Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA74-790
BEGINNING OF FILE FILE TITLE MICROFILMED iiii 7: 1---;16-;;;- Y7 4 M 4i se 5 12ENTON VILLAGE DL I I I l':;•"R- CI yEi:!GS- 1Ili8R,1 c 'A III 1 -• fii111410.-1 ell L 47 4 4- r rc10EETIO.Ir 12 r!PS N 1.16i Z 21 Trsa !till' 5-1111 11I i_• QIIIOMQ O ,t ,•: mmL1 "."` f --1.7 R-2 Y *N 641.4 ."N.,z,,,,,,, 4. ..1-t* - itlit 4i)4) io ar Anti" I.I ak l a rL A 4it. i .a_ ISM• L: A 4%1No s QJ OOO'^••+Q wk el A 44/14:,-,\„(--- E 3 39 5 I • SR 4.1.2-- _ ,,, • a.. .0 i o,°.. i i 1 .0, I ,di/, I•.• °ice WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO . . 7 SPECIAL PERMIT N T `R-3 ` SITE APPROVAL r._ i G-9 0 0 1::- SPECIAL G-7200 1NoR. 0" mil I--..-I.111,_!<\\*. ..„. .:* ,„. , .. —— — — - - 0,12:4,‘b.,;C: .17 RIM __,_ .., ss`, PERMIT AND SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION : WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO . ; Appl . No . SP-789-74; special permit to allow filling and grading in R-1 zone; property located between S . Puget Dr. and Williams Ave. S . AND Appl . No. SA-790-74 ; site approval to ,add storage capacity to existing peak shaving plant in the form of (20) 30 ,000 gallon underground propane tanks in R-1 zone ; property as listed above . APPLICANT WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO.TOTAL AREA 1701± acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS South Puget Drive EXISTING ZONING R- 1 EXISTING USE Peak shaving plant for storage & distribution of natural gas . PROPOSED USE Additional storage capacity to existing peak shaving plant in the form of (20) 3U ,000 gallon tanks . COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Single family residential COMMENTS Proposed use allowed by site approval . Oricinal facility approved by Planning Commission July 22 , 1964 . CITY OF RENTON APPLICATION SITE APPROVAL FOR OFFICE USE ONLY File No . SA- 79e, - 7.51 Filing Date 9- /-7, APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : 1 . Name Washington Natural GAR rnm+any Phone 622-6767 Address 815 Mercer Street, Seattle. Washington 2 . Property location 100 Avenue SE & SE 160 Street 3 . Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) additional sheet attached 4 . Number of acres or sq. ft. 17.01 acres Present zoning single family 5 . What do you propose to develop on this property? Add storage capacityfto existing peak shaving plant in the form of (20) in,00n gallon underground propane tanks. 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application: Scale A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , exi:3ting structures , easements, and other factors limiting development) 1"=10 ' or 20 ' attached B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan. . 1"=10 ' attached C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning attached on adjacent parcels) 1"= 200 ' - 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) No new building proposed. 7 . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Date approved Date denied Date appealed Appeal action I Remarks i,1j. to ('a,i J //ohs . Planning Dept. 2-73 r ti AFFIDAVIT I, Robert R. Golliver being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 4th day of September 19 74 , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Dockton Name of Not ry Public)Si Nature of Owner M 9 411- ' Washington Natural Gas Company P. O, Box 262, Dockton. Washington 815 Mercer Street Address) Address) Seattle Wash. 98109 City) State) 622-6767 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found ,to—borough and complete in every particular and to conform to the ru, ' es .and- _r.e'g ations of the Renton Planning Department governing the fi _;ng to uch lication . C, i—Date Received 04 , 19 By: e 4'Nd ./ Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON r ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WORKSHEET s\`\'* ` r` j FOR OFFICE USE ONLY : Application No . Z--" -C.9 --?7- 73' Negative Dec . Date Received y'--5/- 7/ EIS INSTRUCTIONS : The purpose of this information is to assist the vari - ous departments of the City to determine whether an environmental impact statement will be required before approving and issuing a per- mit for a proposed project . Single family residential uses in non sensitive areas are exempt from this requirement as established by , Washington Administrative Code 173-34 . In addition to the following information , please submit a vicinity map recommend scale : 1 " representing 200 ' to 800 ' ) and a site map ( rec- ommEnded scale : 1 " representing 10 ' to 40 ' ) . APPLICANT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REQUIRED IN ITEMS 1 THROUGH 30 BELOW : 1 . Name of applicant Washington Natural Gas Company 2 . Mailing address 815 Mercer Street, Seattle, Washington CPO Box 1869. Seattle) Telephone 622-6767 3. A plicant is : nOwner EILeSsee I 'Contract purchaser I 'Other ( specify) 4 . Name and address of owner , if other than applicant : Telephone 5 . General location of proposed project ( give street address if any or nearest street and intersection 100 Avenue SE & SE 160 Street 2 - 6 . Legal description ( if lengthy , attach as separate sheet ) Attached 7 . Area 17.01 acres Dimensions irregular, see p1 nt plan 8. Intended use of property or project ( include details : number of units , volume , etc . ) : The intended use is a peak shaving plant. This plant now exists under authority of the Renton Planning Commission approval of July 22, 1969. 9 . Generally describe the property and existing improvements : Wooded and landscaped property screened from view with existing peak shaving plant on premises. 10 . Total construction cost or fair market value of proposed project including additional developments contemplated : approximately $850,000 11 . Construction dates (month and year) for which permit is requested : Begin Septecgber, 1974 End January, 1975 3 - 12 . List any other permits for this project from state , federal , or other local governmental agencies for which you have applied or will apply , including the name of the issuing agency , whether the permit has been applied for , and if so , the date of the applica- tion , whether the application was approved or denied and the date of same , and the number of the application or permit :none Date Agency Permit Type Submitted* Number Status** Leave blank if not submitted . Approved , denied or pending . 13 . Has an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assess- ment been prepared for the proposed project? l Jyes xino If "yes " submit copy with this environmental impact worksheet . 14. Are there similar projects , both public and private , existing or planned in the immediate area : yes lx ] no ldon ` t know If "yes" explain . 15 . Is the proposed project located in or adjacent to an area or structure having unique or exceptional historic , cultural , or other values considered important by some sectors of the popu- lation? yes Ixino If "yes " explain . 16 . Is the proposed project located in an area that may be considered sensitive and is subject to erosion , landslides , floods , etc . ? ' yes xi no If "yes" explain . 4 - 17 . I ! the proposed project located in an area that has a number of large trees or other natural landscaped areas , waterways , marshes or wildlife? Px lyes m no If "yes" explain . The property is landscaped with many trees, small wildlife is evident and is compatible with plant usage. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PROPOSED PROJECT : In the following questions summarize what the applicant feels will be the environmental impact , both beneficial and adverse , of the proposed project . Consideration should be given to both the human and natural environmental as well as physical , social , and aesthetic aspect . For projects which are part of a more extensive plan , consider the implications of the entire plan and not just the project now being proposed . 18 . Land Use : Will the project have a significant effect on land u ;e in the surrounding area? dyes L no Explain : The project is an addition of underground storage to an existing plant. No change in plant use or effect will result. 19 . Project Design and Appearance : Will the project design , appear- anc , landscaping , etc . , assure the maximum protection for the nat iral environment? eyes I` ' no Explain : The project is designed to increase storage capacity by undergrounding the tanks. Revised contours will be landscaped to conform to the aesthetic impact of the existing areas. 20 . Ground Contours : Does the proposed project have an effect on he existing ground contours of the project location? lx `yes l lno . Is the project likely to cause erosion or sedimentation? (_—lyes x lno? If "yes " to either , explain . Final contours will revised from natural to a realitively minor extent. Adequate subsurface and surface drainage is designed and all affected areas are to be planted to control erosion. Work methods will be designed to minimize erosion or sedimentation during construction. 5 - 21 . Air Quality: Will construction of the project and use of the completed project have a substantial effect on the existing air quality? (Consider the effect of any gas , chemicals , smoke , dust , particulate matter , and odors ) ? yes ix no If "yes" explain . 22 . Water Quality : Will construction of the project and use of the completed project be likely to have an effect on the existing water quality of the area? (Consider the adequacy of drainage and runoff and the likely endpoint of any liquids draining from the project . )tyes [x]no . Is there a good possibility that this project will requir an expansion of local water and/or sewer facilities?I__yes [x no If "yes" to either , explain . 23 . Noise : Will construction of the project or use of the completed project significantly affect the existing noise levels of the area? e yes Y tno . Will the project be affected by airports , freeways , railroads or other sources of noise? yes r1 no If "yes" to either , explain . 24. Population Density : Will a noticeable population change result from this project? ( Consider the present density per acre in the surrounding community to the proposed density of the project and including daytime density . ) j ; yes (lino . Will the pro- ject cause periodic or temporary fluctuations in population due to tourism , employment , shopping , schools , etc . ;__dyes =ono . If "yes " to either , explain . 6 - 25 . Effect on Population : Will the proposed action directly or in- directly cause the relocation of a sizeable number of persons or the division or disruption of existing community patterns of liv- ing? I Iye.s Li] no If "yes " explain . 26 . Schools and Parks : Will the proposed project have an effect on schools and parks in the area? yes IXIno If "yes " explain . 27 . Transportation : Will construction of the project or use of the completed project have a significant impact on transportation in the area? _ yes IX no Explain : 28. Public Use : Will the project be available for use by all sectors of the public? Iyes LX_Ino Explain : Peak shaving plant is not intended to be available for any public use. 29 . Other impacts : Identify any other beneficial or adverse environ- mental impacts which may result from the construction or comple- tion of thee proposed project. none 7 - 30 . VIEWS OF LOCAL GROUPS : Have you made your plans known to interested community roups or neighbors in the vicinity of the project? [-j yes [x Ino If "yes" what are their reactions? If "no" do you intend to cr.ntact these people?[ ilyes [Jno Interested persons will have the opportunity to review our plans during the normal permit aquisition phase. CERTIFICATION BY OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE The Owner/Representative identified in Item No . 1 or 4 above hereby certifies that the information furnished in this Environmental Work- sheet is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge . 2 L /,C Z '- . eL'L'l.t'LA G //-'_0-7 J-L/ "X /2 Signature Title ate / 8 - TO BE FILLED IN BY CITY DEPARTMENTS REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : ems Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : C6mmunts : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 9 - REVIEW Bx OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 10 - ACTION BY RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL A. Staff review determined that project : Has no significant environmental impact and application should be processed without further consideration of environmental effects . May have significant environmental impact and a complete environmental assessment should be prepared by applicant prior to further action on request for permit . B. Reasofls for above conclusion : Signature of Responsible Official or Authorized Representativet Date : Form: EIS-1 Planning Department October 15 , 1973 NOTICE: OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION RENTON , WASH 1 NGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASH] NGTON , ON OCTOBER 9 19 74 , AT 8 : 00 P . M . TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . SITE (USE ) APPROVAL TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF EXISTING GAS STORAGE PLANT IN R- 1 ZONE ; file No . SA-790-74 ; property locxated between S . Puget Dr . and Williams Ave . S . Legal description on file in Planning Department office . 2 . SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW EXCAVATION AND GRADING IN R- 1 ZONE ; file No . SP-789-74 ; property located between S . Puget Dr. and Williams Ave . S . Legal description on file in Planning Department office . ALL PERSONS INTERESTED OR OBJECTING TO SAID PETITIONSBEARE 'IN1V 74 'ED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON AT 8 : 00 P . M. TO VOICE THEIR PROTESTS OR OBJECTIONS TO SAME . LARRY GIBSON , SECRETARY PUBLISHED OCTOBER 4, 1974 RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION I , MICHAEL L . SMITH HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOIJS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW . 21ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary Public , SIGNED on th day of '4F 19 7 . NOTICE OF PUBLIC hEARING RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION RENTON , WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON , ON SEPTEMBER 25 , 1974 , AT 8 : 00 P . M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING : 1 . REVISION OF THE CITY"S COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AS IT PERTAINS TO a . AREA IN VICINITY OF THE HOSPITAL REGION . b . AN APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT . Request of W. Stewart Pope for property located at 3713 Talbot Road S . consisting of 8. 2 acres of land at the southwest intersection of Talbot Road and South 37th St . to amend the Compre- hensive Land Use Plan from single family residential to public and quasi public use . 2 . PETITIONS AS FOLLOWS : a . SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW FILLING AND GRADING IN G ZONE , file No . SP-763-74 ; property located at Black River Junction . Legal description on file in Planning Depart- ment office . b. APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL IN R-2 zone , file No . PP-789-74 ; property located on N . E . 8th ST. between Harrington and Jefferson Ave . N . E . Legal description on file in Planning Department office . c . REZONE FROM G TO R-2 ; file No . R-787-74 ; property located on Park Ave . N . between N . 30th St. and N . 32nd St. Legal description on file in Planning Department office . d . SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 10-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING IN G ( R-2 ) ZONE ; file No . SP-788-74 ; property located on Park Ave. N . between N . 30th St. and N . 32nd St. Legal description on file in Planning Department office . e . SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW FILLING AND GRADING IN R- 1 ZONE ; file No . SP-789-74 ; property located between S . Puget Dr. and Williams Ave . S . Legal description on file in Planning Department office . 4 f. SITE APPROVAL TO ADD STORAGE CAPACITY TO EXISTING PEAK SHAVING PLANT IN THE FORM OF TWENTY 30 ,000 GALLON UNDERGROUND PROPANE TANKS IN R- 1 ZONE ; file No . SA-790-74 ; property located between S . Puget Dr. and Williams Ave . S . Legal description on file in Planning Department office . ALL PERSONS INTERESTED OR OBJECTING TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 25 , 1974 , AT 8 : 00 P . M. TO VOICE THEIR PROTESTS OR OBJECTIONS TO SAME . PUBLISHED September 15 , 1974 LARRY GIBSON , SECRETARY RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION I , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW . ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me , a Notary; Public , on the /a /, day of,J "„_t _" SIGNED V/41 1/4.41 19 -p/ . 27Q x :.Z,e- i' C (, ( of L___, APPLICATION : SPECIAL PERMIT - FOR EXCAVATION AND GRADING APPLICANT: WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY LOCATION : Property located between South Puget Drive and Williams Avenue South in the vicinity of South 19th Street . ZONING : R- 1 REQUEST : Applicant requests Planning Commission approval for excavation and fill related to a proposal to increase propane storage capacity at the existing peak shaving plant . COMMENTS : 1 . The project will entail 4 ,000 cubic yards of cut to provide a level foundation for the storage tanks and approximately 6 ,000 cubic yards of additional fill to bury the tanks . The depth will be approximately 14 feet . Total area disturbed = ± 30 ,000 square feet . 2 . An existing stream is to be culverted an additional ± 330 feet with 36" pipe . Purpose is to allow free movement of the stream, reduce possibilities of erosion and subsidence and decrease siltation . 3 . A group of existing trees will be removed and all replanted for screening (except the larger Cedar trees ) . 4. Disturbed area will be replanted in grass and evergreen trees . 5 . Hillside above access road should be reseeded to prevent erosion . STAFF RECOMMENDA—Recommend continuance for additional input TION : for the Environmental Assessment . Areas of concern are erosion , drainage , and landscaping . APPLICATION : SITE (USE ) APPROVAL APPLICANT : WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY LOCATION : Property located between South Puget Drive and Williams Avenue South in the vicinity of South 19th Street. ZONING : R- 1 APPLICABLE SECTIONS 4-706 OF THE ZONING CODE : REQUEST : Applicant requests approval of plans to expand the storage capacity of an existing peak shaving plant. COMMENTS : 1 . The applicant has submitted an Environmental Assessment . Upon review by staff , certain portions of the assessment , including the areas of safety hazards and precautions , should be explained in more detail . Support- ive data should be included . 2 . The demand for natural gas " peaks" during a few of the coldest winter days . This peak can be described in terms of maximum instantaneous increases in and duration of average demand when weather is continu- ously cold . The Gas Company was informed of a' forthcoming shortfall in gas delivered by Canadian suppliers for the coming heating season . Existing facilities are not ade- quate to provide for the increase in peak shaving demand created by the supply short- fall . The additional gas storage would thus provide assurance that gas supply to highest priority customers ( residential home heating customers ) will not be affected . 3 . The proposal provides for the installation of twenty 30 ,000 gallon underground propane storage tanks , 54 feet in length by 10 feet in diameter, and associated appurtenances . 4. The existing facility serves the South County region . 5 . No noise is generated from the proposed facility except during the times of extreme weather conditions , when the plant machinery is activated . (Estimated to be approximately once every twenty years . ) 6 . The noise and odor presently existing is generated from the pipeline substations located on the west side of Williams Ave- nue South . This station is presently being updated to solve these problems . 7 . No air pollution will be caused by operation of the facility. The engines used during operation are operated by natural gas , thus no noxious pollutants will enter the atmo- sphere . WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY, SITE (USE) APPROVAL - Page 2 . COMMENTSCONTD : 8. Safety hazards and precautions have not been explained in depth . Various safety precautions listed in the assessment are : a . ) The Renton facility conforms to D. O. T . Office of Pipeline Safety and Uniform Fire Code Standards . b . ) The storage tanks are underground , coated , and cathodically protected to ASME pressure vessel codes . c . ) All tank connections protected with automatic excess flow check valves . d . ) Normal status of the plant is standby , with operation occurring infrequently during severe cold. Operation is on a fully manned basis and not remotely controlled . e . ) Roving security patrols on a confi - dential schedule . f. ) Availability of radio equipped Com- pany personnel in the general area 24 hours per day . g . ) Six inch fire water main at the site , in addition to chemical fire fighting equipment. h . ) Large buffering area with setbacks in excess of Code Requirements . Code requirements take into considera- tion the loss of tank integrity and require safety setbacks according to container size and installation methods . The required setback for size and installation of the proposed containers is not less than 50 feet from the nearest important building or line of adjacent property which may be built upon . The nearest line of adjacent property which may be built upon is a distance of 210 feet or over four times the code requirement. The nearest important building is the on-site compressor house which is a distance of 120 feet or over two times the code requirement. 