Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMisc 1-~--.-.., ~~ -.. ~ ..
_i,.. __ .,;.' ~ ·i -.,'
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
21 November 2006
File Number: LUA-06-073, SA-H, SA-M, SM, ECF
RESIDENTIAL
MISTY COVE CONDOMINIUMS
RESIDENTIAL
PROJECT SITE
RESIDENTIAL
PORT QUENDALL SITE
1-405
EXISTING CONTEXT
i d
1,', a ~!
i ~ I : • § ] , ~!
t:'~
NO.U)NIHSVM N01N31:l I
:)ll 1S3MH11:l0N 11V8100~
"l!IPB::I a8 !P8Jd S)1M e4eas
SEAHAWKS ~
'
):
I ' ' I I J l I I I
Ii h · 1 ~ t l §~ i t ..,ii5
, II .• ¥
-~------
'. SEAHAWKS ~'
(~ SllM.YHY:1$
-r • -... -~ --~ T" .,. "T ----'T --,. .., t \!I --_r-, r
j ;,
ff
~
: ' %1 l s
~ ,ffl • . ~~ l,1;! ~ ; ..
N01SJNIHS\IM 'N01N3~
:Jll 1S3MH1 ~0N 11\18100~
Al!ll:::>e.:1 a:::>1peJd S)1Me4eas
• SEAHAWKS ~
i i i
I I ; ~I I ~ 11 '
~ i ~
8 ~ • ~
I P. :..
....
C w z w w
0:::
(J
Cl) -3: <(
<( w w 0:::
0::: <(
<( 0:::
WW
(J ti
-a. ~ :E w ::::,
Cl) C
gi;Q86 "!M 'UOlU4ii~
l.lµDN p.e.~nog uo1flu 41H/M a ii1n <; I~
A)lll:J l'!:l 5U!U ll'!J1
'l? sJaµenbpeaH S)!Me4 eas
-1N3V'ld013/\30 N81S30 %09
u. u.
<(
t-
C/)
oc?S (!)
0::: z w->-~
<( 0:::
...J <(
a. a.
'/
. I
'.' -:·
:=/
r .".
, u...
'1 _:,2'.--I LL r-I <(
I ·\ q .... ;r (/)
t
1</) (/)
o6 'W I (.)
0:: (.) LU _..
~i "
I ~ •
,: ;ijJ : ; ,i li'r I -
:% :
'~lj
(f)
U)
w
I (.)
I (.)
<(
I Ii .
/
.' /1~
I :
.( >, ,·'1-
I 1· '·,
_:'/
. I ,·; -,.;,\. LI.
"" 0 " ' 0 "Z (.)'
7
u
\
.. '·~ "·
)
/
(1
-:· ,'
" C
') t-. / z y /' 0 ' / o::: I / /', u. I
/ '
' ! ' ..
' .. -I
/) .J ·1
/ ..
/ ',, ·, ~-)'
/ '. . ..~ / ., /-. ;--~---·----------~·:r-··-··-------------------r -~, --
1
-----,
! '/ --~_,.-, ~-> \cl
l::...=.=.=.::-;:z:-===-==-==-,;..-_==1l
/
/
J 1
I
:i1
I
111
.11
1 I
"' "' " u.
C/'J
C/'J w u
' u ·,,<(
~ '::...J
':)
e
!f w
~
jif~ ~
~ ~ ~
(/1 V ;;.
~ a, !
~ et:.-.
~ n ::j
u V: :!;
~ 3 -~:
a. ~r: ~
c_: ..&,.. JI
~ :iS ~
~ g ~
'-' '.) L
;-C. < ~ .., -. ..._:.
::-l -,-----,----
; ~
/ V: -·
'.~,
i'
'I
; I
I I
I I
'! '' Ii\
I I
: i
1, \
: '
I
w >
"' < z oc w >--..J <
z s a.
w >--
iii
z
0
~~
(!).
j:::
~ !
,,
L
iJ .
I
~
I
•·
\
r.
/
, I
j ' (
,' ~ /
'· ··(
J
-'· 's"-. ··~",>
/
/
-·--r __ ,_..: __
lJl.lOl-,J p.ieAOtnoe .JOlflL.111.1-;:cM .J)lc, Sl~
A}1p::ie::1 6u1u 1eJ1
~0% VM ·uo:1.10~ I
~ SJalJenbpeaH S)1Me 4eas 1
._, I .:/
{
~}i
'"("'
" ., "J;
"
' "' ) ., /
,/
/'
/
/
/',
/ '
/ ' ' ' '
/
' ' ,
/
/
---____ .., ___ ,T/ --------------------------
/
~-.-t._,J-~~~--,_.1-r-;---:~i
/
-:~ I / t::..=.=-=-=-:::-T..:..-----7 -----~---· --
/
/
; -.
I •J&:_ I 1--. -1
I I
I I
"'.,, .•. )·l
C, -~ i
' I
' , I
-' I
' I .
I
I
NOllJm:USNOJ t!O::l lON
-1N3V'Jd013/\30 N81S 30 %OS
I I
.,
y
~ ..
0: -< C.
\
J~
:!:-:1--</),_;'
. a
('(),.;""
<;;
" ..
~
C.
?!
u
~
<i:
E
V'
en en w
(.)
(.)
\ <( ',>.-
cl) z ·w e,
Ii
:i
U.l
~
"' > 0 CE:: --~
C."'
u,:' 5~
V' X
u,.,J',
_J J:
<D ' ;:j,._;
!,/);;.; w.,. u c;Z ~ ·i
r:--·=-
;;
0
"' ,:
~ c;:
w
~~
,,.
/0
5 ,
-I
en lf..l sf)·' :s ~ u ~
' "' a
z"
'" ., ~ 'i
-; . .' -;;,: ,,
:~.
i
I
I f
I I
i
I
I ' ''·
' I '
I! I\
" l
1'
·•
I
I· f 1 ~ r ~ ~ >--~ i-I W ·.,'")
C:::ic:i.l.
t7 :s \
' CONCEPT DESIGN GOALS
1. Representat ive of the C.014 v alues of
the Seattkl Saahawk.s and Paul Allen
• ExceNence
-Passion
-Characior
• 12th M tm
2. Feels like it belongs In the Pacific
Northwest
-Responds lo ,ts enwonment lake
W.lshlngton climate
-Max 11111.tt1 1.J$6 c t loca l amJ 1eyt00al
matenals
-Use o f naturaj matenals ._.s h,gn ly
•tdined m ate111:1h:1
J . EHkioncy
-Cosl-effectrve ,o11.111ons
-Efticieot use of mateuats. mmm,ze
waste
-Flex1b ll1ty 111 des19n
4 . Provide an apf)<opriate corpora te
•nvironme:nt
Subtle Seahawks' branding at the
office
• St1•d1um m ore iilp~opuate fOI
in-your-lace bfancllng
-A place thal people wanl to w ork m
C 1eahvv. c1bun<icmt nah . .ual hg ht
5. Creal& llex lbllity i n interior desi gn
· Open office concept s whe1e
appropnate
-Budd less walls
-P,omol e commumcahon between
floor levels
P,omOle informal g athenng and
exchanging of Idea:.
• Connection l o the outdoors
Exterior Imagery
, MATERIALS MATRIX
-----MORE EXPENSI VE
E XTERIOR STONE BRICK
IN T ER IO R
STONE WOOD
SURFAC ES WAINSCOT
FLOORS WOOD/BAMBOO
CEI LIN GS WOOD PAN EL
SOLID PHE NOLIC
WALL PANEL T IMBER
TRESPA
FABRIC S OLID PHENOLIC
PANELS WALL PANEL
TRESPA
STONE TIL E
PA INTED GYP.
BOARD
,, •)
~
<I)
u ....
Q) :::f z ~ g ~ ~
:J ·c3 w z
O"ro ~I' ~ LL ti:~
OJ oi o ;,; I C z . ·c ...J 5
<I) ·-<I >-...:: ro cc z ~ '-I-w
ro .,._ 8 "' .c u. ro
QJ
(/)
LESS EXPENSIVE ----------i-
SITECAST/TILT-U P CORRUGATED F IBER CEMENT TRANSLUCENT
DAYLIGHTING CON CRETE METAL BOAR D PA NELS
CERAMIC TILE/ HONED /TEXTURED CORRUGATED PA INTED GYP STAINED PLYWOOD
STONE TILE CMU BLOCK M E TAL BOARD SHEETIN G
C ARPET TILE STAINE D CONCRETE S EALED CONCRET E
ACOUSTIC T ILE PAINT ED EXPOSED
STRUCTURE
..
.,. .,. .. .. .. .. e; e: ' ' ·-;,
o-0 ~ o ·
'
l t
i:I
1:1 I
z lb
=ii
~u
:I
~
~
' !
~ z z z Cl
(/)
0 0 w
0 --r-~ ~ z
:c w
<( <( Q'.:
Q'.: > > ::> u w " w (/) ...J ...J z ' w w 0
~ ~ :c I w u
' en ~ _J .. w I <( ::::, 0 w
I w 0 Q'.:
~ -.....-w
§ i 0 0
L ::i ,; en z
( ; w
Q'.:
0
..
<
l:r
!, I . ' { i
tr , u' J
-....-.... ._., .... . '
X17 XIS
~· ~~_'t:~ ....... ..,,.,
N
X15
.. u
)(II
Xl4 X13
J9 -:::""-
""
O C,7 C
·--· .. ---.... ---·--· -___ ..__ ............
NORTH ELEVATION
X12 X1 1 XIO XlJ "" X7 "" )($ .. X3
WEST ELEVATION
RENDERED ELEVATIONS -CURR EN T DESIGN
C
• A
X2 X1
#.TQ1~ ...
f -... o,:,c:: ..
•,
3.6
'~,.·'~ ... .. ~,: . .,. ~· ..
'';;· ......
-·~-
. ~
..,,o,~ ...
' ..,._.ol:,c: ...
1
t,,,, ....
...
....
...
,,1111111111iiiiiiii f/J -----
..... ~..,... _,_
~ -
•. , r..._!·r·t·"'r ""
"' ~'·:~-~~m,,
/ /
~ ..
,. B
.----f
m:=r
CAP
C C1 D E G H
XA ,_
\
:ii.--CAP .:u-
RENDERED ELEVATIONS -CURRENT DESIGN
J.8K LL1 M
)(M
-
/ ,
··--.. ... -... , .... ..
N
---
! V ~·~ •
" f •
..._,01~ ..
.... o,~ ...
·~,s 11 ....
··.:·.~ ..
···:.-· ......
CONSTRUCTION i JfC•i~
COMPONENTS ~-.,;a>"d!t,.i,
~':'.c;,. .....
. _, __ _ -
_, t~~t,
1
~·~.o.lO;
.. ~-·:~-:-~rq.
, ·-
A
, , ,
-~-----::,-;. ~ :.,.~ .... --
BUILDING
.-------J •,
'=-'
CAP
C C7 0 E 0 H J t K Ll1 M N
~ ~ ..,.,o,~.,
.... o,:";. •. -~B_UJL OJJ~G-· -----'--..---.-----,
__ _...,.,.,_
--CAP :r-
RENDERED ELEVATIONS -CU RRENT DE SIGN
...
...
•,
CONSTRUCTION ~
COMPONENTS ~
AERIAL VIEW -TRAINING CAMP
I"'\~~ .. , '~ ' .. ~ --.i -..
~
VIEW FROM RIPLEY LANE
LOOKING NORTH
MISTY COVE UNIT #302 BIRD 'S EYE VIEW OF AREA
MISTY COVE UNIT #3 12 ··,"SITE ORIENTATION PLAN
S ITE V ISUALIZATION STUDIES
SEAHAWKS H EADQUARTERS A ND T R A INING FACILITY
PHOTOMONTAGE -EX ISTING CONDITIONS
FOOTBALL N O RTHWEST, LLC @
SITE P LAN -EX ISTING CONDITIO NS
·,,..SITE V ISUALIZATION STU D IES SCALE 1" = 50'-0" .,, · ~ ..
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AN D T RAINING FACILI T Y e . , :ur """.'.~ "'"'' p~r .. ·r -FOOTBALL NORTHWEST. LLC
SHADOW STUDIES
MAR 21st
~
I\~=-~) -~-
SITE PLAN -CURRENT DESIGN
.,-" SITE VISUALIZATION STUDIES SCALE 1" = 50'-0" · · ·,
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY Cl ~ N ....... ( ·No/ .......... ~ ... FOOTBALL NORTHWEST . LLC
SHADOW STUDIES
,.. \ ----~-~ ']'l ·~-~·--~.
: : -I . ' 'I ; , ... , --~. ' r '$ , " ~ • ~ • !-.-· .. .~-a.¥ -
MAR 21 st
fr~
\~
SHADOW STUDIES
SITE PLAN -BUILDING MOVED 62' EASTWARD
," SITE V ISUALIZATION STUDIES
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACI LI TY I) •).',. ,;~ ,1, l
SCALE 1" = 50'-0 "
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST, LLC
((,~
~
SITE PLAN -BUILDING MOVED 62' EASTWARD
/" S ITE V ISUALIZATION STUDIES SCALE 1" = 50 '-0 "
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS ANO TRAINING FACILITY " FOOTBALL NORTHWEST, LLC
SHADOW STUDIES
.. , ---~~\1
~.:tt
:1 . ... • ~-.l~: ·' ,..,# ~ ~:~-.--'·~-•• . , ..
JUNE 21st
•-.1..1' ...
MAR 21st
/'::=~ ~
EXISTING VIEW FROM UNIT 312
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
BASE SCHEME
VIEW FROM UNIT 312
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
BASE SCHEME COMPARED TO RELOCATION EAST
VIEW FROM UNIT 312
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
RELOCATION SCHEME
VIEW FROM UNIT 312
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
EXISTING VIEW FROM UNIT 302
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
BASE SCHEME
VIEW FROM UNIT 302
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
BASE SCHEME COMPARED TO RELOCATION EAST
VIEW FROM UNIT 302
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
RELOCATION SCHEME
VIEW FROM UNIT 302
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
SITE V I EW STU DI ES -NAUTICAAPARTMENTS
V IE W E V I EWF VI EWG
SITE V IEW STUD IES -EAST AND UPHI L L FROM NAUTICA APARTM E NTS ... -:~
V IEW I VI EW J
SITE VI EW STUDI ES -EASTWARD FRO M SITE
.-," SITE VISUALIZATION STUDIES
SEAHAWKS HE A DQUARTERS AN D TRAINING FACILITY
/ ;_:"\
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST, LLC \ '"---'-7
..____/
JUNE 21ST SE P TE MBER 21ST DE CEMBER 21 ST
3:00 PM 3:00 PM
S HADOW STUDI ES -M ITIGATED A LTERNAT E
,,,. SI T E VIS UALIZATION STUDIES
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAININ G FACILITY C
MARC H 21ST
3:00 PM
/;.~
I \ e-..,,,.,..,..
FOOTBAL L NORTHWEST, LLC \ '---,/ /
"--.__/
,-,~~,~
~t~~ ..
"BPS:,.,
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
21 November 2006
File Number: LUA-06-073, SA-H, SA-M, SM, ECF
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PLANNING/BUILDING/
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
November 27, 2006
Fred Kaufman, hearing Examiner
Elizabeth Higgins, Planner
Seattle Seahawks' Headquarters and Training Facility
Attached to this memorandum you will find the exhibits used during the November 21
public hearing for the above-referenced project. They are identical to those included with
the staff report with the exception that these include color versions of several exhibits.
They may be useful to you and should be added to the "yellow file."
Thank you
h:\division.s\develop.ser\dev&plan.ing\crh\tcmplatcs\mcmorandurn hex.doc
SOOTH P0Ilff
0
EXHIBIT
2
1/4
LAKE
SHINGTON
1/2
Scale In Miles
NOTE
COLOWI
POINT
1
6 Reproduced with pennlsslon granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPSo,,
l:j This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPSo,. It is
:: unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
PROJECT
LOCATION
'·
/
/
; \r
l
I
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
VICINITY MAP
September 2006 21-1-20525-003
NO h personal use or resale, without pennlsslon. All rig ts reserved .
., SHANNON & WILSON, INC. ~ ... _________________________________ ... ______ c.ns.-__ ~_ .... _____ _.
" J . .
ii
~~"'
• • -¢-·"-• ,-
' / / --/"
~ :-s;""'·~·-.,i) ·-
~-
" .. --
.... --~ .. ,
_...4....... r
------------
Historic Aerial Photo of North and Ba,t<11'foperty (date unknown)
~
_/VI' 111teri;tlltt-
Major Roath,
OtllOf RDiH.I
/ lllt"-'•S.lii'l<I
Stntti h4Ull"wt'BJ
// US. hJlthW.!V
r: : I
Roaitls
Cities
usGs Quad Index 2.o&K
Lower 4B Available Wet!an,d' Data.
N-0n•Diglt.al
Digit.II
NO IJata
Sun
NHD Streams
Countiei. 100K
D Sti1!:l!S100K
D South Amt1ric6
D North Amuica
EXHIBIT
3
COR <
.40th St
o"' ~ . 5:' '&
~§ R-8
N 38th
JI~ .:JO
ZONING MAP
C,
c~ 43
<[
u ~ z
'1J >
""' CA
EXHIBIT
4
CURs-------------_
EXISTING POWER
POLE LOO,TION----{i
SOUTH PROPERTY
FENCE LINE -
PSE EASEMENT
LINE (TBO) --....__
[XISTING P0\1/[R
POL[ LOCATION
'"'E>------
NEW 1 -STO'tY
MAINTENANCE
SHED --
COV~RED CAR WASH
EXISTING POWER
POLE LOCNION------jf-.___
'
WIINT. PARKING L!s.o ~
3 STALLS -··
SECURITY GATE ·~
/
' '
I ;/ ..---...----·
"
/
"·1·-+·"i'"'' .... 1 .. .;i.l!
l!.
,, " " • " '·' • • '·' • •
LAKE WASHINGTON
' \j
~ ----·. -.. --------• Ff'GE I
~v ___ ~~~~-'*··---------··@='\'#~, -------------~~-~ I I .. -f'~~----~ · ~~ G,--·----· I I \ ----·-
___ :iK~:•·[·0.:r · ~ ~:q~ ___ ::~--____ :: ___ _.. __ ~:: ___ -_: __ .: ____ :: _____ · __ ·------------------------------------
PROPOSED RAILWAY CROSSING
EXHIBIT
= 5 PARKING CO\/NT -STREAM CIASS GENERAL SURFACE PARKING 91 STALLS 405
lAKE WASHINGTON -CLASS 1 SECURE TEAM PARKING 161 STALLS I ERST A 1 E-
GYPSY SUB BASIN DRAJNAGE -CLASS 2 (RE: FIGURE 8 . .3} IN \
TOTAL 252 STALLS
--
® g ro-,oa·
~ ------
.. -------------=™
b ~~?!,TION SITE PlAN -ALTERNATIVE ·-~ AelRIEO -n NO'V9.IBSl
•
1,
®11
1-z wz ::;,O c.. -0 1-
...J (_) w=> > a::
wl-
o~ zo
CJ (_)
7=...== ..
-==--=r.:::-
~,¥= ..
= '"'~"?'"
c!S
~
~ .?;,
rn = fr ·u
"C "' "'u.
C1) "' :I:_~ cn.s i~ ., I-
~
C1)
(f)
1
h fl.
d
3
§
=-=>
-=.=-'=
,.,...
~~I~--I -·-~ f-MtflW,.""fKm C)O Sfl'EPI.N,I
10z
LOCKERS AND FOOTBALL
EXERCISE EQUJPMENT
AREAS AREA
SHED FOR INDOOR PRACTICE
' TV STUDIO
MTG. RM.
~1§1~ ~ I m ~ (/) g
1 LEVEL 1 -PLAN DIAGRAM
L'.J 1" = 100'
~2STORIESW/~ 1 STORY WITH ,
;;,I MEZZANINE~ MEZZANINE 1
ROOF
11 OFFICES,
BUSINESS
AREA z SHED FOR INDOOR PRACTICE w
~ ONE STORY
0
3 LEVEL 2 -PLAN DIAGRAM
L.:'.J 1" = 100'
Owner
CRAWFORD ARCHITECTS, LLC
1 ~ 1 Main Street Suite 200
c: ......... 0 .. 0 Kansas City. MO 6-4108
tel: 816.421.264D
lax: 816 421.2650
www.crawklrdatdl.CQm
Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
OFFICES, MEETING AND D!N!NGAND
BUSINESS CLASSROOMS KITCHEN
AREA
-OPEN_/
r--
w
"' z 6 w "' ~ SHED FOR INDOOR PRACTICE 0 w
!:i ~-
2 LEVEL 1 M -PLAN DIAGRAM
1"=100'
AREA CALCULATIONS:
PROPOSED FLOOR AREA-LEVEL 1 .................................. 55,674 S.F.
PROPOSED FLOOR AREA-MEZZANINE LEVEL ................ .48,556 S.F.
PROPOSED FLOOR AREA -LEVEL 2: .. . .......... 31,304 S.F.
INDOOR PRACTICE FACIL TIY: .. . ..... 89,423 S.F.
TOTAL BUILDING AREA (ALL LEVELS):. . ................. 224,957 S.F.
No. Description 0.te
PLAN DIAGRAMS
----· Proiect number KC045-05
~ -
Dale 11/07/06
Drawn by JEF
Checked bv JEF
-----·--~-
--··-·-----
Scale 1· = 100'
EXHIBIT
6
I
'
'
'
~
@
' ®
' G
C 0
G
~ ..
@
®
0
0
e
0
e
0
ii'
'-~
$
l OOJ.~NIHS\'M 'N0J.N3cl
::>11.lS3MH.1WN llVIUOO.:l
Jimpe.::1 6U!UJ8JJ.
'!I S.Jai,en bpeaH s~Me4eas
N0l1:Jn°81SNd:J "HO:! lON : 1N3Vlfd013A30 N~IS30 "
f ' i i
I • ' I 0·
I
~-e
0
0
G
0
G
0
G
®'
@,
.
~
i w, ~,
~l
-1 "'
i •·
" i lfll
)----"'' -· -----j hi!
... ::1'
'I
.1
'
Iii
I
l--,L,l-+---.Cfc;_n}·~r
·1"1· ,,'!! 91! ' [ @,; :_ ·.[ ~ )'1 fr l,t;l;J '.L ' . . • •!!
• '
E-< ......
CQ ...... t--::c:
>< ~
m
><
00 :I: s -"'"'3
l1
~i ;~ ·~ ~
~ ·~
~
0 z
5
0
A z
~
$ .
~ I ii,
~
·0
0
C
" "'
©
TI'
Ii ' e,
Ii ·0
\\11 i' ·8 !l p
·©
i> •®
r
I I( ,e
II
' E>
. ·· ... ~
'®
;c,
' 0)
e
l!ll,lill ,lll
,0 : ~ " ..... 1-U
.. "'' ,._,.,. __ ,,_ --. ... "
,. ~ i i I
• DESIGN DEYELOP.MENT: N_Qlf9R CPNSTfsUCTIQN
I l I I I ,,_ ___ :_.-. -.-. -I Seahaw~s .Headq~Mers & I ~1 .. : . Training Fac,hty i ---' FOOTBA.Ll. NORTHWEST LLC
l I I l • : ;._~___;,._ -RENTON, WASHINGTON I
·<
<
,;:;
~
.,
:~
•
-. B iij~@ !
,1\_
•1~
' \
, I CURS~
" "
LAKE WASHINGTON
--:---------l EXISTING POWER-----! ~
POLE. LOCATION ~
SOUTH PROPE~2::"
F(NC[ LINE
l--+-~--1,s---;--;,-,,;c--
PS( [AS(l.4~ .p:; IJ
LINE (TBC) ~
[XtSTING POWER
f'OLE LOCATION
CURB·----'-
NEW 1-STO'<Y
MAINTENANCE
5
"" Ir '' I u,__~~-·
COVERED CAR WASH
EXISTING POWER
POLE LOCATION---·-
~AINT. PARKING ,._ls.in::::~
10 STALLS
SECURITY GATE
CURB
~~l,_G{0S~ j
PRAC'l!GE RI[[ --'' ' \. ,..,
1 fil1m1ri 1r~1111t1 1
1
"
=->·•>«" -1 · ..
----------' !':AND FILTER I.\
I --~:.;:!.._-='" -··:....:_:'.""'"j.~~ .... -~"'-:':':"":"-~_:_~-:"'-~S~-'=~~~/J __
IL
•
EXISTING BUILDING
S7RUCTURE TO SE
REMOVED
' \j
~ ,,.~~tp' & EE'IGE j .. -----
r:.u~.:,,,)1;.,;...,"e·;·--;·;·--·-------~-_"_"_"_"_"---,~t~-1\:~;?:~1~-;~~ :: __ §=~ ~--~~~-------------------· -----------------
PROPOSED RAILWAY CROSSING
EXHIBIT
t!Q]L
STREAM GI ASS
LAKE WASHINGTON -CLASS 1
GYPSY SUS 6AS1N DRAINAGE -CLASS 2 (RE. FIGURE 8 . .3)
~o•m
PARKING COUNT 9
1~• ~ ~lNT[RSTATE-405 --GENERAL SUR'ACE PARKING 141 STALLS
SECURE TEAM PARKING l 1J STALLS
~oo· @ --------------~
b ~~ ... ~TE PLAN 6SEPTEM8EFt
FtEVISED • 13 NO\IEM!!E/1
"
@l -' ~-
7:!::-
-·¥=·
-~-
,,a
~ t ~~z
Ctl --]
:::I= .i:g
CT l;j ~.
] LL ~~
(1) g> f c
l
::c __ •t
rn c: ~0:: ..Iii::·-j ~ ~ j
rol-\!! .c •
l,'l
CJ)
~
-1='--
~zl ~g
OU
...J =i1.--=
UJ a:: > f--UJ CJ) Oz zo
CJ ()
[3 a:: 1=·-··-1 D f2 -•
#. I--~
Q O SrrEPLAN
"' z
=-...=
PSE
ELECT. an
STATION
LAKE WASHINGTON
--------------~ ------------
--~~
=----~~-~
====-----==-----------~---=~=---=-~--
~-------------------puq ~ ~~~--
~
=--===--= =----------==--=-~_;~~ ·,~--~: ·---==---------
~~~-='~:C~~~~~--'"'7/ ,,,----::-.. ==--~ ~ ~--------=----,, \ V ,f --
fv," SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY
1
. 16) BUILDING LOCATION OPTIONS
o=~~uc
@
CRAWFORD AACHrTECTS. LLC
1901 main-, sulta 200
l:ansas ,::tty, mo 64108
tel: 816.421.2640
ta,:c 816421.2650
FOOTBALL
NORTHWEST, LLC
PROJECT KC-045-05
~ z
~ z
'I-
'-' z z s
; 1 l I ~ i ,1
::,
ii~ ~
SITE PLAN
-
EXHIBIT
10
·"' .. , "'r . ' .,,,.. ~
" . t. ..
" 1. \
• : "
Misty Cove Unit 302 -Existing View
EXHIBIT
13
Misty Cove Unit 302 -View with Base Plan Location
EXHIBIT
14
Misty Cove Unit 302 -View with Mitigated Plan Location
EXHIBIT
15
Misty Cove Unit 302 -Comparison of Views with Base and Mitigated Plan Locations
EXHIBIT
16
Misty Cove Unit 312 -Existing View EXHIBIT
17
Misty Cove Unit 312 -View with Base Plan Location
EXHIBIT
18
Misty Cove Unit 312 -View with Mitigated Plan Location
EXHIBIT
19
Misty Cove Unit 312 -Comparison of Views with Base and Mitigated Plan Locations
EXHIB IT
20
JUNE 21ST SEPTEMBER 2 1 ST DECEMBER 21 ST
12:00 PM
3:00 PM
SHADOW STUDIES -CURRENT DES IGN
,-• S ITE VI SUALIZATION STUDIES << SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY C ·11'C1'("1t~Rt,;i.Pf"R'ffT'":"!f""
MARCH 2 1ST
3:00 PM
EXHIBIT
21
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST, LLC @
JUNE 21ST SEPTEMBER 21 ST DECEMBER 21 ST
I J A
12:00 PM
3:00 PM
SHADOW STUDIES -MITIGATED ALTERNATE
• SITE VISUALIZATION STUDIES
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY • ~ ,:~ttf+f) AfiN'~--~. ft".
MARCH 21ST
3:00 PM
EXHIB IT
22
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST, LLC @
SHADOW STUDIES
.. ,.,,,,.-, ...
'-,!I\ I""'.".._·~ r .'\ ~ ~ /I '
MAR 21st
SITE PLAN -EXISTING CONDITIONS
1\/'" SITE VISUALIZATION STUDIES
J SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY C rl'.:t, -r,:.,·.~ ... ..., ,'dr:.t
SCALE 1" = 50'-0" ' '11 ~ _::;-~ I EXHIBIT ~
FOOTBALL NO RTHWES{ LL C \9
23
,. , ...... ,.~ .. ,~
,., . ..., .. ~ .......... ,,.
• S ITE VIS UALI ZATION ST UDIES
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FAC ILITY
; "
SITE PLAN -C U RRENT DESIGN
fl }")ti-, ".r-,•.,, ... "P.' .• :".
l.:_~ ">, I (\ ,-
/1 ,)''
SCALE 1" = 50'-0" .i' 'cf" --· --
FOO TBALL NORT HW ES{ LL C
SHADOW STUDIES
l:\u~ --·+::--~1
1 • ~-, ' . , .
I • , --:
.
r:.. 1s ·,·~~; .... ~_,•_.
1· :_~ .. ~
JUNE 2 1st
MAR 21 st
EXHIBIT
24
........ .-:'1•"" ·,~ ., ..,
•',,' I ~ ~-..:. /\,
SITE PLAN -BUILDING MOVED 62' EASTWARD '>" SITE VISUALIZATION STUDIES
< V SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY o -r,r-,;-t't?~-,.c:ir,,..-...,.... ~
SCALE 1" = 50'-0" · "-!, :~ -:,, ~ :
FOOTBALL NORT HWEST, LLC
SHADOW STUDIES
\ --·~1~,J r-=,·y
l. r \ -I r . ~ -:
'
J ,,,. ~ li , ,. ,. . .,___,,,..
t .. '
JUNE 21st
EXHIBIT
25
@
Exhibit 26
EXHIBITS
The following exhibits are entered into the record:
Exhibit 1: Yellow file containing: application, proof of posting and
publication, environmental review documentation,
correspondence from interested parties, and other items
pertinent to this request.
Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map
Exhibit 3: Historic Aerial Photo of North and South Baxter Properties
(date unknown)
Exhibit 4: Zoning Map (dated 02/16/2006)
Exhibit 5: Mitigation Site Plan -Alternative Plan (dated 11/13/2006)
Exhibit 6: Plan Diagrams (dated 11/07/2006)
Exhibit 7: North and South Building Elevations (dated 11/15/2006)
Exhibit 8: South View Transverse Section (dated 11/15/2006)
Exhibit 9: Base Site Plan (dated 11/13/2006)
Exhibit 10: Building Location Options (dated 11/03/2006)
Exhibit 11: Green Screen Wall A (no date)
Exhibit 12: Green Screen Wall B (no date)
Exhibit 13: Existing View from Misty Cove Unit 302 (no date)
Exhibit 14: View from Misty Cove Unit 302, Base Site Plan (no date)
Exhibit 15: View from Misty Cove Unit 302, Mitigated Site Plan (no
date)
Exhibit 16: View from Misty Cove Unit 302, Comparison (no date)
Exhibit 17: Existing View from Misty Cove Unit 312 (no date)
Exhibit 18: View from Misty Cove Unit 312, Base Site Plan (no date)
Exhibit 19: View from Misty Cove Unit 312, Mitigated Site Plan (no
date)
Exhibit 20: View from Misty Cove Unit 312, Comparison (no date)
Exhibit 21: Daily Shadow Studies -Base Plan (no date)
Exhibit 22: Daily Shadow Studies -Mitigated Alternative Plan (no
date)
Exhibit 23: Seasonal Shadow Studies -Existing Conditions (no date)
Exhibit 24: Seasonal Shadow Studies -Base Plan (no date)
Exhibit 25: Seasonal Shadow Studies -Mitigated Alternative Plan (no
date)
Exhibit 26: List of Exhibits
LAND USE, SHORELINE
.& MASTER PLAN PERMIT
~ s APPLICATION
North & South Baxter
Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
& Training Facility
Renton , WA
VOLUME 2
Prepared by Crawford Architects & the RETEC Group for
Football Northwest LLC
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
TABLE OF CONTENTS & LIST OF FIGURES
Volume 2
Section 12 Traffic Study
1. Introduction
2. Existing Conditions
3. Future Baseline Conditions
4. Project Impacts
5. Mitigation Measures
Section 13 Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (1PM)
(Environmental Impacts of Chemicals)
1 . Introduction
2. Integrated Pest Management
3. Practice Field Staff
4. Maintenance/ Operations Chemical
Management
5. References
Section 14 Wetland Mitigation Plan and Map (Updated)
Appendices
1. Shoreline Survey
2. Wetland Survey
2.1 Vegetation
2.2 Soils
2.3 Hydrology
2.4 Wildlife Habitat
2.5 Baxter Cove Wetland
2.6 Wetland Regulatory Summary
Appendix 1 Title Report
Appendix 2 Geotechnical and Soils (Shannon Wilson 2006)
Appendix 3 Historical and Cultural (Larson 1997 Report)
Page 1
Page 5
Page 8
Page 11
Page 18
Page 1
Page 2
Page 15
Page 15
Page 20
Page 2
Page 3
Page 3
Page 4
Page 4
Page 5
Page 5
Page 5
Table of Contents
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page I
Traffic Impact Analysis
SEAHAWKS' HEADQUARTERS
Prepared for:
Port Quendall, Inc.
Football NW, LLC
September 2006
Prepared by:
The Transpo Group, Inc.
11730 118'h Avenue NE, Suite 600
Kirkland, WA 98034-7120
Phone: 425.821.3665
Fax: 425.825.8434
www.thetranspogroup.com
© 2006 The Transpo Group
September 2006
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... l
Project Locarion and Descriprion .......................................................................................... 1
Study Approach .......................................................................................................................... 2
EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................ 5
Roadway Network .................................................................................................................... 5
Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................................... 5
Traffic Operarions ..................................................................................................................... 7
FUTURE BASELINE CONDITIONS ............................................................... 8
Traffic Volumes ....................................................................................................................... 8
Planned Transportarion Improvements ................................................................................ 8
Other Improvements (Long-range) ...................................................................................... 8
Traffic Operarions .................................................................................................................... 9
PROJECT IMPACTS ................................................................................. 11
Trip Generation ....................................................................................................................... 11
Project Trip Distribution/ Assignment ................................................................................. 11
Traffic Volume ......................................................................................................................... 12
Traffic Operation Impacts................................................ . ............................................. 12
Site Access ................................................................................................................................ 13
Events "Non-Typical Day". ................................................................... .. ........... 17
MITIGATION MEASURES ......................................................................... 18
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Figures
Site Vicinity ............................................................................................................. 3
Site Plan .................................................................................................................... 4
Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Turning Movemcnts .................................... 6
Baseline AM and PM Peak Hour Turning Movements .................................. 10
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ....................................................... 15
With-Project AM and PM Peak Ilour Turning Movements ......................... 16
Tables
Exisring (2006) AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary ................................... 7
Baseline Weekday AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary .............................. 9
Trip Generation .................................................................................................... 11
With-Project and Baseline AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary .............. 13
Site Driveway 1\M and PM Peak Hour LOS Summary ........................... 14
The Transpo Group I
Seahawks' _ Headqua~te_'.s
Introduction
This report summarizes the transportation impact analysis (TIA) conducted for the
Seahawks' Headquarters project in the City of Renton, Washington. The scope for this
traffic srudy was developed by City staff and provided to the project team. This report
reflects analysis that is based on the scoping memorandum provided by the City. The
report is divided into five primary sections.
• Existing Conditions documents the current (Year 2006) conditions within the
srudy area. Existing levels of service at srudy intersections are calculated based on
existing intersection geometry and traffic volumes. This section also includes
descriptions of transportation facilities within the sh1dy area and on roadways
adjacent to the site.
• Future Baseline Conditions (Without-Project) documents the conditions
expected to prevail in the srudy area in year 2008 without the proposed project. The
operations analyses includes all roadway improvements and increases in traffic
volume resulting from other planned developments in the vicinity of the project site
by year 2008.
• Fumre With-Project Conditions documents the impact of a "typical day" of the
proposed project relative to year 2008 baseline conditions. 1\ "typical day" is the
esrimate of traffic that is expected to be generated by the normal use of the facility.
The impacts are measured by comparing with-project conditions to year 2008
baseline, which is the proposed year of opening.
• Special Events provides a discussion of a "non-typical day" event that is likely to be
held at the facility, primarily during training camp.
• Summary and Proposed Mitigation documents the results of the analysis and
identifies measures that are necessary to offset potential transportation impacts, if
necessary.
Project location and Description
The project is located on the Baxter site on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in
Renton. The property is west ofl-405 and north of NE 44"' Street as shown in Figure 1.
The Burlington Northern Santa re (BNSF) railroad tracks are on the east side of the
property. The site will be the furure location of the Seahawks' Headquarters. The site u,-jj]
primarily be used for corporate offices and athletic training.
The site is currently in the preliminary planning stages and is shown in Figure 2. The site
proposes an indoor practice strucrure, outdoor practice fields, training facility, and
administration space. The site is expected to accommodate approximately 150 staff and
65 players. All the players are not on-site daily, thus daily on-site personnel is expected to
be about 200 people on a typical work day. The site .,,-jj] also have a small team store,
which will primarily service team and staff needs, but will also be open to the public
during normal business hours.
The Transpo Group I Page 1
~eahawks' Head.quc1,rter_s "--·-··· _____ ....... __ Septembe~ 20_06
The new facility will also accommodate the annual training camp. Parking for fans
attending training camp (over staff and player parking) will be accommodated off-site,
no formal event management plans have been defined at this early point in the planning
process. Currently 300 parking spaces are planned on-site. Access to the existing
property is currently provided by two at-grade driveways from Ripley Lane. Preliminary
discussions between the Seab.awks and the BNSF railroad have commenced regarding a
third (new) crossing, located approximately halfway between the existing crossings.
Study Approach
The approach for this analysis was developed by the City of Renton staff. The analysis
focuses on the weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at the proposed site
driveways and at 3 off-site intersections. The following intersections were selected for
study during the weekday PM peak hour:
• Lake Washington Boulevard/ Ripley Lane;
• I-405 Southbound (SB) Ramps/NE 44'" Street; and
• l-405 Northbound (NB) Ramps/NE 44"' Street (Lake Washington Boulevard).
The project is expected to be complete in year 2008. The following sections document
existing, future baseline (without-project), and future '>'~th-project conditions within the
study area. Project impacts are identified by comparing forecast "~th-project conditions
against forecast baseline conditions. Potential mitigation measures are identified where
necessary to offset these impacts.
The Transpo Group I Page 2
r Figure 1
Site Vicinity
Seahawks Headquarters
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Faciilty\graph1cs\Seahawks_graphic01 <A> robertm 08124106 14:34
• N
NOT TO SCALE
li The
ra~
Group
'
''
Figure 2
Site Plan
Seahawks Headquarters
M:\06106039 Seahawks Practice Fac1lity\graphics\Seahawks....9raph1c01 <8> robertm 08/24/0614:33
• N
NOTTO SCALE
'
'
The
Tran~
Group
Seahawks' Head_qu_arters .. -----·-
Existing Conditions
This section of the report provides an inventory of existing transportation conditions
throughout the study area. This inventory serves as the foundation from which future
traffic conditions are forecast and evaluated. The following paragraphs describe the
vicinity roadway network, existing traffic volumes and operations.
Roadway Network
The following roadways comprise the primary roadway system in the project site vicinity.
Furthermore, these roadways would accommodate a majority of the project-generated
traffic and, in doing so, would experience the greatest project impacts. The following
paragraphs describe the general characteristics of these roadways.
I-405 is a north-south interstate freeway facility providing regional access to the area. In
the project vicinity, l-405 is six lanes (two general purpose lanes and one HOV lane in
both directions). The NE 44"' Street SB and N 30"' Street NB onramps have HOV
bypasses, and all onramps are metered.
Lake Washington Boulevard is classified as a collector arterial within the study area.
Lake Washington Boulevard extends south to its terminus at Park Drive, and to the
north turns into NE 44"' Street as the roadway crosses over l-405. At the intersection of
the l-405 >iB Ramps, Lake Washington Boulevard continues north as a minor arterial
into the City of Newcastle. The roadway has one travel lane in each direction, \.vith a
center turn lane at several locations, and has bike lanes on both sides. The posted speed
limit on Lake Washington Boulevard is 25 mph.
NE 44'h Street is a collector arterial connecting Lake Washington Boulevard on the west
with Lincoln Avenue NE to the east, and connecting with 1-405 as a fully-directional
service interchange. NE 44" Street is three lanes wide "'~th no sidewalks on the west side
of 1-405, and five lanes wide with sidewalk on both sides cast ofl-405 as it turns into
Lincoln Avenue NE. The posted speed limit on NE 44"' Street is 25 mph.
Ripley Lane is a two-lane local access road beginning just west of the BNSF railroad
tracks, crossing the tracks, and connecting to Hazelwood Lane, which in turn connects
to Lake Washington Blvd west of the NE 44"' interchange. South of that connection, a
second shott segment of Ripley lane extends from Lake Washington Boulevard
east\vard.
Traffic Volumes
The weekday AM and PM peak hour was selected for the analysis since it is the ti.me
period that typically accounts for the highest background traffic volumes, and thus
results in the most congested periods for a traffic analysis. Turning movement counts
were provided by the City from September 2005. Existing weekday AM and PM peak
hour traffic volumes at study intersections arc summarized in Figure 3.
The Transpo Group I Page 5
r
INTERSECTION 1
O (01
10 (10) l 'o (301
--' '-
101101) ( 301101
122(943)--326(167)
01101, ( 101101 --1 r-10 ([)) 10 (10)
1010)
Figure 3
INTERSECTION 2
3111
177 (72) l 142 (53)
--' '-
152 (971)-
8(121!
-189(115)
( 252 (320)
Existing (2006) AM & PM Peak Hour Turning Movements
Seahawks Headquarters
M:\06106039 Seahawks Pract~e Facilitylgraphics\Seahawks_graphic01 <C> robertm 09/W06 09:04
• N
NOT TO SCALE
INTERSECTION 3
17 (22)
292 (304) j 4B (15)
--' '-
81 (568) ) ( 49 (B4)
151 (113)--139 [121)
62 (343)f ( 5611391 --1 r-10 (10) 142 (68)
2361801
LEGEND
X PM PEAK HOUR
(X) AM PEAK HOUR
T~~
Group
Seahawks: _Headqu_~rters September_,2006
During the weekday AM peak hour there is a distinct commuter travel pattern with
relatively high traffic volumes. Eastbound on Lake Washington Boulevard there are over
950 vehicles approaching the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection
during the AM peak hour (7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.). Most of this traffic travels through the
I-405 SB Ramps intersection along NE 44"' Street to the I-405 NB Ramps intersection.
At the NE 44"' Street/1-405 NB Ramps intersections over half of the traffic volume
turns left onto Lake Washington Boulevard, a third of the volume turns right onto I-405
NB and the remaining volume continues through to Lincoln/',, venue NE. The weekday
PM peak hour counts are significantly lower and more evenly distributed within the
snidy area.
Traffic Operations
A level of service (LOS) analysis was conducted for the study intersections under
existing conditions. Level of service is a qualitative measure of the performance of an
intersection. Levels of service values range from LOS A, indicating good operation and
low vehicle delays, to LOS F, which indicates congestion and longer vehicle delays.
Appendi..~ /\ contains a detailed explanation of LOS criteria and definitions.
Synchro v.6.0 (Build 612) was used to evaluate intersection levels of service based on
2000 Highway Capacity Manual (l-!CM) (Transportation Research Board, 2000)
methodologies. Existing traffic volumes, lane geometries, and traffic controls were used
to estimate existing traffic operations for the study intersections. Currently all study
intersections are unsignalized. Table 1 shows the LOS results for the study intersections.
The detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix B of this report.
Table l. Existing (2006) AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
# Intersection LOS 1 Delay' WM' LOS Delay WM
Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Ln E 45 8 58 B 13.9 SB
2 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'h St F >80.0 58 F 63.6 SB
3 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44'h St F >79.8 NA D 2 5.4 NA
1. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle
3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized rntersections.
As Table 1 shows, during the weekday AM peak hour each of the three intersections
have approaches that operate at LOS E or F. This is primarily caused by the high
eastbound traffic volumes during the weekday AM peak hour. Operations during the PM
peak hour are improved with only the southbound approach ofl-405
SB Ramps/NE 44'" Street operating at LOS F.
The Transpo Group I Page 7
Seahaw~s '. _!=I_E:~j q_~ a_rt .. e ... r .s_ ..... Septen_,ber 2_006
Future Baseline Conditions
A future 2008 Baseline (Without-project) analysis was developed to identify forecast
traffic conditions without the development of the proposed project. These evaluations
establish a baseline for identifying project impacts, which will be based upon a
comparison of without-project traffic conditions to with-project conditions. The future
roadway net\vork, traffic volumes, and traffic operations are defined in this section.
Traffic Volumes
Year 2008 baseline traffic volumes were established with a two step process. First a 2.0
percent annual growth rate was applied to the existing traffic volumes. Then local
pipeline trips were added to the appropriate turning movements resulting in the baseline
traffic volumes. Pipeline trips result from approved projects that have yet to be
constructed. The only pipeline project that was included was the Barbee Mill project.
This approach was based on guidance provided by City staff. Figure 4 shows the future
2008 baseline traffic volumes for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. These volumes
will be used to estimate year 2008 baseline conditions.
Planned Transportation Improvements
Based on information provided by City staff, the 1-405 Ramps/NE 44's Street
intersections are planned to be signalized by year 2008. WSDOT will be constructing this
improvement and planned to have it completed by year 2006, which is why it is assumed
as a near-term condition in the Port Quendall report. This project is behind schedule,
but should be complete prior to year 2008. The planned improvements are as follows:
• 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44,. Street: li signal will be installed at this location along
with an eastbound right-turn lane.
• 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44"' Street: A signal will be installed at this location along
with a northbound left-tum pocket, an eastbound right-turn pocket, and a
southbound left-turn pocket.
These improvements "ill be assumed as a 2008 baseline condition in the traffic
operations analysis.
Other Improvements (Long-range)
The I-405 Congestion Relief and Bus Rapid Transit Projects (1-405 Corridor Program)
has identified significant improvements for 1-405, as well as the surface streets along NE
44m },venue. In the Renton area 2 general purpose lanes in each direction are planned.
The 1-405/NE 44m Street interchange will be completely rebuilt into a tight-diamond
configuration. 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'h Street will be reconstructed to accommodate a
southbound right-turn lane and a double left-turn lane, 3 eastbound lanes, and
westbound will have 2 through lanes and 2 double left-turns. l-405 NB Ramps will be
separated from Lake Washington Boulevard. The new 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44'" Street
intersection >will have 2 eastbound through lanes and a double left-turn, a northbound
left-turn with a double right-turn, and 3 westbound lanes. The new Lake Washington
The Transpo Group I Page 8
Sea~awk_s' ~eadqu_arters
Boulevard intersection will be realigned across from the !\l[cDonalds driveway. This
intersection will have 2 eastbound through lanes with a double left-turn and 2
westbound through lanes.
These improvements are not expected to be completed until year 2018 and were not
included in the analysis of baseline conditions. When they are fully implemented, traffic
operations should improve, all other factors being equal.
Traffic Operations
Future traffic operations in the study area were evaluated based on the year 2008 forecast
traffic volumes and roadway improvements described above (excluding the long-range
improvements). This analysis uses the same methodologies discussed in the evaluation of
existing levels of service. Signal timing parameters were developed to remain similar as
those used in the Port Qucndall report. Table 2 summarizes the weekday AM and PM
baseline level of service results. The detailed LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix
B.
Table 2. Baseline Weekday AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary
AM 2008 Baseline PM 2008 Baseline
V/C' or V/C or
# Intersection LOS' Delay2 WM' LOS Delay WM
Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Ln F 64.6 SB C 16.4 SB
2 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'0 St F 90.4 1.09 B 15.3 0.49
3 l-40S NB Ramps/NE 44'" St B 19.0 0.60 B 1 5.3 0.47
1. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology.
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle
3. Volume-to-capacity ratio reported for signalized intersections
4. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections
A.s Table 2 shows, due to the continued high weekday ,'\..\1 peak hour traffic volumes
both Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane and I-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'' Street are
expected to operate at LOS F. 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44"' Street is expected to improve
to LOS B due to the new signal and improved channelization. During the weekday PM
peak hour all three intersections are expected to operate at LOS C or better.
The Transpo Group I Page 9
r
INTERSECTION 1
o )01 10 (10) 20 {JO)
_; '-
101101) \.30(10)
165 (1035) --405 (195)
0 (10) t ( 10 (10( -, j r
10 (OJ 10 (10)
10 (0)
Figure 4
INTERSECTION 2
5 (5)
195 (80) j 150 (55)
_; '-
185 (1055) -
15(25)")
-25'J(120)
( 260 (335)
Baseline (2008) AM & PM Peak Hour Turning Movements
Seahawks Headquarters
M:\06106039 Seahawks Practice Faciliiy\grapnics\Seahawks_graah1c01 <D> rot>ertm 09/14/06 09:03
• N
NOTTO SCALE
INTERSECTION 3
20 (25)
320 (320) ! 50 (15)
_; '-
95 (605) ) \._ 50 (85)
170 (135) --165 (130)
70 (370) t ( 60 (145)
""'j r 25 (15) '. 50 (70)
245 (85)
~
X PM PEAK HOUR
(X) AM PEAK HOUR
The
Tran~o
Group
Seahawks' He~99-~a~~~~-
Project Impacts
This section highlights forecast traffic conditions with the proposed project. The results
were compared to baseline traffic conditions to identify project impacts. A description of
project trip generation, trip distribution, and future traffic operations with the proposed
project is provided in this section.
Trip Generation
Project trip generation estimates were developed based upon information contained in
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (Th Edition, 2003). Trip
Generation is a nationally recognized and locally accepted method for determining trip
generation for private and public developments. It is developed from surveys and studies
conducted throughout the nation for a wide variety of commercial, industrial,
institutional, residential, and recreational land uses. The application of the !TE rates
provides estimates of the total trip generation for each land use.
The primary function of this site v.ill be for the Seahawks' Headquarters. The land use
from the ]TE Tnj, Generation manual that best matches this proposed use is the
Corporate Headquarters (!TE LU #714). This use is a single tenant office building with
typical support uses. This is how this site will function most of the time "~th players
showing up for training and meetings on a typical day. The site will also have a 2,000 sf
team store, which will primarily service team and staff needs, but will also be open to the
public during normal business hours. Trips associated with the team store were
estimated using ]TE Specialty Retail (!TE LU #814). Table 3 shows the estimated
weekday daily, AM, and PM trip generation for a site which expects to have 200
employees on a typical work day and a small retail store.
Table 3. Trip Generation
Project Trips 1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Size Daily Total In Out Total In Out
Corporate Headquarters (LU#714) 200 emp' 466 109 101 8 106 12 94
Specialty Retail (LU#8 l 4) 2.000 sf 89 NA' NA NA lQ 1 .§.
Total Project Trips 555 109 101 8 116 16 100
l. Retail trip rates from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7'" Edition
2. emp = employees.
3. NA= Specialty retail stores typically do not generate trips during the weekday AM commuter peak hour.
As Table 3 shows, on a typical work day the project is expected to generate 555 new
daily trips with approximately 109 and 116 occurring in the weekday A:'v[ and PM peak
hours, respectively.
Project Trip Distribution/Ass nment
Project trip distribution is based on the nearby recently completed Port Quendall traffic
analysis (CH2M Hill -Julv 7, 2006). The Port Quendall project, which includes a
The Transpo Group I Page 11
Seahawks' Headguarters "·
significant office component, based their trip distribution to the surrounding street
network on the distributions provided by the 1-405 / NE 44" Street Interchange Project Accen
Point Decision &port, February 2001. The Decz:Cion &port distributions were based on the
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) planning model. The Seahawks' Headquarters
trip distributions and assignment are shown in Figure 5. The project trip distributions are
as follows:
• 30% of the project trips would access the site from 1-405 to/from the north;
• 3% of the project trips would access the site from Lake Washington Boulevard
to/from the north, on the east side ofI-405;
• 4% of the project trips would access the site from Lincoln Avenue NE to/from
the south, on the east side ofI-405;
• 48% of the project trips would access the site from 1-405 to/from the south; and
• 15% of the project trips would access the site from Lake Washington Boulevard
to/ from the south, west of I-405.
Traffic Volume
The project generated traffic (Figure 5) was added to the baseline traffic volumes to
obtain the "~th-project volumes for the study intersections illustrated in Figure 6. These
are the volumes used to estimate project impacts in the operations analysis.
Traffic Operation impacts
A level of service analysis was conducted for with-project conditions in order to quantify
traffic operations in the study area with the proposed Seahawks' Headquarters. The same
HCM 2000 methodologies were applied and all intersection parameters such as
channelization, intersection control, and signal timings were held consistent v.rith those
used in the evaluation of baseline conditions to measure the degree of impact of the
proposed project. Table 4 shows the results of the with-project level of service, baseline
conditions are provided for comparison purposes. Tbe detailed LOS worksheets are
provided in Appendix B.
The Transpo Group I Page 12
Seahawks' Headquarters--·-·--·------~------_Sept.emb~r.2006
Table 4. With-Project and Baseline AM and PM peak hour LOS Summary
Baseline With-Project
V/C1 or V/C or
# Intersection LOS 1 Delay2 WM' LOS Delay WM
AM Peak Hour
Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Ln F 64.6 SB F 110.7 SB
2 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'" St F 90.4 1.09 F 86.7 1.09
3 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44" St B 19.0 0.60 C 22.0 0.77
PM Peak Hour
I Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Ln C 16.4 SB D 31.3 SB
2 1-405 SB Ramps/NE 44'1' St B 15.3 0.49 B 16.0 0.52
3 1-405 NB Ramps/NE 44'" St B 15.3 0.47 B 14.9 0.47
1 Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity·Manual methodology
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
l Volume-to-capacity ratio reported for signalized intersections.
4 Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections.
City of Renton code states that a development is expected to maintain the same level of
service with their development that would be anticipated under baseline (horizon year)
conditions if the site were not developed (unless the baseline year level of service is C or
above). Based on this criteria the proposed project does not degrade the level of service
standards when cotnpared to baseline conditions.
As shown, project impacts are not noticeable at either of the signalized intersections. In
fact, the average delay per vehicle is expected to decrease in some instance since the
project "-ill add traffic to non-critical turning movements. Project traffic volumes arc
primarily traveling in the opposite direction of most of the commuter traffic. Commuters
are typically outbound from the general study area during the weekday AM peak hour,
while most project trips will be inbound. Just the opposite "-ill be true during the PM
peak hour. Since project trips are not significantly impacting commuter volumes, the
impacts on the signalized study intersections are minor, as shown in Table 4.
Impacts are more noticeable at Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane. During the
AM peak hour, the intersection will operate at LOS F with or without the project. Delay
is calculated to increase from 65 to over 80 seconds. However, this is largely caused by
the heavy traffic volume on Lake Washington Boulevard; only 7 A.M peak hour project
trips impact the southbound movement. During the weekday PM peak hour the
southbound left-tum at Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane degrades from LOS C
to LOS D with the project traffic. This change in LOS only applies to the southbound
minor street approach and does not effect traffic on Lake Washington Boulevard. The
intersection as a whole is forecast to operate at LOS A with 7.7 seconds oi average
vehicle delay.
Site Access
Three site access driveways are proposed to the site from Ripley Lane. The third access
is being negotiated with BNSF, which would be in the middle of the property. The
southern most access v.rill be an access to the maintenance shed and will only be used by
maintenance personnel. The middle access (proposed new) will be the primary access
The Trans po Group I Page 1 3
Seahawks'_ Headquarter_s __ _________ September 2006
driveway. The northern most driveway would provide access to a private parking lot for
coaches, players, and service vehicles. Thus, for traffic analysis purposes t:v.ro drive\vays
v.rill provide access to the site, no traffic would be assigned to the maintenance driveway.
Since the timiog of the third driveway is unknown, the site access will be evaluated v.-ith a
1 driveway scenario and a 2 driveways scenario (assuming no traffic is assigned to the
southern maintenance driveway).
The baseline volumes on Ripley Lane are relatively low. There are 40 southbound and 20
northbound weekday AM peak hour trips and 30 southbound and 50 northbound
weekday PM peak hour trips. No turning lanes were assumed for the analysis. Level of
service analysis consistent v.-ith HCM 2000 methodologies was conducted at the
driveways under two driveway scenarios, which are (assuming no project trips assigned
to the maintenance driveway): 2 primary access points and 1 access point. The results of
the analysis are shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Site Driveway AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Intersection LOS1 Delay1 WM' LOS Delay WM
Two Drive.ways
North Driveway/Ripley Lane A 8.5 EB A 8.5 EB
Middle Driveway/Ripley Lane A 8.5 EB A 8.9 EB
One. Drive.way
North Driveway/Ripley Lane A S.5 EB A 8.8 EB
1. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology
2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle.
l Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections
As the results in Table 5 show, the site access driveways are expected to operate well
during both the typical weekday AM and PM peak hours under either scenario. The
driveways operate well due to the low traffic volumes on Ripley Lane. Ripley Lane traffic
volumes are unlikely to change much in the future since Ripley Lane only serves
residential dwellings along Lake Washington to the north and there is little/ to no area
for future development north of the project site.
The Trans po Group I Page 14
r
(15)
Figure 5
....
(30)\ ' 5 30
(2)
(0)
(1) t 'I 1
' (4) ....
(4) I· t 48 a
+ : (49) ....
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Seahawks Headquarters
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Facility\graph1cs\Seahawks_graphic01 <E> robertm 08/2410614:29
• N
NOTTO SCALE
LEGEND 0 a PERCENT TRIP DISHl3JTION
PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
X PM PEAK HOUR
{X) = AM PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION 1
O jO)
25 (11) 105 (37) .,.,, '-
12 [25) ) l_ 44 [96)
165 (1035) --405 (195)
0 [JO) I ( 10 [10[ --1~ 10 (0) 10 (10)
10 (0)
Figure 6
INTERSECTION 2
5 [5)
200 (110) 1150 (55) .,.,, '-
222 (1058)-
63 (291!
-259 (1761
( 260 (335)
INTERSECTION 3
20 j'5)
320 (323) 50 (15) .,.,, '-
• N
NOTTO SCALE
96 [605) ) l_ 50 (85)
174(136)--166 (134)
100(372)1 (60(145) -, 1 ~ 33 (64) 150 (70)
245 (85)
LEGEND
X PM PEAK HOUR
(X) AM PEAK HOUR
The
'
With-Project (2008) AM & PM Peak Hour Turning Movements Tran§OO
Seahawks Headquarters Group
M:106106039 Seahawks Practice Fac1litylgraph1cs\Seahawks_graphic01 <F> robertm 09/14/06 09:02
__ Seahawks' _Headquarters _ _____ September_2_0()_6
Events "Non-Typical Day"
A "non-typical day" event will be limited primarily to training camp. Traffic for this
event will likely not occur during the commuter AM and PM peak hours. Traffic
management plans will be developed for this occasion to provide remote parking
location(s) and shuttle services.
The Scahawks' training camp will generate increased activity at the site beyond the
normal use of the corporate headquarters and training uses. The training camp is
typically about 25 days in length and begins approximately August 1" of each calendar
year. Training camp activities would take place at the site on approximately 20 of these
days. Five of the days the team is playing exhibition games or having full
scrimmages, neither of which will occur at the Renton location. Thus, the on-site activity
during training camp would be confined to approximately 20 days.
Over the course of these 20 days, the Seahawks invite fans and fan groups to the facility
for such activities as viewing training camp or seeking autographs. The fans would not
park on-site, but would park at a remote location(s) and be shuttled to the site.
At the existing facility in Cheney, Washington, these activities typically attract
approximately 200 fans per day. In order to conservatively estimate impacts, the
Seahawks have estimated that the Renton facility has the potential to attract 1,500 to
2,000 fans on a weekday and up to 2,500 on a weekend day, but actual attendance may
be lower. The potentially larger weekend day numbers may occur 2 or 3 times per
year. The fans would not commute to the Renton site, but would drive and park at off-
site location(s) and be shuttled to/from the facility from that remote location via
buses. It is unlikely that two or more buses would be at the project site at any one time.
These events would last throughout the day, and arrivals and departures spaced
throughout the day (i.e., no large event where the full number would attend and leave at
one time). The beginning and end of these activities would not coincide with the
commuter AM or PM traffic peaks on surrounding streets. Events would typically begin
at approximately 10:30 AM and conclude by 3:30 PM.
Therefore, no significant increase in site auto traffic would occur above typical levels.
However, to assure that fans are well directed to the off-site parking location(s), it may
be appropriate to develop an Event Traffic Management Plan (ETMP) which would
include:
• Signage
• Shuttle bus pick-up and drop-offlocation(s)
• Planned travel route
• Communication protocol with the City of Renton, and/ or appropriate other
stakeholders.
The Trans po Group I Page 1 7
_Seahaw_ks' __ Headquarters __ ... ·-··------· .. ·-··-· _ -----------~------------.. __ Sep_tember 2006
Mitigation Measures
The following summarizes the mitigation measures identified for the Seahawks'
Headquarters:
• The addition of project-generated traffic would not cause any study intersection
to degrade level of service below City requirements. No mitigation is required.
• The site will host occasional events that will attract more people than projected
on a typical day. These events will largely be limited to training camp and would
occur not more than 20 days per year, primarily in late July and August. An
Event Traffic Management Plan (ETMP) would be developed to provide parking
and shuttling services from off-lite location(s) for special events.
The Transpo Group I Page 18
Appendix A: Level Of Service Criteria
Highway Capacity Manual, 2000
Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of the average total vehicle delay
of all movements through an intersection. Vehicle delay is a method of quantifying several intangible
factors, including driver discomfort, frustration, and lost travel time. Specifically, LOS criteria are
stated in terms of average delay per vehicle during a specified time period (for example, the P~ peak
hour). Vehicle delay is a complex measure based on many variables, including signal phasing (i.e.,
progression of movements through the intersection), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes \vith
respect to intersection capacity. Table 1 shows LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described
in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000).
Table 1.
Level of
Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Average Control Delay
(sec/veh)
~10
>10 -20
>20 -35
>35 -55
>5 5 -80
>80
General Description
(Signalized Intersections)
Free Flow
Stable Flow (slight delays)
Stable flow (acceptable delays)
Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasiona!ly wait
through more than one signal cycle before proceeding)
Unstable flow (intolerable delay)
Forced flow (jammed)
Unsignalizcd intersection LOS criteria can be further reduced into two intersection types: all-way
stop-controlled and two-way stop-controlled. All-way, stop-controlled intersection LOS 1s expressed
in terms of the average vehicle dday of all of the movements, much like that of a signalized
intersection. Two-way, stop-cont.rolled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average vehicle
delay of an individual movement(s). This is because the performance of a two-way, stop-controlled
intersection is more closely reflected in terms of its individual movements, rather than its
performance overall. For this reason, LOS for a tv.ro-way, stop-controlled intersection is defined in
terms of its individual movements. With this in mind, total average vehicle delay (i.e., average delay
of all movements) for a two-way, stop-controlled intersection should be viewed with discretion.
Table 2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections (both all-way and two-way, stop-
controllcd).
Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service Average Control Delay (sec/veh)
A 0 -10
B > 10 · 15
C >15 -25
D >25·35
E >35 -50
F >50
Appendix B: Level of Service Worksheets
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1 · lake Washin9ton Blvd & Riele:i:'. lane ,,
---+ -. f +-.__ " Movement EBL EST EBR i YfB(.; , WBT WBR NBL
Lane Configurations , J. 4,
Sign Control Free Free
Grade 4% -4%
Volume (veh/h) 10 943 10 10 167 10 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.90
Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 1025 11 15 249 15 0
Plldestrians
Lane Width (fl)
Walking Speed (ftls)
Percent Blockage
Righi tum flare (veh)
Median type
Median storage vch)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX. platoon unblocked
vC, confl1cling \/olume 264 1036 1352
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
\/C2, stage 2 con/ \/DI
vCu, unblocked vol 264 1036 1352
tC. single is) 4.1 4.1 7.9
tC, 2 stage (s)
IF (s) 2 2 2.2 4.2
pO queue free % 99 98 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 1306 671 84
Direction. Lane #. EB1:EB·f W1Ft:' N~.1· Sl31
Volume Total 11 1036 279 11 53
Volume Left 11 0 15 0 40
Volume Right 0 11 15 11 13
cSH 1306 1700 671 203 140
Volume lo Capacity 0.01 0.61 0.02 0.05 0.3B
Queue Ler"lgth 95th (ft} 1 0 2 4 40
Con1rol Delay ts) 7.8 0.0 0.8 23.7 45.8
Lane LOS A A C ' Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.8 23.7 45.B
Approach LOS C E
lntarseclion Summ!!i'::':'i,
Average Delay 2.2
lrilersection Capacity Utilization 65.8% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (rni11) 15
M \06106039 Seahawks Prac11ce fac1lity\Synchra\AM Existing.sy7
lhe Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
t ~
NBT:< tJff~
4,
Stop
3%
0 10
0.90 0.90
0 11
Nor"le
1346 1030
1346 1030
7.3 7.0
4.7 4.0
100 95
103 203
"'"·=:-
C
Existing AM
... + .,,
SBL SBT·· SB§:
4,
Stop
-3%
30 0 10
0.75 0.75 0.75
40 0 13
None
1344 1344 257
1344 1344 257
7.3 6.7 6.4
3.7 4.2 3.5
64 100 98
110 137 745
·I''!
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Seahawk's Headquarters
2: NE 44th St & 1-405 SB Rames Existing AM ,,
---+ -. f +-.__
" t ~ ... + .,,
Movement ESL EBT ESR WBL WST :WPR NB!: NEH NSR :;;:ssu ·sar·: SBR
Lane Configurations " , t ,f r
Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop
Grade 4% -4% 3% -4%
Volume (veh/11) 0 971 12 320 115 0 0 0 0 53 1 72
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.73 0.73 0.73
Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 1055 13 444 160 0 0 0 0 73 1 99
Pedes!rians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (Ns)
Percent Blockage
Right tum flare {\/eh) 9
Median type None None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, connicting volume 160 1068 2161 2111 1062 2111 2117 160
vC 1. stage 1 conf vol
\/C2, stage 2 conf vol
\/Cu, unblocked vol 160 1068 2161 2111 1062 2111 2117 160
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 8.5 6.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3., 3.5 4.0 3.3
pO queue free % 100 31 100 100 100 0 91 69
cM capacity (veh/h) 1407 648 13 16 271 16 16 880
Dlrectlan1 lane# · EB 1 wa j · ws :i? ::S:1:r:t;Y
Volume Total 1068 444 160 173
Volume left 0 444 0 73
Volume Righi 13 0 0 99
cSH 1700 648 1700 38
Volume to Capacity 0.63 0.69 0.09 4.59
Queue Length 95th {ft) 0 135 0 Ee
Control Delay (s) 0.0 21.8 0.0 Err
Lane LOS C F
Approach Delay (s) 0.0 16.0 Err
Approach LOS F
lriters.jctlon Summa!)! :''/~
Average Delay 940.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.9% JCU Level of Service E
Analysis Period (min) 15
The T ranspo Group Page 2
M:106106039 Seahawks Practice Fac11ily1Synchm\AM Exisling.sy7 Synchro 6 Report •
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: NE 44th St & 1-405 NB Rames
.,> --. ' +-' .._
Mov~ment ESL,, !=BT. liBR -WBbii>WBT W8R N8L
Lane Conliguraliuns , I, , t
Sign Cantml Stop Stop
Volume (vph) 568 113 343 139 121 0 10
Peak Hour Factor O.l:l4 0.9' 0.94 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.90
Hourly How rale (vph) 604 120 365 162 141 0 11
Pirectio11;,l:ane # E.E.U '· EB 2 WB.t W82-·Nli:1 sSB·1 ·
Volume Total {vph) 604 485 162 141 176 411
Volume left (vph) 604 0 162 0 11 18
Volume Right (vph) 0 365 0 0 76 366
Hadj (s) 0.55 -0.48 0.55 0.05 -0.06 -0.49
Departure Headway (s) 8.0 6.9 8.7 8.2 7.8 6.7
Degree Utilization, x 1.34 0.93 0.39 0.32 0.38 0.76
Capacity (vehlh) 454 509 391 422 421 528
Control Delay (s) 190.3 49.9 15.9 13.7 15.6 27.9
Approach Delay (s) 127.8 14.9 15.6 27.9
Approach LOS F B C D
lnt!i'fSectlOn 'Summar)'. . °/,,_-:---~)'!,!
Delay 79.8
HCM Level or Service F
Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.9% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M·\06106039 Seahawks Practice Facility\Synchro\A.M Ex1sting.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
t ~
NBTi.VNBR
"' Slop
80 68
0.90 0.90
89 76
C
Existing AM
'-. ! .;
SBL' · SBT<0SBR
"' Stop
15 22 304
O.B3 0.83 0.83
18 27 366
Synchro 6 Repor1
Page 3
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1 · Lake Washin9ton Blvd & Rieel~ Lane
/ --+ • f <-' "' Movement EBL EBT · EBR:<".WBL;;, ·~s'( · WBR NBL
Lane Configurations , t, .;,
Sign control Free Free
Grade 4% ~%
Volume {veh/h) 10 122 0 10 326 30 10
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.46
Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 128 0 11 366 34 22
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal {ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vG, conflicting 11olume 400 128 570
vC 1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf 11ol
vCu, unblocked vol 400 128 570
tC. single (s) 4.1 4,1 7.3
tC. 2 stage (s)
IF (s) 2.2 2,2 3J
pO queue free % 99 99 94
cM capac1ly {vahlh) 1159 1457 394
DirecliQn Lane# I;~ 1 EB·2 .WB 1 : N6·1'· :·ss.1 ,",
Volume Total 11 126 411 65 45
Volume Left 11 0 11 22 30
Volume Right 0 0 34 22 15
cSH 1159 1700 1457 487 451
Volume to Capacity O.Q1 o.oa 0.01 0.13 0.10
Queue Length 95th (ft} 1 0 1 11 8
Control Delay (s) 8,1 0,0 0.3 13.5 13.9
Lane LOS A A B a
Approach Delay (s) 0,6 0,3 13.5 13.9
Approach LOS a B
lnteraectJon Summa!}'.
Average Delay 2,6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.1% ICU Level of Service
Analys,s Period (min) 15
M.\06106039 Seahawks Practice Fac11ity\Synchm\PM Existing.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
t ~
NIH>'NBR
.;,
Stop
3%
10 10
0.46 0.46
22 22
None
572 128
572 126
6.7 6,4
4.2 3,5
95 98
402 880
·n)•;W; ,ht!'·,·,,,
''i''
A
Existing PM
'. + .,,
aBL SBT SOR
.;,
Stop
-3%
20 0 10
0.67 0.67 0.67
30 0 15
None
588 555 383
568 555 383
7.1 6.5 6.2
3.5 4.0 3.3
92 100 98
389 433 664
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
i
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: NE 44th St & t-405 SB Rames
/ --+ • f <-' "' MoV8rrient EBl EBT EBR WBl;' Wl}r'.'WBR NBL
Lane Configurations t, , t
Sign Control Free Free
Grade .<!% ~%
Volume (veh/h) 0 152 8 262 189 0 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.90
Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 163 9 315 "' 0 0
Pedestrians
Lene Width (ft)
Walking Speed {ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right tum flare (veh)
Median type
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (fl)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume '36 172 1145
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vG2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 236 172 1145
IC, single (s) 4,1 4.1 7.1
1C, 2 stage (s)
IF {s) 2.2 2.2 3,5
pO queue free % 100 70 100
cM capacity (veh/h) 1337 1405 105
Dlfecllo!l;L!ll1!i# ., ' l;:lP {\1Vff1' !.WB 2 sa1··
Volume Total 172 315 236 398
Volume Left 0 315 0 175
Volume Right 9 a 0 219
cSH 1700 1405 170() 389
Volume to Capacity 0.10 0.22 0.14 1.02
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 22 0 318
Control Delay (s) 0,0 8 3 0.0 63.6
Lane LOS A F
Approach Delay (s) 0,0 4.7 63.6
Approach LOS F
lnte,section S1.1mtn~ ""(
A11erage Delay 24.9
Intersection Capaci1y ULilizalion 40.5% ICU Le11el of Service
Analysis Period (min} 15
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac1l1ty1Synchru\PM E;,;istmg.sy7
The Transpo Group
t
NBT
Stop
3%
0
0.90
0
None
1034
1034
6,5
4.0
100
161
Seahawk's Headquarters
Existing PM
~ '. + .,,
·NeR'.:'-:SBl.'.'0
• ,59r, 'SBR
0
0.90
0
168
168
6.2
3,3
100
879
A
,t ' Stop
-4%
142 3 177
0.81 0.81 0.81
175 4 219
9
None
1034 1036 236
1034 1038 '" 7,1 6.5 6.2
3.5 4,0 3,3
0 96 n
175 180 805
Synchro 6 Reporl
Page 2
I_
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: NE 44th St & 1-405 NB Rames
/ ---+ • f'" +-' .._
Movement EBL·i EBT EBR ' W!:!\:;i'· war: ' W~R' :,NBL
Lane Configurations ' I, ' t
Sign Control Slop Stop
Volume (vph) 81 151 62 56 139 0 10
Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.B6 0.86 0.86 0.90
Hourly flow rats (vph) 86 161 66 65 162 0 11
Oirection 1 Lane# EB 1·· EB 2 WB f?fVi§'2''• NEf1 :::se·1:
Volume Total (vph) 86 227 65 162 431 430
Volume Left (vph) 86 0 65 0 11 58
Volume Right {vph) 0 66 0 0 158 352
Hadj (S) 0.55 -0.15 0.55 0.05 -0.03 .0.43
Departure Headway (s) 8.7 7.9 8.9 8.4 6.9 6.5
Degree Uliliza1ion, x 0.21 0.50 0.16 0.38 0.82 0.78
Capacity (vehlh) 371 411 372 38B 501 529
Control Delay (s) 12.7 17.4 12.4 15.1 34.3 28.9
Approach Delay (s) 16.1 14.4 34.3 28.9
Approach LOS C B D D
lritars-ectlon SummaQ! ·', i' ::isH} ;,
Delay 25.4
HCM Level of Service D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.2% ICU level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Pr.ict1ce Facilily\Synchro\PM Existing.sy7
lhe Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
Existing PM
t ,.. '-. ~ .,,
NBr, :·~Em ' SBL sst:'. seR
.;.
Stop
236 142
0,90 0.90
262 158
C
.;.
Slop
48 17 292
O.B3 0.83 O.B3
58 20 352
'j:H
Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Seahawk Headquarters
1: Lake WashinliJlon Blvd & Rielel Lane AM 2006 Baseline
.,J _. • f +-' ~ t I' '-. + .,,
~ovement EBL ''EBf,;' EBR" warn ;war, ,,WQR NBL,' N'Bi''.'' N§R ·SsL SBT SBR
Lane Canfigurat1ons ' ~ .;.
Sign Control Free Free
Grade 4% -4%
Volume ("eh/h) 10 1035 10 10 195 10 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.90
Hourly flow rate ("ph) 11 1125 11 15 291 15 o
Pedestnans
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Block:age
Rtght turn flare {veh)
Median 1ype
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 203
pX. platoon unblocked
vC, conf11cling volume 306 1136 1494
vC1, stage 1 cont vol
1o'C2, s!age 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked 1.'0l 306 1136 1494
IC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.9
IC, 2 stage (s)
IF (s) 2.2 2.2 4.2
pO queue free % 99 98 100
cM capacity (vehlh} 1260 615 65
Direction. Lane #-· <-EB·t> EB,£ WB· V: N§ 1 ' SB J <
Volume Total 11 1136 321 11 53
Volume Left 11 0 15 0 40
Volume R1ghl 0 11 15 11 13
cSH 1260 1700 615 175 111
Volume to Capat:ity 0.01 0.67 0.02 0.06 0.46
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 2 5 54
Control Delay (s) 7.9 0.0 0.8 27.0 64.6
Lane LOS A A D F
Approach Delay (s) 0.1 0.8 27.0 64.6
Approach LOS D
lnterseciion S1J[l1mii1!}'.
Average Delay 2.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.7% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M:106\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac1hty\SynchrolAM 2008 Baseline.sy7
The Transpo Group
.;.
Stop
3%
a 10
0.90 0.90
0 11
None
1488 1130
1486 1130
7.3 7.0
4.7 4.0
100 94
'2 175
C
.;.
