Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA74-790BEGINNING
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