9 . The facility will generate minimal traffic except during the construction period . STAFF RECOMMENDA-Recommend continuance for additional input for TION : the Environmental Assessment . Areas of con- cern are safety precautions , setbacks , and screening . of f2 rt^ r) IHR 2. THE CITY OF RENTON z o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 p AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT40- 235 - 2550 04y- SEPO- O MEMORANDUM November 15 , 1974 TO: Del Mead, City Clerk FROM: Joan Lankford Planning Department RE: Landscape Installation and Maintenance Bonds for Washington Natural Gas Company We are forwarding the two landscape performance bonds, U792970 and #U792974 from Washington Natural Gas Company for installation of landscape and three-year maintenance at the Swarr Station located west of Puget Drive. The landscape plan will be submitted to the Planning Department in the near future, and will be on file in our department. If you have any questions, or need any additional information, please contact us. Attachments JAL:ms oWASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY l \l 'r er .1lrt'(.t (P.O. /iul 180) .1ea/ll/i'. UNAI'lrl,14lull NI/ ) I e/.'I,Inole f_'th ) 1L)2.6-.6' November 5, 1974 Ms. Joan A. Lankford Assistant Planner, Landscape Design City of Renton Planning Department Municipal Building Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Lankford : Enclosed are two performance bonds to cover installation and maintenance of the proposed landscaping at our Swarr Station. The amounts are 150% of estimated cost as required by our Site Plan Approval. A third party estimate for topsoil, reseeding and trees is attached. The estimate for maintenance is our own and is based on an average one man-day per month for watering, mowing, spraying, etc. We have not finalized our landscaping plans as yet and realize that the drawings numbered 2D-837, on file with your office, indicates only in general the final plan. Next week all of the tanks will be in place and the final contours will begin to take shape. We would appreciate your help in final- izing the landscape plan and would like to meet with you at the site. We will contact you in a few days, but if you have any 'questions, please call. Sincerely, 1 v _ ` Tony Tessitore Eastern Division Engineer enclosures c 1-P'"._CF:VED' V ° NOV ,, JIB lOOYears! 4,A, 4, 1 SERVING PUGET SOUND COUNTRY SINCE 1873 LNG DES MID-MOUNTAIN CONTRACTORS, INC. OIL AND GAS PIPELINES - PROCESS PIPING - PIPE FABRICATION P. O. BOX 577 206) 4(,-76U0 1200-112TH N. E. - SUITE 143 BELLEVUE, WASHINGTJN 96009 PIPE FAB SHOP WAREHOUSE 1401 - 130TH AVE. N.E. 1401 - 130TH AVE. N.E. 1206) 455.7620 12061 466.76in October 22, 1974 Washington Natural Gas Company P. 0. Box 1869 Seattle, Washingtot: . 8111 Attention: Mr. Tony Tessitore Gentlemen: IVo have reviewed tile proposed landscaping to be performed at y ..u1 in con;IeLLiu,, N1L11 Llw ai& La1ii.1LiU of uU- ditional propane storage. We estimate that this landscaping can be accomplished for $11,500.00 plus Washington State Sales Tax. In this price the reuse of those trees which can be saved is contemplated, along with the purchase and installation of 4' to 5' nursery-size trees, as required. If you need additional information, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, H. Stubbs t' Vice President JIIS/sr R4' vRRECEIRECEIVED 1/.%......./ 1/A. yG DEP' Bond No. U792970 PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY, as Principal, and UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington and Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Renton, State of Washington, in the sum of SEVENTEEN THOUSAND-TWO HUNDRED FIFTY AND NO/100 Dollars ($17,250) lawful money of the United States of America, for payment of which, well and truly, to be made, we hereby bind ourselves and our heirs, executors and administrators, and each of our successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The conditions of this obligation are those arising pursuant to a Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for fill and grading, the subject applications being approved after a Public Hearing of the City of Renton Planning Commission on October 9, 1974 and in connection with the approvals the Principal shall : 1. Provide additional buffering in the form of trees along the west property line according to landscaping plans 2D-837, on file with the City of, Renton and subject to its approval. 2. Provide top soil and reseeding of an area of 3335 square yards which is to be excavated and filled over new propane storage tanks as shown on plans 2D-837. 3. Replant or replace 22 evergreen trees five to seven feet in height to provide screening along the in-plant access road as shown on plans 2D-837. 4. Provde errosion control on bank above said access road. NOW, THEREFORE, if the above-named Principal shall complete the above requirements to the approval of the City of Renton Planning Director, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. If the Principal fails to complete the above requirements, the surety hereby guarantees their performance. In the event the above requirements are not complied with by either the Principal or surety, the bond shall be forfeited to the City of Renton, and the Principal hereby grants unto the City of Renton, the right of entry to this property in order to fulfill these conditions. Signed, sealed and delivered this 3RD day of NOVEMBER 174 . WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY Byr- UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY' By. . THEO W. BACKMANN ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Countersigned: La BOW, HAYNES COMPANY, INCORPORATED By . Resident Agent, Seattle, Washington OF RFNT, Z1/4 Ig 497 , v/A, DEQP .; Bond No. U79297q- f PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY, as Principal, and UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington and Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Renton, State of Washington, in the sum of THIRTY-SIX HUNDRED AND NO/100 Dollars ($3,600) lawful money of the United States of America, for payment of which, well and truly, to be made, we hereby bind ourselves and our heirs, executors and administrators, and each of our suc- cessors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The conditions of this obligation are those arising pursuant to a Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for fill and grading, the subject applications being approved after a Public Hearing of the City of Renton Planning Commission on October 9, 1974, and in connection with the approvals the Principal shall: Provide maintenance on the following landscaping for a period of three years : 1. Buffering in the form of trees along the west property line according to landscaping plans 2D-837, on file with the City of Renton and sub- ject to its approval. 2. Top soil and reseeding of an area of 3335 square yards which is to be excavated and filled over new propane storage tanks as shown on plans 2D-837. 3. Twenty-two evergreen trees five to seven feet in height to provide screening along the in-plant access road as shown on plans 2D-837. 4. Errosion control on bank above said access road. NOW, THEREFORE, if the above-named principal shall complete the above requirements to the approval of the City of Renton Planning Director, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. If the principal fails to complete the above 'requirements, the surety hereby guarantees their performance. In the event the above requirements are not complied with by either the principal or surety, the bond shall be forfeited to the City of Renton, and the principal hereby grants unto the City of Renton, the right of entry to this property in order to fulfill these conditions. Signed, sealed and delivered this 3RD day of NOVEMBER 19 74 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY BY ( r) - 1 --iu-r UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY Bye THEO W. BACKMANN Countersigned: ATTORNEY-IN-FACT La BOW, HAYNES COMPANY, INCORPORATED By . Resident Agent, Seattle, Washington kz ' VG DEp% S 6 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY 815 Alerc-er Street (P.O. Box 1869) .Seattle, 6Uashrnglon 98111 Telephone (206) 622-6767 November 5, 1974 Ms. Joan A. Lankford Assistant Planner, Landscape Design City of Renton Planning Department Municipal Building Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Lankford: Enclosed are two performance bonds to cover installation and maintenance of the proposed landscaping at our Swarr Station. The amounts are 150% of estimated cost as required by our Site Plan Approval. A third party estimate for topsoil, reseeding and trees is attached. The estimate for maintenance is our own and is based on an average one man-day per month for watering, mowing, spraying, etc. We have not finalized our landscaping plans as yet and realize that the drawings numbered 2D-837, on file with your office, indicates only in general the final plan. Next week all of the tanks will be in place and the final contours will begin to take shape. We would appreciate your help in final- izing the landscape plan and would like to meet with you at the site. We will contact you in a few days, but if you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, 61 I Tony Tessitore Eastern Division Engineer enclosures R\^' \ Y RECDED 2 NOV 0 1;i- o Years!16692,S+ 4/_ SERVING PUGET SOUND COUNTRY SINCE 1873 LNG DEP MID-MOUNTAIN CONTRACTORS, INC. OIL AND GAS PIPELINES - PROCESS PIPING - PIPE FABRICATION P. O. BOX 577 206) 455-7600 1200-112TH N. E. - SUITE 143 BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98009 PIPE FAB SHOP WAREHOUSE 1401 - 130TH AVE. N.E. 1401 - 130TH AVE. N.E. 206) 455.7620 206) 455-7610 October 22, 1974 Washington Natural Gas Company P. 0. Box 1869 Seattle, Washington 98111 Attention: Mr. Tony Tessitore Gentlemen: We have reviewed the proposed landscaping to be performed at your Swarr Station in connection with the installation of ad- ditional propane storage. We estimate that this landscaping can be accomplished for $11,500.00 plus Washington State Sales Tax. In this price the reuse of those trees which can be saved is contemplated, along with the purchase and installation of 4' to 5' nursery-size trees, as required. If you need additional information, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, H. Stubbs Vice President JHS/sr ergEIVED /6 NOV b• iJ(Y y/L% G DEP P7 Bond No. U792970 PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY, as Principal, and UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation organized and exi;3ting under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington and Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Renton, State of Washington, in the sum of SEVENTEEN THOUSAND-TWO HUNDRED FIFTY AND NO/100 Dollars ($17,250) lawful money of the United States of America, for payment of which, well and truly, to be made, we hereby bind ourselves and our heirs, executors and administrators, and each of our successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The conditions of this obligation are those arising pursuant to a Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for fill and grading, the subject applications being approved after a Public Hearing of the City of Renton Planning Commission on October 9, 1974 and in connection with the approvals the Principal shall: 1. Provide additional buffering in the form of trees along the west property line according to landscaping plans 2D-837, on file with the City of Renton and subject to its approval. 2. Provide top soil and reseeding of an area of 3335 square yards which is to be excavated and filled over new propane storage tanks as shown on plans 2D-837. 3. Replant or replace 22 evergreen trees five to seven feet in height to provide screening along the in-plant access road as shown on plans 2D-837. 4. Provde errosion control on bank above said access road. N0W, THEREFORE, if the above-named Principal shall complete the above requirements to the approval of the City of Renton Planning Director, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. If the Principal fails to complete the above requirements, the surety hereby guarantees their performance. In the event the above requirements are not complied with by either the Principal or surety, the bond shall be forfeited to the City of Renton, and the Principal hereby grants unto the City of Renton, the right of entry to this property in order to fulfill these conditions. Signed, sealed and delivered this 3RD day of NOVEMBER 194 . WASHINNGGTON NATURAL GAS CCOMPANY By L / a Jrn-jtig UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE-cOMPA THEO W. BACKMANN ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Ccuntersigned: LaBOW, HAYNES COMPANY, INCORPORATED By , Resident Agent, Seattle, Washington A\lh 'c) 4\ r'`9, LN7N Dt 'y Bond No. U792974- PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY, as Principal, and UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington and Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Renton, State of Washington, in the sum of THIRTY-SIX HUNDRED AND NO/100 Dollars ($3,600) lawful money of the United States of America, for payment of which, well and truly, to be made, we hereby bind ourselves and our heirs, executors and administrators, and each of our suc- cessors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The conditions of this obligation are those arising pursuant to a Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for fill and grading, the subject applications being approved after a Public Hearing of the City of Renton Planning Commission on October 9, 1974, and in connection with the approvals the Principal shall: Provide maintenance on the following landscaping for a period of three years : 1. Buffering in the form of trees along the west property line according to landscaping plans 2D-837, on file with the City of Renton and sub- ject to its approval. 2. Top soil and reseeding of an area of 3335 square yards which is to be excavated and filled over new propane storage tanks as shown on plans 2D-837. 3. Twenty-two evergreen trees five to seven feet in height to provide screening along the in-plant access road as shown on plans 2D-837. 4. Errosion control on bank above said access road. NOW, THEREFORE, if the above-named principal shall complete the abov,e requirements to the approval of the City of Renton Planning Director, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. If the principal fails to complete the above requirements, the surety hereby guarantees their performance. In the event the above requirements are not complied with by either the principal or surety, the bond shall be forfeited to the City of Renton, and the principal he:^eby grants unto the City of Renton, the right of entry to this property in order to fulfill these conditions. Si;;ned, sealed and delivered this 3RD day of NOVEMBER 19 74 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY By C(), 7 UNITED PACIFIC INSURANC COMPANY ? BY THEO W. BACKMANN Countersigned: ATTORNEY-IN-FACT LaBOW, HAYNES COMPANY, INCORPORATED Resident Agent, Seattle, Washington RECF ED of 2 Noy j 1.;;-1" 1/7 YJ GDE?P5L CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT OCTOBER 10 , 1974 NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPLICATION : SITE PLAN APPROVAL SA-790-74 FOR ADDITION OF TWENTY (20 ) 30, 000 GALLON PROPANE STORAGE TANKS TO AN EXISTING FACILITY AND SPECIAL PERMIT SP-789-74 FOR FILL AND GRADE . APPLICANT : WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY As the result of a detailed analysis of the subject proposal via an Environmental Assessment , it has been determined that although the project is a major action , there would be an insignificant environmental impact . A Negative Environmental Impact is there- fore declared . Rationale or findings of fact supportive of this decision are as follows : 1 . The subject project is the expansion of an existing storage facility . Said expansion is contained entirely within the present site , surrounded by adequate buffer areas . Project does not increase the safety factor of the existing facility nor result in a detrimental impact on adjacent proper- ties . 2 . No significant noxious emission or air pollutants will be released into the atmosphere by the pro- posed •facility . All engines operate on propane which is noted as a clean fuel . Also filling of the tanks is accomplished by a closed system , whereby the liquid is pumped from the truck to the tank and the vapors within the tank are trans- mitted back into the truck . 3 . The storage facility is used only in times of severe cold weather emergencies , and is shut down as a closed dormant system unless such a need arises . 4 . No noises are emitted from the facility except during times of operation . Existing enclosures , setbacks , and screening would tend to mitigate these noises . Noises near the present site are caused by separate existing gas pipeline facili - ties located in King County . 5 . The proposed facility would produce no odors except possibly insignificant amounts during emer- gency operations . 6 . No smoke , dust or other air polluting substance will result from the facility except those normal to construction and occasional traffic generated from maintenance and operation . 7 . All propane storage will be underground. The below ground storage tanks have controls that create a safer facility . The undergrounding allows for a more stable temperature , 40-50 degrees . This is important in maintaining low storage pressures . 0 r NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY . PAGE TWO At 50° F . the pressure of propane within the tanks would be 77 . 1 psig . The tanks are designed to 375 psig . Because of the pressure in the tanks , no oxygen exists which would preclude any hazard of fire . The temperature range for ignition of propane is very limited , as documented in the Environmental Assessment. 7 . The tanks will be buried with 18 inches of cover at the same level as the existing tanks so as to maintain the same hydrostatic pressure gradient . The temperature and resulting pressure would not be changed significantly , if the tanks were deeper . Additional soil coverage would create a berm effect . 8 . The related piping is above ground so that valves may be readily identified and operated , and to provide access for inspection and preventative maintenance , such as the detection and repair of potential leaks at fittings . The piping is de- signed for flexibility in the event of earth- quake or outside disturbance . 9 . The facility is equipped with automatic excess flow valves which shut off flow from tanks should piping be damaged . This isolates each tank as an individual unit. These valves thus would prevent any discharge from the tanks . A remote controlled fail closed shut-off valve in the piping manifold would limit discharge to 100 cubic feet of liquid in the event the largest pipe is damaged . In addition , each storage tank is provided with manual valves which remain closed until manually opened for operation of the plant. Evaporation rate of liquid escaping from the piping would be very fast . 10 . All containers and piping are protected from excess internal pressure by safety-relief valves . The relief valves are provided in duplicate as a redun- dant safety feature and to provide for maintenance of those valves . 11 . The site is well buffered from surrounding proper- ties by topography , vegetation or combination thereof. However , further buffering may be desir- able as an extra safety precaution and visual buffer to the facility . 12 . It appears that problems related to noise , odor , and visual appearance are associated more with the exist- ing substation in King County near the proposed facility. The applicant has agreed to undertake constructive action to remedy this situation as soon as possible . RESP I OFFICIAL 45 j, 41/4 t- G--as R• U \ / e.