or near the foundations or floor slab areas of the building or pavements, either during or after construction. Undercut or excavated areas should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, ground water or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface water around the perimeter of the building and beneath the floor slabs. All grades should be sloped away from the building and surface drainage should Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -13 - be collected and discharged such that water is not permitted to infiltrate the backfill of the building. While groundwater was not encountered at the anticipated depth of the excavation time the field exploration was conducted, it is possible that seasonal variations will cause fluctuations or a water table to be present in the upper soils during the spring months or after a prolonged period of rain. Weather Considerations The soils encountered at this site are expected to be relatively sensitive to disturbances caused by construction traffic and to changes in moisture content. During periods of wet weather, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities. Care should be exercised during the grading operations at the site. Due to the fine-grained nature of the surficial soils, the traffic of heavy equipment, including heavy compaction equipment, may very well create pumping and a general deterioration of those soils in the presence of water. The grading should, therefore, if at all possible, be carried out during a dry season. In some cases, a layer of crushed stone is required to allow the movement of construction traffic over the site during the rainy season. The contractor should maintain positive site drainage and if wet/pumping conditions occur, the contractor will be responsible to over excavate the wet soils and replace them with a properly compacted structural backfill. PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Overall, the existing asphaltic concrete pavement at this site appears to be in good to very good condition. Therefore, consideration should be given to leaving as much as practical in-place for the new restaurant. Recommendations for new flexible and rigid pavement sections, however, are presented herein. Traffic loads and intensities for the Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 have not been provided. Therefore, based on the anticipated number of parking spaces, estimated traffic Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -14 - flow, and an assumed 20 year design life, the traffic load was estimated to be equivalent to 5,000 18 -kip single axle loads in automobile parking areas and 60,000 18 -kip single axle loads in heavy duty areas (light commercial trucks and entrance lanes). The pavement recommendations presented below are based on the above described traffic information, the soil types encountered at the anticipated subgrade elevation, and a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 18 percent as being representative of the on-site soils when compacted to 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557): Light Duty (Automobile Parking Areas): 2.0 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course 6.0 inches Mineral Aggregate Base Stone heavy Duly (Light Commercial or Truck Entrance Lanes): 3.5 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course 8.0 inches Mineral Aggregate Base Stone The above sections represent recommended minimum design thicknesses which are typical of pavements in the area. Periodic maintenance of the pavement such as crack and surface sealing should be anticipated. All pavement materials and construction procedures should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation, 1994 Standard Specifications for Road. Bridge and Municipal Construction. The base stone should be aggregate as outlined in Section 9-03.9(3); the asphaltic concrete surface course should conform to Class B. Rigid pavement sections merit consideration for areas to receive relatively high concentrated sustained loads such as dumpsters, loading areas and storage