Stop
-3%
30 0 10
0.75 0.75 0.75
40 0 13
None
1400 1486 299
1486 1486 299
7.3 6.7 6.4
3.7 4.2 3.5
54 100 98
86 111 705
Synchro 6 Reµml
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2. NE 44th St & HOS SB Ramps ,,
-+ • • +-.... ..,
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL
Lane Configurations t r , t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) 4% -4%
Total Losl time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DD
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1790 1522 1787 1882
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (eerm) 1790 1522 1787 1882
Volume (vph) 0 1055 25 335 120 0 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.90
AdJ. Flow (vph) 0 1147 27 465 167 0 0
RTOR Reduction {vph) a 0 6 0 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow {vph) a 1147 21 465 167 0 0
Heav:i,:Vehicles (%) 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2%
Turn Type Pe= Prat
Protected Phases 4 3 B
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G {s) 49.0 49.0 22.0 75.0
Effective Green, g (s) 49.0 49.0 22.0 75.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.24 0.83
Clearance Time js) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 975 829 437 1568
vis Ratio Prat c0.64 c0.26 0.09
vis Ratio Perm 0.01
vie Ratio 1.18 0.02 1.06 0.11
Uniform Delay, d1 20.5 9.5 34.0 1.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 0.63
Incremental Delay, d2 90.2 0.1 59.4 0.1
Delay (s) 110.7 95 94.9 1.0
Level of Service F A F A
Approach Delay (s) 108.4 70.1
Approach LOS F E
lnlersettlon SummeCl
HCM Average Control Delay 90.4 HCM Level of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 1.09
Actuated Cycle length (s} 90.0 Sum of lost time {s)
Intersection Capacity Ut1l1zat1on 87.4% JCU Level of Service
Analysis Period {min) 15
C Critical Lane Group
M:106\06039 Seatiawks Practice Facihty\Synchro\AM 2008 Baseline.sy?
The Transpo Group
t
NBT
1900
3%
0
0.90
0
0
0
2%
a.a
A
Seahawk Headquarters
AM 2008 Baseline
~ '. i ..,,
NBR' '"SBL:T ·ser SBR
1900
0
0.90
0
0
0
2%
F
12.0
E
~ f
1900 1900 1900
-4%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
0.96 1.00
1782 1584
0.96 1.00
1782 1584
55 5 80
0.73 0.73 0.73
75 7 110
a 0 101
0 82 9
4% 4% 4%
Split Penn
6 6
6
7.0 7.0
7.0 7.0
0.08 0.08
4.0 4.0
139 123
c0.05
0.01
0.59 0.07
40.1 30.5
1.ao 1.00
17.1 1.1
57.2 39.6
E D
47.1
D
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
i
'
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: NE 44th St & 1-405 NB Rames
/ -+ • • +-.... ..,
Movement E13L' EQT l;Bf!: "Wl3L WBT WBR NBL
lane Configurations , t f ' t f ' Ideal Flow {vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade{%) -3% 0%
Total lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Ulil. F ac1or 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00
Flpb, ped/b1kes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 1779 1872 1591 1752 1845 1532 1594
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.18
Satd. Flow (~rm) 1779 1872 1591 1752 1845 1532 296
Volume (vph) 605 135 370 145 130 85 15
Peak-hour factor, PHF O.Y4 0.94 0.94 0.86 Q.86 0.86 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 644 144 394 169 151 99 17
RTOR Reduc\Jon (vph) 0 0 223 0 0 " 0
lane Group Flow (vph) 644 144 171 169 151 15 17
Conti. Peds. (#/hr} 1 1
Heavt Vehicles\%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 11%
Turn Type Prat Perm Prat Perm Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G {s) 40.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 24.0
Effeclive Green, g (s) 40.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 24.0
Acluated glC Ratio D.44 0.43 0.43 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.27
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 791 811 669 292 287 238 79
vis RaUo Prot c0.36 0.08 c0.10 0.08
vis Ralio Perm 0.11 0.01 0.06
vie RaUo 0.61 0.18 0.25 0.58 0.53 0.06 0.22
Uniform Delay. d1 21.8 15.7 16.2 34.6 34.9 32.4 25.7
Progression Factor 0.27 0.20 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 0.0 0.1 8.1 6.7 0.5 6.1
Delay (s) 6.8 3.1 7.6 42.7 41.7 32.9 31.8
Level of Service A A A D D C C
Approach Delay (s} 6.6 40.0
Approach LOS A D
1nter!ject1on stlmma!:l-'-
HCM Average Control Delay 19.0 HCM Level of SeMce
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60
Aclualed Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time {s)
Intersection Capacity Utu1zation 77.9% ICU Level of service
Analysis Period (min) 15
' Critlcal Lane Group
M \06\06039 Seatiawks Practice Facillty\Synchro\AM 2008 Baseline.sy?
The Transpo Group
t
NBT
).
1900
4%
4.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.93
1.00
1563
1.00
1563
85
0.90
94
33
139
11%
2
24.0
24.0
0.27
4.0
417
c0.09
0.33
26.6
1.00
21
28.7
C
29.0
C
Seahawk Headquarters
~
NBR
1900
70
0.90
76
0
0
11%
B
8.0
D
AM 2008 Baseline
'. i ..,,
SBL SBT SBR
' I,
1900 1900 1900
0%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.86
0.95 1.00
1770 1603
0.57 1.00
1058 1603
15 25 320
0.63 0.83 · 0.83
18 30 3'6
0 "' 0
18 133 0
2% 2% 2%
Perm
6
6
24.0 24.0
24.0 24.0
0.27 0.27
4.0 4.0
262 427
0.08
U.02
0.00 0.31
24.6 26.4
1.00 1.00
0.4 1.9
25.1 28.3
C C
28.2
C
Synctuo 6 Report
P.age 2
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Lake Washington Blvd & Ripley Lane
.,> _. .. • +-.....
"" Movement EBL: EBT · . EBR --WBL' WBT WBR NBL
Lane Configurations ~ 1, 4,
Sign Control Free Free
Grade 4% -4%
Volume (vet1/h) 1D 165 0 10 405 30 1D
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 o.a9 0.89 0.89 0.46
Hourly flow rale (vph) 11 174 0 11 455 34 22
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
PerC{:!nt Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal {ft) 203
pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94
vC, conflicting volume 489 174 704
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, ~tage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 456 174 685
IC, singla (s) 4.1 4.1 7.3
IC, 2 stage {s)
IF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.7
pO queua free % 99 99 93
cM capacity (veh/h) 1038 1403 308
Dll'ebtion, ~n&# :. •·''EB 1 EB-2 WB<'t ,·Na·1> S8'1
Volume Tolel 11 174 500 65 45
Volume Left 11 0 11 22 30
Volume Right 0 0 34 22 15
cSH 1038 1700 1403 398 359
Volume 10 Capacity 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.16 0.12
Queue Length 95th (11) ' 0 1 15 11
Control Delay {s) 8.5 0.0 0.3 15.8 16.4
Lane LOS A A C C
Approach Delay {s) 0.5 0.3 15.6 16.4
Approach LOS C C
lntarsec\ion Summa!Jl
Average Delay 2.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.2% ICU Level ol Service
Analysis Period {min) 15
M.106106039 Seahawks Practice Facility\Synchro\PM 2008 Baseline.sy7
The Transpo Group
---------
Seahawk Headquarters
PM 2008 Baseline
t ~ \. + .,
NBT :: NBR -·· SSL'· SBT !:iBR
4,
Stop
3%
10 10
0.46 0.46
22 22
None
0.94
706 174
687 174
6.7 6.4
4.2 3.5
93 97
323 830
A
4,
Stop
-3%
20 0 10
0.67 0.67 0.67
30 0 15
None
0.94 0.94 0.94
722 669 472
704 669 438
7.1 6.5 6.2
3.5 4.0 3.3
90 100 97
302 350 582
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: NE 44th St & 1-405 SB Ramps
/ -+ " • -' ..... t
Mov~mi;:=nt ESL. EBT>: EBR ;:;WBlli'.:'-.WIH WBR NBL ., NST
Lane Configurations t r ' t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) 4% -4%
To!al Lost lime (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Fac1or 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
FU Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 1844 1567 1805 1900
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Said. Flow (~rm) 1844 1567 1805 1900
Volume (vph) 0 185 15 260 250 0 0
Peek-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 0 199 16 325 312 0 0
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 12 0 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 199 4 325 312 0 0
Heavi'. Vehicles (%i 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1%
Turn Type Perm Prot
Protected Phases 4 3 8
Perrnilled Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.0 14.0 19.0 37.0
Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 14.0 19.0 37.0
Actuated glC Ri:IUO 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.62
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap {vph) 430 366 572 1172
vis Ratio Prot c0.11 c0.18 0.16
vis Ratio Perm 0,00
vie Ratio 0.46 0.01 0.57 0.27
Uniform Delay, d1 19.B 17.7 17.1 5.3
Progression Fac1or 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.66
Incremental Delay, d2 3.6 0.1 3.9 0.5
Delay (s) 23.3 17.7 15.4 4.0
Level of Service C B B A
Approach Delay (s) 22.9 9.8
Approach LOS C A
tntersestlon Summary ,,;<\0:i¥H;i' iii;!'.'<::
HCM Average Control Delay 15.3 HCM Leval of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.49
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost time (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.7% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
' Critical Lane GroLJp
M \06\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac1hty1Synchro1PM 2008 Baseline.sy7
·r he Trans po Group
1900
3%
0
0.90
0
0
0
1%
0.0
A
Seahawk Headquarters
I'
NBR
1900
0
0.90
0
0
0
1%
B
12.0
A
PM 2008 Baseline
'-i .;
SBL SBT SBR
4 r
1900 1900 1900
-4%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
0.95 1.00
1830 1631
0.95 1.00
1830 1631
150 5 195
0.81 0.81 0.81
165 6 241
0 0 1B1
0 191 60
1% 1% 1%
Split Perm
8 6
6
15.0 15.0
15.0 15.0
0.25 0.25
4.0 40
458 408
c0.10
0.04
0.42 0.15
1a.a 17.5
1.00 1.00
2.8 0.8
21.6 18.3
C B
19.8
B
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3; NE 44th St & 1-405 NB Ramps
/ -+ " • -' .....
M()._;~imr:+:,> · · EBL" EBT """ WBL WBT WBR '· NBL
Lane Configurations ' t ' ' t ' ' Ideal Flow {vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) -3% 0%
Total Lost time {s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Ulil. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikos 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Said. Flow {prot) 1814 1909 1623 1770 1863 1549 1751
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.44
Satd. Flow leerm) 1814 1909 1623 1770 1863 1549 '14
Volume (vph) 95 170 70 60 165 50 25
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph) 102 183 75 73 201 61 27
RTOR Reduction {Vph) 0 0 55 0 0 48 0
La11e Group Flow (vph) 102 183 20 13 201 13 27
CMn. Pads. 1111hr) 1 1
Heavl Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1%
Turn Type Prat Pocm Pro! Perm Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8
Permitted Phases 4 B 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 16.0 16.0 7.0 13.0 13.0 25.0
Effective Green, g (s) 10.0 16.0 16.0 7.0 13.0 13.0 25.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.22 0.22 0.42
Clearance Time ;sJ 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vpr"l) 302 509 433 207 404 336 339
vis Ratio Pro! 0.06 c{), 10 0,04 c0.11
11/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.01 0.03
vie Ratio 0.34 0.36 0.05 0.35 0.50 0.04 0.08
Uniform Delay, d1 22.1 17.8 16.3 24.4 20.6 18.6 10.6
Progression Factor 0.57 0.48 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 1.8 0.2 4.7 4 3 0.2 0.5
Delay (s) 15.3 10.3 0.2 29.1 25.0 18.8 11.0
Level of Ser,iice B B A C C B B
Approach Delay (s) 9.6 24.7
Approach LOS A C
lntersectioil'Summ~
HCM Average Control Deiay 15.3 HCM Level of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost 1ime (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.3% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
' Critical Lane Group
M:\06106039 Seahawks Practice Facilily\Sy11chro\PM 2008 Basel111e.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk Headquarters
PM 2008 Baseline
t I' '-i .;
~BT" 'NBR i:!f SBL'i' 'SBT ' SBR
T,
1900 1900
4%
4.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.94
1.00
1738
1.00
1738
245 150
0.94 0.94
261 160
37 0
384 0
1% 1%
2
25.0
25.0
0.42
4.0
724
c0.22
0.53
13.1
1.00
2.8
15.9
B
15.6
B
'
8.0
B
' T,
1900 1900 1900
0%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.86
0.95 1.00
1767 1615
0.38 1.00
712 1615
50 20 320
0.94 0.94 '0.94
53 21 340
0 198 0
53 163 0
1% 1% 1%
Perm
6
6
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
0.42 0.42
4.0 4.0
297 673
0.10
0.07
0.16 0.24
11.0 11.4
1.00 1.00
1.3 0.9
12.3 12.2
B B
12.2
B
Sy11chro 6 Report
Page 2
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Seahawk Headquarters
1: Lake Washin~tan Blvd & Riele~ Lane AM 2006 Wilh-ProJect
/ --~ • ..-' ~ t t" \,. ! .-'
Movem5:nt EBL EBT EBR 'WBL WBT 'WBR "NBL' "NBT-C NBR-· SBL> SIH . SBR
i
Lane Configurations , !, ,I,
Sign Control Free Free
Grade 4% -4%
Volume (veh/h) 25 1035 10 10 195 96 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.90
Hourly now rate \vph) 27 1125 11 15 291 143 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (fl)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Righi turn flare (Veh)
Median lype
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 203
pX, platoon unblocked 0.99 0.99
vC, conflicting volume 434 1136 1592
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 429 1136 1597
lC, single \s) 4.1 4.1 7.9
IC, 2 stage (s)
IF (s) 2.2 2.2 4.2
pO queue free % 98 98 100
cM capacity (vahlh) 1125 615 53
Pir~~lc»>!.' Li'jne ~< --> ,-. l=B ·1 E8•2 WB 1 NB1 SB 1
Volume Total 27 1136 449 11 64
Volume Left 27 0 15 0 49
Volume Right 0 11 143 11 15
cSH 1125 1700 615 175 90
Volume lo Cepacily 0.02 0.67 0.02 0.06 0.71
Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 a 2 5 88
Control Delay (s) 8.3 a.a 0.7 27.0 110.7
Lane LOS A A D F
Approach Delay {s) 0.2 0.7 27.0 110.7
Approach LOS D F
!nt.1i!rn$c~on-summa~
Average Delay 4.7
Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.1% [CU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M.\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac1l1ty1Synchro\AM 2008 W1th_Projecl.sy7
The Transpo Group
L ____ _
,I, ,I,
Stop Slop
3% -3%
0 10 37 0 11
0.90 0.90 0.75 0.75 0.75
0 11 49 0 15
None None
0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
1649 1130 1583 1583 363
1655 1130 1588 1588 357
7.3 7.0 7.3 6.7 6.4
4.7 4.0 3.7 4.2 3.5
100 94 31 100 9B
61 175 72 94 647
:/nFj;ilt'j:'if!i!Jii?";';.;;ij!:'iiii:,··
C
Synchro 6 Repor1
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: NE 44th St & 1"405 SB Ramps
,> -+ • • --' ~ t
Movement EBl-EBT EBR "'WBF' WBT . WBR NBL ·NBT
lane Configurations t r , t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) 4% -4%
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Ulil. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Fil Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Said. Flow (prot) 1790 1522 1787 1882
Fil Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Sald. Flow (eerm) 1790 1522 1787 1882
Volume (\/ph) 0 1058 29 335 176 0 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.90
Adj. Flow (\/ph) 0 1150 32 465 244 0 0
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 1150 24 465 244 0 0
Heavt Vehicles(%) 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2%
Tum Type Pem Prat
Protected Phases 4 3 8
Permitted Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 49.0 49.0 22.0 75.0
Effective Green, g {s) 49.0 49.0 22.0 75.0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.24 0.83
Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 975 829 437 1568
vis Ralio Pro! c0.64 c0.26 0.13
vis Ralio Perm 0.02
vie Ralio 1.18 0.03 1.06 0.16
Uniform Delay, d1 20.5 9.5 34.0 1.4
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.52
Incremental Delay, d2 91.5 0.1 59.5 0.2
Delay (s) 112.0 9.6 94.9 0.9
level of SeNice F A F A
Approach Delay (s) 109.2 62.5
Approach LOS F E
Intersection Summary
HCM Average Control Delay
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio
Actuated Cycle length (s) Sum or lost time (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 87.6% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Penod (min) 15
' Critical Lane Group
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac1!1ty\Synchro\AM 2008 Wilh_Project.sy7
The Transpo Group
1900
3%
0
0.90
0
0
0
2%
0.0
A
Seahawk Headquarters
r
NBR
1900
0
0.90
0
0
0
2%
F
12.0
E
AM 2008 With-Project
'. ! .1
SBL SBT SBR
<! r
1900 1900 1900
-4%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
0.96 1.00
1782 1564
0.96 1.00
1782 1584
55 5 110
0.73 0.7:I U.73
75 7 15'
0 a 139
0 82 12
4% 4% 4%
Split Perm
6 6
6
7.0 7.0
7.0 7.0
0.08 0.08
4.0 4.0
139 123
c0.05
0.01
0.59 0.10
40.1 38.6
1.00 1.00
17.1 1.5
57.2 40.1
E D
46.1
D
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
I
I
!
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: NE 44th St & 1405 NB Rames
,> -+ • • --' ~
M<lV~rri~iit'· EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT,WBR NBL'
lane Canfiguralians , t r , t r ,
Ideal Flaw (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) -:1% 0%
Total lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Ut,1. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, pedlblkes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00
Flpb, pedlbtkes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 1779 1672 1591 1752 1845 1532 15!:!4
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.17
Satd. Flow \eerm) 1779 1872 1591 1752 1845 1532 288
Volume (vµh) 605 136 372 145 134 85 64
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.B6 0.86 0.86 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 644 145 396 169 156 99 71
RTOR Reducuon (vph) a a 224 a 0 64 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 644 145 172 169 156 15 71
conn. Pads. (#/hr) 1 1
Heavi Vehicles(%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 11%
Tum Type Prat Perm Prat Perm P,m
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8
Permitted Phases 4 8 ' Actuated Green, G (s) 40.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 24.0
Effective Green, g (s) 40.0 39.0 39.0 15.0 14.0 14.0 24.0
Actuated glC Ratio 0.44 0.43 0.43 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.27
Clearance Time \s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 791 811 6'9 292 287 238 77
v/s RaUo Prot c0.J6 0.08 c0.10 0.08
vis Ratio Penn 0.11 0.01 c0.25
vie Ratio 0.81 0.18 0.25 0.58 0.54 0.06 0.92
Uniform Delay, d1 21.8 15.7 16.2 34.6 35.1 32.4 32.1
Progression Factor 0.27 0.20 0.47 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay. d2 09 0.0 0.1 8.1 7.2 0.5 82.5
Delay (s) 6.8 ,., 7.7 42.7 42.3 32.9 114.6
Level of Service A A A D D C f
Approach Delay (s) 6.7 40.3
Arproach LOS A D
lnte'rsootlon summat:t
HCM Average Conlrol Delay 22.0 HCM Level of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ra!io 0.77
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.0% ICU Level of SeNice
Analysis Period (min) 15
' Critical Lane Group
M·\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Facilily\Synchro\AM 2008 With_Projec1.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk Headquarters
AM 2008 With-Project
t r '. ! .1
NBr'· NESR·' ::s·0L "SBT, SBR
t,
1900 1900
4%
4.0
1.00
1.00
t.00
0.93
1.00
1563
1.00
1563
85 70
0.90 0.90
94 7a
33 0
139 0
11% 11%
2
24.0
24.0
0.27
4.0
417
0.09
0.33
26.6
1.00
2.1
28.7
C
53.8
D
C
8.0
E
, t,
1900 1900 1900
0%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.86
0.95 1.00
1770 1603
0.57 1.00
1058 1603
15 25 323
0.83 0.83 0.83
1B 30 389
0 285 0
1B 134 0
2% 2% 2%
Perm
6
6
24.0 24.0
24.0 24.0
0.27 0.27
4.0 4.0
282 427
0.06
0.02
0.06 0.31
24.6 26.4
1.00 1.00
0.4 1.9
25.1 28.3
C C
28.2
C
Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Lake Washinston Blvd & Riele;t: Lane ,. -,. • • ..-'-"' t
Movement 'EBt·/ f:l:ff EE3R ·;;wet "i>WBT: '•WSR \NBL · NBT
Lane Configurations ~ " .;.
Sign Control Free Free
Grade 4% -4%
Volume (veh/h) 12 165 0 10 405 44 10
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.46
Hourly flow rate (vph) 13 174 0 11 455 49 22
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh}
Median type
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft) 203
pX, platoon unblocked 0.94 0.94
vC, confhcUng volume 504 174 739
vC 1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 471 174 721
tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.3
tC. 2 slage (s)
tf (s) 2.2 2.2 3.7
po queue free % 99 99 92
cM capacity (veh/h) 1021 1403 278
Otrection. Lane# · · EB,1 "·ee;F~!YB 1':· NB·t ss·-1
Volume To!al 13 174 516 65 194
Volume left 13 0 11 22 157
Volume Right a 0 49 22 37
cSH 1021 1700 1403 375 324
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.17 0.60
Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 1 16 91
Control Delay (s) 8.6 0.0 0.2 16.6 31.3
Lane LOS A A C D
Approach Dalay {s) 0.6 0.2 16.6 3-1.3
Approach I OS C D
Intersection Summa~
Average Delay 7.7
Intersection Capacity Ulilization 52.8% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Fac,l1ty\Sym:hro\PM 2008 Wilh_Project.sy7
The Transpo Group
.;.
Stop
3%
10
0.46
22
None
0.94
726
707
6.7
4.2
93
312
Seahawk Headquarters
PM 2008 W1th-Pr0Ject ,. \,. + .,,
NBR 'SBL SBT SBR
10
0.46
22
174
174
6.4
3.5
97
830
A
.;.
Slop
-3%
105 0 25
0.67 0.67 0.67
157 0 37
None
0.94 0.94 0.94
734 701 480
716 6B1 444
7.1 6.5 6.2
3.5 4.0 3.3
47 100 94
294 342 575
Synchru 6 Report
Page 1
t
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Seahawk Headquarters
2: NE 44th St & 1-405 SB Ramps PM 2006 With-Project
,> --+ -. ' +-.... " t I' ... + .-'
Movement EBl ;!;f!T EBR'' .WBL WBJ WBR NBL ,::).JBT,:/ NSR0~ §1:!il ·SBT SBR
Lane Configurations t t ' t
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%) 4% -4%
Tota! Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane U\11. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00
Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot) 113'4 1567 1805 1900
Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Satd. Flow (eerm) 1844 1567 1805 1900
Volume (vph) 0 222 63 260 259 0 0
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.90
AdJ. Flow (vph) 0 239 6B 325 324 0 0
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 52 0 0 0 0
Lane Group Flow {vph) 0 239 16 325 324 0 0
Heavl Vehicles(%) 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1%
Turn Type Perm Prol
Protected Phases 4 3 8
Perrnilled Phases 4
Actuated Green, G (s) 14.0 14.0 19.0 37.0
Effective Green, g (s) 14.0 14.0 19.0 37.0
Actuated 9/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.32 0.62
Clearance Time js) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap {..-ph) 430 366 572 1172
vis Ratio Prot c0.13 c0.18 0.17
vis Ralio Perm 0.01
11/c Ratio 0.56 0.04 0.57 0.28
Uniform Delay, d1 20.3 17.8 17.1 5.3
Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.67 0.67
Incremental Delay, d2 5.1 0.2 3.9 0.6
Delay {s) 25.4 18.0 15.3 4.1
level of Service C B B A
Approach Delay (s) 23.7 9.8
Approach LOS C A
ln!ersection Sµmmary c,
HCM Average Control Delay 16.0 HCM Leval of Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.52
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost time (s)
Jnlerseclion Capacity Utilization 44.7% ICU Level cf Service
Analysis Period (mrn) 15
' Critical Lane Group
M·\06106039 Seahawks Practice Fac1litylSynchro\PM 2008 W1th_Projecl.sy 7
The Transpo Group
1900 1900
3%
0 0
0.90 0.90
0 0
0 0
0 0
1% 1%
0.0
A
B
12.0
A
<I t
1900 1900 1900
-4%
4.0 ,.o
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.85
0.95 1.00
1830 1631
0.95 1.00
1830 1631
150 5 200
0.81 0.81 0.81
185 6 247
0 0 1'5
0 191 62
1% 1% 1%
Split Perm
6 6
6
15.0 15.0
15,0 15.0
0.25 0.25
4.0 40
458 406
c0.10
0.04
0.42 0.15
1a.e 17.5
1.00 1.00
2.8 0.6
21.6 18.3
C 8
19.B
B
Synchra 6 Report
Page 1
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Seahawk Headquarters
3: NE 44th St & 1-405 NB Rames PM 200a With-Project
,> --+ -. ( +-.... " t I' ... + .-'
Mov~fflf;ltlC. EBt -ear.1 iFS:BR WBL WBT_. VvaR NB!..'-NBT . NBR SBL<-SBT :-saR
Lane Configuralicms ' t f ' + f ' Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade(%} -3% 0%
Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00
Flpb, ped/b1kes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Frt 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00
Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95
Satd. Flow (prot) 1814 1909 1623 1770 1863 1549 1751
Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 D.95 1.00 1.00 0.44
Satd. Flow (~rm) 1814 1909 1623 1770 1863 1549 B14
Volume (vph) 98 174 100 60 166 50 33
Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.94
Adj. Flow (vph) 105 187 108 73 202 61 35
RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 79 0 0 48 0
Lane Group Flow (vph) 105 187 29 73 202 13 35
Confl. Peds, {#/hr) 1 1
Heavt Vehicles(%) 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1%
Turn Type Prat Perm Prot Perm Perm
Protected Phases 7 4 3 8
Permitted Phases 4 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s) 10.0 16.0 16.0 7.0 13.0 13.0 25.0
Effective Green, g (s) 10.0 16.0 16.0 7.0 13.0 13.0 25,0
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.22 0.22 0.42
Clearance Time \s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph} 302 509 433 207 404 336 339
vis Ratio Prot 0.06 c0.10 0.04 c0.11
vis Ratio Penn 0.02 0.01 0.04
vie Ratio 0.35 0.37 O.D7 0.35 0.50 0.04 0.10
Uniform Delay, d1 22.1 17.9 16.4 24.4 20.6 1!:1.0 10.7
Progression Factor 0.56 0.47 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2 28 1.8 0.3 4.7 4.4 0.2 06
Delay (s) 15.2 10.2 0.3 29.1 25.0 1B.8 11.3
Level of Service B B A C C B B
Approach Delay (s) ,., 24.8
Approach LOS A C
lnt,r$ect10n Summa!}'."' · ''''"''I
HCM Average Control Delay 14,9 HCM Level or Service
HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.47
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 60.0 Sum of lost lime {s)
Intersection Capacity UUliza1ion 57.5% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
' Critical Lane Group
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Facility\Synchro\PM 2008 W1th_Projecl.sy7
The Transpo Group
),
1900 1900
4%
4.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.94
1.00
1738
1.00
1738
245 150
0.94 0.94
261 160
37 0
384 0
1% 1%
2
25.0
25.0
0.42
40
724
c0.22
0.53
13.1
1.00
2.8
15.9
B
15.5
B
B
8.0
B
' ),
1900 1900 1900
0%
4.0 4.0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.86
0.95 1.00
1787 1615
0.38 1.00
712 1615
50 20 320
0.94 0.94 0.94
53 21 340
0 198 0
53 163 0
1% 1% 1%
Perm
6
6
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
0.42 0.42
4.0 4.0
297 673
0.10
0.07
0.18 0.24
11.D 11.4
1.00 1.00
1.3 0.9
12.3 12.2
B B
12.2
B
Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
i __
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: North Access \2l & Riele~ Lane
_> • 4\ t j. .,I
Movement EBL 'fEBR NBl ""NBT SBT SBR
Lane Conlig11ralions y 4 • Sign Control Slop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 0 26 48 12 16 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly flow rate (vph) a 28 52 13 17 0
Pedestnans
Lane Width (fl)
Walking Speed (fL's)
Percent Block.age
Right 1urn flare (veh)
Median lype None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 135 17 17
vC1,stage 1 r::onfvol
vC:2, stage 2 conf vol
vCll, unblocked vol 135 17 17
tG, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC, 2 stage (s}
tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
pO queue free % 100 97 97
cM capacity {veh/h) 831 1061 1600
Qirecbon. Lana# Et):1 ,JllB<I SBF'' '~·F
Volume Total 28 65 17
Volume Left 0 52 0
Volume Right 28 0 0
cSH 1061 1600 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.03 0.01
Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 3 0
Control Delay (s) 8.5 5.9 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Apµroach Delay {s) 8.5 5.9 0.0
Approach LOS A
!nleraection Summa!i'.
Average Delay 5.5
Intersection Capacity Ulilizalian 20.0% ICU Level of Ser.iice
Analysis Period (min) 15
M:\06\06039 Seahawks Practice fac1hty\Synchro\AM Site Access.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
,.\::.·::::"'~
A
AM Sile Access
Synchro 6 Report
Page 1
i
i
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Middle Access pl & Riele~ Lane
_> • 4\ t j. .,I
~ovement EBL EBR ·, NBL NBT' "SBT SBR
Lana Configurations y <I I>
Sign Control Slop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (veh/h) 0 6 71 60 42 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly now rate (vph) 0 7 77 65 46 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (fl)
Walking Spead (fL's}
Percent BlocKage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 265 46 46
vC1, stage 1 con/ vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 265 46 46
IC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
IC. 2 stage (s)
IF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
po queue free % 100 99 95
cM capacity (veh/h) 686 ,1024 1562
D1re¢1lon"."La,;-e·#·:· EB1' "IB 1 sa f'· ·
Volume "Total 7 1'2 46
Volume Left 0 77 0
Volume Righi 7 0 0
oSH 1024 1562 1700
Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.05 0.03
Queue Length 95th (ft) 0 4 0
Control Delay {s) 8.5 4.2 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay (s) 8.5 4.2 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summ,i;t:t ''.o,
Average Delay 3.4
JntersecUon Capacity Utilization 23.8% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (mm) 15
M.\06\06039 Seahawks Practice Facilily\Synchro\AM Site Access.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawk's Headquarters
A
AM Site Access
Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
I HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
8: North Access Only (Option) & Ripley Lane
/ ~ "\ t i .,,
Seahawk's Headquarters I
AM s;t, Aco.ss I
Movl;!ment < EBL> i!:.§fl NBL -_{:f\larz iSBT SBR
Lane Configurations ¥ ,f I,
Sign Control Slop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume {11ch/h) Q 32 119 12 16 0
Peak Hour Fai::tor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly flow rata (vph) Q 35 129 13 17 0
Pedes1rians
Lane W1dih (ft)
Walking Speed (ftls)
Percent Blockage
Right tum flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 289 17 17
vC 1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 289 17 17
IC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
IC, 2 stage {s)
IF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
pO queue free % 100 97 92
cM capacily (veh/h) 645 1061 1600
OirectiQh,'!,.'ahtttt·>· ;-s;,:Efi,1> Nin ·sBT,,.
Volume Tolal 35 142 17
Volume Left 0 129 Q
Volume Right 35 0 0
cSH 1061 1600 1700
Volume lo Capacity 0.03 0.08 0.01
Queue Length 95th {ti) ' 7 0
Control Delay (s) 8.5 6.8 OQ
Lane LOS A A
Approach Delay {s) 8.5 6.8 0.0
Approach LOS A
lnteraection Summ@ri'.: ;,j,,:: ;;,i,:,:(···
l __
Average Delay 6 5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.9% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M 106\06039 Seahawks Practice Facility\Synchro\A.M S1te Access.sy7
The Transpo Group
A
Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: North Access (2! & Rielel Lane
,> • " t + .;
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurat,ons ¥ • !,
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume {veh/h) o 48 35 20 12 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly flow rate {vph) 0 52 38 22 13 o
Pedestrians
lane Width (fl)
Walking Speed ([Us)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median type None
Median ~torage ,.eh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 111 13 13
vC1, stage 1 confvol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 1 '1 13 13
tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
IC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
pO queue free % 100 95 98
cM capacity (vehJh) 865 1067 1605
Dir'ect!on, Lane# ES 1 NB·1 SB 1,
Volume Tota\ 52 60 13
Volume Left 0 38 0
Volume Right 52 o 0
cSH 1067 1605 1700
Volume lo Capacity 0.05 0.02 0.01
Queue Length 95th {fl) 4 2 0
Control Delay (s) 8.5 4.7 0.0
Lane LOS A A
Approach Dalay (s) 8.5 4.7 0.0
Approach LOS A
lnlE1rsectiqn-S1,1rnmat]:
Average Delay 5.8
Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.7% ICU Laval of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M.\06106039 Seahawks Practice Fac1lity\Synchro\PM Site Access.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawks' Headquarters
'iili!!H;ih'
::::,,,• :<ii"'
A
PM Site Access
Synchro 6 Repol1
Pag!l 1
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
5: Middle Access P! & Rielel Lane
,> • " t + .;
Movement EBL EBR NBL" :NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations ¥ • !,
Sign Control Stop Free Free
Grade 0% 0% 0%
Volume (vehJh) o 70 11 55 60 o
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Hourly now rate ivph) 0 76 12 60 65 0
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (Ills)
Percent Blockage
Right tum flare (veh}
Median type None
Median ston1ye veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume 149 65 65
vC1, stage 1 confvol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol "' 65 65
IC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1
tC, 2 slage (s)
lF {s) 3.5 3.3 2.2
pO queue free % 100 92 99
cM capacity (veh/h) 837 999 1537
Plr(lctJon.' l-8:nEi # ,-,,-EB t NB-1 '-:-se 'IJL''''' '
Volume Total 76 72 65
Volume Left 0 12 o
Volume Right 76 o 0
cSH 999 1537 1700
Volume lo Capacity 0.08 0.01 0.04
Queue Length 95th (rt) 6 1 0
Con1rol Delay (s) 8.9 1.3 0.0
Lane \.OS A A
Approach Delay (s) 8.9 1.3 0.0
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summ~
Average Delay 3.6
ln.tersectton Capacily Ulilii:ation 21.2% ICU Level of Service
Analysis Period (min) 15
M:\06106039 Seahawks Practice Fac11ity\Synchro\PM Site Access.sy7
The T ranspo Group
Seahawks' Headquarters
A
PM S1te Access
Synchro 6 Report
Page 2
HCM Unsigna!ized Intersection Capacity Analysis
7: North Access On!l'. (Detion) & Rielel Lane
/
Movement EBL
Lane Configurations 'f
Sign Control Stop
Grade 0%
Volume (veh/h) 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92
Hourly flow rate (vph) 0
Pedes1rians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed {ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right tum flare (veh)
Median type None
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting vo(ume 135
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol n5
tC, single (s) 6.4
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s) 3.5
pO queue free % 100
cM capacity (vehlh} 832
!;:!irection; Lllm<•-lt EB 1
Volume Total 128
Volume Left 0
Volume Righi 128
cSH 106"f
Volume to Capacity 0.12
Queue Length 95lh {ft) 10
Control Delay (s) 8.8
Lane LOS A
Approach Delay (s) 8.8
Approach LOS A
lntersee;li~_ Summa[Y-·'
Average Delay
Intersection Capacity Utilization
Analysis Period (min)
" "" t ! .,,
EBff·;; Nfil".0-:!j~~;:sBT>'·SBR
118
0.92
128
13
" 6.2
3.3
" 1067
Nl:t1
72
50
0
1605
0.03
2
5.2
A
5.2
" 0.92
50
13
13
4.1
,.,
97
1605
$1;!, 1 \.
13
0
0
1700
0.01
0
0.0
0.0
7.1
24.2%
15
,r I,
Free Free
0% 0%
20 12 0
0.92 0.92 0.92
22 13 a
JCU Level of Service
M \06106039 Seal"1ilwks Practice Facilily\Synchro\PM Sile Acce;;s.sy7
The Transpo Group
Seahawks' Headquarters
A
PM Site Access
'"=,.'.Jj_'iYiii
Synchro 6 Report
Page 3
A.C. Kindig & Co.
SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
and TRAINING FACILITY
TURF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN
(1PM)
Prepared for:
Football Northwest LLC
505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
Prepared by:
A.C. Kindig & Co.
12501 Bellevue-Redmond Road, Suite 110
Bellevue, Washington 98005
425-638-0358
Fax: 425-455-8365
September 20, 2006
Project >Jo. 283
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pesl Management Plan (!PM)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 INTEGRATED PEST .\1ANAGEMENT ................................................................................. 2
2.1 Components and Strategy ................................................................................................ .2
2.2 Turf Seeding Species and Varieties ................................................................................. .3
2.3 Turf Fertilization .............................................................................................................. .3
2.4 Turf grass Pest Control Under 1PM ................................................................................... 6
3.0 PRACTICE FIELD STAFF .................................................................................................... 15
4.0 MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT ..................................... 15
4.1 State Requirements for On-Site Chemical Storage and Chemical Handling .................. 15
4.2 State Requirements for Maintenance Area Drainage Control ........................................ 19
5.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 20
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Typical maintenance fertilization program ....................................................................... 4
Table 2 Summary of pest control measures ................................................................................... 7
Table 3 Pest Tolerance Thresholds ................................................................................................ 8
Table 4 Pesticide application rates and intervals ......................................................................... 10
Table 5 Pesticide chemical characteristics summary ................................................................... 12
Pesticide Assessments
Chipco 26GT
Heritage
Primo Maxx
Prograss
September 20, 2006
APPENDIX A
A. C KINDIG & CO.
Page i
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM)
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
AND TRAINING FACILITY
TURF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN (IPM)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This !PM addresses management techniques and anticipated chemical uses on the Seahawks
Headquarters turf practice fields. While the management of the practice fields is described
according to current plans, modification of the management techniques described in this !PM
should be anticipated to address site-specific turf needs that develop, new and perhaps superior
turf management chemicals that may be developed and approved for turf use in Washington
State, or new !PM approaches as they develop. Seahawks turf management will allow for the
use of new or alternative products that are shown to be more effective, exhibit greater target
specificity, are less mobile, and/or can otherwise reduce environmental risk in the future.
Management techniques covered by this !PM include the following practices:
• Turf Practice Field Management Techniques
• !PM Strategy and Chemicals
• Maintenance Chemical Use, Storage, and Disposal
• Accidental Spill and Response
An !PM program is key to modern turf sports field durability and maintenance and for achieving
environmental objectives. !PM focuses on the use of best management practices (BMPs) to
create healthy and disease-resistant sports field turf by use of durable and disease resistant turf
species and varieties, physical control of drainage and light, adaptive fertilization and watering
regimes, and cultural control of soils. Healthy turf minimizes disease which reduces the use of
fungicides and herbicides when proper application methods, judicious chemical selection, and
proper irrigation methods are employed (Petrovic 1995). In addition, pest damage threshold
levels are established under 1PM, and chemical treatment occurs on an as-needed basis, if at all,
for weed or insect pests as a backup control treatment only cultural controls fail to prevent their
outbreaks. Fungus diseases are more ubiquitous and form the exception, requiring routine
seasonal prevention treatment to prevent outbreaks that would increase need for higher curative
fungicide doses and could render the sports fields unsuitable for the stress of Seahawks practice
requirements.
Pest damage levels and comparison to response thresholds will be determined through on-site
monitoring of the turf by the practice field manager and staff.
September 20, 2006 A.C. KJND!G & CO
Page l
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
2.0 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
2.1 Components and Strategy
Chapter 17.15.010 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) defines IPM as "a coordinated
action process that uses the most appropriate pest control methods and strategy in an
environmentally and economically sound manner to meet ... programmatic pest management
objectives. " IPM is achieved through the use of combined and balanced strategies of cultural,
biological, physical or mechanical, chemical, and other control technologies (King County 1993;
King County 1999). IPM turf management strategies stress turf disease resistance, turf health,
pest tolerance limits, and alternatives to pesticides to minimize their use. For example, the
Seahawks !PM seeks to control all insect pests by cultural methods; no insecticides are expected
to be necessary. Likewise, 1PM is designed to be flexible by including adaptive modifications to
optimize turf health and disease resistance while reducing impacts to the surrounding
environment. Healthy turf is less susceptible to disease and pests, and in the long-term, requires
less fertilizer and pesticide treatment. By its nature, IPM avoids and/or minimizes off-site
transport of pesticides and fertilizers.
The following approach and steps define the IPM process that will be employed at the Seahawks
Headquarters and Practice Fields (Washington State University [WSU] 1980; Berndt 1992; King
County 1999; Chapter 17 .15 .10 RCW):
(1)
(2)
(3)
lnfoouation Gathering: Regional pests expected to require management on the
practice fields have been, to the extent possible, identified and anticipated in this
1PM. Pests include insects, plants, and plant pathogens, including fungi, bacteria,
viruses, and nematodes.
Monitoring: The practice field manager will assess the type, timing, and extent of
any observed pest problems on a near-<laily basis. These observations will
indicate when and what pest control measures are required given pre-defined pest
tolerance levels.
Deteouine Economic Tnjmy and Action Thresholds: The relationship between
pest populations, the amount of damage, and the cost effectiveness of various pest
control options have been assessed by the practice field manager to establish pest
tolerance thresholds below which treatment is not initiated. Cultural, physical or
mechanical practices will be employed in preference to chemical control measures
to the extent practicable. Chemical controls will be used when they are
determined by the practice field manager to be the most environmentally
responsible control method, the safest method to address the pest problem, and
where other control tactics cannot be relied upon to meet pest tolerance levels.
September 20, 2006 A.C. KJNDIG & CO.
Page 2
Seattle Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
(4) Record Keeping: Records describing the process and methods employed to
address pest problems are kept by the practice field manager.
(5) Treatment Evaluation: Evaluations of the strategies employed and their
effectiveness in controlling pest problems are part of adaptive management by the
practice field manager.
2.2 Turf Seeding Species and Varieties
Turf varieties were selected based on their growth habit, vigor, disease resistance, and resistance
to weed encroachment. The practice fields will be comprised on three varieties (80%) Kentucky
Bluegrass and three varieties (20%) of Perennial Rye. All the varieties selected have been shown
to be resistant to fungus diseases (primarily using Leaf Spot as an indicator for resistance), and
for superior shear strength to be durable to the turf stresses from Seahawks practice. Use of this
turf blend will give resilient turf, reducing weeds and turf diseases needing treatment, and
minimizing fertilizer losses from the actively growing root zone.
2.3 Turf Fertilization
Ovenriew
During fertilizer applications, field maintenance personnel will adhere to all applicable
Washington State Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) and Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations.
The three main nutrients in turf fertilizer are phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen. The potential
for adverse impacts to water quality from the delivery of phosphorus and nitrogen to Lake
Washington has been considered by the practice field manager. This concern is mitigated by
!PM as a source control measure, and by increasing sand depth under the practice fields to 18
inches to equal sand filter treatment for water quality for l 00% of the turf drainage. This level of
water quality treatment will be superior to that usually employed for phosphorus-sensitive lakes
(Lake Washington is not determined to be phosphorus sensitive) and for sensitive fish habitat
under the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual approved by the Washington State
Department of Ecology as ensuring compliance with state surface water quality standards under
WAC 173-20 IA. The fertilization program includes nutrients and trace minerals (Table 1) to
maximize turf health and vigor to minimize pesticide need. Off-site nutrient transport will be
avoided through reliance on granular slow release fertilizer for most applications, application
rates and application frequencies, and through course irrigation and drainage control. Trace
minerals and organics will be used to ensure the turf have all requirements necessary to make use
of the fertilizer nutrients during the growing season, which minimizes nutrient loss from the turf
rooted zone. From time to time, soil chemistry analysis may be conducted by the practice field
manager to determine turf growth requirements if warranted.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CD
Page 3
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Twj1ntegrated Pest A1cmagement Plan (JPA1)
Table 1
Typical Maintenance Fertilization Program
Product Soluble% or Application Nitrogen (N) Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K)
% Liauid % Granular Slow Release % Month ' lbs/1-000 ft 2/vear lbs/1 000 ft 2/vear lbs/1,000 IUvear
March 1_0 0-25 1.0
Aoril 1.0 0.25 1.0
Mav 1.0 0.25 1.0
Fertilizer Slow -100% June 1.0 0.25 1.0
100% Julv 1.0 0.25 1.0
Auaust 1.0 0.25 1.0
Seotember 1.0 0.25 1.0
October 1.0 0.25 1.0
Roots 1-2-3 Soluble -100% Every 28 days Trace minerals and organics 1 at 5.87 oz/1,000 ft 2
100%
Speedy Green
March through Soluble nitrogen (15%), iron (6%), and magnesium (0.5%l in Soluble -100% December 100% natural oraanic acid chelate solution at 5.87 oz/1 000 ft
1 liquid humics, seaweed extracts, iron, manganese, zinc, magnesium phosphate-citrate, organic surfactant
September 20, 2006 A. C. KJNDJG & CO
Page 4
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM)
Nitrogen (N)
Turf grass requires nitrogen in the largest amount in terms of physiological functioning relative to
other essential nutrients with the exception of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen (Beard 1973).
Nitrogen is required for plant tissue growth, enzyme production, and carbohydrate utilization,
and is also an essential component of chlorophyll, amino acids, proteins, and protoplasm (Brady
1984). Nitrogen occurs naturally in soils in four major forms: organic nitrogen, ammonium
nitrate (Nl-L,N0 3), soluble inorganic ammonium, and nitrate compounds (N0.3 ). Surface soils
are mostly comprised of nitrogen sources associated with the decomposition of organic matter.
Some clays have the ability to fix nitrogen between their layers.
There are many types of synthetic inorganic and organic nitrogen fertilizers that have slow
release forms. Slow release nutrients are insoluble and generally take 4 to 12 weeks to become
completely liberated and available for turf utilization. Several types of slow release nitrogen
include: urea formaldehyde, isobutylidene diurea (IBDU), sulfur-coated urea, and mixtures
using natural organic sources.
Nitrate-nitrogen added to soils, either naturally by plants and animals or by fertilizers, may
follow four pathways (Brady 1984 ):
(1) incorporation into microorganisms;
(2) assimilation into higher plants;
(3) loss to subsurface drainage (ground water); or
(4) escape to the atmosphere in gaseous form.
The rate and frequency of fertilizer application and the type of applied fertilizer are significant
factors that affect the potential for applied nitrogen losses from turf and are therefore adjusted to
minimize water quality impact (Cohen et al. 1990). Fertilization guidelines will be followed as
described in this IPM, thereby allowing for the proper allocation in the amount, distribution, and
timing of nitrogen fertilizers to maximize nitrogen utilization by the course turf and, therefore,
minimizing the potential for runoff into the drainage system.
Phosphorus (Pl
Phosphorus is an essential macronutrient found in all living cells (Beard 1973). Phosphorus is
involved in many physiological functions within turfgrass including:
(1) energy transformations in the form ofadenosine triphosphate (ATP);
(2) incorporation into the genetic material of the cell nucleus; and
(3) carbohydrate transformations, such as the conversion of starch to sugar.
The probability of phosphorus escaping from the practice field soils and environs is low because
of the chemical characteristics of phosphorus and the irrigation system controls to prevent
overwatering. Phosphorus is readily mineralized and immobilized (attracted and adsorbed by
ionic reactions with cations) by iron, aluminum, and calcium which naturally exist in sand that
September 20, 2006 A. C KINDIG & CO.
Page 5
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
will be placed to 18-inch depth under the practice fields. Plant available phosphorus will only be
applied in amounts necessary to provide adequate nutrient levels for optimal turf growth.
Overfertilization and overwatering are contributing factors to phosphorus leaching and will be
avoided through 1PM.
Potassium /K)
Potassium is essential for normal turfgrass growth and development processes (Beard 1973).
Physiological functions of potassium within turf grass include:
(1) carbohydrate synthesis and translocation;
(2) amino acid and protein synthesis;
(3) regulating transpiration;
( 4) controlling the uptake of certain nutrients; and
(5) regulating transpiration.
A common form of potassium in fertilizers is potash (K2C03), which is soluble and readily
available to turf. Different forms of potassium fertilizer include: potassium chloride (KC!);
potassium sulfate (K2S04); potassium magnesium sulfate; manure salts (mainly KC!); kainit
(mainly KC!); and potassium nitrate (KN03).
The application of potassium fertilizers has little probability of locally altering water quality. In
its available form, potassium is not prone to leach from soils. Most potassium fertilizers do not
alter soil pH and are held in the soil by cation exchange processes. Once in the soil, potassium
(K) replaces other soil elements such as calcium (Ca) and hydrogen (H). There are abundant
anion binding sites in soils for the single charge cations such as Ca+, K+, and H+. While K+
additions would compete with Ca+ and W for binding sites, there is no reasonable expectation
that this displacement would alter soil chemistry away from the immediate point of application.
2.4 Turfgrass Pest Control Under 1PM
Overview
Turfgrass pests and diseases requiring control on the Seahawks practice fields are identified in
Table 2, as are the management methods (i.e. cultural, physical/mechanical, biological, etc.) that
will be employed to minimize chemical control methods. Turfgrass pests and diseases not listed
in Table 2 are either not expected to occur, or not expected to require chemical control measures
on the practice fields.
September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page 6
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
Table2
Summary of Pest Control Measures to be used for the Seahawks Practice Fields
Physical/
Disease or Pest Cultural Control Mechanical Chemical Control
Control
Turfgrass Control Primo Maxx
Turf growth suppressant Overseeding with (Trinexapac-ethyl)
and Annual Bluegrass desirable during growing
tPaa annual control turfgrass; season
Promote vigorous Prograss
turf root growth to (ethofumesate) for
with soil nutrient curative post-
Weeds and irrigation emergence control
Annual Bluegrass control, to out-of annual
compete Paa bluegrass in fall
annua. and in spring if
warranted.
Fungus Diseases
Brown Patch
(Rhizoctonia solani; R. blight)
Corticum Red Thread
(Laetisaria fuciformis)
Dollar Spot
(Lanzia spp. And
Moellerodiscus spp.)
Fusarium Blight Chipco 26GT
(Fusarium spp.) (lprodione) Fusarium Patch Good air as preventative (Microduchium niva/e)
Gray Snow Mold Promote vigorous circulation; method of control
Good drainage; fall and spring /Typhula spp.) turf root growth to Helminthosporium with soil nutrient Avoid shading:
(Dresch/era spp.) and irrigation Avoid irrigating in
Necrotic Ring Spot late afternoon;
(Leptosphaeria korrae) control, to out-Limit thatch;
Pink Snow Mold compete weeds. Maintain soil pH
(Fusairum nivale) <7 Rust
rpuccinia corona/al
Fungus Diseases
Brown Patch
(Rhizoctonia solani; R. blight) Heritage
Fusarium Patch (azoxystrobin)
(Microduchium nivale) as preventative
Rust method of control
/Puccinia corona/a) in fall and winter
Take-all Patch
1Gaeumannom 11ces "'raminisl
September 20, 2006 A. C. KINDIG & CO.
Page 7
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest lvfanagement Plan (!PM)
Table 3
Pest Tolerance Thresholds
Pest Tolerance Threshold
Funqus Diseases Zero tolerance
Broad leaf Weeds Five weeds per 1,000 ft 2
No oesticide manaaement orooosed
Annual Bluearass One sauare foot catches
Insects No nesticide manaaement orooosed
Pest and Disease Tolerance Thresholds
Turf pest or disease tolerance thresholds are established by this IPM plan to determine when
curative action is warranted, which may require chemical management (Table 3 ). With the
exception of fungus diseases, pests are not managed for total eradication at all times.
Cu)tqral Control ofTurfgrass Pests
Under IPM, cultural control methods (Table 2), in combination with disease and pest tolerance
thresholds (Table 3), take priority over chemical control methods to minimize the use of
chemicals to manage turfgrass weeds. No chemical control is proposed for insects or broadleaf
weeds. Cultural methods include all management activities that prevent pests from developing
due to the enhancement of desirable vegetation which out-competes or otherwise resists pests
and disease, including but not limited to irrigation, seeding, and fertilizing. Periodic soil testing
as warranted, addition of soil amendments (i.e., trace minerals) as indicated, and fertilization at
rates that match turf growth requirements are cultural methods whereby the practice field
manager will provide for vigorous turf root growth and disease resistance.
Vigorous root growth allows turf to crowd out broadleaf weeds and self-repair damage from
common turf pests such as European cranefly (Tipula paludosa). Avoidance of phosphorus and
potassium deficiencies can prevent or minimize the occurrence of take-all patch
(Gaeumannomyces graminis) fungus disease. Irrigation control and avoidance of overwatering,
as well as control of the irrigation timing, are other means used by the practice field manager to
prevent excessive soil and grass moisture conditions that can otherwise lead to fungus diseases,
leaching of nutrients from the rooted zone, and invasion of annual bluegrass (Poa annua).
Physical/Mechanical Control ofTurfgrass Diseases Weeds and Insects
Physical, mechanical, or management methods are also used to control pests. For example,
avoiding aerifier holes during the annual period of egg laying by armyworm (Pseudaletia
unipuncta) or black cutworm (Agrotis ipsilon) moths prevents the females from depositing their
eggs in the turf rooted zone. Taking this precaution eliminates any need for further control of
September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page 8
I
Seattle Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (JP:'vf)
these pests to prevent turf damage that would interfere with practice field resilience and use.
Even allowance for good air circulation through surrounding plantings can help minimize
conditions leading to fungus disease, which is one reason some understory trimming (but not of
the canopy) of native trees along the Lake Washington shoreline is proposed.
Chemical Control of Turfgrass Diseases and Weeds
Despite the emphasis on cultural and physical/mechanical control practices and pest tolerance
thresholds, annual bluegrass that cannot be hand eradicated and diseases are expected to occur on
the practice fields, which will require the use of pesticides. A list of pesticides that will be used
on the practice fields is provided in Table 4, indicating application rates and preventative or
curative strategies employed for each. Preventative applications are those made over the entire
practice fields to prevent a disease from occurring. Curative applications are spot-applied only
with hand pressure sprayers to diseased areas (fungus) or to broadleafweeds that cannot be hand
pulled because they re-sprout from roots left behind or are too high in number to otherwise
control due to invasion by offsite seed stock. This pesticide list may change over time as new
chemical products with lower toxicity, greater specificity, less persistence, or less mobility
become available.
Pesticide Selection Process
The pesticides that will be used were selected using the following hierarchy:
1. Can cultural controls or alternative control methods be expected to adequately
control any diseases or pests without pesticides?
a. YES for insects; No insecticides proposed.
b. YES for rodents and burrowing animals; No rodenticides proposed.
c. YES for most weeds; No broadleaf pesticides proposed.
d. NO for annual bluegrass (Poa annua).
e. NO for fungus diseases.
2. What are the fungus diseases and weed pests expected for the practice fields?
a. These are identified in Table 2.
b. Tolerance thresholds are identified in Table 3.
September 20, 2006 A. C. KINDIG & CO
Page 9
Seartle Seahawks Co,porate lleadquarters and Training Facility
turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (f PA1)
Table4
Pesticide Application Rates and Intervals
Product Category Application Rate
Application Season &
Freauencv
4.0 fl. oz./1,000 ft' Fall through Spring;
Chipco 26GT Fungicide Not more than 35 fl. oz./1000 fl 2 /yr Once per 2 to 3 weeks for
or preventative control 6 a--1ications oer vear
Spring and fall; Two
Heritage Fungicide 0.4 fl. oz./1,000 tt' applications 28 days apart (4
annlications total)
Herbicide Through the growing season
Primo Maxx (growth 0.25 fl. oz./1,000 ft 2 (March to October); about
inhibitor) once every 4 weeks
Fall; 2-3 applications at 21-
Prograss Herbicide 1.5 fl. oz./1,000 tt' 28 day intervals;
One spring application if
needed
2 Curative use means spot applicatons (hand sprayers) after disease or weed problem is detected.
Curative' or
Preventative3
Preventative
Preventative
Curative
Curative
3 Preventative use means application to practice fields to prevent diseases when conditions are prone to their occurrence.
September 20, 2006
Comments
Preventative applications
when conditions favor
disease development
Used in rotation with other
fungicides to prevent
disease resistance
Enhances establishment of
desirable grasses by
suppression of Poa annua
arowth.
Post-emergence control of
Poa annua (annual
bluegrass)
A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 10
Seattle Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (1PM;
c. The need to treat in advance of a disease known to readily occur, or the ability
to only respond with curative treatments to diseased areas after the disease
occurs is identified in Table 4.
3. For those pests expected to occur and requiring pesticides to adequately control,
what are the appropriate pesticides?
a. Only Washington State and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
approved management chemicals for specific diseases or weeds on turf are
legal to use.
b. Among the products legal for a specific disease or weed and for turf
application, products with the lowest persistence, lowest mobility, and lowest
toxicity to non-target, off-site species such as fish, other aquatic species, birds,
and bees were preferred for any specific disease or weed problem (Table 5).
1. Lowest mobility is generally ranked with the most importance if all
other factors are near equal between choices, because if the product
stays where applied, longer persistence is not a problem and toxicity is
not a problem. Indeed, longer persistence plus low mobility would
mean that a small amount of product will have a lasting intended effect
on the turf disease.
ii. In some cases, depending on season of expected use (low rainfall
periods), low persistence can similarly offset higher mobility,
particularly if the aquatic toxicity is very low.
111. For preventative chemicals with broadscale application, low mobility,
and/or very low aquatic toxicity were always important criteria.
iv. For curative chemicals with spot application only to diseased areas or
weeds, moderate to low toxicity was sought in combination with either
low to moderate persistence or low to moderate mobility, to the extent
possible. See also the discussions and references provided for each
proposed product in Appendix A.
v. For fungus diseases, rotational use of two or more fungicides is usually
required to prevent or respond to disease resistance to any one
treatment.
September 20, 2006 A. C. KINDIG & CO
Page 11
Seallle Seahcrwks Co,porate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management P_lan (/PM)_
Table 5
Pesticide Chemical Characteristics Summary
Product/Active EPA Registration Category Mobility• Persistence• Ingredient No.
Chioco 26GT Funaicide 432-888 Low Short-lived
Heritage Fungicide 10182-408 Low Short-lived /azoxvstrobin!
Primo Maxx Turf Growth 10Q.937 High Very short to short-
(Trinexapac-ethvl) Suooressant lived
Prograss Herbicide for
Poa annua 4563S-00062 High Moderately short-lived (ethofumesate) control
4 Ranking criteria from King County ( 1993)
Pesticide
Movement Toxicity
Ratinq'
Low Sliqht
Low 6 High
n/a Slight
Moderate Slight
5 Ranking criteria from Vogue et al. ( 1994); derived from Groundwater Ubiquity Score (GUS) relating pesticide persistence (half-life) and soil sorption
coefficients (K,J. GUS~ log 10(ha]f.Jifo) x (4-log10 K,,).
6 Koc data not available for GUS computation, however EPA Pesticide Fact Sheet reports " ... field di.r;sipation studies indicate ... moderately, immobile and
relatively non-persistent under actual use conditions. "
September 20. 2006 A. C KINDIG & CO.
Page 12
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!Pk!)
Fungus Diseases
The diseases listed in Table 2 are common fungi on Pacific Northwest turf that are expected to
require chemical control. There are no effective alternatives to fungicide control for these
diseases once they take hold, although careful turf culture will increase turf resistance. If
allowed to occur, small patches of fungus disease on the practice fields would be spread by the
heavy practice foot traffic and by mowers to all areas of the fields. Because of the intense use of
these fields and the need for the turf to stand up to considerable stress from football practice,
fungus disease that weakens the turf must be avoided and there is zero tolerance for their
occurrence. On the rare occasions when fungus infestations are not readily identifiable by the
practice field manager, samples will be sent to Washington State University's Puyallup turf
extension service for analysis. Laboratory results are usually available within 48 to 72 hours to
guide control measures on the fields. The fungus disease chemicals proposed for preventative
use on the practice fields are listed and evaluated in Appendix A. The list of fungicides may
change over time as new products become available that meet the environmental objectives of
the Lake Washington setting and the practice fields.
Weeds
Cultural controls or manual removal are expected to be sufficient to control broadleaf weeds. If
threshold levels for broadleaf weeds are exceeded and cultural/hand control measures are not
effective, LISe of broadleaf pesticides may need to be considered; however experience with the
practice fields in Kirkland indicates this is very unlikely. Over time, annual bluegrass is
expected to invade the practice fields from off-site seed stock sources. Because this annual
turfgrass species lacks the resistance characteristics necessary for practice field durability but
would tend to dominate the turf over time, it will be controlled by curative treatments to kill new
seedlings in the fall and if warranted spring, and by use of a turf growth suppressant to impede
the ability of annual bluegrass that does establish each year to dominate the desirable turf species
and varieties.
Insects
The Emopean cranefly is the most common Pacific Northwest turf pest (OSU 2006b ). The
European cranefly larvae feed on grass roots during warmer periods from fall to spring, causing
the turf to brown and die. Cultural control measures (Table 2) are expected to control insects
below tolerance thresholds (Table 3), and consequently no insecticide use is proposed.
Application Guidelines
Manufacturer application gLiidelines and directions will be adhered to during all pesticide
applications, and all pesticides will be applied by Washington State licensed applicators. See
Table 4 for summaries of the pesticides that would be used See Appendix A for detailed
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CU
Page 13
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
environmental assessments based on the best available science for each pesticide. Weather
forecasts will be used when undertaking any pesticide applications.
Application Equipment
Sprayers and spreaders would be used according to application rates, intervals, and seasonal
applications guidelines noted in Table 4 and Appendix A.
Sprayers
Two common forms of sprayers exist, tractor-drawn or mounted, and hand sprayers. Tractor-
drawn sprayers are only used for large area applications. Maintenance personnel will adhere to
all applicable WISHA and OSHA regulations during all management chemical applications.
Tractor-drawn or mounted sprayers have a series of down-aimed nozzles that spray directly onto
the turf. Tractor-drawn or mounted spray equipment use will only occur on non-windy days to
prevent wind-throw off of the turf.
Hand Pressured Sprayers
Two types of hand pressure sprayers may be used: backpack or hand carried. Hand sprayers are
used for curative spot treatments. Due to their target site specificity, application of management
chemicals via hand sprayers allow for controlled pesticide applications regardless of wind
conditions.
Spreaders
Spreaders are generally used for application of fertilizers and seed. Tractor units and/or smaller
walking spreaders or truckster-mounted spreaders may be used.
Identification of Chemical Hazards to Staff and Public
Pesticide and fertilizer container labeling will be in accordance with Chapter 16-201-170
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and Chapter 16-229-180 WAC. Persons applying
management chemicals will comply with use regulations described in Chapter 16-228-185 WAC.
The practice field manager will keep appropriate chemical information on file for inspection
(Chapter l 6-228-190 WAC).
Cleanup
Cleanup of all spraying equipment will adhere to Washington State Department of Agriculture
(WSDA) regulations. Tanks of spray equipment and spreaders will be filled with water three
times and sprayed over the turf after pesticide application (Chapter 16-20 l-190 WAC; Chapter
16-229-400 WAC), before being returned to the wash drain pad. Only as much pesticide as will
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 14
Seal/le Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!Pivfj
be used in a single application would be placed in the application equipment. Should excess
mixed pesticide occur, the surplus will be immediately collected for reuse (Chapter 16-201-230
WAC; Chapter 16-229-250 WAC), or if not reusable, will be disposed of in accordance with all
applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Hazardous Waste Management
Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water Pollution Control Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW), and
King County Code 9.12 (see also the King County Stormwater Pollution Control Manual BMP
discussion in Section 6.3).
3.0 PRACTICE FIELD STAFF
A qualified turf manager selected by the Seahawks will be responsible for implementation of this
!PM. The manager's background may include education or experience in turf grass management
current with industry standards and science, certification(s) in pesticide application, and
awareness of pertinent environmental issues and concerns related to turf management. The
practice field manager will be responsible for training permanent and/or seasonal assistants in the
pest management strategies and specific maintenance standards implemented under the !PM
program.
All persons who apply pesticides will be licensed per requirements of the Washington Pesticide
Control Act (RCW 15.58), Washington Pesticide Application Action (RCW 17.21) and
regulations in 16.201 WAC and 16.228 WAC. Such licensing does not apply to grounds
maintenance staff using only general use pesticides on an occasional basis not amounting to a
regular occupation. Pesticide applicators must undergo 40 hours of continuing education every 5
years to maintain licensing. Applications of products in Appendix A would be the job of
licensed applicators.
4.0 MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT
A permanent operations structure for storage of course equipment and management chemicals
will be constructed in accordance with all applicable state and local requirements.
4.1 State Requirements for On-Site Chemical Storage and Chemical Handling; Secondary
Containment of Management Chemicals
Spill Prevention
Turfgrass management chemicals will be stored in a maintenance building in accordance with
WSDA's Rules Relating to Secondary and Operational Area Containment for Bulk Pesticide
(Chapter 16-229 WAC) and Fertilizer Bulk Storage and Operation Area Containment (Chapter
16-20 I WAC). A separate area roofed will be used for the mixing and loading of management
chemicals. The area used for such operations, at a minimum, will be a roofed area adjoining the
September 20, 2006 A. C KINDIG & CO.
Page 15
I
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Twflntegrated Pest Management Plan (IP!vf)
chemical storage facility. Spill prevention measures will be employed to prevent environmental
and human health risks through inappropriate use of management chemicals or accidental spills.
Key elements in spill prevention for the maintenance building include the following:
• Fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers will be stored in a maintenance
building designed to prevent the release of chemicals (Chapter 16-201-020 WAC;
Chapter 16-229-020 WAC). The floor of the building will be lined to prevent
leakage and sloped to a liquid-tight collection point or sump that allows easy
removal of spilled or deposited material (Chapter 16-201-030 WAC; Chapter 16-
229-040 WAC). The facility will also be constructed with a watertight ceiling
and walls that prevent chemicals leaking from the building (Chapter 16-201-028
WAC; Chapter 16-229-030 WAC).
• Within the secondary storage facility, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and
fertilizers will be secured in storage containers resistant to corrosion, puncture, or
cracking (Chapter 16-201-l 00 WAC; Chapter 16-229-l 00 WAC). The storage
containers will be labeled (Chapter 16-201-170 WAC; Chapter 16-229-180
WAC) and ventilated (Chapter 16-229-160 WAC) in accordance with state
regulations.
• Within the storage facility, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers will
be stored in their original containers with labels intact. Copies of the product
labels and MSDS will be inserted in a logbook.
• The maintenance building will not have discharge outlets or valves (Chapter 16-
201-050 WAC; Chapter l 6-229-060 WAC). Fungicide, herbicide, insecticide,
and fertilizer mixing will be completed in a site constructed to contain 125
percent the capacity of the largest storage container. The mixing/loading site will
use concrete curbs or other means for spill containment (Chapter 16-20 l-190
WAC; Chapter 16-229-210 WAC). The floor of the mixing/loading site will be
constructed of concrete or other material with similar permeability. The floor will
be sloped to a liquid-tight collection point or sump that allows spilled or deposited
material to be easily recovered (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; Chapter 16-229-210
WAC).
• Discharges of fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers occurring within
the maintenance building will be immediately recovered (Chapter 16-201-080
WAC; Chapter 16-229-090 WAC) and reused per product label if possible, or
otherwise disposed in an approved off-site location consistent with the Hazardous
Waste Management Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water Pollution Control
Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW).
September 20, 2006 .4.C. KINDIG & CO
Page 16
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMj
• No other commodity except pesticides (including fungicides, herbicides, and
insecticides), pesticide rinsate, or recovered pesticide discharges will be stored
within the pesticide secondary containment facility (Chapter 16-229-070 WAC).
The pesticide secondary containment facility may share an impermeable wall or
portion of a wall with the fertilizer secondary containment facility. Fertilizer
rinsate will be stored in the fertilizer secondary containment facility.
• All management chemical storage areas will be secured by a locked door to
provide reasonable protection against vandalism or unauthorized access (Chapter
16-201-160 WAC; Chapter 16-229-170 WAC).
• Precise records of chemical applications will be maintained on Form AGR 4253
as required by the WSD A.
• Pesticides will be applied according to regulations specified in Chapter 17.21
RCW, Washington Pesticide Application Act and Rules Relating to General
Pesticide Use (Chapter 16-228-190 WAC).
• Fungicide, herbicide, and insecticide mixing and application will be performed
according to the manufacturer's instructions and under the direct supervision of a
licensed applicator.
• Cleaning and maintenance of chemical application equipment that comes in direct
contact with any pesticide or fertilizer will be performed in a site constructed to
contain 125 percent the capacity of the largest storage container. The site will use
concrete curbs for rinsate containment (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; Chapter 16-
229-210 WAC). The equipment wash pad located adjacent to the maintenance
building will be roofed and drain to the sanitary sewer, not the storm water system.
Accidental Spil) Response Plan
A spill response plan will be activated for spills or leaks of management chemicals that occur
despite prevention measures listed above. This plan would comply with applicable federal, state
(Chapter 16-201-260 WAC; Chapter 16-229-280 WAC), and city laws. Major provisions of the
proposed accidental spill response plan are the following:
Accidental Spill Response Procedure
The following items must be in place and an inventory of these items posted in the
chemical storage area:
(1) Telephone numbers for emergency assistance, including the City of
Renton law enforcement and fire departments.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 17
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Tu11ntegrated Pest Management Plan (1PM)
(2) Sturdy gloves, footwear, and apron that are chemical resistant to most
pesticides, such as foil-laminate gear and protective eyewear.
(3) An appropriate respirator, if any of the spilled materials require such
during handling activities or for spill cleanup (reference MSDS on file for
each product used).
(4) Containment "snakes", or booms, to confine the leak or spill to a small
area.
(5) Absorbent materials, such a spill pillows, absorbent clay, dry peat moss, or
sawdust to soak up liquid spills.
(6) Seeping compound to keep dry spills from drifting or wafting during
cleanup.
(7) A shovel, broom, and dustpan made from nonsparking and nonreactive
material.
(8) Heavy-duty detergent.
(9) A fire extinguisher rated for all fire types.
( l 0) Any other spill cleanup items specified on the labels of any products used.
(11) A sturdy plastic container with a tightly closing lid that will hold the
quantity of spilled material from the largest pesticide container being
handled.
Spill Responding
Employees will be required to have proficiency in spill response procedures.
( 1) Reporting the Spill
September 20, 2006
As soon as possible after a spill has been identified, the practice field
manager will be notified and have responsibility for reporting all spills to
the list of responsible parties, the city Emergency Agency responsible for
rapid response, and Ecology's Hazardous Substance Information Office.
The following will be reported:
(a) Name and phone number of reporting party
A. C. KINDIG & CO
Page 18
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest lvfanagement Plan (1PM)
(b) Time and location of spill
( c) Identity and quantity of material released
( d) Status of cleanup and containment.
(2) Controlling the Spill
On-site responders will: (a) protect themselves with appropriate
protective clothing and eyewear; (b) stop the source of the spill; (c) protect
others by warning them of the spill; and (d) stay at the site until the spill is
cleaned up.
(3) Containing the Spill
On-site responders shall: (a) confine the spill as quickly as possible; (b)
protect water sources and water resources; ( c) absorb liquids with
absorbent material; and ( d) cover dry materials to prevent them from
becoming airborne or solubilized.
(4) Cleaning up the Spill
On-site responders shall: (a) cleanup the spill; (b) decontaminate the spill
site; (c) neutralize the spill site; (d) decontaminate equipment; and (e)
decontaminate themselves.
4.2 State Requirements for Maintenance Area Drainage Control
A large capacity, curbed concrete basin will be used for pesticide and fertilizer mixing and be
sloped to drain to a sump system to prevent management chemicals and rinsate from escaping
the area if a spill occurs. Spill response measures and supplies will be defined and available
(Chapter 16-201-260 WAC; Chapter 16-229-450 WAC). Any sump contents will be recovered
by manually activated pumps (Chapter 16-229-400 WAC) and properly reused, or if reuse is not
possible, disposed in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations, including but not
limited to the Hazardous Waste Management Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water
Pollution Control Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW).
Fueling and equipment maintenance areas will be constructed so that outside drainage will be
excluded from entering such areas. Fuel storage tank(s) will meet all design, maintenance, and
inspection provisions required by Ecology (Chapter 173-360 WAC). An approximately 250-
gallon tank of biodiesel with an electric pump for field tractors and vehicles will be located in the
maintenance area, along with an approximately 100-gallon gasoline tank and pump for
equipment field vehicles. Activities in the equipment garage will include routine equipment
maintenance, which may include the changing of oil, brake fluid, batteries, and
antifreeze/coolant, and motor or undercarriage cleaning. Closed sump drainage will be provided
September 20. 2006 A.C. KJNDIG & CO.
Page 19
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (1PM)
and any sump contents will be pumped out manually and disposed m an approved off-site
location.
Washing the exteriors of sprayers, mowers, and paint machines will occur in a roofed bay with a
concrete floor, draining to the sanitary sewer. Sprayers will undergo three rinses over the turf
before washing in the roofed bay. This equipment will not be washed outside of the wash bay.
Wastewater from the wash-down bay will not discharge into stormwater drainage facilities.
5.0 REFERENCES
Personal Communications
Heintzelman, D. 1998. Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer
Goldsmith (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), July l, 1998.
Ortego, L. 1998. Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer
Goldsmith (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), July 7, 1998.
Shultz, M. 1998. Zeneca Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer Goldsmith
(Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), August 18, 1998.
References Cited
Abrams, R. 1991. Toxic fairways: risking ground water contamination from pesticides on Long
Island golf courses. New York Environmental Protection Bureau, New York State
Department of Law, July 1991.
Balogh, J.C. and W.J. Walker. 1992. Golf course management and construction: environmental
issues. Lewis Publishers, 951 pp.
Beard, J.B. 1973. Turfgrass: science and culture. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey.
Berndt, W.W. 1992. A best management practices development manual, turfgrass maintenance
section. Prepared for Beak Consultants Incorporated, September 16, 1992.
Brady, N.C. 1984. The nature and property of soils, 7th edition. MacMillan Press, New York,
New York.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 20
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turflntegrated Pest Management Plan ([PM)
Cohen, S.Z., S. Nickerson, R. Maxey, A. Dupay, and J.A. Senita. 1990. A groundwater
monitoring study for pesticides and nitrates associated with golf courses on Cape Cod.
Groundwater Monitoring Review 10:160-173.
Federal Register. July IO, 2000A. 65(132): 42472.
Gustafson, D.l. 1989. Groundwater ubiquity score: a simple method for assessing pesticide
leachability. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:339-357.
Horsley, S. and J.A. Moser. 1990. Monitoring ground water for pesticides at a golf course -a
case study on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Groundwater Management Research, Winter
1990.
King County. 1993. Best management practices for golf course development and operation.
Prepared by the King County Environmental Division. Bellevue, Washington.
King County. 1999. Tri-County integrated pest and vegetation management: Guidelines.
http://www.metrokc.gov/hazwaste/ipm/ipmguide.htm.
Oregon State University. 1996. EXTOXNET Extension toxicology network pesticide
information profiles.
Oregon State University ()SU). 2006a. Pacific Northwest plant disease management handbook.
Extension Service.
Oregon State University (OSU). 2006b. Pacific Northwest weed control handbook. Extension
Service.
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 15.58 RCW. Washington pesticide control act.
Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 17.15 RCW. Integrated pest management.
Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 17.21 RCW. Washington pesticide application
act. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 70.105 RCW. Hazardous waste management.
Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 90.48 RCW. Water pollution control.
Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 21
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
Sygenta. 2000. Material Safety Data Sheet and Label for Primo Maxx. EPA Reg. No. 100-937.
Sygenta. 2006. Material Safety Data Sheet and Label for Heritage Fungicide. EPA Reg. No.
100-1093.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. Pesticide fact sheet for Heritage
fungicide. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, Ofiice of Pesticide
Programs.
Vogue, P.A., E.A. Kerle, and J.J. Jenkins. 1994. Extension properties database. Oregon State
University.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-201 WAC. Fertilizer bulk storage and
operational areas containment rules. Washington State Department of Agriculture,
Olympia, Washington.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-228 WAC. Pesticide Regulations.
Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-229 WAC. Secondary and operational
area containment for bulk pesticide. Washington State Department of Agriculture,
Olympia, Washington.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 173-360 WAC. Underground storage tank
regulations. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington.
Washington State University (WSU). 1980. Revised 1991. Concepts of integrated pest
management: Extension Bulletin 0753. Cooperative Extension. College of Agriculture.
Watershed Company, The. 1993. Fish habitat assessment and anticipated fisheries-related
impacts of the proposed Blakely Ridge master plan development. Prepared for
Blackhawk/Port Blakely Communities.
Wauchope, R.D., T.M. Buttler, A.G. Hornsby, P.W.M. Augustijn-Beckers, and J.P. Burt. 1992.
The SCSI ARSICES pesticide properties database for environmental decision-making.
Review of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 123:1-171.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page 22
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headqua~ters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
APPENDIX A
PESTICIDE ASSESSMENTS
September 20, 2006 A. C KINDIG & CO.
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT -Chipco 26GT
Categorv: Fungicide. Active ingredient is Iprodione (23.3%)
Application Target: Preventative foliar treatment fungicide recommended for the control of a
large number of fungus diseases on turf.
Label Recommended Application Frequencv: Chipco 26GT should be applied when conditions
favor disease development, or when the disease is first noted. Applications are recommended at
label instructed rates as long as required.
Label Recommended Application Rate: Application rate is dependent on the fungus disease. The
application rate varies between 3 and 8 fl. oz per 1,000 ft. See the label application rates for the
fungus disease to be targeted. Do not apply more than 35 fl. oz per 1,000 ft2 per year or more
than 6 applications per year.