—' Z PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON c MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTO.4,WASHINGTON 98055 • N7SJC7aj03d 0 235-2550 ysQORl CA VIi AI Of October 21 , 1974 Anthony Tessitore Eastern Division Engineer Washington Natural Gas Company P. O. Box 1869 Seattle , Washington 98111 RE: Washington Natural Gas Company Landscape Plan and Performance and Maintenance Bond Dear Mr. Tessitore: Pursuant to our telephone conversation October 17 , 1974 , it is our understanding that you will be submitting your landscape plan and performance bond by the end of this week. The bond is to cover the installation of the landscape, as per plan, and a three year maintenance provision in the amount of 150% of estimated cost. We would suggest that you separate the three year maintenance bond from the installa- tion, so that you may retire the installation bond upon completion. Since it is apparent that the trees stockpiled for transplanting will not survive, it is understood that new plant material will be provided in the plan as a replace- ment. Please contact us, if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, Joan A. Lankford Assistant Planner , Landscape Design JAL:wr 4- 4 0v ti V: O U 6 1 Z PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 • ]R(}{QOOMM 3 235-2550 ysP0R1 CA iTA Of` 4 October 10 , 1974 Paul Hogland Senior Vice-president for Operations Washington Natural Gas Company P. O. Box 1869 Seattle,., Washington 98111 RE: Planning Commission Site Plan Approval for addition of twenty 30,000 gallon propane storage tanks at existing facility and Special Permit for fill and grade. Dear Mr. Hogland: The Renton Planning Commission approved the subject applications after a Public Hearing on October 9, 1974 . This was also subsequent to detailed review of the environmental significance, thorough study of all other aspects of the proposed action, and a Negative Declaration of Impact. However, the approval was subject to the following conditions : 1. All related codes and ordinances are met. 2 . Additional buffering in the form of trees and other landscaping must be provided along the west property line. these plans as well as proposed screening plans for the additional storage must be approved by the Planning Department. 3. The Planning Department may upon periodic inspection require additional screening at the site, especially with reference to the west property line and the future SR-515 route. Paul Hogland Senior Vice-president for Operations October 10, 1974 Page Two 4 . The existing substation facilities should be upgraded to decrease the noise, odors , and visual impacts they produce. Although powers to require such upgrading are limited, both gas companies involved should be encouraged to do so as "good neighbors" and in light of proposed improvements in the area. 5. Any conditions set forth in previous appro- 1vals. 6. Erosion control on bank above access road subject to staff approval. 7 . Planning and Engineering Departments ' appro- val of final drainage plans . 8 . Substantial screening buffer to be main- tained around perimeter of the facility. 9 . Bond for installation of landscaping 'and a three-year maintenance period. In reference to the upgrading of facilities adjacent to the subject facility and in King County, we would hope that this is begun immediately. Complaints have been generated by this facility. We would encourage timely steps be taken to alleviate the problems of odor, noise , and visual appearance. You may now make application for your annual filling and grading license through the Building Department. We also suggest that you check with the Building Depart- ment and Fire Department regarding any other permits that might be needed. If you have any further questions, please contact this department. Very truly yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen Planning Director Michael L. Smith Assistant Planner cc: Fire Department Public Works Dept. RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE MEETING OCTOBER 9, 1974 MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT : Don Humble , Larry Gibson , Anthone Mola , Bev Morrison , Norman Ross , Arthur Scholes , Patricia Seymour , Clark Teegarden , Bylund Wik . COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT : None CITY STAFF PRESENT : Gordon Ericksen , Planning Director ; Michael Smith , Assistant Planner ; Willis Roberts , Recording Secretary . The October 1974 administrative meeting of the Renton Plan- ning Commission was called to order at 8 : 00 p . m . by Commis - sioner Ross , Chairman . The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Scholes . 1 • ROLL CALL was taken by Secretary Gibson . All members responded present . 2 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Chairman called for additions and corrections to the minutes of the meeting of September 25 , 1974 . In order to allow more time for review , IT WAS MOVED BY SCHOLES , SECONDED BY MORRISON , THAT APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES uE CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS . Discussion followed with regard to the necessity for approved minutes being available for the City Council public hearing of October 21 . On the question , MOTION DEFEATED . ACTION: MOVED BY SEYMOUR, SECONDED BY WIK, THAT APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES BE PLACED AT THE END OF THE AGENDA FOR DISCUS- SION AT THAT TIME . MOTION CARRIED. 3 • CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS : SITE (USE) APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMIT (FILL) 1j4' A. WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO . ; Appl . No . SA-790-74 ; site ( use ) approval to allow expansion of existing gas storage plant in R- 1 zone ; Appl . No . SP-789-74 special permit to allow excavation and grading in R- 1 zone ; property located between S . Puget Dr . and Williams Ave . S . The Chairman invited a review of previous action and background information from the Planning Director . The Planning Director reviewed the request , noting the 17 acre site of the present Washington Natural Gas facility on the vicinity map . He reviewed ques- tions raised by the Planning Commission with regard to public safety and environmental concerns . He referred the Commission to a staff report relative to the environmental assessment submitted by the applicant and noted that Washington Natural Gas repre- sentatives were available for further response . Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Two The Commission was referred to a memo from the City of Renton Fire Department that indicated that the proposal me. s Uniform Fire Code and complies with recognized stand- ards of that Code and to a statement from the King County Land Use Management Division that the proposed development was not expected to adversely affect the neighboring S-R Suburban Residential ) classified properties under County jurisdiction in the vicinity but raising several environ- mental questions . Noting that several questions had been raised at the prev- ious public hearing , the Chairman invited response from the applicant . Anthony Tessitore , Washington Natural Gas Company engineer , 815 Mercer Street , Seattle , stated that his primary purpose was to answer direct questions from the Commission . He noted that they had worked closely with the staff with regard to the Environmental Impact Assessment . Responding to the environmental issues raised by the King County Land Use Man- agement Division , he indicated that the problem of erosion characteristics of the ravine located on the site were ad- dressed in the soils report , which noted that with drainage control , no problem was anticipated . He stated that they had been in contact with the Department of Fisheries rela- tive to any potential fisheries impact from culverting the stream on the site and will have their approval before commencement of the project . The Chairman then recognized the Planning Director , who reviewed the amended Environmental Impact Assessment for the Commission . He noted the following statistics : 1 . Proposed installation - (20 ) 30 ,000 gallon pro- pane tanks to be installed underground . 2 . Area of excavation - 75 ' x 275 ' ( ±2 acre ) . 3 . Grading material - 4 ,000 cubic yards . 4 . Filling material - 6 ,000 cubic yards (approximately 18" earth covering ) . 5 . Culvert - 350 ' of 36" culvert . The plot plan was described in detail . He noted that the staff had reviewed the assessment in order to address it- self to questions raised . The continued public hearing was readvertised and notices were sent to property owners in the vicinity . Noting that the matter of public safety was signi - ficant , he requested review by the Washington Natural Gas representatives as to the potential of fire and a major conflagration in the area . In terms of concerns noted by SEPA, it is the staff ' s position that , while the proposed addition is a major action , it has insignificant impact as far as adding to any potential problems that presently exist in the area . Mr . Ericksen then referred the Commis- sion to staff recommendations , should approval be con- sidered . The Chairman invited further comment from the applicant . Mr . Tessitore , Project Engineer , advised that propane stor- age tanks are not unusual in Renton , some of which are located above ground as well as underground . He described the proposed tanks as built to AMSE specifications , composed Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Three of carbon steel 7/8" thick , weighing 60 ,000 pounds , and hydrostatically tested . The proposed tank is commonly used either above or below ground . Underground installa- tion is proposed for aesthetic reasons , to reduce varia- tions in temperatures as propane is subject to vapor pressures , and for additional safety . He described pro- visions for safety , noting that the limit of flammabil - ity of propane is relatively narrow and that each tank is an integral unit providing for no transfer of fire to other containers . Mr . Tessitore stated that the Code recognizes the intrinsic safety of buried con- tainers and places no limitations on numbers or sizes of these containers . The Washington Gas Company engi - neer then described the automatic excess flow valve system, which shuts off flow from tanks , should piping be ruptured , thus limiting flow to other tanks . He noted fail control valves which would limit discharge to 100 cubic feet of propane , substantially less than the Code allowance . The provision of safety relief valves in duplicate as a safety feature were also noted . Chairman Ross invited comment from the audience , either in favor or in opposition to the proposal , but received no response . He then opened the discussion to the Plan- ning Commission . Responding to Commissioner Gibson , Assistant Planner Smith stated that the Fire Department has indicated its approval of the proposal based on compliance with the Fire Code . Gibson queried Mr. Tessitore regarding the valving structure for a fail -safe operation on each tank and was advised that there are provisions for removal and testing them independently of other valves . Responding to Gibson , Mr . Tessitore stated that the plant will not produce odors because vapors will not be released from the facility . He noted the problem exists at another facility nearby , which will be in- vestigated by the Company . He stated that expected operation of the facility is only once in ten years . Mr . Tessitore , in response to a request from Gibson for a description of 100 cubic feet of propane , stated that it would encompass 10 ' x 10 ' x 1 ' or in terms of gallons , 750 gallons . Mr . Tessitore advised that 750 gallons would be the total loss from the entire mani - fold for all the tanks , should a rupture occur . Mr . Tessitore described the appearance of the pro- pane in the event of a spill . Inasmuch as propane boils at -40°F , it would appear to be boiling and would rapidly disappear into the atmosphere . The Planning Director , in answer to a request by Com- missioner Scholes , advised that the legal status of Washington Natural Gas Company had been discussed with the Assistant City Attorney , who advised that the Com- pany would be included in the quasi -public category , which allows this particular use in an R- 1 zone . The utility is privately owned but has public powers and falls under the control of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission . Mr . Ericksen stated Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Four that the Planning Commission must make the determination that a development is not detrimental to adjacent property or the enjoyment thereof. In so doing , the Commission has the right to consider such factors as air and water pollu- tion , land use impact , noise , traffic controls , view , etc . , and can attach special conditions to alleviate or mitigate detrimental effects . In response to Scholes , Mr. Tessitore noted that Washington Natural Gas has no plans for the sale of property which now serves as a buffer zone around the facility . Scholes inquired , if there was any possibility that the plant might be placed in operation at a temperature other than the presently planned +10°F . Mr. Tessitore advised that the function of the station is peak-shaving and that it would not be economical to supply gas to the consumer through the facility . Paul Hogland , Senior Vice-president for Operations , Washington Natural Gas Company , stated that in a "design year" it would be necessary to require the operation for about 15 days or at about +20°F , but there was an economic limit , inasmuch as propane is approximately four times as costly as natural gas . Scholes requested a status report regarding the proposed SR-515 highway . The Planning Director stated that some right-of-way has been acquired ; but due to budget cutbacks , construction is not expected within the next three to five years . Responding to Scholes , Mr. Hogland advised that a 1963 sur- vey revealed an abaondoned coal mine shaft opening in the northern portion of the property , but it is substantially north of the tract in current use and not in the area of proposed construction . Mr. Hogland also noted in answer to Scholes that the present tanks have been in existence for ten years and that the Company had never experienced a rupture in any of their propane storage tanks at any of their operations , some of which dated back to the early 1930 ' s . Mr. Hogland discussed the subject of odors emitted , as noted by Commissioner Scholes , and reported that they are emanating from the nearby facility in King County . He stated that equipment was installed in 1956 and that a new type of equipment has been ordered and will be in- stalled as soon as it is available . He said the Company recognizes the problem and feels they can and will con- trol it . Mr. Hogland described the process of converting the pro- pane from a liquid to gas , as requested by Teegarden , and indicated that it was provided the customer in a mixture of 50% propane to 50% natural gas and recognized in the same manner as natural gas . Mr. Hogland did admit that natural gas , air and a source of ignition could explode , but stated their operation is within limits that are nor- mally accepted . Stating that their Company is in the business of handling materials similar to this in tremen- dous quantities on a daily basis , Mr . Hogland said they feel the proposed operation is explosion-proof . Responding to Teegarden , Mr . Hogland estimated that it would take approximately 15 minutes for the propane ( 750 gallons ) to evaporate , should there be a rupture . He stated that any flow would be defined in a puddle configuration within the confines of their fence and not affect the stream . Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Five Commissioner Teegarden noted the possibility of a rup- ture of piping exposed above ground as the result of a truck out of control (on Puget Drive ) or other damage and inquired if the valving system would control such an incident. It was indicated by Mr. Hogland that the valve system would control the break , although a bend would be more likely as the piping is designed for a high degree of impact . Responding to Commissioner Humble , Mr . Hogland said that the pipes are designed for flexibility in response to earthquake or outside forces . Referring to the staff recommendation for additional buffering in the form of trees and other landscaping along the west property line , Commissioner Mola sug- gested that in the event of the construction of SR-515 , in addition to the buffering , a traffic barrier be installed as a safety factor . Mr. Hogland noted that there is a berm adjacent to the tank farm for safety purposes and advised that they have worked with the State Highway Department with regard to their design and that the roadway is planned to be below grade . Responding to Seymour , Mr . Hogland indicated that in addition to the berm, retaining walls due to a cut area are planned . In reply to Commissioner Scholes , Mr. Hogland stated that no natural gas is stored at the facility . 900 ,000 gallons of propane are presently stored , and the addi - tion of 600 , 000 gallons is proposed . It is a feed- point through which natural gas travels and is distri - buted north through Renton , south to Kent and SeaTac , and west across Vashon Island . About 180 ,000 ,000 cubic feet of gas per day is passed through . Mr . Hogland advised Seymour that any sabatoge that may occur at the nearby substation would not have influence on the plant. He also noted that the tanks at the Renton facility could not be used for the storage of natural gas due to their design . Responding to Seymour ' s questions with regard to land- scaping , Mr . Hogland stated that relative to the easterly side , there is a considerable span between the access roadway and the property lines which is in natural growth and will not be disturbed . Seymour inquired if the facility is likely to remain as at present and was informed by Mr . Hogland that except for the present plans to double it , there are no fore- seeable plans for additional expansion . In reply to Scholes , Mr . Hogland indicated that he was unfamiliar with a "national petroleum permit" or "design permit. " Also responding to Scholes , he advised that he did not mean to imply that incidents with regard to fire could not happen , but they have done everything to take positive action to see that they do not occur . Referring to concerns listed by the King County Land Use Management Division with regard to potential ero- sion of the ravine and fisheries impact from culverting the stream, Seymour asked the Planning Director to dis- cuss staff evaluation of the issues raised . Mr . Erick- sen noted staff recommendations for erosion control Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Six measures and stated that the staff did work with the appli - cant specifically with reference to the areas involved . Referring to fisheries impact , the matter was investigated , and it was determined that the stream is not a fisheries resource . Discussion followed , and it was noted that any change in use or additions of a major nature would require Planning Commission review in terms of the Zoning Ordinance . The Chairman again invited comment from the audience but received no response . It was then MOVED BY SCHOLES , SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED . MOTION CARRIED . ACTION: MOVED BY SCHOLES, SECONDED BY MORRISON, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANT THE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILLING AND APPROVE THE SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED IN APPLICATIONS SP-789-74 AND SA-790-74 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: 1 . ALL RELATED CODES AND ORDINANCES ARE MET. 2. ADDITIONAL BUFFERING IN THE FORM OF TREES AND OTHER LANDSCAPING MUST BE PROVIDED ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. THESE PLANS AS WELL AS PROPOSED SCREENING PLANS FOR THE ADDITIONAL STORAGE MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 3. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAY UPON PERIODIC INSPEC- TION REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SCREENING AT THE SITE, ESPECIALLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND THE FUTURE SR-515 ROUTE. 4 . THE EXISTING SUBSTATION FACILITIES SHOULD BE UPGRADED TO DECREASE THE NOISE, ODORS AND VISUAL IMPACTS THEY PRODUCE . ALTHOUGH POWERS TO REQUIRE SUCH UPGRADING ARE LIMITED, BOTH GAS COMPANIES INVOLVED SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO DO SO AS "GOOD NEIGHBORS" AND IN LIGHT OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA . 5. ANY CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN PREVIOUS APPROVALS. 