bins. Rigid Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -15 - pavement of 6 inches in thickness will distribute concentrated loads over a greater area, hence reducing the possibility of high stress concentrations to the subgrade. The concrete used for rigid pavement should have a minimum 28 day flexural strength of 600 psi, a maximum slump of 4" and air entrainment of 5%t1%. The subbase should consist of a near uniform soil of equivalent moisture content, and density. Pavement joints, reinforcing and details should be designed in accordance with the applicable American Concrete Institute (ACI) standards. The horizontal dimensions of concrete pavement at the dumpster stations should be such that the entire truck is supported by the concrete pavement section. All pavements should be sloped to provide positive surface drainage. Water allowed to pond on or adjacent to the pavement could saturate the subgrade and cause premature pavement deterioration. Catch basins should be perforated to allow drainage of the subsurface aggregate base course. Preparation of all new -pavement subgrades in parking and drive areas should be in accordance with the following recommendations. Strip and remove all organic topsoil from the site and either waste it or stockpile it for later use in landscaped areas. The depth of removal should be determined by a representative of the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction. Any existing utilities in construction areas should be located and rerouted, as necessary. After stripping and excavating to the proposed subgrade level, as required, the pavement areas should be proof -rolled with a fully loaded tandem -axle dump truck or similar equipment providing equivalent subgrade loading. Soils that are observed to rut or deflect excessively under the moving load should be undercut and replaced with properly compacted fill. All proof -rolling and undercutting activities should be witnessed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer and should be performed during a period of dry weather. The subgrade soils should be compacted to a dry density of at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density for a depth of at least 12 inches below the surface. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. -16- After subgrade preparation and inspection have been completed, fill placement may begin. Fill materials should be free of organic or other deleterious materials, have a maximum particle size of 3 inches, and have a liquid limit less than 50 and plasticity index less than 25. Structural fill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of modified Proctor maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Designation D 1557. GENERAL COMMENTS The recommendations submitted are based on the available soil information obtained by PSI and preliminary design details furnished by Darden Restaurants for the proposed structure. If there are any revisions to the plans for the proposed structure, or if deviations from the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during. construction, PSI should be retained to determine if changes in the foundation recommenda- tions are required. If PSI is not retained to perform these functions, PSI will not be responsible for the impact of those conditions on the performance of the structure. The geotechnical engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifica- tions, or professional advice contained herein have been made after being prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the field of foundation and pavement engineering, soil mechanics, and engineering geology. No other warranties are implied or expressed. After the plans and specifications are more complete, it is recommended that the geotechnical engineer be provided the opportunity to review the final design and specifications in order that the earthwork, foundation, and pavement recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented. At this time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Darden Restaurants for the specific application to Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 in Tukwila, Washington. Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc. APPENDIX • Darden Restaurants Professional Service Industries, Inc, rs-� •?xliriidd cue, L_I___11.1t...1....1.1-1:1" • 1-1--J--- ('.r Nt _p. e c:f. rr 1.2 110 1:I I I I III I I I l l l l l l I!liiil 111 1 1 1 •'Approximate Outline of Proposed Building S .. 1 11 lin 11010-111110 011Militil 0 1LIE0:0:IUIQ'flh I • B4. 7l. Ie' 1 0 1 Outline of Existing Building a as a; D * Q lei I. r r.o4' 1111010 -Toni w 111 1 1111Ki11M111i1111111111( C0•00.0Qa0:U0:0:0:Q 0i0 01DLLTInH ,I,' 111 1 ULU 11.:fr � I eo, 8' COMMIE WALK ' • 1.4 N nlp41• i i B 8 LEGEND 1" = Approximately 46 feet Boring Number and Approximate Location jai, .1 — RED LOBSTER RESTAURANT 2408 West Valley Highway Tukwila, Washington BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM PSI File No. 880.55204 HS ■ S 132N0 ST 13477. s s: f� R 139'�j, S 143 151 ST CRYSTA SPRI s 16onr GREE!/ BAKER BL D W PROJECT: R SITE STRANDER 167TH ST TRECK OR '• RED LOBSTER RESTAURANT 2408 West Valley Highway Tukwila, Washington VICINITY DIAGRAM PSI File No. 880-55204 [33RD Photo 3, View of north parking lot. RED LOBSTER RESTAURANT 2408 West Valley Highway Tukwila, Washington Photo 4, View of south parking lot. PHOTOGRAPHS PSI File No. 880-55204 Boring Number Sample Number Depth (feet) VOC Reading (ppm) B1 2SS 23-4.0 5 B1 3SS 5.0-6.5 2 B1 4SS 7.5-9.0 2 B1 5SS 10.0-11.5 3 B1 6SS 15.0-165 2 B2 2SS 23-4.0 4 B2 3SS 5.0-63 4 B2 4SS 7.5-9.0 6 B2 SSS 10.0-113 4 B2 6SS 15.0-16S 4 B3 2SS 23-4.0 7 B3 3SS 5.0-63 5 B3 4SS 7.5-9.0 6 B3 5SS 10.0-113 S B3 6SS 15.0-163 4 B4 2SS 23-4.0 0 B4 3SS 5.0-63 1 B4 4SS 75-9.0 2 B4 SSS 10.0-113 1, 17. B4 6SS 15.0-163 1 B5 1AU 23 1, 14 B5 2AU . 5.0 1 B5 3AU 73 3 B6 ' IAU 23 3 B6 • 2AU 5.0 3 B7 IAU 2.5 3 B7 2AU 5.0 2 B7 3AU 73 4 B8 IAU 2.5 1 B9 1AU 2S 4 B9 2AU 5.0 2 B9 3AU 73 6 B10 1AU 23 2 1310 2AU 5.0 2 RED LOBSTER RESTAURANT 2408 West Valley Highway Tukwila, Washington VOLATILE ORGANIC VAPOR SCAN PSI File No. 880-55204 GENERAL NOTES SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION The Unified Soil Classification System is used to identify the soil unless otherwise noted. SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS N: Standard "N" penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2 inch O.D. split -spoon sampler. WR: Weight of the sampler and rods. WH: Weight of the sampler, rods, and 140 pound hammer. Qu: Unconfined Compressive strength, TSF. Op: Penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, TSF. Ma Water content, % LL: Liquid limit, % PI: Plasticity Index, % Dd: Natural dry density, PCF. Apparent groundwater level at time noted after completion of boring. DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS SS: Split -spoon - 1 3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., except where noted. ST: Shelby Tube - 3" O.D., except where noted. AU: Auger Sample. DB: Diamond Bit. CB: Carbide Bit. WS: Washed Sample. RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION TERM (NON -COHESIVE SOILS) STANDARD PENV'TRATION RESISTANCE VALUE Very Loose 0-4 Loose 4-10 Medium 10-30 Dense 30-50 .• Very Dense Over 50 TERM (COHESIVE SOILS) Ou - (TSF) Very Soft 0 - 0.25 Soft 0.25 - 0.50 Firm (Medium) 0.50 - 1.00 Stiff 1.00-2.00 Very Stiff 2.00 4,00 Hard 4.00+ PARTICLE SIZE '- Boulders 8 in. + Coarse Sand 5mm-0.6mm ; Silt 0.074mm-0.005mm Cobbles 8 in. -3 in. Medium Sand 0.6mm-02mm Clay -0.00Smm Gravel 3in.-5mm Fine Sand 0.2mm-0 074mm • Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Q. Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLE N Qp MC RIDfAItlCB Surface Elevation 24' AMSL - /— - _ 3" Asphalt, 6" Aggregate Base - Brown SILT to SILT with fine- - sand (ML) �- 1AU -- – 16.4 - - Light grey Lean CLAY with _ - sand (CL) 5. 2AU -- -- 18.0. 