Mobility: Using the ground water ubiquity score (GUS) method of Gustafson (1989), iprodione
has a "low" pesticide movement rating (Vogue et al. 1994 ). The GUS score includes soil half
life, water solubility, and sorption coefficients as factors, and has correlated well with monitoring
data once point sources of contamination are ruled out. Other investigators, the U.S. EPA and
the USDA Soil Conservation Service have also attributed low mobility potential ot lprodione
(Horsley and Moser 1990, Abrams 1991 ). A ground water monitoring study for pesticides from
golf courses over sandy deposits on Cape Cod included iprodione, but it was never detected in
any of the monitoring wells (Cohen et al. 1990).
Persistence: lprodione has a soil half-life of 14 to 30 days and an aquatic half life of 3 to 7 days
(Heintzelman, D., personal communication, July I, 1998). These range from "very short lived"
to "moderately short lived" in classification (King County 1993). Vogue et al. (1994) and
Wauchope et al. (1992) both list a soil half-life of 14 days for iprodione.
Toxicity: The LC5096 for rainbow trout is 92.2 mg/L (Ortego, L. personal communication, July
7, 1998), which is classified as only "slightly toxic" by King County (1993) and Balogh and
Walker (1992).
Evaluation Summary: Based on (1) low mobility and movement ratings, (2) short-lived
persistence, and (3) slight toxicity to rainbow trout, Chipco 26GT is an excellent fungicide for
preventative and curative control of some of the most ubiquitous turf fungus diseases without
risk of unintended environmental impact.
September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page A-1
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Yfanagement Plan (!PAI)
PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT -Heritage
Category. Fungicide. Active Ingredient: azoxystrobin (50%).
Application Target Preventative treatment fungicide with systemic and curative properties on
turf.
Label Recommended Application Frequency: Heritage should be applied prior to disease
development. Applications are recommended at label instructed rates as long as required.
Label Recommended Application Rate: Application rate is dgJendent on the fungus disease. The
application rate varies between 0.2 and 0.7 fl. oz per 1,000 ft'. See the label application rates for
the fungus disease to be targeted. Do not apply more than 3.7 fl oz per 1,000 ft2 per year.
Mobi)it.i,~ The chemical structure of azoxystrobin would suggest moderate mobility in sand and
loamy sand soils. The potential mobility and persistence of some of its degradates, based on
laboratory and some field studies, are similar to pesticides with known potential to leach into
ground water under some conditions. For this reason the EPA placed a ground water advisory on
the label. However, the EPA ( 1998) also notes that "upgradable, supplemental field dissipation
studies indicate that Azoxystrobin was moderately immobile and relatively non-persistent under
actual use conditions." Azoxystrobin has relatively low binding affinities on coarse, textured
soils (loamy sand and sand), but approximately five times higher binding affinity on finer-
textured soils (EPA 1998).
Data supplied by the manufacturer lists the Koc as 1,690 (Schultz, M., personal communication,
1998), which ranks as low mobility using the King County ( 1993) system. Using the GUS index
method of Gustafson (1989), azoxystrobin has a low pesticide movement rating. The GUS score
is an empirically derived value that relates sorption in soil based on the sorption coefficient
(Koc) and pesticide persistence (half-life).
Persistence: Azoxystrobin is stable to hydrolysis, but does photo-degrade with a half-life of 11
to 17 days in aquatic environments (EPA 1998). Photo-degradation on soil results in a half-life
of 11 days. Both of these degradation rates in the presence of sunlight are characterized as short
lived (King County 1993). The dissipation of azoxystrobin is mainly dependent on sunlight
(photo-degradation), and secondarily dependent on microbial metabolism. In the absence of
light, degradates, but not the azoxystrobin itself, could be more persistent and mobile. However,
these degradates prove to be nearly nontoxic.
Toxicity: Azoxystrobin is considered highly toxic to rainbow trout (LC5096 of 0.47 mg/L) (EPA
1998; Syngenta (2006). The EPA (1998) notes that azoxystrobin is of low acute and chronic
toxicity to humans, birds, mammals, and bees, but is highly toxic to freshwater fish and
invertebrates. However, its degradate products are practically nontoxic to only slightly toxic to
rainbow trout and daphnids. Degradate R234886 has an LC50 96 of greater than 150 ppm for
rainbow trout and greater than 190 ppm for daphnids. Degradates R401553 and R402173 have
LC5096 values of greater than 50 ppm to daphnids.
September 20, 2006 A. C. KINDIG & CO.
Page A-2
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest ,vlanagement Plan (!PM)
Evaluation Summary: Based on the relative immobility of the parent compound azoxystrobin,
and the relative non-toxicity of its degradates, Heritage is environmentally safe for use on the
practice fields.
Restrictions to Use:
• The label recommends Heritage be restricted to two applications, 28 days apart in the
spring and fall for curative/preventative treatment on turf.
• The label recommends that application be restricted to a 48-hour forecast of dry weather.
September 20. 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page A-3
Seattle Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (!PM)
PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT -Primo Maxx
Category: Turf growth suppressant. Active ingredient 1s Trinexapac-ethyl (Cyclopropyl)
(11.3%).
Application Target: Slow the rate of turf gro.,,th and aid suppression of invasive Poa annua.
Label Recommended Application Frec,uency: Multiple applications can be made as needed by
local conditions of grass growth rates, but should not exceed the maximum described below.
I abeJ Recommended Application Rates· Approximately 50% growth suppression is likely to
occur without grass yellowing for 4 weeks at rates of about 0.25 to 0.50 fl oz. / 1,000 fr per 4
weeks. Applications at half these rates are recommended where Poa annual control is a primary
objective in order to prevent yellowing, and can be made at higher rates for brief periods durin~
periods of very rapid grass growth. Multiple applications should not exceed 7.0 fl. oz./ 1,000 ft
per year.
Mobility: Cyclopropyl mobility is rated as "high" with Koc values that range from 59 (sandy
loam) to 629 ( clay) based on data supplied by the manufacturer, Syngenta (2000).
Persistence· The soil half-life for cyclopropyl at between pH 5 and 7 is 8 days in the dark and
about 4 days in the light. These half-lives rate as "very short-lived" to "short-lived" persistence
(King County 1993).
Toxicity: The manufacturer reports an LC5096 for rainbow trout as 68 mg/L and greater than
142.5 mg/L for water fleas (Daphnia magna) (Syngenta 2000) . This toxicity rates as "slightly
toxic" to "practically nontoxic", respectively (King County 1993 ).
Evaluation Summarv: Although highly mobile, the use of Primo MAXX for routine treatment as
a growth inhibitor is an environmentally safe product for use on the practice fields due to its low
persistence and slight-to non-toxicity.
September 20, 2006 A.C KINDIG & CO.
Page A-4
Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (1PM)
PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT: Prograss
Category: Herbicide. Active ingredient ethofumesate (19%).
Application Target: Curative post-emergence control of annual bluegrass.
Label Recommended Application Frequency: Maximum of four applications per year; two to
three in the fall at 21 to 28 day intervals, and one subsequent application in the spring if needed.
I abe] Recommended Application Rate:
four applications per treated area.
' 1.5 fl. oz per 1,000 W per application, to a maximum of
Mobility. Ethofumesate has Koc values ranging from 210 for sand up to 160 for silt clay loam
(U.S. EPA 1995). These would be classified as "high mobility" (King County 1993).
Ethofumesate has a "moderate" pesticide movement rating using the GUS index method of
Gustafson (1989) reported by Vogue et al. (1994).
Persistence: Ethofumesate has a reported field dissipation half life of 21 days (Balogh and
Walker 1992). Microbial and chemical degradation accounts for 66 percent of the dissipation,
and leaching accounts for 31.2 percent. Half life in sandy load soils is reported to range from
122 days to 285 days, which is highly persistent. However, Vogue et al. (1994) report a soil half
life of 30 days for this product, which is more consistent with the moderately short-lived ranking
from field dissipation studies.
Toxicity: Ethofumesate has a rainbow trout LC5096 of 17.5 mg/L, which is classified as "slightly
toxic" (King County 1993).
Evaluation Summarv: Although highly to moderately mobile, and moderately persistent, the
slight toxicity of this product combined with the proposal to limit applications to greens on a
curative basis combines to make it an environmentally safe element of the !PM.
September 20, 2006 A. C. KINDIG & CO
Page A-5
The RETEC Grcup. inc.
1011 SW Klickitat Way
Suite 207
Seattle, WA 98134~1162
.RETEC
August 30, 2006
Ray Colliver
Project Manager
Football Northwest, LLC
505 Fifth Ave South, Suite 900
Seattle, Washington 98104
RE: Shoreline and Wetland Survey, l'\orth and South Baxter Parcels
Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, City of Renton
Dear Mr. Colliver:
{206) 624-9349 Phone
{206) 624-2839 Fax
www.retec.com
This letter summarizes the results of a shoreline and wetland survey conducted on the
approximate 20-acre Baxter property, located to the west of the 44th Avenue Exit from I-405,
within the City of Renton, Washington (Township 24 North Range 05 East Section 29, W.M.).
The Baxter property consists of two adjacent parcels, Parcel #29245900 I and #2924059015
(Figure 1). Lake Washington (Lake), a Class 1 Inventoried Shoreline of the State, bounds the
western portion of the property. A BNSF rail line bounds the eastern property boundary.
Currently an abandoned open field, the North and South Baxter properties were formerly used
for the operation of a wood treating plant and storage yard, as shown in Figure 2. Photos 1 and 2
show recent conditions of the property. After the plant's closure in 1981, a portion of the
property was used to store bark mulch. Remediation actions were prescribed via Consent Decree
for the North Baxter and South Baxter properties (#00-2-11778-?KNT and #00-2-11779-5KNT,
respectively) with the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE) under the Model Toxics
Control Act (MTCA). Cleanup of South Baxter resulted in the excavation and replacement of
soils in the Baxter Cove area and stabilization of soils in the uplands. North Baxter remediation
will consist of capping at the time of development of the property.
Two previously delineated on-site wetlands, Wetlands "D" and "E", were excavated and filled in
association with the remediation plan as described in the February 2000 Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum (MAM) report for the Quendall and Baxter Properties, prepared by Associated
Earth Sciences, Inc (AES!) of Kirkland, Washington (Figure 3). Approximately 0.46 acres of
mitigation wetland was restored in November 2002 within the former footprint of Wetland "E"
along the shoreline of the Lake near the southwest comer of the property, as shown on Figure 4.
Current features of the North and South Baxter properties are shown on Figure 5. Few
developed features are present on the South Baxter parcel. The Baxter Cove wetland is present
along the shoreline, and an open field is present on upland areas where remediation has been
completed. Developed features on the North property consist of a paved area along the shoreline
in the southwestern portion of the parcel. A paved driveway also extends from the northeast
entrance to the site around a house located on the northwestern corner of the property. The
driveway extends to the south along the shoreline, as shown in Figure 5. Other features of note
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 2
on the North parcel include several abandoned gravel roads extending parallel to the shoreline
and railroad tracks. Historical use of these roads is shown in Figure 2.
1 Shoreline Survey
Dan Berlin of The RETEC Group, Inc. (RETEC) delineated the Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM) of the Lake located along the western boundary of the subject property on May 19,
2006 (Figure 5). The OHWM was marked with a total of 41 sequentially numbered orange pin
flags in preparation for a professional survey. The OHWM along the Lake's shoreline was
determined according to tbe protocols of the Washington Department of Ecology (WAC 173-22-
030) and the Washington Department offish and Wildlife (WAC 220-110-020)
The OHWM survey was conducted based on the presence of biological and physical indicators
along the Lake shoreline. Biological indicators consisted of the transition from aquatic to
terrestrial vegetation. Vegetation was classified based on the indicator status designated for
northwest plants. Physical indicators included sediment deposition and flood debris.
Vegetation identified along the shoreline consists primarily of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus
armeniacus), Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius), and red alder (A/nus rubra). A few black
cottonwoods (Populus ba/samifera) and willows (Salix sp.) are also present along the shoreline.
All of these plants are rooted on top of a steep bank between two and three feet high. Himalayan
blackberry extends out over the water's edge several feet. Very little other vegetation is present
below the top of the bank.
Lake water elevations along the Baxter shoreline range from approximately 18.8 to 19.5 feet
above sea level (NA VD 88 datum). The US Army Corps of Engineers (USA CE) controls lake
elevation with the Lake Washington ship canal, generally keeping it at its highest elevation
during June (18.8 feet) and at its lowest during December and January (16.8 feet). Although lake
elevation is generally maintained at a high of 18.8 feet, some areas experiencing erosion showed
an OHWM of 19.5 feet because of the absence of vegetation along a steep bank. The OHWM
survey results are mapped on Figure 5.
Wind and boat generated waves tend to contribute to shoreline erosion along the North and
South Baxter properties. Along Baxter Cove, large woody debris has been anchored along the
cove opening as part of wetland restoration, as shown in Photos 3 and 4. Other logs have washed
up against the shoreline just north of the cove opening. Some piles are present along the
northern portion of the South Baxter shoreline (see Photos 3 and 4). Details of those piles are
shown in Photo 5.
A series of piles and log seawalls are present in varying densities along the entire North Baxter
shoreline, as shown from an aerial perspective in Photos 6 and 7. These piles help to dissipate
wave energy against the shoreline, which show obvious signs of erosion. Wind and boat
generated waves are common along the entire length of shoreline. A covered boathouse along
with a dock is present on the north end of the North Baxter property (see Photos 6 and 7). Other
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 3
features include a small IO foot by IO foot dock with a chain link fence is also present along the
southern portion of North Baxter (Photos 6 and 7).
2 Wetland Survey
Dan Berlin and Tina Mirabile of RETEC conducted a wetlands site assessment on the Baxter
parcels on May 26, 2006. Wetland identification was conducted according to the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual 1997 (Ecology publication #96-94) (DOE,
1997), which is based on the USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Guidance (Environmental
Laboratory, 1987). This methodology requires that evidence for each of three wetland indicators
for vegetation, soils and hydrology must be present to make a regulatory wetland determination.
Four sample plots, SP! to SP4, were established on the subject property during the site visit, as
shown in Figure 5 (see Photos 8 to 11). Dominant and subdominant plant species were identified
at each sample plot based on visual estimates of 20 percent or more real cover within a 5-foot
radius for herbaceous and shrub layer plants and 30 feet radius for canopy species. A sample plot
was determined to have hydrophytic-dominated vegetation when more than 50 percent of the
dominant species present had an assigned indicator status, based on USFWS designations of
obligate (OBL), facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC).
Typically soils are observed to depths of 18 inches or more at a sample plot. The compaction of
the site's soils however, limited the ability to dig beyond certain depths as indicated on the
dataforms. A Munsell soil color chart was used to determine soil color.
Hydrology of sample plots was evaluated by determining the depth to free standing water in soil
pits, secondary characteristics, and a review of historical data. Sites which have saturated soil
conditions within the upper twelve inches of the soil horizon for five to twelve percent of the
growing season typically meet the positive wetland hydrology parameter. The site investigation
was conducted during the growing season.
Past land use disturbances have altered the site's vegetation, soils and natural hydrology. Details
regarding the site's vegetation, soils, hydrology and wildlife habitats as recorded during the site
visits are summarized below. Datasheets are attached for additional reference. Photos depicting
the existing conditions at the time of the site visit are also attached.
2.1 Vegetation
Hydrophytic species of non-native grasses and weedy herbaceous plants, typical of disturbed
meadows, dominate the vegetation on the subject property. Past industrial land use activities on
the property have disturbed the site's native vegetation and limited the ability for canopy species
to mature. A historical aerial photograph indicates that the southern portion of the Baxter
property was devoid of much of its vegetation (Figure 2). This figure also shows that vegetation
on the northern portion was portioned between multiple roadways. Vegetation clearing also
occurred on the Baxter property in 1990 (AESI, 2000). In 1996, during a David Evans and
Associates, Inc. (DEA) on-site field investigation, weedy herbaceous plants and sapling-and
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 4
seedling-sized deciduous canopy species of red alder, black cottonwood and willows were re-
colonizing portions of the property.
Representative grass species currently present on the Baxter property include bent grass
(Agrostis sp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), tall and red fescue (Festuca arundinacea, F. rubra)
and reed canary grass (Pharalis arundinacea). Representative weedy herbaceous plant species
present include soft rush (Juncus ejfusus), sickle-leaved rush (Juncus falacatus), bird's foot
trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), white clover (Trifohum repens), western dock (Rumex; occidentalis),
vetch (Viccia sp.) and hairy cat's ear (Hypochaeris radicata).
Young black cottonwood and red alder trees and Scouler's and Pacific willow (Salix scouleriana,
S. lucida spp. /asiandra) shrubs are present along the property's eastern boundary. Non-native
and invasive purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom are
present in some areas, including the shoreline edge.
2.2 Soils
The Soil Survey of King County Area (USDA 1973) indicates Bellingham silt loam (Bh) as the
dominant soil type on the subject property, as shown on Figure 6 (USDA 1992). Bellingham silt
loams are listed as hydric on the King County Area, Washington Hyric Soils List (USDA, NRCS
Oct. 30, 2001). Typical Bellingham silt loams are located within depressions on upland glacial
till plains with slopes less than two percent, slow permeability, and high available water
capacity. However, based on the field survey, the soils on the site have been altered from those
described in the Soil Survey.
None of the soils observed at any of the four sample plots constituted undisturbed hydric soils.
Highly compacted fill, including gravel, sand and wood chips, was observed at each of the
sample plots. Non-hydric grayish brown (2.5 Y 5/2) gravelly silty sandy loams with no mottles
was observed at SP4, located near the southeast property corner.
Some indicators of hydric soil were observed at some sample plots, including mottled gray or
dark gray soils displaying low matrix chromas within gravelly and woody fill materials at SP I
and SP3. Gravelly sandy loam fill displaying low matrix chromas and mottles was observed at
SP2, which was located in a shallow swale with wood chips present on the ground surface.
Although plots SP!, SP2, and SP3 contained potential indicators of hydric soil, soils are all
disturbed and compacted with wood fill and rocks as a result of historic industrial activity on the
property.
2.3 Hydrology
No positive indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at SP2 and SP3, located in the central
portion of the property (Figure 5). Water was observed seeping along the interface between the
organic "O" horizon and the compacted fill "A" horizon at a depth of two inches from the
surface at SP4, located near the southeast comer of the property. Surface run-off appears to be
unable to penetrate the compacted soil and the roots of the vegetation only extended two to three-
inches from the surface. Water was observed seeping within the highly compacted fill at SP! at
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 5
a depth of 10 inches from the surface. SP I was located within a remnant roadway on the
northeast portion of the property (Figure 5).
2.4 Wildlife Habitat
No federally Endangered, Threatened or Sensitive animal or plant species were observed on the
subject property during the site visit. Turtles were observed near the Baxter Cove wetland,
however species were not identified. Common turtles that are associated with the Lake include
painted (Chrysemys picta) and red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elagans). A killdeer
(Charadrius vociferus) was observed on the central portion of the property. Canadian geese
(Branta canadesis) were observed on the adjacent property to the north.
2.5 Baxter Cove Wetland
The Baxter Cove wetland was restored in November 2002 along the Lake shoreline in
accordance with the Consent Decree and Mitigation Analysis Memorandum negotiated with the
Department of Ecology. The 0.46 acre wetland was designed to be a forested wetland with open-
water and emergent components in the cove area. A 50-foot vegetated buffer was also restored
in 2002 with the restoration of this wetland. The restored wetland was not delineated because it
was constructed in the fall of 2002 and it has complied with performance standards. Monitoring
of the wetland vegetation was conducted following construction (AES!, 2002), and during years
1, 2, and 3 (RETEC, 2003a, 2004, and 2005, respectively). Plant survival of trees and shrubs and
emergent vegetation was low during the Year 1 survey, and therefore in the fall of 2003, goose
exclusion devices were installed and additional tree, shrub, and emergent plants were planted as
described in the Mitigation Plan (RETEC, 2003b ). Performance goals have been attained in each
of the subsequent years of monitoring.
A wetland rating was performed on the mitigation Baxter Cove Wetland during the site visit.
The rating was conducted according to the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for
Western Washington (Ecology, 2004) and according to the City of Renton classifications m
Section M ofRMC 4-3-050.
The HGM classification of the Baxter Cove mitigation wetland is lake-fringe (Lacustrine
Fringe). Wetlands that receive scores between 30 and 50 points on the Washington State rating
forms are classified as Category 3 wetlands. The wetland received a score of 46 points and is
therefore classified as a Category 3 wetland. The wetland received a score of 18 points in the
Habitat Functions section of the rating system.
2.6 Wetland Regulatory Summary
No jurisdictional wetland areas were identified on the subject Baxter property during the site
investigation, with the exception of the Ecology-regulated Baxter Cove mitigation wetland
located near the southwest corner of the property. The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps
indicate the presence of lake-associated wetlands within the vicinity of the Baxter Cove
mitigation wetland and further off-site to the south, as shown in Figure 7. No wetlands are
indicated on the NW! map as being present along the subject property's northern shore or within
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 6
its central and eastern portions. The City of Renton wetland maps do not indicate any wetlands
on or within the immediate vicinity of the Baxter property.
The target vegetation and wetland classification for the 0.46-acre Baxter Cove rrut1gat10n
wetland is a Class 2 forested wetland (AESI, October 2000). A 50-foot vegetated and enhanced
buffer was designated around the restored wetland during negotiations with Ecology. This buffer
may be subject to buffer-width averaging, however the minimum buffer width shall not be less
than 40 feet and the total area contained within the buffer after averaging shall be equal to
amount of the total buffer area established within a standard 50-foot wide buffer.
The wetland was observed to have three types of vegetation structure: aquatic bed; emergent
plants; and scrub/shrub. Although trees have been installed in seasonally saturated wetland
areas, they have not obtained the required height to contribute towards a forested classification.
The open water component represents less than forty percent of the total wetland. During
periods when lake levels are lowered, a major portion of open water areas in the wetland become
exposed. These areas as well as an emergent fringe along the cove during high water meet the
emergent classification.
The City of Renton classifies wetlands into three classes: Category 1, 2 and 3. The City of
Renton requires a standard protective buffer of 100-feet, 50-feet, and 25-feet for Category 1, 2
and 3 wetlands, respectively.
The City of Renton defines Category 1 wetlands as those wetlands that provide essential habitat
for fish and wildlife species listed by Federal or State governments as endangered or threatened
or include the presence of plant associations of infrequent occurrence; and/or have 40% to 60%
permanent open water with two or more vegetation classes; and/or is equal to greater than I 0-
acres in size with three or more vegetation classes, one of which is open water.
Category 2 wetlands are those wetlands that: I) do not meet the criteria of Category I or 3
wetlands and that have heron rookeries or osprey nests; or 2) are wetlands of any size located at
the headwaters of a water source; or 3) are wetlands having minimum existing evidence of
human-related physical alteration such as diking, ditching, or channelization.
Category 3 wetlands are severely disturbed; newly emerging or; are those wetlands that do not
qualify as a Category 1 or a Category 2 wetland, such as smaller, high quality wetlands.
The Baxter Cove wetland appears to qualify as a Category 3 wetland under City of Renton
regulations.
Mr. Ray Colliver
August 30, 2006
Page 7
I hope that this information will assist you with your development planning. If you have any
further questions or comments regarding this letter, please do not hesi late to contact me at (206)
624-9349.
Sincerely,
The RETEC Group, Inc.
~:JL~VB
Wetland Scientist
Attachments: Reference List, Figures, Dataforms, Photos
cc: Grant Hainsworth, File VULCJ-19589-300-RETEC
References
Reference List
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. February 2000. Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Quenda/1
and Baxter Properties, Renton, Washington. Kirkland, WA. 60 pps.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. October 2000. J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum. An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum, dated February 17, 2000. Kirkland, WA. 7 pps.
Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 2003. As-Built Monitoring Report, Baxter Cove Remediation
Project. Prepared for Port Quendall Company. January 8.
City of Renton. December 2005. Title 4 Chapter 3 Sections 010 -090. Renton, WA.
Cooke, S. S., 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and
Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society-Trailside Series. Seattle, WA.
David Evans & Associates, Inc. Revised May 1997. Wetland Determination Report on the JAG
Development Property, Renton, Washington. Bellevue, Washington. 51 pps.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, WA 730 pp.
Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington-Revised.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-025. Olympia,
Washington.
Kollmorgen Corporation. 1975. Munsell soil color charts. Baltimore, MD.
National Geographic Society. 1987. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. 2nd Edition.
The National Geographic Society. Washington, D.C.
Pojar, J. and A. Mackinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast -Washington, Oregon,
British Columbia and Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing.
Reed, R.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988 Northwest
Biological Report 88 (26.9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, St. Petersburg, Florida.
RETEC, 2003a. Baxter Cove Wetland Monitoring Report, Year 1. Prepared for Port Quendall
Company, October 14.
RETEC, 2003b. Baxter Cove Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Addendum to Year 1 Wetland
Monitoring Report. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, November 18.
VULCl-19589-300 Pagel of2
RETEC, 2004. Baxter Cove Wetland lvfonitoring Report, Year 2. Prepared for Port Quendall
Company, November 3.
Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. United States
Department of Agriculture.
Soil Conservation Service. 1973. King County Areas Hydric Soils List. King County, WA.
United States Department of Agriculture.
Washington State Department of Ecology. March 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication No. 96-96. Olympia, Washington.
USFWS, 1996. National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. 1996 National
Summary Indicator by Region and Subregion. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Website: http://www.nwi.fws.gov/bha/download/ 1996/national. pdf.
VULCl-19589-300 Page 2 of2
Figures
Lake Washington
North &
South
Baxter
Property
N •
Figure 1. Vicinity Map -North and South Baxter Property, Renton, WA
Parcels 292459001, 292459015
Historic Aerial Photo of North and Bax te r Property (date unknown)
/V lnterr.tate
111.ij or Road•
0111 0< K o&d
/V lnte-rstat~
,'\' Sta te hlvhwa y
/'/ us h lvhwa y
Road•
• Cl tie•
I •. I USGS Quad Index 24K
Lower 4 8 Avallabla Welland Data
Non -01~11a1
DlglUI
No D•ta
Sc.an
NHD Streams
Counlie • 1 00K
D Slat,,. 100K
D Soulh Ame ric a
D North Americ~
a~-..
,·
'
11.
i 1·
........
;,.O~ r,
,j,'1'
~'r-s
s-+-,,,
~-.;·"'<
!i
al
1i
I
~I
-, i
; ~~
I i
i
~
Q
.\ ii-,
.o'·' ov.
//
.'-.
) 11-'I!. ~'1-,e.
,i. "<' ..
&,1!, '
GY,SY S,BBASIN De:::,,(,./
// ......
QUENDALL
TERMINALS
/'/_./
' ', ',
"··< ·,.
NORTH
J.H.BAXTER
j
I
I :::, ·--l-'11 • ' i
' -"11
' l&SIABBDCIATED ;r l!ARTH
•---• 8ClliiNC&S1 INC
REMEDIATION ACTIVITY AND WETLANDS AND SHORELINE VEGETATION
SOUTH J,H. BAXTER PARCEL
REMEDtATION FOOTPRINT
RENTON, WASHINGTON
"""""
L__J
c:=::J
II:T:Iill
c;;:;J
c:=::J
LEGEND
Arna of remed1&tion impact along the shoreline
Less tllan 50% wood wasto (oo aetion, capping,
partial capping, pa11ial dredge, or complete dredge;
to be determined)
Dredge to6' and replaced with clean matenal
to original grade
Dredge to 3' and replaced with clean material
to original grade
3'cap with clean mateoa! or cap with
redevelO?Tient
Excavated io required depth to remove
C011tamlnants otsludl)o; In situ stabi~zed to 1B'
below ground surfa<.e or replaced w~h clean
mtterlal to capped grade (See Note 2}
Btackbeny
Shrubs
Trees
NOTE: 1. ALL HABITAT, WETLAND, ANO PROJECT FEATURE
LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE.
2. SEE FINAL CLEANUP ACTION PLAN FOR ACCURATE
CLEANUP Dl::TAILS.
A
NORTH
1W :m :m. -,m
APPR:OX™TE SOH.E IN FEP:.T
FIGURE 1
DATE <1,6,,00
PROJ. NO. l<M9142EI
li.RETEC
APPROXIMATE WATER
BOUNDARY ON
NOVEMBER 11, 2003
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME PL.ANT SIZE ORIGINAL REPLACEMENT SUPPLEMENTAL
QUANTITY PLANTS QUANTITY
/TREES @I Doug,o.-1, --/. e ·--
p...,.Ol<uo,,"""'1;.<i,
p......,.....,,..,,,..., ....
f"""'/rejorop/rfllo
r.,.,,.;,rr:ar,
,_.,, __
4"Loa-... ,.,.,t.,rt,,p
9
\ @
\. €) O<~almaplo A""'"''*"""'""'" 1.10;,~
\ ® ~ad-P<,p<J1<,,inc!,o,:,a,po
l § ·-·· ,_,__ ,,,,_
,_.,,_
1·k>2~
1-lo2-~ Sit ..... ..,, ..._ .. _ ...
1· lo 2-gob,
cr-J . .., @ ,O<IO!do, Affl",,,__ 1-102·~
~ ® Pocille,..ow s.oxi,....-1-lo2"9'*>o
5fl.FnrlJ Wnl;.klDISHO NE BUFFER ---r; -....__ @ 811tarCootf\' ""°"''omo,,ga"'"" l·lo211"11on I\ ·····.":-., -,-·--... ,_
" •
•
"
•
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
/ "'SHRUBS ~ ...,.....,.. A""'c<-t;!,,"""" 1-to<-{l<IIIOn •J
/ \ I], «<loslor~ Comu,!Ro/oorre.. 1-lo2·~ 116 53
/ ~ @ """""'""' COH-dou"'..,. 1-lo2·,18k>n lO 10
---_J ~'. 9 wo>1omc,-,o.,.,., ,,,,...,,._ 1-I02·-
~ -/··-\ @ $ .. --·---,.,_ <' -. '\ \ & lw:alout Co,yl.•a>m<il• 1·1o2~
"'~ 19 --<II -Ruru,--· 1·l02-galon I ~ ., -1 -,i \ • -·-,--"· ,.,,,._
I \ . a,_.,~po -,,....,,.,.. ,.,02-go1on
1 \ / ....,,.,,.... POlystr,c.oomm..-.)""' 1-galon
\ 1 / a """'W'Tl' s __ .,.,,. 1-galon
\ I I _j
\ \ L-:>O /J) _..,. Lc,,/Uto.,...OI""'"'' 1-~don
I \ ..... G•-·-· ··~"""
I ) \ . EMERGENTS lad\'lam A1",..,tun, -,-.o1on
)
',~ ~-2 , -~ o1ougi,-c""'""'""'' 6-1'11:nr,lug
C:.:::3 ----.,,,t!u,
. mm:l -fnlltoObl,nJII, Sd,p<Umirto<atp<JI
mm ...... _.. °""""""-·
&oocn"'og
""""""'""
1L>OO,or08rerool ~-~ "'""'"'"'"II_. G~••..,..
NOTES FOR >1/!IGATIOh CONDUCTED I~ 2003:
"'
" ,.,
'" • ,.
" • ,.
• .. ·-'" .. ,.
•
"' •
"'
"
"'
"' ,. -
"
"
"
•
"
•
•
/ ,,
/ P!onb All .,;110~ ond ,od-o,io, dog.,.ood sholl hov• ot _1<.-,,1 J ,t..,,..s .o.dd;l;onoJly, oU Mootko ,ooe •hall hove o\ leo>l ~ ,tom,
20 ,upplemonlol 00101 and 20 suwlemen\01 snowt,erry .,,1, be ocot\ere~ '" oreo, where ,~o<d lorn ond O,egon g,ope demon,t,otM lo ..
our,ivol in \he lowland burro,.
//
RECOITTOURED PORTION WITH /
ESTABLISHED SMALL FRUITEJJ,/
_fiULRUSH AND ADDITIO~
~f.lBE!ffl't;-1'ACIF!CWfLLO\N, AND
t<~OSJER DOGWOOD ~
~II loeoUon• o,o opprox;mote
Coloc,,d plant symb,ol• o<O opproxmote loco\oas of ,uppk,montol plantng, lo, 200J m~goton Block ond wh;(e picot •ymboi, ore
op pro, moto locol,on, of o, g,MI!)' pklnted moler ol, D,od and dy;ag plon!s wi>I b, "ploeod ocemd,ng lo th, loeo(;on, ;n lhi, pk,, ..
units, otho,~,•• sp•e,r;,d ,n the m;t,got,on pion
~ PERMANENT
UPLOT
PS#2e ~i:r~~ENT
'
MONITORING
PHOTOGRAPH " '
SCALE IN FEET
,0
BAXTER COVE -RENTON, WASHINGTON
\IULAN-167~500
,~TLI0/21/0i °"""· A.S./Sf.A
2D02 RESTORED WETLAND WITH
2D03 REPLANTING LOCATIONS
FIGURE4
.... RETEC
ORCINARY HIGH
W.A.'ER MARK
FIELD INVESTIGATION PLOT
PROPERTV BOUNDARY
CHA<N LINK FENCE
RAILROASI TRACKS
1/-3/o('I Xr.1/S
WSTY COVE CON{)QI.IINIUI.I COIJPLEX
NOT!::
. . I
APPROXIMA'i::E . ·i
GYPSY, /'-~
SUBBAdN---./
DRAl~AGE
CULVE~.t
NORJ·I
B,\XTtR
WETLAND AREA
EXISTING
PAVEMENT/ROADWAY
SHORELJOE cti\\1.1 AND rlELO !1-1\11:STIGATION
PLOTS LOCATI:J FROU 6/)/00 TO
6/16/ll6
VULAN-16756-100
DATI::OB/08/0ti DSv.N: C.1.1./SEA
\.,; I
l'e
, ,
I
I I
,GY SY
·,. S'J6JBA IN
CU~VE, S
ct.L .
'",_
(" /
\
€0 ' ----1"=1:::.0'
BAXTER PROPERTY WITH
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK AND
FIELD INVESTIGATION SAMPLE PLOTS
FIGURE 5
I
I.
\,
FIGURE 6 SOIL SURVEY OF KING COUNTY AREA, WASHINGTON
0
0
M
~
"'
0
0
~
~
"'
0
0 ;;:;
~
"'
§
~
"'
0 g
~-
"'
~
-;I,
i;,i
0
R
~
559.600 559900 560000 560100 560.200 560300
l!dlg~
LO I , • .,. .ff #'-"I..
559·000
·•·
USDA .''i•l•r•l H KUIIT<"' :iliii runur.-1llon ~er, n
559-900 560 000
0
560100
45 90
560200
Meters
180
560-300
Web Soil Survey 1.1
National Cooperative Soi l Survey
560400 560500 560600
560400 560500 560-600
--Feet 0 100 200 400 600 80 0
560.700
560°700
7/3/2006
Page I o f 1
0
l:l
~
"'
0
~
~
"'
0
0 ;;:;
~
"'
0
8
"' ~
0 g
~
"'
0
0
~
/(l
"'
0
R
" "' ~
z
0
c-:,
"' ,.:_
<T
Figure 7 NWI Map
122-12-5W 122-12-0W 122-1 1-55 W 122-11-50 W 122-11-45 W
...
c' w
r:,>
0
z
... ..... z
"' c-:,
"' ,.:_
;~--_ :/........-/i .. ·.·ll:l ·i:<} 1.i .. .' 01
<T
z
0 c-:,
~['·.· ~v
VVashi ~qton
Mercer I land
Digit I
')•,f _A;,
.::·~~\?" "r,.' C::;,··
.,:::•<
1<--./~;
,.,_-...:-
"''
:1J
·-.1'
z
...
c'
-----1~
0
z
;l__________i__~~~~ "' ,.:_
<T ,\,f.1 .1:-\'. .,.···o.
... -.
·:(
') . .~,.
...
c' ------t ~ 8;
z
122-12-5 W 122-12-0 W 122-11-55 W
T his map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for general
reference on ly, Data l~~e;,:
4
t~at appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or
otilel:lluse.reliallle....D:t -ls.AIOI TO.Be USED-liOR.N.Al.llGAT ION ... , ... -•. .. •. . ..
122-1 1-5DW 122-11 -45W
Map center: 47° 32' 3 .1" N , 122° 11 ' 55.3 " W
Legend
~ Interstate
M aj or Roads
Other Ro ad
~ ln lenlata
,;/ Stato h ighway
,;/ US highway
Ro ad s
e Cities
U SGS Quad lndox 24 K
lower 48 Wet la nd Pol ygons
ts'.] Estoarlno 3nd Marino D oe pwa1or
E stuarin e and M-lrlne Wetland
freshwater Emo rganl Wel land
l:l:] tra•h walor Fore•tad /Shrub Wetland
r 1 F resh watcr Pond
m L ako
Other
.• J R iverine
Low er 48 Availab le Wetland Data
Non-Digital
Digit al
No D•l a
Sc,,n
NH D W aterbodies
NH D Str eams
.::J Counties 1 OOK
Cl States 100 K
o S outh Am erica
o N orth America
$ Sca le: 1 :5,852
Dataforms
••¥ • • -··-.--¥0¥UHOU .... V ..... _ .. , .... nv•• ••~••••fH< ~v, ~ nvu_,,, ""-"'"' ,.,..,,._, ,,. nn """" """"'""'"u" ,.,,..,,...,
Project Site: Vulcan· Ba.,:li:r Property Date: Sn.6/200(J
App!icant/ownc,; Mt. Tal Fowl<;t. Projc<:1 Manager. Vulc;m Coimty: King
S1ate: WA
lnvcsnE_:ator{~J: Dati lk:-hn, Tina Mirabile, Tl:.: RETEC Group, Jne. Location: T.!.4N/R0SE/S2':I
Do Normal Circumst;mccs c~ist M the $ilc'! NO Community JO: UPLAND. FrLL
1$ \he Site s,gnificantly dislucbcd (~typical situaiion}"! NO l"rao11cc1 ID:
Is the area a pol¢111ial P,oblcm Arca? NO Plot JD: l
Dominant Planl Species Stratum lndicalor
Pham/is arudinac,:a (6S%) HRR8 FACW
Fesntca robra (20%) HERB FAC
lon,s corm,,,;u/ants (20%) HERB f.ACW
Jwu:1,s /aka.m(10%) HERB FACW-
Jwu:us e/fl<.rus (5-10%) liER8 fACW
Fc~m,a arurn!inacea HERB FAC
Trifolium rcp;ms (TRACE) HERB fAC
% of spccin thal are OBL. FAC\V, arul/or FAC: >50%
Hydropht}ic vegetation prcs.ent? YES
Rational for decision/Remarks; Hydrophy1ic \'Cgetation is dominant W~dy species, typical of dimnbed ar,y.is, :ire pres.::nt.
NOTES; • -Assumed Indicator Snecres. Dominar,t S"'""i¢S a,c: those wilti 20% or more i:ovcr
HYDROLOGY
ls it the &rowing se;1~on"! ~ Water Marks: NO Scdimcn1 Dqio:.its: NO
Base.:! on: SCS Soil Swve;, Drift Lines: NO D.aina11e Patlerns: NO
Depth ofinuruiation; NIA inches Oxidized Rools: Local Soil Sun•c.y NO
Dq::th to free wa1cr in pit 10· inches Channels< 12"' NO Wmcr stair.<:d kilvcs: NO
Oen th lo sahlrnted soil: NIA inches FAC Neutral: YES
Cr=k all !hat apply & uplain bclow: Other:
Stream, Lake or g.aug-e data: ~
Aerial photographs: NIA -Other: NIA
Welland hydrology pr~-nt? ___!:iQ__ Recent prcc:1p1!al1on,
R.1tional for decision/Remark$: Surface wato"" !s p0ndint: on ccmpacicd IHI material
··---1ple p ·-· 1---···". ,,, .. ,_ -'--11-.. , ---·-·-,_ _.., ,_ .. --._ .. ·-· ·-1 . ____ ,_ .. -· _ ....
SOILS:
Map Uni! Name
(Series & Phnsc): _((3h} Bdliniharn sih loam
l"rofile Descri.e_tion
D~th
9:!.Y
Mottle
colors
Ma1ri~ C-0lor l{Munscll
!to,U.on l(Mum,c_\l.111oist) moist2
10 YR 5/1 10 YR 4/4
Dr.'l.inagi; Class;
poorly
field cbscrv:itions confirm
map~dtyp,;:'/ NO
Moltlc
Abun<.hLritc ITe~lurc,
iuc & <:onCfclions.
consll'ilst straurc-~ctc.
da),'C)' loam with
sand , l,!tavel and
wood fill.
Drawing of ooil
profile {mat eh
de:'lC~~nl
. . ' ;) : ,.
i\ ~' ' \f",·
~_,.-··,,C· ,;. --( ( -~
~-1,,· :, '
. " ( " ' . ,.
f1_·{ .\. __ /? ..,u
Compacuon of soit, ILmitcd abili1y to obsrc,·e soils at d«pcr d<':plh:;.. '~ / }~--• / c(
<--·~,\)';:-\ .\ /,,,,__.,
\____; ~' ~.) 1----------------------1,p\~' :'ii/
H)"dric S()1l lndic;il,m: (check all thal apply)
____ Hi'>lo:iol Concretions
. ..~;;it~ / '/7-:l1s' ·\·~'
Histic Epip,;,don
Sulfidic Odor
----Aquic Musilure Rci:imc -=--Reducing Condi1ions
YES Gle}Cd or Low-Chron,~ Colors
----Or~Jnic Content in Sandy Soils
OrHanic Strcakio1g in Sll!ldy Soils
==Lis1cd on Local llydric Soils lists
I.isled on N,i,t. Hydric Soil Ust$
Other (c.,:plain in remarks)
llyd1ie ~oils prc,ccnf! NO -Disturhed -Compac1..:d Fill
Rati-0nal for decision/Remarks:
Soil,. lire disturbed and con:;.a~ls of JO%, gr.we I and sand and 20--10% wood fill.
}(Ids arc cu~i1c~.
w.,tla,nd Dc!cmiinalion
Hydril: vcgcu,tion prtwnl'!
HyJric :Wil prcscn1"!
Wetlaml hydroloi::v prcscn1'!
R~1iona1/tt.cm.arH:
YES-Disturbc,J Is 1hc sampling point
NO -Fill within a we1land"C
NO -Ponding due to compaclion of till m111aial
S11c is disturbed due lo gravel. sand&. woOO f:ll & compacti~n fiom industrial use
f'oni:lini;t of surface run-off and prei:ipi1a1ion occi.r~ du.: to
to lack of infiltmion .~:ithin com£~~ fill m~taja!s
NO
'-""" '"''" -"uuu11~ ..-,.,,..,,,., ..,._,,:ull,IJ>i:IUU<l l"ll.."l!IU<I 1,s.cv<:K>U "'""' -.o, 1..o.n~ we1~u,u ....::uma,uo11 ,v,,u,u~, '" "'" _,.,~,~ '-"''"'"'-'""" 1•·1,1,nu;uJ
Prnjecl Site· V\ll~i»t -BaxtCT Propeny D~le: Sl26i2006
ApplicML'o1,11c,r· Mr, Ta! fowkr. PtQj.:,;t Ma.iai::,;r. Vukan Cuunly. King
S1aic: WA
luvc::;tis~lm(s): D.w Bl:rlin. Tiro Mirabi!i::, The l'lETEC Group. foe Ulca1ion: TI4NfR05VSZ9
Do Normal Circums1ances exist on !he site'! NO Commuoi1y ID: UPLJ\ND • FILI.
ls the Siu; sis11ifi~;1111ly d~turbcd (illypi<;al siluaiioo)': NO T=.=i!O:
Is the an:a a polcnCial Problem Arca? NO PlotiD: 2
Dominant Plmit Spc,;i~ Stmlllrn Indicator
Agro11i, ~p. (8M'•) BERB FA(•
R,;,(tw i11110flt.f{40%) HERB FAC
I lum.·1,s efftm,s (30%) HERB f'AC
Ru~ ;iccide.nm//i; 00%) flERB FACW•
loms corni,1culatu.s. (20~,) MERB FAC
Rypochaeril ,'Odicaf<J (20%) HERB NI
Jun= fa/catus(15%) HERS FACW-
'rn'folium renvu /TRAC€) flERS FAC
E/eochal'U paiustris (TRACE} HER.5 OBL
%of species lhal areOSL, FACW. and/or FA(': >SO%
Hyd.opMyic veg¢1atiOll ()rCSCflt'/ YES
Ra1ional J'nr decision/Remarks: tlydrophylic vq;i:1Mion is do1ninan1. We>:dy spc,;ir;:;. typical of Jii;1u,beJ ar<':.lS, ar,:, pr=L
NOTES: • · Assumed lndicalor S0<cics. Dominant s-ics arc tho~ with 20~·i or more cover
!iYQJt._QJ,.QQX
[.s i1 tt." growi.~g se,.s(Jn'' YES Water M:ll'ks· NO ScdimClll Depos1u: NO
Based on: SCS Soil Surny -Drifl Lines: ~ NO Drainage P.iuans:
Dq;,th of inundation: NIA inch<:S (hidizcd Roo1s: Loc~l Soil S<1rvcy NO
Depth IO fu!e waler isl pit: NIA inche; C~Js<l2" NO Water .~lain«! ka1·e1: NO
lr'-'th w ~urated :,oil: NIA inehes. FAC Neu1ral: ~
Cbc,;;k all 1hal npply & t:~plain below: Other:
Strcaru., Lah or gauge d;,ta: NIA
Aerial photographs: NIA --Other: 1,!IA
Wctl,1nd itydroloi;y pr=if? __li2...,_ E,i.dcnce of past pond.ins on surface. Soils arc not saturated or imrnda1cd c,·cr. wiih
11.alional fur d(Cision/Rcmarks: rci::ei\t pre.:ip1ta1ion.
NOTES: Sample plot located within shallow S'Wa!eon iTidustrial impa.::1ed property.
so1i:s·:
~fap Uni! Name
(Sctl<,':5&~,:;):
Profile D=:riE_Lion
(Bh) !kllin.&_ham sill loam
Drain.is~ Cl:=:
poorly
fidd obscr.~lions 1'.0nfirm
m~~-type'! NO
Moulc I Monie colors. Abul,d.')nce Tcxwre,
M~lri., Color \Munsdl ,i7.c: & concn-1io1Cl.
V<p<h !Hori,o, J<M=,ll~(s)lmo,n rn~,rn, L"""·"'· '.,) ~ra,·clly :sandy v,.,1., •
M.u,y. tim:. loam fill. Wood
0-8" 2.S Y 4'1 5 Y 414 mrmffll ,hi on~urfo, t, __ . .c,·1
Cump;,ction of soils limilod ability to obsrcvc soils ~1 dcq,c:r dq,llu ({
9.'' _.J
/1)[''\'. / ' ,,,.
.---···
Hydric Soil lndi.:ator!i· (chttk all 1ha1 apply}
Histo.sol C'on,;;rmions
,/
----tti'itic Epipcdon
Sullidic O<lor
----Aquk: M0Ii1w:c Rcgims:
____ Reducins Condi1ions
Organic Corucm in Sandy Snils
----Org:u1ic S11ca1<1r.g inSiU?dy soils
----Lktcd nn Local H~dri, Soil, Lim
Yt:::i Glcycd or I.ow-Chroma Colors
I c.ted on Nae H)dric Soil Lim
----Other (explain in remarks)
Hydric soils prcsatt'! NO-D'.sturbcd -('omp~eled Fill
R~1ionul for di:dsion/Rein.,rl:s:
Soili ;,,re di.,.111,bed Md consi.s1s of30% sr..ivcl ands.1nd Md 20J\0% wood li.ll.
Soils. arc compacuxl
Wr!l!;v.,.s:!_Q!:t~
Hydric vq;<:l,,1ion pr.:scn\'!
Hydric ,:oil present'!
WciW!d hvdtolol-Y pr-=i1l'!
R.itional'Rcmt1rks:
't'f.S-Duturbcd h the samp!ini;. po<II!
~ wit~in a wetland?
NO -P1,mdinf: due to co,nµJ..(:tion of fill rn;ncrial
Site is disturbed due to gravd, s.md & wood fill & compac1io1l frofll indusmal 115e
Ponding ofsurfocc nuH)ff and prccipita1ion o..curs d\K: !o
lo lack ofinlihration within CQmpac!OO fill mai:cruds.
NO
,;::::__:.,
·--. ···--·--·······-··-····--· -·-· -··-··-·-_ ................ _. • v• •• • • W<••• ••••n••u .. wu muuuu•
Projed Site: Vulcan -Baxter Pfopetty Date: Sl2m006
Applicant/owner: Mr. Tal F<iwler, Pt-0j,:,::1 Manager, Vulcan Count:,: King
State: WA
lnvcstigaloi(~}: Dan Betlin. Tina Mirabile, The REfEC Croup, ln.c. Lo<:ation: T24N/R05E/S29
Do Nomial Circumstances c~i:;l on lhu site"/ NO Community m: UPLAND • FlLl
ls the Site sisriiticai\1lyd1sturb<;d (atypical situation)'! NO Transect ID:
b the area a potential hoblcm Arca"! NO PIOl ID: J
Domioaril Plan! SpL..::i,:s '""= lndicalor
Junc115 fa.lea/us (40%) HERB FAC
Agnmis sp. (30%) HERB FAC•
Hofcw; famiru1. (20%) HERB fAC
.iuncrl.l! effi,.,u.J (20%) HERB f'AC
lotus corniflClliarus (20%) HERB PAC
.Rumet:occidenlafis (15%) HERB FACW+-
%ofspccies1hat arc OBl, FACW,.md/or FAC: >~0% ----Hydr<iphtyic vcgelati,;m present? YES
Rational for decision/Remarks: Hydrophytie v,;,ge1ation is dcm1nan1. Wcc<.ly ipc-cies, typi<.:al lf dislml:ed arC3s, ar<:: pm:cnt.
NOTES: • -Ass.urned lndica1or Soccles. Dominant s...,.,..;cs arc those w11h 20% or murc c-o,·cr
HYDRQJ,QQY
Is it <ht growing scaJOll! Yl'S WrucrMark.s: NO s~'i'.lirncnt Deposits: NO -
Bas.cd on: SCS Soi/ Sunoev Drifl Lines: NO Drain.ige Pnt1erns: NO
Deplh ofinumlation: NIA inch~ Oxidi7.cd Roots: Lo.;c:il Soil Suf\·cy NO
Dcp1h to free w.atcr in pit: NIA inches Channels-:: 12" NO Wat<::( $!lined Lea~cs: NO
DM'olh to satur.lled soil: NIA in<::hes FAC Ncul.l"a!; ~
Check all that apply & explain below: Other:
Stream. Lake or g3uge dala: ~
Aerial photographs: ~
Othtc NIA
Wetland hydrology pres.cm"/ NO Evidence of past pondini; on surface. Soils are not satural~d or inundated even wilh
Ra1ior,al foc decisioru'Remarks: re.cent prcdpitati011
NOTf!S: Sample plot located ...,ithi11 shallow swale on ill<lustrial impacted property,
SOILS: Duin~ge Clas~:
Map lJnit Name
(Series & Phase); (Bh) B<::Hiogham s,U loam poorly
Field obscrva1ion5 confirm
mapped 1ype~ NO
Profil.:: D<!scripliOll
Mn1tle Monie
Matrill Color colors Ab11ldancc Tt.,curc, D:rawingofsoil
(Mu11sell (Munsi:!ll size& concretions, profile (maJch
Depth Horizon moist) mois1} cJmtrasl strccurc. c,c_ dc:;cripliOn)
[,:.,...,coac;c, 1_:1·3sclly clayey II Q 0·12~ 2.5 Y Sil 5 Yll 3/4 nrornimcnt loamfil! 'p .041 C-0m~1ion ofsoil.i lim1too ability to obsreve soils al decJ)-0' depths. @C_
(\P{
r /; .. ·~-~. w
Hydric Soil lndicalors: (check all that apply)
____ l-l1s1os.ol
____ His1ic Epipcdoo
S\.IHidit Odor
----Aquic Mo.situn: Rcsimc
----Rcdudo~ ConditioM
YES GlcycU or l.ow-Chr(lm.a ('ol(lrs
H)drie soils p1cscnt"!
RJrional for dcci&ion/Rcmaiks:
(
\ .. ,________ __ .
Concrc1ions
----Or game Content in Sandy Soils
Or~anic Strcakin!,l in Sandy Soils
----J.is1e<:1-0n L0Cal H)dric Soils Lists
L,s:cd on Nat. H)tlric Soil Li~ls
Other (c.wlain in remarks}
NO -Disturbed -Cornpactl!d Fill
Soils ii.re disturbed and consists of 30% yr.i.•;d and 5Jlld .ind 20-40% wood fill.
Soils arc compacted.
YES-nisuuboo
NO-Fill
Is thc sampling poim
within a wc!land"!
Wctlaod Dctcnninelion
Hydric vq:ctation prcscm'!
tlydric soil 9rc$Cnl"!
Wetlar1d hydrology pre:senl?
Rational/Rcmai:~~:
r-•J -,.onomg due to co:ripaction oftlU nwtcrial
Si!, is disllirb«I due to g:ravd, sand & wood fill & compact:on from indu;tri.il use.
Ponding of sl!ffacc run-off and pr.ecipi1atioo occms due to
ID lack of infiltration within co~~t~d fill ma1erials.
NO
' /
{\1i.)-: '
(/ ..
J
'-'~'" n,rn, -"""'""' .. ,..,..,.., uc,~ommauon M~uioa \r<~v,scc m:un<)'O, ~.Q wcnarKJ ucuneauQn M'.illl\UU or w,,. :;,1a1c vcu=non ;-.1anuaJ
f'T()j<:ct Sile: Vlllcan -8.i.i,;tu Property n .. ic: 3t.l6lW06
Applicanl/owncr: Mr. Tal Fowler, Project Manager, Vulcan C'ot1nty; :<.i11g
Sl:ltc; WA.
lnvest1g~10r(s>: Dan Bulin, Tina Mirabile, The RETEC Grouo. Inc. Location: T24N/R05EfS2'}
Do Nonnal Cin;l,llll1(unces~,ist on 1he ~tc'! NO Community ID: UPLAND -flLL
ls the Sile sis:nifkanlly disturbe<:I (ilt}pical situation)'! NO Trariscc1 JD:
I~ the area a pol~'lllia! Problem Ase;,:! NO Plot ID: .f.
Dominillll Plant Species Stratum Indicator
J1mrn1 effi~us {90%) HERB FACW
Agro11i• sp. (40%) HERB fAC •
l.orus comincult1rus (15%) IIER.13 FACW+
lltJk~-1 /0111r/,,s(IO"/,,} HERB FAC
% -0fspcc:iu \l1a1 ;ue OSL. FACW, and/or FAC: >SO%
Hydroph!yic vegc1..ation pr~cn11 YES
Raiiomil for dccision/Rcmarks: ilydroph)tic vc~c1ation is d~ots are only llrowing 2 to ) inchc::; within suil prufih:.
NOTES: • -Assumed Indicator Snrrics. Dominant SP~cics arc those wilh 20% or more cov~
HYDROLOGY
Is it the Qrowm:c: season? ~ Waler ~brks: NO Sedimc,n Oepeoi:s: NO
Based an: SCS $,;ii Survev Drift Lini:s: NO Drainase PaHern;: NO
Depth ofinWldati,Jll: NIA inches Oxidi;:cd Rools: local Soil Suryc.y NO
Depth IQ free waCer in pit: ,. '"°"°' Channcls-<12" NO Watcr stained Jea..-es: NO
DcDth lo saturated ooil: NIA ir:clre~ FAC Ncuti:al: ~
Chixk all 1hat apply & cxpl~in b<>low: Otbec
Stream, Lake or gauge data: ~
Aerial phot<igr.iphs: ~
Othtt; NIA
Welland hydro!Ol}y present'! _J:!Q_ Recent prccipiiation,
Rational for docisionlRemarh: Surfaca walcr is pondini1; on compacted fill 111al~1ial.
NOTES: Sample plot !oca1cd wiilun shallow swale near :,0utllw.:s1 cormr of proptl'1)'.
!SOILS:
Map Uni1 Name
(!il:ric> & Phase):
Profile DCSCT.iption
(BhJ__~lingham sill loam
Mame
Matrix ColQr ,ak,rs
'(Munsell (Munsell
W.ot1los
Abundance
s,ic &
Drainage C'la,;5:
poorl~
Field obsen-~1iozu cnntinn
mapped type'.' NO
D,a.,,,·ingofs.1il
prcti!c Jmatch
rcxlur~.
concrctio~s,
D,:pth lllorixon !moist) ~~;·" ~"".,•••• I I I , ........ , ,.............. r ..... -........ I '"~:~'""' •• k'
.-t'~tff?~;;-·-:'··
10-1" I O I 10 YR 211 I I jOrpnie soil I · <[ .. ;' ~-
(1, '--"
r-7" A '1.5 Y .512
Grav,;[ ~n<J -.andy
iiltloamfil!
1·)71
( __ )_ 1_-..,:
-~ :
'
7
C"ompacti(ln Qfwi!s lirnikd a~i~ity to obsrc\'C so,is at de<:pcr oJcpth~.
--~~-J -' .... ~_, __ ;. 1. ~
1')1'li --'>---
/
Cor..crc1i0<1s
H}dric Soil lndica1ors: (cllccl: atl ttut apply}
____ Histo,;-ol
----llis1ic Ep1pedon
SulfitJicO<.lor
----Aquic Mosi1u1c R~mc
____ Rcdudn~ C'OMitions
YE~ (jlcye4 or Low-Cllroma Colors
== Or1ianic Conccnl in S;>ndy Soils
Oi-g,mic Streaking in Sandy 501!s
----Listed oo Local Hydtic Soils Lists
Lister.I on NJt. H~dric Sail Um
Othc; (c~pluin in rcmatks)
llydrfo soil~ present'! ~rbcd -Compaclcd Fill
R~tional for dcc;isian/Rl-mark.s:
Soils arc disturbed and consist~ of30% 1!]11\l'CI and ~nd and 20-40% wood fill
Soil$ are compacted.
Yf:~-Disturbed
~
ls the umplins p.:,m1
within a wct!and'!
Wctl3lld l)eterminalion
llydric vegctalion pr~nl?
Hydric soil prcscnr!
Wetland hydrology pto:i,cnl'! NU -ronomg due 10 compaclioo of fill material
Rational/Remaiks:
Si1e is di~tutbed due to gravd, ~And & wood fill & compaction fmm indt1strial use.
Pandin.g ot·surr~cc ron-ofTand pr,x;ipilaliori occ,us due cu
to lac!< ofi(l/!!!Ji!<igp 11'i_thin c~acti:4 fill matcri.:ils.
NO
·.? 1 ·
,_;{} .. (/Y
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
Wetl,md Name: f (:1\1..2 ... / Date: s/7_[. h (o ,
I. /):fc the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides (i.e. except during floods)?
(NO/ go to 2 YES -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe \__ __ ..
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per
thousand)? YES -Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)
If your wetland can be c/assified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine
wetlands. !fit is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that
were called estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt
Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were
categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this
revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept.
Please note, however, that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine
wetlands have changed (seep. ).
2. ls the../cpography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source (>90%) of water to it.
·· NO l-go to 3 YES -The wetland class is Flats
\.. · If your wetland can be classified as a "Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional
wetlands.
3. Does the ;,ietland meet both of the following criteria?
..cLThe vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores ofa body of open water (without any
vegetation on the surface) where at least 20 acres (8 ha) are permanently inundated
/{ponded or flooded);
\./At least 30o/~,offneor,cn water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m)?
NO -go to 4 ·(YE_s __ :::,.Ti1e wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the wetland meefa11 of the following criteria?
__ The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),
__ The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually
comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct
banks.
__ The water leaves the wetland without being impounded?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in
very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks( depressions are usually
<3ji diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO -go to 5 YES -The wetland class is Slope
S. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from
that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to
answer "yes. " The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is
not flooding.
NO -go to 6 YES -The wetland class is Riverine
Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 3 August 2004
(P".~7'~f~ ~~11=--f'!/J.) .. ?·~~1~::J;f,~»? .r~:.:;: ~;~1Ti?:'r"?~~~,~~-:-· ·::;1:: ·:· -... ~· .·;-:: ·~1r~r>JF ~;:" :r-: ..
0~ !.. ·-~<; ft-~ ..,.,, , '. t :..-;V,11.1~1~.:i·':\i5~ ,..:.ffJ !.)'.:;~!. -~.~.~:~-~-... •~t. Y.-"•;J·f[f,,~~-')::: 4 4'1t ... ,~.?.' : '.,i,, ·-~~ ?if-;11--':"· ', ...--+I.-:~-•--r.,{1:1· ';(£~ .-, •. ~ ~;.-....,, :_.,[.,,. ,..:.,.,M,•A•;.•~:,;-;,~•~•·0::..._~,,{}-·~ . .'ff,,'1.<"11.:,;l·~• ~~i:?f:.t...:•:'--~~!~,t.•,~., "-'! •·,.-{';.';of,,•:-.-{•.;;, ,1 '.~:-!-~-..!;. •! -,.,
WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to improve
water quality
L L l. Does the wetland have the [!Olential to improve water quality? (seep. 59)
L L I. I Average width of vegetation along the lakeshore:
poin& Vegetation is more than 33ft (!Om) wide
/ Vegetation is more than 16 (5m) wide and <33ft points= 3 Co Vegetation is more than 6ft (2m) wide and <16 ft points= I
V cgetation is less than 6 fl wide points= O
L L 1.2 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland: choose the oppropriate
description that results in the highest points, \and do not include any open water in
your estimate of coverage. In this case the herbaceous plants can be either the
dominant form (called emergent class) or as an understory in a shrnb or forest
community.
poin~__p Herbaceous plants cover >90% of the vegetated area
Herbaceous plants cover >213 of the vegetated area pomts = G' Herbaceous plants cover> I 13 of the vegetated area points= 3
Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in> 2/3 vegetated area points= 3
Other vegetation that is not aquatic bed in> 1 /3 vegetated area points= 1
Aquatic bed cover> 2/3 of the ve_getated area · ooints = 0
L Add the points in the boxes above I z..._
L L 2. Does the wetland have the O[![!ortunity to improve water quality? (seep. 61)
Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in the lake water, or
surface water flowing through the wetland to the lake is polluted. Note which of
the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants.
-Wetland is along the shores of a lake or reservoir that does not meet water
quality standards
-Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft
-Polluted water discharges to wetland along upland edge
-Tilled fields or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier
-Residential or urban areas are within 150 ft of wetland
-Parks with grassy areas that are maintained, ballfields, golf courses (all L
~ithin 150 ft. oflake shore)
-Power boats with gasoline or diesel engines use the lake
:WOther
(Y ~· multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1
L TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from LI by L2 2'-' Add score to table on fJ, 1
Comments
Wetland Rating Fonn-western Washington 9 August 2004
,...,.,.-.~-:?:..-, ... ::-,-,~-.-·~m· •-=' .... ,,,,._~~",;'~'T-~":'-~;S"....,.....~~ -~~.,..:--·•-7-r.-~..,-... r.-~r. 771 ~--r~r ,.....___,, . : ;, ~ · ~ ~ /r~.,,,,:;-:.:" :,"·~:.~> . .-,_-.~\,">-1.··.:;;-•• ;.·""::;-., ·,·~.·::,.:.: ••• • •• • .:· ., ili1'· -{f ·.·· .. , .... ctfl.::L4i: lliff{! . Httt<Y;\··' .. , .. , ..... '',i(' •.. , .• ,,.. ,, ..• ,., ... ,. '·, ., •..• ·) .• ,., .... , ·-. ' ... . .. . .' ., ....... -., -.---. : -~·-·.,'·'!··:,~ ·. "-· :.: ·t 1'-~',?-~•'\ l ,';-r:~t;:~··· ~:;_-; .-·1 ·,,·_.,.,:·,:-:..,,:,:·.: •• , •• 0·.:_!··,<:::,,',,:<;,;,,•\, -· ;;,•'·'" •·• · · ,,. • '!'
HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to reduce
shoreline erosion
L L 3. Does the wetland have the 11otential to reduce shoreline erosion? (seep. 62)
L L 3 Average width and characteristics of vegetation along the lakeshore (do not
include aquatic bed): (choose the highest scoring description that matches
conditions in the wetland)
pointsQ > % of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft ( IOm) wide
> % of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 6 ft. (2 m) wide points= 4
> V. of fringe vegetation is shrubs or trees at least 33 ft(] Om) wide points= 4
Fringe vegetation is at least 6 ft (2m) wide points= 2
Fringe vegetation is less than 6 ft (2m) wide ooints = 0
L Record the points from the box above ( r,
L L 4. Does the wetland have the op11ortunity to reduce erosion? (seep. 63)
Are there features along the shore that will be impacted if the shoreline erodes?
Note which of the following condilions apply.
-There are human structures and activities along the upland edge of the
wetland (buildings, fields) that can be damaged by erosion.
-There are undisturbed naiural resources along the upland edge of the
wetland (e.g. mature forests other wetlands) than can be damaged by multiplier gshoreline erosion ·
Other O"wV s efzt.J--0)):'.\ __, d w:« frU I
YES multiplier is 2 ~o) mu~plier is 1
L TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from L 3 by L 4 (// Add score lo table on p. 1 -Comments
Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington 10 August 2004
HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat
H 1. Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species?
H 1.1 Vegetation structure (seep. 71)
Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class
cov::.;.(Jore than I 0% of the area of the wetland or '.I, acre.
Aquatic bed
~ Emergent plants
.X,Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have >30% cover)
__ Forested (areas where trees have >30% cover)
__ Forested areas have 3 out of5 strata (canopy;-sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous,
moss/ ground-cover)
Add the number of vegetation types that qualify.
H 1.2: Hydroperiods (seep. 73)
If you have:
4 types or more
3 types
2 types
l tvoe
points= 4
pointZ=W
points= 1
ooints = 0
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The
water regime has to cover more than I 0% of the wetland or '.I, acre to count. (see text
for descriptions of hydroperiods}
~Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present X Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present
__ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present
~Saturated only
__ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
points=-~
pomts<§P
point= 1
_ Seasonayy flowing stream in: or adjacent to, the wetland ... -----.. --.. --"") X,. Lake-fringe wetland = 2 pomts ---------··--·----·-----·---·-,---
__ Freshwater tidal wetland= 2 points
H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species (seep. 75)
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ff. (different
patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold)
You do not have to name the species.
Do not include Eurasian Mi/foil, reed canarygrass, purple looses/rife, Canadian
Thistle ~
If you counted: > 19 species points -2
List species below if you want to: 5 -19 species points=
< 5 species points = 0
Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 13 August 2004
L
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats (seep. 76)
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation
( described in H 1.1 ), or vegetation types and unvegetated areas ( can include open
water or mudflats) is high, medium, low, or none.
C) 0 @
None = 0 points Low= I point Moderate= 2 points
[riparian braided channels]
High = 3 points
NOTE: If you have four or more vegetation types or three vegetation types
and o en water the ratin is alwa s "hi h".
H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77)
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is
X the number of points you put into the next column.
__ Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4in. diameter and 6 ft long).
__ Standing snags (diameter at the bottom> 4 inches) in the wetland
__ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation
extends at least 3.3 ft (Im) over a stream for at least 33 ft (JOin)
__ Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for
denning (>30degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present
__ At least V. acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present
in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for eggc/aying by
yamphibians) .
~ Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in each stratum of plants
Comments
Wetland Rating Fonn -western Washington
H 1. TOTAL Score -potential for providing habitat
Add the scores in the column above
14 August 2004
L
L
0
H 2. Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species?
H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80)
Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest
scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is lO be used in the rating. See text for
definition of "undisturbed. "
-100 m (330ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
>95% of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer.
(relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing) Points = 5
-l 00 m (330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
> 50% circumference. Points = 4
-50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
'-/ >95% circumference. Points = 4
/....:O,. 100 m (330ft) ofrelatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open~
> 25% circumference, . Points "'V
-50 m (170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water
for> 50% circumference. · Points = 3
If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above
-No paved areas (except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m (80ft) of wetland>
95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points= 2
-No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for >50% circumference.
Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points = 2
-Heavy grazing in buffer. Points = 1
-Vegetated buffers are <2m wide (6.6ft) for more than 95% of the circumference
(e.g. tilled fields, paving, basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland Points= 0.
-Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above. Points= 1
H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81)
H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated
corridor (either riparian or upland) that is at least 150 ft wide, has at least 30% cover
of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie, that connects to estuaries, other
wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (dams in riparian
corridors, heavily used gravel roads,paved roads, are considered breaks in the
corridor). /::~
YES = 4 points (go to H 2.3) ~ go to H 2.2.2
H 2.2.2 ls the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated
corridor ( either riparian or upland) that is at least 50ft wide, has at least 30% cover of
shrubs or forest, and connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands
that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an
undisturbed coJridor-as in the question above?
\ YES :'.J.pbints (go to H 2.3) NO = H 2.2.3
H 2.2.3 ls tnewetland:
within 5 mi (8km) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR
within 3 mi of a large field or pasture (>40 acres) OR
within I mi of a lake greater than 20 acres?
YES = 1 noint NO = 0 ooints
Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 15 August2004
H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW (seep. 82)
Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft ( 1 OOm) of the wetland?
(see text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats)
__ Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains
elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
__ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha (2 acres).
__ Cliffs: Greater than 7 .6 m (25 ft) high and occurring below 5000 ft.
__ Old-growth forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands ofat least 2 tree
species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at
least 20 trees/ha (8 trees/acre)> 81 cm (32 in) dbh or> 200 years of age.
__ Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm (21 in) dbh; crown
cover may be less that I 00%; crown cover may be less that I 00%; decay,
decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally
less than that found in old-growth; 80 -200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
_Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas (as indicated by dominance of native plants)
where grasses and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community.
__ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m (0.5 -
6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap
slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
__ Caves; A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected
passages
_Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations
where canopy coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%.
__ Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides ;,,,ithin or is adjacent to the
open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space
functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that
would otherwise be isolated; and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural
habitat larger than 4 ha (10 acres) and is surrounded by urban development.
__ Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands, usually
semi-enclosed by land but with open, partly obstructed or sporadic access to the
open ocean, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater
runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the
open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable
dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where
ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual
low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons.
__ Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones
of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the
terrestrial landscape (e.g., cliffs, snags, mature trees, dunes, meadows) that are
important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline
function (e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment, nutrient contribution, erosion control).
If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats = 4 points
If wetland has 2 priority habitats = 3 points
If wetland has I orioritv habitat = I point No habitats= 0 ooints
0 c~l,L.v
Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 16 August 2004
H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the Otte descnj,tion ,,[the land,cape around the
wetland that best fits) (.,ee p. 84)
There arc at least 3 other wetlands within •;, mile, and the connections between them
are relatively undisturbed (light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with
some boating, but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads, fill, fields.
or other development. points= 5
The wetland is Lake-fringe on a 'akc with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-
fringe wetlands within V, mile points = 5
There arc at least 3 other wetlands within V, mile, BUT the connections between them
are disturbed points= 3
The. wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there arc 3 other lake-;:.\
frmge wetland within V, mile . pomts~})
There is at least l wetland within Y, mile. points= 2
There are no wetlands within Y. mile. points= 0
H 2. TOTAL Score -opportunity for providing habitat
Add the scores in the column above
Total Score for Habitat Functions -add the points for H l, H 2 and record the result on
o. l
Wetland Rating Form -western Washington 17 August 2004
'?
,_)
({
ry IV
I ' :' l./
Photo 1
/:_
,;
Aerial view looking south at north and south Baxter properties. Historic gravel roads
extend parallel to the shoreline and railroad tracks (upper left side of photo).
Photo 2
Aerial view looking north at south Baxter and part of north Baxter. The restored wetland
and associated buffer is present along the shoreline on the left side of the photo.
Page 1 of 8
I
Photo 3
...
t.,,. •. I
~
/
Aerial view looking east at south Baxter and part of north Baxter. Baxter Cove is shown to
the lower right.
Photo 4
Aerial view looking south at south Bax ter and part of north Baxter. Piles and a log seawall
are present along the shoreline.
Page 2 of8
Photo 5
Photo of pilings (background) and washed up logs (foreground) along the northern portion
of the restored Baxter Cove wetland.
Photo 6
., '
,·
Aerial view looking east at north Baxter. Piles and a small dock are present along the
shoreline.
Page 3 o f 8
Photo 7
Aerial view looking south at north Baxter. Piles and washed up logs are present along the
shoreline. A covered boathouse and dock are shown at the lower left.
Photo 8
Page 4 of 8
Photo 9
·" "'~ Photo of SP2 soil pit. Soils are heavily compacted and consist of gravelly sandy loam fill .
Wood chips were present on the surface.
Photo 10
~ ~: -
Photo of SP3 soil pit. Soils are gravelly clayey loam fill with substantial gravel.
Page 5 of8
Photo 11
Pag e 6 o f 8
~ ( ..... ~
''' '' C' I
" ,,,,_
-fC, --..-/ First American 1itfe
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Comm1trnent Fact> Page
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
Issued by
File No.: NCS 236628 WAI
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
First American Title Insurance Company, herein called the Company, for valuable consideriltion, hereby
commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the
proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagor of the estate or interest covered
hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges
therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations
hereof.
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount
of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, e1t11er
at the time of the issuance of the Commitment or by subsequent endorsement.
This Commitment if preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all
liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date
hereof or when t11e policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that
the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not
be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this commitment to be signed and sealed, to
become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance
with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date."
First Americ;m Title Insurance Company
By:
Attest:
By:
0~ : _./
;,/~ :-;!' .J;:~'ltUcJ(/----President .• ·i -/'
/J-'l ~ ti-~-Secretary
(1 _.;<--7~ /~,~---Countersigned
"fh<-r I V-'"' (/
Aist American Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Comm1trnent
File No.· NCS·236628·WAl
Page No. 1
First American Title Insurance Company
National Commercial Services
2tol Fourth Avenue, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98121
(206)728-0400 FAX (206)448-6348
To: Vulcan
Mike Cooper
(206)615-3107
mcooper@firstam.com
SOS Fifth Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
Attn: Clint Chase
SCHEDULE A
L Commitment Date: May 25, 2006 at 7:30 A.M.
2. Policy or Policies to be issued:
Standard Owner's Coverage
Proposed Insured:
To Follow
$
AMOUNT
To Follow $
Vincent Nguyenpham
(206)615-3267
vnguyenpham@firstam.com
File No.: NCS-236628-WAl
Your Ref No.: Baxter parcel
PREMIUM TAX
To Follow $ To Follow
3. The estate or interest in the land described on Page 2 herein is Fee Simple, and title thereto is
at the effective date hereof vested in:
Port Quendall Company, a Wash·1ngton corporation
4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
First American Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Commitment
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
EXHIBIT 'A'
File l'Jo.: NCS-236628-WAl
Page No. 2
"BAXTER PARCEL NORTH" AND "BAXTER PARCEL SOUTH" OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.
LUA-00-044, RECORDED JANUARY 5, 2001 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20010105900005, IN KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON.
First American Title Insurance Company
Fann WA-5 (6/76)
Comrrntment
SCHEDULE S -SECTION 1
REQUIREMENTS
The following are the Requirements to be complied with:
file No.: NCS-23662S·WAl
Page No. 3
Item (A) Payment to or for the account of the Grantors or Mortgagors of the full consideration for the
estate or interest to be insured.
Item (BJ Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly
filed for record.
Item (C) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy.
Item (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will
get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make
additional requirements or exceptions
SCHEDULE B, -SECTION 2
GENERAL EXCEPTIONS
The Policy or Policies to be issued will contain Exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed
of to the satisfaction of the Company.
A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing
authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records.
B. Any facts, rights, interest, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could
be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of person in possession thereof.
C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records.
D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts
which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records.
E. (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the
issuance thereof; (3) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted
under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records; (4) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations,
Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes.
F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, materials or medical assistance theretofore or
hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement
charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity.
H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in
the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the
proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgages thereon
covered by this Commitment.
First American Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Commitment
File No.: NCS-236628-WA.L
P<1ge No . .:1
SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2
(continued)
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS
l. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if
unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 1.78%.
Levy/Area Code: 2151
For all transactions recorded on or after July 1, 2005:
• A fee of $10.00 will be charged on all exempt transactions;
• A fee of $5.00 will be charged on all taxable transactions in addition to the
excise tax due.
2. .General Taxes for the year 2006.
3.
Tax Account No.:
Amount Billed:
Amount Paid:
Amount Due:
Assessed Land Value:
Assessed Improvement Value:
(As to Baxter Parcel South)
General Taxes for the year 2006.
Tax Account No.:
Amount Billed:
Amount Paid:
Amount Due:
Assessed Land Value:
Assessed Improvement Value:
(As to Baxter Parcel North)
292405-9001-04
$ 39,042.77
$ 32,137.78
$ 6,904.99
$ 3,267,500.00
$ 0.00
292405-9015-08
$ 97,492.88
$ 51,308.66
$ 46,184.22
$ 8,159,700.00
$ 1,000.00
4. Facility Charges, if any, including but not limited to hook-up, or connection charges and
latecomer charges for water or sewer facilities of King County Water District No. 107 as disclosed
by instrument recorded April 1, 1981 under recording no. 8104010618.
5. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: April 23, 1963 under Recording No. 5573335
In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and Light Company
For: Power line
Affects: as described therein
6. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: April 25, 1963 under Recording No. 3042108
In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and Light Company
For:
Affects:
An electric transmission and distribution line
as described therein
First Amcncan Title Insurance Company
F-orm WA-5 (G/76)
Comm1tm~11l
File No.: NCS-2J6628-WA1
Page No. 5
7.
8.
9.
Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: September 24, 1964 under Recording No. 5790408
In Favor of: Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, its successors and assigns
For: A sewerline with all connections, manholes and appurtenances
Affects: as described therein
Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: December 15, 1964 under Recording No. 5823182
In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and Light Company, a Washington
corporation
For:
Affects:
Ingress and egress to tax parcel 12 across existing roadways
as described therein
Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: December 15, 1964 under Recording No. 5823184
In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and Light Company, a corporation
For: The construction, maintenance, operation and repair of
submarine power cable
Affects: The Southwesterly portion of said premises
This easement is given to correct the description of that certain easement recorded April 23,
1963 under Recording No. 5573336, in Volume 4399 of Deeds, Page 461, records of King County
and w,11 supersede and terminate said easement.
10. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: December 15, 1964 under Recording No. 5823185
In Favor of: Puget Sound Power and light Company, a corµorat,on, its
successors and assigns
For: The construction, maintenance, operation and/or repair of
power lines
Affects: The Southerly and Southwesterly portion of said premises
11. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: January 11, 1973 under Recording No. 7301110427
In Favor of: City of Renton, a municipal corporation
For: Public utilities (including water and sewer) with necessary
appurtenances
Affects: A portion of Northeasterly 10 feet of said premises
12. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein:
Recording Information: October 8, 1975 under Recording No. 7510080739
In Favor of:
For:
Affects:
City of Renton, a municipal corporation
Public utilities (including water and sewer) with necessary
appurtenances
as described therein
First American Title Insurance Company
Form WA·S (6/76)
Comm1tmer.t
File No.: NCS·236628-WA1
Page Na. 6
13. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Land Use Agreement", exceuted by
and between J. H. Baxter & Co., a California corporation and Lakeside Associates, a limited
partnersh,p and Ripley Lane [nvestments, a limited partnership, recorded January 7, 1980 as
Recording No. 8001070208 of Official Records.
14. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Boundary Line Agreement",
exceuted by and between J. H. Baxter & Co., a California corporation and Lakeside Associates, a
limited partnership and Ripley Lane Investments, a limited partnership, recorded February 27,
1980 as Recording No. 8002270469 of Official Records.
Said instrument 1s a re-record of Recording No. 8001070207 recorded January 7, 1980.
15. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Agreement", exceuted by and
between J. H. Baxter & Co., a California corporation, its successors and assigns and The
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, a municipal corporation, its successors and assigns, recorded
November 3, 1981 as Recording No. 8111030611 of Official Records.
16. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements:
Recorded: February 15, 1996
Recording No.: 9602150689
17. Conditions, notes, easements, provisions contained and/or delineated on the face of the Survey
recorded February 9, 2000 under Recording No. 20000209900005, in King County, Washington.
18. Terms, covenants, conditions and restrictions as contained in recorded Lot Line Adjustment
(Boundary Line Revision) LUA-00-044-LLA :
Recorded: January 5, 2001
Recording Information: 20010105900005
19. Any question as to the true location of the lateral boundaries of the second class shorelands.
20. Any question that may arise due to the shifting and/or changing in the course of Lake
Washington.
21. Rights of the general public to the unrestricted use of all the waters of a navigable body of water
not only for the primary purpose of navigation, but also for corollary purposes; including (but not
limited to) fishing, boating, bathing, swimming, water skiing and other related recreational
purposes, as those waters may affect the tidelands, shorelands or adjoining uplands and whether
the level of the water has been raised naturally or artificially to a maintained or fluctuating level,
all as further defined by the decisional law of this state. (Affects all of the premises subject to
such submergence)
22. Right, title and interest of City Investors as to the herein described property as disclosed by the
Order Sheet. We find no record of the party(ies) having an interest in the premises.
23. Evidence of the authority of the officers of Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation, to
execute the forthcoming instrument, copies of the current Articles of Incorporation, By-Laws and
certified copies of appropriate resolutions should be submitted Prior to closing.
First American Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Commitment
File No.; NCS-236628-WAl
Pa.ge No. 7
24. Title to vest in an incoming owner whose name is not disclosed. Such name must be furnished
to us so that a name search may be made.
25. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personai property
and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term.
First American Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Com1111tment
INFORMATIONAL NOTES
File No.: NCS·236628-WA1
Page No. 8
A. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to
standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be
met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder.
B. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment
or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First
American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upor it.
C. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization
requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured.
Baxter Parcels North and South, UA No. LUA-00-044, Rec No. 20010105900005
APN: 292405-9001-04
APN: 292405-9015-08
D. A fee will be charged upon the cancellation of this Commitment pursuant to the Washington
State Insurance Code and the filed Rate Schedule of the Company.
END OF SCHEDULE B
First Amerk:an Title Insurance Company
Form WA·S (6/76)
Commitment
First American Title Insurance Company
National Commercial Services
COMMITMENT
Conditions and Stipulations
File No.: NCS-236628-WAl
Page No. 9
1. The term "mortgage" when used herein shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security
instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of a defect, lien, encumbrance,
adverse claim or other matter affect:ng the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by
this Commitment, other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose sud,
knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or
damage resulting from any act or reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by
failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclosure such knowledge
to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien,
encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option, may amend Schedule B
of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability
previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured
and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of Policy or Policies
committed for, and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith
(a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown ,n Schedule B,
or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the
Policy or Policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion
from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of Policy or Policies committed for
in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by references, and are made a
part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein.
4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the
status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the Insured mortgage covered hereby or
any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and
Stipulations of this Commitment.
First Amencan Title Insurance Company
Form WA-5 (6/76)
Con1mitmc11t
The fil"st American Corpo,.ation
First American Title Insurance Company
National Commercial Services
PRIVACY POLICY
We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer lnformation
File No.: NCS-236628-WAL
Page No . .0
[n order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We underst.)(ld that you may be
mncerned about what we will do with such 111formation particul¥ly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how
we will utilize ttie person.al inforrr41tion rw provide to us. Therefore, together with ovr parent company, The First American Corporation, we have
adopled this Pnvacy Policy to govern the use and handhng ot your personal infonnaton.
Applicability
l11is Prwacy Policy governs our use of ttie information which you l)rovide to us. (t does not govern the manner in which we may use information we
have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from ancther person or entity. flrst American has atsa
adopted broader guidehne!i that govern our use of person<il information regardless of its source. F1rst American calls these guidelines 115 Faii-
lnfo,rnation Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com.
Types of Intormatiqn
Depending uooo which of our services yw ar-e utilizing, the types of nonpublie personal information that we may caUect include:
• Information we receive from you on applteations, forms and in other comrnun.catio<ls to us, whether in writing, ln per5on, by
telephone or any other means;
• lnformatim aboot your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and·
• Information we rec.eiv,e from a consumer reporting agency.
Use of Information
We request informatiOn from you for our ow:, legitimate business purp~es dl1d not for the benefit of any nona{filialed party. Therefore, we will not
release your information to nonaffiliatc<l parties except: (t) as necessary (Of us to provide the product or service you have reque!:;te<l of us: or (2) as
permitted by law. We may, however, ,;tore such information indefinitely, imludim_J the period after which any customer re1ationship has ceased. Suc.h
information may be used for any mternal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of
nonpublic personal in!ormat10f1 listed above to one or more of our affiliated compdnies. Such affiliated companie,; indude financial service providers,
such a.s tille insurers, property ar\d casualty msurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such
as appraisal companies, home Wdrrant~ companies, and escrow compan~. Fl.lrthermore, we may also pr()'lide all the intormation we collect, as
described above, to companies th.tt perform mark.ettng servaces on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions
wilh whom we or our aff1hated companies have jomt marketing agreements.
Former Customers
Even it you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy wiO continue to apply to you.
Confidentiality and Security
we will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic. personal
information about yoo to those individual!> and entities who need to kflOll'I' that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best
efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and m accordance with th,s Privacy
Policy and First American'<; Fair Informat100 Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic., a11d procedural safeguards t1Mt comply w1!h federal
regulations to guard your nonpulllic persooal information.
c 2001 The First American Corporation · All Rights R~rved
First Amencan Title Insurance Company
= = = en
Lr> =
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO
FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN PLLC
A TIN Joseph E Delaney
1 I I I Thutl A venue, Swte 3400
Seattle, Washmgton 98101
E1754029 eo11u1zee• JZ ll
KING COUNTY LIA
TA)( St1:li '71e.,e
SAL£ $&,,ill,••• • PAGC &e 1 OF" ff4
STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED
Grantor: @3:1$2/37-Cl
Grantee: 1ST AM-S
Legal Description:
Assessor's Tu Parcel ID Numbers:
J.H. BAXTER & CO., a California
limited partnership
PORT QIJENDALL C0,\11' ANY, a
Washington corporation
Section 29, Township 24N, Range SE,
SW Quarter
Additional Legal on Exhibit A
292405-9015----08
292405-9001-04
THE GR.ANTOR, J H BAXTER & CO, a Cahforrua lim1ted pannersh,p, for and
m consideration of Ten Dolla,, ($10 00) and other valuable cons1derat.1on, m hand paid,
conveys and warrants to PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washrngton corporatJon, the
real property situated tn the Cowity of Kmg, State of Washmgton descnbed on
EXHIBIT A attached hereto and make a part hereof by tl:us reference
-1 -
S017tH! Ol
....
0
CAI.I FORN IA
STA TE OF-WMHiN(fff}N
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
ss
I certify that I kno~ or have satisfactory evidence that GEORG IA MXTER -aA<.i..
Ml,-the person& who appeared before me, and srud persons-
acknowledged that said person• signed tlus instrument, on oath stated that said persoO!i was were authonze.d to execute the mstrument and aclmowledged Lt as the Exe:cu t 1 ve Yice-P res 1 dent
and of J H BAXTER & CO , !NC , a Caltfom,a corporation, to be
the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes merit10ned m the
mstrument
Dated tins l1s!;_ day of ------'--'M"'-a y._ ------'' 2000
CHIYE HORIYE
(l.~g,t>ly i'nn1 Of $•mp J•,"ll<TI~ ,;ifN<>U1ry)
Cai1fornLa
Notary public ta and for the state of Wa:slung,on,
res1dmg at San Mateo
My appmntment cxpm:s June 9. 2000
'@ CHIYE HORIYE I
~ ,.. COMt.A #1100:::'f:':2 ii NOT"P" f>t."!31..C C>.~,FQRNI.I. "/ I . SAN ',tf., f'E:.0 COlJ!t.lT'r I ,..., Comm f:.:•r:•u, ~ Juno, 'II ;;>(O) ...
-3-
'
= en
cc, = = u
en
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 4, WHICH POINT IS
MARKED BY AN IRON PIPE AND IS 920 FEET, MORE OR LESS, NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT,
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LNE THEREOF, 156 FEET,
THENCE EAST 62 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LlNE OF SAID RIGHT OF WAY,
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAJD RIGHT OF WAY LINE l56 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
POINT OF THE LINE TO BE DESCRIBED,
THENCE NORTH 58°20' WEST 460 FEET,
THENCE NORTH 67'40' WEST 2l0 FEET TO THE INNER HARBOR LINE OF LAKE WAS!IlNGTON
AS NOW ESTABLISHED AND THE TERMINUS OF THE LIN'E,
ALSO
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS, SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,
WM, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND ADJACENT SHORE LANDS OF THE SECOND
CLASS IN FRONT THEREOF LYING WESTERLY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY
COMPANY'S RIGHT Of WAY, DESCIUBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGfNNJNG AT THE QUARTER CORNER ON THE SOUTH LfNE OF SAID SECTION 29,
THENCE NORTH 89"58'36" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE Of SAID LOT S, A DISTANCE OF
1113 01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHERN PAC!f!C RAILWAY COMPANY'S
RIGHT OF WAY,
THENCE NORTH 29"44'54" EAST, ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE, 949.63 FEET TO AN IRON
PIPE WHICH POINT IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE SOUTH 29'44'54" WEST, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 100 01 FEET,
THENCE NORTH 59"24'36" WEST 1039 16 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE ft,INER HARBOR LINE
OF LAKE WASHINGTON, .
THENCE NORTH 44'20'00" EAST ALONG SAID INNER HARBOR LINE 102 95 FEET TO A POINT
FROM WHICH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS SOUTH 59°24'36" EAST,
THENCE SOUTH 59'24')6" EAST 1013 23 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING,
EXCEPT PORTION THEREOF DESCRJBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGIKNING AT THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY
THENCE SOUTH 29"44'54" WEST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHERN PAC!FIC
RAILWAY COMPANY'S RlGHT-OF-WAY 100.01 FEET,
THENCE NORTH 59'24'36" WEST 100.01 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 56"28'50" EAST 111 16 FEET TO A POINT FROM WI-UCH THE TRUE POINT OF
BEG!}iNING BEARS SOUTH 59°24'36" EAST A DISTANCE OF 50 FEET,
I::XEIBI'l' A-2
EXHIBITB
Permitted Exceptions
FACILITY CHARGES, [F ANY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO HOOK-UP, OR
CONNECTIONS CHARGES AND LATECOMER CHARGES FOR WATI:R OR SEWER
F.~CILITIES OF KING COUNTY WATER DJSTRJCT NO. 107 AS DISCLOSED BY
INSTRUMENT RECORDED APRIL I, 1981 UNDER RECORDING NO 8104010613
EASEMENT, INCLUmNG TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN
RECORDED APRJL 25, 1963
RECORDING NO 3042108
IN FAVOR OF Pl'GET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
FOR AN ELECTRlC TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION
LINE AND APPURTENANCES THERETO
AFFECTS 30 FOOT STRIP OVER THAT PORTION OF THE
PROPERTY HF.REIN DESCRIBED lN GOVERNMJ:NT LOT
4
EASEMENT, INCL\JTJING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN
RECORL'tD APRlL 23, 1963
RECORVTNG NO
IN f_.\ \'OR Of-
FOR
JiHTCTS
55i3.335
PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY
POWER LlNE
PORTION OF TIIE PROPERTY BERElN DESCRIBED
WITHIJ'/ GOVERNMENT LOT 5
EASEMGIT. INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED HIEREIN
RI-CORDED DECEMBER 15, 1964
RECORJJfNG NO 5813)84
IN F.-\ VOR OF Pt:GET SOUND POWER MID LIGHT COMPANY
FOR THE CONSTRIJCT!ON, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND
REPAIR OF SUBMARINE POWER CABLE
AFFECTS SOUTHWESTERLY PORTION OF PROPERTY Hf.REIN
DESCRIBED
THIS EASEMENT IS GlVEN TO CORRECT TllE DESCRJPTION OF 1 HAT CERTATN
tASHIENT AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 4J99 OF DEEDS, PAGE 461. RECOR.OS OF KING
COlJNTY. RECORDING NO 5$73336 AND WlLL SUPERSEDE AND TERMfNATE SAID
FASEMF.NT
EXHJBJT B-1
= t.::> = ,..__,
FOR
AFFECTS
PllBLIC UTILITIES (INCLUDING WATER AJ'{O SEWER)
AN EASEMENT FOR UTILITY PURPOSES OVER, UNDER,
ACROSS AND THROUGH THE NORTHERLY 140 f"EET OF
THE EASTERLY 25 FEET OF THAT PROPERTY
CONVEYED TO J.H. BAXTER AND C01'1l'ANY BY DEED
RECORDED UNDER RECORD!J'IG NO. 5491576, RECORDS
OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SAID EASEMENT
BEING CONTIGUOUS WITII THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-
WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAIL ROAD,
SAID 140 FEET BEING MEASURED ALONG SAID RICIIT-
OF-WAY.
BOUNDARY UNE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF
BETWEEN J 11. BAXTER & CO, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
AND LAKESIDE ASSOCIATES, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND
RIPLEY LANE INVESTMENTS, A LIMITED
DATED
RECORDED
RECORDING NO
PlJRJ'OSE
PARTNERSHIP
DECEMBER 12, 1979
FEBRUARY ?7, 1980
80022704~9
THE PARTIES BEING UNCEHTAIN OF THE LOCATION
OF THIS COMMON BOUNDARY LINE AND DESIROUS OF
ESTABLISHING THE LINE CONCLUSIVELY SO THAT A
FENCE MAY BE MAINTAINED AND IMPROVEMENTS
MADE ON BOTH THEIR PROPERTIES, DO AGREF'. ON
Al'<D FIX THE COMMON BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN
THEIR RF.SPECTIVE PROPERTIES
SAID INSTRUMENT IS A RE-RECORD OF RECORDING NO 8001070207
LAKD USE AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF
llETWEEN J 11 BAXTER & CO, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
AND LAKESIDE ASSOCIATES, A LIMITED PARTNF.l<SHIP AND
RJPLEY LANE INVESTMENTS, A LIMITED
PARTNERSIIIP
DATED DECEMBER 12, 1979
RECORDED JANUARY 7, 1980
R.ECO!<.DfNG NO 8001070208
EXHIUJT B-3
=
DISCLOSED BY THE ALTNACSM RECORD OF SURVEYOR 71!E PREMISES PREPARED BY
BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, DA TED AUGUST 21, 1996, UNDER JOB NO 96145 00
NOTICE OF
A. ENCROACHMENT OF 6 (SIX) FEr.T HIGH WOOD FENCE
OF UP TO 3.2 (fHREE.TWO) FEET ALONG NORTHEAST
BOUNDARY
EXl!l[l!T 8-5
I
I
I
'::)·J,::, .. n·ER. ~·1:?k:1...·1-::u 10'7
i: n.1.: ccu::-rr. '-1'.::..St\ 1 ;1crc,_·~
Xo. 107, Ktny Cuurit,·, W.:; •htnq+:on, r .. u.:, on ~L ... rc;.!1 25, LlJ8l,
unJ0.-l{e-s..>lutiun ~;o.
Ch.1.r"';J'2, t.O be do::tcrmir.cd µrioL to const~uct.ion of r\e~· Wd~f:'r
f"3.cil1.ties. ·-~i~l be-assessed ag2iir.st. the re21.l e:statc <i.escribed
01: E:xhiblt ~_,i," hereto c1.tt<Jcht!d.
DATED th i.s ddy uf Mdrch, 1~81.
S-'L\tE OF w;:;sHr:-;GTo;..:1
:SS
COl/N'l'Y m· KING
lOARD 0F COH.MISSI0NERS
KHJG COUN'I''l 1._rt\TER DI:iTRI:CT NO L07 . _;.~t ;_ .
Hy'. .C.f *··
Henrt F. McCul Lough, Presid~nt
011 this d.a.y pecsonalLy app,e:ar~d before me, a dul'::'
comnissioried Ncta!"y Public ln and (or the Stat.,; of Wdshi.ngton,
!iENRY r _ McCULLllllGH, ':.o me knm,,.:1 to be the P~es tdi:!nt of the
Board ot Comm1.ssione:rs of King Coul'\t~· Ylatcr District No. 107
and, bein,;: duly authorized, ack.nowledqed to me th.a.: he si~ned
the foregoing document as hi;; ire~ and voluntary act. anC de~d
fa[-the uses and purposes thet:""ein ment.ioned.
198 l .
. .-/ ~
GIVEN under rn1 hand and seal this_...1-) _._day
1
/
Cf ); /,y A_,
,-?
· N~;~~~~~-tiic;·~1~ni%i~£i,~ .. ~t-~~:.~-
of washinqton, rasiding .Jt. :::e.,':i:le.
2f1 '!' •.·
. 1-
I
!
!
I
I
I
I
l
t
l ..
l ::·.r1r, .._..;,.111~, · .. •c1t.er :Jis·.nct No.107
:._r{l,ll ;)~._,crirt1cn
440 Grad1't'nt_ Spi-vic.: MN
PdO<:" fwQ
<H[NC[ \.IESTEi<U ALDNG THE Z:(~HRLH;[ Of S.(. 60rH STRffT ro TH[
(Er;/(RLl!iE Qt rnr ~UGEi '.;outiJ Powrn .o.rw llCHT CCMPAN~ Hl.ANSP-"[SSION
LJr;r {B[I/ERl Y-R(NTON) tASfMENT; THENCE NOll.111£AS T'::!<L., AL ONG SAID
CENTERLINE TO CHE EASTERLY CORN[R Of LQr 7, 6LOCK ~ Of N'EWPORT HlLLS
~0.9 AS RECO~DED TN VOLUME 69 or PLATS, PAGr t7. RECORDS OF KING
COliNTY, \IASM !!1GTOO; n,::_NCE NIJlffHERL\" ALONG THE EAST ~ r~,£ Of" SA [O 8LOCK
2. TO THE ~ORTHEA'ST i:ORf.:ER THER[QF; THHICE WEST Al ONG THE NORTH l IN[
OF SA.IC BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST LINE OF NEWPORT HILLS N0.5 AS RfCOROED IN
VIJl.UH[ 66 or PLATS. PAGE 90, ~[CORDS or SAID COUNTY; THENCE ND.HHERLY
ALCflG SAll) £AST UN£ TO TH[ NORTHEAST CORN£rl ntl:REOF; THENCE \.l(ST lll!NG
TiiE NORTH LINE OF SAlD NEl-tPORT HILLS NO.) TO THE S(JI.JTHEAST CORNU m-
SLOCt 4. NEWPC~T H1LL5 NO.IJ AS RECOROfO lN V0LUH£ 73 OF PLAT~. PAGES
5) ANO 54, RFCORDS {If SAID COUNTY; THENCE tWR:TH ALONG THE EAST Llt{E Of
SAID OLOCK 4 TO THf NORTHf~ST CORNtR THERFOf, rH[NC[ W(S'i" ALQNr. THE
1<0RF LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4, Arrn AUJtiG THE WESTERLY EXf£NS10N fl-lf.R(Or
TQ TH[ <;URVEY LUlf OF TH( t'l(RC[R [SlA1'iC PIPE um: RIGHT-Of-\.!J1.Y
(l2BTH AVENUE S.E.};
lH(MCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAlD SURVEY UNt:. TO THE CtNTERLlNf_ OF l27TH
PLACE S.E.; <HENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE 10 THE EASTERLY
EXTENSION OF HIE SOUTH L:Nt OF LJT \J, BLOCK J OF SAID KEWPORT HlLlS
N0.13; THENCE WfSTlRL'i Al(}t(i SAIO SOUTH LINE TO THE sourn£AST CORNER
or LOT 1a rn SAID BLOCK J; THEN([ NORTHW[ST£RLV ALONG TH[ SOUTHWlSTERlY
LINE OF SAIO LOT 18 ANO ALON£ THE NORTHWESlERlY EXT[NS [ON THCREOF TO
THC CENTERLINE OF 126TH AVCNUC I.E.; THENCE NORTH£RLY ALONG SAfO
C(hlERllNE TO THE EASTERLY [>TENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY UN[ Of LOT \,
BLOCK I. Of SAIO NEWPORT HILLS N0.13; THENC[ WESTERLY ALOIIG SAfO
EASTERLY UTfNSION ~NO ALONG THE SOUlti LIN[ !HEREOF TO THE SOUTHWEST
. ~ ~-=-'"---=---·---
.....
l o:J
-.)
0
'
l
~
C
' "'
;
l:111q [<'J<J:',, y \.:a tfr ~, ':itn..:.t No.107
l~qdl Oestr1pt1on
440 G,·a.dient "ervice /Ired
Pa9e rovr
wt.:;r J!J.2. ,} FE~T OF TP£ SGLJ7Hwrsr OUARHk l)f THt IIC'qT){WE)T QllARTEa OF
SECTION 28. TO\.INSH'lP 2/l NQRTl', RANGE 5 £AST, lri.:-1. {.0.tS.0 f.'.NM AS Hif
FAST LIN( ::ir TA:< LO~ '16 or '-1Al0 5!JB0I"I510N); HIEN(( SOUTff ALONG SAIO
(AST LlN: TO TH( rtOIHH 1.HiE oi:-Pi[ S.QIJTH 504.02 FHT 0~ SA.JO SL18Dl~'iSION;
rno1c:: W[ST ALON-G SAID NOfl:TH LINE TO THE [AST UN£ )F THE W"!:.3T JOO FEET
Of SAlO SHfION 28; H-lERCE. SOUTH ALONG SArD £k..,T L!NC TO THE SOUTH UN£
Cf $1\lD S.E:CTJON ?~; TH[IW.£ £!\ST I\L{JNG. SAl[ S.OtJTH L.lNE TO THE NORTHfRL Y
:'..'il(NSJON Qt THE WEST LIN£ or LOf i, BlOtK s OF[.'!). 1-\iUJ'iAfl'S LJ\KE.
i1ASH!NGTON GARDEN Of [O[N AODITIOO ro S[Affl[, DIVISION ,o.a AS RECOROEO
I.~ VOCl!M( !6 OF Pl/\TS. PAG£ 61, R£COR05 OF SArn r::OUNfY;
THENCE sourn ALONG SAID NORWERLY LHENSION AND ALONG 111£ W(ST LINE or
':.A(O LOT 1, ANO ALONG. ntE \oltSl LIN( Of L{Jl 4 OF SA.ID BLOCK 5 TO Tl-![
r.ORTHWEST COH.tl[!-1 Of l OE 5 QF SAID S.U)CY, 5; rnrnct £AST ALONG ll-lf MRTH
UN[ "F SAID LOT I. aNO 'LONG THE EA. ·.RLY UTElllION THEREOf TD THE
C[NTERtINE OF 120TH AVE~UE S.E.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG $AID CfNTERLINE TO
lll( C£KTEP..UN( or S l. 34TH S.TR[(T; WOK£ EAST II.I.ONG THE CENTf.RLiNC
OF S.L 8'1TH STRUT TO mi:_ !1()R.TH£RlY OT[NSlOH OF TH£ WEST lINE OF
LOT 1. BLOCK g or saw c.e. H[Ll"'N'S PLAT; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG
SAID NORTH£,:_'!' (XH.NS[~ ANO ALONG THE WEST LINE Of SP.ID LOT l A_;;o
ALOOG rnE WEST UH£S or lO"fS 4. 5 Mm e rn SAID BLOCK g TO TH[
SOUTHWEil CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE EAST ALONG Till SOUTH LINE O,
SAID LOT 8. ANO ALONG TkE EASTERLY fXIENSION Of SAIO SOUTH LIN[ TO
TH£ C£NTCKf.l.lK£ OF l22t;D IWEmJE S.E., fHEN(l_ NORrn ALOI'«:. SA[O CENTfRUN(
:o IHl CENHRLlNE Of I.E. 84TH STRcET; 1HENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE
or 5.£. 841H STREET TO A LI~[ PARALLEL WITH ANO 300 rHT [AS, or
(M£ASUREU Al RIGHT ANGLES TO) Iii( C[kTERL!N[ or 122,iO AVENUE S.E.;
ruENrr SOUTH AlONG SA10 PARALL£l LINE 10 TH[ SOUTH U'HE or LOl 2,
-4-
----·-··-------. ...... ~---·--·-·-
~-
ti ,w .
I
tinq C::w,,t, i.:atrr 01~v1<:t :113.107
L•}Qt1l Ocs(r',pt 1..:,n
d~O Gradi~nt Servic(' l\r.-,.a
P~qe 5 i,:
SA iD sourn Ut;[ TO IHE WEST ti NE. Of TH£ )OUT:-lEAS T QUAP'TEft OF Pff
sourHW(ST OUARffR OF SAID J(CtlON J1; THENCE ~ORTH ALONG SAID WEST
1 !NE TO A PO(N.';' Olt A LIN( Pift.AALLfl WITH AtW JOC FEH NORTHCAS'fERLY
or (ME.11.SVRfO AT RIGI-IT ANGlE"S TO) TH[ CHHERllHE OF S.£. rtl\Y V,!ILLEY
ROAO; ill[~~[ $0UTH(A.STERl\' AlONC SAIO PARALLEL UN[ ro TH[ EASr LINE
Of TH( SDUIH\o1£ST QUAR:TEtt. 0~ TH£ SOUTHEAST QUARTER f)f SAIO
SECr!Oti 34; THENCE S'JUrH ALOfiG SAID EAST LIN{ TO ft!£ SOUTH LIHE:.
OF SAID SECTlON l4; THENCE WcSf .. ~LOtiG SAID SOUTH LIME ro THE EAST
llN( or SHORi PLAT N0.677007 AS RECORDED UNO{R KING CO\JNTY ~UOITOR'S
FILE N0.77120907gs; Tt-![N':.E rlORHI, WEST !\NO sourn ALONG T~T PORTif'\r;
or 1-0T \ lt\ SAID SHORT PLAT lYlNG IHTHlrl THE SOL'-'-iWEST QUMHR 0~ ,m
SOUTHf:ASJ 0.UAlHFR OF SAID S[CTION.34 TO Hff. SOUTH LINE OF 5Af0 SE:CTION
l4; THENCE W[ST ALONG SAIO SOUTH UN( TO fill NURlliEAST CORNER OF THE
NORTffi.l(ST QIJA1HTR or S.ECTWN 1, TOWNSHlP ?.3 tlOil.TH, RANGE 5 EA)T, ',UL
Tl-tfN(E SO\JTH fl.LONG TH( £.A.Sf llNE or THE -NORTHWEST QUARTER Of S.A!O
SE(TI011 1 TO THE. S0U1H LIKE OF THE NOR.TH 530 FEET Of SAID SUBDlV15ION;
ll![N(f WE:51 ALONG SAlD SOOTH lHlE. ro TH[ CENTERLINE OF lJ6TH A'.'£NUE
S.E.; THE.NC£ NOR1H\ilE$TtRlY AtONG SAID CENTERUNE TO THE: CENT£RUNE
or COt.L CRffJ.: ?AHl<WAV S..L; THENCE N0RrHW£ST£RLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE
OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.E. TO THE NORrH UN£ Of SAID 5£CTION 3; THENC[
WEil ALONG SA[O t,(JRTH LIHE ANO ALONG THf NORTH LINE Of SECTION,,
TOWNSHIP 2] NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, S.M. TO HE NORTHEAST CORNER Of TH£
NORTHWEST QUARTtR OF SAID SECTION 4; fH[NCE SOUTH Al.ONG TH£ HST LIN[
Of Tl<£ NOHHWCST QUARTER OF SAID SlCT!Off 4 TO THE IOUTH[.~<T (ORNER
PARADlSC [5'AffS N0.1 AS RECORDED IN VOLIJt1£ 102 Of PLATS, PAt( ll,
RECORDS Of SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY AL())IG IHE SOUTH LIHE O' SAIO
PLAI ANO ALOIIG THE SOI/TH UN[ Of PMAUISE !STATES AS RECORDED IN
VOLUM[ 95 or PLATS, PAG( 9J, RECORDS Of SAID COON['( TO IH[ SOUTHWESI
CORNER or SAID PARADIS( ESTAHS~ THOKE NORH1 il.l~G HH. WE';,1 LlNf OF
-6-
1
Kinq Co1,m.ty i.ta·.et Di'itrict No 107
lega 1 )es.cr-ipt ion
440 Grddieot S£rv'ce 'I.re"
Page (lght
Hit E.ft~T SHOR(UNE OF LAKf WASHINGTON~ fHfNCf NORTHERLY ALONG
IA!O INN[R HARBOR LINE TO Ti;£ CEN!ERUN[ OF PRl!Wll STATE
KlGHWAY NO.I; THENCE EAST Ai.OflG SAID CLNTERLINE TO TH£ PO[NT
Of BH,lNNlNG.
-8-
,<. I•
'·s I~ ~)
f
TtMI V11n~~; .J. H. -B,a~I.' &.
•fM:t 1n CIOO.ld•nt1on Of tbiii ·•Ula .Ot One Dollar 'U.00) and Other
goo4 and v•l~bl• •a1141ld~rstl<>n,_, ln hand! p.ald, ro~olpt ~hereof
la b•t"ll~J'. •~l~~4. doe.a her.by gr•nt, •ell, and convey to
Puget soun.a. ~~w•~ & L.1.&h,t Compar.1, • co~poratton. lte auccesnor8
fflilln&e:0,11.ncei •M/or t'<!pa.1r, ot' power llneo over and acro~.11 a p0:·tlo.n
'lt' thr, !'ollo,..1ng d6!'1.crlboJ.:1 real proper-ty aituated ln Klng [Junty,
niat rort1on or Oov•rrunent u:it 5, Sect1on ?9, Town-
-.hlp 2~ N. , Ra.nS') 5 £. w. ;,f., atl.d. adjacent l!l_hore lands or
cha: ucond cla.41:11 ln (root th«rtof lying we:iterly of the
Hort.barn raalflc Rall~•1 Coa,pany•e rlgbt-or-~ay, J~-
•cr1~d as tollowa:
S.ginnlng e.t th• q1,1arter COC'ner of the llne
or sa!.d section 29; thenc~ N By•58•36" w o.long tiH11 .J
11nii, at aald Lot 5, a distance or 1113.01 fef!t to the
'..'!:, l!.:-:e c!.' :..:!d M-:-!";;~~'!"n P~~H'lc I ! lwa!.' Comp.sn;:,r 's
r1,ght-of"-wa:,; thence N 29~41.i 1 54" E along s.;.id rlght-
~r-~ai lln~ g49.63 feat, to ~n iron p~p~ ~hlch poinL
La the tt."u"' po1n:.. ~r b11gJnolng; thcncl! s 29G4(! •5,4" w,
along aald I_"i~~-or-:-:~a;.r lint! 100.01 roeet; tl'i-cnce N
s,9•,:i1J 136"'"•..; 1039·.16 t!!1111t-~·-·more or le!!ia, to tht: .Inne!'"
Harbor t~ne of Lake Wa$hing~on; thence N 44v2o·oc• F.
along aald Inn.er H11rbor· Line 102.95 feet. to o. po1nt
tr-om whicb the tru• point or beginning bears s s~~
?1.1 1 36''1!.; tt,ence S 59•24 1 36·· E to th• true point of
bcgtnol.r.g; f:XCEP"l' port1on tht!l'eof descr-ibecl &6 follo· .. s:
s,eg1nn1ng at the ~rue polnc of beglnninf
or tht> abou 4eacl'1~ciG ~roperty; thi,nce S 2.;,•44,54·· ~
along th• Wly llne of th• :Northern Pacific flallwey
Co1111pan.y·a rlght-of-••Y 100.01 fe-et: th~nce N 5ci 0 2q•36'"
100,.01 fuc; thence N jo•.28•)0·· f lll.16 feet tc a polru.
rror.i which the true po~nt of beginning Clears S 5·..,i",_•4 ']6"' F
a dlatanoo o( 50 t•i1t; tn•nce ~i ~-J'"<-'-" ':36" E )G rcer. to
the true polnt or :tM-glnnfng. •Oil !XC!P1' th•t port1on
of aeld shore I•nd:• lf1na: Hlf or the Hly llne of ss~~
aovef't'UHM. tot Ii produced. Wl1 and EXCEPT that portion or CoY1;1~·0Dtnt 14t 5, s•~t~01n .t'J. To111nahlp ."'!4 N, tt.e.nge
:,. ! . W. ~., •nd adJl,o•nt chore land11 n( the se.cond c le~~
in fronL thU"IIOf l.)1'1n& w"l.y of the Nol't.ho11rn ~aclflc
Rallwa;y Cdtllpany'• t'1ght-ot~1111ay, dllllocrtti•d a111 rollow::;,
S.glnnlrtg •: th* qu.arier corner on the
s Une of aa1d J,aot,1(]n 2''}; thenc:• N 8,}•:,8 1 36" \II alor,p;
the s line, or H1d t,at , .. a dietanc, or 1113.01 re,n
t.o t.Qe vly lirw ,;:,r ••id North•rn J"&c1Clr: R•tl.w&y Co",p!ln:; '.:>
rlgtit-or-we,y; tM:nlMI N 2;•1&4 1,JI" r alone, sa.td :-1.gklt.-or-~i:sl-·
ltM: 649.62 titet, tb.4.n.o• -" 59•;;i4•36'" w' .1+3c fei1't lo r.h~ -
t.rue p4.1.nt, ot b4&1rtnln.tr.; ~t..nc. N ~j-j•;,:-.ti t36·· ~ lo;_;. reet
t.h41rHie )I 30•35•24" I lQO ·-t1111t1 th•nc:1 3 ~"i.'!4'j6" F
100 n11t; 1:b«bc.411 5 ,0•351211•· w 100,l'••t. to tllc tr\J~
point Q( \Miginn1ng;.
1
.-__ .,.--··--
EASEMENT ·-.... ~ ............. .
I H~~ INU!'.:i. ..... runE • .rr,~dt't tt-1.
,,,.a~,,. ,·,Ji.H:'l.•, :<"t·.l.r,;;.
• •,.-•n;,!of, cc,t ~·1 t"'e ~ ... ,.,..,,,.
, .. ,' ,.,,. ..... . ..... ~
,_,-•·., -,. 'T J...
. ,:-'-'. ;,,,-' ....
, .. ,i ,· ·'' •l.,., .>n
~~-----------
'
''
., .... (C,
.o"l
' '
. c,
~ "';J ' " .... . .............
".
·-.-
7
'
f
..... '-.. <! '
••<".-.-llc<-n c>' tt,~ <.""'
I-" Ui.,C.'
' '}
,..:-•'
'" , ....... x .. :::..._.
' .-.~.
•• ~· r I ' ,) .. ,..,,, r ,·
'.
~ .... , '
-_r.:..L.. • ··-.... ,, ••H---'••
to ,
• ...;...:..L"
.,..,~ru,;,1. r~c<.t •• ,~,.
.. ,.,,. o• r.,..i,.,.,,...
•; "'11 c! ... , ..
·-
M.,.,
•e ,-:;-.. _, . .,.
'0
...,,. .. ,,..., ........ H -·•••0 ..
-----~--1
,'"!.
'. T .-,;-,;:~;_:;:,.~~ ._:_:·.:_·~--"'"
·.(· -' -, ...
_,, -"'.
'-c-<'·
... ,~ --;-•,
·:, .... .,·,;,.
··--------~=-~-~?ii~;;:s-~-~~-~~~·-.~--.-~~, ··'"~~-~ ,-~·:-d~ a~
-~.:,_.n= .... tl\«-c hp,ri,.,.;. ·, ,')(,:, ,_~,-~I ,_,_-:!_______!__:. ..,,,;,,.,, 'J'""'" "<".-~•n . .>I.,, ""'"""
-~.-,+-.nt.rnuo»--. ,., ~" -• -----. ·-
:.. 0 zji".,-~~.-·~6-·:::M;;;;/, ,-;~,~~~-.. ;:.~ ~~.,ii~~ ),S,.J :,s ~"L'' S•'I:~'' '---.--•
..,......., ti d · ... '" ,,:' v,·:o·w,c, ,
... ~ ~;.~, ~·:::~:::~~;.";::·::~:::::::~:·~:~;:~:·:~:·:~ :;::~-~· ~::~:;:· .. ,''.'. :, ' .
W.-""'-"' -u_,.. • .,,. "•"""" .,~,~,-.µ·,., ),•1 -G~sntc,,
F".,__thlt.__L~t·u • .......,..,..,~~----,,;;;.. ~:.;;.;·;~;::-~::.\;oVl'"._..t<-l"'n ·--·-.. ·
,~.:w,;n!3·-;,--~. ei"~~~;~~-=-~~H_]~.~~~·N~·~~'.·i~
~ '.;-. . --
'~TNf.§.SET-H:
·~~t-.-pci~tr,;n: o-r eovern!UeUt Lot, 1.. •. ~ect~·)::: .,,.. ::..._., .n.,:-,(/
:-~ . .rO.J.~-CTh'-~:_ ·A ~-.to .... t· ~~ri.P: of lenr~: he:111 :c. G:. .. :t _ .. ~ ...:.;.:·.:'
:..:..J-l.rie:: _'!::lrr.iil.nlng r.t: ___ f(.,.pe,int :,r, -thn·~,:,j: -:!..L.'""!,:-,1-
·~'....-"Tll! -~eL;:i s.ppr~:djietely··.:-r,.:, f'et,-; .!\,:.;:-'.: .... · ::.1~ ·:J, -,..,2>,·
· ... · · ,i.aLJ~· f>-·eor•e ·Ko.~~-_::;..:.$O~=Rl!~-t:~_,.·-..,1-~--"'t>:1-,·--
~i,~i:e:-lr ~':L:Jnr. rr~·1&
0
t-t1._.roed ~ ,11 .. :t.·,.:1cr r .:_t1 f'~:,·-:-.
-:,q:;:r.ro1::i-.11.f·:"f·ly-·71·,--. fi::r•t ~est ,-.,r ~· · ~J· .. :
rn-e '"!'."'"•
·2"1!1ct: ~L:.J.i::L'lc ·:."-tFli...:<.
n·'l 1 nt '~.l
-\:. ,. ' ·-'· :·' '--
' ~II·
'"·" ·.f f • •d :, ,lfl;<n,U.i.,:}.-, ,•'I • _,.,;, 'l-J\L<·,,. > .Y·
•.-,,. ?11,-n,.,·,:-;;,: ;::f ,L·,-s;trtr' .
"
:,=--:_ -i'rqlin') !::.1(! l1.n,f._ 1n,j tj,e-nght ~t :.n1_t,!'ri_t ~ i.-_Bll,v;· '·'·'' · .--~
-==--~,.ac.:;:,-fn~-r,~·"to--U,-i:C7'j,r\l,x:Pli;..gu.,;,:r~o;(:r~ ;incl.,:;-;·,)•"·~.:
P---<>'-'"'-"'i,-. .... ,.,~.,,,,dttl•<••«•Ls-~ ~~fie iif;·..-nr-;n -_-;;-t;.--;:·:,~.~~f-~~:. ~---..... .,._
==--
)~· ~ ... ,i ~ :·:ast;
r ->-:. ~:-.
, l ·)·,·~_c_--'-~-'-'--'-"'!'-~=
•J
.·p-.
-~;,.-·,--~ . .:~.-:.-=:::·
' --:-r· -1~~~-."i
. .• i
._.,...
. " 1
-----~,--,,-
,. ,c
•, t ..
·-· ;~.---
~-------------------.---~ ~ ~ -_....,, -·-·· .. -.J ·_,....., -.ne1::-1L :urcre::,;:,o.-, or,, i:,=r~t:5 ._.,.,....,__~-·-
--~~:~~',iHJti.a. .. 11 -:::l111t<'ITI_ce <71' t~_l,µn5b·s...'! {.1~,·,:t -~--1~ '" .,..,,t,,,u-t-q,~-,·(_J ,~.,.<!';Oflf,O<~ ,,,,t,,;<1-!'· ,,_.,
------• ..,~ {).:l _,;,-,-.-
.:::::::ttrr e---l't.-~~·111'51f"U~~:.of intr,n-ti~n -=--tq ~-_ ---, -·---·---.--.
-~• . _ _, __ .:.·....;.ni, .l:,~l::if•~•t.k. ,pr-1vHeg~~d-_;uiho-~it:t. ~-~;~~~~--r.~} ~ .. c~,-,.,p :,,,-c !:r<' n; rs:,;-:=-,:;-·vnt~I ·s~~;'?'J,:, a:>..t,.r,~G.-'.;: 1 ~~~
..
. ,ai1•,:,:.,._• _;'r • .. ign~._ ,;h~!\ P•;m".!.~;ntly--;:o:·~,o ... ~ ,!>.iid p,n~:.. """ ~& ,,,1d .. JJn'-' ,,,.,...,.'le,.,..,,.~ ... ,,... ""'d ...!.:;!t·,d's.;_-",. isi.ajJ-~<Jtfic rw,~~· ~· :r '
'J ---~: .. :h~i·1 :-~.rmi~~tc.
: -.r,,., ......... .; ... 1 ... i 11 ................ <-~-.:.. ..... _____ ....::;-:-,-::
..r
..
5790<108
4tbo und~raigned Ora.ntoc~ ~to heira~ auccea•o:o and
dll.a.Bi.c.Jn.s., (bere1.na!"ter ~ogethor rel"alt'"red to ac •orantor .. ),
foe ~"1 1.n cona.ldar.a.t.lon o~ tho au.ta o~ §;E;y&N HUffDMD E, PI.t:rX h
N0/400 DO~(,.!LRS ($750.00)4.ttd othar valuabLe cona~aerA~~on, tho
r~c~~pt 0£ ~~ch 1s hereby Mckn~wledg'•d, hcr,shy convey~ ~nQ gr4.ntn
to tllc MVllIC IPiU..ln' OP JO:TROPOLI..T.Alil' &BA.1:'Tt..2 1 J.ta succeeaorl! ~d
auu~gna, {h@~1naEter togother reE•rred to 44 ~KU!ilXCiPA.L~TY~)~ ~
?(!:Pl~ent &.!lo~t'lt:. ovAr-~ acroaa, e,.long, .Ln .. upon and under the
following d~acribed p~opcrey~
;i., port.ion of OoV'nt:nacnt Lota 4 end 5, Sect.ion 29. Tawnah1.p
~4 Hurth, R4ngc ~ B~~t. M.tt •• KJ.ng CoW"lty. W••h.1.nqton~ aa1d por-
tLon be-in9 a atr~p of 1and 10 feet Ln ~idth 1yLnq $ Leot on aa~h
&1dQ o~ tho ~oiiow~ng dascribod c•nt~r l1ne1
Ekl9~nni~9 at a point on the •outh 1Lue of Oovcrnment Lot 5
at th~ intera~ction o~ aa~d ~outh 41ne With the weat 1in~ n£
the k.iqht o~ w~y 0£ th.e North~rn PA~i~~c Jta~i~ay Company, t=.nen~c
North 2'l0 44' 54" "'"8t -s,4,&.! foot 11lon9 011.t<S ""'"t Lino: tnenc:o.
tlo.r;th S9°;l'4' .36'' Waet t:o th4iil Tru• P·olnt oc lJ.e.ginn.t.ng, aai.d True
Poi..nt of: Hc9.i.nal.nq, beJ.ng on ll .tine whl.Ch boara :iouth. 56u-'2'e •SO~
'h'QAt (cQt\ a po.1.nt on a.f\.id 'W'r:t•t l.1no of the l{lght of Way of t: he
~orthcr~ P~c~ric P.~Liway co~pany d~atant 1049.6) £eet &long 9a1d
""""O!lt, !..1ne .froru tha i.t,tt!PraectJ.on thereof' w.1.th. t;~o oout.h 11.ne 0£
GoYOX-rl-P'IG.n.t Wt Sr t..hcnc1J Uorth 59°,24• J6 •• W~at 460 feet;
t.h"!'nce lloeth J..4'°.;:4•J:t.i"" ,est 127~.J foet to poi.nt cf te.rtn.inua dis-
tant S !eoet south o:f tnie" noi;:-th.c.t1.nt cocner on the t!!!I-.Jlat l11'\e of a
hace.1.nJfties:-d~sci:-l.btld l.OD.00-Eo,ot:: a~ara ·p.:..rce.l o~ property r~nc:n,r,"'i
an l'~rc:01_ '"A'•:-tl,once beginn~ng zat, a. po.1~t d:te.ta.nt:.. 5 -feft~ BO-Ut:::b ot
the north l.J.nc 4nd 1S £get oat1t of t:u::! weest J..1na of 9aJ.d Pa.cc•H "r~·· ~
~.J co.nt.J.nu1.n9 tfoC"th J9 29'" 19 .. Wost to: • term1nu.s o:l:t th-e :in.'1.cr
1-t.arbor l,inc .. ~c Washington. EXCEPT .i.ny pcreJ.on ther~of J.ying
Within saJ.d Pa..r;c~l "'A·'.
The bcfore-m.e-nt.1-on«!d Pa.r~el. .. ,,_ .. .t.t!I dee:cr.1bccf a6 ;fo.tloWCJ. i
n-..1.t. p-urt:1.on of' <;ovoJ:"n.moot; ~t s,. ~ct.ton 29'. Town.chip :!-=: ~uLLn.
R~nqc 5 ~aut, w.H., K.tng County~ Kaqhing~on, lying -eater~y of
Nortl .. c..-n P.<'\c::.l f 1.e Ra1.lwo1y C'0tt1p>m.ny• a R.1.9ht o £ way, toqcn:.he.r W-J. th
~!";.~.;"cl.m1:ta. ot: =~..:....o~.::! =.!.::.-::~, 1.f a:""•::.r ~~=:~~.!:;:: ·:: .. h::-:-::-:--~. a!.l ;;;~ ~~.!.:~
.1::s more p.:trt:.~cu.L.ar-.ty de-s.~r.1.bcd a!J 2!0.Ll.ows~
acginni~9 at the l/4 corn~~ af the south i~n~ o~ eaid
Sect~on 2~; tncnce Ncccn a9°5~•36-west a1ong the aoutn l~n~ of
oaid Lot 5~ a dLatance 0£ lL~J.01 feet to the ~atar~y ~~n~0 o£
&.J..id Nortne.i;-n Pa.c~fl.c .Ra.i.lway R.i.':Jh't. o.f Way1 t:;hence NO%.tl'l 29 44' 54 ..
S"lst aloti'3' :,.a.J.d: Ri9ht o.C Wa.y l.inc R-49.6.£ .feet; thence tforth 59°
24' j.Qo .. we.s·t. 641. • 44 f~et to thn True PQJ.nt of Beg.1.nn,1.ng: t:.henso-
CCl)t.l.nu.l.n9 /1<.,rt..'l ~~0 l4' 36" West 100. 00 :i:ee t: thence North JO 35 • 24"
Ea:;;.t: .100 6 00 :tcoet';' thence south S9°..!!4•J6,•• .C~:c;.t:. l.OOaOO Ct:.:et; thence
South .J.O _;5• :z.;;·· West l00 ... 00 .feet to the 't'::-ue Po1.n1::. o~ 9cg1.nn.1.ng.
S4~Q e~seru-ent beitg for the pu=£--'&C of 1.nstaii~~9 6 constru~t1ng,
opcrdting~ matntdini.ng~ remav1n9, r~o~1rir.g, re-plae.1.ng ,anQ using
~ sewer l~ne ~~th aiL ~onnect~on~. ~nho~~a and appurtenances
the~eco. together ~1th the r~gh~ of Ln9rcs~ to and egress £ram
s~i.d Qcac4~bed pr~pc~ty fox the ~oregoin9 purpo6~~-
SY &ccep~i~g an~ ~ecard~n9 t:h~a ea~'et::.ent.
,i;;;:avenanc..s ,'l~ f!:}1lo,.r!:;.
' ,
l. N.Ul-l.XCIPAL:ITY Jia..ll. 1..2,pon eo:i&p,1.et.1.o!"I of o!'J..r'lj· .::.or.atructi.on of any
£acil1tie::.. C.eacrJ...bect herei.b. re:::".ovo a..1.1.. de·b:r.L& .:int: r.e.store the
aurface of the above-deac~.1.bed J~operty as ne~cly as po3a1.ble to
the condit~on in ~hich ~t ~~at~I at t.he dace of thl.s ag?:""eement.
-~-
1
J
-· -··---· ---·--. ~-
;_ '«'\. 1580 mE :.k:8
By 4cceptLng .and raeordinq thia oa•e::nc,nt, HUNIC~PAL.I't'Y covenants
oe fo1l.o~i
i. MUliZCZPAL1TY nho.1..1 upon comp1et~cn o~ con•truct~on o~ any ~~c,·tt~e•
d~ecribod ~ore.1.n, and upon t~• ~~lbt~on o~ any repa~ro to ~ny ouch
~ac~l~tie• foi1ow~nq construction. remJve -41 dabrie and reeton, the
surraec 01! t.h.o .ahove-1:::le.acr.1.bftd proP'f"":rty-.a.a na.a.rl..y .r..;a poad.1.b1a to t:.hei
condition in -which ~t ex~.~~~ at tho date o~ thi~ 49raemc!nt~
.. • :1u:::1c.IPALI'rY agree:B to .1.nd~J.ty and •et.Vo narml.aae Gran.tor__. fro~
an~ ~g~ln9t any and ali dm:i.age to th~ a..bove-d~•crJ..bed propert~ or an~
bu1l<lLn9 locatod th~roo~ nt tho date of thia agreement, ar~ein~ out oL
t:hc c-o,u:i:truct.ien, oper.:it1.on, mo..tnte.n.a.nc~, repa.1r ancl rop"1..-cer.1ant o:f the
faciLiti~~ d~~eribeQ ~~va4
3~ Tn~c ternpor~ry ccnatru~tion c~#emc:nt shall cctmienco ..u~d be in
orfcct on th~ d~tft oC thie inatru:ment .and ahall tertaLn~te on the d~te
a.ctual 11-"IQ o-..~ an.id eas-e-mont 11reQ Sh4ll t:6rmJ.nate or upon -===1~y._~l~-----
l9~, \./hlch~vQr d~te anQLi firot occur.
4~ P~yr:,,.ont fc~ D~t~ tnrnporhry conet~uct~~n •a•eme~t ~hft11 be D\.adC ~t
tho r-~tc of PX.V?:: "" B0_/100 ---Ooll..1.r& ($ 5,00 · )
per c~lenddr ~~k. or fraction thereof. th4~ Qdld t:<tmpor~,~ eonoC<uCtlon
e..:a.ocrnon-t ar,e,r12 i.o in ..:lct.ual u•e by HtJNICicl'AL:ITY'. P-ayment eha.ll ~ m4dC
on o~ t.o~orc the last ~~yo~ the ca.J..endar month ouCCEedlng the c~l~ndar
~Onth when aaid tempora~y zonetruction eaaement are~ is ~n ~ctu~L uae.
5. /"_ctu~l unc as u.s~-d .1n this te.:n.porary conat.r1Jc:tion '1aflC:rtt-ant oh~l.1.
))'(;' ccn~trued to incLudQ onLy thb par~od from the start of conntructlan
o! Sd1d ae\...l"'C'r line 1h the ~bovo-deae~ibed tewror~ry co~nt~uction c~sc
tt;,t..int .. ,.r4a!.:a unt:.Ll. ccm.pl~t.10:r-tharcof inc1ud1.ng recon.utruct .l.01~ 0£ Coancinq
~nd c~cbin9 ~nd ronocla~ln9 o~ ~mprov~d ~rcaa4
S'l'r.,'t"'~ Of' h"ASHWGT'ON )
) S::"1 -
COUtiTY OF l{IUC )
Clt:y 6 C,·-,>clt· ,,: S:.-n F-r_~t:'-(:t•~o s •.
5T,"\.TE OF C..\llFOR.N'IA. }
--~ !.}:I. _ M_.t.r~ -=I September ;,. 1 .i,,r-.,-.n::.,. -,,. ... ~ ,..;,.,. ,.><--1~,r.l-a-J.-. • t.xtx=(our
'· • rr .... -_ .J".Q," V~ 'C,en<'l,e:dy _____ ,o-/i.,u..r-rPJ..IO,rO .. .....;fo,r,J.r--.CJ.ty_,11.n4. __ c • ..,,.,yf>/
S.an trr..-n1:.13i.:o -, '.h:f, p/ c.=i;,,~ ... n, tlul:, &:..ro.UJUHI0;.:1-J ~ ,,rT,,.-.-u., qr,r.,_,..i
c ... A. .. _ C:ha.dMuq;i,,; and ff.,. e .. tlQ••~:ri _ ""~ . ...,, .. ._,,.c,,,._,, __ . ?t.ci;,.id~nt_ a__n_d_S.-ec.i:::~tc.o. --~--·. ____ • -··
f"! a,it" ~---, .. ~lL"<II. .,j,-,r~ .,._ ~ .t...il ,r.11:rn•J;.,/ .I.Lr-~....-. ;....-i.---... .1. ~ ~,,, ..,,C":T"III ,.., ,..,. I~ 6,
,;.,.. ~.,,..___""""""..., r-3:~.W:rd t4, ~.I~ .;...,.,~, '-""" i!:rb.<lllf .,, 111., r.:.-/v~ rl,-,-ri.il IUio,t,tJ, .:i.J
,:.,..· Wl7!,:i:SS u·uF....R£0F I~,. ,.,,,.._,;,,,..-:r ... u1 ••;i i&...:a..:I ~ 4-~'"'1--:, ,,.r.f'fri..I .. ~ t,0 r:..r
f.1E:J> -!r!~--,--~c~ Gf-. S-!_f!. ~--n~ i•C:C!'. _ ,:, ... ?..q 8..:1 :;-lff.'J, .-. 1.14" .-.-r,"'i...,: ...
·~,a ... ~--.,. ,.--.u .....
... _ ·.•f}" J·>.J!··. .-i,~-
C..-w ~.-. t-.~ ... ),;: .. ~o
.• • t-,r-. 11"•' lo·...:,. I,
!'-ufl!" •<i c.;.,7.....,.,:~
r~ ~ it--~ ::::J....J -'"' "'..,. /:°'"'L.. rM...
~,;..EI.A..,t'C,, .. -3-
IOU.~ A.~-~ .._,.""""
•
....
• • 2
t
1
~
l
,,_ 1..••
fort"4ia..........,,c,_<III Oil£ OOUM (tLOO) •114 <iti...l' goocf .a!N ~,1Ja,•illc co<11ldcrttion,
UI U.od ~. «-rJ'I .and • ..,-.;; b> Niall sw.i l'Olfil &. l lG.MT iON'HIT, t "•1hoingt<>11 C<><pcl r .tt io<1,
'""~""'""•....a....i .... ..w ....... 1..i•~c....-,..r llt~ .s. .. ~.i ......... ".
Th•t p:,rc;a,r1. of '4••r-t Lat S, kc;t:-I!, Tow;"'i/llp 2oli Jbrth, lu1g, S tnt, 11'.lf.., 11,,.:1.to<.int'f,
W;a.1hil'><j1lon, lyi<'HJ ... 11.rly c;,f Jilorttwtr• 1..:lflc l~lh,ey ~MIJ'I rlgllt of-,. to9ol!ther with .
shore hnd1 af HC()l'IO (lau, If..,., aboatth19 l!Mir-, •II of "*"ic~ 11 aor,1 p,rtrc .. hrly N1Cr1~
.. Jg,llo,n:
geglruo.i•9 H <lw 1/r. c;.e,rnar of tho, 10dth 1111• oi i.&14 $..ectl.:. 8; ttloance I 8'J 0 S3•lft" wr-t •IQ<Mf:
tltc! ,o,.th Ii•• of Hi4 \.ot S, • 4;u,11Kc of 1111, 'I het to tN!l -1t,u1y line of Uid -.OrtM:n\
11'.ateJflc l.aih••r '°"~•r'1 ritf,t of_,, 1fta1u Ill 2'°11i4•Slt• u:t,t .. 1Qft9 u;d .-;.;:t of ,...r IIH St,\1.62
r-t; tl\..tn<.e 111 51<121i!'J&"'-1t "41,._.. fan to u .. uv• ,c,hu: al .,,~1"'\ft;"'i!; 1~ «>O"ti ... ln9 II s,0
;io\']6'' -u 100.00 fe.t\; thillll'ICC I JO")S'*' Mlt 100-4» re111t.; lht1111c.e S ;,0 2.ti.•]6"" oUH 100.0G foret;
thalu S )0°35•2'/• -it 100.00 hcl to thlll: 1n1e poi"'t of b4-ii.,<1in,; Toq,,et"'°r •hh • ,e .. -~.-t
H'l.-ctl for ;114r,u. •1'14 e,1111u -•• a4ld 1cnu; .. the <Jr .. lol 1:t ,>t1u:i1119 roe-4 ,11M/or 4, nl4 r04d'l'
.,, be cll4nf"ld frOIII ti-to tir.e '"'Ith r011d1 cross • ~1i,:. ·of t""' re•I prOf)t!rty putittol,rly
cl,n,., lbd 1ft, the dud dtecd tM 2M 4,y cif S,a:p,t~r. 1,sti.. ,.,oorch::d in l.l"':iJ (.qq"t7 Auditor•.,.
h11h flh lie;,_ l,,~&J~. •oh,11111a ~ Qf k:eih, r1119e li<ll, ""'°"'"d-. cif J.in1 ~t,. \lut.in',)ton.
fhli cl,td {s ti.,,11, lA n,,tac.-•t <if tllet cHt1i11 4-d ~ated tlw: IU ..i..., of ~rclil, 1'16l fro,
J, H. S.i<\<!!r ., C,::,,,,,p1,t1f ~<:I PQ911 ~ t-r & light (,::-.,,eftf, re,;ord,d i,i Voh ... e l,}9' of Doted,,
P•g,e ltS.S, F.'«>rd.i of ~Ing i:c:,y,.ty kl4itor •
--•-1oH..,_Ji1a....loaiUK........._SK.u.un.--··--··----·--_,_,""',.....~"-'.d.ol•-.l ... _._...._ __ 4,,, ..._1,t_ ......
... ,.. ..._.... ,__. ........ ...._ ... lkWI., ___ ,_,..,. ........ -...1.. .,l _ __,_ __ ... _._~_,.,.. ... _________ -····-------
Ill WlTlJI.St WHDmr I._.~ -4 ._,. ..... _, .~.I -, ,f.,!J"""'.;.. tL,
-~--c-,.-1.......,. fuKltra _ ____.. .. ,.J_ioi..,r,1.1,a, "'·~--
, -
. '
..
.... -
-----------
.,...
Mint•-:.. ~r•tlon Hid Nf4I~ or• 1~rll'II_,.._, u•I• """' •1114 ,c:,011 •
po<UOII or tN fa.I !owfn11 "81ulk4 t"hl prOf*rtr cli .. tclill I"' l:lflt ~t'f. Wadil111ton,
to-wl t:
That portion of &o.•,,..•t lot S, -tlbll Z!, fOM'lffllp lit l&o,.th, A.lf'l'i$ S
tut, w.1., -1111 IMIIJ•i:.Mt fl'IO ... IW-1 .. , o .. ...-4114 ClHI '" frOllt tMr,-.gf
lrlnt wit•rlr of thl lortMl'll f'Klt1c .._ll111111y ~1 1 rl,ght of-,.
•udbd H follCN$;
le,;hw:,1,. U tto. Hl4 1011th ~rter Col"'Mr; tlii&n-u II 19°sa'}fJ"' -d al--t
uld .... tit llrw • ll1t,911£4 af lllJ.iU (Mt o, ti. .,.,tuty 1'1Mo of MIid
J&cH-tllc!n• r.a,lflc ll&11W11 ~,·~ dpt•'.,.,., ttw~ I 2"1\lt'S'-" u,t
,11\°"'9 ulllll tl9.h\ of ,..,. ll~ '"'·'J fMt; t'-"u ll S.,0111t13' .. u1t 7'L" fut to
the '°'"' of bolgiMl"t -:' 1.a1.-.. ....,.,; tM-,u • ~J'i~ .. 1oeu i89.1S fHt
tot.,_ 1-r lllli"Mf l•N Of '-"• V.ultl111t•; tJM.u. ftli 1''5f' U1t •Ian, ., .. Jd
·-r 11.ukr Uiw 1}1.5\1 fut; ~"-e.1'1(4 s i.t°S,~sr Hit '6S.64 feet; t.h,all('.(I s 10°
)5'2.li'' ~,t 101,00 feu ,,:, t"'9 ,olnt of lc911ffl11tf.
sr.tn Of c,,urouu.
On thl1--11UL_ill,y of _ 19611,, lwfore int, tbe ~r, i<J"n.ei!.
941n0fl.1Uy •~.1r..d &lh:d I lvEu emf I I "9t1M1
l<>""' Ii..-lo M tN--.Jw.._P,r.lf"11l ..._., fHUltO r,np,,!c.tiwclr,
gf .>. It, IAJ:TU 6, i.l)., lM «H'l'O'.tlOf'I tMl u.c1,t.lll , ... fore,olng lt11,tN1M,Rt, 6ftd
•~ledf,1.4 1.M u!d lt1s.tr-Rt to k lti. free an4 '¥oGliir•t11)1 act eftOi Mie4 ,of s•ld
c,;:,,P'r•tJM, for th.I u,u •M P\l,r'PC)s.e, tta.rcln -•nloned, a.NIM -th ,uted thllt Hll!f
-r• •••tllllrl•elll t.a e.uc:iotc ttw. H-td lnU~t ~ tf\.lt lht sul affl-4 h tM eorpe,ratc
st.al of wtd C-<1r,Or.1tlQII,
; '
-,.
,wi.~ ~., ..... ..,~ ~ -1·::..-.
~ .. ,... s..,,1,-. l i... , ..
t()lff.f A.~C......,.....
--
t' i?S---:, -~--ct-~·'¥.JtUn;z ..... _5,df,<Et'.'\ll.*2.#P. --~
,. . ; ·.;h_ ,·,.--~
r" ....0 1us•ft~ .~~~-'.;i'ttlf.:. ·-C.ABu: s 'l'h• guntor, J, "· ,,.rt.,.;,, -. oarporatlan, rar •nd ln
' !
I
I
l
i
":_ '· t' ••.=)_ .~ -, cona1der..t.it;m or Ont! Dollar· ..,.. ..._ .... ot.h1or good end valu•ble
Con~itleretiorus in hand paid, t.tle r.ce1pt •he~eor 1• -h•niby &cknowled~d,
d.01!::!I hereby grant e.ad CORVOJ ~Cl _P~t Sound PO'lfflr & L.1..a;:t'),t Company.
• corporot1on, • pel"'SIDnent ••~Qt tor th~ cortstr~etion, ?118.lnte-
nar.-:e, opere.tion and r11palr or u aubmartne power cable undl!:I" end
across a po~tlon o~ the foll~•1ng deecr1bed c-eal prop~rty a~tuated
l~ Kins County, \ilashlngton, c.o-w1t;
Th•t port~Qn or QoY•rnll"•nt Lot 5, Sectlon 29. Towoah1p ~4 N,
"Ranco 5 E, W' .M., and odJacent ahore l•nds of' th~ second
c1aaa ln Cron.c che~or ~!ng lril,J or the HQrl.heni Paclflc
Rall••Y Co~pany•3 rtght-or·~•Y, deocribed as follo~~:
Beginning at ttu: qua:rt;er c:orn.er on the so1,1th line of :,ald
s.et1on. ~9; tl'lence N S9•58•36" w· along ~he .'S lln,e or ssild
Lot 5. • dlstar.ce of lllJ.01' :~ ~Me •ly line at 5ald
No~thern Pac1flc ~a11~•Y Company's ~lght-oC-~ss: th@nce
N 29•44,5~·-E alone; $S1d r-lgt:it.-or-wa)' line 849,C!'; then<:e
~ 5-1•2.ta•J6" ·.,; •.)30' to the true riotnt Qf be.r;;lnning; t.hen.::e
P.:-::if·::,~•36·· .t to th~ Int.er H1111:rCor t.lne or take W.esh!t'lgtori;
thence w ~4~20 1 cc·• :::-.Jlon& :1e'!.d Innc-t""" H:trbc.r-t.lne 102.-)5';
the:nee s 59•2!!•36 i;-t.o .a r,oint: _.-h1.::h bear-=,. J,/ 1.c·3~•,~4~F
lC[.:• rroo: the tr-u@ 901,nt at b.!-g1rrn1ng; tt:'l':nce S 10•35•;,.ti" 'i
lt.'(... • : ... ,.:1" t. t"'-"" r,,v:. ;; ~ vf !:::!!g !.:i:'l.!. n,g,
')"TE~ t.hl:i __ l,s-:. _ Jay of _E~-·--' 1963, ttlt. l-,1·1 ?r., ·· : s:,... ,:-, •. · -------
! .. ,.,
i
I
.,,
, ~·r. ?::.f'll~ ---1..il___ ..;,ay or ~J;ii __ .... _-.. • l_,63. be(ore me. the tondt:r-
:,q~;nt!d. l'.,ler3onalIY al!pear-ed ~~:; ···--.. __ and ...:!..._:!.,. .!!1..1.......:.!_·.:.i
tn i:te kr:o•n t,.;, b-e re2Hdoenl ana--;· • ,
NSpac"fl'y•.:.1, of J. H. Ba~ter . "., tt.(.: cor-p,oi--:!!'o~t'it· ~ ~ec\.t.ed
:..r1-e r,,'"egoll'lt: ln:'\t.rvment., and acknowll!d~d thll!!' sald ln~trurr.~nt. -.. .. , oe
:.:'1-e f~ee and voh,nlJl':J fllc:'t. ,ind d.eed ("lf s.ald cof'f.>O['dt..lon, for i.t, ... ,.Se!:
:i.:~ p..:.r~o•e:1 tt1•reln !l,ent.toned, and ou 011.11 :!..La-:..ed. Lt,@y 1,11,H"t! eu'.n0r"i:·ca
tc> ••e-C~t.• c;he 3ald lnal.rume:nt end thet the ::i.ettil •fflaed ts u1e corJ;or-•t• se•l or aa.14 co-rporetlon.
:..:I'Mi'f.:J.: flff t'.I.NO AND OFP'IC'U.l.
t lr11t. aoo-ve wrltten.
<;.<r ,I ·,.,, ~:~ • { •1v•.I ...... -·· . . '. ·,
...
c1'4 , .. of GM hll• .. (tr,IO) .,_. o&"9r ,-oil "4 .,.,.,..,1. ,;o,1ll•rulo,,1, 111 11••.:I
,.r,, rec•lpt WIii .. "( It Mn"1 ~14di"C, .,., itri.nei·y , .. tftt, ••t I 61\4 c.w,.,
!:: to Puctr ~o ,owtit' lfCJfT CONf'~. • COl'PQ .. •tlon, h11 ,.,«.H4o'I ·"" ... ,,,,,·, ~ r.r; P<l........,l eu-o,t f¥ tM c.o.,un,,:t/4", ,;,p,er•Han, -•lll•ll.arlce ¥i4(or np•lf, ot
"' ~ .. fh,e1 aw.r .nd .,,,ou a ,o,-tfon of th.I (ol l-in,g d,uedhd , •• 1 pr~rt,
,u ... ,.,., In «l"'t Cow.tr, W.1-M119ton~ to-.. rc:
nw.i ,po,rclo,, of M1'1'1rlwe,I\C r.ot 5. So1:c1I001 H, r-hfp ii.. llortlli,
~c 'j, (ht, W.M., lftlf .. J.,;ent llw)r• latlodt of tM 11-1100,,d <:lot ill
front th.!,cof Jyl119 -Herly of tlle lortlwr" l'KHle hit-; ~,·,
~ight of ... .,, l,ucrlbed n foll(!-,:
e.,inni""J at the q,.l,ffla" eot"11t:r of th<= i0011th H11111 of uid ~tti,on ~;
t~~ N ll"'i°'511'36'' -st •long thot 1o.ic1i· lhw, ol ui" lot S. • dinanca of
111).01 fut ta the i.oesterly II not of uf4 11,.,,thao """Hie a .. u-r C,,;ap,av' 1
rl~t of .... ,; (flellt,e II ~'SIi' HH •I°"" n1' rlgl,t tot.._, Une 'Jlo,.'3
f•el to.., Ir.on pipe .._;,11 polnt i1 th.I! u..e. pol"'t of k9iMl"'9; thr.11c•
°S 2')"':IJ,4'51(• ~lit •IO!'g i.tfd ,J9ht of_, 111'\I. 100.01 fHt; t~ t( 1'1'2'-'}6"
· i.n 10)9.16 fdt, ., ... « IHI ,o tk '"'"r t...-W LIN of lP• IIHhla<)tQoll;
thence It ""-0 1l-'Sl" Hit ,,~ Mlrl '";IU &roo, l.lfte IOL')i fHI to • poiu
fr011 ..,.;,11 the tnoe ~11t of beflMhg li<t..1n $ s,02r.• 36'' ust; tbe11c1 s Sio
lft'J6" euL t<ll Ow, tn.ie ,ol"'t of bcglrv1lfti: DICfPT p,,,nlo,i ttoer.-of ducribe4
1t fol Lo"'"
l,,9!n11l"'9 •t tt-e true i,oi111t of be<JIMl"'J of tl'tir tbowc IMl<=fi\i.ed prop,9r,,:
t"-rl<:1 S 2"3'°41.'5'-'' """u •lor.g t~ _,tar(y lrne gf the tlortN!n l'aclfic A1ll••r
Ccnp.,r,y'i; right of '"'1 ,to.01 fe1t; t1i.uu:e N 53°11,1 )6'• · .. ut 100.Dl fut; theACe
11 S6°2~'S,a'' uu l!Ll6 fHt lo• pol1't frOOII M'lidl thot. tr"ve poi11t af b,:9;...,1~
b,,,1r1 'S S,02'4']6'" ult• dlU•AU af 5,0 feet; thence S S'JGlft']b" 11.nt SO fut
to u-... tr1,14 poi"t of kgi1W1ift9; a'14 U:Cl""( th.it poui.,.._ af u14 :'.hor• 1•11h
lyillo) northedt Gf tM IIOrUwrly u,,. of s,td i:-.n .. 11t lot S produce4 ~1-tedy
~ UU.P1 tlwt po.-1iOt1 of Cowu1We11t Loi s. S.cti~ 2!1, T0"'#0$1\1p 24 Pwrth,
l.•f19,1 S tnt, \l.ll,, rttl _.IJ,11~1 ihorc land1, of 11\e :lccond ti.an i• frOAt tlw.reof
•r;f\f -uul,-vf the Noo-thar11 Pacific «•il ... y '-'PM>y', ri<Jht of -Y. 4oncri"d
H follo..1,
!..,,;:iAfli~i It l.hc qu,rt•f com<!,.,, t~ ioutta 1;,.,.. of ~•1,1 $.eCtion 2'9;
thenc• I !3°51'}fi" ..._u aton, the south line (If u J lot S. • distet10 of
UIJ.01 fut to tlw, ""IIHcdy 1l1W. of ui<I lotche~n Pu.Hie bil-y Co!of...,1'•~
ri,ght ,of .,,; tt~nce 1t 19°'-'''51/' ust •lc.tt<J l4id ri9"1l of -y II~ 8.tt9,fi?
feo:t; thenctc II S'J~21o'J.6"' _,t "'·'*" fnt ,o the tnM r,oint of '.:>0!!9innin'I:
tlocnu eq,tti•Miln'i N S9'°':1,i 1 )6" _,t 100.00 f.at~ tMn<:e Ill }0°}'i,'l'4'' t,nt 100,00
f,e,ie1. thenc.e S ~,o~i.·~6" UH 100.00 fu.t; th.nc, S 3ri 0 )S'2ft'' wBt l00.011
f1cet IG l c tru• poi"' of kgl""•IMJ.
-
nus lM.',Tlt'X~"'. 0...1~ u,;.;, . .,.' ,,.,, i!!iy of --~<1-,.,,-~,,,_,.,,.,,__~-=~-/-;cr; ,r ., n •Y and b,eb.teen ~~-~&,,,...--.,_~ ___ -___ '-
·-----·-'"d --------------
--------_________ .... 4. _____________ _
~·----'--------. ______ ,,d, _____________ ~
""~in,ftel" u11t-d ·-;~,1i.1tods)M. and the C.lll OF P:ENTCII • .ai 11.inldpitl Cofll'ar4.tion
of ling ':aunty, .. ds"1<1-;ton, nef'!inafter called ~Gr,nc.-•.
That \.<!id :J.rotnt.r\,;l. for a<!-d in cons1der.a.t10fl Of the s-Of$ / Fi
~-~~--------~P••d b)' Gf"ant.e,e.· anci ot:her ¥•li,ilbl@ <unslCl@ratton, Ji_ by thes.e pruen.:s, ":}rant, b.:aqa~n • se1l, conYl!y; Md ..-,rr111t Wl1D t1lii!! 1•1d
Grilllntft. its <;u<:ce<..sor.: and i!ssigns, dn -!'ase-lll!nt for public 11tll1t1es (t.c1"'1ng
1111ater lfld sewn·) "'i rli ne,:es'!i ~ry apr-..irte"•nc~'i: over, thl"OUqt'i, acran end 1IPOII u.e
fo11011lng described property in King County, W4,sh.ington. aore p,ar-ticul•rly
•'!icrlbed as follow~:
A ·utility east:N:11t 10 feet. ht widU over the E.asterly 10 fei!t of the fallowi~
descr-ii.td property;
M..L tl\it -portioo of Gc>W!~t lot 4 and Sect1an 2'l,. T01ii11t$hip 24 lfQrth. R.lnge 5 E-as.t~
V.N. 1.rin'SI ~t of eu.-1111,gmn Nortlllml (llortheffl P•ctftc l Rl.il road ri,ght-Gf~ a:Rd
South of the fullo.fii.g R$Uibed 11M:
8EGUffUllliG •t the 11ortheas.t. Corner of Sil.id ~nae1t.· Lat 4:. u.ence SouU-<1long the
tut lhM! t:hii!ftof .ill dhtMice of 156 feet; ttiieAoe Ll:St 6Z feet to the Mt-st l11M! of
said ritl_roAd ri;ht-1tf--y~ ~ Saut:herly .along utd: r.afl.....t rtgtrt-of-ay 1'56
feet to the! tn,e point of beginniag of s•l4 1 i11e;. thi!«ce liortlt sr 20' 00-~t 460
fttt, mre or less; ~ North 67" 40' 00"' Wl:''iit 110 feet to tllll! lnrwr H,ubor Liae
c,f lake Washtn.g:ton, Tl»THE1l with Shoreluds •djo1n1ng:
USS BEGINltING 599. JO f@et Vest of tt11! Sol.lthl!!ast conw:r ef s•id GoW!rna.e.tt lot 4;
t~~ li&Qrth 33"' 4:/' 00"' E,ut 216 feet to tile tl"'UI!!! point of be9inni1NJ; l:M!Cla: North
33" 47' 00-U~t a d1sbnce of l4S.51 feet; tllefta! ~ 61~ 51' DO"' -We-st UiS f~t;
thence Sovt.Msterly 146 feet to ,1 poh1t l:>rth 61"_" 53' 00-llest , .... Hie true po111t
of bergtnfttng; thena South 61° SJ" OD" Ea$t 1£.8 f«t to U.e tl"U!! po"•t of be,gi-tn,;n
TOGETI£R vith Sho"lmds .djoining.
f09'!ther witti a te~orary "'4nHnictiOtl ei11sie.ent described as,;
Over the [utei-ly 30 feet of the above dl!scrttlll!'d p1"'Ul)@rty.