6. EROSION CONTROL ON BANK ABOVE ACCESS ROAD SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL. 7. PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT'S APPROVAL OF FINAL DRAINAGE PLANS . Discussion followed , and the following amendment was offered : ACTION: MOVED BY SEYMOUR, SECONDED BY SCHOLES, THAT THE MOTION BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE WITH REGARD TO LANDSCAPING, A SCREENING BUFFER AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE FACILITY AND TO REQUIRE PERFORMANCE BONDS FOR 150% OF INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE NEW LANDSCAPE PLAN. Speaking in support of the amendment , Seymour indicated that it is an expression of Planning Commission intention that the buffer be preserved , that landscaping replacing Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Seven existing vegetation should be maintained and that re- quiring a performance bond was consistent with previous Commission action with regard to landscaping . On the amendment , MOTION CARRIED, MORRISON DISSENTING. Further discussion ensued with Mola expressing concern with regard to provisions for some type of safety bar- rierwith relation to the future SR-515 route . It was noted by the Planning Director that condition number three of the original motion , which states "that the Planning Department may upon periodic inspection re- quire additional screening at the site , especially with reference to the west property line and the future SR-515 route , " provides for that design review. However , it was indicated by Mola that it was his opin- ion that a definite requirement for review should be stipulated , and the following amendment was offered . ACTION: MOVED BY MOLA , SECONDED BY SEYMOUR, THAT CONDITION NUMBER THREE OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION BE AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAY UPON PERIODIC INSPEC- TION REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND SAFETY DEVICES AT THE SITE, ESPECIALLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND THE FUTURE SR-515 ROUTE. " A roll call vote was requested with the following results : HUMBLE - AYE GIBSON - AYE MOLA - AYE MORRISON - NO ROSS - ABSTAIN SCHOLES - AYE SEYMOUR - AYE TEEGARDEN - NO WIK - NO In view of the tie results , the Chairman cast his vote . Ross voted NO, AND THE MOTION WAS DEFEATED. On the original motion , with first amendment , THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Commissioners Teegarden and Gibson thanked the represen- tatives of Washington Natural Gas Company for their forth- right manner in answering the questions . A recess was declared at 9 : 50 p . m. The meeting was resumed at 10 : 05 p . m. , with all members noted as being present . 4 • NEW PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS : REZONE A, PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT CO . ; Appl . No . R-792-74 ; rezone from S- 1 to L- 1 ; property located on Grady Way at Talbot Road . The Chairman invited a presentation from the Planning staff. Renton Planning Commission Meeting October 9 , 1974 Page Eight Assistant Planner Smith pointed out the 4 . 5 acre site on the map , noting that the property is located to the south of Grady Way on either side of Talbot Road . Property to the south and east is zoned H- 1 , and sites north of Grady Way are zoned L- 1 . Adjacent uses include the Puget Sound Power and Light substation to the south and an auto rebuild facility on S . 7th Street . He noted that the site consists of two parts . The easterly portion is approximately three acres , and the westerly portion , which is bisected by a powerline easement , is 1 . 5 acres . The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates the area as M-P/L- 1 . The Chairman invited questions regarding issues to be con- sidered at the forthcoming public hearing . Commissioner Mola suggested that the applicant be encour- aged to consider landscaping of their plant adjoining the site . Noting the addition of some screening along Talbot Road , Mr . Smith indicated the subject would be reviewed . Seymour requested information as to the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission with regard to the requested rezone . Noting that the Comprehensive Land Use Plan desig- nates the area as L- 1 or M-P , the Planning Director ad- vised that the Commission may review the various alterna- tives and can recommend to the applicant that he amend his application . Wik asked if the applicant had been approached by the staff in regard to M-P in lieu of L- 1 . Assistant Planner Smith stated the matter would be reviewed . Humble indicated that he would like information regarding future use of the property . This request was also made by Morrison and Teegarden . Seymour noted that the reasons for requesting rezoning should be provided by the appli - cant at the time of public hearing and that each applica- tion should be considered on its own merits despite zoning that had been granted in the past . Scholes requested that an opinion be obtained from the City Attorney relative to public utilities as it might pertain to this rezone . Gibson suggested that the whole area be reviewed from an M-P standpoint . Gibson also requested information regard- ing the circumstances designating a narrow strip of land located along FAI -405 in the vicinity as S- 1 . SITE APPROVAL B. JOSEPH T . RYERSON & SON , INC . ; Appl . No . SA-791-74 ; site approval to construct office and steel fabri - cation and warehouse building in M-P zone ; property located on S . W . 10th St . between Thomas Ave . S . W . and Lind Ave . S . W. Chairman Ross requested staff review . Assistant Planner Smith pointed out the ten acre parcel located in Earling- ton Industrial Park on the map and noted the area is zoned M-P . Proposed construction is for an office , steel fabri - cation and warehouse facility . Mr. Smith displayed views of the elevation of the proposed 39 foot high facility and described landscaping plans . 01'-, R U THE CITY OF RENTON z o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 0 AVERYGARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT A 4, 23 - 2550 oR' 7 tr.FO SEP October 9 , 1974 MEMORANDUM TO : Files FROM: Michael L . Smith , Assistant Planner RE : Meeting with Assistant City Attorney RE : Washington Natural Gas Company Gordon Y . Ericksen , Planning Director and I met today with Jack Pain , Assistant City Attorney to discuss various items of concern regarding the Washington Natural Gas Company ' s site approval application and special permit for fill and grade . 1 . Mr . Pain felt that this facility could not be in any way likened to the Shell facility upon the receipt of the information from the environmental assessment which was required . He assured us that it would pose no threats to the Shell case that is presently pending court action . 2 . He felt , as we did , that the expansion of the tank facility would be properly handled through Section 4-706 , (3 ) of the zoningcow. It was his opinion that Washington Natural Gas is considered a quasi -public institution . 3 . He also agreed with us to the powers of the Planning Commission in such cases . They would have the powers of ; a ) determining whether the use should be allowed on the site , and b) if it is allowed they would have the power to attach reasonable conditions to protect adjacent properties and the general welfare of the community . MLS :ms King County Sialn uI ww.hinuton Department of Community John D. Spellman, County Executive and Environmental Developme t Thomas M. Ryan, Director LAND USE MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF n EDWARD B. SAND, DIRECTOR G\ s Of ' 1'< W217 King County Courthouse C/// 2 Seattle,Washington 98104 v OCr 6 0206-344-4292 October 4, 1974 4974 z/ Michael L. Smith, Assistant Planner City of Renton Planning Department sO O ME. c/ Municipal Building SPAR / Renton, Washington 98055 Regarding : Environmental Assessment, Proposed Addition of Twenty 30 ,000 Gallon Storage Tanks to Washington Natural Gas Peak Shaving Plant Dear Mr. Smith: This is in response to your September 30 , 1974 correspondence regarding the subject matter. It is not expected that the proposed development would adversely affect the neighboring S-R (Suburban Residential) classified prop- erties under County jurisdiction in the vicinity . The existing tank field lies between the proposed expansion and the afore- mentioned properties . No alteration of existing traffic patterns would result. However, with regard to the environmental assessment, the following issues should be considered: 1 . Site characteristics include a ravine, .Alderwood gravelly loam soils ( according to SCS Soils report) with severe erosion potential, and a stream. Consequently , the assessment should more completely and explicitly state intended or required mitigating or controlling measures to reduce the potential erosion and sedimentation of the project, and the potential adverse impact of such erosion. 2 . Additionally , the question of any potential fisheries impact from culverting and erosion should be clearly answered before any project approval. Thank you for the opportunity to comment this proposal . Yours very truly, Eaward B. Sand, Director Land Use Management Division EBS :08:js v,7 44 ..:/we 4/ Gr.S Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. a•voa•ra• .}fna being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that :.;.:..c... is the ....::_::;..e.l...::.(.r..:ai of THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a tri-weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a tri- weekly newspaper in Renton, King County, Washington, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Renton Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King County, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Washington.That the annexed is a u:.t is I,r a ri n.--RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION RENTON,WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON PLAN-w....:..to ,..1.e.nt••4.-i.C• NING COMMISSION AT ITS REGU- LAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL in regular issues (and CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, as it was publishedWASHINGTON, ON OCTOBER 9, not in supplement form of said newspaper)once each issue for a period 1974, AT 8:00 P.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: 1. SITE (USE) APPROVAL TO of d.. consecutive issues, commencing on the ALLOW EXPANSION OF EXISTING GAS STORAGE PLANT IN R-1 4,.-,..„, 19.r ZONE; file No. SA-790-74; proper- day of 4 , and ending the ty located between S. Puget Dr. and Williams Ave. S. Legal de- scription on file in Planning De- day of 19 both dates partment office. inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its 2. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW subscribers during all of said period.That the full amount of the fee EXCAVATION AND GRADING IN R- 1 ZONE; file No. SP•789-74; prop- erty located between S. Puget Dr. charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of$...L l...J.Qwhich and Williams Ave. S. Legal de has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words s menption on file in Planning Depdrioddmentoffice. for the first insertion and per folio of one hundred ds for each ALL PERSONS INTERESTED OR subsequent insertion.OBJECTING TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT 4 /- i THE PLANNING COMMISSION 4, ' 1 >: S f! ATMEETI00 NG PM.OTO VOICE, THEIR' chic clerl- / SAME. OR OBJECTIONS TO LARRY GIBSON,SECRETARY is RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION Subscribed and sworn to before me this dayof o in the Renton Record- Chronicle October 4, 1974. 71} R2955. 19 i t L.i.:i..r...G „Z C l 'l Notary blie in and for the State of Washington, esi ing at Renton,King County. Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9t h,1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. 49 Y C) =IR THE CITY OF RENTON 3 8 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 n o> AVERYGARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT o 235 - 2550 tfo SEP100 MEMORANDUM October 8 , 1974 TO: Fire Department FROM: Planning Department RE:WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS PEAK-SHAVING PLANT ON TALBOT HILL Would you please provide us with a letter advising us whether the attached assessment meets all the safety standards. We would appreciate an immediate response, as this issue is appearing before the Planning Commission Meeting on October 9 , 1974. Thank you. Attachment JAL:ms I 4 of R C.) to.0 & _ 2, PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 •bt;XX3X0 235-2550 9yspORl CA PIT Of, 4 September 30, 1974 Edward B. Sand, Director W217 King County Courthouse Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: Proposed Addition of Twenty (20) 30, 000 Gallon Storage Tanks to Existing Washington Natural Gas Peak Shaving Plant Dear Mr. Sand: Our Planning Commission is presently reviewing the abovementioned application. Attached are some of the plans submitted and a draft environmental assess- ment to further describe the application. We are presently asking for additional information and data to be included in the assessment, so that we can make a reasonably educated determination of environ- mental significance. We would appreciate your review of the proposal and any comments you might have. What is presently called "Talbot Island," as you are aware, is within the jurisdiction of King County and adjacent to the subject site. We are aware that you and your staff have other commitments, but would appreciate any comments you might have by October 7, 1974 , so that we might include them in preparing our staff report to the Commission. Very truly, yours, Michael L. Smith Assistant Planner Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 25 , 1974 Page Eleven Slides and aerial photographs of the area were then viewed . Following a brief discussion concerning the questions raised relative to lot size , it was ACTION: MOVED BY MOLA , SECONDED BY GIBSON, THAT THE LOUIS B. ROWLEY APPLICATIONS FOR REZONE AND SPECIAL PERMIT BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS CLARIFIED, AND THAT THE MATTER THEN BE PLACED ON AN APPROPRIATE HEARING AGENDA . Discussion followed , and it was noted that both applications were affected by the discrepancy and to withdraw them would involve another filing fee . Mr. Synder then stated that he had refigured the property and noted that the lot is 197 feet in length by 75 feet in width . The Chairman pointed out that the legal description and plan do not agree . The Planning Director stated that the matter would be investigated with all parties involved . Commission Teegarden , noting that the plans submitted were sketch plans , requested specific information as to how many units will be provided , what they are going to look like , and where they will be placed on the property . It was agreed by the Commission that they would only act on detailed plans . ON THE QUESTION: MOTION CARRIED. SITE (USE) APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMIT C. WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO . ; Appl . No . SA-790-74 ; site use ) approval to allow expansion of existing gas storage plant in R- 1 zone ; Appl . No . SP-789-74 ; special permit to allow excavation and grading in R- 1 zone ; property located between S . Puget Dr . and Williams Ave . S . The Chairman invited background information from the Plan- ning Director . Mr. Ericksen pointed out the site on the vicinity map and noted that it is the location of the existing facility operated by Washington Natural Gas Company . The proposal is for the addition of twenty 30 ,000 gallon propane tanks to be installed underground . The site is situated in a single family residential zone . The Planning Director reviewed the history of the original approval of the facility , which was granted in 1964 , when the property was zoned R- 1 utility reserve . The current Zoning Ordinance designates an R- 1 zone , which allows quasi -public institutions upon approval by the Planning Commission . The Planning Director then noted the site on the topographical map and described the elevation of the site . He pointed out the 19 existing storage tanks and proposed location for the new tanks . The Planning Director then described plans for installa- tion of the new tanks on the 360 ' x 150 ' site . He noted proposed changes to the landscaping due to removal of some existing vegetation . He then referred the Commission to the staff report in which comments regarding the environ- mental impact assessment were noted . Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 25 , 1974 Page Twelve Slides and aerial photographs of the area were shown . The Chairman invited comment from the applicant . Paul Hogland , Senior Vice-president for Operations , Wash- ington Natural Gas Company , stated that he was the Chief Engineer at the time of original development of the facil - ity . At the time of original approval , immediate and future development was considered . At that meeting the Commission approved the zoning as requested subject to the Commission ' s review of detailed plans . These plans were approved July 22 , 1964 . Mr. Hogland discussed their provisions and indicated that it was their intention to double the capacity of the facility in the reasonable future at that time . Mr . Hogland then reviewed the present proposal . Stating that they service an area of 1 ,900 ,000 people , and obtain gas from Northwest Pipeline Corporation , he said that under their contractual operation with Northwest , they are limited in the quantity of natural gas they may take in any given day . Noting a much higher require- ment during extremely cold weather , Mr. Hogland stated that propane gas is provided in such instances . Mr . Hogland indicated that a short supply of natural gas is expected for the coming winter due to a limited supply from the Canadian supplier ; and , therefore , they feel additional storage must be provided prior to peak per- iods . He noted that the Talbot Hill site is centrally located and the source of supply to major service areas to the north , south and west of Renton . Mr. Hogland then cited reasons they believe the requested permit should be approved . The site is a greenbelt area with limited access ; the plan has no impact in their opinion on surrounding land uses ; the facility has made significant contribution to the tax base of the commun- ity ; and natural gas is used extensively in the Renton area . He noted similar storage existing at businesses and schools in Renton and described provisions for safety . Tony Tessatore , Engineer representing Washington Natural Gas Co . , 815 Mercer St . , Seattle , addressed the matter of environmental impact and discussed the safety aspects . Mr. Tessatore stated that less than one-half an acre of the 17 acre tract is involved in the expansion . Slides were viewed . Plans for screening , fencing and replace- ment of lost vegetation were described . No stability or drainage problems are expected . Mr. Tessatore stated that the proposed installation does not increase the hazard factor . No significant amount of pollution is anticipated . Regarding the noise factor , there is gen- erally less noise than in a residential area . The normal operation is essentially a stand-by operation with a roving patrol on a 24 hours per day schedule . He stated that there are no alternates to this location . Bob Tomlinson , attorney for Washington Natural Gas Com- pany , stated that Washington Natural Gas is a public utility company with a mandate to serve citizens of the 1 State of Washington with natural gas . That responsibility i requires planning so as to be able to meet high peak loads during periods of extremely cold weather . He noted Renton Planning Commission McEting September 25 , 1974 Pace Thirteen minimal environmental impact , including no visual impact . He also noted plans to place tanks on a site previously approved for such usage . i Teresa McKay , 7800 S . 130th , Seattle , inquired as to how the propane gas would be delivered to the facility . Mr . Hogland responded that it would be delivered by tank trucks . Respond- ing to Mrs . McKay , Mr . Hogland stated that it will require about sixty tank truckloads to fill the station and that operation should be accomplished within a thirty to forty day period . He stated that they hope to never have to fill it again but weather is unpredictable . The present facility has been used only once since its construction . Mr. McKay , 7800 S . 130th , Seattle , asked if in the last ten years there had been any instances of fire . Mr . Hogland responded there had been none . Responding again to Mr. McKay , Mr. Hogland indicated that tanks are loaded with a pressure piping connection into the tank loading facil - ity pump and moves the product into the tanks internally , and there would be no vapor emissions . Mr. McKay inquired if the area is on an earthquake fault . Mr. Ericksen advised that there are fault lines along the westerly slope of Talbot Hill and noted that the entire Puget Sound Basin is subject to earthquakes and the whole area does have conditions that result in earth movement under certain circumstances . Mr . Hogland stated that the design takes into consideration earthquake faults . Responding to Mr. McKay , Mr . Hogland indicated soil in the area is glacial till and provides a solid foundation . Grover Shegrud , 18216 - 196th Ave . S . , Renton , noting that the facility has some danger potential , pointed out that it is located in the vicinity of several schools . He questioned if it was reasonable to expand an operation of this type at this time and suggested continuance to allow public input . Mr. Hogland stated that safety was a factor , when considering any form of energy , and noted approximately twenty schools in the area that have tankage of this size and capacity above ground within fifty feet of their buildings . Discussion among the Commissioners followed regarding the questions that had been raised and time required to resolve them. ACTION: MOVED BY TEEGARDEN, SECONDED BY SCHOLES , THAT THE WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY APPLICATIONS FOR SITE (USE) APPROVAL AND SPECIAL PERMIT BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE OCTOBER 9, 1974 , PLAN- NING COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. 