14 _ End of Boring - .. ■ 10■ ■ ■ 15. Ii ■ 20. ■ _ _ ■ 25. ■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Wshington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPInON DBP14j SAMPLE N Qp MC REMARKS Surface Elevation 25' AMSL - 3" Asphalt, 7" Aggregate Base - - - 1AU -- -- 17.6 - - Brown SILT to SILT with fine - - - sand (ML) - . ■ 5■ 2AU -- — 23.3 ■ - Brown Lean CLAY with sand - - - (CL) - 3AU — -- 27.9 ■ End of Boring 10. .. ■ ■ . •15. ■ • 20. • 25■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring J. Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLB N QP MC RSw(ARAS Surface Elevation 25' AMSL - 3" Asphalt, 6" AgEgate Base - --N - Encountered unmarked utility line, aborted boring at this - - . - \ location. 7--- • 5. ■ _ End of Boring - - 10■ 1 • - 15■ ■ • 20. 1 • 25. Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Z Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DffiCRW' ON DEPTH SAMPLE N Qp MC - Surface Elevation 24' AMSL - - - _ \2" Asphalt, 7" Aggregate Base - - 1AU -- -- 25.9 _ Brown SILT to SILT with fine - - _ sand (ML) - . ■ 5■ 2AU — — 35.3 ■ Brown Lean CLAY with sand _ - - (C-) - 3AU — -- 41.5 - ■ 10. ■ ■15■ ■ ■ 20. ■ 25. ■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DRSCRIP[nON DEPTH SAMPLE N Qp MC REMARKS - Surface Elevation 23' AMSL - 2" Asphalt, 3.5" Aggregate Base /— - - \ - - 1AU -- – 15.6 - - Brown SILT to SILT with fine _ - - sand (ML) - - ■ 5. 2AU -- -- 14.2 a - End of Boring - - 10. 1 • 7 15■ ■ • 20. ■ • 25. ■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLE N Op MC REIMAR CS Surface Elevation 24' AMSL 0 - 33" Asphalt, 6" Aggregate Base 1— - Brown SILT to SILT with fine - 1AU -- -- 16.6 Orange rock, - sand, some gravel (ML) - PID = 14 - 5■ 2AU -- -- 18.5 ■ Light grey to dark grey Elastic . - SILT (MH) - . 3AU -- -- 203 - End of Boring- - 10. ■ • 15. ■ - - • 20a ■ is 25. ■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring 4 Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: B80-55204 DESCRLPnON DEMI SAMPLE N Op MC RL .(ARKS Surface Elevation 24' AMSL 1AU 2SS 3SS 4SS 5SS 6SS -- 4 2 2 14 WR – -- -- -- – 0.25 7.6 28.1 41.1 7.7 743 0 Hour - - - - ■ - - - ■ - - - . ■ - - ■ -N. 4" Asphalt, 5" Aggregate Base z—: - - ■ Brown SILT to Silt with fine sand (ML) - _ 5.. - - • Brown Lean CLAY with sand (CL) _ - 10. - - - - ■ Dark -brown fine to medium SAND (SP): Orange soil with solvent -like odor at 11.5 feet, PID = 17 - - . 15■ - - Grey Elastic SILT with sand (MD) - / _- _ IN • End of Boring - 20.■ 25■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring _3_ Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila, Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLE N Op MC REMARKS Surface Elevation 24' AMSL - 1AU — -- - -\ 3" Asphalt, 2.5" Aggregate Base / - - Brown Silt to SILT with sand - 2SS 3 -- 16.1 - - (ML) - - ■ 5. 1 - Brown Lean CLAY with sand - 3SS WH -- 43.0 - - (CL) - _ 4SS 4 -- 19.0 - - Dark -brown fine to medium - . ■ SAND (SP) 10. ■ - - 5SS 5 -- 23.5 - - - 0 Hour - ■ 15■ 1 - Grey Elastic SILT with sand - —.� 6SS 2 -- 58.4 - - (MH) /__ - End of Boring - . ■ 20. ■ • 25. ■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila, Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLE N Op MC REMARKS Surface Elevation 24' AMSL AU 2SS 3SS 4SS 5SS 6SS — 2 2 5 4 WH -- -- -- -- -- -- 19.6 29.2 82 15.4 67.1 - " - - ■ - - ■ - - o Hour. - ■ ■ Asphalt, 3" Aggregate Base _ ---6" ,= - _ Brown SILT to SILT with fine sand _ ■ (MI-) 5. - - _ Brown Lean CLAY with sand (CL) - • 10. - Dark -brown fine to medium SAND - _ (SP) - ■ Grey Elastic SILT with sand (MH) 15. - - _ End of Boring - • 20. • 25■ Professional Service Industries, Inc. RECORD OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION Boring Project Name: Red Lobster Restaurant #95R200 Site: Tukwila. Washington Date of Boring: June 29. 1995 Project Number: 880-55204 DESCRIPTION DEPTH SAMPLE N Op MC MAARIB Surface Elevation 24' AMSL 1AU 2SS 3SS 4SS 5SS 6SS -- 3 2 2 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.3 32.3 36.4 10.2 57.9 LL=41, PI=24 -#200=83% -#200=8% 0 Hour LL=53, PI=17 X3.5" Asphalt, 2.5" Aggregate Base 7-- _ Brown SILT to SILT with fine _ _ sand (ML) - • 5. - - _ Brown Lean CLAY with sand _ (CL) - - - • 10• _ Dark brown fine to medium , - SAND (SP) _ • 150 \Grey Elastic SILT with sand (MH) /—: - End of Boring _ • 201 • 25.