~t1d t('n,pora rv cons tnJc:t · .:>l'I e-a'5.er.nt 'i•u.11 ~in 1n faf"O! •rlflt toll$lrvc.t1Qfl
a,d fl't11 s.1Jch t11"1e d~ th~ ... t l 1t1e~ and ,niour~nana:s ltaw been acc:aptl'd for~
-,t:ratto,, ttnd ......,1ntena<1;.t! by ~e Urant.ff.-b11t not later~ ,~~.c+-=tJlbit) ·.'1 ··
l
I
-----------------------
:J_ 1-.• · ,_
till ,-ll ~ ll 39
1'11ECTOR
a:u:ua,t I,. a.EC7iCt6 ~-car.err~ ~~:::ill.
,
..... ~ ..
.· --~---~---~-..
-.~ .. -. :;s:
~ _.,. ... ., _..;
~ ~-~h:-!·_,;._j~-:=--
'
by
.4
'rfflS lffS'tRU",i}, 9&._d,a, l.hll .j <) dl!IJ' /~-/{ _,__--/'-,
and bet v~en .1 ; /~ C:; < ---•,,<--c,o
tl! ; ·, ·
"""'----'---"--------------/. -----~------------""·'-----------------
--------------------·------------------
------------------~-·'------------------
herein11ot"ler ca.l~ecl .. <;.,.-.ntor(s) ... an1 t.he C'[T't OF Jl:t:NTON". a Municipal Corp,:,ratton
o:Jf" King Co\lJ\t::, .. ',lllil,.$hln~Oll'I. • herein11.ft.~t'" <:'al l<er! "r;r....,1t.e~ -..
W' l'rtH:.SSETH;
That ••1,j Gr.ntor( 11) • f(,r Nld in con•1derat.lon '>f" the uuai or $._--"/-'0'-=":.... ______ _
---------------_______paid b1 Gre.nter, and other v•lu~blr con11lderatton, do __
by these pre~cq\.• • gr-.Al, b-.rga.lr,, 1,ell, ,:onve7, and varl"'1111t un._o th~ "•1,1 Or,uitee,
it.is 1uocea•ars ~d •s•lp•. &11 e-eae,,J1t for public ut.illtleta (il'lclud:ing v&t.~r -.nd.
ae-:-r) vitb nece••aq appurt.enuc~• over, t.hrou«,h, -.cJ"Qe• add upon t.t\e rollo..,in,e.:
d.e1ct-ib<ed pr.::>pert.:, la K:lcc C<:t1.moty, v .. bS.114t.on, aor. p&rt.ie:u.l.&rl7 dll!!acribed
"'" fQllCNWo l
A"I F.ASE.P•UIT f(Jk UTIL! fy PIJRPOSt:S OVER, ~R, ACROSS, ~ lttROUGH
"fi-lt l'()Rn.£12:L'I' 111:, FEET Of' ~ ~TERlT ;;•_: FEET OF THAT PR.OPERfY
CU'IVi:Yi;O TO ..J _ H. ~fER ' ootfJ,,NY BY D€E0 RECORDE0 LNOe~
A f ru. -.,11)1':JG, RECORDS OF tc:I~ (.QtNTY' W~SH1"'6TCN, SAID
EASEM:NT 6'::'.ENG CONTIGl.OJS WllH 1l-fE wESTERt..'f RIGHT-of"-WAY
LJNII:; Of ~\.JRLINGTW !VR.Tt-lEJIN AAIL ROAD, SAIO HO FEET BEING
t-EASUlED ALCNG SAID RJGHT-OF-wA'f, AND SAID 2'.J FEET 8E1NG
11::.ASUlEO A.l R.tQ-tT M.:;LES THERETO. ALL EsE lt,K; WI TH1N THt
1-4:: 1/il SW 1/11 OF SECTl(.N 2rJ T?liN, R·.,E, W.M. ~ -··-----------
~------------------· ------·--
• I
I
'
1 n ~ -·. 1· '•j .
I ' ' I/
I (
. ' i
I
I
/,
/ .ltA
" '-
.,
'.
•
(X)
0
N
0 ,._
0
~
0
0
OJ
,,
'
' '
t; ~,
1----
I
'
-, --·· ..... ,~ -~t-4:, . ..
LAND IJSE A.GR.&EHENT
FOR GOOD Mio VAIJJABr...E COltStDERATION, :t"ec<!ipt of vt\i.ch. is
hereby ·ackoowled.qe:d J. R. BAX!'E!t , co., a California corporatiOn
(be.rein.aft.er •Ba.Jeter•) and u.ttSloE ASSOCIATJtS, a l~itect pa.rtnec-
sh.tp~ 1Dd· RIPUY LANE' ·IHVESTMEHTS,' a !imitied. paxtnE:rship (ile.ceinaftet:'
collectively referred to as thie "partnerships:•),. agree-as _follovs:
1. PROPJUlTY AETECTED. B.a.Xt.er-is the· owner of . the pC"~i:ty
c:le:scribed ln Eibibi.t A vti.1.ch is attached. to ahd focorpor:ated here-·
in by thi.s reference, and ~rtnershi.p's, as t~ts-i.n-coaaon. are
the o1'net:s of that pl"Operty desc.i:ibed i.1. Bx~~it 8 which i.s
atta~hed bere:to and iil¢otpo1"".ited b.erein by t.h.ia reterence. The
parties baVf!,.. coiitempo'ra.rie6Usly With the!I execlition··of this ii.qree-
me~t, ente~ed into a Boundary Line Agreement "l'hic~ establishe$ the
boundary dividing their properties.
2. Atrl'.EJOR,IZEO L.~O U~l:. The part.nee-ships do covenant and
agree to ac(lthesee to the construction; hy ~axter or. its ·successors
or assiqias Of h.igb-deiistty .. multiple'· resideD.ces on that pCOperty
which Scu;ter now owns arid tha.t iS more particUlarlY described in
Paragr~?h-1 above~ The partne:t'sbips further. agree that sUCh
a:ctp1iesCtfoce,._ shalt be binding 'Qpon their :Suct=e._Sso'rs ·or·,<1.sS'iljns ;and
SMll rur; with and be a burden on the l:ahd -ni'Ch they now own ·and
that is 111.0-re. particularly descr.ibed in ·Paragraph l .above .. and !Shall
run to the benefit of th"cit pro~rty ·no~ 01,med by Baxter that is
more paTti.cularly <le!;cribcd. in Paragraph l above..
DATED: This'~ day of
J. ff
BY
-1·-
ited partnership
~·--,...,7~ .. -.
..
•.
'° 0
N
2
0
3
a)
.·_{";
S'TAT£ Of NASU.INGTON
Count.yo( KING
I
l
,, ..
On th.is · \l~ day of 1)D C'ilrN,1,c.,[\ ., l ~n 9, before ae. the
Wldersiqnod, Notary Public in _and for the St:.at:.e of Washingt.on~
~
_coaaissM).n. ed.· ADiQ. sworn 1 ·personally appe:ared before •. ·
j"(\~ ... ~ '(\q\ ~ to me mown ta be the
C..c-7 of R1?LBT LANE !NVESTMESTS, a l i.m.ited. partnership. and
WQO e][ecuted the foregoing instri.aent .as h.is free and voluntary
act and deed for the use.s and pW'.'JM)=tes there:in mentioned~
w!T!itss MY llAND :iiirid" OF'FICI.U. SEAL heret.U\tO affixed tlie dd.y
and year first abOve writ:.t:.en.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for theMe
of NASHntGTON., residing at Ha
{S E A. L l
-3-
-~~~·.--. ~--~ : ----·· ---........... ..,. ....
•
,. ........ .
,o
0
N
0 r-
0
1.-,,, r,A
---.. ---,--·
'th,-!,1l lc,\Ji11,, ti,•::,·_, it .. ,d 1,~,! ••:.1.1, .. , •;it,1.11,-i11 thr: t'fl11/ll•t
<•I hi1v1, '.iL11 .. nt •~.1::lii11,11<.111'.
n,~•Ji11ni11,1 ill th,, '.:nul·h q,1.1r!•·1 ,·01·11,,, <,f ::,--.r:f inn '.!'I,
'l',·M..lnshlp '.14 tl<1r1·l1, lt;in,i•· 1-:.1:;1, l·/.M., i11 hin,, f'o11u1v,
l,J.1c;hlt1l]lnr1: 'l'h.r.11,~,, r1<,1·t11 ·o"O·l'F'" W•~.<:t 21l77~4H f.-.,:,t .1tof\,.1
th~ n.uth -'Xll1l"h Cf"n,r·1·1in,• nr ::.1i,t '.i<>el·tnu ~!I, t:,·, ;, f1t,iut·
".\" ,li•;t,111re ~.,,11t:]1 0"0'1':~:·, .. 1-'..,i~I J?.•>4.. 7·1 fNit. fr0111 ,111 l1·rn1
.,-ip<> c.,11 ... ,1 the ~h11111 <1u,-;rt.-..l-c,lrrH•r of :1,ii,t !:~i·tinn Ht
•;.1i,I pnt11 1 hrin•J 1•,-1i111 *,\"', t .. ·inq ,11!:.-, Hnrt-11 '",il"~O·
\-:,,~1 (,.1.11 fi•,•t ff',,11• \/f'•,1i•rl1i• n1.1P1i1t n1 ~IH' t-iorl·l1,•r1t
l'il(•ifi,· 1i.1ili,),)d i•Jhl "t 1,•.1y; lll(,11/·p :;,,uLI, '",>l"~·o· l-:;1:;I
f,4:,.11 f,i,~t t,, th,-;.1/d 1~.•::l,•, I\" lll,11'<1in au,I tit,· ~r11,, pni11t
ri( h<'1Jin11i11•r ,,r ,1 m11t.:11:i1 t,r,ur1,i;11·,1 !in,-.1:; i',., . ..,,-,1,..d und,•1
llN .. '('\1"1li11.•) M<i .. ft,..,fl2(1',I .1(1\] !·Ji,, II.I~-pni[1l •)( l),_,~Jil\ni119 (Jj
thi:; dP::•:, i.1,ti<,11: lht'tl<""(• l!C)rth 'i!t"J.O• Wr.•::t ,11011•1 ::.1i,I
1,,,u1ncl,1ry 1 in•· Ii.II:' .. 12 r,0 ,,t tn H1,: l111tr·1· 11,1rJi.nr I.in,, ()f T.ak,•
l-l,1.•;hi1,9!:nn; l lro•,w~ ~:nut.I: ,1,i~:~o· t~<'::t lfil .. Ofl (<'<'t; thl"nc,•
Sn11t_l, f,7°411' •·:.,:;f ~IU 1,.,,1: t-11.('!ll('•' !":{)1Llh 'ill"~n· f:<1<1t .rnfl.f,O
f.r,o,t· tn th,-\le:,1:,.,1·!1· un1qi11 of ~•,lid lloi't!1<'rn l':l·<'.'iri,·
l:.'11lrn,l-d ri<il1[ nl 1~:1r; 11,.•11('<· f-f•l1·M, .... "\~l:<>1ly ;1!011q i,,,i,i
t i<ih' of w;,•1• Ln llu~ tn1•· po"ii1,t "l t·,,...1i111ri11,1 ..
<-;it:11:11,, in t·Ju, l."ily ii[ llt·nl!1n, ("nunl',' ril Kinq, !;till•· nr
W;1i;h lnql:011.
1'.:,i: /, i I• j I ll· I
~, ...... ....._ ......... .-........---.----·
..
· . ., '' ~ ··--·-
, p.·.
;..!'·'
~ _,.
/
::a
·~
> I ' ·, ,
-' tr = a
(']
~
3
I
l
w......--..._-.-. . . .:: ..... ~
--.. lil..r.
POR GOOD AHO ·JA.UJAB.LE CON'>IO:-RATI~, cec~ipt of which is
hereby aekno"Wledg~d. J. R. BAXTER & ~O., -J Califocnia cocpoca-
tion (hereafter ·aaxter") and Ul.KESIOE ASS0CIA.TES, .a limite::i
pactrier.ship, and Rtl'LIT LANE INVESTMENTS, a li:ait.ed oartf'lecshio
{hereafter collectivel'il referred t.o as the "'partnersh.i.ps•J ,1gce~
,1~ fnllo....s: ·
Ba::a:tec and t:he ?ac-t.nersi,!.1s. ace ov:ie.:s of <1djo•ni.ng
prO!)-erty sepai:-"'-ted by a c:~:"I boundary I ine. Baxtl"'C is the
owner of the ?c-operty to the sout'i of the COftlll'IOn boundary lin.e,
which ?ropert.y is described in E1tl:\i.bit A which is attached t:o
anti ineocporated in this aqree.ent by tRis reference. The pact:-
nershlps are the owners of the property to the north of t.he
cOl'llltOn 001.tnd.uy line, ~bich pr~:e-ty is described in e:xhibit B
which is attached to and incor-po,ated in this agreeiaent by this
c-e-fet:ence.
The ~art.ies, beinJ UI\C·::.•t.ain of the locatiofl of this ::0111mOn
:Xlun<lc1ry line and desiroi..s of establishing '::he li.rte conclusi,vely
.so that ..i Eence may tie maintained and iinpcoveii:ent.s :node on both
their pi:operti~!ii, do agree on and fix the eomA10n hou111dar:y line
~etw-cen their' i:espectiv~ propertiP.s as follows:
Cornmencinq at the !!t0nllit1entea 5outli qua.rt.er: COC'fle:e-of
Section 29, Trn.,nship 24 N0rth, ~ange S. East, \f.~., thence
Noc-th 01aoo•o1• Ea-;t along the !ioc-t!i-South cent.erlir.e of
said Sect.ion 2071.48 Eeet; thence Hort" 57"10•37..-\lllest
578.01 fe~t to .the inner harbo:::-line; thence sooth
4S .. 29' 23" Wi?st 103.08 {eet along t~~ innei:-hat"bor line;
thence South 66°30' 11.. East. 210.00 [eet; thence South
57°11J'J7"' east 469,79 feet to an existing fence line which
shall he t:h'? tl'"U€ point of ~innin,g; thence Nor:t:h
64°21 1 55• West .\66. 7-4. feet. along said line to an
.angle point: then::ce Nor-tl-i 71°41 'ss• 'W~st feet. to the
irmer-har-bo£ lim:: which st-ia.11 be the end 1 ine.
·t-i' I ; I • ,J.,-. .\ I
----·~-----
r
-
·~-
to e,:ecute the !;,aid instt'ument and tlia.t the S1:!al af[ixed i~ the
corporate seal of saia cor!lOr~tion.
WITNESS ,cay hand and official seal hereto affixed°-the day
and ye3( in tnis certificate abov~ wcitten.
STATe OP WASHINGTON
) ss.
COUNTY OF K I N G )
/
l/c,,: 1 .• o)
NOTAR.i° P~SLIC in ~nd for the
State of wa:l(l.ifC1U•~xu~
ff CAl IFCRNIA. rse-sfd;nq '!t 1,{] -/ {h;,_j;:
On thi~ t11l dzy of })oc( 1:m\JSA 197'7, befoc-e
d'le. th':! undersigned, a Notary Publ!r:: 1n and for the Stat.~ ot
Washi1tgton, d•_1ly commissioned ;ind S'ioiorn pec_sonal!y appeared
before me: '3,cl"J'i,A,:i Q 'Y>ctn.() ,..,.,J,.. to ~ k.:-i~n
to be the partner{s) of IAKF..SIDE ASS0C1A.TI::S~ I~ •• ill lir.tted
pactnership~ and who exoc••':ed the foregoing instcun,ent a':"" ', Ls
free and voluntacy act and deer! fo[" the uses and !?Urpos.es
therein sentiotled.
WITNES!:i my hand ,;i.nd official seal here ~::i affixed the!: day
and year in t;lis c:ertific3tP-above written.
$'!'A'T'C OF WASHING'?'ON
) ss.
COUNTY 0~ K ING )
On this \\~ de"y of ~µ re~ r 1979r befoi::""
me, the und~t":;:1Qn'i!'r:l, a Notary Public: in a~::I foe the State cf
washingtofi, dutY comrnission~d and swo~n pecscnally app~~rerl
be for~ 111e ~ )C; W, o·n~·· o • to me :.:.nown to be the
partner (stf RIPLEY LA"I rNVES™eN"I'S, d ? i:rii.t~d partnecshi.p.
and vho executed t"i~ foregoinq instrume!h as liis fr-Pe and
'
• -!
----------
r
1
1-;;.UJSJT A
T!,Q fQ1lo:.,•i,.1 df!S;Cr'."it'-"c'd r .... ,'!l e~~.it~, ~~tu'J.t.~'1 in the ,:f)l.1nt:'(
of "Kinq~ Stat+.? .::,f Wastlinqt,on, ':.'"'.l-vit:
to:_·n-::;!i i p 7-1
\,i;,d~ 0f th~
th'? ?"lr')c th~r n
the !oltowin"l
That pocl:.i.Qn oE '::'OV~rnm~nt l"."lt ,, , 5'"!('."t ir•n 2.:,,
north, ranq~ 5 r,:1:;t, W.M., TOGE·f11f:fl wiJ:\, she>r<!
secoml c!;:iss front inq the.:~nn J.~-ing ~.<.t of
Paci.fie Rail·,•ay i;lqht of way and scuth -of
described 1 in":!':
B,..qitnninq at the noctheast cc1rnr>r 0f ;.aii"I .F,v.rn,,.,nl:" lo .....
1,.-•· ~:::1 pt"Ji:;': is ro·,<·s-::'.:: L,~· ...;--:: 1 ~-c':-, r:,i;·<:> .l, .. l: L.J "1;_; ~r><'>• :-C'1f'·
oc J.es:c., n~rth of ti1e sout!1eilst corn<"C of <:;?!rl 1"v<?r11m~n~
lnt1 thence SO'-Jth a.l0n<;i ti'\~ ~ast:: lin~ th!:'reof, 156 fp~t_;
th~nce ~as;.t. 62 f~et to ~he· ·.o1f"St1c>rly llfl.<:! of s'l '.·l r iqht <'f
v;oy; thenc· $Outhw~,;;t~cly alonq sain riqhC of ..,.ay line 156
f.eet to th~ b~inl'\i,19 poLnlt. o{ t.tle line to he de-;cribed;
t.hence no{th 58"20' west 460 fe~t; the,1c~ l"IQrth '>7"40' -.iQSt
210 feet to the innec h.acb~c line of t,.,J,;~ W,.-ishin";JtOn as now
est~blis:h~d., and t.he teclQinus of 1:h":" line; SUBJF;CT TO ["iqht
o!: ;,1ay gzant'\!O to P-uq~t So1..11>d Pow<?t'." a1'\d t.ight Company by
ins:trument ctat,~r. April J, 1939, betw'!:'~n J•,liuf: B, i'alk., a
ba.cl:leloc. "1.nd ~vgeL .Sauod Powec and Light Col"'tpany_
359'41\
·: .. _:, ·, ' .. 1--: \ \
i < !:
• f
\ t
' I
. 1 -I .
. . . l . ---------------·--
---------
,.
_,-
' .>--
•• >
..t
~--
. --\ .... I • :: "'"'-t . . .
. .. -l· ~. ~ --:--·-··-<~-~ -
,.
~,~ \ .,_.,
' s ...;;:,.
-~ ,_
/-~ I · t . . ,V.
\ .. \ .
. ·,. ,, ..
\
.\
·' .
·----·· --~----
,
\.
AGRECMCt;T
TH IS I\GREEMEN't'. made ll1cis 2._j._,_ day of t--~~~~~~~~
1981, by and betwe~n the J. JI. Baxter & co., a California
corporation. its successors and assigns, hereinafter jointly
called OWNER, and th~ Munlcipality of Metropolitan Seattle, a
municipal corporation of the ~tate vf Washington, its successors
anC assiqns. hereinafter jointly calle~ METRO,
WIT~ ES SETH:
WHEREAS, M.ETRO i~ t.h.e holder of an easement for eight
of way on certain property described in the Certificate of'
Grant: of Right of Way issued C~, the state of Washington, Depart-
ment of Natural Resources, by application 30006, dated April
14, 1965; and
W1:IERF.AS, the OWNER of the abutting u!)lands and second
class shocelands, act~ng through the Port Quendail Development
Company desires to con~truct a marlna and a breakwater: and
WHEREAS~ said breahlater will cross METR0 1 S South
Mercer Force Main right of way: and
WKERE-'5 .. METRO does not: object to said breakwater
i~stall.ati.oni
NOW TH&REFORE.,. in consideration of 'l':eN NfD N0/100
DOLLARS and the mutual covenaats QJnt.;l.ined herein, ~he pa~ties
hereto agt:"ee as follows:
(1) Pean.is5ion is he-~y granted to the OWNER ~o
install a cetmJivab1e floating breaJc,,,ater section at the ~ol1ow-
i.nq described lo~~t~on for the purpose of protectinq its
mar i.na ~ to-wit!
"l'bat porticn of the har:bor ar2a and bed of La.':ce
Wa.sb.i.ngton in front. of a portion of Government Lots 4 and s ..
Pase l :-,f 4 Pa~es
7 3S rt f;g . -CI 15
' _/·
'-----<---::._....----~ "-
l.:...00
i·::
'
_..._,;_,_ -
.. :.-. .'-, -.
"-i----.1 •••
:"·:'t-':;~·
_\':?c-~
.:, ....
(I,,} Ttl'. 1a:ncs and .;.j::h:-Pssos for: commur.Lcuti.ons as
5p;;,,ci f ted in the A~1rc.:-mc,nt may be cn.;;i.nged at any t imt:" by ei thcr
pa.--ty by giving written not1cc th~n~of to th~ other of said changt.'.!.
Dated this -~··-day of
ATTEST:
Maureen Varni
Cl~rk of the Council
J. H. Sa~ter & Co.
\ \
\
Municipality of ~e;7opolitan
'/GlL 4.7 _1, _,. ,.1-".
e1.l P teison
-..::ecutiv.__ Oirecto::-
Seat.tle
S'fATi. OF «:;/::;L : ss.
COUNTY OF ~---)
Or. t'iis w__day of @.G.fr'f.< , l~ll'oefore me the under-
sign:'1• _ a N:Otary Publ1.c 1.0 and for t:.he St.ac..e of ~dZyL • duly
cOIIIIII-\SSlOOed and s pec-sora.lly appeared =z.~
1:: (lhu/ 4era7'ZY-.-respeetLvely,
__,~;,l~~9!~(/,~<-c'E.~~!:cc.-cCCic-c=c' the corporat.ion tha.t execut the or oing i.nst taent 4nd acknowledged the said instrwi.ent
to be the t.:ee and V3luntary act and def!C of sald ~Jrpn::-ation foe
the uses and purpo~s therei:1 uientioned and on oath stated that
they were authorized to ex~ute the S3id inst~ent and that the
seal affixed is the corporatl:: seo.1 of said. corNi..·ation.
lr.J'.TNESS •Y h~n<.: .a.nd official seal hereto affixed t:he day dnd
}'ear in th.is certitica,te at..ove lilciti:er.. _
.&,~~,~~~,
(rif"'rt #l tttr
I
l
,l
,.
, ..
..
I
•
~ • . : ' ~-.
---~~-
. '' "'\ ··,-·.
i
I
\
\
r, :•:';'•
r ..
• \
/
/ •
~-~~::::-.:~=--!"---· ·=-·
I
'
)~ & WI •• --:;._7:,-
... . ~'
\
-J! ..JI
..JI
..JI
..JI
..Jl
~t
i
-
\
'
• -
on.s-arrr ...., .,,,.........
1'qTe=t -de. eff•""ive .., of µ~, /Q
be~w-.n QL"C.nd.it.l l Term.inal:GI, a Joi.De. •cnc.ure COR!Prised of Alti...no
I
"' i
" i
' I
Prope~1.es, :::nc _, .;1. Waxh..i:ng;:or> corp:::ar.i.t.iot1, ~d ,J. B. e..utte~ "-Co.. !
a Cal.iforr.ia li~t.ed p,;a.rc.nersh,o,p {hereinafter '"'Gra.:l.:crs•) • and a
8a...rl>ee M..i.ll co. . Inc . , o11 wash j TY]tOll corp;irac.i=:x., .o;I.Qd J _ B _ n.a.xt:er
4 Cu,_ a califarn.i.a. l.i.~t:.e,d ~siu.p t~rei.nafte.r •Grantees·} .
WHER:F.A.S, Grant.or6 a.re the: Olfflen of certai.Il n!al. p~y
whose loc.atioo is co-a:zrtl.y ~ as 4S03 ta.Ju~: Masb.i.Dgtoc. 8lvd. W.,
R~nt.on, w.a..shi.ngt:on, c.be leg-1:i de.sc:ripc.ioa. of ,,..hich iti ac.t:.~bed
hereto .ills :E:XHiiUT A ~ by th.iii refei;l!..nce incorporated herein
• WH£R.EAS, Grant~ (B.a.~ Mill C;:J.. Inc ) .1.s the owner of
4;e:-t.•i.n real property comaonly icDowD a..a 4Hll. '...ake ~lii.DgtOll
Blvd. IL. Renr.cm, Waahingt.on, the iegal dl!:seripti::::m of whi,ch, is
d.t:tached ~r~to ~ EXRI.B?T a aDd by th.is ~fll!r'l!nCe i.ncorporated
1"R£REAS, Gra.nc.e-e !J 9:. B&lct.er • co. J i!II UMS owner of certilin
real property coma;mly knoWll a.s 501, t.,ak.e Haebiogt::on Blvd. R_,
Renton, 'QSb..ington, ~ leg.a.! ~ioa of wbi.cb ia .1.tc..a.cbed.
bereto .a& £XBIBIT ~ and by t:.hi.s ref~ ~:r-ated berei.c
(Parcel "C").
>
,
• •
•.
---
-
r
~
I
• -
the owners of !)arc-el B a...,d Parc-:el C, as well as t;J;aeir off.i,.cera.
employees. ~gent.&, 1:en.a.•1L>::1 ..u,..i l~;.-:..·i::.;;:.:..::.
T'he l!asepent granted in this in:.it'['Umenc is locaced on the 1:~sc
bO '."eet of tha.t. portion of Pare1!:l A lyi~g, i-d1a.tely we.r;;:.c ot
railroad right-of-... a.y.
The Gra:ntors or Gra.t1tors' s~ccessors or 4Ssign.s may relocate
the easl'!-1Dl"!nt across Pa~cel A at their sole discretion~ expen.&e
provided passage between rarcel B and Pa.reel C re11,ains
Ufli:tt.errupted, and at least. two access. paints rem..~.in ~roaa Parcel A
to the public highway. Gr.u&cor or Ur.ntor-• a succesao;-e or .a.s&ign&
further i!lgt"ee ::.o l "C:cord ,.a. rest.ilted leg,d descriptioo for tiria
easement upon relo~ation. They shall ~lso dedica~e the eaBe1De.CC
t.o the City as a public righ.t:-of-way, if such dedic•tion is
r~g;uired by the C;it.y as a condition for approval far any plat.ti::;
proces~es involving either Parcel B or Parcel C.
Th@ e_a:se111e:1t granted herein. eh.all exist in perpet.Uic.y. and
sh.all run wic.h the land and th'! t:.icle to sucb proper,:y. a,i:id. stall
inure to the beiiefi.t of the part:ie• to t.hia Ag~•~•""'""'""t., their
reapective tleire. succ~s9ors or assigns.
vx. ~orn '
covenant with Gr-.ntors, t.hell respec:'tiVl! ~111eers, he.in .and
assigns that. Grantees, fi:-ae t:iaic c.o time. and .at .all t~ Ut.er
3
a
'
I • •
de . ~--
---
• -
,a_
-rb.i.s: ~~-.nt s::.all bind .and inun, to t.he benefit of tbe
=-1!:spe:ct.ive heirs. personal represe.nt.a.t.ive.s. S'UCCl!,.ssors. ~d .assigns
of !.he part:.ies.
It. is ~ i::.ba't. r.his ~t &b~ll be gove.n:u?d by,
construed. aud ~c;rcl!d in accord.an~ with the: l.t.vs: of the st.ate of
k.uhingt:cm. ULd ve:nue Shu l be in ling coum::y.
UV. a'.J'O:C:SS
.Any not::i.ee provided for or cooce:ruiDg this .Agreement shall be
ir. writing a.od sb.a.11 be ~emed 5\ifficieC!.tly given vhen sent by
c~r~ified or ~egist~red mail ~f sent co the respective address of
each 1WrtY as set fonb at: the. begin:1.ing of this Agre2ment.
The tit.le.s to the ~ of this Agre-eae.nt ~e solely for
t;..b,e coava..ience of the ~rt.ies J.J::¥i eb.iall m>t b,c. u.eed to ~la.in .
.aod.ify, aiaplity, or aid in the int:erpretac:!..an of c.blll! pruvi•ions of
·-~1~,·1n....,, 1, s
>
I • •
'
I I
1 I
--
•
• -
On this ~ day of Fc;b • 199!i. before ae
personany ,11ppeared Cl\e I c_uc_,,; j..-. , _to -.e_ k:noi,m ~o
be t.he p f"1"C.e't::feo:t 01: AJ.(;:Lm" n;-ope~J..-. J...a<..:-. ~
t::orp:=ir-1.c.1.on tlMtt:. execut.ed tbe v1.t.bi!I. ~ foregoing inat~t. ~
admowled;:ed the s.id ins::ru.ent. 'C.C be d>e !ree ~ ..._,lw::it.llry a.ct
and deed of -id ccr-po1,11tion. !o.-tbe use• ~ p.upo,ses 1:.be~i.t:i
nentioned, oilnd oin o.,.!:.h :!Jtat~ tb.at they -~ a.ut!Jorized to e.z~.r.t.,::
said illo;;truae11t apd, tb..11,t tbe .:e.al .affixed. 1.f -y. is dloe corpor.&'C.~
seal of said co.rporat.ion.
WI'!.'NESS my h..t..nd .uid official se,111 l'!:ttre"t.o <11f!1xed i;;be d.ay
.a.nd year firsc aoo...-e ..-cit.ten.
lflSB [liilG'TOtll
STATE OF B\:lslPQRllJ.A
("01.JNTY OF UMC
r certify that I bow or b.lve ..,.~isi:.ictory evidence t.har.
t.he persons ai;.pearing before me and ~.ing ::b..i.s .acknowl~t. a"
t.he pe.rsons whose ::rue s:ignature11: .appe.i:r; O."'l. t:ti.iG docume.Dt.
on this ___)£'day of £4"'~ . l9'9f;, ~for!! !Ill'!
~rsonally appc.-red :r«.t....t &cr>I . t.o IDi! lcn.ow:c t.o
be c.he 2-s J.-,tt o ;; . H_ ii:\..a::EY:er *' CO., t.bl!
corporatioo t:hat exec-.r.ted t.be within ~ foregoi.J:ag i.nat~t. and
acknowledged the said i.nst.ruaent. t.o be tbe free ~ '\"Olu.nta.ry act
and deed of ~c1,id corp:n.·•t:.iGU. for t.bo!: w;.e:$ ~ ~ t.bl!rein
lfte.ntioned, .:l.Od on oat:.b sta~ed. chat t~y -..ere •\lt..hQ.!:"i:f:ed. tc ~t~
sa.id inst:.rwaent a.ad t:..bat. t:.he seal •ffi.xed. if ,uy. i• the corpor•t1!"
aeal of said co.qx:iracioo.
WI."1'11ESS ay band ~ official ae:al be~to a!f~ cbe d.11.y
and y~ar firsc above: 117iCCen.
Q, ,. f' µ <·
< _.., ,TJ«s,n:nlfCUII I~ ... u . 1, 1
t ..•• 1: '
I
I
•• • •
PIP t ze •
-
--
---··-------------·--~-·--·-
•
• -
Thac portic:m of Q::>ve~t Lot S in 84!Ctioa 2~, Townahip 24 llorth,
~ 5 &&st:. "'·"· ~ s!loreland ildjoia.iilg lyi.!Jq westerly of t~
Mo~ ~c.i.fk Railroad right c,f way and 80\l.t.berly of • liae
de.scribed~ follows,
Begi...on.iag at. the qu.&rter corner (IQ tbe FJ11.1t.h ll..Q;, of a.aid Section
27; ~OI!; DO!'th 8~'"59"30" west along t;be south line of !Qid Lot S,
l, 113.Ql. fee~ to t.he -atcrly line. ot: said I4orchl!!rn Pacific
~•il~ rigbc. of vay; thence oorth 2g•.u. •Si• e.1L.St IH.~. 62 feet
aloaq eaid ri~t:. of -y 1.i.ne to a point hereinafter referred to •s
point.~; tbeoce cont.inuing No:i;._h 2~•44•54.• ea.st l00.01 feet. to t:be
~ rue: point of begi::m.i..nq of t.he 1 ine herei.n descril:),eG; tbf!:nce south
56·28'5~" west 222.32 f~t co a point whic.i:r. .bears north 59•24•56•
M!&t 100.01 feet from said Point A; t.~ce north Sj-•2•·s1i• -st to
t.be imler harbor line and the end of ea.id line des,c:ript.ion.
lit
I
I
I
I • •
--
I
I
•
• -
11-..at. p:::rtion o! Gov~~t. lot. 5. ,ec,:i.oo. 29-, t.OWDllb.ip 21, r:ortl:.
't"ange S east, W.l'l .• a.nd .-t:!!•ce.:i=-5.=-on! l.&r.ds of~~ c-!.ass ill
f~ont. 1:bereof ly1D9 vesterly of ~ Jlonheni. Piacific R.ail. ... y
C'Ol:lp&!ly' s right. of way ..nd. lyiLg ~~isterly of c.be !allowing
des:cri.bed li~, Begi.nn.i.og ~t the qru.&xter cottaer on the sout..h line
of s.aid sect;ion :Z.9; t:.~ UiQ:c-r;.b. •11•st·11;• ~ .a.loog the 9Cllltb
line of .sai.d iot 5. a d.istil.ll.OI! of 1!..13 .Dl fe-e-: t:o tbe -wesc.erly li.i:;e
of said Nort.be.ru Pacific b.ilW3iy ~iUly' s ::igtrt of way; thence
.llon:.h 2, .... ,. ·Sf• 11::ASt:, aloag ~id rigbc of -Y lioe, 949. 63 :tcet to
an iron pipe tdiich poi:it is c.he :.:rue po,i..;:ir. of begi:ln.iDg of t.he .iine
described herein; "ti.en.ce J:1.0rt.t.: s,•24,·11,• 1lle8'C 525.00 fee~ t.o ,11.ll
irot1 pi~; tbence continui.lg ilOrt:h S!-•41.• J6''" we.at t88 .~3 f-eet. -=ire
or leas. ti"\ i:be: Icner &utter Li.cc of :t..ke ~oc. liXC£P'!
poTt.ion t.~n!Of desc;-.i.t:J@d U1, follOWll!il: ~i.mli..l)g at. the true poia,t
of beginning of the l Ule described herein.; c!le:loe DQl"tb 59• 24 ·:Hi•
111est SO f~t; thence no~t:erly to .a point ~ 9.il.id 111eSCerly l.i.De
cf said Morthe:rn Pacifie ~ilway o::-p.ny• .1o ri,gbt of ¥iii.~ cli11>r.~
Uorth 29•44•>1,"' e.;a,st 100 f~t frcm 5oa1,d true poi.nt. of begi.Lni.ng;
t.bence south 29•44•5,.4• llfleBt. to &lid t.l"L>e point of begi..nn.ing. And
£1:crP'I' that p:,rt.io.o of .a.a.id sboh!land:& lying oortberly of ~
tlertberly line ot :!laid lot 5 p~ ~e.riy; sit~tc in t.be
County cf King, S~ate of 11.ash..it:gton_
':'t.-c: porti~:c of gove~t. lot 4. sect.ion 2!J. t.owru;:hip 24 north.
range S e.u..t., W.M., .1.\XEHD-..R vitl:. ahore lands <:if the Aee04d i;:l.u;;e
frot1:t:ic9 thereon lyi.og West of the lilO:n.be.rn Pacific iilaiiw;ay ri.';Jht
of way and SC\lJth of -.:.be follow!~ dc!'se:-i.b!-d l i.flc, a.egim:..ing at tbe
northeast. corner of .said 9¢Vll.'l:X'1UIIIIUI~ lat 4. whic:h point: i!l; m...r1r: ... 1 by
ac iron pipe and is 920 fe-et:. lllOn: o..: let.IS. oo~ of t:be eout=....,~st
cou:ier of ~id gove~t. lot; t~ sou.c.b .U.ODg t..he ~t line
ttiereof. lS6 feet:; thence e.uit 11.2 f~ to the ~~ly line of a.ilid
ri,gbt of -Y; tbence sout~rly aloog ,wid rigb: of -.ay line 156
f-c t:o che begi.u.::u..ni:J poi::it 11f t.h@ li.De to be cleecri.bed; tbea.~
qorth 58°20" veat 4GO feet, t~ north 67•4Q' .eat ~1D (eet to
the i.ra..er ~r 1~ of r..Jce ~oc as nc-eauablished~ ~
th<!: ter..inus of t..be. 1 i.Ae:: ~ ~ right of -r gnmr.ed to Puiis,ec
Sound Po-er .aud Light ~ by i a-t: ar datd Apri 1 7. J. '9l !t.
bet~ Jul.i.u.s B. F~ll, ..a bacbel.or. ~ Puget SouDd PcMer ..ilDd Li.ghr.
C:Ctll?<Ulf; 6ituai;;:e in the O;iu;aty of Uog, St.at:"'" of Masbin,gton_
Tb.at: poru.on of ~enaen-r. Lot. s, Sect.iga 2,. ~ 24 11. lt.-:nge
s a. N.pt., ud 44.j~,:: .silox,: laJ¥:l:s a"f u.e M:eODd c.Lass i.n fra:it
t.hereof lying Vly of the mict.rt..bcru Pacific ltulMaY ~· • ri'Jht-
of -way, deacriat=d as fol.l.,:;;R4; Beg"iim!llg ilt u-e ~~of
t.be s lUiC of N.id. Sccticm 2,; tbeoce • •~·sa•Ji" v .io.::.g the s
line of ~id Loe S, a d..i.stulC)e of l.ll3.01• to tiae Nly l.i.oe of A.id
llort.bern. Pacific Railw&y ~· • ~-of--Y; tbeDce • 29•44•5,4,•
E aloog said rigbt.-.of--.y liDe, '4,.n• to an iraD. pipe w.ic:b. poi.De.
is the, true point: of ~inn.ing.; ~ s 2,•44·sc• v. along 11aid
1
I •
) , -' .......... ...., .................. _J.. ____ ~
..
•= --• ·
i~
j!
''
:1 • 0 • 1 :~.
'" : ~
1 • -· ,,
:?
I~
I~
16
i
i
,_
'J z
C,
' •(
I
i
I
Z-'-·.•:
·, .
---J.:.: :J' ~ ,.-'
·•II';-,;.<_
I
II.~ :.;J:(; :t,:
rJf'l>:f" .'(
_._, :1.,s·~r-.
~ ,3?'.H-1
T --:?Hi ··~\
'-} ill\S .. ' .. ,··
~-l~.lll'~--·-.-.·_'
~~? .. "\
}Ii ";'
t;;ii
lc/jl(
:,;l1li',,
;nr,~·
·ll)-9';
1,10.1,,,,,
•). I. fl.}'(
--,,_·,.
! :· -j·)~·
---,: ,;,,o,;,.
), ; :_l' i'."'"
11,.
··.:,,,;l'l,vr,
·s.:1
"'~: : ~" ~-.,
;--( ~ ,, ,c,
:'./;-t~·I/
/ 11+1"-.':'
,-,,>!',· , ..... -..
.,.. ',,: ),r,
· -:./;:·rw·
' r.:uo:
,.,)',;<
!1" ~1'.-.'! ,:n
1-c!i:
iS•' r
--;x1,f7.,<;:• . ..:
'·) 11,-.,: •• ;,:-· >~
' h ,II~· •. i,-,:::,, :::;· _;·
~~hf·f....-..:
\tC;:)M•lJti
l IUIT 'J ;(!Mor.<;
ifP!JUl.'f
:·1,
i-:'J.Y:
1,;;;,~iiL~ ·
'" -------,
·c;J,
;;•:.'
fq~' :-;.:,~, ..
1.' 'J".QI "JI:']( •
:, •. l ~~-:.-. ' :c~;·,_,, .. l)-1 :i I te11
;; J -,~~' .·,: ;,
l('-r•)~,-; ~1·£-
,:1 ,~ ~·.,,
·,~·1_: SL~f'l~:G W:T[S ..
0 i" ,~f'Pi,'~ •• ,
J:t·-, ~.-T -i1_:;;;i
r
... ~. !.ll•
.,
" ' . j
."80,'<'l'(,;j
i.'!:ftfl. ;~ ~1r1 •1 ~Nf.N ffll~ 1.\1 Oi P.!11 N....: ;:
lff:·;; r~, ;.,~)'!) r; <;..R;&;1 ~ s,))( ,ca ~u~·.,:
~; -IICE I.if., rt,: CC\ll<iY. ~/cir!(.;[ct,._
~fl' I~• 'Ki'-PIAf flt 110 ,U1 ,lj.[j;._:.:,1'.,
~r i"l,\I 00.'tl,()/; ~C. illll-1~-0l~J
R!.10° !J ;~:l~ ~~ I.~!·[' ~!'Ill~' ,::rH)J
;o m,i.,,r,.;,j -;;;,c· s CF 6. oi::t, lfll!1. 12, 9;~
;;;s 'l.F'.-n .. ~, ;.,;r:'i'Ji: ,ri , iu ·e:·~J
11Hff....: i-:(1),(, E.iC'.llGII\ 1\f"CU-'::11". i'.P 'l -.: ::.!iii'.
;;TI·.l. L'.:l~T -;:-~:..~,': AIJll~il,i'} ~Cl{t f(I' S.'.
(.'...) °TV'!"S~ [n_ ,I>,') •~JJj:l:, ",J J-[ ~0-ll("(i\
s·~,t rLMi :.:.r,ut1,.;:r \•ire:,, •cr:i :~c :~''"° i;:~ :.
\/St.C :·;-i (i" <i 1\(91 :-l~;c~;A_ ,;;. J•I --::N·\ !1.ii,,
~fa·~ j,3,j
(GOV LOT 5) A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SW 1/4 OF THE SEC. 29, TWP. 24 il, RGE. 5 E., W.M. &
(GOV. LOT 1) A. POR110N Of THE NE 1/4. NW 1/4 OF THE SEC 32, TWP. 24 N, RGE. 5 E., W.1.t
MXJITOI OR RECOOOCR'S CERllflCAlf..ffl
·~·,,r-:-:-1:tt1'fll(~·:;ot.fll .I" :::,au'-:
r r~»l~i' -i, '.1,.·1,11, p;~11~ J' l~i 1;:;,m. ~·
a.,St-~::o u tt-:H ·.:-'i.. it
-:.U, ,· Atl[·\f 0$ ;C]<,:iJ, ;f ':-(CP,;~ \ [I :~I:}{
tu 6'lf.l. :..,.,,t) !,.,,H:ir ;;,
W~ 1.:.,,1,Mlh;r~tJ
~r~,1-,,w,. l'~i:,:,.-i,
51.lfMJil!'S CfRffiCA[
(:"·:r (:.'!r~:11~ C;IIC,',f l c ,..,._, h:, ,,
,·,:~ -,, :(,-:·.::,,, ::,1.;·11c -:< ,,,1· -i-., r<:J1•m,·1;
JI .1, ',,_r-,..; C,:c.,1,'.n\ <.· 1: ih; r~:;,:.: v
'J\IL~ f./.U:,. l,jQJ. ,·n
, ' r '-:')~ ,:t 1,fu..)
~k.:i..::·.: ···i n;,11.,,
II mi _____ _
BUSH, ,OED & ~TChllii:S, INC
CM. (1/ljJ,((?"5 t ;lffl '.l.1-~'f'J'S
2003 111[(}' U'.. Ei.5! (;'O;i j)!-1111
':IA!~!'. 11.l'ifOC"l)'I l-~-0 3Hl"fi!
91!1),-j)ll ''-'-i :,:..s: l2!-/;.')
E -~~I. f.fC:O!Sil( .:C.~
0.i)l!(N,
tCr.Fo c: -su~vf.,
JAG.DE\HOPMENT
-~tiS C0\.1!1l'
i
)
j
)
)
Jt;,,. -rAP·:L
{l:i~)S~f fT~i.~~ ;L:. i.::r:;. 1:i..:,
':L ~,-'YT-': C' ,-::,1:'~-'f· 10: '· .'I:~;)! ;~ rc,11;1p 1•
',~·~I. ~/.ti',( )[<i" «~ '! ~·o.: :-:i.~r, #A~Jli;~, C"l] 1;~
;;i;;_-)111.?-:..::.:i:: :,};::i·~.c1:11.; it,-~·_,~ 1.:r:.;e:1
RllL'li'.'•fr ~1or ·-· ,r>\'
~~c:~; ,;,,,,_; PC.,!f), r ,;',.·.y·\.'-IC· :,il:ei_:LN-IC-: L;~,~ -~" (r
""''.. ;;S:ER!f_ti'riaC,;"1 :, ',,[ r,,y11 1 1_;H.:·11 ''I~ ~'!_'i.fs','{1•1 ,,· l
~l'Jlf" i-: -C":lf[i rf 111. qul -, ,.~,Hr.(""
UluDL, ?1'i.Ccl
{QIJ[IIJ.J.1 1_ EP.\lli~lS)
11i>I ,,J>n::-ij r; r<M1111.tr.<thi.i' ) li ,;;c~ ,~-.,1,l!'J.S+o ,1
lk)'lf-1. PIMI ~ ~1.\T tu. !J.f, '1tff.~1(l }0~~i;~ ._>1,,, t~:i;(!i'.·
~ II{ ~(]N~\I!, '•(lflC ~.1.1.Wo,J i:.OY.f.l:f. NI~.>\~ s:,i·nr• i'j I
U"f 1ff~0 -u; r. ~·,::u,;...-;
BEGilltt~ >' "H l)JA!<fi:~ '))!'!{'. CH "Ii: 5001-: lJt( ,y -s,..;:i 51:;:~:): ;~
~ ~fH '3'5i!J,' fl{); i..i:,.; T-1: $C•.lfrl lllf ,J ~-1:, 1_:,t "£:
1,:1J~. mr io r:t: ,u,Pn ,r.i: ;J ;~o ~,:11,[~-~ r1:-r1~ ·
ill.lLl!-J.\I.· !r;ir-Or-111~,.
n-o-t N<E11i 1~·,1::,( iti! 8l~G2 r;~, >1.~C. ,~ ~r.,:-L•-~,,
~': "( '!'(»II fif:~1,J-,1 ~·'!RRfo ·:, A) Pn~: l_
.;flf.f co.TH.•,«; rorn irn":i+" r1-!: 10001 i(ET r~ ,;;~ ff:~:
f'Cfll '.f ilfl)Jllfj~ ] 11-l I~. >(f[JII OCSJ![;[~:
!h[h,! ',L~ i:B~r 1,rn ,')Ui ifEI J(I A 'ClW li'.::'!\ :~Vi
l!Cl<f.-Yr!<'.!fi' 11\.Sl IXIOLf£ll,,l,,MSi,IJ P(l!l,;I ,\
l't~t! n,"1<1'!' ',~":"("i," :{)I IQ :\'l Nil~ H~'-SOO l~: ~·o :fi!:
Eiiv <1 'iii: Lil( cco•w:1)4 · ·
AJ.90 ml ?:Im!)! ,:f ;:JI ))\(Fl-,Y]H L~T ) L ~~G.SQ. W ~);r.\p Ci
L#i 11,.l~~;!li ll(iJ f.VAl'Q il,£·SilU J .:tC)fJ1.~1"-j,1 t ·m1'AA1
N;] ;A ~ !Q(l~fl':S:l:li\ \' ·"T f•( :1(:~T ••'J, 1•\ LI F~~ ( ~lfi
~iX~~Y )IJlll:I(~ 1 ;;; 1s:,;.-~fo a• oJLi·'l>::au.~ IJ'.):~ !IC~'f:ihC ~= '.-li,1-l(li; . .
tJS~TH J~<J·
I.~ G~Hrn· l C'.f.AFA.1, 1,
Iii~ PCfll,ii:f .(-0".~~~C~f LO: s.·~(:lm 1'l, ;°"!~ 11 IMl7 ..
~ .. ~;;: 5 [~~1. WL,._ /1_ K~,; ~:t,· '!. lf.il~~!Oli ;J(l"-1~\W1l, .
::;i;~Cl~O<; i; fl( 'i\,()~ •Hil ii; fmil n,m:;j '. m:, JtST,~. r I)
ii( ll~R i~ .>il)lC P.J.l.,1M< (;P.'.l.1£5 t,1(-HI -(t· t11 l..'l: l"r1:':
N,)lf,to-:.i:i1 ~ ~ C, II{ :,J1•:mNG ·y,2i),r, Jijl. .
FC™'ii.-+; If Trf '.).J/Jl!IP. CDl111l! 01 llf sct. l,•i.Hi Ci OA1J <.r::'r.J1 C':'_ .·
IJ;tM,1 ~()k,J-~)~'.l;' ifil .1,L~; I~ SOOiH 'J\f: •'-1~} ._G;:, .
A [l'))At.0. Ii 1,1:.l~! mr ll Ill[ 1(5'1:id.Y\lf c;.-s,1;, ~;:ir.-t•-~
P~JFIC 11-1'.1\'r •nl'l,'I'() p,~;-lf-Wil ,
f"'11i'1 IIJ'!"' 2r,.nt u1r .11.1)1; il'li RGtl-~--UfC"\l ·
9n.;jff{'l ~ t.~1/Cllf'P': ~lf\'PClllllS rl( •l<IJf ;~.1· (f
e((JNt .... ; Cf irtt t,i (.,-:i::<!:!O ,0'.t..
lil'!..,f. ll(Ul, 5',1(1;" ':'(SJ iC~(;) rw '".I !Ji lictl p:r
1'-i).Q cr~m.tf".: 1i(u-;r-;4';f 11.s; 4-3:w •:l,. t"-ll ;i,
l['i\ IJ 1)1' l\.'t:~ 1i.,t,1" J/IL cl 11¥! W•.:iH11+:li}l
(1C:F! f'v1~1)_ f-(Rl!l' J'~C.'v:!lO ,s '::UC))
OC·Jllr,; IT .1<£ f.J" r:)•,1 ·Y h~1"!C Ci mi ~,r -::;:,oa:0
Hl{t1
fr(•.:: ~!ti mnf ,:,i:~· ':-0 'F
t-1~~· 11-:.,JH[~%'LI <W _; F'(I~! 'J", SA'li 'iliSIU'I~ lnf •"f Jt;
w:eEl1'! ?AC11C ).uw awun /lllli!-(1"-u· C1.'ir1.~1 ll'CT1•
:rq·u·'.',.f (j~J ]l)J f',.!l jR':)A S<IJ Tlt.l P!lil Cf ol'.°'l'aiC
H:Jc: ,rn~ 2~·Hs1· :.(',1 !!i '>AD fil l'CIII CJ (lL(!W!~-; .v-.u
[C:.'l ~IA' ~()ijl(JI ,}" ~:F! <,1'ffi.»1~; tm: t-r.Y.IH-'t r :J I+.
NO-TlH 1 ~'" '1:"'i.llCDT ~f'lloTh.c.H· lll.lll>".1
,._;; :1,r r·Yl~'i ':i ,:-0.;;:.'.1111;·;0 ,C·! ,. x::.11 n. :,:..,.i;;i~ ;,
'·'-··-•:H-;-: ,.,,:_ti(,·~,,.~ :·u:i·,. ''·*:l¥~f,:t1
(G;r,e ~I-}~':!.-\l(•l Cf'£ f__Ci"H". •l.•5$ fF,JlihC IH:'~Y:
,-, i.~ 11t:i "_ H-.:~ fif'll F-1,)'1: c:11 .,~-, i;,,:,<r-·J -nA' :.nc s,~,-·
Ll 1 ,)1·.vi~;,_J.~~;_11~
:: ,f.r,ti·· :r "( k>r:"r<(~,i ,:('l•,:_i ~: :;_~i cc•Ff!!1111)1; ,e ,. ~:-.
i'JN'. i; 11.:..,,·:, l: IH l'!'J:l r1'i _1,1; ~ ;}: >[['.. lou': ,J! '.1>'1.
~(C'.c :'" 1)-{ '.OJlH)Si ·:w(? ~ i>.il 0)\('~"'J;! lCI
",-(If,£ '>'JJTll ~I)..'., 1( Hi! \~.t T,U[::f. :<,; FU.
l-l1J(l.iJ51 ,: ,~:1 1c nt i(;JU1.nt( :J :;,,);i,:i-,·-D·-•~r
.'rl(IJ<1 "£Wlllf0''.:>_Y Ill!'+~ 3;j: f'l,°JH · ".i ·II' !.,I,( l'Ji FI(l I·: T:[
?f?,,11.~ :>ell-•..f JI<[ !.f,[ IC St l:fiCJ.IBED.
1-uce: ~ :~·:c -r,::;1 1-:~ rm.
1fr.~ i,GF!;,. ii"•( 'F.it . ..:IC.a-110 THf NU :;;..Q!\,.',; L~:" Ot'
"ij,/1~\li N:~-i~ 1'01' LS-,-'iif.D '1IC. !Ii l[tW,<~; '.$ ;\( ilf..
1,j,.1_',.~(;i~°f(]-, Ci C_C',('C./f,l[/H1:cii·~."xCIICll Z'l. -~~ 11
it:;.p. _;,,~,;, l ~;;·_.111:'l~ u:, CWl'ff. f.lS,>ltlGfr.tj. J.'I.'.
1J;-l::'{m '.i~'..l..l~i·t-.. :1{" 1(::)£ [l~~ N ~i)r :.O-:) C~,l,'c,
~Sf[f,t};o 1·'. 1-11!:l\f_l'h HJ-1( ~111:'UY CJ.IP~(> ~:--:J-11~1.
K5':l'lp A'. ft1;l~·~·
B£iil"J,1'. i: _c;, ~iJ~~ ,:001_jr'.~ 1W: S..1!1li It( V SAil c;:n.
iii .· ,-· ..
'rft.a tt)1t, lf:i6'-Y." ~r:;r -~·:u.: [:',!:'<;iJIJTH lJI..[ rJ ~)(]·.or:.
• ~-ONi:l If · 11_;01 fITT :"O 1(.1,(~ft:;n_t lN( r; Wt~:::f!!k[_;_,.
1,i;:,r,:.~~l~J1_clt4P.1N(S:"'i'.Ctll,~Cf-'AA1; .. :.
ill[NCf~l\!.,'l l!"5f (AST If]./'.: ':JIC 00:T-Ci-U! l)lf,
. !"-fi ITT! 1.0· /JI P.;tt:f'1t WfC:11 P:A(: l I\!( ~~' IC Hf :~
E(Ct-11:'"1(. . ' ...•
JW2,,:;: :((l:..:1i1}"f 1(-,l Al.:;!;( S~JI: P~}l!-ff-W).Jjl; "i!-111
fCT .. . . .
11.t:J:1. >¥:"sl~ -~:f'f-.' 11r:;l 1.•Hl 16 .ft(t:~ c, LESS. i!; H.
:'1tlli ~i,:11,_,1 U1: :j l.111.C 'c.i.Sl!~ClGH;
f'i:IIC:: 'f'j':l!I U?;oc· :~~11(}1~ ~c Nl(R W<llR t»: 111.~t
r,:; "C /. f'i)r: iliQ",j 11tC·• r.,(·rt:.u.: ?:r,·_;f)((»aiit OURi
S:tl'• mC\6"[li[: ..... _.: ::
1-<::-i<:: WJH inno· :i.sc 1.c-,i2; rn 11;)1( cfu:;-s, 1-~-r l
Pu~ ,c.;r :; !f:C*ll-.i~:
if'.~JI ~yn, nt.-.":[( OC'iCFHO Ai f(HQ'I(
~~iti: ,r 1l'l l!!'J( !'<:i,T 'J ~~tlw.111'.; rJ !!'-. ®.( OCSiJOO::
t"l.::ff]ll·
1-StJ. 3JJf~ CH-f'.1f I(;" il.);f :,( \lf:si~L' .Mc (J Tl{
:tl'.J!i"'":inl Pi.cfr; >AUAl ')J,Pl!l(~ il(-Hl-o"'-0~ 100.\11 rm;
f":tt:::: ,.,;!!TM ~-:!4°.lt. li.":il is'l:11 ,'!JI.
r.-!i"H:' .._~~'.<Olf:i' t~i! Ill ii, ,Tii I~~ "C~i Flt)I w,t,:-,
rrlt T'i!Lf Petn (J ll.:tWIC Ill~~<; 50.iN snfW [AS! I
Cl~)".U!U·ll .'./, HT,
J~J)l 1)_>;~-:.9.2!'l6' [4~! ~ fl::" "0 JI( 'J:'JC ;>)kC V
OCi:t>!II'.( J.:J)fCi:Pf lit>,; ?~Tl4)i I) SAlU 9t'.Jfil.~~'-l"lr.
N~llOq Cf ]H( >(ii]l!FP.., Lr( Cf 'iA'(l X¥1"/'~U>JII U! , ?lOO..,c:,.;
'i!:i_ill!H: ·. ,• ' .
JJ,~ i~QP;-f·IJ o::RPCt/ :IN,t({l..~Q ~IICI) :,(\f4i P!l"I{' lN() ~::ttT
®'J..~/ g-v 0:U: J(CIJIO-:! J!(J~~p 15., \'If-•. IJlll.'fP. P.fCOOltC Ht.
: X['j;~ ._.
··i: b· ,,:~-! ·,-.,-. j.i, .~ 1• ·~ ,.,,.~ ::,01,;11.-·')"!'!I" ; • ;a,·,:--, r.:·• · fa
,1::)1). ;!i,'•MJ\:.,J,J' '''?Ci;
;u:i. 0,,; t ~ r:-1-r;
;(;U' \•,'.'::'C~ ·J )\ :.:·1 c,· a:::'.~ ·.f.:k
s~ ~~e-
~ .,, ..,, ·=•.::·:· ,, :iu ·l;·:: .. t· ·c 1::!J!'":m,-1.
·· ,r, ·;r--:, <,._~(<1; ~·-i 11-, r;:i1;. ,
,l)a;l _____ _
IIJ9l, ROED & HITmNGS, ,IC.
0'.!. ;o,rn,5 t -•~) :;JS\-1:l~:
1X~ Ill+); il(.C~'i1 l!C6! l'/Hlil
>.:m.-:" r.\,l<HIOI 1-axt-lli-M
!lllOi-)IIJ C•)J {,:~; ;;i ;i:,
i:-~l•. N ;,f.1141,.'..:.Jc"
R[Cil1!D or ~.Fvi'<
JAC DE\ifLOPMENT
. -· KNG ~JH': ~-·': ?'(iJ!
')
)
' I
)
)
.... :"M --· . . ..
· \Jij,.;.~t iil~r~·a.l\.\~
... , .... , .
--~---··-·:
· ··: .21 r.i:r,.,I,,, 00
}._lf:)Jt,. {., .. ~~li.7""":'"".·-~
iW -';:[_Al-} 6/
5...(;i.TT.J.b&U: .. ~~---
':----·~-· ·--·-··---
. 2r,,1aws9oooo5 ----------
5'
~eRf! -_----·-----·
------~-------.-. ·----~--
,,
.,
}
1
)
)
' .)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
-~--
_/
-! r:.,::·.:: r·· ----.. --. !7'--~-
_ _10i0/DViM()o5 ---····
.---
.--/-~---·
i /
' '
I//
V
i
Q
d / .. / "t.,"
/
/ ,/, "",.,
.
' ,
p
\
/./
,,7'
i
I
®
lCINGCOUHf'Y
OEMRTMENT <>I ASSEUMHHS
~~.it~-g~~ == -~ == =---~------
I
/~/
I
'
,,
'
I
' I, \
I i, " I, I
:02~(il.·. " ,( L" ,-£. +
sw 2~~]:-:4~:o~s=-... -_~,u-C(J>!-·
1
,
1
~
_,. ... ,,, .. -, -il
j(
-~-
~ l
.-·~ "~::: First American
Title Company
Plotted Easements
Reference Number : 236628
County : King
POR. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO LUA-00-044, RECORDING NO. 20010105900005
N
t
A
...
C
...
...
12/15/#1964#5823182 .. (Not Locattable]
(Ingress & Egress)
04/23/1963#5573335
(Power Line)
04/25/1963#3042108
(Electric Transmission & Distribution Line)
09/24/1964#5790406
(Sewe,line, Manholes)
12/15/1964#5823184(04/2311963#4399-461)
(Construction.Maintenance, Operation)
12/15/1964#5823185
(Construction, Maintenance, Operation)
01/11/1973#7301110427
(Public Utilities)
10/08/1975#7510080739
(Public Utilities)
8
Firsl Americ•.n Till• Co,np•11y
rt ;.;:_
~ " !i:' <i5
"'-.:....._ 1 O'
o· u
,t'
25'
Tax ID#292405-9001-04
#292405-9015-08
Map not to scale
This m.ip is n<>I a SJJrv8'/ ot r11& /itfi{j CJePJClad fle,ean You shoofO ncit UJJy upon it tor any purpo~e other rban rmenrar10n 10 the general 1ocar1on of Ille parcel or pa,ce/s dep1ded Any ptJIJ)Qsa of an easem,ent Iha/ 1s ooted is ro, reference only and
;iou should rely on !h~ Mle repoft issued amJ e copy uf /he OO~me,n/ for Illa eicact term and cond1/tons or /he e.i$ement. Fm>/ Amexan T1tl8 Com~ny expro:;.sly di~la1ms any /1ab1/ity /or dHrJ9ed /os~ or ddmdgc wf)lch may re:;.uft from 1e!iance
u!!!3_n tflrs map
-) k:in't-_
' '
)
)
;
)
)
)
)
)
··)
)
.. _lo.r..-~~.1flo.r+, f\
.:;;:.. .....
"'-~-l<0.11.D!
---l ..... i
If ...
ol
;.-~----
-i
)
,J
\
i
)
)
)
I
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
')
j
)
)
' )
' )
\
:)
)
.> /
.. -·
---------------.-·. -·-----
-------
Geotechnical Report
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
SHANNON t,WILSON, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ANO ENVIRONMEN.TAL CONSULTANTS
Ar 5/wnnon & Wilson. our mis.1'io11 1s to be a progressive. wel!-
munagn/ pmff's.1iono! conrn!tingfimz in rhe fields ofengi11ea111g
(Ind applied earrll .w:iences. Our goal is lo pe1form our 1·en:ices
H'ith the highest depn:e 1!{pmfessimwfi.H11 wirh due cu11siderntio11
tu the hest inter{'srs o/ the puh/ic. our l'lirms. and our employees
September 13, 2006
Submitted To:
Mr. Tai Fowler
Football Northwest, LLC
505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900
Seattle, Washington 98104
By:
Shannon & Wilson, Inc.
400 N 34th Street, Suite 100
Seattle, Washington 98103
21-1-20525-001
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of our geotechnical field explorations and engineering studies
performed for the Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility project. The currently proposed
project will include a three-story office space, an indoor practice field with a 110-foot-high roof,
four outdoor practice fields, an ancillary structure, and a parking lot along the east and north
sides of the site.
Subsurface Conditions. In general, the subsurface soils under the building footprint consist of
either (a) fill material, soft estuarine deposits, loose alluvial soils and underlying very dense
bedrock, or (b) stiff to very stiff silt and clay, and medium dense sand overlying bedrock. The
fill is generally 2 to 3 feet thick, while the soft estuarine and loose alluvial soils extend to depths
ranging from 17 to 38 feet below the existing ground surface under most of the building
footprint. The alluvial and estuarine deposits contain layers ofloose sand that are susceptible to
liquefaction, as well as layers ofhighly compressible peat. The bedrock consists of highly
weathered Andesite and is a competent bearing material for building foundations.
Borings on the north side of the proposed building encountered bedrock at depths of 44 to 58 feet
deep, while borings near the center found bedrock as shallow as 17 feet. The depth to bedrock is
highly variable across the site. A geophysical survey has been completed to better define the
bedrock depths and reduce the uncertainty about lengths of foundation shafts. The results of this
survey are presented herein.
Groundwater was generally encountered at about 10 feet below the ground surface with the
exception ofHQ-2, which found groundwater under artesian pressure (higher than ground
surface) emanating from a gravel layer between 35 and 44 feet deep.
Effects on Design and Construction. The effects of these subsurface conditions on the design
and construction of the Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility can be summarized as
follows:
~ The upper 17 to 40 feet of alluvial and estuarine soils contain layers that are susceptible
to earthquake-induced liquefaction and settlement, as well as settlements under static
building and fill loads. These soils are not suitable for conventional at-grade foundation
support without extensive ground improvement.
~ The weathered Andesite bedrock will support high-capacity foundations consisting of
drilled shafts extending to a range of depths depending on the column loads and the depth
to bedrock.
~ We recommend the office building have a structural floor slab at the ground floor level.
21-1-20525-001-R I rev\ .doc.'wp-'LKD 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
• The small ancillary building south of the outdoor practice fields can be supported on
spread footings designed with a low bearing pressure.
• The proposed site grading will involve minimal increases in surface elevation.
Seismic Design. The project is located in a moderately active seismic zone. The subsurface
soils beneath the project have a moderate to high susceptibility to liquefaction to a depth of about
40 feet. Liquefaction-induced ground surface settlements are estimated to be on the order of 3 to
4 inches. Lateral spreading of soils toward Lake Washington could range from 2 to 8 feet along
the shoreline.
In accordance with the 2003 International Building Code, the site is classified as a Soil Type SF
because of the presence of liquefiable soils. A site classification of So may be used if the
structural period of the building is less than 0.5 second.
Foundation Design. We recommend that the proposed office building and practice facility
structures be supported on drilled shafts bearing in the very dense bedrock. Drilled 24-to
36-inch-diameter concrete shafts could be installed to develop capacities ranging from 200 to
900 kips, or higher if necessary. Geotechnical analysis oflateral resistance of the shafts
indicates that they will perform satisfactorily provided they are extended into bedrock. Ground
improvement methods such as stone columns, soil-cement mix or grout columns, earthquake
drains, soil-cement reinforced with geogrids, and combinations thereof have also been
considered as potential alternatives to deep foundations. Based on the very poor quality and low
strength of the soils above the bedrock, ground improvement is not likely to be a cost-effective
alternative to deep foundations.
The ancillary structure located south of the outdoor practice fields may be supported on spread
footings designed with a relatively low bearing pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot (psf).
Floor Slabs and Field Support. Because of the presence of highly compressible peat and clay
of variable thickness, and the presence of liquefaction-susceptible layers under the building
footprint, we recommend that floor slabs of the office building be structurally supported on
drilled shaft foundations. The west side of the indoor practice field and the outdoor practice
fields will involve placement of 3 to 4 feet of fill over existing grades. These areas could be
preloaded with a surcharge fill in order to preconsolidate the compressible soils layers to the
extent practicable to reduce long-term settlements. Some long-term maintenance should be
anticipated as secondary settlements of the peat layers continue over time. Mitigation of
settlements due to localized pockets of highly compressible soils can include use of a soil cement
treatment and a reinforcing geogrid beneath the field section.
21-1-20525-001-Rl rev\ .doc·wp'LKD 21-1-20525-001
11
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. .i
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Authorization and Scope of Services ......................................................................... 1
1.2 Site and Project Description ....................................................................................... 2
2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM .................................................................... 3
2.1 Existing Subsurface Data ........................................................................................... 3
2.2 Current Subsurface Explorations ............................................................................... 4
2.3 Borin~ ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.3.1 Drilling Procedures ..................................................................................... .4
2.3.2 Soil Sarnpling ............................................................................................... 5
2.3.2.1 Penetration Test Sampling .......................................................... 5
2.3.2.2 Relatively Undisturbed Samples ................................................. 5
2.3.3 Boring Logs ................................................................................................. 6
2.4 Potential Contamination ............................................................................................. 6
2.5 Groundwater Monitoring ........................................................................................... 6
2.6 Downhole Seismic Testing ........................................................................................ 7
2.7 Seismic Refraction Survey ......................................................................................... 7
3.0 LABO RA TORY TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS ................................................... 7
3. l Classification .............................................................................................................. 8
3.2 Water Content Determination .................................................................................... 8
3.3 Grain Size Analyses ................................................................................................... 8
3.4 Atterberg Limits Deterrnination ................................................................................. 8
3.5 One-dimensional Consolidation ................................................................................. 9
4.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .............................................................. 9
4.1 Regional and Site Geology ......................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 Seattle Fault ............................................................................................... 10
4.1.2 Tertiary Bedrock ........................................................................................ 10
4.1.3 Fill Deposits ............................................................................................... 10
4.1.4 Holocene Deposits ..................................................................................... 11
4.1. 5 Vashon Glacial Deposits ............................................................................ 11
4.2 Subsurface Conditions ............................................................................................. 12
5 .0 Engineering Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................ 13
5.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 Earthquake Engineering and Geologic Hazards ...................................................... 14
21-1-20525-001-R I rev l .doc/wpiLKD 21-1-20525-001
lll
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
5.3
5.4
5.2.1
5.2.2
Page
Design Ground Motions ............................................................................ 14
Earthquake-induced Geologic Hazards ..................................................... 15
5.2.2.1 Ground Surface Fault Rupture .................................................. 15
5.2.2.2 Liquefaction .............................................................................. 15
Geotechnical Design ................................................................................................ 16
5.3.1 Drilled Shaft Foundation Design ............................................................... 18
5.3.1.1 Axial Capacities ........................................................................ 18
5.3. 1.2 Lateral Resistance of Deep Foundations ................................... 19
5.3.2 Lateral Earth Pressures on Buried Structures ............................................ 20
5.3.3 Lateral Resistance Against Pile Caps and Grade Beams ........................... 21
5.3.4 Floor Slab and Pavement Design ............................................................... 22
5.3.5 Grading and Estimated Settlements ........................................................... 24
5.3.6 Alternative Settlement Mitigation ............................................................. 25
5.3. 7 Drainage ..................................................................................................... 26
Earthwork Recommendations .................................................................................. 27
5.4.1 Site Preparation and General Excavation .................................................. 27
5.4.2 Temporary Excavation Slopes ................................................................... 28
5.4.3 Temporary Groundwater Control .............................................................. 29
5.4.4 Fill Material, Placement, and Compaction ................................................ 29
6.0 Construction Considerations ................................................................................................ 30
6.1 Drilled Shafts ........................................................................................................... 30
6.1. 1 General. ...................................................................................................... 30
6.1.2 Methods of Construction ........................................................................... 31
6. 1.2.1 Dry Method ............................................................................... 31
6. 1.2.2 Casing Method .......................................................................... 31
6.1.2.3 Wet Method .............................................................................. 33
6.1.3 Drilled Shaft Testing .................................................................................. 33
6.1.4 Monitoring Drilled Shaft Construction ...................................................... 34
6.2 Obstructions ............................................................................................................. 34
6.3 Wet Weather Earthwork ........................................................................................... 34
6.4 Review of Plans and Specifications ......................................................................... 35
6.5 Construction Observation ......................................................................................... 35
7 .0 LIMIT A TIO NS .................................................................................................................... 36
8. 0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 3 8
2 J .. J -20525-001-R I rev l .doc/wp/LK D 21-1-20525-001
IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
LIST OF TABLES
Table No.
1 Downhole Shear Wave Velocity Measurements
2 Recommended Parameters for Development of P-Y Curves Using LP ILE PLUS
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No.
1 Vicinity Map
2 Site and Exploration Plan
3 Seattle Fault Zone
4 Preliminary Contour Map: Top of Bedrock
5 Generalized Subsurface Profile A-A'
6 Generalized Subsurface Profile B-B'
7 Generalized Subsurface Profile C-C'
8 Estimated Axial Capacity of 2-ft diameter Shaft at Borings HQ-1 and HQ-3
(2 sheets)
9 Estimated Axial Capacity of2.5-foot-diameter Shaft at Borings HQ-I and HQ-3
(2 sheets)
10 Lateral Resistance Analyses 3-ft Diameter Shaft
11 Lateral Resistance Analyses of2.5-foot-diameter Shaft
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
A Subsurface Explorations
B Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results
C Seismic Refraction Survey Report
D Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report
21-1-20525-001-Rl rev! .doc-'wp!LKD 21-1-20525-001
V
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND PRACTICE FACILITY
RENTON, WASHINGTON
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This supplemental report presents the preliminary results of the subsurface exploration and
geotechnical evaluation of the project site for the new Seahawks Headquarters and Practice
Facility project located in Renton, Washington. This report is provided as a preliminary
document for review and comment by the design team. A final report will be prepared after
comments are received and additional site investigation and alternate foundation support scheme
studies have been performed.
1.1 Authorization and Scope of Services
Our services completed to date have been in general accordance with the scope of services
submitted to Football Northwest, LLC, dated May 19, 2006. Notice to Proceed for the project
was authorized by Tai Fowler on May 19, 2006.
The services provided for our study were to explore the subsurface conditions; summarize the
exploration and laboratory test data; and provide geotechnical recommendations for the
foundation, practice field, site grading, and seismic design of the proposed facility. Our services
included the following:
• Identifying and reviewing existing geotechnical information.
• Drilling and sampling six deep soil borings (designated HQ-I through HQ-6).
• Excavating and sampling 29 relatively shallow test pits.
• Completing a seismic refraction survey of the building footprint.
• Preparing three generalized subsurface profiles through the project site.
• Conducting engineering and seismic analyses.
• Summarizing our conclusions and recommendations in this report.
We reviewed the following existing geotechnical reports for other past projects in the vicinity of
the Seahawks Headquarters project:
21-1-20525-00 l-Rl rev 1.doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
I
•
•
1.2
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
Shannon & Wilson, Inc., 1997, Geotechnical report, conceptual design phase, JAG
Development, Renton, Washington: Shannon & Wilson, Inc., Seattle, Washington,
Report No. W-7443-04, February.
Shannon & Wilson, Inc., 2000, Draft geotechnical data Report, Interstate 405/NE 44th
Street Interchange and access revisions, Renton, Washington: Shannon & Wilson, Inc.,
Seattle, Washington, Report No. 21-1-09054-006, September.
Site and Project Description
The project site, known as the Baxter site, consists of approximately 19 acres of land adjacent to
the southeast shore of Lake Washington, as shown in the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The property
contains approximately 1,300 feet of waterfront. The ground surface topography across the site
slopes gently down to the southwest with approximately 12 feet of elevation difference between
elevation 33 feet at the northeast comer and elevation 21 feet at the southwest comer. Slopes are
generally less than about 1 percent across the site, but local slopes ofup to 5 percent are present
on the north side of the site. The attached Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2, presents an
overview of the site plan with existing topography and proposed new development locations.
The site is the fonner location of a lumber mill but currently contains no significant structures
other than an abandoned single-story, wood-frame building along the northern edge of the
property and a boathouse extending approximately 50 feet from the shoreline. There are several
paved and unpaved access roads traversing the site. The southern, approximately 7 acres of the
site, known as Baxter South, is separated from the northern portion by a chain link fence and a
gate. The Baxter South area was the former location of a wood treatment plant, which caused
contamination of the subsurface soils. Some of the subsurface soils in this area were subjected to
remediation cleanup action, including contaminant removal, soil excavation, and in situ
stabilization. More infonnation about the remediation work is contained in the Construction
Completion Report (Byers, 2005).
The currently proposed project includes construction of an indoor practice facility, an adjacent
three-story office building, and four outdoor practice fields. There will also be an ancillary
structure for equipment storage located south of the outdoor practice fields. The proposed
locations of the indoor and outdoor practice fields, office building, and ancillary structure are
shown in Figure 2. Primary access to the facility will be via a driveway at the southeast comer
of the proposed office building. The driveway will enter the site from Ripley Lane on the east,
cross over the railroad tracks, and gain elevation as it approaches the building. The proposed
elevation of the driveway and surrounding parking lot near the entrance to the building will
21 "l-2052S-001-R 1 rev! .dociwp/LKD 21-1-20525-00 I
2
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
range from 38 to 40 feet, approximately 14 feet higher than existing grade. The parking lot will
slope down to the north and then tum to the west around the north end of the building where it
will meet existing grade. The proposed entry driveway and parking lot will require construction
of walls to retain up to 14 feet of fill adjacent to the building.
The current grading plan shows most of the outdoor practice fields to be graded to elevation
27 feet. This will involve up to 4 feet of fill over the practice fields. The eastern side of the
indoor practice field will be cut to final grade, while up to 3 feet of fill will be needed to raise the
western side. There will be a loading dock at the northwest comer of the office building with a
low point at elevation 24.6 feet, about I foot higher than existing grade.
Based on our discussions with the project structural engineer, Magnusson Klemencic Associates
(MKA), the proposed office building and indoor practice facility will have typical column loads
on the order of 400 to 700 kips, with a few columns approaching 850 kips. Lateral loads on the
structures have not yet been determined; however, we have assumed lateral loads at the columns
could be about IO percent of vertical loads.