5 - ADMINISTRATIVE : SCARSELLA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Commissioner Mola requested a status report , noting that the pond on the Scarsella site is completely dried up . Tie Planning Director advised that the staff had been in con- tact with Mr. Scarsella and his representatives , regarding p-eparation of the EIS , and the staff is expecting additional Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 25 , 1974 Page Fourteen information to be submitted shortly . Review by the Soil Conservation Service has been requested . The Com- mission will be advised , when the EIS is completed . COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE Commissioner Scholes , Chairman of the Community Services Committee , announced a meeting at 7 : 30 p . m. , October 2 , regarding outstanding referral items . In view of the late hour , it was MOVED BY SCHOLES , SECONDED BY HUMBLE , THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS BE CONTINUED TO THE OCTOBER 9 AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED . As there was no further business before the Commission , it was MOVED BY HUMBLE , SECONDED BY MOLA, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 1 : 00 a . m. r7 Larry Gi bso , S'ecre£;,x4y Norman Ross , Chairman Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 25, 1974 Page Two ACTION: MOVED BY SCHOLES, SECONDED BY HUMBLE, THAT THE MINUTES OF JULY 24, 1974, BE APPROVED AS AMENDED AND CORRECTED AT THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11 , 1974 , AND INCLUDING ADDITIONAL CORRECTIONS AND AMENDMENTS OF THIS DATE. MOTION CARRIED. Chairman Ross called for additions or corrections to the minutes of September 11 , 1974 . Commissioner Scholes requested that all questions and requests raised by the Commissioners be included in the minutes . He asked that the following items be noted : With regard to the Dick Colosurdo Preliminary Plat Application , Scholes had requested that the staff offer an opinion regarding the acceptability of pipe-stem lots versus public rights-of-way . With regard to the Louis B . Rowley rezone and special permit requests , Scholes asked that it be noted that he had requested a staff review of the Commission ' s powers regarding density and landscaping changes and revising setbacks . With regard to the Washington Natural Gas Company Site ( Use ) Approval and Special Permit Application , Scholes asked inclusion of his request for a legal opinion as to the implied or inherent rights of expan- sion of projects similar to this ; request for an environ- mental assessment ; request for a letter of acceptability of the project by King County ; Commissioner Gibson ' s request for a report from the Fire Department on how they would handle the total proposed facility ; and Commissioner Seymour ' s request that adjacent property owners be advised by mail of the public hearing . ACTION: MOVED BY SCHOLES, SECONDED BY TEEGARDEN, THAT THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11 , 1974, BE APPROVED AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE ABOVE COMMENTS. MOTION CARRIED. At the request of the Chairman , Commission Secretary Gibson counted the number of people in attendance and reported that there were 38 people in the audience . The Chairman then intro- duced staff members attending and Eric Pryne of the " Record- Chronicle . " Ross then introduced the continued public hearing items . 3 . CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS : REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN A, REVIEW OF THE CITY ' S COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN IN THAT AREA LOCATED GENERALLY IN THE VICINITY OF THE VALLEY GENERAL HOSPITAL . B. W. STEWART POPE ; APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC AND QUASI PUBLIC USE ; property located at 3713 Talbot Road S . At the request of the Chairman , the Planning Director pointed out the location of the areas being reviewed and noted significant development in the vicinity. RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING MEETING SEPTEMBER 25, 1974 MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT : Don Humble , Larry Gibson , Anthone Kola , Norman Ross , Arthur Scholes , Clark Teegarden , Bylund Wik . COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Bev Morrison , Patricia Seymour. CITY STAFF PRESENT : Gordon Ericksen , Planning Director ; Michael Smith , Assistant Planner ; Willis Roberts , Recording Secretary . The September 1974 public hearing meeting of the Renton Plan- ning Commission was called to order at 8 : 00 p . m. by Commis- sioner Ross , Chairman . The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Mola . 1 . ROLL CALL was taken by Secretary Gibson . All members responded present with the exception of Morrison ( illness ) , Seymour (out of town ) , and Scholes , who arrived at 8 : 04 p . m. ACTION: MOVED BY TEEGARDEN, SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT THE ABSENT COMMISSIONERS BE EXCUSED. MOTION CARRIED. 2 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Noting that the Commission had moved that approval of the minutes of July 24 , 1974 , had been continued to the September 25th meeting , Chairman Ross called for additions or corrections . Commissioner Scholes indicated that there were several items of concern . With regard to the Shell Oil Company Special Permit application , specifically page two , para- graph two , " Planning Department recommendations and Shell ' s compromise plans were also described he asked if the Planning Department recommendations and Shell ' s compromise plans were kept on record . The Planning Director responded that they were a part of the Planning Department Analysis , which is a part of the permanent file on the subject . With regard to page two , paragraph four , which cites correspondence between Mobil Oil Corporation and Councilman William Grant , Scholes requested that it be noted in the record that the date of the Mobil Oil Corporation letter was May 29 , 1974 . With regard to page three , paragraph three , relative to the Planning Commission Comprehensive Plan Commit- tee recommendation for denial , the Planning Director advised Scholes that the complete report dated July 19 , 1974 , is a part of the permanent file on the subject . With regard to the substitute motion listed on page five , Scholes questioned the necessity for recording a substitute motion that had not received a second . Chairman Ross and Commissioner Humble stated that it was their opinion that the motion was a part of the business and including it made the record absolutely clear . nF RP c THE CITY OF RENTON z o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT po 235 - 2550O, p' 4TFO SEP1 ' MEMORANDUM September 25, 1974 TO: Files FROM: Mike Smith SUBJECT: Washington Natural Gas Site Approval and Special Permit (Cut and Fill) Joan Lankford and I met today with Tony Tessitore and Arnold Olson of Washington Natural Gas Company. We informed them that we needed additional speci- fic information, especially with respect to safety and reasons for the additional storage tanks . We asked that this additional information with sup- portive data and references be included in the Envi- ronmental Assessment. Most of these items had been discussed at previous meetings or were discussed at this meeting, and we asked that they simply be in- cluded in the assessment with the necessary sup- portive data. They agreed that some items needed more explora- tion and supportive data, but at the same time they feared the document would become too wordy and technical. We said that we welcomed all the technical data to back up their rationale that they could reasonably present. We explained that we needed as much backup information as could possibly be assembled in order to make an accurate determination of environmental significance. 4 pF v U 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WASHINGTON I Q MUNICIPAL BUILDING • RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 • xLRMAW 9 0 235-2550 sp0Rl CA PITA OF` ate September 19 , 1974 Arnold H. Olson Chief Engineer Washington Natural Gas Company 815 Mercer Street P. O. Box 1869 Seattle, Washington 98111 RE: September 18, 1974 , Meeting regarding Special Permit and Site Approval Appli- cations and Environmental Assessment for Proposed Additional Propane Storage Tanks. (Attendance: Arnold Olson and Anthony Tessitore, Washington Natural Gas Company; Michael Smith and Joan Lank- ford, Renton Planning Department) Dear Mr. Olson: Pursuant to our discussions at the abovementioned meet- ing, we have requested an Environmental Assessment of the proposed project so that we may more definitely determine its environmental significance in terms of the State Environmental Policy Act. As discussed previously, safety aspects of the project are probably the most overriding concern. What hazards exist, to what degree would they increase with the addi- tional storage, and what measures are taken to reduce any possible hazards are the type of questions needing thorough treatment in the safety element of the Environ- mental Assessment. We also gave you a brief outline of what we considered the primary areas of concern. It was as follows : 1. Description of proposed action. 2. Need or rationale for the proposed action. Arnold H. Olson Washington Natural Gas Company September 19 , 1974 Page Two 3 . Existing conditions both man-made and natural . (This would include a descrip- tion of adjacent land uses. ) 4 . Various environmental impacts of the pro- posed action: a. safety b. construction c. to the natural environment d. air and water pollution e. odors f. visual impacts 5. Mitigating measures taken to reduce any anticipated impacts. (Include supportive data. ) 6. Alternatives to the proposed action. You were also given a copy of the procedures and suggested Environmental Report for the State Environmental Policy Act to supplement the above outline. We hope that this will assist you in compiling an assessment that is thor- ough, yet concise. As mentioned, the Planning Commission cannot make its decision until the matter of environmental significance via S.E.P.A. is determined. If you have any further ques- tions, please contact this department. Very truly yours , Michael L. Smith Assistant Planner Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 11 , 1974 Page Three The Chairman then invited comments from the Commission , stating that he would solicit input and questions from each Commissioner . Requests were to be directed to the staff or appropriate source for response prior to or at the public hearing . The poll resulted in the follow- ing requests : a review of the Restrictive Covenants for Fairview Terrace to determine applicability to this application and an evaluation of the planned pipe- stem lots versus a public right-of-way. Discussion followed relative to the designation of the lots as interior and lot coverage as it applies to the R-2 zone . REZONE - SPECIAL PERMIT: B. LOUIS B . ROWLEY ; Appl . R-787-74 ; rezone from G to R-2 ; App . SP-788-74 ; special permit to construct 10-unit apartment building in R-2 zone ; property located on Park Ave . N . between N . 30th St . and N . 32nd St . The Chairman introduced the proposed rezone and special permit requests and invited review from the Planning Director . Mr. Ericksen pointed out the location of the 14 , 775± square foot site on the vicinity map . The requested rezone is in agreement with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan . which designates the area as low density multi -family . A request for special permit to construct a 10-unit apart- nent complex is proposed . Response from the Commission was invited by Chairman Ross . Seymour asked for staff review as to normal land coverage in an R-2 zone as opposed to the coverage pro- posed by the special permit application . Staff comment and recommendation in regard to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and zoning in the Kennydale area was requested by Gibson and Wik . The Chairman suggested a map of the area showing the Comprehensive Land Use Plan designa- tions in more detail . Humble , Chairman of the Compre- hensive Plan Committee , advised that the study of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan in the Kennydale area is expected to proceed shortly . Discussion followed regarding the approach to follow in evaluating the applications . SPECIPL PUNT: C, CHICAGO , MILWAUKEE , ST . PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. ; App1 . SP-763-74 ; special permit to allow filling and grading in G zone ; property located at Black River Junction . Noting that no action was planned for that evening , the Chairman requested staff review from Mr . Ericksen . The Planning Director advised that a letter had been received from the applicant amending their previous application for a special permit for grading and fill - ing . He noted the revised area on the cross-section map of the property . There is no proposal for develop- ment at the present time . c Renton Planning Commission Meeting September 11 , 1974 Page Four The Chairman called for comment from the Commission . It was requested by Scholes and Humble that a map citing the zones and topography of adjacent County areas be pro- vided for Commission revie•. . Seymour requested specific information with regard to the revised application , in particular an indication o' intended use of the filled property . Scholes asked that the matter of environmental assessment be re-evaluated in view o'' the amended applica- tion . SITE (USE) APPROVAL — SPECIAL PERMIT c D, WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO . ; Appl . No . SA-790-74 ; site ( use ) approval to allow expansion of existing ,gas storage plant in R- 1 zone ; Appl . No . SP-789-74 ; special permit to allow excavation and grading in R- 1 zone ; property located be- tween S . Puget Dr . and Williams Ave . S . The Chairman introduced the applications for special permit and site ( use ) approval and requested background information from the Planning Director. Mr . Ericksen pointed out the location of the seventeen acre site on the vicinity map . He noted the applicant proposes to install an additional twenty 30 ,000 gallon gas storage tanks on the present site , said tanks to be placed under- ground and to involve grading of approximately 4 ,000 cubic yards of native material and filling of approximately 6 , 000 cubic yards . Mr. Ericksen stated that Washington Natural Gas Company is considered as a utility and public quasi institution . He noted original approval of the peak shaving lant in 1964 . Nineteen larger tanks are presently in exist- nce . He then noted the location of the proposed tanks and lanned excavation and grading . The Chairman invited comment from the Commission . Wik and ola requested information regarding the conditions of approval of the existing facility . Scholes suggested that an investigation be made into the history of complaints that may have been registered regarding odors from the plant . Ques- tions were raised concerning the applicant ' s legal status as a quasi public agency , technical differences between the storage of natural gas and the type proposed , the matter of public safety , and environmental impact . 5 - ADMINISTRATIVE : p , FIELD TRIP Following discussion , it was MOVED BY SEYMOUR , SECONDED BY MOLA , THAT A FIELD TRIP BE HELD MONDAY , SEPTEMBER 16 , 1974 , AT 7 : 00 P . M. , PARTICIPANTS TO MEET IN FRONT OF CITY HALL . MOTION CARRIED . B, COMMITTEE REPORTS The Chairman called for committee reports relative to items to be considered in September. 1 . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE Humble , Chairman of the Comprehensive Plan Committee , announced plans for the Committee to meet on Septem- ber 18 , 1974 , with regard to the Comprehensive Land WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY 815 Mercer Street (P.O. Box 1869) Seattle, Washington 98111 Telephone (206) 622-6767 September 6, 1974 Renton Planning Commission City Hall Renton, Washington 98055 PROPOSAL TO INCREASE STORAGE CAPACITY DAVID W. SWARR STATION, RENTO;;, WASHINGTON Washington Natural Gas Company has made application for approval of an addition to the South Seattle Peak Shaving ;'lant located in Section 29, Township 23, Range 5E, WM City of Renton, Washington. The proposal calls for an addition to an existing peak shaving plant which is an inte- gral part of the supply of natural gas to the RenLon South Seattle area. The original permit was approved by the Renton Planning Commission in July of 1964. Subsequently, the plant was built and has been in existence slid has operated periodically during extremely cold weather. The current natural gas supply situation requires that Washington Natural Gas Company add to its peak shaving storage capacity; the proposal calls for an additional 40%. Swarr Station now hes storage capacity to operate for 22 days at full capacity. The addition will provide another day of operation. Our forecast shows that under design conditions this add- ition is required to insure adequate supplies for our residential and commer- ciPl customers. Since our decision to add this facility was made and approved by our Board of Directors, the Federal Energy Authority has requested that utilities add to their energy storage facilities. lMYears! 1 SERVING PUGET SOUND COUNTRY SINCE 1873 MDIfVG OF FILE FILE TITLE Cl- n.l ENVIRONMENTAL PACT ASSESSMENT FOR STORAGE TANK EXPANSION AT 15171(1 R PEAK SHAVING FACILITY ENTON, WASHINGTON,rt Illiers'% re. s. oF RFC RECEIVED 2 OCT 9 1974 NG DEPTx' FOR: CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, P. r WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY oF WAS ` s'/ J, G O z 'n October 4, 1974 BY: 4,s'iS T r hi r Anthony P. Tessitore INTRODUCTION Responsible Agency City of Renton City Hall Renton, Washington Objective of the Environmental Assessment The objective of this assessment is to provide the responsible agency with environmental, scientific and engineering data. From this, a determination of environmental significance may be made by the City, pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act of 1971. Scope of the Environmental Assessment The scope of this assessment includes the following: A. To describe the proposed expansion of existing propane tank storage facilities in Renton, Washington. B. To discuss the need and justification for the proposed action. C. To describe the existing conditions both man-made and natural at the site of the proposed expansion. C. To analyze and discuss the potential beneficial and adverse im- pacts of the proposed expansion. E. To describe mitigating measures to be taken to reduce impacts. F. To consider alternatives to the proposed facilities. 2- A. The Proposed Action 1. Adminstrative Action The Washington Natural Gas Company will undertake administrative approval procedures to allow the expansion of existing peak shaving facilities. Two permits are sought prior to construction of the proposed facilities. a. A grading permit from the City of Renton. b. An approval from the Renton Planning Commission for the addition of storage tanks at the site. 2. Structural Measure The proposal provides for the installation of twenty (20) 30,000 gallon underground propane storage tanks and associated appurtenances as shown on the mechanical plans furnished with this assessment. The site encompasses an area which can be described as approximately 75 feet by 275 feet (0,47 acres) centrally located on a 17 acre tract presently owned by Watnngton Natural Gas Company. See Figure 1. The project will entail the grading of approximately 4000 cubic yards of native material to provide a level foundation for storage tanks. Any unsuitable material not used at the site is to be hauled away and dis- posed of in a manner consistent with jurisdictional regulations. In order to prevent siltation of an existing small creek bordering the work site, an existing 36" culvert will be extended beyond the limits of the work prior to grading operations. The proposed extension will be approximately 350' in length. See Figure 2. In addition to grading, approximately 6000 cubic yards of select fill material will be brought to the site for bedding and backfilling the storage tanks. Landscaping requirements include topsoil to be spread over a 3000 square yard area covering the underground tanks. Above ground appurtenances connecting the tanks to process plant piping will be similar in visual impact to those already existing on present underground tanks adjacent to the proposed expansion. This piping in- cludes 8", 4" and 2" pipe manifolds the length of the tank embankment approximately 260'). 