2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PROGRAM
2.1 Existing Subsurface Data
We collected and reviewed previous geotechnical exploration data in the project area to
supplement the current field explorations. The approximate locations of the previous field
explorations that were used in our study are shown in Figure 2.
During our review of files for the two older Shannon & Wilson projects listed in the previous
,section, we reviewed the stored files and copied selected data for our current study. This
included data from older studies performed by CH2M Hill and Woodward-Clyde Consultants.
In general, the following data from previous geotechnical studies was collected, copied, and
compiled for this report:
~ Exploration Logs
~ Site and Exploration Plans
~ Groundwater Monitoring Data
~ Seismic Shear Wave Velocity Data
~ Subsurface Profiles
21-1-20525-001-R I rev 1.doc-'wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
3
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
The data that was judged potentially useful to the Seahawks project is presented in Appendix A.
2.2 Current Subsurface Explorations
The current subsurface exploration program included drilling 6 borings and performing
29 backhoe test pit excavations. Soil borings are designated HQl-1 through HQ-6, and test pits
are designated TP-1 through TP-29. In general, soil boring locations were selected to correspond
with heavy structure locations and/or areas where geologic conditions were not well documented
by previous explorations. For this project, we located the borings at the approximate center and
corners of the proposed building, with the exception of the northwest corner where we already
had soil boring data from a previous study. Test pit explorations were generally located across
all portions of the Baxter property to provide a broad overview of near-surface soils. Test pits
were grouped closer together where we anticipate there may be significant cuts to lower the
grade (based on preliminary grading plans provided to us).
The locations of the current field explorations are shown in Figure 2. The boring and test pit
locations were surveyed by Bush, Roed & Hitchings approximately 2 weeks after we completed
our fieldwork. The project vertical datum is the North American Vertical Datum (NAVO 88).
The following sections present discussions of the subsurface exploration program and associated
results and analyses presented in Appendix B.
2.3 Borings
The current soil borings were drilled by Gregory Drilling, Inc. under subcontract to Shannon &
Wi_]son, Inc. during the period of May 23 and 24, 2006. Borings were designated HQ-I through
HQ-6.
Each boring was observed by an experienced engineer, who visually examined each sample,
performed air and sample monitoring, and prepared field logs of each boring. The following
sections present a discussion of the drilling and sampling procedures used in the borings. Logs
of the borings are included in Appendix A.
2.3.1 Drilling Procedures
The borings were drilled using a CME-85, truck-mounted drill rig equipped with mud-
rotary drilling tools. Borings HQ-I through HQ-6 were drilled to depths ranging from 20 to
65 feet. In general, the mud-rotary drilling procedure used to drill these borings consisted of
drilling the formation materials and removing the cuttings by circulation of drilling mud. The
21-1-20525-001-R 1 rev! .do~:wp,TKD 21-1-20525-001
4
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
cuttings were deposited in a settling tank at the ground surface. The drilling mud used was a
mixture of water and baroid-zeogel (bentonite). The holes were filled with bentonite chips to
seal them after each boring was completed.
2.3.2 Soil Sampling
Soil sampling was generally conducted at 2.5-to 5-foot intervals, as shown on the boring
logs in Appendix B. Disturbed soil samples were obtained by a split-spoon sampler used in
conjunction with a penetration test. At selected locations where fine-grained soils were
encountered, relatively undisturbed samples were obtained using thin-walled steel tube samplers.
The field representative for Shannon & Wilson, Inc., visuaJly classified the samples, compiled a
detailed log of each boring, and returned the samples to our laboratory for further analysis and
testing.
2.3.2.1 Penetration Test Sampling
To obtain a disturbed soil sample, Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were
performed in general accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Designation: D 1586, Test Method for Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils
(ASTM, 1999). In the SPT, a 2-inch outside-diameter (O.D.), 1.375-inch inside-diameter (I.D.),
split-spoon sampler is driven with a 140-pound hammer faJling 30 inches. The number of blows
required to achieve each of three 6-inch increments of sampler penetration is recorded. The
number of blows required to cause the last 12 inches of penetration is termed the Standard
Penetration Resistance (N-value). The number of blows causing the last 12 inches of penetration
is termed the Standard Penetration Resistance, or blow count, N. When penetration resistances
exceeded 50 to 100 blows for 6 inches or less of penetration, the test was terminated, and the
number of blows recorded. The N-value is used as an indicator for the relative density or
consistency of the soil, as described in Figure A-1 in Appendix A.
2.3.2.2 Relatively Undisturbed Samples
In some areas, relatively undisturbed samples were obtained, and attempted, but
not obtained, using a 3-inch-diameter, hydraulically pushed, thin-walled tube (Shelby tube). The
hydraulically pushed, thin-walled tube samples were obtained in general accordance with ASTM
Designation: D 1587, Standard Practice for Thin-Walled Tube Geotechnical Sampling of Soils
(ASTM, 1999). This sampling method employs a thin-wall steel tube connected to a sampling
head that is attached to the drill rods. The tube is pushed by the hydraulic rams of the drill rig
into the soil below the bottom of a drilled hole and then retracted to obtain a sample. This type
21 "1-20525-001-R ! rev I .doclwp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
5
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
of tube was generally used in soft to stiff, fine-grained soils, although occasionally in stiffer
soils. Because of the interlayered nature of the soft soils (sand, silt, clay, and peat), no samples
of sufficient size for laboratory testing were obtained for the clay soils encountered.
2.3.3 Boring Logs
The boring logs for this project are presented in Appendix A. A boring log is a written
record of the subsurface conditions encountered in any individual boring. It graphically shows
the geologic units (layers) encountered in a boring and the Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS) symbol (for soil units) of each geologic layer. For soil layers, it also includes the natural
water content (where tested), blow count, and the Atterberg limits of soil samples at various
depths within the boring log. Other information shown in the boring logs is the water level
observed during drilling, approximate surface elevation, and types and depths of sampling.
2.4 Potential Contamination
Previous work performed at the South Baxter site indicated the presence of contaminated soils.
The soils on the North Baxter site were assumed clean; however, all soil samples and drill
cuttings generated by the drilling process were monitored with a photoionization detector (PID),
which measures the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Throughout the
exploration process, the readings of the PID indicated that no VOCs were present in significant
amounts in the soil borings. Some potentially hydrocarbon-impacted soil was detected in test
pits TP-14, TP-16, TP-18, TP-26, and TP-28. No soil samples were obtained and no chemical
analyses were performed.
2.5 Groundwater Monitoring
Observation wells were not installed in our current soil borings because we had compiled a
sufficient amount of information on groundwater levels from older soil borings. We expect that
groundwater levels across the site will generally be controlled by the elevation of Lake
Washington -approximately 20 to 22 feet. Groundwater observations noted in the boring logs
are based on water seepage in the bore hole at the time of drilling and may not accurately reflect
long-term static groundwater levels.
Artesian groundwater conditions, i.e., water that is under a pressure head and flows above the
ground surface, were observed in our recent boring HQ-2 and in the older soil boring, B-7,
located approximately 100 feet east of the site. We observed this artesian pressure in boring
HQ-2 when the borehole reached a gravel layer approximately 40 feet deep (elevation
21-1-20525-00 l "RI rev l .dociwp'LKD 21-1-20525-001
6
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
-14.5 feet). A similar water-bearing gravel layer was observed in boring B-7 at a depth of22 feet
deep (elevation 12 feet). HQ-2 was drilled into bedrock and then abandoned by backfilling with
bentonite chips and grout. A vibrating-wire pressure transducer piezometer (VWP) was installed
in boring B-7 to monitor artesian water pressure. The depths of the sand pack and screened
interval of the observation wells and vibrating wire are presented graphically in the boring log,
Figure A-I 1, in Appendix A. Groundwater pressure was measured at approximately 6 feet above
the ground surface in boring B-7.
2.6 Downhole Seismic Testing
Downhole seismic tests were perfonned in the previous boring B-7 (Shannon & Wilson, 2000) to
measure the compressional and shear wave velocities of the soil and bedrock. Shear wave
velocities in bedrock can provide useful correlations for estimating rock strength, and for
site-specific seismic response analysis, if necessary. These tests were performed about I to
2 weeks after boring completion in a 2-inch-diameter PVC pipe that had been installed in the
boring. This testing was completed by Geo-Rccon International (GR!). The results are
presented in Table 1.
2.7 Seismic Refraction Survey
A seismic refraction survey was performed at the proposed building site on August 3, 4, and 5,
2006, by Philip M. Duoos, Geophysical Consultant, working under subcontract to Shannon &
Wilson. The seismic survey consisted of three survey lines, approximately 470 to 660 feet long,
extending across the building footprint. The locations of the survey lines are shown in Figure 4.
The purpose of the seismic survey was to enhance our information regarding the depth to
bedrock and the strength of the bedrock. Additional information on the seismic survey is
presented in Appendix C.
3.0 LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
Laboratory tests were performed on soil samples retrieved from the borings. The laboratory tests
were performed to provide data for the engineering studies and to classify the materials into
similar geologic groups. The tests performed included classification, index, and physical soil
strength tests. Classification and index laboratory tests conducted on soil samples included
visual classification, natural water content determinations, grain size analyses, and Atterberg
limits determinations. Physical strength tests consisted of one-dimensional consolidation. The
21-J-20525-001-Rl rev l .doc1wp/LKD 2 I -I -20525-00 I
7
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
following sections describe the laboratory testing procedures. The laboratory testing results are
presented in Appendix B.
3.1 Classification
The samples were classified according to a modified version of the USCS (ASTM, 2002).
According to the USCS classification system, coarse-grained soils (greater than 50 percent
coarser than 0.075 millimeter [mm]) generally are classified based on particle-size distribution.
Fine-grained soils (greater than 50 percent finer than 0.075 mm) generally are classified based on
Atterberg limits. A summary of this classification system is shown in Figure A-1. Classification
of the samples was based on ASTM Designation: D 2487, Standard Test Method for
Classification of Soil for Engineering Purposes, and ASTM Designation: D 2488, Standard
Recommended Practice for Description of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure). This visual
classification method allows for convenient and consistent comparison of soils from widespread
geographic areas. Visual classifications were checked by the results of the index testing
discussed in the next section.
3.2 Water Content Determination
The water content of most samples collected was determined in general accordance with ASTM
Designation: D 2216, Test Method for Laboratory Detennination of Water (Moisture) Content
of Soil and Rock. The water content is shown graphically on each boring log in Appendix 8.
3.3 Grain Size Analyses
The grain size distribution of selected samples was determined in general accordance with the
Department of the Anny, Manual of Laboratory Soils Testing (2), Appendix V; Grain-Size
Analysis ( 1986) and ASTM Designation: D 422, Standard Test Method for Particle-Size
Analysis of Soils. Results of these analyses are presented as gradation curves, Figures 8-1 and
8-2, Appendix B. Each gradation sheet provides the USCS group symbol, the sample
description, its natural water content, and the Atterberg limits (if performed).
3.4 Atterberg Limits Determination
Soil plasticity was determined by performing Atterberg limits tests on selected fine-grained
samples. The tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM Designation: D 4318,
Standard Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils. The
Atterberg Limits include Liquid Limit (LL), Plastic Limit (PL), and Plasticity Index (Pl=LL-PL).
21-1~20525-001-R l rev l .doc/wplLKD 21-1-20525-001
8
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
The results of these tests are shown graphically on the boring logs in Appendix B, and plotted on
Plasticity Charts presented in Figure B-3, Appendix B.
3.5 One-dimensional Consolidation
One-dimensional consolidation tests were performed on two relatively undisturbed samples in
general accordance with ASTM Designation: D 2435-80, Standard Tests Method for One-
Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils.
The specimens were incrementally loaded using fixed-ring consolidometers, with each load
increment approximately doubling the previous load, to a maximum stress detennined based on
estimated in situ stresses. The results of consolidation tests are presented in Figures B-4 through
andB-7.
4.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The geology and subsurface conditions for the project area were determined based on the
geologic field reconnaissance, current and previous borings, and published geologic data. The
following sections discuss the regional and site geology and the subsurface conditions
encountered in the field explorations.
4.1 Regional and Site Geology
The site lies in the middle portion of the Puget Lowland, an elongated topographic and structural
depression filled with a complex sequence of glacial and nonglacial sediments that
unconfonnably overlie Tertiary bedrock. In general, the total thickness of the Quaternary-age
basin fill varies from zero in scatte_red locations south of the Seattle Fault zone to greater than
3,000 feet north of the fault. Published isopach maps indicate that the depth to bedrock is greater
than 50 meters throughout the site (Wong, et al., 1999). However, based on the field
explorations, the depth to bedrock in the middle portion of the proposed building site is as
shallow as 17.5 feet (boring HQ-4).
The soils deposited during and after the most recent glaciation of the central Puget Lowland
dominate the surface and subsurface geologic conditions in the project area. These soil deposits
are highly interwoven by repeated sequences of deposition and mass wasting such as erosion and
landsliding. The following sections describe the site geology in more detail and refer primarily
to Figures 3 through 7.
21-1-20525-001-Rl rev l .doclwp.iLKD 21-1-20525-001
9
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
4.1.1 Seattle Fault
The Seattle Fault is a collective tem1 for a series of four or more east-west-trending,
south-dipping fault strands underlying the Seattle area. The southernmost mapped strand of the
Seattle Fault is the closest known fault to the Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
(Figure 3). This thrust fault zone is approximately 2 to 4 miles wide (north-south) and extends
from the Kitsap Peninsula near Bremerton on the west to the Sammamish Plateau east of Lake
Sammamish on the east. The four fault strands have been interpolated from overwater
geophysical surveys (Johnson, et al., 1999) and, consequently, the exact locations on land have
yet to be determined or verified. Recent geologic evidence suggests that movement on this fault
zone occurred as recently as 1,100 years ago.
Another significant geologic feature that is relatively close to the project site is the
Mercer Island sunken forest. The sunken forest is a large (several hundred feet wide by several
thousand feet long) intact block of glacially deposited soils that reportedly slid down towards the
southeast from the Mercer Island uplands during a strong-motion earthquake about I, I 00 years
ago. (Jacoby, et al., 1992). The mapped outline of this submerged soil block extends from
approximately one-fourth to one-half the distance between Mercer Island and the eastern shore
of Lake Washington where the project site is located.
4.1.2 Tertiary Bedrock
Bedrock, consisting primarily of andesite, sandstone, and siltstone, outcrops sporadically
within and to the south of the Seattle Fault zone; however, north of this, Tertiary bedrock is
buried by 1,000 to 3,000 feet of glacial and nonglacial sediments. Bedrock at the subject site
consists of weathered to highly weathered andesite (a volcanic rock) from the Tukwila
Formation (Yount and Gower, 1991 ). A map showing the approximate elevation of bedrock at
the subject site (based on the soil borings where it was encountered and geophysical survey data)
is shown in Figure 4. The bedrock is located at relatively shallow depths (17 to 20 feet) in the
middle of the proposed building site. It appears to slope down to the east and west and, based on
boring B-7, rises up along the east side of the site.
4.1.3 Fill Deposits
Surficial fills are present across the subject property. They appear to have been placed
during multiple periods of site work related to past industrial uses of the site including
construction of access roads. They include a wide range of materials, such as sand and gravel,
asphalt pavements, oil and stone pavements, clean sand and gravel, silty sands and gravels, sand
21-1-20525-001-Rlrevl .doc-'wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
IO
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
mixed with organics (topsoil), and wood chips. There is significant variability in the
composition of fills over the surface of the property. Many of these fills have not been placed
and compacted as engineered fills and, as such, can be relatively loose or soft and potentially
unstable under heavy equipment traffic loads. Other areas, such as gravel backfilled pits within
the South Baxter area and access roads that extend across the property, appear to have been
reasonably well constructed with compacted aggregates.
4.1.4 Holocene Deposits
Holocene (post-glacial) deposits are ubiquitous throughout the project area. They include
alluvium (Ha) and depression fillings (HI or Hp). These soils have not been glacially overridden.
As such, they are typically loose to medium dense or soft to stiff. Alluvium is deposited along
the major rivers and creeks, such as May Creek, which is located south of the subject property.
Alluvial deposits on the property are associated with flooding and sediment deposition from May
Creek. These soils generally consist ofloose to medium dense, silty fine sand and sandy silt.
Alluvial layers are not laterally continuous across the site and are frequently interfingered with
layers of soft depression filling soils, such as peat, clay, and silt.
Depression filling materials consist of very soft peat and organic silt and clay that are
interbedded with loose, silty, fine to medium sand (alluvium). The thickness of the depression
fill layers generally ranges from 10 to 30 feet across the site but is not present below the
northeast comer of the building site (HQ-1 ). Depression fill deposits were likely deposited in
relatively still water of Lake Washington when this portion of the May Creek delta was
submerged. Upon emergence of the delta to a subareal condition (possibly due to tectonics), a
series of ponds and bogs formed in the depressions of the delta. Subsequent alluvial deposition
covered the depression fill layers.
4.1.5 Vashon Glacial Deposits
Glacial geologic units within the project area were laid down during the Vashon Stade of
Fraser Glaciation, between about 17,000 and 13,500 years ago (Waldron, et al., 1962; Booth,
1987). The four members of the Vashon Stade are, from oldest to youngest, the Lawton Clay,
Esperance Sand, Vashon Till, and Vashon recessional outwash. These units comprise most of
the ridges and uplands in the Seattle area. Approximately 3,000 feet of Vashon Stade ice
overrode the lowest three members. This ice did not override the recessional outwash.
21-1-20525-001-R 1 revl .doc/wp.'LKD 21-1-20525-001
II
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
The Lawton Clay (Qvgl), a glaciolacustrine deposit, was laid down in a lake that formed
as the glacial ice advanced southward from British Columbia and blocked the Strait of Juan
de Fuca. The unit consists of laminated and massive silty clay and clayey silt with scattered fine
sand lenses. It is stiff to hard from having been glacially overridden. Because of its consistency
and fine-grained nature, it is relatively impervious to groundwater flow, and groundwater tends
to perch on top of its upper surface and become confined below. A significant thickness of this
deposit was encountered in soil borings on the north and east side of the building site (HQ-1,
SWB-lA, B-17, and B-18).
The Esperance Sand (Qva), a glaciofluvial advance outwash, was deposited by streams
issuing from the Vashon glacier as it advanced southward. It is comprised chiefly of fine to
medium sand that is locally gravelly. Locally, it also contains silt layers and pockets and
discontinuous layers of gravel. It is very dense and pervious with groundwater normally flowing
freely through this soil. This deposit was not identified in borings at the subject property.
Vashon Till (Qvt) was deposited beneath the Vashon Stade ice. It is also known locally
as "hardpan." It is normally a gravelly, silty sand or a gravelly, sandy silt with scattered cobbles
and boulders. It is very dense ( one of the most compact soils in the world) and relatively
impervious. We did not encounter Vashon Till in borings at the subject property.
Vashon recessional outwash (Qvro) was deposited by streams issuing from the Vashon
glacier as it receded or wasted. It is relatively pervious and loose to medium dense, not having
been glacially overridden. Recessional outwash is also commonly associated with other
recessional deposits such as ice-contact deposits (Qvri) and ablation till deposits (Qvat). Ice
contact deposits, consisting of medium dense to very dense, silty, sandy gravel, were
encountered in several soil borings on the site just above the bedrock surface. In general,
recessional outwash deposits are relatively thin and discontinuous on the subject property.
4.2 Subsurface Conditions
The subsurface conditions at the subject site are difficult to.describe in general terms because of
the high degree of variability in both the bedrock surface and the overlying sediments in the
vertical and lateral directions. Based on the data from soil borings and test pits, we have
developed Generalized Subsurface Profiles A-A', B-B', and C-C' for three lines extending
across the Headquarters/Practice Facility site. The locations of the three profiles are shown in
the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The subsurface profiles are presented in Figures 5, 6,
21-1-20525-001-R 1 rev\ .doc:wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
12
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
and 7. These Generalized Subsurface Profiles illustrate the large range of soil layers and bedrock
elevations that underlie the proposed building and practice field sites.
In general, the north side of the Baxter site (the proposed Headquarters and Indoor Practice
building), is underlain by a surface crust of man-made fills followed by very soft to stiff, fine-
grained, depression fill sediments (silt, clay and organic peat) and loose to medium dense,
coarse-grained, alluvial sediments (sands and gravels) to depths ranging from 17 feet to 58 feet.
Weathered andesite bedrock underlies these sediments. The subsurface conditions below the
northeast corner of the building site are significantly different than the conditions below the rest
of the building footprint in that the northeast corner contains a 55-foot-thick deposit of stiff to
very stiff silt and clay (Qvgl) overlying the bedrock, as shown in the log of boring HQ-I,
Figure A-2.
The proposed outdoor practice fields, to the south of the Headquarters building site, are underlain
by a surficial layer of fill placed over soft to stiff and loose to very dense sediments encountered
to depths greater than 80 feet. The fill layer is highly variable in both consistency and
composition. Bedrock below the South Baxter area was encountered in one boring (SWB-2) at a
depth of98 feet and is expected to be much deeper farther to the south. No other borings on the
South Baxter area encountered bedrock within the depths drilled.
5.0 ENGINEERING CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 General
For geotechnical design purposes, we recommend that the bedrock be considered the most
consistent and reliable geologic material at the site because it was encountered in all of our
borings at the proposed building location, and it provides a relatively competent bearing layer for
foundation support. The elevation of the bedrock surface is highly variable across the proposed
building footprint due to its tectonic origin. We observed significant changes in bedrock
elevation over relatively short distances in both the soil borings and the geophysical survey. We
have prepared a Top of Bedrock Elevation Contour Map -Figure 4, to assist the Owner and
design team in design and estimating. Please note that local anomalies in the elevation of the
bedrock surface are likely. The estimated elevations shown in Figure 4 should be confirmed in
the field during construction. We recommend that a representative of our firm be present during
shaft drilling to determine if sufficient bedrock embedment has been achieved.
21-1-20525-001-R lrev 1.dodwp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
13
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
Based on our current understanding of the proposed project and on the results of our
geotechnical studies, we have developed geotechnical recommendations for design and
construction of the proposed Headquarters Building and Practice Facility. The following
sections provide recommendations for seismic design considerations, foundation design and
other pertinent geotechnical design and construction issues.
5.2 Earthquake Engineering and Geologic Hazards
5.2.1 Design Ground Motions
We understand that the seismic design of the facilities will be in accordance with the
International Build Code (!BC) 2003. Computation of forces used for seismic design for this
code is based on seismological input and site soil response factors.
The seismological inputs are short period spectral acceleration, Ss, and spectral
acceleration at the I second period, S 1, shown in Figure 1615 in the code. Ss and S I are for a
maximum considered earthquake, which correspond to ground motions with a 2 percent
probability of exceedance in 50 years or about a 2,500-year return period (with a deterministic
maximum cap in some regions). The mapped Ss and S 1 values in the vicinity of the project are
1.42g and 0.48g, respectively.
The liquefaction hazard calculations, discussed in the following section of this report,
indicate that some of the site soils are potentially liquefiable. Subsurface conditions with
potentially liquefiable soils correspond to site class Sf. For SF sites, the code requires a site-
specific ground response evaluation for structures with periods greater than 0.5 second. For
structures with periods less than 0.5 second, the code allows for seismic design based on a site
class determined without regard to liquefaction. Based on the subsurface explorations at the site
and without regard to liquefaction, it is our opinion that the site is best classified as S0 .
Therefore, Site Class So may be assumed for preliminary seismic design of structures with
periods less than 0.5 second. The Fa value corresponding Site Class S0 and Ss of 1.42g is 1.0.
The Fv value corresponding to Site Class So and S I of 0.48g is 1.52.
The Site Class should be reviewed and revised if appropriate. A site-specific response
analysis may be appropriate if the structural period of the building is greater than 0.5 second.
The effects of liquefaction on site stability and foundation capacity and settlement have been
considered and are presented in the following sections of this report.
21-1-20525-001-R l rev] dociwp/LKD 2 l-1-20525-00 I
14
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
5.2.2 Earthquake-induced Geologic Hazards
Earthquake-induced geologic hazards include landsliding, fault rupture, settlement, and
liquefaction and its associated effects (loss of shear strength, bearing capacity failure, loss of
lateral support, ground oscillation, slumping, and lateral spreading). The principal hazards at the
subject site include liquefaction and its associated affects and to a lesser extent, fault rupture.
The following provides a brief discussion of these hazards.
5.2.2.1 Ground Surface Fault Rupture
The project site is located in the southern portion of the ground surface
rupture/deformation zone associated with the east-west-trending Seattle Fault. While there are
various proposed structural models of the Seattle Fault Zone, they are generally consistent in that
the Seattle Fault is characterized as a south-dipping reverse fault. Based on analyses of marine
seismic and aeromagnetic geophysical measurement by the U.S. Geological Survey (Blakely,
et al., 2002; Johnson, et al., 1999), the Seattle Fault Zone is mapped as an approximately 4-to
8-kilometer-wide zone (north-south) with at least four east-west-trending fault splays in the near
surface. Based on Blakely et al. (2002) the project site is adjacent (north) to the southernmost
splay (see Figure 3).
The locations of individual splays near the site have not been mapped from
nearby topographic features but rather from general interpolations/extrapolations between
geophysical features and anomalies. As such, there is significant uncertainty in the locations of
splays near the site. Furthennore, while faults and fault splays are often shown as a single line
on a map, surface fault rupture may occur anywhere in a zone near a mapped fault.
Consequently, based on the distance of the project site from the mapped fault splays, the
potential for surface fault rupture within the area of the project site may be considered moderate,
. . . m our opm1on.
5.2.2.2 Liquefaction
The proposed building site is located on Holocene deposits that include relatively
loose sands, which are potentially liquefiable under the design ground motions. The effects of
liquefaction may include loss of bearing capacity for shallow foundations, reduction in lateral
and vertical capacities of deep foundations, ground surface settlements, lateral spreading and
embankment instability, or slumping. Specifically, using the semi-empirical procedures by
Tokimatsu and Seed (1987), data from some boring logs indicate liquefaction-induced ground
21-1-20525-00 I ~R l rev! .doc/wp.'LKD 21-1-20525-001
15
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
surface settlements may be up to 1 'I, feet; however, settlements on the order of 3 to 4 inches are
more typical.
Lateral spreading and local instability along the shoreline should be expected.
Using the empirical relationships by Youd, et al., (2002) ground surface lateral spreading is
estimated to be about 2 to 8 feet along the west side of the proposed structure and decrease to
generally 1 inch or less beneath the center. Lateral spreading is not expected to occur under the
eastern half of the building footprint.
Two frequently employed approaches to mitigate liquefaction include improving
the subsurface soils to eliminate the potential for liquefaction or using deep foundations to resist
displacements and induced lateral loads. Ground improvement at the project site would likely
involve installation of deep stone columns. These could be designed to replace some portion of
the loose, liquefaction-prone soils; however, they would not provide a reliable foundation upon
which to support the building because of the presence of highly compressible peat and clay
layers that would not be improved by the stone column process. In our opinion, much of the
effects ofliquefaction on the proposed structures could be mitigated at this site by the use of
deep foundations (e.g., drilled shafts) bearing in rock below the potentially liquefiablc Holocene
soils. Surface settlements and lateral displacement caused by liquefaction could cause damage to
structures and buried utilities that are not supported on deep foundations. Recommendations for
deep foundation vertical and lateral capacities that include the effects ofliquefaction and lateral
spreading are provided in subsequent sections of this report.
5.3 Geotechnical Design
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the explorations, we do not recommend use
of spread footing foundations bearing on unimproved ground or preloaded unimproved ground
because of the presence of soft, compressible peat and clay/silt layers and the difficulty
associated with effectively preloading these soil layers. We recommend that the proposed
Headquarters and Indoor Practice structure be supported on deep foundations. Alternate
foundation support schemes are also presented. Deep foundations should be installed to bear in
the andesite bedrock that underlies the site at varying depths. Estimated bedrock elevations
across the project site are presented in Figure 4.
We have considered the following deep foundation alternatives for use on this site:
21-1-20525-00 !-RI revl .doc.'wp 1LKD 21-1-20525-001
16
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
• Driven steel pipe or beam sections
• Micropiles
• Augercast Piles
• Drilled Shafts
The presence of bedrock can range from highly weathered to unweathered; thus, driven steel
pipe piles would be susceptible to damage during driving, in our opinion. Also, steel pipe piles
would probably not achieve 'adequate penetration into the bedrock to develop lateral moment
resistance or fixity, and could be deflected off alignment by the bedrock surface. Steel
H-sections, equipped with a hardened driving tip also to penetrate the bedrock, would be more
successful in achieving required embedment but also have limited moment resistance (stiffness)
and would be relatively expensive for the vertical capacity developed. Similarly, micropiles
could be installed to adequate penetration into the bedrock but also have limited moment
resistance. It is likely that groups of steel piles or micropiles would be needed under each
building column to develop adequate vertical and lateral capacity. Micropiles also tend to be
more costly than drilled shafts or piles. Augercast piles at this site are not recommended because
they are not likely to achieve sufficient penetration into the bedrock bearing layer.
In our opinion, drilled shaft foundation construction methods will be capable of achieving
penetration into the bedrock bearing layer and developing adequate vertical and lateral resistance
capacity, including lateral spreading after a strong ground motion earthquake. Thus, we
recommend that drilled shafts be used to support the proposed buildings. Traditional methods of
shaft drilling under wet soil conditions, such as advancing a casing to maintain an open hole and
cut off groundwater flow, use of an appropriate slurry, and drilling with both soil and bedrock
cutting tools, will be required.
Alternate foundation support schemes other than deep foundations that may be considered at this
site could be one or a combination of the following: stone columns, earthquake drains, soil
cement mix columns, surcharge with fill, or improving near-surface soils with cement and
reinforcement with geogrids supported on reinforced subsoils. There are two critical design
issues to consider at this site: liquefaction potential and lateral spreading. As mentioned in
Section 5.2.2.2, stone columns replace by densifying, thus, stiffening liquefaction-prone granular
soils, which would be one method to mitigate liquefaction. Alone, however, they would not
provide the necessary capacity to support 500-to 1,000-kip vertical axial loads in the peat and
soft clay soils. These soils do not produce sufficient lateral confinement at depth to support the
stone columns and prevent column bulging and necking. Under these conditions, cement would
likely need to be added to the stone to increase stiffness. Alternatively, soil mixing cement
2 !-l-20525-001-R 1 rev l .doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
17
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
columns installed with single or multiple hollow-stem augers could be considered. A soil-
cement replacement volume of 25 to 40 percent would be required to support vertical column
loads. A combination of soil-cement mix columns, stone columns, and earthquake drains
(vertical geotextile strips) between soil-cement elements may be another alternative. To mitigate
lateral spreading into the lake, a reinforced soil block column of soil cement elements 20 to
30 feet wide, extending into dense, non-liquefiable soils, would be needed.
Ground improvement techniques described above are proprietary systems designed and built by
experienced geotechnical specialty contractors. They would propose, design, and develop cost
estimates in coordination with Shannon & Wilson and the design team and owner. We can
provide additional review of this alternative at the Owner's request.
5.3.1 Drilled Shaft Foundation Design
Based on the estimated column loads provided by the project structural engineer, we have
considered 24-inch, 30-inch, and 36-inch-diameter shafts as potential drilled shaft sizes. Single
interior and exterior column loads are expected to be about 400 to 1,000 kips, respectively. We
assume the shafts may be designed to resist lateral loads of 40 kips or Jess. The following
sections present recommended penetration depths for various axial capacities, lateral resistance
estimates, and estimated settlements for drilled shafts. Construction considerations for drilled
shafts are provided in Section 7 .0.
5.3.1.] Axial Capacities
With the exception of the northeast comer of the building, settlements of the peat
and alluvium layers due to site grading (filling) and seismic ground motion could result in
downdrag loading conditions on drilled foundation shafts. Vertical building and downdrag loads
will be resisted by end bearing at the tip of the shaft and by side friction. The estimated
downdrag values and allowable vertical capacity versus depth of embedment into the bedrock
bearing layer are graphically presented on the shaft capacity plot titled, "Estimated Axial
Capacity of2-ft Diameter Shaft" (Figure 8) and in Figure 9 for 2.5-foot-diameter shafts. Note
that these figures are based on subsurface conditions below the southwest and northeast comers
of the proposed building. The conditions represented by boring HQ-1 can be assumed to be
present under the portion of the building extending 100 feet south and 100 feet west from the
northeast comer. The soils at the location of boring HQ-3 are generally representative ofworst-
case soil conditions at the building site. The required embedment into bedrock for various
21-1-20525-001-R 1 rev! .doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
18
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
diameter shafts can be determined using an allowable tip bearing pressure of 50 kips per square
foot (ksf) and an allowable skin friction of 3 ksf in bedrock. These values are based on the
assumption that approximately Y,-inch of shaft settlement will occur, which will result in about
50 percent of the ultimate end bearing capacity to develop. We have included a factor-of-safety
of approximately 2.0 on the skin friction value given above. Additionally, note that the stiff to
very stiff silt present below the northeast corner is capable of providing 0.5 ksf skin friction
resistance. Downdrag loads due to soft/loose soil consolidation will be accommodated by the
factor-of-safety used in the shaft design values presented above.
The required embedment depth into bedrock may be controlled by the need for
fixity against lateral forces. Additional analysis by the structural engineer will be needed to
ascertain the required shaft embedrnent depths.
Our analyses were performed for a single shaft without a reduction of axial
capacity due to group effects. If more than one shaft is to be used under building columns, we
recommend that the shafts be placed no closer than three shaft diameters, measured center-to-
center. At this spacing, a group reduction factor is not warranted when estimating group axial
capacity.
5.3.1.2 Lateral Resistance of Deep Foundations
Lateral resistance analyses were performed for a 30-and 36-inch-diameter shaft
to assist the structural engineer in design of the foundation system. Our analyses oflateral forces
acting on the pile/shaft heads were performed using the commercial computer program
LPILEPLUS 4.0 by Reese, et al. (2002). This software generates discrete load-deflection (p-y)
curves to estimate deflection of the pile/shaft and distribution of moments and shears along the
length of the pile/shaft. A summary of the various soil layer properties used in our analyses is
presented in Table 2.
Analyses were performed using a single soil profile (HQ-3) for the project site.
We assumed that soils at the southwest comer of the building site will be representative ofworst-
ease conditions. The shafts at the structure were assumed to have a top elevation of about
22 feet. We assumed the following design parameters for the shaft lateral resistance analysis:
21-1-20525-001-R l rev] .doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
19
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
• Modulus of elasticity of reinforcing steel= 29,000 kips per square inch [ksi]
.. Modulus of elasticity of concrete = 4,000 ksi
.. Axial load = 525 kips for exterior columns
.. Lateral force at the top of shaft is 50 kips for 3 6-inch shafts, 40 kips for 30-inch
shafts
.. Two-Y.-inch concrete cover over reinforcing steel
>-Fixed-head conditions for drilled shafts
The lateral load was applied as a static load. Shaft performance was analyzed
using a constant EI (Modulus of Elasticity and Moment of Inertia) for "Uncracked" concrete
conditions. The results of our LP ILE analyses are presented graphically in Figures IO and 11,
Sheets 1 and 2. Note that Figures IO and 11 present four different possible loading conditions:
.. Lateral load only without liquefaction
• Lateral load with liquefaction
• Liquefaction with subsurface horizontal forces due to lateral spreading
• Lateral load with both liquefaction conditions and lateral spreading conditions
We recommend that the structural engineer determine which of these loading
scenarios is prudent for design. Additionally, earth pressure and moment forces due to lateral
spreading are only expected to affect the drilled shafts on the western half(approximate) of the
proposed building. Drilled shafts located near boring SWB-IA (see Figure 2) and to the east are
not expected to experience liquefaction-induced lateral spreading forces.
5.3.2 Lateral Earth Pressures on Buried Structures
The lateral pressures against a buried wall are dependent upon many factors, including
surcharge loads, the type of adjacent native soil, drainage provisions, and whether or not the wall
can yield or deflect laterally or rotate at the top during and after excavation. If the wall is free to
yield at the top an amount equal to approximately 0.001 times the height of the wall, the soil
pressures will be less ( active case) than if this amount of movement is not allowed due to
stiffness or resistance of the wall (at-rest condition).
Rigid permanent walls at the site should be designed to resist an "at-rest" lateral earth
pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of 55 pounds per cubic foot (pct). Temporary
cantilevered walls allowed to deflect laterally or rotate at the top should be designed using active
2l-1-20525-001-R l rev l .doc.'wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
20
SHANNON & WILSON. INC.
earth pressures based on the equivalent fluid unit weight of 40 pcf, assuming they are backfilled
with free-draining granular soils with a level ground surface behind the wall.
The total active earth pressure should be increased for seismic loading conditions using a
dynamic load increment equal to a percentage of the total static active and "at-rest" earth forces.
The percentage increases for the active and "at-rest" earth pressure conditions are 35 and
20 percent, respectively. This percent load increment should be applied as a uniform load to the
wall, with the resultant force acting at the midpoint of the wall height. A percentage load
increase for seismic conditions is consistent with a pseudo-static analysis using the Mononobe-
Okabe equation for lateral earth pressures and a horizontal seismic coefficient of 0.16g. The
horizontal seismic coefficient is not necessarily equivalent to the peak ground acceleration at the
site. The magnitude of this coefficient accounts for the fact that the peak ground acceleration is
experienced only a few times within the record of earthquake shaking, and that the actual
earthquake ground motion is cyclic in nature, as opposed to a static force. Values of the
horizontal seismic coefficient are typically one-third to one-half the value ofa peak ground
acceleration of 0.48g that may be experienced at the site. These pressures are based on the
assumption of drained conditions behind the wall and a horizontal backfill surface.
It may be found that this increase in the lateral earth pressures during earthquake loading
can be accommodated by the 33 percent capacity increase that is allowed in the strength of
structural members by the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Therefore, walls that are adequately
designed for static loads may be capable of withstanding the combined effects of static and
earthquake loading during the design earthquake.
5.3.3 Lateral Resistance Against Pile Caps and Grade Beams
Lateral forces will be resisted by shaft foundations and by passive earth pressures acting
against buried portions of the structure. Frictional resistance against the base of pile caps and
grade beams should be neglected. The magnitude of passive earth pressure acting against pile
caps and grade beams depends on the method of placement and degree of compaction of backfill,
its lateral extent, the type of material, groundwater elevation, and lateral deflection of the pile
cap or grade beam.
We recommend that passive earth pressure resistance in backfill be estimated using an
equivalent fluid pressure (EFP) of350 pcf, assuming that the structure is above the groundwater
table. This EFP value includes a factor of safety of 1.5 to limit deflection and is based on the
following assumptions:
21-l -20525-001-R 1 rev 1.doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
21
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
• The pile cap or grade beam extends at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
• The backfill providing passive resistance is structural fill consisting ofreasonably
well-graded sand, sand and gravel, or crushed rock, free of organics and debris, with a
maximum particle size of about 3 inches. It should contain not more than 15 percent
fines by weight, based on wet-sieving the soil fraction passing the 34-inch sieve. Fines
should be nonplastic.
• Structural fill and backfill are compacted to at least 95 percent of the Modified Proctor
maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557, Method C or D). The compacted structural
backfill should extend horizontally in the direction of movement a distance equal to at
least I Y, times the embedment depth.
• The grade beyond the pile cap or grade beam is horizontal in the direction of movement
to a distance equal to at least 2 times the embedment depth.
5.3.4 Floor Slab and Pavement Design
Because of the likelihood of future settlements below the building, floor slabs for the
proposed structure should be structurally supported with loads transferred into the drilled shaft
foundations. The condition of the subgrade beneath a structurally-supported floor slab is not as
critical as for a slab-on-grade, sports field section, or pavement. Thus, for the building floor slab
we recommend that the surface soils be stripped of organics, grass sod, trees, and brush and then
filled to slab elevation with a free-draining sand and gravel fill (pit-run). This sand and gravel
layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density.
The soils across the site consist of variable thicknesses of granular fill or organically rich
topsoils underlain by loose or soft fill and native soils. Site grading will require both cuts and
fills. We anticipate that the subgrade soils beneath the driveways, parking lots, and practice field
areas will consist of both competent soils and non-competent soils. A field determination
regarding suitability of the subgrade will have to be made during clearing and grading
operations.
We recommend that all surface organics, grass sod, trees, brush, and deposits of wood
chips be removed from areas that will receive fill and all areas where driveways and practice
fields will be located. The South Baxter area contains zones of soils that were treated to mitigate
hazardous materials (ISS zones), areas where contaminated soils were removed and replaced,
and other areas that contain both suitable fill and unsuitable fill. ISS zones, gravel backfill
zones, and suitable fill zones will provide adequate support for the proposed practice field
sections without any stripping required. Overexcavation and replacement of deeper organic
2 l-l-2052S-OOJ-Rl rev l .doc:wp/LK D 21-1-20525-001
22
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
deposits will be required in localized areas, especially at the proposed artificial turf field where
over 3 feet of decomposing wood chips was detected (see TP-13, Figure A-20).
Because of the relatively high water table at the site and the tendency for water to perch
above some of the surficial fill layers, we recommend that a 6-inch capillary break layer be
included under all practice fields, both indoor and outdoor, and under the office building floor
slab. It is especially important to include a capillary break section beneath the outdoor practice
fields within the South Baxter area because of the potential for capillary rise of high pH water
from the existing soils. The capillary break should consist of a minimum 6-inch-thick layer of
washed, rounded, or angular gravel. The gravel should be uniformly graded, i.e., predominantly
of one size, and have a maximum size of 3/. inch and less than 3 percent fines passing the
No. 200 sieve. The gravel should be compacted to a dense and unyielding condition with at least
two passes of a vibrating plate compactor or smooth-drum roller. Angular gravel can provide a
firmer working surface than rounded gravel. Prior to placing the gravel, the exposed sub grade
surface should be compacted as needed to achieve a dense, unyielding condition and should be
evaluated by a representative of our firm to confim1 that it is suitable for support or the overlying
field sections, or floor slab. A moisture vapor barrier consisting of 6-mil plastic sheeting should
be placed above the capillary break in all heated spaces such as the office building main floor.
In general, after stripping sod and organic topsoils from the proposed pavement areas,
loose to dense, silty sand wi-11 be exposed at the pavement subgrade elevation. Elsewhere, the
pavement sub grade will be compacted structural fill imported from off site or other portions of
the site We recommend that pavement subgrade soils be systematically proof-rolled and
compacted after excavation to sub grade elevation in order to identify areas of soft, wet, organic,
or unstable soils. Proof-rolling should be accomplished with a heavy vibratory roller, front-end-
loader, or loaded dump truck ( or equivalent) making systematic passes over the site while being
observed by a representative of the geotechnical engineer. In areas where unstable and/or
unsuitable sub grade soils are observed to be present, these soils should be overexcavated to
approximately 12 inches below final subgrade elevation and replaced with densely compacted,
clean, structural fill. If a significant thickness of very soft, unstable sub grade soil is exposed, it
may be necessary to install a subgrade reinforcement geogrid prior to placing structural fill.
Exterior concrete slabs and asphalt/concrete pavements constructed over proof-rolled and
compacted subgrades, as specified above, could be designed for a California Bearing Ratio
(CBR) of 10. They should also be designed for frost protection consisting of at least 12 inches of
pavement, base course, and/or granular subbase between the subgrade soils and the top of the
21-1"20525-001-R 1 revl .doc'wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
23
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
pavement. The base course and granular subbase should be non-frost-susceptible and contain not
more than 7 percent fines (material finer than a No. 200 U.S. standard sieve). Crushed rock
materials with less than IO percent non-plastic fines are also regarded as non-frost-susceptible.
Subbase fills should meet the gradation requirements ofWSDOT Standard Specification
9-03 .14(1 ), Gravel Borrow. Sub base should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
dry density, as determined by the modified Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 1557). Base
course under pavements should consist of clean, pit-run sand and gravel; well-graded crushed
rock; or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to the WSDOT specifications for
Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9 (3). The base course layer should be compacted to at
least 98 percent of the maximum dry density, as detennined by the modified Proctor compaction
test (ASTM D 1557).
A typical standard-duty (lightweight) pavement section that we have used on similar
projects consists of 2.5 inches of Grade B asphalt concrete surfacing, 4 inches of base course and
4 inches of sub base. A heavy-duty pavement section consists of 4.5 inches of Grade B asphalt
concrete surfacing, 6 inches of base course and 4 inches of subbase. Sidewalks could consist of
4 inches of Portland cement concrete over 4 inches of base course. A concrete pavement section
could consist of 6-inches of reinforced concrete over 4 inches of base course. We recommend
that these typical sections be used for pavements on this project.
5.3.5 Grading and Estimated Settlements
Exterior pavements and the practice fields will be constructed with new fills placed above
existing fill soils to raise the grades. The grading plans that we reviewed indicate that the grades
of the practice fields and the west side of the proposed building will generally be raised by I to 4
feet with isolated depressions, such as the ditch near the proposed entry driveway, to receive up
to about 7 feet of fill. This amount of fill could result in 2 to 4 inches of settlement at the
practice fields due to consolidation of the underlying layers of soft peat, clay, and silt. We expect
that approximately 70 to 80 percent of the ultimate settlements would occur over a period of6 to
8 months after the new structural fill is placed. An option to accelerate the consolidation process
and decrease the potential for differential settlement would include preloading the filled areas
and allowing the preload to settle for a period of up to 6 months (possibly longer if settlement
monitoring data indicates ongoing primary consolidation of a significant rate). The preload fill
thickness, if used, should be approximately 150 percent of the fill thickness needed to achieve
design grades. Settlement of the preload would be monitored using settlement plates installed on
a grid pattern with I 00-foot, center-to-center spacing. The time required to achieve adequate
21-1-20525-00 l-R 1 rev l .dociwp, LKD 21-1-20525-001
24
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
preloading will vary from one area of the site to another depending on the thickness of new fill
being placed and the thickness of compressible soil layers beneath the site.
The proposed grading at the BNSF railroad crossing is not expected to cause significant
settlement of the railroad embankment. We understand, based on discussions with the design
team, that the preload option is relatively costly and time-consuming. Therefore, we have
developed recommendations for an alternate method to reduce settlement impacts.
5.3.6 Alternative Settlement Mitigation
An alternative to preloading the practice fields to mitigate some differential settlement
would be to amend the on-site or imported fill soils with cement. We recommend at least two
12-inch-thick soil-cement layers with a geogrid between each layer. There should be at least 24
inches of amended soil beneath critical piping such as "collectors,'' likely requiring total
thicknesses in excess of24 inches at lower outfall invert elevations. Refer to Section 5.4.1 for
geogrid reinforcement recommendations.
We estimate practice field settlements of 2 to 4 inches with placing 3 to 4 feet of fill to
raise field elevations. By improving subgrade soils with soil cement and geogrid reinforcement,
settlements would be reduced by 25 to 35 percent, or to a total of 1.5 to 2.5 inches.
Approximately 70 to 80 percent of this settlement would occur over a period of 4 to 6 months,
with the remainder occurring over a period of 3 to 6 years at an ever-decreasing rate. We expect
this magnitude of settlement could be tolerated by field maintenance personnel and the field
raised or re-leveled periodically, say every 2 to 5 years. Field subdrain systems would also be
subject to a similar magnitude of settlement and may require replacement or maintenance over
the life of the system.
Where proposed field elevations allow, soils at existing grade would be amended (mixed
and treated) with cement; otherwise, fill could be placed, and cement could be spread, mixed,
and compacted. (Alternatively, imported fill could be mixed on site with a pug-mill and spread
with dump trucks or other equipment.) The soil-cement process would be as follows:
~ Add or spread 4 to 6 percent cement (based on a dry weight of soil) per cubic yard to the
exposed, stripped surface. This corresponds to approximately 5 to 8 pounds of cement
per cubic yard.
~ Thoroughly mix the cement and soil to a depth of 10 to 12 inches.
2 l-1-20525-001-R! rev I .doc.'wpiLKD 21-1-20525-001
25
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
• Compact the treated soil with at least three complete coverages of a vibratory drum roller
(minimum 10 -ton static weight).
• Place geogrid reinforcement in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations.
• Place 12-to 14-inch lift of stockpiled on-site material or imported fill across the treated
area and repeat the first three steps.
Cement spreading equipment must be capable of spreading a known quantity (weight) of
cement at a uniform thickness in order to process the required cement quantities. Equipment to
be used must thoroughly mix the cement with the soil. A minimum soil/cement mixture depth of
I 2 inches is required.
The advantages of soil-cement treatment are that work can proceed in wet weather, less
compactive effort is required, on-site soil with high percentages of fines can be used, and the
subgrade will be stiffer and stronger than compacted structural fill. Non-hazardous,
contaminated, on-site soil can be amended with cement and recompacted. Grass sod, wood
chips, trees, and brush should be stripped and grubbed from the site prior to spreading cement or
placing cement-mixed soil.
5.3. 7 Drainage
To promote surface water drainage, provisions should be made to direct it away from
structures and prevent it from seeping into the ground adjacent to the structures or excavations.
The ground surface should be sloped away, and surface and downspout water should not be
introduced into site backfill. Surface water should be collected in catch basins and, along with
downspout water, should be conveyed in a nonperforated pipe (tightline) into an approved water
treatment facility or discharge point. Catch basins or other drainage facilities should be located
as designed by the project civil engineer.
We recommend that a perimeter foundation drain be installed along the perimeter grade
beams along the outside of the building. The footing drain should consist· of a 4-inch
(minimum)-diameter perforated pipe bedded in clean, washed pea gravel. It should be located at
least 18 inches lower than the finished floor elevation. Cleanouts should be provided at
convenient locations along all drain lines, such as at the building comers.
Other drainage that will be needed for the project will include subsurface drains under the
practice fields to be designed by the sports field design consultant.
21-1-20525-001-R 1 re~· 1.doc:iwp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
26
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
5.4 Earthwork Recommendations
5.4.1 Site Preparation and General Excavation
Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings and test pits, we anticipate
that the excavation can be accomplished using conventional excavating equipment; however,
potentially soft, unstable sub grade soils may require implementation of special measures in order
to stabilize the existing fill materials to facilitate site access for heavy construction equipment.
Grass sod, wood chips, brush, and trees should be stripped and grubbed from the site. As
discussed earlier, there are existing access roads that traverse the site. These access roads may or
may not be located where heavy construction equipment needs to go. The majority of soils
outside the existing access roads at the site have high silt, organic, and/or clay content; are loose
or soft; and are sensitive to vehicle traffic and moisture changes. The soils will deteriorate
quickly when exposed to water. Excavation of soil and movement of construction excavating
equipment will require careful planning. Because of the unstable characteristics of the existing
subsurface materials, we recommend that a working surface be created as soon as practical to
facilitate access onto the site for earth-moving equipment, drill rigs, cranes, and other
construction vehicles. The working surface should consist of a layer of coarse aggregate (spalls)
supported on geogrid, which is placed directly over the existing fill. The design of the
aggregate-geogrid subgrade stabilization system depends on the size of the equipment being
used, the axle loads, the number of passes, and the strength of the sub grade.
For planning purposes only, we expect that new access roads will require a geogrid and at
least 12 inches of granular fill. Granular fill could consist of ballast (Washington State
Department of Transportation [WSDOT] Specification 9-03.9[1]) or gravel borrow (WSDOT
Specification 9-03 .14[ I]). Geo grid materials for sub grade improvement should be of an
integrally formed grid structure manufactured using a stress-resistant polypropylene material.
The structural geogrid shall possess sufficient true initial modulus to cause applied force to be
transferred to the geogrid at low strain levels without material deformation of the reinforced
construction fill structure. An example of a competent geogrid that meets this criterion is the
BXl200 product manufactured by Tensar Earth Technologies, Inc. We recommend that the
structural geogrid have the following minimum characteristics:
2 !-1-20525-001-R 1 rev! .doc;wpiLKD 21-1-20525-001
27
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
Load Capacity' Units MD Values XMD Values
True Initial Modulus in Use lb/ft 17,000 27,000
True Tensile Strength@ 2% Strain lb/ft 250 450
True Tensile Strength @5% Strain lb/ft 550 900
Note:
1 True resistance to elongation when initially subjected to a load measured via ASTM D 6637 without deforming
test materials under load before measuring such resistance or employing "secant" or "offset" tangent methods of
measurement so as to overstate tensile properties.
Aperture Dimensions
Junction Efficiericy
Rib Shape
Rib Thickness
5.4.2 Temporary Excavation Slopes
0.9 to 1.5 inches
90 percent
Square or Rectangular
0.03 inch
Unshored, temporary excavation slopes for site grading and utility trenching may be used
where planned excavation limits will not undern1ine existing structures or extend beyond
construction limits. The sides of the excavation should be sloped back as needed to provide a
safe stable slope. Consistent with conventional construction practice, temporary excavation
slopes should be made the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor is continually at the
site; is able to observe the nature and conditions of the subsurface materials encountered,
including groundwater; and has responsibility for the methods, sequence, and schedule of
construction.
For planning purposes, we recommend that temporary, unsupported, open-cut slopes in
surficial materials be no steeper than 1.5 Horizontal to I Vertical (I .SH: 1 V) in the loose to
medium dense fill material at the site. This recommendation is applicable to slopes less than
IO feet in height and in areas where groundwater and/or groundwater seepage is not present.
Flatter slopes may be required based on the actual conditions encountered, particularly where
groundwater seepage zones are encountered during periods of wet weather. We recommend that
all exposed slopes be protected with waterproof covering during periods of wet weather to
reduce sloughing and erosion.
All traffic and/or construction equipment loads should be set back from the edge of the
cut slopes by a minimum of 2 feet. Excavated material ( or stockpiles of construction materials
or equipment) should not be placed closer to the edge of any excavation than the depth of the
excavation.
21-1-20525-001-RJ revl .doc.\1:p!LKD 21-1-20525-001
28
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
Temporary shoring may be required for the excavation to protect existing utilities and
structures and/or to provide a work environment that compiles with applicable safety regulations.
If instability is detected, slopes should be flattened or shored. Regardless of the construction
method used, all excavation work should be accomplished in compliance with applicable local,
state, and federal safety codes.
5.4.3 Temporary Groundwater Control
Groundwater was encountered in the borings a few feet below the ground surface, and
locally, standing water is present above the site fills during the wet weather season. If the
earthwork occurs during the wet season, perched groundwater or standing surface water could be
encountered. In our opinion, perched groundwater that may seep into the excavation and
rainwater that falls into the excavation could be controlled by means of sumps and pumps
coupled with ditches installed in the bottom of the excavation. This should be made the
Contractor's responsibility, because he will be at the site on a full-time basis and will be able to
evaluate dewatering needs daily. At a minimum, the Contractor should be required to furnish at
least two sump pumps to maintain dry excavations if work is to be performed during the wet
weather season.
Artesian groundwater conditions are also present above the bedrock at this site. Drilled
shafts that extend into the bedrock layer will likely encounter groundwater that flows to the
ground surface. The Contractor should be prepared to employ means and methods necessary to
control the flow of artesian water. Such methods could include the use of drilling fluids and
casing to seal the drilled hole prior to placing concrete. Ditches and sump pumps may be
necessary to direct water away from the work area.
5.4.4 Fill Material, Placement, and Compaction
All fill material placed beneath structures, such as non-structural floor slabs, pavements,
sidewalks, and around pile caps and grade beams or other areas where settlements are to be
reduced, should consist of structural fill. We anticipate that, after clearing and stripping the
surface organic layer, most of the excavated on-site soils would not be suitable for reuse as
structural fill without amendment because they contain significant amounts of silt. Site soils of
marginal quality, e.g., silty sands, may be placed beneath the soil-cement-treated section of the
outdoor practice fields, provided the soils are not excessively moist and can be rolled-compacted
to a medium dense or better condition. Imported structural fill should consist of a reasonably
well-graded mixture of sand and gravel that is free of organics, debris, rubbish, and other
21-1-20525-001-R J revl .doc/wp.'LKD 21 -1 -20525-001
29
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
deleterious material. Structural fill material should contain not more than 15 percent fines
(material passing the No. 200 mesh sieve, based on the minus Y.-inch fraction); the fines should
be non-plastic; and the moisture content of the soil within plus or minus 2 percent of its optimum
at the time of compaction. All structural fill material should have a maximum particle size of
3 inches. If desired, crushed recycled concrete may be used as structural fill at this site provided
it is properly crushed and screened to meet the gradation requirements of structural fill and the
requirements of Section 9-03.11 ofWSDOT specifications.
If earthwork takes place in wet weather or wet conditions, no matter what time of the
year, the structural fill material should contain no more than 5 percent fines (see Section 7.4).
Fines should be non-plastic. Except for the 5 percent fines content limit, this soil should
otherwise conform to the quality and gradation characteristics of Gravel Borrow as defined in
Section 9-03.14(1) (Gravel Borrow) of the current WSDOT technical specifications.
Prior to the placement of structural fill, any ponding water should be drained from the
area. A geotechnical engineer or the engineer's representative should observe the sub grade to
evaluate ifit is suitable for placing structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform lifts
and compacted to a dense and unyielding condition, and to at least 95 percent of the Modified
Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557). The thickness of soil layers before compaction
should not exceed 10 inches for heavy equipment compactors or 6 inches for hand-operated
mechanical compactors.
6.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Drilled Shafts
6.1.1 General
Construction of a drilled shaft requires boring a hole of a specified diameter and depth
and then backfilling the hole with reinforced concrete. The selection of equipment and
procedures for constructing drilled shafts is a function of the shaft dimensions, the subsoil
conditions, and the groundwater characteristics. Consequently, the design and performance of
drilled shafts can be significantly influenced by the equipment and procedures used for
construction and also by the method of placement and properties of the concrete. Construction
procedures and methods are of paramount importance to the success of the drilled shaft
installation at this project site.
2 J-1-20525-001-R 1 revl .doc-'wp 1LKD 21-1-20525-001
30
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
Drilled shaft contractors who participate on this project should be required to demonstrate
that they have suitable equipment and adequate experience in the construction of drilled shafts
using the general methods recommended for this project.
6.1.2 Methods of Construction
In general, there are three typical methods of constructing drilled shafts: the dry method,
the casing method, and the wet method.
6.1.2.1 Dry Method
In the dry method of construction, the excavation is nonnally carried to its full
depth without casing or slurry through dry clay or dry, dense sand where groundwater is not
encountered. Following cleanout and inspection, concrete is placed through a drop chute (tremie
pipe) to reduce segregation. Dry soil conditions and dry methods of shaft construction are not
anticipated at this site except for drilled shafts located within the northeast corner of the
proposed building where stiff to very stiff clay/silt is present above the bedrock.
6.1.2.2 Casing Method
The casing method is applicable where seepage and/or caving soil conditions are
encountered and a casing can be pushed, vibrated, or driven into an impenneable ( or low
hydraulic conductivity), finn stratum below the seepage zone or caving soil. In our opinion, the
casing method will be required to complete drilled shafts at the subject site. The hole is
generally drilled as in the dry method until caving, squeezing soil, or excessive seepage is
encountered. Water and polymers are placed in the hole and mixed with wet soil to develop
slurry, and/or pre-mixed slurry is added to the hole. Drilling would then continue until a low
hydraulic conductivity layer is encountered. At this site, we expect that the bedrock will be the
low hydraulic conductivity layer. A water-bearing layer directly above the bedrock is known to
have artesian water pressure conditions.
The top of the slurry must be maintained above the groundwater level. Casing is
then placed into the shaft and driven, vibrated, or pushed into an impermeable layer to form a
seal. The slurry is then bailed out with a cleanout or mud bucket and drilling proceeds in the dry.
The impermeable firm stratum must have sufficient thickness to resist hydrostatic pressures
below this zone when the shaft is dewatered. For this method to be effective, the casing must be
clean and smooth.
21-l-20525-001-R I rev I .doc/wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
31
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
At the subject site, we expect caving soil zones will be encountered to the top of
the bedrock. Groundwater seepage through cracks and fissures in the bedrock should be
expected.
Upon completion of the shaft excavation, the hole is cleaned and the reinforcing
steel is installed. For the casing method of construction, the reinforcing steel, typically a rebar
cage, is usually placed to the bottom of the hole because it is difficult to keep a partial-length
cage in position by a hoist line as the casing is withdrawn. The reinforcing steel should therefore
be designed to accommodate both the structural requirements of the completed shaft and the
stability requirements for its placement, concrete placement, and casing withdrawal.
After the reinforcing steel is placed, the hole should be filled with concrete.
Under no circumstances should the casing be withdrawn until the concrete produces a
hydrostatic pressure greater than the groundwater and/or slurry that is sealed on the outside of
the casing. The casing should be pulled slowly and smoothly so that the concrete flows out of
the base of the casing to displace the trapped slurry. All voids or annular spaces that may exist
between the casing and the subsurface materials should be filled with concrete during this
process.
Improper casing extraction could result in an unacceptable drilled shaft. Casing
may tend to adhere to the subsurface soils. Attempts to knock the casing loose take time and
may allow the concrete placed in the shaft to set. The concrete may then separate when the
casing is pulled, resulting in voids in the shaft. Therefore, the casing should be left in place if the
concrete appears to be setting up and extraction becomes difficult. Frictional resistance would
be altered and the load-carrying capacity of the shaft would have to be re-evaluated. If the
casing is left in place during construction, the lateral load capacity of the shaft could be
significantly impacted unless some remediation such as post grouting outside the casing is
performed.
The position of the steel reinforcing cages should be maintained when the casing
is pulled. As the concrete column is placed in the hole with sufficient head to resist hydrostatic
forces from the groundwater and/or slurry, downward forces could be exerted on the steel cage.
The magnitude of this force will depend on the slump of the concrete, the flow velocity, and the
volume of reinforcing steel. These forces should be considered in the design of the rebar cage.
21-1-20525-001-R l rev l .doc/wp:LKD 21-1-20525-001
32
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
The presence of"running" or "caving" fonnations will require close monitoring
of the concrete level during casing extraction. Failure to maintain a positive head of concrete
during casing extraction could result in a contaminated mix or presence of voids in the shaft.
6.1.2.3 Wet Method
The wet method of construction involves the use of slurry to maintain an open
hole during drilling. The subsurface conditions where the wet method of construction is
applicable include any of the conditions described above for the casing method. In instances
where heavy seepage and/or caving conditions are encountered and the hole cannot be sealed, the
wet method of construction may be the only feasible way to stabilize the shaft walls while
drilling is continued. If an impenneable soil zone is not encountered in which to fonn a seal, or
there is potential for bottom heave or blowout, it would be required to complete the excavation in
the wet with slurry.
After the hole is completed to its full depth, the slurry must be processed to meet
specifications prior to concrete placement. If there is too much sediment in suspension, material
can settle to the bottom of the excavation before concrete is placed, resulting in a soft base. The
volume of sediment remaining at the base of the excavation prior to concrete placement would
generally depend on the actual shaft design and the amount of settlement that can be tolerated.
For designs where end bearing is high, a clean, finn bottom is required. The American Concrete
Institute (AC! 336.3R-72) recommends that in no case should the volume ofloose material and
spoil at the base of the shaft exceed that which would be required to cover 5 percent of the base
area to a depth not exceeding 2 inches (50 mm).
In addition to spoil at the base of the shaft, the sediment in suspension could also
settle to the top of the concrete column as the pour is progressing. This material could coat the
rebar and sidewalls of the shaft, reducing the bond strength. Such issues need to be addressed in
the contract specifications and will require careful inspection and quality control during shaft
construction.
6.1.3 Drilled Shaft Testing
As a means of providing quality assurance testing, we recommend that non-destructive
testing, consisting ofCrosshole Sonic Logging (CSL), be used to evaluate the integrity ofat least
21-1-20525-001-R 1 rev! .dociwp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
33
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
10 percent of the drilled shafts. Tubes consisting of 2-inch-diameter steel should be installed in
all the drilled shafts to provide access for the ultrasonic equipment. The access tubes are
typically attached to the rebar cage. If any voids or other defects are detected in the CSL testing,
the test findings should be analyzed to determine if the installed drilled shafts satisfy the design
requirements. CSL testing should be made the Contractor's responsibility.
6.1.4 Monitoring Drilled Shaft Construction
We recommend that an experienced and qualified geotechnical engineer familiar with the
subsurface conditions of the project site monitor the construction of the drilled shafts.
The construction of the drilled shafts by the wet method will prevent downhole visual
inspection. An experienced and qualified geotechnical engineer, familiar with subsurface
conditions at the site and with this project, should visually evaluate soil mucked from the
excavation or retrieved from auger flights and cleanout buckets. These observations should
confim1 that the subsurface conditions assumed for design are actually present, especially the
embedment into bedrock.
In addition to a description of the subsurface conditions encountered, the excavation
methods, steel reinforcing and concrete placement operations should be monitored and
documented. At a minimum, a report should be prepared for each drilled shaft that includes the
criteria recommended in the Drilled Shaft Inspector's manual (Deep Foundation lnstiiute, 1989).
6.2 Obstructions
Cobbles and boulders were not encountered in the explorations; however, this site has had past
industrial uses, and large concrete rubble or wood debris are commonly found in fills. Thus, the
presence of these types of materials should be anticipated at the site. The Contractor should be
prepared to encounter cobbles, boulders, and large debris during nears-surface excavations and
drilled shaft installation.
6.3 Wet Weather Earthwork
Wet weather generally begins about mid-October and continues through about May, although
rainy periods may occur at any time of year. Nearly all of the soil at the site contains sufficient
silt and fines to produce an unstable mixture when wet. Such soil is susceptible to changes in
water content, and tends to become unstable and difficult or impossible to compact if its moisture
content significantly exceeds the optimum. If earthwork at the site continues into the wet season,
or if wet conditions are encountered, we recommend the following:
21-1-20525-001-R I rev! .doc'wp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
34
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
1. The ground surface in and surrounding the construction area should be sloped to promote
runoff of precipitation away from work areas and to prevent ponding of water.
2. Work areas should be covered with plastic. The use of sloping, ditching, sumps,
dewatering, and other measures should be employed as necessary to permit proper
completion of the work.
3. Earthwork should be accomplished in small sections to minimize exposure to wet
conditions. That is, each section should be small enough so that the removal of unsuitable
soil and placement and compaction of clean structural fill can be accomplished on the same
day. The size of construction equipment may have to be limited to prevent soil
disturbance. It may be necessary to excavate soils with an excavator located so that
equipment does not traffic over the excavated area.
4. A subgrade stabilization geogrid is recommended for this site where heavy equipment will
traverse areas of the site that do not already contain gravel-based access roads.
5. Fill material should consist of clean, well-graded sand and gravel soil, of which not more
than 5 percent fines by dry weight passes the No. 200 mesh sieve, based on wet-sieving the
fraction passing the Y.-inch mesh sieve. The gravel content should range from between 20
to 60 percent retained on a No. 4 mesh sieve. The fines should be nonplastic.
6. No soil should be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture. A smooth-drum vibratory
roller, or equivalent, should roll the surface to seal out as much water as possible.
7. In-place soil or fill soil that becomes wet and unstable and/or too wet to suitably compact
should be removed and replaced with clean, granular soil (see part 5).
8. Excavation and placement of structural fill material should be observed on a full-time basis
by a geotechnical engineer (or representative) experienced in earthwork to determine that
all work is being accomplished in accordance with the project specifications and our
recommendations.
9. Grading and earthwork should not be accomplished during periods of heavy, continuous
rainfall.
We suggest that these recommendations for wet weather earthwork be included in the contract
specifications.
6.4 Review of Plans and Specifications
We recommend that we be retained to review those portions of the plans and specifications that
pertain to earthwork and foundation construction prior to printing the 90 percent drawings to
determine that they are in accordance with recommendations presented in this report.
6.5 Construction Observation
We recommend that we be retained to provide geotechnical observation, testing, and consultation
during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those
21-1-20525-001-R l rev! .doc/wp.'LKD 21-1-20525-00 I
35
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
indicated by our explorations and to evaluate whether earthwork activities and foundation
construction comply with the contract plans and specifications. If conditions encountered during
construction differ from those anticipated, we can provide recommendations for the conditions
actually encountered. Such activities would include observation of earthwork construction,
structural fill placement and compaction, drilled shaft installation, and other geotechnically
related activities.
7.0 LIMITATIONS
This supplemental preliminary report was prepared for the exclusive use of Football Northwest,
LLC, and their design team for specific application to this project. This report should be
provided to prospective contractors for information of factual data only, and not as a warranty of
subsurface conditions, such as those interpreted from the exploration logs and discussions of
subsurface conditions included in this report. The general contractor and subcontractors who
work on this site may only rely upon the factual data presented in this report at the location,
depths and time that it was obtained.
The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site
conditions as they presently exist. We assume that the exploratory borings made for this project
are representative of the subsurface conditions through the site; i.e., the subsurface conditions
everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the explorations. If conditions
different from those described in this report are observed or appear to be present during
construction, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider
our recommendations, where necessary. If there is a substantial lapse of time between
submission of our report and the start of work at the site, or if conditions have changed because
of natural forces or construction operations at or near the site, it is recommended that this report
be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations.
Within the limitations of the scope, schedule and budget, the analyses, conclusions, and
recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted
professional geotechnical engineering principles and practice in this area at the time this report
was prepared. We make no other warranty, either express or implied.
Unanticipated soil and rock conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully
determined by merely taking soil samples or completing test borings. Such unexpected
conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly
constructed project. Therefore, some contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such
21-1-20525-001-R 1 rev l .dociwp/LKD 21-1-20525-001
36
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
potential extra costs. Furthermore, we have recommended additional subsurface investigations
be conducted using geophysical survey measures.
The scope of our services included no environmental assessment or evaluation regarding the
presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water,
groundwater, or air at the subject site. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. has qualified personnel to assist
you with these services should they be necessary. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. has prepared
Appendix D, "Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report," to assist you and others
in understanding the nse and limitations of our reports.
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
l EXPIRES 4/21/ t) ~
Martin W. Page, P.E., L.E.G.
Associate
MWP:WJP:BSR:TMG/mwp
21-1-20525-00 I-R J r1;:v 1.doc/wp/LKD
37
Thomas M. Gurtowski, P.E.
Vice President
21-1-20525-001
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
8.0 REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 2002, Annual book of standards,
construction, volume 04.08 Soil and Rock, West Conshohocken, Pa.
Blakely, R.J.; Wells, R.E.; Weaver, C.S.; and Johnson, S.Y., 2002, Location, structure, and
seismicity of the Seattle fault zone, Washington: evidence from aeromagnetic anomalies,
geologic mapping, and seismic-reflection data: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 114, no. I, p. 169-177, January.
Booth, D.B., 1987, Timing and processes of deglaciation along the southern margin of the
Cordilleran ice sheet, in Ruddiman, W.F., and Wright, H.E., Jr., eds., North America and
adjacent oceans during the last deglaciation: Boulder, Colo., Geological Society of America,
The Geology of North America, v. K-3, p. 71-90.
Byers, M., and Muttige, S., 2005, Construction completion report, J.H. Baxter South property
site, Renton, Washington: The RETEC Group, Inc. (RETEC), Seattle, Washington.
Deep Foundations Institute (OF!), 1989, Drilled shaft inspector's manual: The Joint Caisson-
Drilled Shaft Committee of DFI and the International Association of Foundation Drilling,
Sparta, NJ.
International Code Council, Inc., 2003, International Building Code, Building Officials and
Code Administrators International, Inc.: Country Club, IL; International Conference of
Building Officials, Whittier, CA; and Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc.,
Birmingham, AL.
Jacoby, G.C., Williams, P.L., and Buckley, B.M., 1992, Tree ring correlation between prehistoric
landslides and abrupt tectonic events in Seattle, Washington: Science, v. 258, p. 1611-1623.
Johnson, S.Y.; Dadisman, S.V.; Childs, J.R.; and Stanley, W.D., 1999, Active tectonics of the
Seattle Fault and Central Puget Sound, Washington--implications for earthquake hazards:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 111, no. 7, p. 1042-1053, July.
Reese, L.C., and Wang, S.T., 2002, Technical Manual of Documentation of Computer Program
LP LILE PLUS 4.0 for Windows, stress-and-deformation analysis of piles under lateral with
special feature of use of piles to stabilize a slope: Austin, Texas, Ensoft, Inc., 364 p.
Tokimatsu, K., and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of settlement in sands due to earthquake
shaking: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, v. 113, no. 8, August.
21-1-20525-00 ! -RI rev I .doc/wp 'LKD 21-1-20525-001
38
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
Youd, L.T., Hansen, C. M., and Bartlett, S.F., 2002, Revised MLR equations for prediction of
lateral spread displacement: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
American Society of Civil Engineers, v. 128, no. 12, p. I 007-1017, December.
Yount, J.C., and Gower, H.D., 1991, Bedrock geologic map of the Seattle 30' by 60' Quadrangle,
Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File report 91-147, 37 p., 4 sheets, scale
1:100,000.
Waldron, H.H., Liesch, B.A., Mullineaux, D.R., and others, 1962, Preliminary geologic map of
Seattle and vicinity, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map
1-354, 1 :31,680.
Wong, I., Sparks, A., Metcalfe, B., and others, 1999, Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and
ground shaking microzonation maps for the Seattle, Washington, metropolitan area:
characterization of the near-surface geology (year I), final technical report, program element
II evaluate urban hazard and risk: Oakland, Calif., URS Greiner Woodward Clyde Federal
Services, 1 v., 2 plates.
21-1-20525-001-Rl rev] .doc/wp!LKD 21-1-20525-001
39
TABLE 1
DOWNHOLE SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS
Stickup:
0.0
Offset: Borehole: B-7 1-405/NE 44th St. Interchange/Access Revisions
10.0
Shear Wave Data -Interval Velocity Computations
Depth Below Depth of Recorded Corrected Interval Interval Average
Top of Casing Data Time Time Time Velocity Velocity
Velocity Change between O and ± 5 feet.
(compacted surface sandy gravel over sand)
5.0 5.0 18.700 8.363 8.363 n/a
10.0 10.0 33.100 23.405 15.042 332
15.0 15.0 46.400 38.607 15.202 329 331
Velocity Change at ± 15 feet.
20.0 20.0 53.900 48.210 9.602 521 521
Velocity Change at ± 22 feet.
25.0 25.0 57.300 53.202 4.992 1002 n/a
30.0 30.0 58.700 55.688 2.486 2011
35.0 35.0 60.400 58.076 2.388 2094 2070
40'.o 40.0 62.300 60.440 2.364 2115
45.0 45.0 64.400 62.866 2.427 2061
Velocity Change at ± 45 feet.
50.0 50.0 66.200 64.914 2.048 2441
55.0 55.0 68.000 66.903 1.989 2514 2533
60.0 60.0 69.800 68.850 1.947 2568
65.0 65.0 71.600 70.767 1.917 2608
Velocity Change at ± 65 feet.
70.0 70.0 73.000 72.266 1.499 3336
75.0 75.0 74.500 73.846 1.580 3164
80.0 80.0 76.000 75.413 1.567 3192
85.0 85.0 77.500 76.969 1.556 3213
90.0 90.0 79.000 78.517 1.548 3231 3388
95.0 95.0 80.400 79.958 1.441 3469
100.0 100.0 81.700 81.295 1.336 3742
105.0 105.0 83.000 82.626 1.332 3755
Bottom of Casing at 108.2 feet.
Source to Borehole offset: 1 O feet. Velocities in feet per second.
Casing stickup above ground: O feet. Depths in feet -Times in milli-seconds.
n/a -Not included in Velocity Average. Velocity breaks from Time-Depth Plot.
21-1-20525-001
Proposed 22
Building~
SW Comer
(HQ-3)
Notes:
TABLE2
Recommended Parameters for Development of P-Y Curves Using LP ILE PLUS
1
2
3
4
·.· . .:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-' .·.·-: ···-: :-.·... : :.:.:-:.:-.-. :-:-:-·-:-:: -:-:-.. ·.·.·.: : :-.-:-:-. . ':-.·. :-·.-:.-.:-:-·-:-·-· :-:-:-:-::
0
15
24.5
38
15
24.5
38
Sand
Soft Clay
Sand
Silt
43
28
43
73
0
200
0
8000
0
200
0
8000
25
0
25
30
5
0
5
30
(1) Parameters given above are based on subsurface conditions encountered in boring HQ-3.
(2) Parameters given above are based on groundwater at surface elevation.
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
·_:\:<:::>:::":>:>::-: ><-::
•••tniUai MciduiJs ~1••-
~~~~~~~~:~~~-?~i*~:;:~
.(piil••·•·········· ~f Ji( . ti]li~d
15
0
15
2000
2
0
2
2000
0.020
0.004
(3) Based on subsurface conditions observed throughout the site, scatterred zones of soil may liquefy under earthquak~ loading. Seismic loading may also result in strength reduction for some
soil layers; malnly soils overlying liquefied zones. Parameters under seismic loading are provided.
(4) Parameters given above do not reflect effect of deep foundation group action.
21-1-20525-001
7f10/2006/lpile _par.unetm.dl-bsr
SOUTH POINT
t
LAKE
SHJNGTON
0 114 112
Scale in Miles
NOTE
I
-+
COL[,'11\N
Pm.VT
1
l(,','/1,ff/}AU.
8EAC/! ;>;1,!'j~
~ Reproduced wiU, pennission granted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS@.
0 This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS@. It is
PROJECT
LOCATION
t
I
BOAT LAUNCH ..
SE ~
l.
!
I
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
VICINITY MAP
~ unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part Uiereof, whether for September 2006 21-1-20525-003
,, personal use or resale, wiU,out permission. All rights reserved.
• SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 1 ~ Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consultants •
u:._ ___________________________ _. ____________ .... ______ ....
;/
"' c
~
8
N
o\
:i'.
0
s <
Cl
I
el
"' "' 8
:i;
~
"I
~
9
"' ,?!
-_ ----r-;rT'i'.)1?1t· ...•• ··~ . . le :· =· .:{/i,:;Hv·r~. if It ,0
-7'/ '0-/0/'%/ -~>-~--···-. -. --·1,~[ ")1·1'11'~1'30 ,,,,_[,. ,-7'. ~~/ //// / /// ",;////:; / ;,; =:_ ::c; ? --=:_-c -__ _______ ------------------=-__ _ _ :,F:' ,·111~·,u~'c•: ,,o-/0-/ ,,-:f;,-/,/'i',~ -:<-::_~~-~~'l7h~¢A. ·-:-c:c--.:~:::zQ,,;.->·.-----.--'----.--.,-,.~~o~@!IB@:3ho.ceITne _-, ~~;(// ---· ' ~~f0-C::'./;///0;/-;c2). · :;,~:;~=~~2csicC::2• _
7
==:~----/. -~", /;;t';:;;;--,_ L-IIU\' ~;/////--c"> ", ,i;,ii-~--·11,,/,·,~~-'>---... -. ----. -I I 'E,_~ rr'Z'v:~/---->v/ 0/~}f~ --;: ,_. -,: .. . '<,~~-;::,~;~
' --~y///--/// -;-:-;/ -/ . ' ','' I ' -;V/r,/-·'/ /--; :v ('. --// -'• ,->-. 'Y ' I ' E B-1 CD >:-/~;-7'.-'_/: -;:j/A// -,~
~/;,/, / //'//1.-/-
r-<t~,:, -_ ~-:-: ,: , l"
,11 '' ··-11,,11• ;1,:' i
'111~!
11"' ,-r1 1 ,1,,"1. -
''
1 \l\1
l//'11!! '.
11\1111.' !'·.11
~:tit
11
,,,
-i.)Jj;
1i!kf·.j ,, ·'I ,1,,·-1l'i
\~·\:
li11,q\',;
''·i111,
=
-·-~~-----.·--'·~ -~~-~-.;.:.~--· ' -. ·-'=e-'~-==--::~,
1 .• , -. : •/ -~ TP-17 • ...
._::lJ~K;:'in§-, . .. rr--~-=, -·--~swt2c:r==-'-:7~,:ccce,-:-X
MJ\. I , , . 11 _i ,-I
l~TP-27 ' ... ----~~ s~~------~: _____ '_t ____ ..c--:--.
I _:j
----. --------------_,
. t . --
,_~ -------------------·---~
----------------·----.
-------· ----~------_i
~:r;,r _ • 'it __ -'C;~~~c'ce'l
---···, ' ... -'· '.c __ ?.,_~m -~--__;__,_____ ---
/ EB ' T -7
/ HQ-3
------
i •. '. ~-0 ~-f-TP-26 ~-= . =-~B~-3 () BP-1 ~---=-~
I _---·: I
I
HQ-6
BAX-9
0
B4J!
;J,111 ill-
:~-
TP-25_
-:
BAX-2
~ •
0
_,J••••.-'
:TP-18 EB
DL-01
------~
TP-16 TP-8
~
BAX-10'
'
• HQ4
'HQ-5
_..
I / i~: / ~\Y /--'--~~~ / . h/ ----·~ ~~ /~/
'1 !
'. __ ,/
---~~:if::: ~1i~fi2~i--::,:~, -... --r··":""-\
n.j·· --., .... _
J r ;',)·.--· ·--·, ... , ·o r-· · -. swe·~1 ·,.
~----TP -5 \i .. -"'>, .---· -, ... -~ 'j1
'-~---_OSWB-1A _
1
\::1·· /•.·
···--·--·--· _--:-]-------. -?:'"'"
I. ~
-~ TP-4"
·."><_
F-----c_-.:.:;_i
.··i i
·1 . -.,
BAX-11
I
I
I TP-9
~ ·B-i8 ~ TP-3
-~
r----,
B-22 I I
• I I
l""""iiiiilTP-241 ----. '-., I
I I
I I
·--...! . .J I I
L---.J
l""""iiiiiliP-20 BAX-1 ·0
TF-1 EB
TP-22 l""""iiiiil ~ TP-21
l""""iiiiil TP-23
l""""iiiiil TP-29
LEGEND
Boring Designation and
~
TP-19
TP-15/ -· · -_
l"""a.l B•19 .~:~•c. i.~
0
_ffi_, J-----
TP•14 , l HQ-2
)''''''''iiiiiil
Tt:i~13 .~~;:_::~.:-~-~-...-.. -
0
Boring Designation and
~
TP-12
:I!··:
100
CJ~ ....
200
HQ 1 ~ Boring Designation and SWB-10 Approxknate Location, JAG
BAX-1(!)
Approximate Location,
-Approximate Location Development (Shannon and Baxter Property,
Wilson. Inc., February 1997} (Woodward-Clyde
Scale in Feet
TP-1~ Test Pit Destnation and Consultants, May 1983)
Approximate ocation Boring Designation and
Approximate Location; Baxter
TP~11
'="--"'
"-c·"-cc -·=----._ ..:: .. -,C<>-.-
~B-7
.i l""""iiiiill
-·-·--TP-1t:
Qs1
EB
a·
~
TP-2 Q._ -
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
2_ ---------------··-·-··'"..:_ .. _ ~•-··--"-.:-Ann,.,, n-·1n -:;...:rr -;,-~·;.:,;;..~~ •• ,., NOTE
BP-1 () Boring Designation and
Boring Designation and Renton (Woodward-Clyde B-16. Approximate Location. Port
B-7· Approximate Location, Consultants, November 1992) ~~e~~~l~j~~}~ Hm
C Bedrock at
El.+11'
SITE AND EXPLORATION PLAN
----··--.. 1-· ·-·-· --;:._,: :-__ : = ..... :.-.;:;: ; .. =. Nuvernuer 1::,roJ This figure is based on Crawford I 20525 003
Boring Designation and AL . Architects, LLC drawings• A001.dwg, September 2006 21-1--
roximate Location, Generahzed .Subsurface dated 8-18-06, Site Plan C.dwg, dated
odward-Clyde Consultants, Profile .Location 8-31-06, and XS-SUR.dwg, dated B-14-06. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 2
Logs, September 1990) (See Ftgures 5-7) Geotachnical l:!lnd Environmental Consultants • a-L__ _ __:::::.:=-____ _:_...:..__ _______________ ---1..,._ ___ ___.__ _ ___,
Interstate 405/ NE 44th
Street Interchange and DL-01, EB-1 EB Borir
Access Revisions ApprOxi1
~Shannon and Wilson, Inc., SR-2, TF-1 (Woe
eptember 2000) Field
N
0 1 2
Scale in Miles
NOTE
J, Map based on Blakely et al., 2002, "Location, structure,
f;j
Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, Washington
SEATTLE FAULT ZONE
o and seismicity of the Seatle fault zone, Washington:
': Evidence from aeromagnetic anomalies, geologic July 2006 21-1-20525-001
~ mapping, and seismic-reflection data" SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. 3 II ._ _______________________ ....J __ G,_0_1,ch_,_;,_,1_,n_d _En_,fr_o,_me_,_1a1.,;,Co;.ns_u1_1a_,,_..._ ____ __,
' / -~---" -..__ --......_ --~ -~~ ,_ ---...___,----..._ ~ /~----...__ i r_,------*'~ "--~--------------~~-,--------:::--_l /-~ --:---------\ -, I I 1\ ~ / ; /----
··· ~~,:;;~cc -• ···<::+£.;zr~,lv'&·.·Fi:lN-€0~£:E§:: :::C,:' .'...~' )= ·/·~;~ 1~
~~------___,_<,__ -----~ ~----~------c::.:c~----I ' --V --=<::_-s=:::~-----' -----------.___,___ ' ----.· -----==---__ / . f .e
"/,,-h"?'c,-,,, ~~~---~ ---------, --. ,,o,e '~"'"""'°"' -----.---~----., .---. , Z !¥~'
------" ~ -~An=1mareSboielTiTe-, ", ·-,. '""' ,,i,;,,,, --------"··---~-.. ·----,, / -.'?!·· / / ~ -~---' 7'--'-= ~ \ ' ',, ------_:--,, --~ I ' -I ,,-----~ ' ' 1";;;, -~ ~, ---_ ', ', ', '--. · ,,---____ __-•. ----\,·,--.,,I! / / ~ ----~------:; .,__ ------' ' ----~ -. ' I ' I / I / ,,..-, ------·-·-. . ---C~\ '_-,_/, , ".. < ·-, -~~~~----=Seismic Survey ---------------"'\\[, ~~ , 1 1 , v /
/~......... , ,,, --...__ ,, --~ -...._, ~ -~ ~-----L-3 ~ " ----\lh-~/ /.II I --..._/ ----\ '<, '. -•· ;"'-,,, >-. .. ·. ~-~-~ · Line S , ._ "., , __ ___ --___ ,
11
~-::-:~~ //, _____ _
"· ', "'.-\ •Y, /\ '<!!,,,,,"·,, ----""'c'e,c "----.;-._, "\/.,, -,, ----. ------------\ \~~/ /------
----
5
;/ ft/"\.>, ',, -',;;~ __ T' ',i::::_:cft.::-' ~ _ _:::~;~~~~<l:'-~c~--" -----. ~-------=-PR~\;: /_-_-_-----~
I / -r-,--_ ;""/ /-;2:,Y,_-; -~ ',, / 7#6-:-;: .23 '\ I -' ,').t., ', -=~G~:,-:,---·----------~---_____ -----
·----=-~_::_:_;,;:_V !, ·" ''.: / ft·.;_··, .--, -=~:~:::----Jl."-~,t-~>-::c---~.;,. ~
1
Selsmlc§ury,eyl.J!1eS\2«------------~ I ~~B 'I ~-i : /fo)N_ 'l <:( l ___ '---~-·-·,__I_ .. ::::~ -=-~4 nd ;_,,," I -, ----~--~-;'-1' ~------=:t:_:_-----======---..---------___........-__,----------'
... ~-/
. llCc '' ;C ·• ~ i . / ..
\ijlf\1.\1i;~1i. --,,[<-+~ . ,, . -·_ v--,-"'~M "-,t __ 1, . ,~ ;p/,/1/ ~&~-1~1,,.i,
1,~.1 1
1
: I ---'c:i....--"' .) ----= --; .;,,t' # ' "'I ...._..,__~1P"' -~'.·:":= ~/ I -/-I
--er;;;/ ' " -• ---d'A ,.3 , , , ,,!I ' / C' ~-
1
,, 'I -0~4~A , C ·-~ ,"• ~ ' __-/,/ '''i,;;~ ,-~,-Ii . . _ _;, r ~ --.... I~ ~· -)-; -. =P--~-y---~ --, , ~ ~ ~Ji,6---------, 0/ts::=-~-14 I I
'.EJA)'.,9, .. ! --: --, ,-+ , :"·;;·-,"·~-=-~-; _i / . 2;' · 0
, , ,,o'~ ~ ~ ~ 'C ' -' •':::'. V /
1 ' -', ----r' 1 • ,-' • . ~r~. : <; .,o/ \ ' -· .. · :-, , ~--c-: 1----~-, ' ; ./ /II/ \ ,
i • : , 0·1 I. _ I
--I. ---
I ' 8 ~Ji'..2 1 . 1 . -~-~c,__---a
i 1· ,·1·'(. ~ . , .,,. -· .
.r ' :-n\, -: ~ ;) -c---~ l---; --·-· ____ ::_-'= ___ _::_ -}, • -::..~ --~--........ · ·v· -,-......._ I ~ •. , ... , • 1,1)\·, \ ~ .. , ·~· -·-·. j. ~~~-~. .i1;· ·._ -----------.··--\ -..., -~-r---
,. . ... j;:Cj( r ,,2 • ' -'',___ ·-' •./ ' ' "'','11~ ',/ // ---------------------------___ .-.::::,\. _ la&-r11---
' i ' .. ::1 -. ' -.----6 -' -: J' ----' ':mif\~~~-__ -. ---~-------------/-....._ -, ........_ :::"',----i I -L '-,
;\d;.,h~I BA;,. .·11 -----·-~--'l1Wlf" .----'/ .... ·· . I ----------,-..::--::::-._ -==°--.jJ ff-2
,;_~] JC""" .'1", · •1;1111,I · : / · -------------··· ------....._ -.......__ ~ -7 -J4i-
f\ _ 3 1,11____ / / ---------------------------·. ------~ '"-... __ -()•,, I II __ _ r1 · --· 8 "'X 1 c-= "fir,2-i,-----' , / --....,.,,.;~·,:fl~:,,,,,.._ --·., --1 , 1 1
'fil,I --l ·~ · !-\J: . I · · -' _,,.,,,: .. , 0
·_ --,/ • •• •• ·,..-•• -,-.:Jt·>1f..,_., ·'..Jl: . ~g"l'>.·£i,'j1;J.i~~""'-.. -.., . -... ,-......._ .. ,5'~1'--!------' i.1~1 -· .... { :-~-~.I:.-~ ·---,____ .,...,--'.;,:..;i-i<lfifi' . ..;.,·J·~-'·, -._, +,'
.-,\1 jrll " -::. r~ ~ -·"''·.·:,'.;;~l!...;;L~tv~ -af~ ·;: .. ~ -......... .... ,-....: ·f---_ ,-, ,J.i:: 8-1~;-TF,I . --;~-cc, ~ ~--"-----_,-TP,10 . / ~\~A:{~~·W-~ ;il,.~)A. "-,, ,~:~--
j Vf ··-TP~22==i~----__ . -.. __ .. · I I' ..... ~7 ... , ........... ~.. g11 .. )~:"-"~ :1:11,
·•c:f1( ' -=:E3 TP' :2·1 --:-er"~ ?>·''Iv ' H I I ,. '-T"".""°1/, I ,-,---,~···· 1;, '·. I' ·;,~)'>,, I f?,J'tf--"'
,'
~
c
!
~
'1
~
!
"
f
LEGEND O 100 200 ~:::::'. ___ ~ · --,, -
r
~ =··l:''1:::-=-:;:., .:.,-~,,__
:g O' to +S' Approximate Elevation Range Boring Designation and . Boring Designation and ~ '\j1~11/ of Top of Bedrock "'\ -,;a _
1
Approximate Location, JAG , Approximate Location, .,_ 0 I CJ" Development (Shannon and BAX , ·1 , Baxter Property. Scale in Feet
NOTES
'-. -----==--=--=-· _··-·-·-.-
~ . ==:~--,~l -~ ~-;-~-' Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
~ '-] Q .1 J_ Boring Designation and Wilson, Inc .. February 1997) (Woodward-Clyde
o r -~ J Approximate Location Consultants, May 1983) ~ Boring ~esignation _ and . . . ~ ~ , , ----Test Pit Designation and ci p ~ ·] Approximate Locat10n; Baxter Boring ~es1gnatlon.and
o T P · I =S Approximate Location "' Renton (Woodward-C~de g 'I 6 Approximate Location. Port ~ Consultants. November 1992) " Quendall (CH2M Hill.
1. This figure is based on Crawford Architects, LLC
drawings: A001.dwg, dated 8-18-06, Site
Plan C.dwg, dated 8-31-06, and XS-SUR.dwg,
datecB-14-06.
_{ -7-·3.9:j( )1~(i.
--~1 ,r=f i
TOP OF BEDROCK
ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP
1:;i Boring Designation and . . . November 1978)
-s Approximate Location, lnte,state fj L .i) I EB. I . . Bonng Designation.and . rf 2. Top of bedrock elevation contoo,s are based on September 2006 21-1-20525-003
a:i B ~ 7 405/ NE 44th Street Interchange ~ ' ·---, Approximate Location, Generalized _Subsu ace limited data from soil borings and geophys~al ~ · and Access Revisions (Shannon SR.? TF. ·'I {Woodward-C~de Coosultants, Profile_ Location surveys. Bedrock surface elevations are high~ SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 4
j and Wilson, lnc., September 2000) ~ 1 Field Logs, September 1990) See F1gures 5-7 variable and should be verified during consfructlon. Geotechnical and Enviroom911tal Consultants • u:L_ ___ ...:._~ _ _:..... ____________________ ~----------L.-----...1.-------1
~
C
0
~
:li
g
'.)'
~
0
.i!i
~
I
i
M
~
gJ
'1'
~
"' 0
M
0
i
~
A
West
30
BAX-88
(WCC)
--
TP-17 SWB-2
(S&W) (S&W)
(Proj. 20' W) (Proj. 10' S)
I I
HQ-3
(S&W)
(Proj. 12' W)
-~ PROPOSED BUILDING------"
HQ-6
(S&W)
(Proj. 50' W)
I
PROPOSED
LOADING
DOCK r
SWB-1
(S&W)
(Proj. 30' W)
I
A'
East
30
201-7 1 v-T
Very stiff SILT with trace ? '-----------7~?
? ? I-?
Med.ium dense, brown, sitty, gravelly 136 . -------------?
? -------_J_ ?
? ? 20
fine SAND; ML . Very loose, S!L T and
SANO;SP,ML
SAND; numerous organics, SM :i.
7 ____ ___, 7
Very loose to loose,
trace to gravelly, silty
fineSANDwitll
scattered organics: SM
? Soft, clayey, fine sandy SILT; ML
?~?
10
" a,
LL
.!:
C
.Q
1ii > 2 0 w
2
"' E ·x
E'
0.
0.
<(
-10
-20
-30
7+------7
Loose to medillll
dense, ·medium SAND
with trace organics: SW
?~7
Medium stiff SILT with
organics; ML
7~7
Loose to very dense,
fine to coarse SANO
with some gravel; SM
LEGEND
B-1 Boring Designation
(Proj. 12' W.) ~ Offset from Profile
15 Standard Penetration Test ~ Blows/Foot
5416 ,, Standard Penetration Test
--Blows/Inches Driven
P ~ Pushed Sample
sz_ I Groundwater Level During Drilling
7 7
Very loose SAND; SP
? ? Very soft PEAT_-__ ·
and SILT; OH 7 7
Loose to very loose
SAND;SM
? ?
Very soft to soft, sandy to
clayey SILT; ML-CL
? ?
? ?
Very stiff, clayey Sll T and
silty CLAY; CL-ML
? ?
Very loose, silty, fine to
medium SAND: trace of
dropstone gravels; SM
?
7 ~ ? Very soft, wood~,
Very soft, wood fibrous 1 fibrous PEAT; PT ? --
PEAT; PT
7 II~
Soft, fine sandy SILT; ML 4
?------1---
Very loose to medium
dense, silty, fine to
medium SAND; SM
?
7 -1 7
Loose, silty, sandy GRAVEL with
?
organic fine sandy silt \ayer: G~M~ ?
5010 • ANDESITE
05-24-06
40 feet of medium dense to dense SAND
and SILT (See Boring Log SWB-2); SP-SM
Very loose to loose/
very soft to soft stratified
silty, fine to medium
SAND and fine sandy
S!L T, trace dropstone
gravels; scattered to
numerous organics;
SM/ML
?
0 10 20
05-24-06
0
?
7
Sott, clayey ~LT; ML -------?
Very soft, gravelly, silty, clayey SAND and
organic SILT, trace of fine sand;~
? 7
Very loose, fine SAND; SP ?
? .
100
Very loose to loose, silty, fine
to medium SAND; scattered
wood pieces: SM J ......--?
?
?
Very dense,'slightly
fine sandy, gravelly,
silty CLAY; CL
ANDESITE
200
10
" Q)
LL
.!:
C
0 .,
"' > a,
0 jjj
i!J
E ·x
E'
0.
0.
<(
-10
-20
-30
Very dense, gravelly, silty
SAND and hard, clayey
SILT; SM
aaaaa1 I ELR a a gj ~
'"'=''I''
'"l~""'
BEDROCK
(possibly sandstone)
Depth 105.3'
12-04-96
Vertical Scale in Feet Horizontal Scale in Feet
Vertical Exaggeration= 10X
NOTE
This subsurface profile is generalized from
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE PROFILE A-A'
D
? ----+-~-? Approximate GeoloQic Contact materials observed in soil borings. Variations are
-_L B
I
B . likely to exist between profile and actual conditions. September 2006 21-1-20525-003
~ ottom o onng
~ 5-23-06 --Date of Completion SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 5 ~ Geotechnical and Env1ronmerital Consultants • ~i...-------------------------------------------------------------------------------1------------.1..-------'
~
C
0
£
~
m
8
:,'
;;;
D
2
/l
I • .,,
'!i a.
" ~
~
N :g
~
N
~
B
West
40
30
20
10
PROPOSED BUILDING -------------1
BAX-9 I PROPOSED PRACTICE FIELDS
(WCC) I I
(Proj. 70' E) HQ-1
1/\
B-18 (S&W)
--BAX-1 HQ-2 (CHSM) (Proj.112' W)
f 1 BAX-2 BAX-11 (WCC) (Sand W) , •
' (WCC) (WCC) (Proj. 80' W) (Proj. 40' W) ' 11-s,s--?
\ (Proj.15' E) (Proj.15' W) ~ ' ? I. ?------? n -
..______? ~N~-and GRAVEL FILL I I SAND and GRAVEL FILL T . Medium stiff to sbff, slightly
Hard, silty CLAY, trace ? SILT ? ? plastic, fine sandy CLAY; CL
road gravel· CL ? . · • ? ' Very loose to loose, Loose, silty,
?
------? •
? ~-? medium to coarse SAND, fine SAND
· traceof~t ? ?~
Soft to medium stiff,
sandy SILT; ML
?
Very soft, wood fibrous PEAT
with scattered silty, clayey fine
sand layers; PT
Stiff to very stiff
SILT with fine sand
partings; ML Medium dense, silty
SAND; SM ?
? ---+;EA\ sand
interbeds; OH
PEAT; sand
interbeds; OH
PEAT
?
PEAT observed at bottom; OH
? ?
·,
B'
East
40
30
20
10
!
? , Loose,
· silty
SAN-
? ~~ Medium stiff, clayey SILT; CL
~? Loose, soft, stratified silty, fine
to medium sand and fine Stiff to very stiff, silty CLAY
and clayey SILT; trace of
dropstone gravels and
seashells; CH/CUML
?---1----?
,.;
C:
.Q
1ii > iIJ 0
~
-~ >< e
Cl.
ft
-10
-20
-30
LEGEND
8-1 ~-Boring Designation
(Proj. 12' W.) -Offset from Profile .---
15 Standard Penetration Test
-Blows/Foot
? ---------------?
_ foft, peaty
~
00
SILT
Loose, silty SAND; SM
0 10 20
HHHHHI I
Vertical Scale in Feet
sandy SILT; SWML -? ----,1----
---------.
?
~
?------1--~ ?
Soft, silty CLAY; trace
organics; CL
--? ?-Medium stiff, slightly
clayey, fine sandy SILT
? ?
Medium dense to very
dense, silty, sandy
GRAVEL
? -t------__
ANDESITE
0 100 200
HHHHHI I
Horizontal Scale in Feet
?
Vertical Exaggeration= 10X
Medium dense and
stiff, interbedded silty,
fine SAND and SILT;
SM/ML
? I ?
Stiff to very stiff, silty CLAY
and clayey SILT; trace of
dropstone gravels and
seashells; CH/CUML
?--
Medium dense, silty, fine
SAND with seams of silty
clay; SM
-7
7--ll--
MEidium stiff, silty CLAY; CL
?--9--w--
?--~ ~ . . / /" "' Very stiff, slightly clayey, fine ~
sandy, gravelly SILT
ANDESITE 50
_ 5013"
05-23-06
?
?
?
0
-10
-20
I
I -3o
i
I
!
-40
" Q)
lL
·" C
0 :g
>
Q) w
~
E ·x e
Cl.
Cl.
<(
16 • Standard Penetration Test 54 -Blows/Inches Driven
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
P -Pushed Sample
NOTE 8 GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE PROFILE B-B' ~ + Groundwater Level During Drilling This subsurface profile is generalized from
:g materials observed in soil borings. Variations are ~ ?-·-? Approximate Geologic Contact likely_ t_o exist between profile and actual September 2006 21-1-20525-003
\'i Bottom of Boring conditions. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 6
-, 5 23 06 Geolechnical and Environmental Consultants ' .!! • • ----------Date of Completion u:
;,/
"' i
~
8
~
;j;
Q
.2i • 0
r
~
~
£
8
9
i'.l :g
~
N
C
~
8
:(l
:g
N
D
ai
" lJ..
~
C
.Q
1ii > " w
%l
E ·;; e
CL
CL
<(
C
South
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
r~~ ....
-30 c__ __________________ ~
LEGEND
B-1 ~-Boring Designation
(Proj. 12' W.) ~ Offset from Profile ,-
'Q.
15 ~ Standard Penetration Test
Blows/Foot
16"--Standard Penetration Test
54 Blows/Inches Driven
P ~ Pushed Sample
----Groundwater Level During Drilling
? I ? Approximate Geologic Contact
0
!-----------------PROPOSED BUILDING---------------------!
HQ-4
(S&W)
(Proj. 25' W)
Loose, brown,
gravelly, silty
SAND; (Fill) SP
B-18
(CH2M)
(Proj. 65' W)
I
HQ-5
(S&W)
(Proj. 35' W)
? ----------:--I
Brown, silty, sandy__.. Medium stiff, slightly plastic,
fine sandy CLAY; Cl GRAVEL; SM ? ~ L, ..
? ? /
Very soft to' stiff, gravelly PEAT
with occasional sandy clay; PT
Loose to medium ? -1-• b
dense SILT; ML ·
? ?
Very soft. gravelly PEAT; OH
?-----------?
Very soft, wood
fibrous PEAT; PT Lenses of fine daye/SANa; SP ?
Loose, silty fine SANO,
trace organics; SM Very stiff, high plastic
CLAY with fine sand; CH
Lense of stiff, silty llA Y with I ?
some sand I 7-?
BAX-10
(WCC)
(Proj. 12' E)
?
?
Medium dense,
gravelly, silty
SAND grading lo
sandy SILT; SM
I Moose, silty, fine to ?
coarse SAND· SP 7
Stiff, clayey SILT to silty
CLAY with trace fine
sand; ML/CL ?
?
ANDESITE
10 20
?
Medium dense and stiff,
stratified, slightly gravelly, silty
SAND and slightly gravelly and
clayey, sandy SILT; SMIML
0
highly lo comple\ly weathered
40 80
?
HQ-6
(Proj. 10' W)
Medium dense, brown, silty, gravelly
SAND; numerous organics
?~?
0
Very loose, slightly gravelly to gravelly,
silt, fine to medium SAND; SM
?-~L ?
Very loose to loose, very soft to
soft, stratified, silty, fine to medium
SAND and fine sandy S1l T; trace
dropstone gravels, scattered to
numerous organics
50/3" ?
ANDES/TE, slightly to
moderately weathered
16
~78
05-24-06
c·
North
40
30
20
10
0
I
~ -10
-20
-30
-'Qi
" lJ..
.!.
C
~
~ w
2
"' E ·;; e
CL
CL
<(
RHB H Fl I j a= E3 j ~
Vertical Scale in Feet Horizontal Scale in Feet
-1/ertical Exaggeration = 4X
NOTE
This subsurface profile is generalized from
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE PROFILE C-C'
materials observed in soil borings. Variations may September 2006 21-1-20525-003
---Bottom of Boring exist between profile and actual conditions.
.. 5-23-06 . SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG 7 ~ ------Date of Complet1on Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants •
N
D
"-'---------------'--------------------------------------------------------------'-----------_. _____ .....
ilea 6-9/11/2006-Seahawks-2ftshftHQ1 .xis
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROl'II I'
ESTIMATED AXIAL SHAFT CAPACITY (kips)
(Based on boring HQ-1)
2 5• Loose to medium r
· \ dense, silty sand /
Stiff to very stiff silt
and clay, and
medium dense
sand
58' f---------,
Andesite
bedrock, highly
weathered
,::-
a,
a,
~
z
0
j::
<(
c::
f-w z w
0..
w
<fl
<( cc
f-u..
<(
J:
<fl
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
100 200 300 400
' _,. ________ , _________________________________________ _
'
'
" ~. --: ...
' '
'
' ---~--
'
'
'
'
"
'
' \
'
500 600 700 800
Mobilized End Bearing
---Allowable Friction Resistance
Ultimate Uplift Resistance
---Allowable Total Capacity
' ' •
' ' '
900
70 -L------------'----~--~-....... ~--~~--~----'
NOTES:
1. Allowable comoressive caoacitv is a summation of allowable friction
and mobilized end bearing.
2. Allowable skin friction is obtained bv aoolvina a factor of safetv of 2.0
to the estimated ultimate skin friction. Mobilized end bearina is obtained
bv estimatina the oercentaae of ultimate end bearina that will be mobilized
bv about 1/2-inch of shaft settlement. This is estimated to be 57 oercent.
3. Calculations assume static loadina with oost-sesimic liauefaction induced
settlements.
4. Calculations assume aroundwater at the around surface.
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice
Facility
Renton, Washington
ESTIMATED AXIAL CAPACITY OF
2-FT. DIAMETER SHAFT
Sep-06 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants FIG. 8
I c p
ilea 6-9/1112006-Seahawks-2ftshftHQ3 xls
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFII F
ESTIMATED AXIAL SHAFT CAPACITY (kips)
(Based on boring H0-3)
Dense to loose,
silty fine sand w/
gravel
7
Very loose and
very soft, sand,
peat and silt
-., .,
,::.
z
0
~
<t
0: ... w z w
38 a.
w
(/)
<t
Andesite al
bedrock, highly
weathered
...
LL
<t
J:
(/)
-200 0
···············10· ....
NOTES:
20 -1
3 ..
40
' 60 -'
I
200
1. Allowable comoressive caoacitv is a summation of allowable friction
and mobilized end bearing.
2. Allowable skin friction is obtained bv aoolvina a factor of safetv of 2.0
to the estimated ultimate skin friction. Mobilized end bearina is obtained
bv estimatina the oercentaae of ultimate end bearina that will be mobilized
bv about 1/2-inch of shaft settlement. This is estimated to be 57 oercent.
3. Calculations assume static loadina with oost-sesimic liauefaction induced
settlements.
4. Calculations assume aroundwater at the around surface.
400 600 800 1,000
Mobilized End Bearing
---Allowable Friction Resistance
---Ultimate Uplift Resistance
Allowable Total Capacity
' ' ' '
-....... .
' ' ' ' '
' ' '
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice
Facility
Renton, Washington
ESTIMATED AXIAL CAPACITY OF
2-FT. DIAMETER SHAFT
Sep-06 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
flea 6-9111/2006-Seahawks-2.5ftshftHQ1 .xls
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFII F
ESTIMATED AXIAL SHAFT CAPACITY (kips)
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 (Based on boring HQ-1)
0+-----+----~----+----+------+------,-.;
2 _S'h Loose to medium{
I \ dense, silty sand
Stiff to very stiff silt
and clay, and
medium dense
sand
58' L--------l
Andesite
bedrock, highly
weathered
z-
"' ~
z
0
~
ti z w
Q.
w
10
20 ·
30
VI 40 ~
Ii:
<(
J:
VI
50
60
'
'
'
_, -
'
'
' :\
'
'
'
'
' ... "'
...... t
'
Mobilized End Bearing
---Allowable Friction Resistance
Ultimate Uplift Resistance
---Allowable Total Capacity ______________ _.
'
' 70 -'-----~---------~----'"---~-~----------'
NOTES:
1. Allowable comoressive caoacitv is a summation of allowable friction
and mobilized end Dearing.
2. Allowable skin friction is obtained bv aoofvino a factor of safety of 2.0
to the estimated ultimate skin friction. Mobilized end bearino is obtained
bv estimatina the oercentaae of ultimate end bearina that will be mobilized
bv about 1/2-inch of shaft settlement. This is estimated to be 46 oercent.
3. Calculations assume static loadina with oost-sesimic liauefaction induced
settlements.
4. Calculations assume aroundwater at the around surface.
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice
Facility
Renton, Washington
ESTIMATED AXIAL CAPACITY OF
2.5-FT. DIAMETER SHAFT
Sep-06 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechmcal and Environmental Consultants
ilea 6-9/11/2006-Seahawks-2.5flshftH03.xls
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PRnFII F
ESTIMATED AXIAL SHAFT CAPACITY (kips)
(Based on boring HQ-3) -100 0 100 200
Dense to loose,
silty fine sand w/
gravel
7
-------10-
Very loose and
very soft, sand, ·•
peat and silt
2
z-
" ~
z
0
~
0:
I-w z w
38 Q.
w
Vl
~
Andesite
bedrock, highly
weathered
aJ
J I-
LJ..
~ :c
Vl
NOTES:
1. Allowable comoressive caoacitv is a summation of allowable friction
and mobilized end bearing.
2. Allowable skin friction is obtained bv aoolvina a factor of safetv of 2.0
to the estimated ultimate skin friction. Mobilized end bearina is obtained
bv estimatina the oercentaae of ultimate end bearina that will be mobilized
bv about 1/2-inch of shaft settlement. This is estimated to be 46 oercent.
3. Calculations assume static loadina with oost-sesimic liauefaction induced
settlements.
4. Calculations assume aroundwater at the around surface.
300
i
400 500 600 700 800
Mobilized End Bearing
---Allowable Friction Resistance
Ultimate Up!ift Resistance
---Allowable Total Capacity
' '
' •
900
Seahawks Headquarters and Practice
Facility
Renton, Washington
ESTIMATED AXIAL CAPACITY OF
2.5-FT. DIAMETER SHAFT
Sep-06 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants FIG.9
:,_ D~
Seahawk 1p11e summary1.xls. 9/7/2006
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFILE
Based on Borings HQ-3 V
0 ........ .
Very loose to loose,
clean to gravelly, silty
fine to medium SAND
15. I
Very soft to soft wood
fiberous PEAT and fine
sandy SILT
Very loose to loose
silty, fine to medium
24. " " '=-
..c:
SAND & sandy
GRAVEL with organic
-CL
" Cl
38.0
fine sandy SILT layers
Highly to completely
weathered AN DE SITE
-0.20 0.00
0
10
20 I
30 I
40 I I.
50 ;•--
Deflection (in)
0.20 0.40
I
0.60 0.80
I
I
~
" -
-1,000
0
10
20 j ... -
';;; 30
ii
" Cl
40
50
Moment (kips-ft)
-500 0 500
\
Shear (kips)
1,000 -100 -50 0 50 100
0 ,...,....,~~~'"T'"'"~"""T'"~-
10
I 20
...
" ~ 30 ..c:
ii
" Cl
40
50 I·-·
60 l.._~.:.___~_;__~~~~~~ 60 ~---------~--~ 60 ~----------~
NOTES
1. The lateral resistance analyses were performed using the computer
program LPlLEPLus. Version 5.0.6
2. Loads assumed to be applied at top of drilled shafts are as
follows:
Lateral Load ::; 50.0 kips
Moment = 0 kips.ft
Axial Load= 525.0 kips
3. Analyses assume the following drilled shaft
properties:
Area Moment of Modulus of
(in2) Inertia (in4) Elasticity (ksi)
-----------------------------------.,,,
; G) 1,018.0 82,448 7,100
.....
N _.
-0
Length
(ft)
53.0
4. Groundwater level assumed at surface elevation
5. Analyses assume fixed-head condition at top of drilled
shafts.
6. Analyses do not consider group effects
7. Under seismic loading conditions, liquefaction is
estimated to occur within the sand layers.
;.::::;;;-;;;;:;-,L;;,at;;;e,al Load Only
· Lateral Load &
Liquefaction
Seahawks Headquarters &
Practice Facility
Renton, Washin_g_ton
LATERAL RESISTANCE ANALYSES
36-INCH-DIAMETER DRILLED SHAFT
Sefl_tember 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG.10
Geotechnk:al and Environmental Consultants
bsr
Seahawk 11,, .. ,... summary2.xls. 9/7/2006
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFILE
Deflection (in)
Based on Borings HQ-3 'v
0 ........... .
Very loose to loose,
clean to gravelly, silty
fine to medi.um SAND
15. )
Very soft to soft wood
fiberous PEAT and fine
sandy SILT
;
Very loose to loose
silty, fine to medium
24. -.;
~
.c
SAND & sandy
GRAVEL with organic
-C. ..
C
38.0 I
fine sandy SILT layers
Highly to completely
weathered ANDESITE
-0.50
0
10
20
30
40
0.00
l I
5o I l
f
60
0.50 1.00
NOTES
1. The lateral resistance analyses were performed using the computer
program LPILEPLus, Version 5.0.6
2. Loads assumed to be applied at top of drilled shafts are as
follows:
Lateral Load:;;; 50.0 kips
Moment = 0 kips-ft
Axial Load = 525.0 kips
3. Analyses assume the following drilled shaft
properties:
Area Moment of Modulus of
(in2) Inertia (in4) Elasticity (ksi)
-----------··--------------------
"' ~, 1,018.0 82,448 7,100
0, .......
~o
Length
(ft)
53.0
1.50 2.00
.,-..
~
.c -C. ..
C
-2,000
0
10
20 f
30
40
50
Moment (kips-fl)
-1,000 0 1,000 2,000
\ I
.,-
" ~
.c
1i
" C
Shear (kips)
-200 -100 0 100 200 o~-~--~~--~--~
10
20
30
40
50
\
\
' (······--
l -
'
'
' .
60 '----~-----~-----' 60 '------'------'-----'
4. Groundwater level assumed at surface elevation
5. Analyses assume fixed-head condition at top of drilled
shafts.
6. Ar.ialyses do not consider group effects.
7. Under seismic loading conditions, liquefaction is
estimated to occur within the sand layers.
8. Under design-level seismic conditions, analyses
assume lateral spreading of up to 8-feet at ground
surface.
Liquefaction & Lateral
Spread
, .. , Lateral Load,
Liquefaction, & Lateral
Spread
Seahawks Headquarters &
Practice Facility
Renton, Washin_g_ton
LATERAL RESISTANCE ANALYSES
36-INCH-DIAMETER DRILLED SHAFT
September 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG.10
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
bs,
Seahawk lp11i:: summary3 (30-inch}.xls -9/7/2006
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFILE
Deflection (in)
Based on Borings HQ-3
0
Very loose to loose,
clean to gravelly, silty
fine to medium SAND
15.0 I
Very soft to soft wood
fiberous PEAT and fine
sandy SILT
; 24.5
Very loose to loose
silty, fine to medium
SAND & sandy
GRAVEL with organic
38.0 I
fine sandy SILT layers
Highly to completely
weathered ANDESITE
v
.; .. ,::_
,: -C. ..
0
-0.50
0
10
20
30
4o I
so I
l
60
0.00 0.50
\
I r
NOTES
1. The lateral resistance analyses were performed using the computer
program LPILeLus. Version 5.0.6
2. Loads assumed to be applied at top of drilled shafts are as
follows:
Lateral Load = 40.0 kips
Moment = 0 kips-ft
Axial Load= 400.0 kips
3. Analyses assume the following drilled shaft
properties:
Area Moment of Modulus of
(in2) Inertia (in4) Elasticity (ksi) ------------------------------------------
-"Tl' ..... -707.0 39,761 7,100 0 G) .... "' ... -.....
Length
(ft)
53.0
1.00 1.50
';;
.S!
-1,000
0
10 f ..
20 f
-;; 30 a. ..
0
40
50
Moment (kips-ft)
-500 0 500
I I
Shear (kips)
-100 -50 0 50
0 ~~~-,-,-~~-,-~,--,
10
20 1· ·
J i
30 I .. I --,: a.
" C
40
50
60 ..__~~~~~~~~~~~~ 60 ~~~~~~~~~~~~
4. Groundwater level assumed at surface elevation
5. Analyses assume fixed-head condition at top of drilled
shafts.
6. Analyses do not consider group effects
7. Under seismic loading conditions, liquefaction is
estimated to occur within the sand layers.
Lateral Load Only
Lateral Load &
Liquefaction
Seahawks Headquarters &
Practice Facility
Renton, Washinl)_ton
LATERAL RESISTANCE ANALYSES
30-INCH-DIAMETER DRILLED SHAFT
Sef>_tember 2006 21-1·20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. 11
Geotechnicat and Environmental Consultants
bsc
0
15_ )
24. ;
38.0
Seahawk Ip. _ ~ummary4 (30-inch}.xls -9/7/2006
GENERALIZED
SUBSURFACE
PROFILE
Based on Borings HQ-3 ___ 'y_ __
Very loose to loose,
clean to gravelly, silty
fine to medium SAND
Very soft to soft wood
fiberous PEAT and fine
~
~
.c:
sandy SILT
Very loose to loose
silty, fine to medium -Q. ..
C
SAND & sandy
GRAVEL with organic
fine sandy SILT layers
Highly to completely
weathered ANDESITE
-1.00
0
10
20 I-
~1
40 I
50
Deflection (in)
0.00 1.00
I
/ . .--"
l
2_00 3.00
I
I
:;;-..
of!
-2,000
0
10
20 r
~ 30 a ..
C
40
50
Moment (kips-ft)
·1,000 0 1,000
-\
2,000
I
~
~
.c -Q. ..
C
-200
o
10
20
30
40
50
Shear (kips)
-100 0 100
r_-_-_--__ ------.r
-~ :
-----·-,-. '\
~
60 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 60 L-~~~~~~~~~~~---' 60
NOTES
1. The lateral resistance analyses were performed using the computer
program LPILEPLUs, Version 5.0.6
2. Loads assumed to be applied at top of drilled shafts are as
follows:
Lateral Load = 40.0 kips
Moment= O kips-ft
Axial Load= 400.0 kips
3. Analyses assume the following drilled shaft
properties:
Area Moment of Mooulus of
(in2) Inertia (in4) Elasticity (ksi)
------------------------------------,,, .., -
0 p 707.0 39,761 7,100
.........
~ .....
Length
(ft)
53.0
4. Groundwater level assumed at surface elevation
5. Analyses assume fixed-head condition at top of drilled
shafts.
6. Analyses do not consider group effects.
7. Under seismic loading conditions, liquefaction is
estimated to occur within the sand layers.
8. Under design-level seismic conditions, analyses
assume lateral spreading of up to 8-feet at ground
surface.
Liquefaction & Lateral
Spread
Lateral Load,
Liquefaction, & Lateral
Spread
Seahawks Headquarters &
Practice Facility
Renton, Washin_g_ton
LATERAL RESISTANCE ANALYSES
30-INCH-DIAMETER DRILLED SHAFT
September 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. 11
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
bsr
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
21-1-20525-001
APPENDIX A
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
CURRENT SHANNON & WILSON EXPLORATIONS
Figure No.
A-1 Soil Classification and Log Key (2 sheets)
A-2 Log of Boring HQ-I
A-3 Log of Boring HQ-2
A-4 Log of Boring HQ-3
A-5 Log of Boring HQ-4
A-6 Log of Boring HQ-5
A-7 Log of Boring HQ-6
A-8 Log ofTest Pit TP-1
A-9 Log of Test Pit TP-2
A-10 Log of Test Pit TP-3
A-11 Log of Test Pit TP-4
A-12 Log of Test Pit TP-5
A-13 Log of Test Pit TP-6
A-14 Log of Test Pit TP-7
A-15 Log of Test Pit TP-8
A-16 Log of Test Pit TP-9
A-17 Log of Test Pit TP-10
A-18 Log of Test Pit TP-11
A-19 LogofTestPitTP-12
A-20 Log of Test Pit TP-13
A-21 Log of Test Pit TP-14
A-22 Log of Test Pit TP-15
A-23 Log of Test Pit TP-16
A-24 Log of Test Pit TP-17
A-25 Log of Test Pit TP-18
A-26 Log of Test Pit TP-19
A-27 Log ofTest Pit TP-20
21-1-20525-001-R 1-AB'wp/. LK.D
A-i
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
2]-l-20525-001
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.)
Figure No.
A-28 Log of Test Pit TP-21
A-29 Log of Test Pit TP-22
A-30 Log of Test Pit TP-23
A-31 Log of Test Pit TP-24
A-32 Log of Test Pit TP-25
A-33 Log of Test Pit TP-26
A-34 Log of Test Pit TP-27
A-35 Log of Test Pit TP-28
A-36 Log of Test Pit TP-29
OLDER SHANNON & WILSON EXPLORATIONS
A-37 Log of Boring SWB-1
A-38 LogofBoringSWB-IA
A-39 Log of Boring SWB-2 (2 sheets)
A-40 Log of Boring B-7 (2 sheets)
A-41 Log of Boring B-16
A-42 Log of Boring B-17 (2 sheets)
A-43 Log of Boring B-18
A-44 Log of Boring B-19 (2 sheets)
A-45 Log of Boring B-20 (2 sheets)
A-46 Log of Boring B-22 (2 sheets)
OLDER WOODWARD-CLYDE EXPLORATIONS
A-47 Log of Boring BAX-I (Woodward-Clyde, 1983)
A-48 Log of Boring BAX-2 (Woodward-Clyde, 1983)
A-49 Log of Boring BAX-3 (Woodward-Clyde, 1983) (2 sheets)
A-50 Log of Boring BAX-6 (Woodward-Clyde, 1983)(2 sheets)
A-51 Log of Boring BAX-8B (Woodward-Clyde, 1983) (4 sheets)
A-52 Log of Boring BAX-9 (Woodward-Clyde, 1983) (2 sheets)
A-53 Log of Boring BAX-IO (Woodward-Clyde, 1983) (2 sheets)
A-54 Log of Boring BAX-I I (Woodward-Clyde, 1983) (2 sheets)
A-55 Log of Boring DB-I (Woodward-Clyde, 1990)
A-56 Log of Boring EB-I (Woodward-Clyde, 1990)
A-57 Log of Boring SR-2 (Woodward-Clyde, 1990)
A-58 LogofBoringTF-1 (Woodward-Clyde, 1990)
A-59 Log of Boring BP-! (Woodward-Clyde, 1992)
21-1-20525--001-Rl-AB'wp!.LKD 21-1-20525-001
A-ii
Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (S& V>'.), uses a soil GRAIN SIZE DEFINITION
classification system modified from the Unified DESCRIPTION SIEVE NUMBER AND/OR SIZE
Soil Classification System (USCS). Elements of
the uses and other definitions are provided on FINES < #200 (0.08 mm)
this and the following page. Soil descriptions
SAND• are based on visual-manual procedures (ASTM
D 2488-93) unless othenwise noted. -Fine #200 to #40 (0.08 to 0.4 mm)
-Medium #40 to #10 (0.4 to 2 mm)
-Coarse #10 to #4 (2 to 5 mm)
S&W CLASSIFICATION
GRAVEL• OF SOIL CONSTITUENTS -Fine #4 to 3/4 inch (5 to 19 mm)
• MAJOR constituents compose more than 50 -Coarse 3/4 to 3 inches (19 to 76 mm)
percent, by weight, of the soil. Major
consituents are capitalized (i.e., SAND). COBBLES 3 to 12 inches (76 to 305 mm)
• Minor constituents compose 12 to 50 percent
BOULDERS > 12 inches (305 mm) of the soil and precede the major constituents
(i.e., silty SAND). Minor constituents .. Un\ess otherwise noted, sand and gravel, when preceded by "slightly" compose 5 to 12 present, range from fine to coarse in grain size.
percent of the soil (i.e., slightly silty SAND).
• Trace constituents compose O to 5 percent of RELATIVE DENSITY/ CONSISTENCY the soil (i.e., slightly silty SAND, trace of
gravel). COARSE-GRAINED SOILS FINE-GRAINED SOILS
N, SPT, RELATIVE N, SPT, RELATIVE
MOISTURE CONTENT DEFINITIONS BLOWS/FT. DENSITY BLOWS/FT. CONSISTENCY
Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry 0-4 Very loose Under 2 Very soft
to the touch 4-10 Loose 2-4 Soft
10 • 30 Medium dense 4-8 Medium stiff
Moist Damp but no visible water 30 -50 Dense 8 • 15 Stiff
Wet Visible free water, from below Over 50 Very dense 15 -30 Very stiff
water table Over 30 Hard
ABBREVIATIONS WELL AND OTHER SYMBOLS
ATD At Time of Drilling ~ Bent. Cement Grout [;ff~ Surface Cement
Elev. Elevation Seal
ft feet ~ Bentonite Grout -Asphalt or Cap
FeO Iron Oxide -E~~1 MgO Magnesium Oxide Bentonite Chips Slough
HSA Hollow Stem Auger EJ Silica Sand ~ Bedrock
ID Inside Diameter
in inches rnJ PVC Screen
lbs pounds [I] Mon. Monument cover Vibrating Wire
N Blows for last two 6-inch increments
NA Not applicable or not available
NP Non plastic
OD Outside diameter
OVA Organic vapor analyzer
~ PIO Photo-ionization detector
~
ppm parts per million
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
~ ss Split spoon sampler Renton, Washington
w SPT Standard penetration test ~
" use Unified soil classification
:<1 SOIL CLASSIFICATION ~ WU Water level indicator 0 ~ AND LOG KEY ;;
.;
w
21-1-20525-001 5 July 2006 " " SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I FIG. A-1 z
" 0 Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Sheet 1 of 2 m
~
~
5
" ~ w
~
~
;;:
" i;l
~
N
ii!
COARSE-
GRAINED
SOILS
(mare than 50%
retained on No.
200 sieve)
FINE-GRAINED
SOILS
(50% or more
passes the No.
200 sieve)
HIGHLY-
ORGANIC
SOILS
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
(From ASTM D 2487-98 & 2488-93)
M"-!OR DIVISIONS
Gravels
(more than 50%
of coarse
fraction retained
on No. 4 sieve)
Clean Gravels
(less than 5%
fines)
Gravels with
Fines
(more than 12%
fines)
Clean Sands
(less than 5%
fines)
GROUP/GRAPHIC
SYMBOL
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
• I' ' •
V
TYPICAL DESCRIPTION
Well-graded gravels. gravels,
gravel/sand rfiixtures, little or no fines.
Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand
mixtures, little or no fines
Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
qayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay
mixtures
Well-graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines
SP · :·· :// Poorly graded sand, gravelly sands,
little or no fines Sands ._ -:······
(50% or more of 1-------+----h'i'"r"•'f"+--------------j
coarse fraction
passes the No. 4
sieve)
Silts and Clays
(liquid limit less
than 50)
Sands with
Fines
(more than 12%
fmes)
Inorganic
Organic
SM
SC
ML
:·'. :: ··' ...
... • ·.·.
Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures
Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures
Inorganic silts of low to medium
plasticity, rock flour, sandy sil~s. .
gravelly silts, or clayey silts with slight
filasticity
CL plaslicity, gravelly clays, sandy clays,
-
Inorganic clays of low to medium
silty clays, lean clays
OL
MH
---... ----
--
, 111
Organic silts and organic silty clays of
low plasticity
Inorganic silts, micaceous or . .
diatomaceous fine sands or silly smls,
elastic silt
Inorganic
Silts and Clays ~ Inorganic clays or medium to high
CH plasficity, sandy fat clay, or gravelly fat ~~-Ww -
more) 1------+---{1'~~!--'-------------j
/ /// ~ Organic clays of medium to high
/ ' plasticity, organic silts
//
Organic OH
Primarily organic matter, dark in
color, and organic odor PT Peat, humus, swamp soils with h~
organic content (see ASTM D 44 )
NOTE: No. 4 size= 5 mm; No. 200 size= 0.075 mm
1. Dual symbols (symbols separated by a hyphen, i.e., SP-SM, slightly
silty fine SAND) are used for soils with between 5% and 12% fines
or v.-tien the.liquid limit and plasticity index values plot in the CL-ML
area of the plasticity chart.
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
AND LOG KEY
:S 2. Borderline symbols (symbols separated by a slash, i.e., GUML, silty July 2006 21-1-20525-001
" CLAY/clayey SILT; GW/SW, sandy GRAVEUgravelly SAND)
\1 indicate that the soil may fall into one of two possible basic groups. SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. A-1
~l..----------------------------J.....Geot;;;;;;,;""';,;,;"';.,";.,' ';.,".';,;'".-.· .".m""-ta.1 Con-•'"•'"."'.'-..J....;S:::hee=at:.:2.,oa;f,o2 _ _.
a
'< ~
~
~
~
t
"'
1:
" s
a:
i
Total Depth: 64.8 ft. Northing: Drilling Method:
Top Elevation: -30 ft. Easting: Drilling Company:
Vert. Datum: Station: Drill Rig Equipment
Horiz. Datum: Offset: Other Comments:
SOIL DESCRIPTION " 0 E "' 0)
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the .c .0 Q. 0.
subsurface materials and drilling methods. The a. E Q.
E
stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries 0) "' ci "' 0 U) 0:: U) between material types, and the transition may be gradual.
Topsoil. 1.0
Loose to medium dense, brown, silty, 2.5 0 'I
gravelly SAND; SM. 2I
Stiff to very stiff, gray SILT with fine sand
partings; moist to wet; oxidized at top; ML.
•I
22.0 sI
Medium dense and stiff, gray, interbedded
silty, fine SAND and SILT; wet; SM/ML. ,I
32.0 'I
Very stiff, gray, silty CLAY/clayey SILT,
trace of dropstone gravels and seashells; BI
moist to dry; CL/ML.
'I
47.0 10I
Medium dense, gray, silty, fine SAND with
seams of silty clay; moist; SM. 11I
Medium stiff, gray, silty CLAY; moist; CL. 53.0
Very stiff, gray, slightly clayey, fine sandy, 55.5 12I
gravelly SILT; wet; ML. ' "I ' ANDESITE: Very low strength, gray to ' ' dark brown; massive; highly to completely 64.8 "I
weathered, occasional pockets of
moderate to high strength andesite.
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5/2312006
LEGEND
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
[EJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Filter
~ Bentonite-Cement Grout
~ Bentonite Chips/Pellets
0::TI Bentonite Grout
£_ Ground Water Level ATD
= 1. Refer to KEY for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.
2. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.
3. USCS designation ls based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.
4. The hole location ms measured using a cloth tape from existing site features and
should be considered approximate.
HSA and Mud Rotacr Hole Diam.: 6 in.
Gregor}': Drilling_ Rod Type:
Hammer Type: Automatic
NE corner of proposed building
~ PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blowslfoot)
.c A Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs I 30 inches a.
0)
0
0 % Fines {<0.075mm)
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-1
July 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG A 2
Geotechrncal and Environmental Consultants • •
____________________ .... _________ ..., ____ ..
Drilling Method:
Drilling Company:
6 ;n. Total Depth: 50 fl. Northing: _____ _ HSA and Mud Rotary Hole Diam.:
Gregory Drilling Rod Type: Top Elevation: _:c-c,2;,5;,.5;_flcc.~
Vert. Datum:
Easting: ---~--
Station: Drill Rig Equipment: --------Hammer Type: _ _cA,eue,to,,,m,.,a,,te,iG'----
SE corner of proposed building Horiz. Datum: ____ _ Offset:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the
subsurface materials and drilling methods. The
stratification lines represent the approximate boundan·es
between material types, and the transition may be gradual.
Topsoil.
Loose, brown, slightly sandy, silty, round to
subround GRAVEL, trace of organics; wet;
GM.
.:c!
.c
15.
0)
0
Very soft, light to dark brown, wood fibrous
PEAT with scattered silty, fine SAND
layers; moist; PT.
1---L-o_o_s_e_/s_o_ft_, -g-ra_y_,-s-tr_a_tifi-,e-d-s-ilt_y_, fi~in-e-to __ ---4 20 ·0
medium SAND and fine sandy SILT; moist; 23 -0
SM/ML.
Soft, gray, silty CLAY, trace of organics;
moist; CL.
Medium stiff, gray, slightly clayey, fine
sandy SILT; wet; ML.
30.0
35.0
Other Comments:
0
.0
E
>,
(/)
E
0.
0.
c:i
0:
0
0
" Q)
c5.
E
"' (/)
sI
nI Medium dense to very dense, gray, silty,
sandy GRAVEL; wet; GM. 44.Q X
1
ANDESITE: Moderate to high strength;
gray; massive; fresh to slightly weathered.
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5123/2006
Note: Artesian water pressure was
encountered in gravel at about 40
feet.
'
50.0
'
'
.:e PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blows/foot)
-5 A. Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs 130 inches
"-Q)
0
~I-------------_JL.__j__j__J__JL._ __ ---1=.:.:.:_c=...:.:.l=====:.L::====c:!
w
§
~
~
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
II Thin Wal! Sample
LEGEND
NOTES
[BJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Filter
~ Bentonite-Cement Grout
~ Bentonite Chips/Pellets
ITTI Bentonite Grout
5l Ground Water Level ATD
1. Refer to KEY for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.
2. Groundmter level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may var;.
3. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.
4. The hole location was measured using a cloth tape from existing site features and
0 % Fines (<0.075mm)
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-2
July 2006 21-1-20525-001
should be considered approximate. " "''----------------------...1.----------....L-----"'
~
ii;
w
ij
;;
w
" g
" w
~
i
Total Depth: 40 N. Northing: _____ _ Drilling Method: HSA and Mud Rotary Hole Diam.: 6 in.
Easting: _____ _ Drilling Company: Gregory Drilling Rod Type: Top Elevation: __ -_2~2=N·~-
Vert. Datum: Station: Drill Rig Equipment: ---------Hammer Type: _~A_,,u,,tom=~at,,,ic~-
SW corner of proposed building Horiz. Datum: ____ _ Offset: Other Comments:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the
subsurface materials and drfl/ing methods. The
stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries
between material types, and the transition may be gradual.
Topsoil.
Brown, silty, sandy, round GRAVEL; GM.
Dense to loose, gray, gravelly to slightly
gravelly with depth, silty, fine SAND.
scattered organics, dry and oxidized near
top/wet near bottom; SM.
Very loose, dark gray/black, silty, fine to
medium SAND, trace of dropstone gravels;
moist to wet with depth; SM.
Very soft, dark brown, wood fibrous PEAT;
moist; PT.
Soft, gray, slightly fine sandy to fine sandy
SILT; wet; ML.
Very loose to medium dense, dark
gray/black, silty, fine to medium SAND;
wet; SM.
Loose, gray/black, silty, sandy GRAVEL
with organic (wood) fine sandy SILT layer;
wet; GM/ML.
NDESITE (?) (no sample return).
BOTIOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5124/2006
LEGEND
;<!
.c a.
" 0
7.0
15.0
19.0
24.5
34.5
38.Q X
40.0
0
£>
E
>,
(/)
E a. a.
ci
0::
0
0
"' " Q.
E
"' (/)
eI
,:r
11='
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
JI Thin Wall Sample
[BJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Riter
aIJ Bentonite-Cement Grout
!3:J81 Bentonite Chips/Pellets
0:TI Bentonite Grout
'£_ Ground Water Level ATD
t,!Qill;
1. Refer to KEY for e)(planation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.
2. Groundwater level. if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.
3. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected tab testing.
4. The hole location was measured using a cloth tape from existing srte features and
should be considered approximate.
~ PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blows/foot)
£ A. Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs I 30 inches
CL
" 0
0 % Fines (<0.075mm)
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-3
July 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG A 4
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants • •
..._ ________________ ....._ _______ ..,_ ___ ..,
~
I';
~
ij
;:.
w
" g
~
~
~ «
Total Depth: 20.3 ff. Northing: Drilling Method:
Top Elevation: -24.5 ff. Easting: Drilling Company:
Vert. Datum: Station: Drill Rig Equipment:
Horiz. Datum: Offset: Other Comments:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the
subsurlace materials and drilling methods. The stratification
Jines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries
between material types, and the transition may be gradual.
Topsoil.
Brown, silty, sandy round GRAVEL; GM.
Loose to medium dense, gray, gravelly, sandy
SILT; moist; scattered organics; ML.
Very soft, light to dark brown, wood fibrous
PEAT; moist; PT.
Loose, gray, silty, fine SAND, trace of
organics: moist; SM.
Very dense, gray, silty, sandy GRAVEL; wet;
GM.
ANDESITE: Very low strength; gray to dark
brown; massive; highly to completely
eathered.
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5/2412006
LEGEND
£
0.
" 0
11.0
15.0
17.5 X
20.3
0 .c
E
Ji
X
"' " ci.
E
<1)
Cl)
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
JI Thin Wall Sample
[BJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Filter
~ Bentonite-Cement Grout
~ Bentonite Chips/Pellets
0:TI Bentonite Grout
£. Ground Water Level ATD
NOTES
1. Refer to KEY for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.
2. Grourn::l>Nater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may var:y.
3. USCS designation is based on visua~manual classification and selected lab testing.
4. The hole location v.ras measured using a cloth tape from existing site features and
should be considered approximate.
Hollow Stem Auger Hole Diam.: 6 in.
Grego~ Drillirro Rod Type:
Hammer Type: Automatic
Near center of proposed building
<! PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blows/loot}
£ i.. Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140lbs/30inches 0.
" 0
0 % Fines (<0.075mm)
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-4
July 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG A 5
Geotechnical and Environmental consultants • "' ::,._ ________________________ .,,1,,,, ___________ _.._ ____ _
Total Depth: 30.5 ff. Northing: _____ _ Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Hole Diam.: 6 in.
Easting: _____ _ Drilling Company: Gregory Drilling Rod Type: Top Elevation: __ -~2~4~.5,_.ff,c.._
Vert. Datum: Station: Drill Rig Equipment: ---------Hammer Type: _~A-u-lo-m~•-t~ic~
Near center of proposed building
1
Horiz. Datum: ____ _ Offset:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the
subsurface materials and drilling methods. The stratification
lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries
between material types, and the transition may be gradual.
Topsoil.
Drill through • no sampling.
Medium dense/stiff, brown, statified slightly
gravelly, silty SAND and slightly gravelly and
clayey, sandy SILT; wet; SM/ML.
ANDESITE: Very low to moderate strength;
massive; moderately to completely weathered.
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5/24/2006
Other Comments:
£
C.
Q)
0
20.0
23.5
30.5
X
X
X
0
.0
E
>,
(/)
X
X
"' Q)
ci
E
"' (/)
o=
2I
3=
'Sl-
rn e
5
~ PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blows/toot)
..c .A. Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140 lbs I 30 inches
0. a,
0
§'1-___________ _J _ _L.J.__J ___ .1;.:.::::=::::=.....:J:=:...:.::::=::::=~::::=:::':=~
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
LEGEND
llifilS
[BJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Filter
~ Bentonite-Cement Grout
~ Bentonite Chips/Pellets
~ Bentonite Grout
"Sl Ground Water Level ATD
1. Refer to KEY for explanation of symbols, codes, abbreviations and definitions.
w
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-5
(.!l 2. Grounc:l.vater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vaf'j.
g July 2006 21-1-20525-001 3. USCS designation is based on visual·manua\ classification and selected lab testing.
"' ~ 4. ~u:1~ ~~~~~e= =~~~r:t~~ing a cbth tape from existirg site features and ~~~~~E!!'!~~~s'uttla~tf· FIG. A-6 ,, __________________________ .... ____________ ._ _____ .
~
Total Depth: 46.5 ft.
Top Elevation: __ -~2~3~ft~. _
Vert. Datum:
Horiz. Datum: -----
Northing: _____ _
Easting: ------
Station:
Offset:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Refer to the report text for a proper understanding of the
subsurface materials and dnWng methods. The stratification
lines indicated below represent the approximate boundaries
between material types, and the tr,ansltion may be gradual.
Topsoil.
Medium dense, brown, silty, gravelly SAND;
dry; oxidized; numerous organics; SM.
Very loose, gray/brown, slightly gravelly to
gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND; moist;
oxidized; SM.
Very soft, light to dark brown, wood fibrous
PEAT; moist; PT.
Very loose to loose/very soft to soft,
gray/black, stratified silty, fine to medium
SAND and fine sandy SILT, trace of dropstone
gravels; wet; scattered to numerous organics;
SM/ML.
ANDESITE: Low to moderate strength; gray to
dark brown; massive; slightly to moderately
weathered.
Drilling Method: HSA and Mud Rotary Hole Diam.: Bin.
Drilling Company: Gregory Drilling Rod Type:
Drill Rig Equipment: ---------HammerType:_~A~u~to~m~a~t~ic~
Near west side of proposed building Other Comments:
"' .c
C.
Q)
0
12.5
15.5
33.0
43.5
'
'
"
'
'
0 "' Q)
.D ci. E E >, "' en en
' 10~
"
' 11::::C
'
<
"Cl
C OJ
:, -0"' C!i $'.
"' £
Cl.
Q)
0
PENETRATION RESISTANCE (blows/foot)
• Hammer Wt. & Drop: 140Jbs/30inches
ANDESITE: Moderate to high strength; gray
with brown discoloration in matriex; massive;
slightly weathered.
, 46.5 '2:I
BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 5124/2006
s1-__________ --1_1.__1___1_ __ __L::.Gc::=i4===E=~
w
g
~
~ w
i
Sample Not Recovered
I Standard Penetration Test
JI Thin Wall Sample
=
=
[HJ Piezometer Screen and Sand Filter
~ Bentonite-Cement Grout
~ Bentonite Chips/Pellets
0::::0 Bentonite Grout
5l-Ground Water Level A TD
1. Refer to KEY for explanation of symbols. codes, abbreviations and definitions.
2. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vary.
3. USCS designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected lab testing.
4. The hole location was measured using a cloth tape from existing site features and
should be considered approximate.
0 %1 Fines (<O.D75mm)
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING HQ-6
July 2006 21-1-20525-001
-----------------J---------.J-----'
192
FIie: J:o211D2052S..001D21-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1..0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Envlronmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-1
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, slightly gravelly, silty
SAND; numerous organics (roots);
(Topsoil) SM.
® Dense, brown, gravelly, silty SAND;
gravel up to 3" diameter and
subround; scattered cobbles to 6'
diameter; dry; SM.
G) Brown PEAT, trace of gravel;
slightly moist; PT.
G) Dense, brown and gray, silty fine
SAND: moist; SM.
-Torvane: 3.5 and 3.3 tsf
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2 Hit 8 inch diameter currugated
· pipe at 1. 7 feet deep on south side.
:!!
~
t
~-"'C I-Q) C
CQ) -Q) :,-ca_
e ~ 3: a
(!) ~ u
"O
Cl>
2:
Cl>
C/J
.0
0
Cl>
C
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
C/J u:: I Sketch of Cl> a. .c: E ii "' Q) en O_jQ
North_ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 32.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
.Q.
1
S-1 ®
2
S-2
3 ·0 Pipe of unkl'lown origin
I'· ·--··· ··-·
S-3 ©
4
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-2
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND;
numerous organics (roots);
(Topsoil) SM.
® Brown, dense, slightly silty, gravelly
SAND; several subrounded to
rounded cobbles > 6" diameter;
moist; SW-SM.
G) Medium dense; brown; silty fine
SAND; moist; SM.
© Hard, brown and gray, sandy SILT;
'Tl
!i)
)> co
trace of gravel; slightly moist; ML.
-Torvane: 4. 7 and 4.0 tsf
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Large roots approximately 2 inches
diameter on east end at 2.5 feet.
-01...cBC ca,--Q) :,_. co_. e "' 3: §
C, 3: ~ (.) •
'O Q)
2:
Q)
U) .c
0
Q)
r::
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
U) ...;
_gi u.. Sketch of North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 32.5 Ft.
0. .c E C. Horizontal Distance in Feet <ll Q)
Cl) 0 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
CD
1
S-1 ®
2
S-2 •®•
3 0
S-3
4
12
File: J:o211D20525-001D21-1-2025-001 TF's 1-29021-1-0205-001 TF's 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author. draft.amp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnleal and Environment.el Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-3
CD
0
®
©
"TI
i5
> • .....
0
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, brown, silty SAND;
numerous organics (roots);
(Topsoil) SM.
Dense, brown and gray, silty SAND,
trace of gravel; moist to wet; SM.
Medium dense, brown, slightly silty
SAND; moist to wet; SP-SM.
Hard, brown, slightly sandy, clayey
SILT; dry.
,Torvane: 3.8 and 4.2 tsf
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~-"CL. G.>c
C Q) -Cl) :J-ro ..... e"' 3::§
(!) 3:: ~ u
C
SL
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
<I) u::_ I Sketch of .,
a. .c E -a. "' (1) en OJ_Q
North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 32.0 Ft.
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10 2
0
CD
S-1 0
1
S-2 2
G)
3
S-3 ©
4
12
File: J:0211 D20525-001o21-1-2025-001 TPs 1·29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: drattemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
09Cltetfinlcal and Envlronmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-4
CD
0
0
©
®
®
'"II
~
!
~
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, brown, silty SAND; (Topsoil)
SM.
Dense, brown, gravelly, silty,
medium to coarse SAND;
subangular to subrounded cobbles
up to 6" diameter; slightly moist;
SM.
Very dense, gray and black, silty,
gravelly, medium SAND; slightly
moist;SM.
Dense, black, slightly silty, fine
SAND; moist; SP-SM.
Medium dense, gray, slightly silty
SAND to medium. stiff CLAY;
lenses approx. 0.02' thick; SP-SM.
Medium stiff, brown gray clayey
SILT; thin lenses of brown fine
SAND (approx. 0.03'); moist; ML.
-Torvane: 2.5 and 2.2 tsf
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~-"' 'Ui.... G>c: " CQJ....,Q) C. ~ .... ctl .... E e"' ~ a Cl~~(.) <11
Cf) 0
S-1
I
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-5
SL I I I
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u' I Sketch of North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.5 Ft.
.c
ti
" Dj_Q
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10 2
0 CD
0
1
0
2 ©
3' I ®
I . . . . . .... \. .
. .
®
I ' • _........._, > ,
4
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dral'temp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcel and Envlrnnmental Consultants JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-5 PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
West Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.0 Ft.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
~-1/J u::_ I Sketch of "CJ~ Q) C .91 C Ql -Q) C. -E ::i ro .,_
E ~ a C. a~ "' Q) ~o (J) 0 j_CJ_ 2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10 12
0 G) G) Loose, brown, silty SAND;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
® "CJ
Dense, brown, silty, gravelly SAND; ~ moist; cobbles to 6" diameter; SM. Q)
1/J
.0
0
S-1 1 ®
0 Stiff, gray, slightly clayey, slightly I Q)
C
0 gravelly, silty SAND; moist; lenses z
of gray, sandy silty clay
(approximately 0.5"); SM.
© Stiff, gray, silty CLAY and
gray-brown, silty SAND, trace of
gravel; lenses of brown, sandy silt;
numerous organics; CH-SM
2
.i 1· S-2 I
• • • • • •••
G)
-Torvane: 3.3, 5.0, and 4.0 tsf 3
S-3
4
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
"Tl
!i>
!
N
File: J:o211D205:i!:>-001D21-1·202S-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Dale: 06-30-2006 Author: dranemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-6
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
® Dense to very dense, light brown
and gray, gravelly, clayey, silty
SAND: moist; subrounded cobbles
(approx. 4"); scattered organics;
interbedded with gray, silty clay:
SM-CH.
0 Hard, gray, silty CLAY; moist;
CL-CH.
"Tl
!i'l
~ ....
w
-Torvane: 6.8 and 6.0 tsf
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~ -""CL.. tl) C
C Cl> ......, Q)
:, -~ -e "' " CJ s: :a'! 8
-0 a,
i':: a,
<I) .c
0
a,
C:
0 z I
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DA.TE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
North Pit Side "' u:: I Sketch of a,
C. r. E 0. "' a, en DjQ
Surface Elevation: Approx. 27 .5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0 CD
1
I S-1 ®
2
S-2 3 0
4
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Gaotechnlcal and Envlronmantal Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-7
0)
®
0
0
"Tl
i5
~ -....
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose. brown, silty SAND; moist;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
Very dense, brown and gray, silty,
gravelly SAND; moist; trace to
scattered organics; cobbles to 4";
SM
Dense, brown, slightly cobbley,
slightly silty to silty, gravelly SAND;
moist; trace to scattered organics;
cobbles to 4"; SP-SM/SM.
Medium dense, gray, silty SAND;
moist; distinct oxidation lines;
approximately 0.7 feet wide; SM.
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~-"O ~ _$ C C W fll Q) ::,-
?; ~ O fll
c'.5 3: ~o
:sz_
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Sile and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' u:: I Sketch of .,
i5. .c E li "' Q) en Oj_(l_
North _ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 22.0 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6
0 0)
®
1
S-1
2
0
S-2 3
5;30
4
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1·29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author. drartemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
G90tachnlcal and Envln:mmental Con9Ultsnts
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-8
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
® Dense, gray, slightly cobbley,
slightly gravelly to gravelly, silty
SAND; moist.
@ Dense, brown, silty SAND, trace of
gravel; moist; scattered organics;
:!! p
~ ....
u,
SM.
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~ --0 ~ Ql C C Ql m~ :, -0"' ~ g c5 ~ -;fl.U
-0
~
Ql
"' I .0
0
Ql
C
0 z
I I
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
U) ir_ I Sketch of .,
"1i £ E a. "' Ql en O_lQ
North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 23.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0 CD
/ S-1 / 1
® I
S-21 2
3
S-3 ,@.
4
12
File: J:D211D20525-001o21-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author. draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consultant& JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-9 PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
North_ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 20.0 Ft.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
~-(/)
U::: I Sketch of "'O '-Q) C: Q)
Ca, (Oa, a. .c :::, ..... :::: ..... E 15. e "' c:
(!) ~ ,le 8 "' Q)
U) D_j_Q 0 2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10 12
0 CD CD Loose, brown, silty SAND;
numerous organics; (Topsoil).
0 'C
Dense, dark brown, gravelly, ~ medium SAND; moist; SM. Q)
(/)
.CJ
S-1 0
1
G) Loose to medium dense, 0
Q)
gray/brown, coarse sandy GRAVEL; C:
wet; GW. 0 z S-2 ; (3
0 Stiff, gray, fine sandy SILT; moist;
ML. 2
-Torvane: at 2 feet, 2.5 tsf
at 3 feet, 3.0 Isl 0
at 4 feet, 2.2 tsf S-3
3
4
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
"TI
i;,
!:
a,
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025--001 TPs 1-29021-1--0205--001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcal and Environmental Consuttant!I
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-10
CD
0
0
"Tl
Ci)
> .!..
""
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, brown, silty SANO; moist;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
Medium dense, brown, silty,
gravelly SAND; moist; numerous
organics; SM.
Stiff, gray, silty CLAY, trace of
gravel and sand, moist; CH.
-Torvane: 4.5, 5.2, and 4.7
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~--Ci... (l)c;
C(l) _.Q)
:J+-' ~--0 "' C: ~ 3:: 0 el ~ (.J 0
l
(I)
"' .0
0
(I)
C:
0 z
"' (I) a.
E
"' U)
S-1
S-2
S-3
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u:: I Sketch of West_ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 28.0 Ft.
.c:. a.
(I) Oj_Q 2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8
0 ,CD
1
0
2
k~
3
0:
4
12
Fite: J:0211020525--001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dratlemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geot9Chnlcal end Environmental Consultants JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-11 PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
SOIL DESCRIPTION
"'
...,
-c.._tc Q) LL Sketch of West Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 30.0 Ft. CQ)....,Q) ci. .c :::, _. ctl -E e "' 3: § a. Horizontal Distance in Feet
Cl3:,f?.U "' Q)
C/J 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
numerous organics; (Topsoil) SM.
®
-0
Dense, brown, slightly clayey, Q)
2: slightly cobbley, silty, gravelly Q)
"' SAND; moist; cobbles to 6"; .0
scattered organics; SM. 0
Q)
CD'
1
C
@ Dense, dark gray-brown, gravelly, 0 z
silty SAND; moist; scattered wood
fragments; SM. S-1
2 ®;
3
S-2
• i 0:
4
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
5
"Tl
G)
~ ....
0,
File: J:0211020!,.:.,..U01021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-J0-2006 Author: dra,,,::1mp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geot9Chnlcal and En'v'lroomental Consullanl!
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-12
CD
0
®
©
"Tl
C')
~ ....
co
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Decomposing Wood Chips.
Stiff, gray, slightly gravelly, sandy,
silty CLAY; moist; CL.
Loose, gray, sandy SILT; SM.
Loose, gray, trace to slightly silty
SAND; wet; scattered organics;
SW/SW-SM.
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
~-"' "O ~ Q) C: Q)
C: Q) 1o ~ a. =>-E e"' 3: C:
(!) Cs: ~8 "' en
S-1
S-2
:sl.. S-3
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u:: Sketch of South Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 24.5 Ft.
.c -C. Horizontal Distance in Feet Q)
D 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
1
·CD::
2 •0!·
3
:G)
4
©
5
! .
12
Fite: J:D211D20525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1·29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-13
G)
®
.,,
!i>
> N
C,
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Desomposing Wood Chips.
Dense to very dense, gray, slightly
silty, slightly gravelly SAND; moist;
SP-SM.
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Strong odor, PIO reading 4.5. No
sample taken .
"C .... Q) 'E
§ .s rn .s o"' 3:c ~3: 0
(!) ~ (.)
l
Q)
.2
0
Q)
C
0 z
U)
QJ
ci.
E
"' Cf)
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington ~1 s->o<
Surface Elevation: Approx. 20.5 Ft. South Pit Side
Horizontal Distance in Feet
O 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
1
G)
'
2
3
·®
4
5
12
FIie: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: drartemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geoleehnlcal and Environmental Consuftanta
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-14
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Ci)
0
®
Soft, black, sandy organics
(TOPSOIL).
Very hard, oil rock, ASPHALT.