3. Need and Justification for the Proposed Action Peak shaving facilities are a necessary component of utility operations in that they contribute to satisfy the need for adequate service at reasonable cost to the consumer. Gas distribution system load is neces- sarily temperature dependent. The demand for natural gas "peaks" during a few of the coldest winter days. This peak can be described in terms of maximum instantaneous demand and duration of average demand when weather is continuously cold. Major gas transmission lines cannot economically be installed to handle the relatively infrequent peaks for an indefinite time in the future, hence the need for peak shaving facilities and their future expansion. II i V j r„..,\‘ 10140 . \._ 1__...... s,... Th S‘ C, 1 5,.\, s,............„.:.:.::.........,/ 3:( 451_,.,,,,.I.:,,,..' 1'l',--,,,...,„::...--..--..- 406. 1, 9:-•,_._. 1 0:444:,7.:411w1::.. 1. iisi:‘#/.,'.,.....7, 1I 1"..,. 7"'" IllH. 1...r.,.........,_.: 4,. i.,.,..,, 7.,,..,,.....,:: IN. 74 1 31" flit 0 111. 9, ILI r. v., i, i-CL. N A Th. if rkie-- - --.- A tfil 1-- r sex,..::',... N\ 1- 1 7, I e, i 11- 7; yr --- --- — — _____..----- 1 r-----'- i•-•.. v — 7,-,,- .,.....- 5 IT- 1:--/__ 1 " 1 I 1 . I : 5 . 1 r.. k••-'. r it,.--; i• H 2p i I I! j _ I 7- 2- - ,-_---- 1 i 1 I 1-- Is Ns] 1 , ...-.:—!------ - 7 ----,./- •- i., q' — 1 2 s,...) , N :',.. gi - I: . 34 w r N . cce 1 1 5•%._, .......... r....., ...' 6. • s ,—__......—) e1/4— 1-- I _.,....- 1 ,... s -- T4 ,--•: 26 i f. -•.. ...,, k 1 11 1; 41 4• I -- I I--- * 5 ' n' o, 1 , ve ul 1 , I .•• v1 l' il Ji • I 1 . • 1, 7) 1 41 11: 1 1 i •• 1, 1 ___. _ 1 iv, 5 • A, 0 1 I lid vv3. 1 0 i i •\ Mc - Tc/— it4, 1 4:.?, 7:: 71: 11-- I i i 1,\-- ei o 4) _____ 11 1 1 4 i 1- 7,::- 7.-- . 7-'• k, 1 til 11 L\_ ...: t\\ \ i I # 1 11 c'\)\i t 9v r- ti.. A-- -"' 0....". lea..... 0°'' fSO y MA 1 i 1! l' 1 l 1 'fin ZO / 11 1Ir...sty k ' ! 11, ,' ' / i i 1,11 I 1\ 111 -Y' ' r 1 1 1 I I ' i 10 f CV1.Jc JI ( I 1 II 1 " •• 1 I sI 1I I1 I f I II II Ii II I1 ii ii II ( I I I I t ; 11 fi it ii j r II i I I I 11 ; EJVST/NG PI "ANE 7 ,. I ( j 1 1, II " j1 ;i 11 I I j I ; 1i I I j II ;1 1 I{ IN I ii I ' 'I f1 II II II I I I I , I II AS COMPANYjII11IIIij1 1 i I' 1 , I I II 1, I 11 i 1I I II , II 1! a QII1li11 I I, jl Ii II 11 ILA//. !J/ I ! I i 1 i' f1 II I' III I 1 I 11 11 I l 11 ' I' ROW//VG 1 L. _) I - .__ i , -'_- jI, -. -----%I. 2 Y T 1`0°74E/55 3- Further need for peak shaving ability can be caused by reductions in the amount of gas available to the distribution company from its supplier. Such is the case in the Pacific Northwest for the winter of 1974-1975. Figure 3 shows a "load duration curve". These curves are part of the com- plex process by which gas supply requirements are determined for the coming heating season and are included in this report for demonstration purposes. The vertical portion of the curve shows the magnitude of the gas demand on the system and the horizontal section shows the number of days that the demand will exist. The curve plots what is considered a normal and what is considered a design year on the system. The high point on this curve is what is termed peak load. Note from the curve that propane, or LPG as it is termed, in the last increment of the supply utilized. This is the gas that must be supplied to residential and commercial account during extremely cold winter periods that may occur only once in every ten year period. Gas Company management was informed in summer of this year of a forth- coming shortfall in gas delivered by Canadian suppliers for the coming heating season. Studies by the Company indicate that existing facilities are not adequate to provide for the increase in peak shaving duration created by the supply shortfall. It should be noted here that all winters are not alike and it is impossible to predict the severity of the coming season; however, prudent utility operation requires a high level of assurance that gas supply to highest priority customers will not be affected. This priority included the res- idential home heating customers. The required degree of assurance would be gained by an increase of the Renton peak shaving plant storage by 40%, the subject of this assessment. No other alternate exists that is economically feasible within the time framework. The Gas Company cites the proposal as a matter of public convenience and necessity. 4. Location and Description of the Project Site The project site is approximately one mile south of the Renton Central Business District. The work site entails an area of approximately 0.47 acres centrally located within a 17 acre tract presently owned by the Washington Natural Gas Company and used for an existing peak shaving facility. The 17 acre tract is bounded on the east by Puget Drive, on the West by 100 Avenue South and on the north and south by Puget Sound Power and Light Company right-of-ways. Existing zoning is R-1, the plant site having been held as "utility reserve", (provided in Section IV, para. 3 of Zoning Ordinance No. 1742) since October 7, 1963. 5. Historical Background - Past Planning Negotiations for the acquisition of the subject land began in 1963 with Puget Properties and included meetings with the Renton Planning Commiss- ion. Plans for the utilities use of the land were put before the Comm- ission at this time so that development could be undertaken within the guidelines and requirements of local authorities. Subsequently, the property was purchased with the understanding that development could be accomplished within zoning regulations. Prior to this time, zoning was residential with minimum lot sizes of 35,000 square feet, considered a holding classification only. On September 25, 1963, the Renton Planning Commission recommended rezoning to R-1, withholding the Utility Reserve provision until actual plans could be provided for the development. The City Council ratified the zoning change October 7, 1963. On July 22, 1964, the Planning Commission approved the site for the peak shaving plant. g000 LOAD DI/RA3/0N CURVES - W.N.G. CO. 1 I 7000 I I 6000 - 5,000 14--.I 4,000 L.R G. i..fir!r O O S.G. S. U j 3,°°°T NORMAL OE3/GN F/RM SNT. -"111‘. 2,000 I---- NORMAL DESIGN 000 F/RM 1 1 0 0 20 30 40 BO 20 60 200 240 280 320 360 JUMBER OF DAYS BELOW TEMPERATURE 40 NG MAL TEMP. 23' It 34 75 37 38 34 k 4143 44 45 44. 47 44 44 .* 42 55 S/ 40 CS MEAN E MP. OE_ 5N TENR ie is a' 14 21 3/ 37 40 4' 44 47 ft fa 40 4 f 4- As discussed with the commission in both of those sessions, it was Washington Natural Gas Company's plan to increase the size of the tank- age in the reasonable future. The development of an underground storage field south of Chehalis precluded that immediate concern. Additional expansion of the project has not been requested until this current application. B. Existing Conditions 1. Natural Setting a. Area involved The area directly involved with the proposal is located in a sloping valley and is bounded by a small drainage creek on the west and a private access road on the east. The area was developed for the purpose of a utility plant in 1964 at which time the native forest duff was removed to permit landscaping within the context of the utility use. The proposed tank site is presently in a hearty grass ground cover. There exists approximately 20 small evergreen trees in a cluster planted in 1964. Included among these are several Western Cedars that existed prior to the earlier development. b. Topography The topography is sloping to the west and north and presents no unusual difficulties to the proposed development. The average slope is approximately 20%. c. Geology The geology of the site is atypical of the area, the predominant soils being of glacial origin with dense glacial till overlying compact sand- stone bedrock. Above the dense till is found a more loose weathered till underlying surface alluvial deposits. Soils engineering reports silt, sand, gravel, and clay; as much as 150 feet thick but generally less than 50 feet. The upper two to five feet is generally a loose, silty sand and gravel. The Shannon & Wilson Soils Report is included as an appendix to this assessment. d. Hydrology The site, located on the slopes of a small drainage valley is subjected to a considerable amount of surface runoff. On the east side of the creek, where Puget Drive was constructed, 12 inch corrugated drainage pipes feet water runoff from the road to the creek at a point down- stream of the proposed work. Maximum flows in the creek have not been officially tabulated; however, engineering studies indicate a maximum stream flow of 30 CFS with an increase in the future due to residential developments upstream and a maximum future flow of 75CFS is anticipated. Ground water exists at depths varying between three and six feet during wet seasons due pri- marily to surface runoff. The slope of the ground surface and the re- striction to downward seepage of a very dense soil at a depth of up to 13 feet keep the water level high during the wet season. 5- c. Manmade Features The 17 acre tract is presently occupied by a peak shaving facility composed of many parts. To describe the process functions and mechan- ical aspects of the existing plant is beyond the scope of this assess- ment. Major appurtanences are as follows : 1. A compressor building approximately 40' by 140' in size and of 1 story construction. 2. An existing underground tank farm consisting of 19 tanks varying in size from 16,000 gallon capacity to 90,000 gallon capacity. 3. An above ground coolant storage tank, for engine cooling water, and of 16,000 gallon capacity. 4. Various heat exchangers, pumps, and motors for various process functions. 5. Two large hot water bath heaters some 5 feet in diameter and 40 feet long for vaporizing propane. 6. Interconnecting piping 2" to 12" in size. In addition to the mechanical features on the site, a great deal of landscaping has been completed consisting in the main of evergreen trees which effectively screen the plant from adjacent public right- of-ways. 2. Human Use Since the establishment of the 17 acre tract in a "utility reserve" status over ten years ago the property has been generally closed to public access. As seen from its periphery the area appears as a rural wooded ravine. As such, the area is a greenbelt shielding the various adjacent land uses from each other. High density multi-family uses border the property on the east and rather rural residential areas border the west. The north and south boundaries are characterized by other utilities right-of-ways. No significant socio-economic change can be foreseen in the area due to the proposed addition to the peak shaving plant. The site has no known significance as an archeological or historic site. C. Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action 1. Topography Although the actual work site is comparatively small, a significant amount of grading and filling is required; 4000 cubic yards and 6000 yards respectively. The topography will be altered to some extent; however, the visual impact will remain essentially the same even to those within the reserve and no change will be noticeable from outside the reserve bound- aries. 2. Vegetation Existing grasses presently maintained on the site will of course be lost. They will be replaced in the final restoration. Of greater significance 6- majority of these will be relocated per the landscaping and rehabilitatio-. plan. Three of these are medium size (14" trunk) western red cedar (Thu . Plic.ata) which will be lost. These have value and can be made available co civic groups for purposes such as totem poles. No other significant impact to vegetation is foreseen. 3. Soils, Drainage, and Stability The attached engineering soils and foundation report indicates no signi- ficant soil, drainage, or stability problems will be encountered. Soil bearing capacities of 5 ton per square foot are allowable, actual design loading is less that 1 ton per square foot providing an extreme safety factor to static and seismic loading capacity. 4. Biological Impacts No significant biological impacts can be foreseen by the proposed action. 5. Safety The proposed action involves adding approximately 540,000 gallons of propane storage to an existing storage of 900,000 gallons. The size of the proposed containers is smaller than nine of the existing containers. Safety considerations relate to container size and loss of container integ- rity. The proposed installation does not increase the hazard factor. Storing propane is not a unique concept for Renton. The existing plant has been in operation for ten years in this location. Similar propane storage exists in the same size tanks at Pacific Car & Foundry and to a lesser extend at the Boeing Company within the city limits. Boeing uses propane stand-by fuel at several locations within the main Renton plant, along the west side of the air field and in warehouse and fabrication facilities on the southern part of Renton. Tankage of a similar size is used extensively in the Andover Park area west of Renton and by industries and schools throughout our service area. Rail tank cars of propane of the same size are brought through the city by both Transcontinental railways and presumably are switched through town on spur trackage. The use of propane is not a unique concept. It is covered adequately and properly by national and local codes that have been developed after a tho- rough study. Your own city has adopted a Uniform Fire Code after considerable evaluation. This code outlines the highest engineering requirements. The plant is constructed in full compliance with all portions of that code. In terms of energy stored, each tank contains less energy than a single gas- oline tank at a typical service station. That typical service station could well have 6 tanks of the 30,000 gallon size. As a utility plant, the facility falls under the codes of the DOT, Office of Pipeline Safety, and under the Uniform Fire Code, incorporating NFPA 58 and 59. As such, the installation meets the most stringent requirements for safety developed in this country. Safety features include but are not limited to: a. Underground, coated and cathodically protected storage tanks constructed to ASME pressure vessel codes. 7- b. All tank connections protected with automatic excess flow check valves, which shut off any flow from tanks should the piping connecting the tanks be damaged. c. Normal status of the plant is standby, with operation occurring in- frequently during severe cold. Operation is on a fully manned basis and not remotely controlled. d. Roving security patrols on a confidential schedule. e. Availability of radio equipped Company personnel in the general area 24 hours per day. All of these personnel are continuously trained in safety and emergency procedures. f. Six inch fire water main at the site, in addition to chemical fire fighting equipment. g. Large buffering area with set backs in excess of Code Requirements. Code requirements take into consideration the loss of tank integrity and require safety setbacks according to container size and installa- tion methods. The required setback for size and installation of the proposed containers is not less than 50 feet from the nearest impor- tant building or line of adjacent property which may be built upon. The nearest line of adjacent property which may be built upon is a distance of 210 feet or over four times the code requirement. The nearest important building is the on-site compressor house which is a distance of 120 feet or over two times the code requirement. h. A responsible utility owner-operator. 6. Air and Odor Pollution No significant air pollution is possible by the proposed action. The existing plant, when operated, discharges the products of combustion from natural gas engines and heaters to the atmosphere. These are carbon dioxide and water, natural gas being well known as a clean fuel. No propane gas is released to the atmosphere at the plant although it too is well known as a non-toxic substance but has a distinctive odor inten- tionally added as a detector. Although the plant is odor free, the Company operates another station nearby that has caused odor complaints in the area. This other facility is being redesigned with more modern equipment to allev- iate the odor problems. 7. Water Pollution There is expected to be a small temporary decline in drainage water qual- ity due to construction activities. This will be minimized by the culvert installation and careful methods. 8. Noise There will be a temporary increase in noise due to construction activities. No unusual construction equipment will be necessary here and the excellent natural growth on buffering areas can be expected to limit off-site noises to well below average levels for this type of construction. 8- 9. Construction Construction impacts will be minimal. Off-site considerations include the movement of trucks and machinery on public roads. A below average noise impact is expected due to distance to site bound- aries and buffering vegetation. No off-site visual impact will be significant due to existing topography and screening. D. Mitigating Measures On the long term mitigating measures, with particular regard to safety, have been discussed in the foregoing paragraphs. On the short term, due to the minimal im- pacts expected, mitigating measures to further diminish impacts are of a simple nature. The engineer will reserve the right to approve construction methods whenever deemed necessary to mitigate impacts. The routing of trucks and machinery to the site will be designed to avoid res- idential feeder streets. Transplanting of trees affected by the action is best accomplished in late fall; this time of year fits the construction schedule well. E. Alternatives There is no known alternative to this action that is feasible within the time framework. Without the increased storage the Company will be in the position of providing for the possibility of trucking large quantities of propane to the site under adverse weather conditions. This possibility is at best insufficient, as truck unloading time is greater than plant output capacity. At worst, the transporting and handling of these quantities in adverse weather conditions constitute an increased hazard factor. A "no action" alternate cannot be considered. Such an alternate would result in an insufficient gas supply to meet the residential and commercial requirements of the citizens of Renton and the Washington Natural Gas Company's Service area should a design winter occur in 1974 - 1975. 9- ADDENDUM This addendum to the Environmental Impact Assessment for David W. Swarr Peak Shaving Facility is provided at the request of the Renton Planning Comm- ission to further clarify certain portions of the assessment. The addendum is attached following page 8, and becomes a part of the assessment. Page 2, 7th paragraph. Re: Above ground appurtenances. Above ground pipe manifolds are designed similar to the manifolds on existing tanks. The piping is above ground so that valves may be readily identified and operated, to provide access for inspection for preventative maintenance such as the detection and repair of potential leaks at fittings. This design is in keeping with the overall design of the existing plant and the N.F.P.A. Code No.59 for piping at L.P.G. installations. The subject of spills from damaged piping will be treated later in the addendum. Page 6, 2nd paragraph under Item 5. The N.F.P.A. Code No.59 recognizes the intrinsic safety of underground containers and places no limitation on the number of such containers when in- stalled underground, and setback distances are not increased when the number or size of containers is increased. For above ground containers the set- backs are increased by the code under these circumstances since fire could impinge on above ground tanks, and could jeopardize their integrity. This is impossible with buried containers. Page 6, paragraph 5a. Underground containers exist in a stable temperature environment, ground temperature remaining within a range of approximately 40 to 50° F. at all times of the year. Propane, as with any liquid or gas, exhibits a vapor pressure proportional to temperature. At 50° F. this pressure is 77.1 psig. Above ground containers can contain pressures of approximately 160 psig during summer months, this not being a hazard in itself; but would be of greater concern should piping or appurtanences be damaged. It should further be noted that the proposal provides for cathodic pro- tection of the tanks in which field Washington Natural Gas has decades of Experience and expertise. Buried pipes and tanks protected against corrosion in this manner by the company have been inspected after many years of service End found to be perfect. The Company maintains a staff of corrosion engineers End technicians who are highly qualified under national standards and the gov- Erning Office of Pipeline Safety. Page 7, Item 5b. This item refers to the automatic excess flow valves which shut off flow from tanks should piping be damaged. The N.F.P.A. No. 59 Code requires that discharge from manifolds for this installation be limited to 300 cubic feet of liquid. The excess flow valves prevent any discharge from the containers, and the proposed installation includes remote controlled fail closed shut-off valves n the manifold to limit discharge to 100 cubic feet of liquid in the event the 10- largest pipe is damaged. This amounts to one third of that which is allowed by the code to dissipate to the atmosphere or to burn at the point of dis- charge. In addition to the excess flow valves, and fail closed manifold valves each container connection is provided with manual valves which remain closed until manually opened for operation of the plant. To further clarify the nature of damaged piping and the possibility of fire, the concept of limits of inflammability is significant. These limits for propane are minimum 2.37% gas in air and maximum 9.50% gas in air. This means that if the mixture is outside of these limits combustion cannot occur. The salient point here, is that since the piping, containers and appurtenance are under internal pressure due to the vapor pressure of propane, air cannot enter and combustion inside pipes or tanks is impossible. The tanks and pipes cannot explode. All containers and piping are protected from excess internal pressure by safety-relief valves. The relief valves are provided in duplicate as a redun- dant safety feature, and to provide for maintenance of those valves. Page 7, Item 5d. The roving security patrols check the station during the night approx- imately 4 to 5 times. Page 7, Item 5e. Response time by W.N.G. personnel would be 20 minutes at its greatest, 10 minutes or less under most conditions. The local fire department response time would be on the order of 5 minutes since they are located within 1 mile of the plant. Page 7, Item 7. Washington Natural Gas Company will meet all fisheries or other agency requirements with respect to the creek. Page 8, under Alternatives. The Company has considered the number of tanks required to meet the seating season's peak shaving requirements. A number less than the proposed 20 tanks at Swarr would be insufficient. The Company has considered adding storage at its other smaller facility at Dieringer, Washington and is adding 10 tanks at that location. This is the maximum that can be utilized at that location due to the injection rate Limitations imposed by the physical gas supply mains. The Company has made engineering analysis of other locations on the gas Supply grid and has no other alternate feasible in terms of the thermodynamic rocess or within the time framework. 3 FOUNDATION REPORT SOUTH SEATTLE PEAK SHAVING PLANT RENTON, WASHINGTON FOR 4 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS COMPANY 815 MERCER STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON JAN UARY 19 6 5 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS 110 5 NORTH 3 8th STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. INTRODUCTION 1 B. SITE DESCRIPTION AND GEOLOGY 1 C. FIELD EXPLORATIONS 2 D. LABORATORY TESTING 3 E. SUBSURFACE CONDITONS 3 F. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 1 . General 4 2 . Bearing Capacity 4 3. Lateral Pressures 5 4. Footing Depths 5 5 . Settlements 5 6. Compacted Fills and Excavations 6 7 . Frost Line 6 8 . Natural Drainage and Flood Conditions 6 9 . Road Construction 8 10 . Additional Considerations 8 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT WITH BORING AND TEST PIT LOCATIONS FIGURE 2 PROFILE 1-1 FIGURE 3 PROFILE 2-2 FIGURE 4 ALLOWABLE SOIL PRESSURES FIGURE 5 CONSOLIDATION TEST, BORING 3, SAMPLE 1 FIGURE 6 CONSOLIDATION TEST, BORING 7, SAMPLE 2 FIGURE 7 CLASSIFICATION TESTS ON SAMPLES FROM TEST PITS 2, 3 and 5 FIGURE 8 STAND/3RD PROCTOR COMPACTION TESTS FIGURE 9 DRAINAGE,DITCH DETAILS FIGURE 10 GRADING CURVES FOR DRAINAGE DITCH MATERIAL FIGURE 11 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO (CBR) CURVE FIGURE 12 TEST PIT LOGS FIGURE 13 LOG OF BORING B-1 FIGURE 14 LOG OF BORING B-2 FIGURE 15 LOG OF BORING B-3 FIGURE 16 LOG OF BORING B-4 FIGURE 17 LOG OF BORING B-5 FIGURE 18 LOG OF BORING B-6 FIGURE 19 LOG OF BORING B-7 FIGURE 20 LOG OF BORING B-8 FIGURE 21 LOG OF BORING B-9 FOUNDATION REPORT SOUTH SEATTLE PEAK SHAVING PLANT RENTON, WASHINGTON A. INTRODUCTION In accordance with our proposal dated December 11 , 1964, and subsequent verbal authorization of the same day, we have completed a foundation investigation for the proposed South Seattle Peak Shaving Plant. The plant site is located on. Talbot Hill approximately at the southern boundary of the city of Renton between'100th Avenue South and the Renton-Kent High Line Road. The purpose of the investigation was to obtain subsurface informa- tion in sufficient detail to formulate recommendations for foundation design, backfill control, slope•.stability, and other aspects pertinent to the construction of the proposed facilities. We understand that the proposed structures for the Shaving Station will consist•ofbuildings housing heaters, generators, com- pressors, drums, exchangers, pumps, buried propane storage tanks, etc. Access roads to handle large petroleum tank trucks are also required. In this regard we have been guided by a Specification for Soil Investigation, numbered 11226-SP-Y-1, issued by the Los Angeles office of Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. 3. SITE DESCRIPTION AND GEOLOGY The site is located on the slopes of and spanning a small stream meandering generally in a north direction. At present the area is unused woodland with forest duff covering the underlying soils. Because of the sloping valley sides a significant quantity of cut and fill will be required to finish the site to two level sections, the upper area for the machinery buildings and the lower for the buried propane storage tanks. The predominant soils of this area are of glacial origin with dense glacial till overlying compact sandstone bedrock. Above the dense till is found a more loose weathered till underlying surface alluvial deposits. A Preliminary Geologic Map of Seattle by the United States Geological Survey, 1 1 designates this area as composed of Vashon Till, a compact, concrete-like mixture of silt, sand, gravel and clay; as much as 150 feet thick but generally less than 50 feet. The upper 2 to 5 feet is generally a loose, silty sand and gravel. C. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Field explorations consisted of placing 9 bore holes to depths ranging from 13 to 40 feet and excavating 5 test pits to depths from 6.5 to 11 feet. To provide access into the site for the drilling rig and backhoe, an HD-11 Dozer with a clearing blade was employed. Boring hole locations were surveyed and staked by a local Registered Land Surveyor. Borings were drilled by Soil Sampling Service, Tacoma, Washington using a truck mounted hollow:stem Mobile Auger. Both 2-7/8 and 4 inch inside diameter augers were utilized.. Drilling and sampling was supervised by a Soils Engineer from our firm. Drive samples were taken at 5 foot intervals with a Standard Split Spoon sampler advanced into the soil by the action of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. ..The number of blows required to drive the sampler 12 inches is a measure of the consistency of the soil being sampled and is known as the Standard Penetration resistance. All split spoon samples were classified in the field, placed in air tight glass jars and shipped to our Seattle laboratory for more comprehensive classification and water content determinations on a selected number. Where the split spoon samples revealed fine grained soils, undisturbed Shelby tube samples were obtained by pushing either a 2-1/4 or 3-inch outside diameter thin walled tube into the soil with the hydraulic ram of the drilling rig. These Shelby tube samples were sealed with wax in the field and shipped to our Seattle laboratory for classification and physical testing. Test pits were excavated with a small rubber tired backhoe. Test pit 1 was made in place of boring 10 on the east side of the meandering stream as recent thawing and heavy rainfall had made this area impassible with a drilling rig. The backhoe could maneuver to within 50 feet of the position laid out for boring 10 . Test pit 4 was excavated as a check on boring 4 in which poor recovery was obtained from a Shelby tube sample taken at a depth of 7. 5 feet. Test pits 2, 3 and 5 were excavated primarily to obtain represen- i. tative bulk samples of the soil in the upper 9 feet for grain size analyses and for determination of backfill compaction characteristics. 2 Porous stone observation wells were placed in borings 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and water levels were measured shortly after drilling and again a few weeks later. However at the time of the initial water level reading many of the boring holes had been filled with water by surface runoff caused by melting snow and a heavy rainfall. A best estimate of the water levels at this time and those taken in early January 1965 are shown in Figs.• 2 and 3. Boring logs with detailed sample descriptions are shown in Figs. 13 through 21. Logs of test pits are shown in Fig. 12. D. LABORATORY TESTING Three 2-1/4-inch and two 3-inch outside diameter Shelby tube samples were subjected to laboratory testing. Each sample was classified with water contents taken. Two of the smaller diameter samples containing cohesive materials were subjected to consolidation and Atterberg limits tests; these being on sample S-1 from boring B-3 and sample S-2 from boring B-7. The results of the consolidation tests are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. Atterberg limit results are included in Figs. 5 and 6. An unconfined compression test was also completed on sample.S-1 from boring B-3, the resulting qu is included in the consolidation test results, Fig. 5. The disturbed split spoon samples together with the three Shelby tube samples that had not been specially tested were classified, with occasional water contents taken. Grain size analyses were completed on four bulk samples from the test pits, with the results included in Fig. 7. Two Standard Proctor compaction curves on representative bulk samples were developed to be used as a guide for backfill compaction control. These results are given in Fig. 8 . E. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions are generalized in the profiles shown in Figs. 2 and 3. Detailed boring logs together with standard penetration blow counts are given in Figs. 13 through 21 and test pit logs are shown in Fig. 12. At the time of our investigation water levels varied from 3 to 6 feet deep, while a few weeks later these levels varied from 0 to 6 feet. However we feel that this high level is very much the result of weather conditions and is primarily caused by surface runoff. The slope of the ground surface and the restriction to downward seepage of a very dense soil at a depth of up to 13 feet would 3 keep the water levels high during the wet season. The subsurface down to the maximum depth of the borings can be divided into three soil zones with the middle zone having a more variable distribution of materials of medium or stiff consistency. 1) Top Soil. The upper one-half to three feet of soil can be classed as forest duff containing a mixture of leaves, wood and clayey sand topsoil. This upper zone has relatively no strength and cannot be relied on for building support. 2) Brown Silts and Sands. In general, this zone has from two to six feet of stiff, mottled gray-brown, slightly clayey SILT with gravel and thin sand seams, underlain by medium density, brown, poorly graded, fine to medium SAND with gravel,interbedded with medium dense, browri, 'silty SAND with gravel. This zone appears to be weathered sandy till at the bottom with an increase in the degree of weathering.up•to the•clayey silt material. The thickness of this zor e.varies from,7 to about 13 feet. 3) Gray Silty Sandy Till. Below a depth of 8 to 13 feet a very dense, gray, silty fine SAND with gravel and cobbles was encountered. The penetration resistance blow count throughout this zone exceeded or was very close to 100 per foot. ' In the Seattle area this very dense silty sand is characteristic of glacial till. F . CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 . General All foundations should be founded on the soils underlying the Forest Duff - top soil. This upper few feet should be wasted from the site and not used for fill. The bearing capacity of the middle zone, composed of brown silts- and sands, will be much less than that on the underlying very dense till. However, we understand that relatively light structure loads are anticipated and that it is desired to place the footings as high as possible in the upper materials. 2 . Bearing Capacity The static bearing capacity as related to footing width and depth below finished grade is given in Fig. 4. These relationships are only valid for footings supporting non-vibratory loads. For structures supporting vibrating 4 equipment the footing pressures should be reduced by'one-half to offset increased settlements which occur in granular soils under repetitious loading. If it is desired to place footings on the very dense silty sand till a bearing capacity of 5 tons per square foot may be used. It would be desirable to support vibrating equipment on the very dense till. No reduction in bearing capacity is required in the till for the support.of vibrating equipment. Bearing capacities may be increased by one-third for seismic or wind loading.• 3. Lateral Pressures We understand that only nominal lateral forces are expected in the proposed structures, hence detailed lateral pressure analyses have not been undertaken. Resistance against horizontal movement of spread footings can be computed using•200•pounds. per square foot per foot of depth for the case where permanent drainage is provided below the footings. For the case •' where no permanent drainage is 'provided the resistance should be lowered to 100 pounds per square.foot per foot of depth. Backfill adjacent to footings should be compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor maximum density. If high lateral resistances should be required a more detailed analysis incorporated with perhaps a lateral load field test may be warranted. 4. Footing Depths All footings should have a minimum soil cover of two feet. Fill compacted to 95 percent of maximum Standard Proctor density will be required to a height above the bottom of the footings at least equal to the embedment depth Df as used in computing the allowable soil pressure. Above this depth, compactive effort will be dependent on the use to which the ground surface is put; i.e. for seeding, or roadway. In the former no compactive effort is required, whereas in the latter 95 percent of Standard Proctor density is recommended. 5 . Settlements Adhering to the soil pressures recommended in section F-2 will limit ultimate total settlements for footings located in the upper silts and sands to one inch. Differential settlements along the compressor house structure could be as much as 3/4-inch due mainly to the varying depth to till. If however the footings are placed on till, total and differential settle- ments will not exceed one-half of those stated above. 6. Compacted Fills and Excavations Grain size curves and Standard Proctor density tests have been completed on the soil in the upper 10 feet across the site. The purpose of these tests was to determine the feasibility of using excavated soil for site filling and for backfill around tanks and footings. These soils are predominantly fine grained and the most representative compaction curve, number 2 given in Fig. 8, shows that, in situ, these soils have water contents well above the optimum condition. For use as structure supporting backfill these soils are not recommended, however they may be used for the compacted fill from the center of the propane storage tanks up to finished grade and for other non- structure supporting areas on the site. These materials in a more dry condition could be used for select fill, however, the cost of lowering the water content to near optimum appears prohibitive. Select fills should therefore consist of well graded sands and gravels having less than 10 percent passing a number 200 sieve for dry weather construction and less than 5 percent for wet weather work. Materials satisfying either Zone 1 or Zone 2 as shown on the gradation curve in Fig'. 1•0;• would be adequate for structure supporting fill. We understand that Renton Sand and, Gravel has a pit run material for approxi- mately $1.40 per yard which may be adequate, although no gradation curves are available. One hundred (100) percent of Standard Proctor density should be obtained in the select fill underlying the storage tanks and where other structure support is required. Temporary excavations in the upper sands and silts can be maintained at a slope of 1 vertical on 1 horizontal. All permanent slopes should be maintained at 1 vertical on 2 horizontal. • 7. Frost Line Freezing in the proposed plant area is of limited extent having a duration of only a few days at any one time. Our drilling took place during one of the more severe cold spells in this vicinity, however only a few inches of frost penetration occurred. Pipes having 1.5 feet of cover should, we believe, at all times be below the frost line. 8 . Natural Drainage and Flood Conditions The site, located on the slopes of a small drainage valley, is subjected to a considerable amount of surface runoff. No official records of 6 water flow, drainage area or flood conditions have been tabulated by the city of Renton or the King County Flood control office. North (downstream) of the site, where Puget Drive intersects Talbot Road, a homeowner has erected a concrete counterfort dam 20 feet high and 90 feet wide. A 2 foot deep by 3 foot wide wier is located at the center and crest of the dam. In the ten's of years since the structure was completed the pond behind the dam has silted to within a few feet of the wier. In the 25 years that the present owners have lived at this location, the steam flow has never been observed to overtop the dam with the exception of when a one foot high wood block was used to cut the flow through the wier and increase the depth of the pool behind the dam. Assuming that the maximum flood flow in the creek would just fill the wier; i.e. a head of two feet, the maximum stream flow would have been approximately 30 cfs. •Inspection of the stream bed through the site revealed that the creek has flooded its one to two foot deep primary channel frequently and has produced small flood plains on either side of the main channel in many locations. It will be'•advantageous to excavate an adequate channel through the site, say 4 feet wide arid 3 feet deep, .with protected sides. We understand that the stream flow will increase in the future due to residential developments upstream and that a maximum future flow of 75 CFS is anticipated. Under these flow conditions much more erosion of the stream's banks can be anticipated. The valley slopes leading to the stream are sprinkled with small surface drainage channels which will require controlling. On the east•: side of the creek, where Puget Sound Drive has been recently constructed, 12 inch corrugated half round drainage pipes feed water runoff from the road down the fill slopes from where the water crosses the site to the creek. This drainage water should be collected in closed drainage conduits and emptied directly into the creek downstream from the proposed site. Surface runoff can be controlled by a drainage scheme extending around the site as shown on the plan in Fig. 1 and as detailed in Fig. 9. The gradation curves for the two backfill zones around the 6-inch perforated, corrugated metal pipe with half round cover are given in Fig. 10. We have contacted two local sand and gravel distributors and it appears that material fitting these specifications is readily available. Your construction plans call for finished grade over the petroleum storage tanks of elevation 142. 5 and a corresponding lowest elevation of the 7 bottom of the tanks of 130.0. We feel that raising the level of the tanks throughout this area to a minimum base elevation of 133 would produce fewer excavation problems in regard to the depth of drainage ditches below existing grade and the flow of these ditches into the existing creek. Catch basins should be provided at least as frequently as shown on the plan, Fig. 1, to permit cleaning of the lines. With permanent drainage at this depth, floating of storage tanks will not be a problem. 9. Road Construction The proposed roadway may be built up with soil excavated from the site provided it is dried to about optimum water content and compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density as shown in Fig. 8 . With this compac- tive effort a minimum CBR of 12 should be obtained. This value is based on a CBR test on the zone 2 material compacted wet of optimum at 12.2 percent water content to 94.8 percent compaction and soaked for 24 hours, refer to Fig. 11 . In lieu of this, the pit run material referred to in section F-6 could be used for road construction. With this. material the CBR would be higher and in general a better road subbase could be obtained. Roadway fill slopes should be kept at 1 vertical on 2 horizontal. The 75 CFS culvert indicated on the Stone & Webster Company Drawing, 11226-DY-1, December 1, 1964, should be adequate to handle the creek flow under the roadway. 10. Additional Considerations The major difficulty in the preparation of this site is control of surface runoff and near surface ground water. A permanent drainage system is herein proposed, however it may be desired to only temporarily control the water during excavation, in which case shallow open ditches excavated with a backhoe will probably be suitable. If the location of the permanent drains is o: suitable, they may be moved uphill to any appropriate location on the site. The sulphate content of the subsurface materials was requested and the results of tests for the percentage of sulphate are included in this report as Appendix I. Three soil samples, two from boring 1 (S-1 and S-2) and one from depth 3 feet in Test Pit 3, were sent to the Laucks Testing Laboratories, Seattle, where the necessary tests where completed. We understand that a sewage disposal system is desired in the vicinity of the control house. Final design for such a system can best be accomplished by Designers certified for this purpose by local authorities. 8 A series of percolation tests in the soil just east of the control and compressor structures, performed after final grading of the area, would be required for finalizing a design. We visualize the following to be a conservative estimate of the sewage facilities required at this site; a 750 gallon septic tank located just east of the control house and a maximum of 250 lineal feet of open joint drain line running in a north-south direction in parallel lines, 10 feet apart, to the east of the compressor structures. Respectfully submitted, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. 46...: V e-e,0_/:).:.;-27:e'7-e.f/ 4, * wASy C -i0\ if, lor VWZi.- o ', 41. - E° 4',by G L. Keith Bestwick 4 f -, ANAL O a 9 7 CERTIFICATE MAin 2.0727 LAUCKS TESTING LABORATORIES 1008 WESTERN AVENUE INCORPORATED SEATTLE 4. WASHINGTON ter._ LABORATORY NO. 3 v(j r_ CHEMISTS SAMPLERS • INSPECTORS DATE _IO::C:.)C'-') i i l 1 r ' ASSAYERS • SPECTROGRAPHERS 810 CLINICAL CHEMISTRIES CLIENT r'."."'1 S! 4; LCO.1 LfC! 1 iJ. .x..) .. :i. ,j:l ii: . 173..,":.1.V, !•!E.S.'.J•f,?Lori REPORT ON i•U S.:Y.PIE IDENTIFICATION c-1.7.1...:.°w(:_C ,n-.•r' ar rcc.: T. .. ",..I i, PERFORMED AND RESULTS: :J "" .u.:Cw Y i..f,I•,C^'iil •^ :• •• C .. ..cn11t::r::.: . ,-r .- . J.t. t2 - L c v_: '- — r, r o T..1. ::‘It,:) Cv+1CS 4vt,... 1.1.1141arYc, c .c. ..•c? 1. . r wr:.•.r.•-••.-rw.w .ter.... . • ......_. • ..- ..... r ' .vv. r~.rr1w . r, / I c.a.:. r r l M..... r/ ' _ r. t Cs.) ..,1 . L.+.. V: , awl;l 1}.:-1 i-... i 1 .- v;... •••.1 u •u:. u L t... V w—.lr Ja._+O:..:._C:'iC•.:! .L La• rvl:.'. PO-po LEGEND I t/` PERSON. PARTNERSHIP. OR CORPORATION TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED. SUBSEQUENT1, 1 .. r,\ : THIS REPORT IS SUBMITTED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE 1 t yx,USE OF THE NAME OF THIS COMPANY OR ANY MEMBER OF ITS STAFF IN CONNECTION WITH THE ADVERTISING OR SALE OF ANY PRODUCT ORC43..L'I-+ n PROCESS WILL BE GRANTED ONLY ON CONTRACT. THIS COMPANY ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY EXCEPT FOR THE DUE PERFORMANCE OF INSPEC• U ....' TION AND/OP ANALYSIS IN GOOD FAITH AND ACCORDING TO THE Sul re OP THE TRADE AND OF SCIENCE. 2 yoposed IaLout of BUP,;4C PR--,PANE-,PANE STOFrainncje ditch.( Num - ers along ditch Iir FB-6-.`. ., r -,-,—,-- epresFnt approximate. evo.fi Ions of bott^n, of iitch.) ii B7 i) l u WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS CO. SOUTH SEATTLE PEAK SHAVING PLANT RENTON, WASH. SITE DEVELOPMENT WITH BORING TEST PIT LOCATIONS v) w-G4-405 JAN.1967: SHANNON & WILSON ry = SOIL MECHANICS 4 FOUNDATIO'. ENGINEERS"' 1$C- WATER LEVE. I. CtV JAN. 11/65 JWAER LEVEL ON DEC. 1$/64 AT TIME OF DRILLING r 160 150 uJ ul LA_ Z n E.-6/ w 130'-- / 120-- IIO - i 10G LE ,Er•;D 3Z__ G NOTE Lc cat icri SHANNON & WILSON r., SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS ew:`; 4 160 - TP•2 5-8 TP1 G re. 4 broom 150 - __ PP' f g-9 t +o claye SAND 2_ w/ 9rave.I td 140 -_ t o Q w 130- J Grat,i ver9 deise slightly clayey to silty fine SAND w/ pebbles 4 occ. cobbles ("Glacial Till) 120-- 110- LEGEND V Ground water level NOTE Location of Profile. shown on Fiq, t , PROFILE 2 - a SCALE HORIZONTAL s Ili = 50' VERTICAL : 1''= 10' Jan. 1 SGS SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS at FOUNDATION ENGINEERS S933N10N3 NOIIVaN(lOA 9 S INVHD311 'IIOS NOS71M 'B NONNVHS S3111SS .31ci -110S B1VMO11V N IaVQ1 OI NSI3S It104 o4Stl3aJN1 3g A,tIW S3bnssaad 316VMol"1V (; 1d I SNO1 S Jo 3n1VA 321f15;538d 3151vM0110d NV SVH 1111 la3dzt -9 b'Qddfl 3111 NI SIDS ZSNBQ W 11O3W Ol 3SOO1 Ol 1.-1NO A'lddb S32inSS 32id 318vMO11 V (( S =S 9N1AVH 'S3A21( 411OS 31-i1 Jo 3Sf) 3H1 CNWW0'3?:1 3M '2 J0 A134VS Jo ?lolZd3d 9NI)WH 313VM011d s .N3s.nad32i 3NI1 ga11aa (Z 9af11Onb1S 9N11t12i431/1 y SNi1IAOddnS NOIJVCNf10A N3HM d1dH-"3NO AG 43Ona31:1 33 01 SI <IV01 319vM0'11y (I : 31ON i333- 9N11o03 d0 H.La1M Z 01 8 9 0 S9NIlQO4 1N01108 3A0 d3A00 d0 Hld3Q = 30 0001 Z rr' o m ZIA o D r 0 - fQ OOOZ o o rn0 5 N Z C N 9- to in m 000 O 18 _ Q i11 i L 1 L 1 6 B- 3 S-I 3(- 5.5'18. 4 %I7.5 6 1.145 crr% 4.52cm. CL-ML CIa1.{e SILT w/ trace of son. I 4 gravel; stiff, moist, caraI.{_ brown ro.. .-,....w•r.,a..vna•.'.w-a•......n.ae..._.. a•..a,. ...w .....rw e.... n.-. _...-.-.....__. _ ...... ..., ........... ... .....».... V.:/l O. I 1 1 I I I t t i 1 1 I J 1 I I r ' ' r • 1 tt 1 t i 14 . I 1 i p 1 j I. I t 1 t ; i 1 I , 1 • . . I I 1 j i 1 i 1, f f. 1 i I i j J S_ . ; . I I I— -) 6 i ' OTHER TESTS ON THIS SAMPLE 1 ; II t. ' I : qu=O.38 tsf (unconfi ned compression) LBORING3SAMPLEII, 1 r , 1.L . 24.0! 1 I , I I r : PL z 18.5 At+erbercj Limits 1• {j . ...- PT = 5.5 7 Jo.n. 1565 1 1 .1• . •• , Ul I i w - -11-'105 E B-7 5-2 7.5i- 9' 21,7% 9. 3° 1. I4}1cm q,4Scm CL-ML CI e9 SILT is.)/ some sand; stiff1 moist-, drny-brown a tv.R.Va•^'.y, f 'l.rA-er M I.I.rN•Y.l..+yl...n.t A•H•l•.,a..a...•Y.a.. • ..a..tr.•..u. .. r.. . —.. •_•a>.—r.. ....v. v•,.v......ra•....._. ,rr...-..w.•.._ 0.01 0.1 i.0 1 O i 1 +1 . 1; i 1 I . + 1 1 t I . I . 1 , 1 . • i i I• 1—..•...... 1 . r ,.. . 1_ • 1_ ; . , _..._ • i -•- 1....-!- i-_ ` 1 -. _ I . • ,_!:_ .. .!._.. ...... 1. -' , .. t , I ! 1 • i ,1, I i i i. , 1 1 1 •y- I ; ; • 1 1 , f i I I i i I I i , 1 t 4 i Y r..... .... <., n.... ii• • . I 1 1 1 • • t I i t : • I • • 1, i 1 i , I 1 c- ; 1 , I is 1 'i ' i I , 1 ! 1 t 1.!\, .) U +_ i 1 , . ; 1t•' 1'4 Ts_ S 1- i-. -+ ! _ 1. i_ 1 •• 1 — .. • i i si • ' ' 1 I OTHER TESTS ON THIS SAMPLE 1' J I I. I L 1 BORING 7 SAMPLE 2 _' • + I ; . P z i8 Atferberc Limits it w s .i . I ..`.._1•. ' • i t_ k...l i • ' • 1 { t 1 I • I t 1 1 • .1 11 1 ; } 11 i 1 • . • + i S 1 • ;. • r .i f..--._ _ Jan. 1965.._.-1 : ! !. 1 t I f ' • 1 _ . . . 1 I r + .. I '1 ' •1..-,._ '1 . . 1 ; ' 71 C., Shornon & Yin:an % , •..i -1 i•1 1 . .I i• I 1 t 1 f W-64-d4OS 1. 4.-- F.ItiVti t.H.tLISIS ilY DloRT ER A ALYSIS tzt.; or- o,vetr.... ,.. 1.., :, I.: ri...••••..!--. e 0,, •••:-.0, pEpt t?i1, (t.s. irAist•L.101 ztr: f.1N1-------.1---------"-"' f..1 a) (0 4 1f/ CI i 01 fa q .:3 ,N1 ..',..) ..: 0 0 q et 00 0 t., 0 o o 0 4.3 •( c••4 rt .- .- -1,4 .i •z 4,-, •- ..., 4 0 P, R 0. °. ° 0 0. o. o o o o 0---- ___F [Q.:,•3 --"r"%•• '• ts:1_ t 1-- 50 I 1,----•'--- --41- --!I-- f,p p444 0'' a''..,t .•A'''' 1'P•. 1'..---.-'-----.-_-. z----.-...,:'---.-.-.*...:., _-0•, , -..--• It` ----• -.IL i '----'--.---- -------- i 1 1 - ! I 40 I.- LA 0 1 -1--4- t - I. l:•17- ' --- r - l'' . "' rr -1 1 -- " -1 -• -- -- t------ -- -------- - - \ --- • 1 • ,T.P3V 5 f c...., A , 1- • . 43 I.:A I I 4 - .71.--r- .t- t - - 'i- I f - i - 1 -1 I 1 :- ' - t - l' •- -------1 -- -----I--------t- ---\- ' - •- -, 4' • v I i- ; I ! -•-•1--i---- i C.: I - - 1- I . I ! • i ) - : - • --4- ----1" • --!* • • 4 , • 44,:. 4 , - 4 4 ' 4 1 c.,• 1.I.i Li i' I 1 1 ! i C.!,i .; , _..• _ ! : . ! . . : . . . tu I• • I I ti. 1 i I-- 1-- 1 t j-.. 1 i II 23 —•--- ----4--•t---+----1 et, 4— -- iJIC - -s- -t- 90 i ___1..._4 _ 1.,I.Eni._--1.22.:.--. - -.-..a.--si-..ric - -__----I1) 1_11.1..1-r--T- --r...-.-___---Jrt L• - - -- 7 - ----1• • • -r-r--.----- --- loo 0 0 0 0rI) 0N 0 jt 12--(-: s.- or7 04.. II'NEC.4-:110 X). 40 V 0), -1.4 '•"'• c0 0R cv c( 4) °N 044-. 04-0 0to-. 0(,) oN o GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS c o COIlLS — i f FN I•4 A T• W• C• l I.. PL 3 li 7 TP CL ASSIFICATION TESTS 0/r---- ON SAMPLES FROM 1a . B I 5M Silt9 SAND with craVel 6.a TEST PITS 2, 3 4' 5 CP B 3 I Mt...-CL SlIghii9 CICtlieti fine $and4 SILT 1 2.5 Vo 1 1 T P?:, 7 , SM P11t, gra_de.c.1 silt SAND(.4 w/ gravelii a;-:-.--- 1------------- --7----------- Tr 1.‘.•',:i Jo.rt, ISCS I' 6 sz. 1 zlItli 5AMO ,.u'ith 9faval i 6.0 V '• '-',,-i a,---,.....,..1 I 61........ S•••• S, •:...,S#.::#',Or.,Vo•114S,4 PA .!!••l•.".1 1111.111...!!.........',^'-",. f laI0 • , PROJECT Wt3n1Iv‘.2IVIv NP i UiK1-\i- GAO I s; ;r.r.l_ 1 • ; '1 JOB NO.W-a4- 405 1 : i -'k., ' i._ DATE Jan. 1SG,Y iltj-a-i Fc, I , i , ; , I ,. SAMPLE NO. T P 3 T P 2 i 140 ' mum_ , ; ' DEPTH r a:! ' HAMMER WT.,L 5. 5, 1 I ' as ' ; 1visk CROP, IN. 12 I • t m NO. LAYERS 3 1 k O;NS/LAYER 25 135 . , , ; , DtAM. MOLD, IN. 4 I aaaa 1-;EIGHT MOLD,IN. i . ! I i l''.. 'VOL. MOLD, CF 30 I Tf I I I CO"i?r,CTIVE J a L 00 I • t EFFORT-FT.LGS.F I 1 . 1 : , - .,AA- c.. _NAT.' .c, © I= r a: : ._"_` 1 a:aaa;IIa T. I ; 17.` ` STANDARD PROCTOR L I ,t 1 . I N COMPACTION,ION, TESInsfir, rJ I.,• 1 ' 0 SHANNON USES^:`" y J a i ' t 0j TEST PIT , DEPTH T' Q IT: -I I `` , -- ' . • ?p SM Poor Iv, graded ,i i t u, SAND 1,0 ,-+ ! i ; ! ' :; . ! • ; I ' + J 3 w/orave.I, med;um, mot i, d• j`1 1 i` , -_ o grab. 11- 1. 1 I! ! ! i I I ! ; ' I ! ! ; 1H • -- ,- , 0 © TEST PIT; 2 <- 5, DEPT!; 3 1,e 1 ; ; , ' ' 1 4 A SM Well 9raocd srl to SANDH t , ! ; li , ` , I, , , or vei , m caiul,troisr, a: . . , , , _. MINK .a rust-brown. C. 1 , „ 1 , ; , ' ' i ' , . ' ! NOTE Tess Po lr iv rfor ^d on U 110 minds 3 11 1Y1o.-eria' 1 Li : ; t 11111M111 i NHi k 00 , ' ' ; ! waaa a a aaaaa a aaaaa.a•ta i Ii 1 . I 1 j ! II , 1 , t •., tli-H-ii iIi : I : , i ? - 1 , II I 114 I ill I glah 1 1 ' 1 I t ' ' , , , a N ' ' ' noway ' nina I ,1 I ' aaaaaa oaaa l. t . I I , , 1 i i , ,1- ' 1 1 ' ' I I 1 , ,' 1 1 Tf._" • , I ' 1 ! ICI . ? ' 1 { I . f ' . ii ' i I tip' ; h I 1 i 1 1 I ' I • i ( j i , 1 I l 1 I h; 1 I I 1 I ! I I I I ' '.• i i ' 1 , . I• r i aaOaaaaa\ • f .....-1.• I , 1 I I i '' i 1- t . 1 'T ' f I , 1 i' 1 1 I '--\ 1 ; , ,4 I i ' , 1 i I 0 5 10 1.5 20 2 111 Q V 7 6 7 Z\Aspal+ 6" relatively impervious soil / taken from excavo.t on Filter on 2 is 6 4'- 13' "y/ j Gravel 6 ' p zones III roCQ1\ p _oL,d U c`riq 6"perforated C'x ,L - s corruoo c '• FI 1C T' \ O G GJ O / I f I( C lU !i .. cove'I f f I Epzone. 2 I i 1 31 e. NOTE Grada+ions -For 9ravei zone. I 4 filter zone 2 are given in Fici. I0. DRAINAGE DITCH DETAILS I Jan. 1965 i SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS V.1-r. •'.• . --. : ":. t t,-.—., II1se. ; . • • f i 1 • , . t .•••• c. r., i •.1 7 ..". • ....1 g g ZONE 2 1-FILTER, MATER.IAL 4, . .I ' '' • ' ' VI 1-i -t i- .! • -- „ t , ' .. . -I • I LP. It it i t ra.. 1 ' : ' . .• ...._ . • • . • I g 4/ • GRAVEL-- •-• 7 i _ 1 i , , • 1 i 1- . - - , 1 -- . - , --- • : I i , ...,........ i . _ .. . . . I i. i . r 4• s 6.. '4 • • .1 I.: •l• •- L. .1. • t o •J) I.I. ••• I s C, C. I. II I. ' .. i ' t, •• I i.'r I 1.: F.':. . :'•—'t t-."`, t. :. t, c• I 1 t i • 1 ' 0 •• I 1 '• ' 1 I I A',- r r i 1 i r !'•:`:'-r I 1.4 I 1.1 t t f.' ' 1•C. 1 .'' '• t... l't f .. ,. 4. _ -....".T. SS. f.. GRADII\1G CURVES DRAINAGE DITCH 1 MATERIAL t -1 Jan. 19f In Dry densitti = 06.0 c7 o i Wafer content: ee-Fore. soaking = 12.2 Mier soa.kind = 13. B% Af+er test I" below piston = 12.c) % 300 Remainder of sample= 13.2% of Sid,Proctor max. dry density . 54,8 Swell dur;no soakilna = 0 Water Conteht=l.5% >opfi r vm a Surcharge =201bs. 200. I CavL 0.1"_010(in) 1000 CBR e 0.2 =( 204)(too) = 13.6 1500 Ccrnpo 5 'e , sam Pole of material 100 from tesc pits 2 45, depth 3' 0 I 1 1 1 0 0.{0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 PENETRATION , inches CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO Cc3R CURVE Jan. 1565 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL. MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS T P- I TP-5 DEPTH DEPTH l Cr SASH , POORLY GkADUFF AND O FOREST DUFF GP/WELLY SANDD W/CLr1AND TGPSO%L COBBLES . MED MG(S' EkROWN TLY CLAYEY OME SAND, 2.5- ML SL(GI i FLY Ci ^,, I'ND COBBLES -2.5 Si;T , /cC'\E 1.., F, MOIST,M OT-ML , SLIGHTLY Rf;VEL VEF( STIFF ;f?AY BROWN ANC CLAYEY SILT V/ MOB T LC (..)RA W/OCC THIN COBBLES, VERY ME- MED(UM I STIFF, MOIST, 95 P PODRty MOTTLED GRAY- Si-NZ) (F;Nc M:_D.) ,/ BROWN Gi AvEL, NF, ?•iED , 1i GRAVEL, S%,NO S M, POOR,LY w/SJME SPADED SAND JD COBBLES L70 FINE-MED ) W/SON'E 75 SM P7O; LY FROWN - GRAVEL AND SAND V.URA ? LY GRADED COBBLES MED. LEti IY 1D tn//GRAVEL WET BROWN LES, DENSE O JN II•C' I SHANNON & W14.SON SOIL MECHANICS 6 FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT J o fj 0/0 SM, poorly graded siltyLoose, brown silty fine SAND w/trace gravel 1/2"), fine SAND 115 18 brown loose, wet, w/gravel 5 wW Iv Dense, T SM, uniform silty fine brown, silty 2156 11 SAND w/cobbles (broken), fine SAND w/gravel 1 very dense, moist, light 10 W 10 gray 0 Very dense,gray SM, poorly graded siltysiltyfineSAND fine SAND w/cobbles w/cobbles (till)31>100 broken),very dense, moist,13 light gray 15 LEGEND I5 Split spoon sample, C"O.D. Ficjure to left is sample no. Fioure to richi- indicates no. of blows of a 140 lb. we4 i9ht dropped 30" required todrive sampler 1frr, II 3"O.D. 5helb9 sample P Sampler pushed LOG OF EORING 8-I Jan. 56S SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS Ot FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION coN'rE NT0 0 0 Very stiff, light brown CL, slightly sandy silty CLAYsandysiltyCLAY1IC723lowplasticity, very stiff, moist, 1 light brown 5 6- Medium,brown silty SM, poorly graded silty fine to clayey fine SAND 2I19 13 w/gravel (1/2"),medium, moist, w/gravel brown 1-10 Top: SM-SC, silty slightly clayey fine SAND w/gravel 3I( 3/4") , medium,moi st, gray-brown w 13 Bottom: SM, poorly graded silty fine SAND w/gravel (3/4"),dense, 15 , moist, gray a.1>100 SM, silty fine SAND w/silt layers and gravel (3/4"), Very dense,gray silty very dense, moist, gray 20. fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles (till) 4 SM, silty fine SAND w/broken 5 T>100 cobbles, very dense, moist gray 25 SM, silty fine SAND w/occasional 6 I>ICO layers of silt to clayey silt and gravel (1") , very dense, moist, gray 30 SM, slightly clayey silty very 7 T>10o fine SAND w/gravel (1-1/4") , very dense, moist gray 35 SM, slightly clayey silty very I>100 fine SAND w/broken cobbles, very dense, moist, gray 8M, slightly clayey silty very fine L-10 10 I>100 SAND w/silt layers broken cobbles, very dense,moist, gray j LOG OF BORING B -2 Jan. 1965 SHANNON & WILSON gn'L MF.CMANICS & FOUNDATION FN(:INFFPS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT In 0 0 FOREST DUFF Interbedded zones of CL-ML, clayey SILT w/thin stiff, clayey SILT, layer of fine SAND and gravel medium,silty fine i9 1-1/2"), stiff, moist, gray-brown medium P slightly clayey SAND r 17 Top: SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel w/organics; all 1/4") , medium, wet, brown containing gravel Bottom: SM, slightly clayey silty fine SAND with cobbles and trace organics, medium, moist, gray- I 2 20 15 brown 13 12.2r is 1> 100 SM, silty fine SAND w/broken cobbles, very dense,- moist, gray SM, silty fine SAND w/broken 4I>100 cobbles, very dense, moist gray 2.0 Very dense,gray silty fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles till) SM, slightly clayey, silty fine 5I >100 SAND w/gravel, very dense, moist, gray 255 ML, slightly clayey very fine 61>100 12 sandy SILT w/thin silt and silty fine sand layers, very hard, 30 moist, gray ML, slightly clayey very fine 7I>100 sandy SILT w/thin silt and silty fine sand layers, very 25 hard,.moist, gray SM, only 1/2" crushed rock 38 7 8 I>100 recovered 40 LOG OF BORING B - 3 Jan. ISG5 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL. MECHANICS to FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT 0 0 1,5 FOREST DUFF Stiff, gray-brown 21 ML, slightly clayey sandy SILT slightly clayey sandy 1 IP I w/gravel (1/4"), stiff, moist, SILT w/gravel mottled gray-brown 5 6 Medium,brown, silty SAND w/gravel and 17 SM, poorly graded silty SAND cobbles 2P 13 w/gravel and cobbles, medium, wet, light brown 10w 10 0 ISM, poorly graded slightly silty 3 >100 fine SAND w/gravel (1/2") , Very dense,gray silty very dense, moist, gray 15 fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles (till) SM, slightly clayey silty fine 4 I>\Co 8 SAND w/broken cobbles,very dense, moist, gray" 20 SM, poorly graded, silty fine 22,5 5 z>t0O SAND w/gravel (1/2"), very dense, moist, gray . 2S LOG OF BORING 5 -1 Jan. 1965 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT r '0 FOREST DUFF I r Stiff,gray-brown slightly clayey SILT w/gravel CL-ML, slightly clayey SILT i I Ill t? w/gravel (1") , stiff, moist, 5 gray-brown 6 , Medium/brown, silty 's fine SAND w/gravel SM, .poorly graded silty fineal" SAND w/gravel (1-1/4") , medium, moist, brown IO 10.5 1 SM, silty. fine SAND w/gravel, 3I5 broken cobbles, very dense, i-15 E moist, gray Very dense, gray silty fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel, till) l 4I>I00 broken cobbles, very dense, moist, gray 2O I SM-GM, well graded silty SAND 5 i __)too 9 and GRAVEL, very dense, moist, gray 25 I SM, well graded silty SAND I6 I>100 w/gravel and broken cobbles, 28.5 very dense, moist, gray 3O LOG OF BOATING B - 5 Jan,1965 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS & FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATIONOCONTENT 0.7 Stiff,brown fine sandy 1 I12- 18 CL-ML, very fine sandy SILTSILTw/trace organics w/organics, stiff, moist, 5 brown 6 Medium, gray-brown, silty fine SAND 2T18 SM, silty.fine SAND w/gravel w/gravel I. 1"),medium, moist, gray-brown Ip 9.5 SM, silty fine SAND w/gravelST% 1/2"),very dense, moist, gray IS Very dense,gray silty fine SAND w/gravel SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel, and cobbles (till) 4I>I00 B very dense, moist, gray 20 SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel and alternating thin layers of silt 5 1> 100 and fine sand, very dense, moist, gray 2S SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel and broken cobbles, very dense, 6 L>100 moist, gray28 • 30 LOG OF BORING B -6 Jan. 196S SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS 6 FOUNDATION ENGINEERS fir) SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLAS5IFICKTIOt' CONTENT 0 p FOREST DUFF 2.3 I T22 ML-CL, slightly clayey very fine Very stiff, gray-brown I 1 sandy SILT, very stiff, moist 5 slightly clayey SILT mottled gray-brown w/some sand seams 1 1- 1B ML-CL, slightly clayey SILT 1.11 2 P w/thin medium sand layer, 10 30 hard, moist, light brown U- 104 Medium,brown silty r very fine SAND Top: SM, silty very. fine SAND 1- 13 IS w/gravel (1-1/4"), medium, n, 3'"P 13 moist, light brown i5 w Bottom: SM-ML, very fine sandy 0 SILT w/gravel (3/4"),dense, moist, gray Very stiff, gray silty 4I>100 No recovery 20 fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles, (till) 5I>100 g SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel 1/4") , very dense, moist, gray 25 SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel and 6I>100 . broken cobbles, very dense, 28.5 moist, gray 3G LOG OF BORING B- 7. Jan. 1965 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS Si FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION WATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT 0 0 0/0 FOREST DUFF Stiff gray-brown, slightly clayey SILT 1110 1G ML-CL, slightly clayey SILT, S stiff, moist, mottled gray-brown 7,8 SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel Medium,brown, silty 2 asIC'fine SAND w/gravel 1-1/2"), medium, moist, brown w 12,5 Iii ll' SM, poorly graded silty fine 1!3 - 3'95 SAND, very dense, moist, gray 1- Very stiff, gray silty fine SAND W A w/gravel and cobbles till) SM, silty fine SAND w/broken 2)4I>100 cobbles, very dense, moist, gray SM, silty fine SAND w/broken 5 I> 100 9 cobbles, very dense, moist, 25 gray SM, silty fine SAND w/broken 30 294 Z>100 cobbles, very dense, moist, gray LOG OF BORING B -8 Jan. 1965 SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS ei FOUNDATION ENGINEERS SOIL DESCRIPTION HATER DETAILED CLASSIFICATION CONTENT 0 0 1 FOREST DUFF 0 2.5 I IIG SM, silty fine SAND , 5 Medium,brown silty medium, moist, dark to light brown fine SAND 7.5 31 12 SM, silty fine SAND, dense, 2131 moist, gray w brown streaks 101- w Ui . SM - GM, well graded silty 3I14O fine SAND and GRAVEL, very Very stiff,gray silty dense, moist, grayL-15 n. fine SAND w/gravel and cobbles, (till) 4I>100 SM, silty, fine SAND w/gravel 1/4") , very dense, moist, gray 20 5 I>I00 9 SM, silty fine SAND w/gravel 1/2") , very dense, moist, gray 2. 27.5 Clean SAND layer 61100 SW, well graded SAND,' w/gravel 1/2"),very dense, wet, gray29 LOG OF BORING 8-9 Jan. SGS SHANNON & WILSON SOIL MECHANICS Si FOUNDATION ENGINEERS