Very dense, brown, sandy
GRAVEL; moist; with thin lenses of
light gray, sandy silt. 0
®
®
Very dense, sandy GRAVEL; wet;
groundwater seeping heavily at 2.1
bgs.
Dense, brown, sandy SILT.
Medium dense, fine to medium
grain SAND; very wet.
.,,
!i>
t ....
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Moderate sheen on water collecting on
bottom.
3. PIO reading 6.2 on layer 4.
4. Groundwater stabilized at 4.1 feet bgs
after 30 minutes.
-0 '-a3 C: (/)
Q)
[: Q) +-' Q) a. :, _. ca _.
om 3:c: E ~ 3: 0 "' c.!) ~u (/)
0
SL
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
~
L1. Sketch of North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 26.0 Ft.
.c -Horizontal Distance in Feet a.
Q)
0 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
1 CD,
2
2 G)
0
3
®:
4
®I
5
12
File: J:n211D20525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1--0205--001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: drattemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geoteehnlcat and Environmental Coll$\lltmlls
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-15
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
(Topsoil); SM.
® Dense, gray-brown, silty, sandy
GRAVEL; moist to wet; scattered
organics; GM.
0 Medium dense, gray and brown,
sandy fine GRAVEUgravelly SAND,
trace of silt; wet; GW/GP/SW/SP.
0 Medium dense, gray to gray brown,
silty, fine to medium SAND; wet;
SM.
® Loose, gray SAND, trace of silt;
wet; scattered organics; SW.
.,,
!il
)>
~
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Groundwater seeping in from bottom
and sides (2.1 bgs).
3. Static groundwater at 4.0 feet bgs after
15 minutes.
~-"O ~ 2 C: C: Ql "'2 ;;) -0"' 3: a t5 3: ~u
:sz.
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' ii_ I Sketch of Ql a. .c E a. "' Ql en Dj_Q
South Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
CD
S-1 1
~)
S-2 0
2
-~. ~ I
S-3
3
4
S-4 ®i
5
12
File: J:o211D205:i!>-001D21~1~202S.001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author. dranemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlcal and Environmental Consunants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-16
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
(Topsoil); SM.
® Medium dense, gray-brown, slighUy
silly, gravelly SAND; moist; SM.
® Dense, gray, slightly gravelly, silly
SAND; moist; SM.
0 Dense, brown, slightly silty to silly
SAND; moist; scattered to
numerous small wood fragments;
SP-SM.
® Stiff, gray SILT; moist; ML.
-Torvane 2.2 and 2.6 ts!
® Stiff, brown, sandy SILT; moist; ML.
-Torvane 2.4 and 2.6 tsf
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Strong odor at 2 feet. PID reading 6.3 to
9.5.
No samples collected.
!! p ;
~-"'C '-a.> C C:a, -Q) ::s-rn.., e ~ 3: §
C) ~ (J 0
,:,
Q)
C:
Q)
"' .c
0 .,
C:
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' ~I Sketch of Q) a. .c E -C. "' Q)
Cl) Cl JQ
South .. Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 23.0 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
CD
®
S-1 1
S-2 , I . I . ··®
.. I.
21 I
' ... I
©
S-3 I I
a I . .
1 · • • • .
®
4
S-4
5
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1--0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dranemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnlc&I and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-17
SOIL DESCRIPTION
(D Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
(Topsoil); SM.
® Medium dense, gray-brown, slightly
cobbley, slightly clayey, silty,
gravelly SAND; moist; scattered
organics; SM/SC.
!! p
t
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Ground water seeping up from bottom,
no noticeable seeps along sides.
~--oL... <De
C Cl) -Q)
:J -~ -e <U C
(!)3: ~8
"C
~
Q)
1l
0
Q)
§ z
0
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
Ill u:'. I Sketch of Q)
C. .c E 0. "' Q) (fJ 0 jQ
North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 22.0 Ft.
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 2
0 (D
S-1 ®
2
3
4
5
12
FIie: J:o211020525-001Ll21-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205--001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: drafl.emp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geot9Chnlcel and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-18
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD
®
Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
(Topsoil); SM.
Very dense, brown, silty, sandy
GRAVEU gravelly SAND; moist;
faint hydrocarbon odor; SM/GM.
0 Dense, gray and gray-brown,
clayey SILT/silty CLAY, trace of
gravel and sand; moisl; pockets of
medium grained sand and gravel;
abundant oxidation; MUCL.
0 Stiff, gray, sandy, silty CLAY; trace
of gravel; moist; CUCH.
!! p
t
UI
-Torvane: 3.2 and 3.5 Isl
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Hard digging to 1.5 feet bgs.
Moderately hard to 3.7 feet bgs.
~-"' "'O ~
"' C: "' C: "' CO2 ci.
:, -E o ro 3: C: (!j 3: 0 ro
'if. 0 en
"'O
"' C:
I I S-1 I "' "' .c
0
"' C:
0 z
S-2 I
S-3
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters. Renton, Washington
u:: Sketch of North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 23.5 Ft.
.r: -C. Horizontal Distance in Feet "' a 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
CD
...
0 11 I ' , ' .
I I ··.0:
I . . I
2
3 0
4
5
12
File: J:0211020525-001021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: draftemp
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Gaotechnlca1 end Erwlrnnmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-19
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD
®
®
Loose, dark brown, sandy, organic
TOPSOIL; moist.
Asphalt.
Dense, brown, slightly silty, gravelly
SAND; moist; SP-SM.
0 Dense, gray, slightly silty SAND;
moist; SW-SM.
Tl
p ;
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Static groundwater level at 3.5 feet bg
after 15 minutes.
3. Groundwater seepage up from bottom
and undercutting sand.
~-,, ~ Q) C: C: Q) -Q) :, -"'-0"' 3: a <'.5 3: ~u
Sl.
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' u'_ I Sketch of Q)
""i:i .c E 0. "' Q) en OJ.2_
North Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 24.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
I
S-1 CD!
S-2 1
2
S-3
3 01
4
5
12
--File: J:0211020, )1021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: a. .p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotec:hnlclll and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-20
CD
0
0
0
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, brown, silty SAND; moist;
(Topsoil); SM.
Loose, brown, silty, gravelly SAND;
moist; scattered organics; SM.
Dense, gray-brown. slightly gravelly,
clayey SILT, trace of sand; moist;
ML
Medium dense, brown SAND, trace
of silt; moist SW.
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Ground water gushing in at NE comer,
caving sand.
3. Static groundwater level at 2.7 feet bgs
after 15 minutes.
'Tl
C)
~
~-"C~ d>c
Cd) -"d) =, ... m_.
o ro :l: c: ~ :l: 0 (!) ,<? () 0
SL
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
V, ii I Sketch of QJ
C. -'= E a. ro QJ en OjQ_
South . Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.0 Ft.
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8
0
CD
S-1 1 0
S-2 0
2
S-3 0 3
4
5
12
File: J:02110205, ... _..,1021-1-20525-001 TPs 1-29021-1-20525-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Dale: 07-13-2006 Author.:'.).,_.
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcat 1111d Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT -21
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Quarry Spalls.
0 Brown, silty SAND; moist;
numerous quarry spalls; scattered
organics; SM.
0 Asphalt.
© Dense to very dense, gray to
gray-brown. silty, gravelly SAND;
moist; SM.
® Stiff, gray-brown, clayey SILT;
moist; lenses of silty, fine to medium
sand; scattered organics; ML.
-Torvane: 3.9 and 4.0
® Medium stiff, brown, clayey SILT to
organic SILT; moist; MUOH.
-Torvane: 3.6, 2.5 and 3.0
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
.,,
G)
> .:.,
OIi
~-"'Oi....<Dc i:::m -w ::, -co ........ e "' 3: §
(93::,S!t)
0
"O
"' C:
"' u,
.0
0
"' i::
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u, U:: I Sketch of "' C. .c E a. "' "' U) Oj_Q
South_ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
CDI
0
1 3
S-1 ©i
2
S-2 ©
3
S-3 4 ®
5
12
File: J:o21102l 11021·1-2025-001 TPs 1·29021-1--0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30·2006 Author: t. ·P
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Gootechnlcal and Envlronmenlal Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-22
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD
0
Loose, brown, medium, SAND;
organic, (Topsoil).
Very dense, brown, slightly silty to
silty, gravelly SAND; moist to wet;
SM/SW-SM.
:!!
C')
t cg
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Groundwater seeping in at 2.5 feet bgs.
Sides of test pit caving in -boh
approximately 3 feet bgs after 10 minutes.
~-"' "O ~ Ql C Q)
C Ql -Q) C.
::, -"' -E 0"' 3: § C!i 3: "' ~u en
S-1
<:/_
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u:: I Sketch of West _ Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 25.0 Ft.
.c -C.
Q) O_l(l_ 2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0 CD'
1
0
2
3
4
5
12
Fite: J:0211020;::i .. ~ ..J1o21-1-202S-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dr-..... ~.•1p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcal and Environmental Con!lultanta
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-23
SOIL DESCRIPTION
G) Reddish-brown, organic matter and
topsoil.
® Medium dense to dense, slightly
silty, sandy GRAVEL; moist
GP-GM.
0 Medium dense, silty, fine SAND;
moist; scattered organics; SM.
0 Medium dense, gray-brown, silty,
fine to medium SAND; moist to wet;
SM.
® Soft, gray-brown, silty fine SAND,
trace of clay; wet; scattered fine
"11
i5
t
0
organics; SM.
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X
2. Slight groundwater seepage along east
side at 4 feet bgs.
3. Pipe of unknown origin in northeast
comer running northwest to southeast
approximately 1' diameter.
-01...G>C: C (I) ......., (I)
:J ....... (ti ....... e"' ~ §
C) ~ ;ii? (.)
"O
~ a,
"' .c
0
'" C:
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"'
..,
'" LL Sketch of South Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 27.5 Ft. C. .c E -Horizontal Distance in Feet C. "' '" Cl) 0 o 2 4 6 8 10
o
G)'
1
S-1 ®:
2
S-2
0
3
Pipe. I.
S-3
4
S-4
5
12
FIie: J:0211020!.. __ ,..11021-1-202S..001 TPs 1-29D21-1-0205-001 TPs 1·29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dro ..•. ,1p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geote<:hnlcal and Envlronmental Consultants LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-24 PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
South Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 26.5 Ft.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
~-"' u::_ I Sketch of -0 ~ (l) C: ~ C: (l) -(l) C. .c: :, 1ii ., -E ii ~~ ~ a ., "' 'cft,0 (/) Clj_Q 2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10 12
0
CD Gray and brown, silty, sandy
GRAVEU gravelly SAND; moist;
scattered organics; GM/SM. -0 S-1 CD
"' ® Very stiff, gray, clayey SILT/ silty i::
"' CLAY, trace of gravel and sand; "' .0
moist; MUCL. 0
(l)
-Torvane: 4.0, 4.5, and 4.2 C:
0
1
® z
Medium dense, brown, silty SAND.
trace of gravel; moist; numerous S-2
organics to organic; SM. 2
0 Medium stiff, brown, slightly sandy
to sandy, slightly clayey SILT; moist
®
to wet; ML.
-Torvane: 3.3 and 3.7
3
NOTE:
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
S-3 ®:
4
S-4 0
5
"Tl
C)
t ....
File: J:0211020',,,. ...J1D21-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dr ...... np
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotedinlcal and Environmental Consultants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-25
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Brown, silty, sandy TOPSOIL,
moist; organics.
® Very stiff, gray, slightly gravelly, fine
sandy SILT; moist; ML.
-Torvane: 4.2 and 4.5 tsf
® Medium dense, black, trace to
slightly silty, gravelly SAND; wet;
SP/SP-SM.
0 Stiff, brown, sandy SILT; moist; ML.
-Torvane: 3.0 and 3.2 tsf
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
"T1
!il
> ~
2. No samples taken.
-o~a>c
C Cl) -Cl)
::I -(Oi -om 3:c: ~ 3: 0
(!) ~ u 0
-0 .,
~ .,
u, .c
0 .,
C:
0 z
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' ~I Sketch of _West_ Pit Side .,
a. ,:: E -C. "' ., en o JO 2
Surface Elevation: Approx. 24.5 Ft.
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8 10
0
CD
1
2
®
3
®
4
4
5
12
File: J:0211020!:.~ . .J1021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Dale: 06-30-2006 Author. dr-c. .. _ .. 1p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geoleehnlcal snd Environmental Consullanl!
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-26 PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
SOIL DESCRIPTION
~-"' u::_ I Sketch of "tl ~ QJ C: QJ
C: QJ -QJ C. .c :, -"' -E -0"' 3: § C. ci 3: "' QJ
'cf. u (I) Oj_Q
West Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 23.5 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feel
4 6 8 10 12
0
CD Dark brown, sandy TOPSOIL with
organics.
0
"tl
Very hard, black oil ROCK QJ
C:
(asphalt). QJ
"' .0
i:D! I . . . ~ 0 7
1
G)
G) Dense, gray, medium SAND, and 0
QJ
GRAVEL ; wet. C:
0 z
© Very dense, brown, medium to
coarse SAND and GRAVEL; odor
0:
present. 2
-PIO reading 3.4
® Very dense. gray, silty SAND and
GRAVEL; odor present.
-PID reading 8.8 ®i 3
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
4
2. Groundwater seepage at 1.1 feet bgs.
3. No samples taken.
5
"Tl
i5
t w
File: J:0211020-. .J1D21-1-2025--001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: 01.. ,,p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcal and Envlronmental Con!ultantll
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-27
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Loose, brown, silty SAND; organics
(Topsoil).
0 Dense to very dense, gray-brown,
slightly clayey, silty, gravelly SAND;
moist; trace organics; SM.
0 Stiff, gray, slightly sandy. silty
CLAY, trace of gravel; moist;
CUCH.
-Torvane: 3.8 and 3.6 Isl
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Very slight seepage In nortitwest comer
at 1.7 feet bgs.
"T1
15
:i:,,
~
~--o.._ me
§ .!? ni .!!
0 "' 3: i:: <'.53: ~8 0
"O .,
C: .,
"' I .0
0
Q)
i::
0 z
I I
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' ii:'. I Sketch of .,
C.
E % "' ., rn O_jQ
West Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 23.0 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8
0
CD
I S-1
I 1
01
I
2
S-2 0
3
4
5
12
FIie: J:o211D2L ,J1D21-1-2025-001 TPs 1·290214-0205.()()1 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: o.. .,1p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geot9thnleal and Envlronmental GonsuHants
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-28
SOIL DESCRIPTION
CD Dense, brown, slightly gravelly, silty
SAND; moist; scattered organics;
strong chemical odor; SM.
0 Medium dense, brown, slightly
gravelly, silty SAND; moist
scattered organics; SM.
0 Medium stiff, brown and gray,
clayey SILT; moist; lenses of brown,
silty, fine to medium sand; scattered
organics; ML.
"Tl
c5
)I,
l.,
UI
NOTES
1. Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
2. Groundwater seeping up from bottom.
3. SWL at 3.8 feet bgs after 15 minutes.
'O ._ Q) 'E
CQ) _.Q)
:J ....... m ....... e "' 3: §
(!) 3: ~ (j
0
SL
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
"' ~I Sketch of Q)
a. .c E ~
C. "' Q) en Dj_Q
West Pit Side Surface Elevation: Approx. 21.0 Ft.
2
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6 8
0
I
S-1 0)
1
S-2 01
'
2
0
3
4
5
12
File: J:D211D20t.. .J1021-1-2025-001 TPs 1-29021-1-0205-001 TPs 1-29.dwg Date: 06-30-2006 Author: dr ...... ,p
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geolechnlcat and Envlronmenlal Consultanta
LOG OF TEST PIT TP-29
SOIL DESCRIPTION
G) Black/brown, silty SAND; loose
organics (Topsoil).
0 Very dense, gray-brown, silty,
gravelly SAND; moist; SM.
Hard. gray-brown, stratified organic ® silt and clayey SILT; mois~
OH/MUMH.
0 Loose, gray, silty, fine SAND; moist;
SM.
® t\'tedium dense, gray, slightly silty to
silty, fine to medium SAND; moist;
SM/ SP-SM.
NOTE
Vertical exaggeration equals 2X.
"Tl
(i)
t
"O ~
C: Q)
::i-
0"' c'5 ~
"O
~
Q)
(/)
.0
0
Q)
C:
0 z
~
.!1l C ~~ 0
~ l)
"' Q)
C.
E
"' (/')
S-1
S-2 ,
S-3 I
S-4
JOB NO: 21-1-20525-001 DATE: 6-7-06 LOCATION: See Site and Exploration Plan
PROJECT: Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, Washington
u:: I Sketch of
.s:: a.
Q)
0 j_(J_
0
1
' . .
I . .
2
3
4
5
South Pit Side Surface Elevation:
. . . . .
. I . .
. .....
Horizontal Distance in Feet
4 6
~;
. ~ .
0
®
0.
®
Approx. 27 Ft.
12
..:
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL
£ -a. ..
0 Surface Elevation: Approx. 21 Feet
Brown, slightly gravelly, silty SAND;
h moist; (Fill) SM. ~ 2.0
Loose, gray, silty fine SAND, trace of
h. gravel and organics; moist; (Fill) SP. ;-4.5
Soft, clayey, fine sandy SILT, trace of
coarse sand and gravel; moist; occasional
wood fibers; (Fill) ML
Soft, gray, clayey SILT; moist; (Fill) ML
Very soft, gray, gravelly, silty, clayey
SAND and organic SILT, trace of fine
· sand; wet; trace of organics (Depression
t"\ Filling) SC/OH.
Very loose, gray, fine SAND; moist to
wet; brown silt lens at 17 .5 feet; (Fine
Alluvium) SP.
Very loose to loose, gray, silty, fine to
medium SAND; wet; scattered wood
pieces; wood at 21.5 feet; ( Coarse
Alluvium) SM.
Very dense, gray, slightly fine sandy,
gravelly, silty CLAY; (Till) CL.
Possible Bedrock (Andesite).
9.5
12.0
r 16.0
r ,e.o
C: 22.5
23.0
1------,BccO=n=o~M-O~F~B~O~R-IN_G ____ _i 40·0
COMPLETED 12/3/96
LEGEND
"6
.D
E > rJ)
w
'• . · .. · ..
.' ,,_.
'X
~ I{,,:'.·
'• . ..
~
.. ..
ci
E ... • rJ)
•I
2I ·~
·I sJI
•I
1I
·I
• :::r:
10=
11=
• Sample Not Recovered
I 2" 0.0. Split Spoon Semple
JI: 3" O.D. Snelby Tube Semple
Surface Seal
Annular Sealant
Pie2omoter Screen
Grout
Weter Level
NOTES
1. The stratificetion lines reprosent the approximste boundaries botween
s<Ml typoc. and the transition m•Y be gradual.
2. The discussion in thti text of this report is necessary for II proper
underst•ndino of tha n.turci of subsurface msterials.
3. W.ter level. if indicated above, is for the dete specified and ffMl)i vwy.
4. Refer 10 KEY for explenlltion of "Symbols" and defin~ion11.
5. USC letter 1ymbol be,u,,d on vieual claniflerrtion.
.., ~
C Cl :, ...
0 ..
5~
~
0
.E
5 ..
.E
5
0
..: Standard Penetration Resistance LL
£ (140 lb, weight, 30". drop) -.lo. Blows per foot Q. ..
0 0 20 40 6(
.· ....... .
5 ::::::: :•,:-:-:-:-::-:-:--1:-:-:·-.:-:-::-:-i:
' ....... .
101-+-----'-~:~:~~·:-~::~:~:~:~-~-~-~-~--~·~·..:..1·
~ .: : : : : : : : . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : .... '' ...
: : : : :, 95;4 • : : : : : : \ i I:::~\\\
15H-~~~-'-~.~~·-~-~-~-~-~--.~-~-~-~-~-~·~·~·..:..1·
.; : : : : : : : : ......... : : : : : : : : :
.
\
20k ,·~:·~-~-f'~·~:~::~:·;.:~1:~:~::~:~::J:
-• : : : :: ~ : I : : 1
: stf · ·
251-----'-• I : : ~o/1"'112::
.... ' .. '
30 1----:-:-:-: -• : : : : : . . . . o0/2-:-•
35 ..... : : : : I : .•• : : : I : : : : ?i't·'
401-~~~~+1-·-·~~~-+-·-·_·_-_._._._._·~
: I:::
451------+-----+------1
........ ' ................. . . . . . . . . ' .................. .
0 20 40
• % Water Content
Plestic Limit I e I Liquid Limit
Neturel Water Content
J/>.G Development
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING SWB-1
6(
December 1996 W-7443-03
, -
I
'
'· ' I
' I
i
' I
I
... ·
..
• •
MASTERLG 217117
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
.; ...
,::
~ a.
Suriace Elevation: Approx. 21 Feet " 0
Brown, silty, gravelly SAND; moist; GM.
3.0
4.0 Brown, silty sand with wood; moist; SM.
Brown, sandy SILT; moist; ML.
l---=,-,-:-:---:---,---:--::,;:::-:-::c:-<'l,-;,:-::;::;-;:::-:;;;;:;;;~~ 8.0 Stiff, brown, clayey SILT; wet to moist;
plastic; trace of sand and gravel;
(Depression Filling} CL-ML.
l---,,-=---,;:-~:-;-.. :-::-,:;-:;--=.-.=-:----1 20.0 Stiff, gray, silty CLAY and clayey SILT;
moist; trace of gravel and shell fragments;
very stiff below 30 feet; (Glaciomarine
Drift) CL.
l---:.,--,,---:--:-::----~==:-::-==::---"1 33.0 Medium dense, gray, slightly gravelly
lsubround), silty, fine to medium SAND;
wet; local trace of clay; (Recessional
Outwash) SM.
1-.,..,.---,--------.-,-=..,.,-,-,.=~--J 38.0 Very dense, gray, gravelly, clayey, fine
sandy SILT; (Ice-Contact Deposit?) ML.
1----,,...,----.,.,---~====c-----44.0 Possible tuffaceous SANDSTONE •• 44.2 BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 12/5/96
LEGEND
0
"e ,..
1/)
• Semple Not Recovered
I 2." 0.0. Split Spoon Sample
][ 3" O.D. Shelby Tube Sample
Surface Seal
Annular Sealant
Piezometer Screen
Grout
Water Level
,.
NOTES
1. The lltrat:ifieation lines represent tho npproximete baundaries between
sail typN, lind the transition may be gradual.
2. The Omr;ussion in the text of this repart is necessary for a proper
understanding af the nature of aubaurl•ce mat.eriala.
"' .,
a.
-~
1/)
,r
3. Water lovol, if indiceted above, ii for the date specified and may vary.
4. Refer to KEY for explenation of "Symbols" end definitions.
5. USC letter symbol based an visual c:lassi(ic:atian .
.., ~
C: .,
:, ~
ll, i
.; Standard Penetration Resistance ...
,:: 1140 lb. weight, 30" drop}
~ & Blows per foot a.
" C 0 20 4
: : : : r:::: ......... ......... . ........
5
......... . . . . . . . . .
......... 15i._:_:_.:..:...:..:...:..:...:..+..:...:..-'---.:..C...:-+-'------I
20 • •--•-•------,
I
I 35 ~--· -,,· -~-,-· _._ ·--+----1 I:
. : l:
·I· . : : : : : I. ... : : : : : : i::: ·I.
.... • • • • • I • • . • • • • : I • .. so13·~
: I: · ·I· 40
• I • : · • • ••• • 1 • • • • soi:i·· 451----+----+-----t
0 20 40
• % Water Content
Ple•tic Limit I • I Liquid Lim~
Natural Water Content
JAG Development
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING SWB-1 A
6
December 1996 W-7443.()3
SHANNON &. WILSON. INC • FIG. A-36
G.olaclinic.t and. En~i'oomental Corw.,~ Shoot 1 of 1
I
L
C
L
( ..
l
(
i
I
I
--
1
I
I
,_.ASTERLG 217/!7
.; .. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL 0 .,
£ J:I ii E ~ .E Cl. ... . .,
Surface Bevatlon: Approx. 22 Feet
., en en 0
Brownish-gray, silty, sandy GRAVEL;
~ moist; {Fill!GM. -2.5 ,I Very loose, brown and gray, fine sandy
h SILT and fine gravelly, fine to coarse r 5.0
•I SAND; moist; scattered wood fragments;
\MUSP. I •I
Very loose, brown, sandy SILT, locally . 10.0
•I slightly clayey; moist; with scattered ',
wood, gravel, gray, fine sand interbedded; •I (Fill) ML 15.0
_.
~
•I Very loose, black, fine to medium SAND; /-/
17.0 r.(;; wet; {Medium Alluvium) SP. • '•. ,I Very soft, brown peaty, organic SILT with : :
wood fibers; moist; slight organic color at •I :
16.5 feet; (Depression Filling) OH. ·. :
gray, fine to medium : Loose to very loose, :
SAND, trace of silt, brown, slightly clayey :
•I ~~ILT interbeds; wet; {Medium Alluvium) ( 26.0
SP.
Very soft to soft, brownish-gray, sandy to
clayey SILT; wet; occasional wood fibers, ,oI
sand interbed 33.5 to 34.5 feet; medium
11 ]f stiff below 40 feet; (Depression Filling)
MUCL-ML. 12I
••I
43.0 Medium dense to dense, gray, fine to I
'I medium SAND, trace of silt; wet; with .I ,4I slightly silty to silty, fine SAND and sandy t : ·i
SILT interbeds at 45 and 60 feet; ·1
scattered wood fibers at 61 feet; clayey .1
I
SILT interbed at 65 feet; gravelly at 68 to :: ·i ,.I ·1 69 feet; {Medium Alluvium) SP·SM. _I
I
·.·"t
-1
"I _I
t
:.-l
·1
CONTINUED NEXT PAGE .1
LEGEND
• Sample Not Recovered BTI Surface Seel
I 2" 0.0. Split Spoon Somplo 0]81 Annular Sealant
J[ 3" 0.0. Shelby Tube Somp1,, [EJ . Piezometer $croon
0J2l Grout
i( Water Level
... NOTES
1. The stratification lines ropreaent the approximate bounderia between
aD11 tvP•, and the transition may be gradual.
2. The discu.cian in the text of thia report ill necosury for a prop«
underst..ncling of the nature of subaurfece meteriala.
3. Wirt.• level, tf Indicated above, ii for the date cpecified and may v.ry.
4. Refer to KEY for explanation of "'Symbols" and definitiorw:.
5. USC letter symbol bi,sed on visual ch1scific11tion.
.; Standard Penetration Resistance ,,
~ LL
C .,
£ {140 lb. weight, 30" drop) :, ~
5~ ~ .... Blows per foot Cl. .,
0 0 20 40 ru-
• ••• : .• : :....: 5 . ,., l, :
t,.: ••
10 :1ilh(U
¥'. ... :
•• '·'
"' ~: ~ 15 :2'!~: 0 1· "' .
' . .
C •• 11"§ •• 0 20 . :-.
'
\:
25 '-·
:.i,,.: I ---
i I
! 30 •• I ·~ . '
\ I • 35 ;,\. :
I
40 :~:•::.::_: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . ' . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
45 .... , ~ ... . ' '
I
I i 50 : :, ! I ·x I '''
55 -' :)1,.-..
: :..:
0 20 -40 60
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I • I Liquid Lim~
Natural Water Content
JAG Development
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING SWB-2
December 1996 W-7443-03
SHANNON & WILSON. INC. I AG. A-3~
Geowc::hroiclll .al1d Enwi"orm,nllll Conauh..-illl Sheet 1 of 2
' I
' l
t
'
[
' I
{
J
J
J
'MA.STERLG 20/97
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Surface Elevation: Approx. 22 Feet
.;
0 LL
£
.,, .. E
C. ...
" Vl
C
..
" 'li
.E ...
Vl
·1 n _l
Very stiff, gray, sandy, clayey SILT and
silty CLAY, trace of gravel; wet;
(Lacustrine Depositl CL-ML.
B3.0
.I
I ·: l
·1
.I
I
:: ·1
·1
.I
I
:: l
·1
.I
I
:: l
·1
.I '°I
I
:: ·1
1 .
.l
I ·: ·1
~~
~~ 1-------------------l 90.5 24::J: Very dense to dense, greenish-gray,
gravelly, silty, fine to medium SAND and
hard, gray, slightly sandy, clayey SILT;
wet; (Glaciomarine Driftl SM.
1-------------,---,-----1 90.0 Very dense; moist; very weathered
tuffaceous SANDSTONE.
1------===~====~-----105.31--27;:::c::: BOTTOM OF BORING
COMPLETED 1 2/4/96
:
LEGEND
• Samp1e Not Recovered
I :z• O.D. Spl~ Spoon Sample
JI 3• 0.D. Shelby Tube Semple
NOTES
Surface Seal
Annular Sealant
Piezometer Screen
Grout
Water Level
1. The stretificlltion lin• represent the approximate boundaries between
tioi! types. and the transition may be gradual.
2. The discussion in the text of this report ia necKHry for a proper
underuending Df the nature of subsurface materialt:,
3. Wat.er level, if indicated above, is for the date specified and may vwy.
4. Rt!lfer to KEY for explanation of ·Symbols"' and definitloM.
5. USC letter aymbol bas&d on visunl clessificetion.
,, ~
C Gl :, ..
5::
.;
LL
£ ..
C.
" C 0
Standard Penetration Resistance
(140 lb. weight, 30" ,drop)
Ji. Blows per foot
20 40
: : ...... :..;_!.:: ~: ••• : ........ . :::::::~:::::::::•
651-'-'-'-'-'..C...:...:.ef...:..c...:....:..C.c..:,,;-s:+:....:..:....:..c...:..:..:..-'--I :::::::: .... : : : : : : : : :
:::::i11:11:::::1
701-'-----+---l---+-----I
::1:7::: ....... .
75~...:...:...:..;..:...:...:..+-'-1a~.:...:....:...:...+--'-----, ·rmw:::,:::::
so~.:...:....:..;..:.:...:...+.:.._:.:...:....:...:....:...:...:i-.;-.:...:...---, ,v~::::;:
85 . . .;: ' • • '--. _c.c._ '-\-C.C.C.C.'---'--'--'-1
. . . . . ... ·-·. ...: :
I I
: ! •.• i .,
· · · · I · · · -501:Z~ • ... :<: .. --:\::· ::• I : : I:::
•1•: ··~ .. : :•:I: ... :: . ._..,.
: : ! : : : -~: :~: !~'~,,~:~:~
90
95
100
•• • 1 • •••• · : • • 1 • • : • sois·'
: ·1 • •••• : ...... . • i • • .
1051-'---. -. -. -, -. +1 ·•· -. -. -. --.-. +,-.-.-.-.50/3~.
•••• : • • 1 • : •••• • 1 ·.
110 1c...:.:...:....:..;..:...:...:..+.:...---+---:--1
1151~-·-·_-_: ;~· 1_:_:_: :_:_:~::_:+/_: ;_· ·-·-~
0 20 40
• % Water Content
Plastic Limit I e I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
JAG Development
Renton, Washington
LOG OF BORING SWB-2
6(
December 1996 W-7443-03
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I
G9Qteehnica! llrld Erwtonm11n1al Conaultanra:
AG. A-3"1
Sheet 2 of 2
' '
I
-~-.
'
I
L
l
l
l
'""' ,,,.,:;
l
~~
I
~-
I
~: r
·"-' 'f,
SOIL DESCRIPTION
STA.: 13+68 OFFSET: 235' L
Approx. Surface Elevation 34 Ft. NAVDBB Datum
Crushed Rock Fill.
Loose, yellow-brown. slightly silty to silty, fine to
medium SANO, trace of gravel; moist; scattered
ii organic fragments, scattered till-like zones; (He) /
I \siwsP-SM.
Very loose, dark brown to black, interbedded,
coarse sandy organic SILT, PEAT, trace of sill,
i--. and siltv PEAT; moist to wet; (Ho) PT/OL r
Medium stiff to hard, gray and brown motUed,
slightly sandy, silty CLAY and SILT, trace offine
sand; moist to wet; highly diced and sheared
with abundant slickensides in clay, massive silt,
scattered organic fragments; (His) CUML.
i-, Dense, gray, slightly gravelly, silty SAND, trace /
' \of clav; moist; massive; /Qvril SIWML
ANDESITE: Very low strength, dark gray,
fractured, scattered silty clay gouge; highly
weathered.
-.c
li
O>
0
0.2
4.5
10.5
22.0
23.0
0
.0
E
in
~~
~
~
X
X
X
X
X • X
X
X
X • • • X
X
X
X
"' 'O -a,
0. C a,
E :, 1ii
"' e;,::
en (')
,I
•I·
•I
.. :E ••
,Ii • • •
sI !
~ :
~
gl Standard Penetration Resistance
.c (140 lb. weight, 30-inch drop) li
O> ... Blows per foot
0
0 20 40 60 so
. .. ,· ....... ''' ... .
:·:•: ::::······,····::::::::::::··
5 ·-· ···--·····--·'···--·-··--------l---------···--·'···---------...
I, a,.. . '. . . '. ' .... , •. --
10,·· ··~_ •.•••.••••••••••••••••••••••
' ............... ' ........ . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... " ...
15 :~·~ '::::::::::::::: :
420
....... '.'' ....... , ........ .
20 ···-•--····· ·····---·····---····--·····--·····-
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
25 ···--·· ··----...:·-·•·-·· ··--.. ·--· -···.·--.. .94
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
30 ···--·····--·· ····-···· ···-·······-··<--·:,.or~
NOTE: Sample numbering change at 35.0
feet.
X
X 12= 35 ···--·····--· ·····-·····--·····--·······--···· --···---·····-sorz-; .,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,
i
t
~
&
~
i!' ~ CONTINUED NEXT PAGE
I FGENQ
Sample Not Recovered
I 2·inch 0.0. Spltl Spoon Sample
TI 3-inch 0.0. Shelby Tube Sample
II 3.o· O.D. Osterberg Sample
• X • X • X
X
X • X
X
X • X
X
X
X
' X
' X
X
X
~
X
X
X r
X
X
X
~ ,.. X
Surface Seal
Annular Sealant
Piezometer Screen
Grout
,.-
Ground Water Level ATD
Ground Weier Level in Well
=-s.
1. The stratification lines represenl the approximate boundaries between soil
types, and t11e transition may be gradual.
2. The discussion in the text of this report Is necessary for a proper
understanding of the nature of lhe subsurface materials.
§ 3. Groundwater level, tr Indicated above, is for the date specified and rria.y vary.
40 ----··-·---:----·----:-------: --son:s-; ~
. . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . .
45 ·-·······-
50 -.. ,.-....... _ .... , .. -., .. ···-···SU73•, !to
... • ......... '··. '.
55 ---------·--··--·: ···--· .. ··--·····: --·-----·····-: ... ·---·sst1·, "' ....................
' ' . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . .
..... , ......... , ........ .
0 20 40 60 60
e % Water Content
Plastic Limit r • I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
LOG OF BORING B-7
August 2000 4. Refer to KEY for explanation of ·symbols· and definitions.
ffi i::. 1,~,..~ rlodgn<>1;..,,.,,;.,. ..,..,.,.,.,,1 "" "; .... .,1 . ..-,<>n11<:11 ,..1,,.,.,;n,..,.,;,.,.,, ,..,~ .,,,1 ...... , .. r1 C'U A .. 11'11"\P.,I Cl '~"' C'l"\td INC I Cl~ A AO ,.. ._., 1r,,1u·u_.,,, u. ,ru ... ...,,.n,, . 1 •-· ·'T I laboratory index testing. Geotechnlc:a1 and Environmental Consultants Sheet 1 of 2 ''------------------'--------~~~~~ DRAFT REV -B
I
I
-
-
..
I
~
STA.: 13+68
SOIL DESCRIPTION
OFFSET: 235' L
Approx. Surface Elevation 34 Ft. NAVDBB Datum
color change to light gray from 65.0 to 70.0
feet
lense o1 blue-green clayey, silty sand
(gouge?) at 110.0 feel
~J-----=-so=-n=o=-Mo-c-,o"'F=-=so=R.,.,1 N-cGc-------1
~
COMPLETED 7/27/2000
NOTE: The hole was moved 5 feel south & reDnlled after a
sampler was lost in the first hole. A VNP was
installed in the first hole & a seismic casing was
installed in the second hole.
:S
,5
C.
" 0
110.1
0 .c
E
>,
(/)
~ "O ~ m
1i C a,
::, .; E 2,;: "' (/) (')
X 17
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 19-
X
I><
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 21=
X
X p<
X
X
X
X 22-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 23-
<
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X 25-
X .
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
f--> 2,-
:S Standard P,.,,,te~,atv1, Resistance
li (140 lb. weight, 30-inch drop) ... Blows per foot " 0
0 20 40 60 8'
...... '. ····-............. , ·
65 ..................... ~----, .. , ............. :-----··---------~-.. ·---·5014•
... ,· ... '' ... ' ........ .
70'-----~-----~---~---E;o/· 1'
. ·----.. ' ......... '•' ...... .
...... ''" ............ .
751-----'-----.:..._----'--Sntt· .-:-5'"; ......... ······· ....
' ' ........ ·,····----· .......... ,·· ...... .
...... ·, .......... -..... ''' ' .. --···'.
80 ········· ..... ·. :·:: ... : . .-: . ·. ~013" •
. . . ' . . . .
as --··················· :---·····-··········--'.------·---------··· :---------soM··-,..
90 --.. _-:· ........ ·_·_·_·_ >:: .. -...... _·: .. · .. ~~~~;I.
95 ····--···········5-012·.5"· ..
100 C----·······-·~------~-----;..~1'l •
105
. '
110 ······r··-·····--··-·-·····r····-···-50/1• II'
' ' ' ··········-·····--·······················-------------·····------··--·····----115 ' ' . . . -. -. . . . . . . -.. " ..
' ' ............... ,' .... ·-· ...... .
. ... ·, ......... , ......... ····--···· !1--_____________ _L _ _[.__[._ _ _L ___ _l_ __ ._. ·_· ._._ .. _· ·_·_· ._ .. _._ .. _· ._._ .. _ .. _·_· ·_· ·-:·-:1·
60 80 0 20 40 LEGEND
Sample Not Recovered
I 2-ineh 0.0. Splil Spoon Sample
JI 3-inch 0.0. Shelby Tube Sample
IT 3.o~ 0.D. Osterberg Sample
NOTES
Surface Seal
Annular Sealant
Piezometer Screen
Grout
Ground Water Level ATD
Ground Water Level in Wett
1. The slratificalion lines represenl the approximate boundaries between soil
types, and th.e transition may be gradual.
2. The discussion in the text of thi.s report is. necessary tor a proper
understanding of the nature of the subsurface materials.
e % Water Content
Plastic Limit I e I Liquid Limit
Natural Water Content
LOG OF BORING 8-7
§ 3. Groundwater level, if indicated above, is for the dale specified and may vary. August
200
0
c:: 4. Reier to KEY for explanation of -Symbols-and definitions. li 21-1-09054-006
w 5. uses designation is based on visual-manual classification and selected SHANNON & WILSON. INC. I FIG. /J,. 70 iL ___ labo __ '_"'-",;ry_,_••_•_•_tes_u_n,:.g_. -------------------...1~-a_,_°'_'_"'_"_"'_'_'_"_'_•,_•_•.'".m.,_"'_'_'c.=-·.•-"'-"-"-~:-:Sh~ee=t;2~o~f2~~~
DRAFT REV 0,8
• FIELD M OISTURE ,_ 1% DRY WTltASTM O 22161 ...
~ ... > .... SOIL DESCRIPTION
0. u 0 > w _z "' :, ... .A. DRY DE z ,_
" >w :Ii NSITY !LIi/CU FT! ..,
w < :, ,_ :;; >
J: .... ,_ " ... > ci; w 0 ,_ a.. .. ~ Gravelly
0. ::i: §l zz .... $URFACE COVER: sand • 10 20 30 40
w < z ... 0 0 .. with sparse grass cover
.
0 .. • Ou u :i.
. .
.il 90 100 110 120
-V,
-Moist ~ Highly plastic CLAY (CH) w/trace
of fine sand -Possible FILL ' I I
+-------. '/ . '
!
-s 7 Wet Medium Gray ~ ' I'
5 ---f--Stiff ! ! i I, I
: j i : : 11
-r/ ' .
. ~ 111 I '
--i I 1
~ -------ii
-s 5 Lense of organic I . '
-i I i ! \ 10-peat (Pt)
-~ -------------I I Ii ; !
. j I I ! i i
. f--~ ! I I I ! I I I
• 5 17 Very
; i I ii i
-Stiff ~ i ' I 11 ! , 1
15-I'
. 1ottlec ~ I I I ; I ! !
. r.ray-i ! ! I 11 Ii
.~ "'an ~ I! 11: ; i I 11 i, l !
-s 36 Hard ! Ii ; i ! I l ill
~ ii . I I I !
20-~ I I i
I ! 1 . ;
-~ I l I : i
--Posbl. I '' \
~la. R Rock /, I 'I '
' 25-Boring terminated @ 24.0' I . Ob2ervation well installed ! ''
-@ elev. -0.5 1 ! i : i::
'i ' . ' l I I i:: i -I ! I ! I '; I
I I I 1, i 1 -11 ! ! I I . :
30-' I
'I i i I ':; .
I I 'i i -: i I 11 .
' ! 11 .
,~ I i 11
Elnation: 20.5 Data Drilled : 8 Nov. 1978 ~ Equipment Used : Hollow stem auger Port Quendall
Wat.tr level : Elev. 16.9' (22 Nov. 1978)
(TI STANOARO Sl'LIT SPOON SAMl'LE
I PROJECT NO. 512212. BO
IASTM O 15861 "'° > THAN 100 IILOW/FT
CID BULK SAMPLE
Log of Boring B-16
('f] THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE . NII NO RECOVERY 11/78 iASTM D 1587) • Sl"T N-VALUE IASTM D 1586 I
A·./fl
• FIELD -..o ISTURE ... (~ DRY WT II.UT .. D 21161 w ,w > ...I SOIL DESCRIPTION w ... '0.. u 0 '> w _z "' ..t. ORY DENS z 1,-:::, w ::E ITY ILB/CU FTI
1~ ..J a: > ...
< :::, ... t; > a: .. :r > ... en ;;;; 0 ... '0.. !!! !3 .. ':; zz ...I SURFACE COVER; Gravelly sand • 10 20 3Q 40 w < z 0 wo 0 .. '
C ::E cu u :::l. with sparse grass cover ' "' . .A. 90 100 110 120
:1:-1. I I I I -Moist Very Brown .1;-"1_ Fine silty SAND (SM), low I I I I -Dense :i J plasticity -Possible FILL i ! j ! : I -------}:J ! I I I I
S71
i I: -Wet {i· ii I 'I ! I
5---'' , I,'
:f°:1-•I' I , I I, 'I 'i:1,-! ! ' I --i I i i ii . : ·-; ------------I I I I :/ I --i' I ' I I Sf\2 Hard Gray Highly plastic CLAY (CH) w/trace ' '' -/ --fine sand I i ! I i 11 I
10-I ~ ii I i' i Ii iii! ! I -: I I I': I I '' I 11 i . ' I . ~ I l i I I;:, ' I Ii j
i '' 11 --11 I I i i ! ! l ! ! S~6 I I -~ I I I I I l i ---! I I ! : 15-I! i I i i 111 l \ I I: I -. ~ i' ! i I 11 I ! i I ii I i -I; i ' I I I' I J + Ii ! ~ ' I ! j , I 1; --
1111 i ! I ; I Ii ! ; ! ' -I' Ii : ! 'I l ! i 20-,r -----~ ; ; , 1 !
, i I I I! i <'
: . ' --~ i Ii I i I I!: i ! ; I;
-'' i ! ' ' ! i' i
'I;! ~ '' I I . ':; --I I ' " ~126 Stiff I I I i ' -I, ! ! -to ~ i I 25-very i I i \ i. -Stiff -' -/ I I ! ; i I: . i ! ' ' : I I 1 I! --v i
S .9 Slightly plastic CLAY (CL) , with ! : I ' 11 i.
: : I I . 8; -lenses of sandy clay I: I I : I I i : '! I
30-: 'I I' I.
i . I ! 11 '' ! : ~ ' I 1; i I -i , I i i ! I 11 ! -I [% i -I I : I . j ' I --i i ! ii : I ! I -s 30 ~ , I i Ii I 11 I I!! ,. -I
Elnation 26.6 Dau Drilled : 8 Nov. 197! icH2,\.\I Equipment Uied : Hollow Stem Auger ""HILL! Port Quendall
W1ter Level: Elev.24.0' (22 Nov. 1978) .. ' Sl2212.BO i PROJECT NO. II! ST ANOARO SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
IASTM O 15861 "" > THAN 100 BLOW/FT Log of Boring B-17
I]) BULK SAMPLE
u) THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE . NII NO RECOVERY
IASTM O 15871 ~ SP'T N-V.A.LUE 1.6.STM O 1586 ! 11178
A.-f.2.
1 .. F2
1 '-.
.
• FIELD MOISTURE ,_ 11' ORY WTHASTM D 22161 w I "' > ..J SOIL DESCR tPTION w ... I 0. u 0
I~ w ! ... ORY DENSITY IL.8/CU fTl ::, w _z z a: >"' I :'j
..J > < ::, ,_ t;; a: .. :I: > ,_
cii in 0 ,_ ' "-"' ~ ... :E 0 zz ..J SURFACE COVER: • 10 20 30 40
w <( z wo 0 "' 0 ::i; Ou u :::i. .
"' • 4. 90 100 110 120
Wet Gray / Slightly plastic CLAY (CL) , I i ! ii I -! I I I ! / w/lenses of sandy clay. -l; I l i ! i I I' -,-/ I, I: : l: -s 27 Very / 1 ! : i : ! I 40-,-Stiff I I
: . ! i / . : it i -i ! Ii i I . ' -/ ! i i i ! --/ i i ! I I i I I -s 23
/ I ' : I ! I: ! -' 45-, I I ''
/ 11 i i 11 I I ii ii ! ! -1-----! ! • ! I I 11 ! . \ 1 'I . / ! It i : I ! Ii 1 I I -/ Ii! i : i Ii -s 13 Stiff : I i 1 I
-: ii: i I 11 ii ; I ! ! so-/ i I'
i' I: '' i ! i ; I I' 'I '' " ------i I Ii ! l j Ii ii ' / I I
i I ! I: j I I', I i i
/ --i: I l i -s 7 Medi.urn . Fine sandy CLAY (CL), w/trace I I i 11 ii; '.
-Stiff of subrounded gravels i: ! I I I : 11 : i: i I! I ss-/. I
! ; i i Ii I! i ! ; i ' I : , I -ii : i / I ' I ' ! I!! i '. I -I! i I ! I 11 ! i: ! ------
I ! ! : ! ., I I -s 41 Dense ,. Fine to coarse clayey SAND (SC),
-·: / w/trace of gravel I ! 11 11 Ii I
60-., , .. I i I I!:: -.. -I Ii I , I l iii i . /. ..
, .. r. Medium silty (SM) 11 ' : i I i . I ;
.t.t SAND j ! i ·-! ! i I i 1 ! i I ·_t : i' ' I I ''' I
41 I '' . s . ' ' ~-. ~ . '' '' i I I I ! : ! : 'i' I' i ;
65-Boring terminated @ 64.5'
: : 11 ! i ! Ii 'I : : I 1 . Observation well installed @
elev. 0. O' I' i 'I! 1 I I i -; ' i ' I i Ii I I -i I I I I I' -ii ii ii I ii
Ele-tation: Dau Drilled : j(H2,'v1I Equipment Used : Port Quendall
Water Lntl : ::HILLi I , PROJECT NO. 512212.BO (fil ST ANOARO SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
(ASTM D 15861 · "" > THAN 100. BLOW/FT
(ID BULK SAMPLE
LOg of Boeing B-17
Continued
CTJTHIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE . NR MO RECOVERY 11/78 lASTM O 15871 . • Sl'T N·VALUE \.t...STM O 1S8Ei l .
I • flELO MOtSTUA.E ... I"-DRY WTil.A.STM D 2:216)
UJ :w > .J SOIL DESCRIPTION w ... I 0.. <J 0 ·> UJ _z "' A. ORY DENSITY ILB/CU FTJ 1 ... ::i UJ ~ z a: > UJ -lw .J > < ::i ... t; a: .. ::i: '.J > ... ;;ii ;;; 0 ... '0.. ~ ~ Gravelly sand 0.. I :E zz .J SURFACE COVER: • 10 20 30 40
UJ [< z 0 WO 0 .. with 0 • :. 0 <J <J ~ sparse grass cover ... 90 100 ' "' 110 120
!2r.Q"W _
_,.
-ravellv SAND /SP)-FILL y' 11 i I I I
e9<e_S!, -,. .01; siltv I -v ! l ! I ! 11 I -' ! : i '' I I ' I I I --Damp V 111 i : I I -7 Mediillll ::;ray V: Slightly plastic fine sandy .CLAY( '' . I s ! :·1 !
'I I 11 I i I ,-----Stiff (CL) Possible FILL ! I I. 5-V -' Wet ; ! I\ I ' I '' , I I to ' I I -/ 1
1 ! I l '' I Stiff ·-. : I : l i -----' ! Ii I 11 i I .,_
' ii I ' i I i -s 15 1ottlec Gravelly PEAT (Pt) w/occ. ·,/ f-13ray-! I i I I I 10-gray sandy clay ' I
'1rown 0 i \ i ' I I\: ii I! I: I -
-I! : I I i I; ! I•, I i j ------Ii:, ii of fine \ I i I I I: : i Lense I : : : I· --
111 ! ! I cl~e_y sand (SP I i ' ! ; ii ----
111: T ) I I I : I i i I: Ii 11 15--o' ; '
) i \.: ! ! i' j i I. i, i I -s i
I: : ! I 11 I i I': Ii 11 -------v ' '
I' Ii ! ! ! i ! • : Ii: I; I ·-' '
... 'I V '' ' l ! ! ii! i I::. I i: ! . 19 Stiff Mottle, High plastic CLAY (CH) w/fine sand ! ' : .. s V i; i I ; 11 i : : '.1 :/ : , I :,! ! 20--to Tan-
'ery }ray 7 11 j I I iii! : ' . '!
Stiff i ! i : i I: I I I . ! I
----? I I Ii ' I j : ; ; I I
-------Ii I' / I: ' '.
! ! : ; I I I • ·-V Lense of silty '' i Ii I ii;. ' : I -s 13 Tan CLAY (CL) w/ I: ! : . '. ·;: I ' I I ! .\ ii 11 i: i 25--some sand
V -------I' J 11 I , I t: ! i I . '' . ' '' J, I, , : i . i ! I ii I I., v ! i Ii! i . i . v r i ! , I i 111 /i Ii ' -------. I
ii 11 i , I I ! \ : : I,
T ::;ray k) I.
! JI' : ! , I " ''' 30-i i 1 • I Ii'
:: l! I: ; Ii: ';
. l';: '' .
Boring tenninated @ 30.5' . 11 i i I ; J 1 ! i · I : ; .
Observation well installed @ '::' Ii '' I ! I: I . ' . : I Ii
elev. +0.7' ! I I I I ! I i ! I i . '
ii I I l 1 i I. :
1 j I i
Elevation: 24.3 Dau Drilled :15 Nov 1978 !CH,M[ Equipment U,ed: Hollow Stern Auger · UHILLI Port Quendall
W.u.er lnel: Elev. 19.6' (22 Nov. 1978) : PROJECT NO. Sl2"12 .BO
~ ST "NO .. RD SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
IASTM O l~J II-> THAN 100 SLOW/FT Log of Boring B-18
[fil BULK SAMPLE
11/78
(!] THIN WALL TUBE SA""'LE . NII ,;o RECOVERY
{ASTM O 15,871 • SPi N-VALUE IASTM C 1586 l
i • FIELD MOISTUR.E ... 1% ORY WTl(ASTM O 22161 w w > ..J SOIL DESCRIPTION w
u.. 0. ~I <.J 0 I> w _z "' A DRY DENSITY ILB/CU FTI z ,,-
>'" ~ -lw ..J a: >-< ::, ... t;; a: .. J: ,.., > ... ;;; ~ 0 ... 'o. "' ~ '::; zz .., SURFACE COVER: Gravelly sand • 10 20 30 40 0. 0 w I< z WO 0 .. w/grass cover a ::; 0 <.J <.J ::,, A 90 ' . "' . 100 110 120
I 11 -
• ~ine 11 I Moist Loose Gray to mediwn SAND (SP) -I '' -. ' ?ossible to FILL j i Ii 11 i -~ ----Very , , I 1 / I I ------I'' -s 5 Wet Loose -Lenses of or-I '' Ii I 5_ L-. •, ganic PEAT (Pt 'I .. w/wood chips : I!! i I -..
ii i 'I I' ' -... ------' I TI I I -C-
/ I i 'I :d -s 2 '' i
' -If I ' \ I
10-' ' ' -------i l i I I I '' i I -Lenses of sand : I'.! ' ' I j 1 I!, '.' -organic PEAT ' '. i I I: 1 ' I . ' ! ·'-'-'---lEtL '
~s
-----------11 I ' I ; I I:
mediwn silty SAND (SM) '. 8 1. Fine to ! I i I : . i I '-i I
15-' ' ! ! i l ! I : I! ' : Ii -I I j i -i ! I i ~ ; ! 1 I
l -' , I I i I i '. l ! ' I ·'-
i' ! I Ii' I I . , I ! I! -L~ 4 I.' I I i Ii ! I ! I ! I ' 20-i; , . I
-
1 · 1 ! ; . I ! Ii I Ii ! : : !
I ! I I I ! I
•. !
-I i I I
----I '.i ! i I 'I ! i ! . -~ . ' Dense I ------I: I. I! : 'i J -G:t:1ades to fine I I -s 31 I J clayey SAND (SC) ' ! I I l i '-I i I 25-'
.I. I --------11 I I I I I 11 j; i I
--I ! I J : : , ) I : ! ! ) -.1
• . i ! i ! i , I Iii i I ! -~ . 1-I ;
1·) i I/' ! ; I! i I '; ! : . ~ 36 ii!: . ! ! I' 11: '' 30-C; ': l: !
' i. I L----,I ! l ! i i j ! . ; I -i.
-Very "I i l It I I i I! i I
Dense I :1 111 i i i : i 'I: ii _,_ ; ' ! . i I ! I ! : 11 i .. , ' -s R ~in~ 1:l:1 I!!l!d:t:um-clayey SAND (SC). ·-,~ ..• " 'I I' 11 ii I 35 L-.··.,1_ emented i I
Elnation: 20.9 Data Drilled : 13 l:iov. 197 , I
Equipment Used: Hollow Stem Auger ICH2MI Port Quendall
Water Leve! : Elev. 18.6' (22 Nov. 1978) .::HIU, Sl2212.B0 I ' PROJECT NO. [Ij ST ANDA RO SPLIT Sl'OON SAMPLE
1ASTM O 1 S861 ... > THAN 100 BLOW/FT of Boring B-19 Log
([} BULK S.OMPLE
[EJTHIN WALL TUBE SAMPI.E N" NO RECOVEfllY
l ASTM O 15871 • SPT N-VALUE !ASTM O 1S86 I 11/78
• FIELD MO ISTURE ... 1% ORY WT IIASTM O 22161
w w > ..J SOil DESCRIPTION w .. u 0 u.. > w _z Ill A ORY DENS ITV ILS/C\J fTl 1; ::, w :I: z C: >"' -..J > < ::, ... t; a: .. :I: > ... ~~ 0 ... 0.. !!! ..J lj • 10 20 30 ~ .. ::; 0 zz 0 SURFACE COVER:
w < z we ..
0 "' . :I: Ou u :::i. ... 90 100 110 120
Wet
__ .,,, I I I -./ ·,
I,.-I I Very Gray ,:";, Fine to medium clayey SAND, (SC) , -"/: ii I; i Dense .: ./ cemented
-L-.j:·. ! I I I' I ' -s R _::-/. 11 i I I I Boring terminated @ 39. 5' ! 40-'. i 11 I I Observatio~ well installed @ -ii i i elev. +b·:5' -I I -I I '
-I! I ( 1, '' -' Ii I 1111 i I I
' -I I I I I; I I,, I I 11: I -I I I I I , , ;
-
I ! ! I ! 1 i -I I I I i i I I ' -
I ' I i i I Ii
-
11 I I i I 1': I: . I i I I 11, I i I i . I I I I I' , , I I! i
-, I
'' i I 11; i I I -i ! ! I' i I 11 : ' -i 1, i ii l i I i
-
I! i : ! ! .
! ii -; : ! I I -! i ! : ! --; 1 I; I . -: I I ' ' ' -i j l ' I
I I '' ! ! ; -' i ': I ! ' . I I ;
! -i i : -i I I I -' i I Ii I ' i
ElN"ation: Dote Drilled : lcH2M EQ1Jipment Used : '::HILL Port Quendall
Water LeYel : ; PROJECT NO. S12212.BO f1l ST ANOARO SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
(ASTM O 1586) ... > TKAN 100 BLOW/FT Log of Boring B-19
(fil BULK SAMPLE Continued
II] THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE -N" NO RECOVERY
tASTM O 15871 • SPT M-VALUE (ASTM O 1S86 I
• FIELD MO ISTURE ... 1% ORY WTHASTl.1 0 2216) w w > ..J SOIL DESCRIPTION w ... .... u 0 1~ w ::::, w _z .. & ORY OEN SlTY ILB/CU FTI z ..J . a: >"' :Ii
lj <( ::::, ... t;; > 0: .. J: > ... in ~ 0 ... .... "' ~ Gravel w/sawdust ... :; zz ..J SURFACE COVER: • 10 20 30 40 w <( z 0 wo 0 "' and peat below 0 "' • :; cu u :i. ... 90 100 110 120 ,.
. -:_./
Moist Very :;ray :/ =· :;,ine to medium clayey SAND, . .•.''/
Loose /: (SP-SC) w/occasional gravel I I ------to . ' Possible FILL ! I . ..2. 2 Wet Loose .. ~--! I! ! ! 5-.,·, . ' I
11 . . , ; I
" .• I .. ... -I ! . Tl Fi~e -to-rn;dium -silty -----I I SAND, (SM) ·-. 1·, 1,. Possible FILL I I I . 2-2 : t J L<!rrse-S-cl1' -org-aITT.c I I ! I 10-.t.l PEAT, (Pt) w/wood ii I' 'I . : 1 ··1 chips I I,
· 1 --------i I I ii I' . :I ' : ,., I I ! I' i I I I ·r-'' (i I I I I I. '' . s '' 5
: 1 Ii ' I ! ! 111 r'-I 15-Iii: I j I , I
·r I Lenses-or c1ayey-' 'i ; . .
f 111 1· i ! (I ~~~v~~tY SAND I 11 I .
i I i I!! Ii ----i --h f!ediurn Highly plastic sandy CLAY, (CH) ! i i I I ' ii I :a I • s 5 ptiff I Ii I I , 1 I I ; ii ,-=
20-i 11 I I ! i ! ' ----. '. ; . . ' . .· . Medium (SP) to coarse SAND, ii I ' I I i 1 i 11 . I I . ·.·
I!! I : I j .. I ·r-' .•. -------I .. i . s 9 Loose LeriSes Of organic I I ' -25-PEAT, (PT) w/wood I I I I '. . chips -----.
i I i I '' .. I;
I--
.• I ! I 1 I ' -i--.. ;
-------i \ I : . i ! i
~ 5 Lenses of silty I I 1 II i I '' I 30-.. fine SAND, '. .. 11 I ' -(SP-SM) , ,
... ; . I .
! I --.. ' ... ' "LS. 5 -· '•
35 .. .. i i :
Elnation: 17.7 Dau Drilled : 13 Nov. 197 !CH2M! Equipment Used : Hollow Stern Auger
Waur le<tel : Elev. 14.8' (22 Nov. 1978) . ::HILLJ Port Quendall I , PROJECT NO. 512212. BO lil ST ANDA AO SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
IASTM O 15861 ""' > THAN 100 BLOW/fT Log of Boring B-20
(fil BULK SAMPLE .
[!J THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE . NII ~ RECOVERY .. -
t.A.STM O 1547)
• SPT ~-VALVE IASTM D 15861
11/78
... w w w Q. ... ,.. w
z ... :, ..,
w <(
J: .., > ... Q.
Q. ::; z w <(
C "' •
-
-
--
-s 3 -
40-
-
-
--
-§.. 11
45-NR
-
---
-S 16 -so-NR
-
---
-S 28 ,-
55-
.
.
. S 24
60--
-
-
·-
· s 7 -65-
-
-
--
-S R
70
w a: :, ...
~
0 :;;
Wet
,..
(.)
.... z ,..w
... t;
ci; ci; zz wo
C '-'
Loose
f------
very
Loose
Medium
Dense
----
Very
Stiff
-----
Medium
Stiff
----
Very
Dense
a:
0 ..,
0
(.)
Gray
SOIL DESCRIPTION ..,
0 .,
::E > ..
~ SURFACE COVER: ..
:::i. -
··:: Fine to coarse SAND,
·· · with some clay
(SP)
• F!ELO MOISTURE
I" DRY "'TIIASTM D 22161
... DRY DENSITY IU/CU FTI
e 10 20 30 40
... 90 100 110 120
I
Ii I ---------~++-i~++-11-++1++-lit+il-t+l-+H
Lenses of organic I I I .. : µ..:..µ.i+;-1-1-1-1-++1-1-!+-!+f.!+"-I--I
wood chips i I I I !
i
I, I
---------;!
"i-1-H-t++++tt+++tt+++ct
I!
11 I•'' I I
11 '' I
i I I
! I I 'I
I ; I i I
ii I I !
i I I I I
l i I: I I
I I Ii 1 I '
i i I
•,' i I ii
I I i I
I
I
'
j
I !
1,;
; ;
ii
! i
i !
' :
i
, I
' I ': '
' I
'
' I
'I
i
I :
11 I
: 11
I! I:
I " , : 'I
i' ' i
I I I
v 1-1--'-I +HI -4--f-H-HI ++if++-~'--: '+: i-11
V--Highly plastic sandy CLAY, (CH) I : i : i I
I I i I
i
·_,:_·with some gravels "'"i~l-i-l--l-l-l--h-!+l-i-l-l-4+.:.~l--'-i~!-1--11
/? L!,J\ses-o rc ra yey -1-i.,l..1..1.1+1..1..1.++,.++++1--H-+--'-' i-1!
/, SAND, (SP-SC) i I 1,: -
._/ __ • H-4-i-~'l4-H-H++++!+-+-1 /. I , Ii
J_.·:-Slightly plastic silty
j :i-(SM) with some gravels
1.:1.
1.-t
I ,-
1--r.
.;., :
,. J:layey fine SAND, (SC) .,
,.: , :,ccasional gravels
/·
/."--
SAND,
I
11
l 1 i
I
with I
qi
$" ;
'
I I
i, I
I l i
I I I
I ! I
t
I
'' I: !
! l: '
! I, I I i '. '
11 ; I I
i l 'I !
Elnaticn : Oita Drilled : ICH2,\.\
::HILL
I
Equipment U,ed :
Water Le~el :
r., STANDARD SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE
LillASTM O 15861 II-> THAN 100 BLOW/FT
(ID BULK SAMPLE
NR NO RECOVERY
Port Quendall
PROJECT NO. Sl2212. BO
Log of Boring B-20
Continued
r;i THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE
L!.J !ASTM D 15871 • SPT N-V,1.LUE (.ASTM O 1'586 I
I
I
.... I
w I w > w .. I~ w u
w _z z 11-~ a: > "' ! UJ
...J
<( ~ .... :;;
~ ,...J > .... ;;; "' .... 'o.. " C1. :;; 0 zz
w <( z WQ
0 "' . :;; Ou
-
-
-<-
-s
!Very
tLoose 5 Moist Ito '--5-
-
-
--
-s 4
10_ -
-
-
·-
-s 5
15-<-
-
. s ll
l--"-
20-
.
.
·•-
· S 9 <-----25-
-
-
· S 7 <-----
30-
-
-
35 -~ 12
I----.J..,QOSe
Wet
.,_ ---;Loose
to
Medium
Pense
a:
0
...J
0 u
Gray
...J
0 a, :e >
SOIL DESCRIPTION
• FIELD t.101STURE
11' ORY WTl!ASTM O 22161
.6. ORY DENSITY ILB/CU FT)
"1-------------------1------------1
SURFACE COVER; Gravels e 10 20 JO 40
A 90 100 110 120
Fine to medium SAND, (SP)
11
Iii I I ------
Lenses of Brown ! ) i
organic PEAT, (Pt) 1: j I.
' I' i . I
and silt I [ i j I ! 11
---------! I
I I I
I
i I I ' I
' I ' i, ! i : I !
i ,: i I : l 1 ' i I I :i I I
I 1
I
. : ~-------------~ttH#tt~#tt~*~~ Sandy SILT, (ML) with lenses of
.· . . .....
>--,-
i'. I ...
lt
i '.1
H
f. I
·r ,
I-:--:-.
.'•.
: . ·.
Brown organic
PEAT, (Pt)
Medium silty SAND, -(SP-SM)
with occasional wood chips
SAND, (SP)
Fine silty SAND, (SP-SM)
Fine to medium SAND, (SP)
with some silt and gravel
' 1: I
I Ii I I ' ; I : •
' ! I; i I j (
i 1 ' I
' i I: . ' ii , 11
111 i 11 I Ii: i 11
i
I I/
El...-ation · 22. 3 Date Drilled : 10 Nov. 1978 fcH2M
Equipment U,.d: Hollow Stem Auger
Water Level: Elev. 17.0' (22 Nov. 1978)
r., STANDARD SPLIT SPOON SAMl'LE
~(.~.$TM O 1S86l
[]) BULK SAMPLE
""1THIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE
L!J JASTM D 151171
II-> THAN 100 SLOW/FT
N" NO RECOVERY
• SPT ,._VALUE IASTM O 1S86)
JIHILL Port Quendall
' PROJECT NO. Sl2212.B0
Log of Boring B-22
11/78 Figure A-7
A-%·
/ ol z
i I I 0 FIELD MOISTURE .... [% DRY ¥iTitASTM O 2216i w : ~I w .w > ..J SOIL DESCRIPTION
u.. 'a.. u 0 > _z a, A OF\Y DENSITY lLB/CU FT! z I,_ w :!:
\ I.I.I
...J a: >~ > <( :::, ..... a: .. J: ,..., > .... vi ~ 0 .... ' "-"' lj a.. I! zz ...J SURFACE COVER; C, 10 20 30 .w w z 0 wo 0 ..
0 • ::; cu u :::l. A 90 100 110
.
' 120
Wet Hedium Gray Fine to medium SA>'lD, (SP) i ! ! ! I ! 11 -Lnense... -with some silt and gravel 11 I Ii I ! 11 I' . '' ' -Dense ' i ( \ l .. ! l i I ' . I --to 11 very I I i I! 1 ! -s 2 j. I! I ! ! I -Dense .. ' I I j
40-• I j' ' '' .. : i ! i Ii i I 11 11
• . . • I
" '' ; ,1 l ! -. -'' I i j i 11 ' I! j !
I' ' -11 I I! 11 ! !
I ' --! ! ' ' ". ; I -s 39 Ii i ii ! i ! : ! I 45-Boring terminated @ 44.5' i' ''
11 l' ' I 11 i Ii I' ::tbservation well installed @ , , I 1 -: i I l I:, i elev. +40' 11 i '' , I -': 'I
11 i I! I i I 11 '' ': 11 1: -i -I I! I 11 '/ 1 ' ' I!, I ! ' i I i ' . i
-' I ' " i ; I i ' i'' \ i l : ' '' -i ,i I I'' i I 1 1 I I : ' -i I . i 'i ! I -I I \I:, 111:
! I -I I/ ! I 1 I I I ! i ! I;
! ; I 1 , Ii 1 I· ' Ii ! ; ii , , I I i I -
I 11 : I l 'I i' I I; i -i l i i ! I ! I -! ! 1 ii i i ! . ':
I -I i I I . ' : Ii
. ' I I I i ! ! ' . ' ' I ! I '' I: I ' -I! I
i i I ! 11 \
.
I i.
-! ' '! I I ',,
; t '. ' ! ! -' i I I! I i ! ! j I , I i ! ' -! ; ! ! I!' ' ' i i '' ' ! ' 11 t
\ j I' I . ' ! : : ! ' -i' 1. '' i i; '' \: j 1 'I '' I . '
i ' I: : i j I i : Ii 1 ' -
'.1 l: ' , 1 i' I ''. t i ! ! -l I I ! !I : I 'I' : .1 -: i \ I I l : i I I. i ! i : ; '
Eln1tion: Dau Drilled : ' !
Equi1)ment U,ed: 'CH2,'v1i Port Quendall ::HILL 'Nater level: PROJECT NO. S12212.EO
[j ST,O.NO .. RO SHIT SPOON SAMPLE
. l.ASTM O l5861 .... > Tf<AN 100 BLOW/FT Boring B-22 Log of
i]) BULK SAMPLE Continued
ITJTHIN WALL TUBE SAMPLE N" NO RECOVERY
lASTM O 15871 • SFT N-VALUE LASTM O 1586 1
.
Project: BAXTER PROPERTY I Log of Boring No. -· .. Rent~·, llashln9ton 1
Date Drilled, Hay 20\ ,983 Remark,:
Type cl Boring, 6" Ho I low Stem Au!ler
Hammer Weight,
... • .:: j )-
~ :!-c:> ... :! .. ;;,. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 .c E • c i -. .., .., < .. a ~ .. n -0 w ... • • ~w Q "' ., E ::: ... 0
Surface Elevation: ::; ........
FILL
_!. ·. •. -.: • :6
Sandy gravel ·o·o .. · ....
: • Oo
' ..... . 1 21 < • p·o._.. .• .....
. CLAYEY SILT (HH) -
01 lve·brcwn, damp, highly plastic ---2 9 0.002 --1· -. -~~?-: SANDY SILT (HL) --5-Gray, some elay, slight odor, ,_ ,-r" -
.,. -3 2 < ----C
occ.as i ona 1 peat and organic lenses .. -------. J> -·::!::-' '-' -
4 6 -:'_.; > -< ---... --. ---: ------.. \:-t~ C -. . -5 10 -< ·G·~·: -
SILTY SAND (SH) --. :_:_··.-\ :;,. --Gray, medium to 20t s 11 t -coarse, : : ... -. -·.·. -10---:-.~ .. --... .. -. . -. . -.:;.·:.:.· --... . . .,. -. .. . ·. u --.. . . . ·--... -
'l, Peat
___ ... ---... -.,, --C -CLAYEY SILT (HH) =-Ill -6 5
.,.
< ---Black, damp, some peat . -----._, .. :::-: 15--r --~---SILTY SAND (SH) .... ,: .·.·. . 01 Ive-gray, medium -. •'. '-' to coarse, > -; ~ -: . ... -occas i ona I clay/silt interbeds ·-· . -. -:/: •.
. .,, ---C II ... _., --0 . . :i·~~~ --:;,. ..
7 8 < · ..... -... --..... -··-· -
20-'--
BOTTOH OF BORI HG @ 19.5•
-.
--
--
Proj •. No. 90033A I Woodward•Clyde Consultants Appendix A· 1
ti
0-2.q F,1\
i5~/'f.5 ,n-;-;r,t.S
I'\ .. :2 -"2. /
.
(_
BAXTER PROP~lllT Rento" _Washington I Log of Boring No. 2 1---------:-0 ate Drilled, June 2.' ,83 ' Remarks'-----------------•
Type of Boring, 6" Hollow St•m Auq•r
Hemnier Weigh1:
.: ~ .: ! • • . " ;;.,. :: . -
" E • : I!! ... .. ..
w "' ;;; C,
-
-
-
-
5-1 7 0.003
-
2 < -
-3 6 <
-
10-4 3 <
-
-
-
.
15-5 4 <
-
-
-
-
20-6 6 <
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Surl1c:e Elevation:
FILL
Gravel aggregate and Sand
SANO (SP•SW)
Ollve•gray, medium to coarse,
occas lonal thin (0.1 ') gravel lensu,
minor l of silt, occasional thin
brown peat lnterbcds, no odor
J Peat
:}Put
]Put
JPeat
SILTY SAND/ CLAYEY SAND (SH•SC)
Greenish gray, medium to fine,
20t silt or clay, moderate to
well rounded Si02 , no odor
>
0 g
0 :r .. ::;
_, = _, <
l,U ..
~ l,U
C
~
o'1f!. ,_o o
~oQ.
---IJ. -. :::-:::: . ]: -· -Cl -~.-:.~ ·._. --
. J' . -· ;-:'::::.= -~·. ·~ .·
_i.§~·;·. ::_::~::
~ . !: ~ :: ... -\:·::-:. "' -·:. -Ill-·· --:.= tll -•• ==-.... _ ...... -5. ··c = .:·· ==-= Ill • -.. ::::;= ::: ·f-·. · .. · . . : : · .... ·, .. : .. -E¥E c·_::.:.:-----.. === -:-···:
-~-~ '6 =·:····. :_':-.·:~· .... -.· .. . -
-~-:/ ....
,, .... -;:{-~\
.. · ....
-···-· '• ..... -:· ·. u··-.•
Ill = .
~ :_ .. .., ·: -..
C ,• 1--,
Ill. : • .,,. . ,' . ·.: -: -... -... -:-··.·· . -: ..... -+-t'f--t-~r-~~~~~~~----~~-;-;--;--~·
BOTTOM OF BORING@ 21' Cap• -
-
Proj. No. 90033A I
-
-
Woodward-Clyde Consultants __ _
u,c.c. Bfl 1' "J.
0·3. f,tl
3 -11 5 .,/J.P tJ:3-1
11-,. ( -ts~ o.5 tJ;..lc
Appendix A-3
Project: BAXTER PROPERTY _Log • Boring No • tsn?'-
Ren: • Washington r 3 .
Date Drilled: June 2, 1963 Remarks:
i'rpe of Boring: 6" Ho 11 ow Stem Aul;!er
Hammer Weight:
i • .: f > • C, .... = 0. ;:-:z:. -MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 ... E • c C It .., .... <
Q D D L~-0 "' .. ! "' ii :: 31:: IU B .. C
Sur1aa EN'vation: :;
·; • -.r-~ ~ FILL ·:.
0 '.-. -Gravels with sand, 1" minus
. ....... vi~ .. ~ :;; .. ;; ..
sub rounded to angular ~~;'
.. . . "0 ,.· :. -... o .. ;_~···· 0 .. ~ . . .. ... ..
SILTY SAND (SH) ~-:.: ,oo~ ~%! 1 3 0.00~ .. •, .. oOOO C ...... -Dark greenish gray, some clay, . ;....·.-·. 00 • Oo~ occasional thin (0. 1 1 average) --. 00 ..
• 0 .. o_o s-2 6 < pelt lenses, no odor --::-~: :-=.:.·~· ... .. .. . .. '"' .. . -· ... " . . . .; .. ·.::. -.:..: -.... . ·. ·. :-. _ .. .. ..... C " ;;,. . . .
3 2 < :) Peat o-... . .. :=::=-..-...... . . . ·-· :: C II -. :_:. ·.:....: II"--. ,., . ~ 0.002 .. :·;. :: -. . 2 . ·.·. . . -.
:} Peat -=== •. -. -~.(~ . -. . . -. . -.
·f/::·: -10-,_ -: . . . , ... K: . . . . .. . .. . . . ---.. ·c
SILTY CLAY (CL•CH) II • --. II. . 0 l l ve·gray, some (St+) sand, ... . -. u •
occasional thin (0. I ') peat lenses --.. •, --. -. ---~ -s 3 :}-Peat . . . -" . < . :i . . --... -. . . . . ---. -~ . -.,,.
15-
:: -·=
-0 .... . ------..,. -:: : . . C• ---.. .-II .
"' --. --. -C -. -· ---.. -. -.. . --. .. -.. . --. -.
6 ~ -'"' C SILTY I (SH•SP) --. -.. -SANO CLAYEY SAND -. --.
Gray, medium to fine, occaslonal --. -~-. -20-thin peat lenses -. =---==-. . -.. -. . -. ---. . . . . -:::} Peat === . . -. ·-
~BOTTON Cap• JI
OF BORING @ 22' -.
Proj. No. 90033A I Woodward-Clyde Consultants Appendi~ A-4
DRILLING LOG
,
0 ROJECT
BAXTER
LOCATION N198156.4805 E1662509.0209
DRILLING AGENCY
HOLE NO.
NAME OF DRILLER
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE
ELEV. T.O.C. : 19.39'
GRND l7,9'
EVEV.
Soil Sampling Service
BAX-6
T. Asberry
24.5'
Bl SAM %
NO. RE
000 100
19 015 100
7 030 100
PROJ ECT NUMBER
86006S
TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 10 .
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
DATE HOLE STARTED COMPLETED
12/1 2/88 1 2/12/88
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
INSPECTOR K. Susewind
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
(DESCRIPTION)
Medium stiff, damp, brown to black,
SILT with sand and organics. (ML)
3.0'
Loose, moist to saturated, gray, silty
fine SAND. (SM)
7 045 100 ... decreasing sitt content ...
10 060 100
12 075 100
16 090 90
5 130 100
12.0 ---------1
Soft, wet, green to brown SILT. (ML)
OVA= 0 ppm in
auger.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
---)J~ 5' 6
I of Z
/
DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-6
SHEET 2
OF 2 SHEETS
DPT S Bl
(FT) T
AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
Soft, wet, green to brown SILT.
(ML)
17.0 ---------l
26 160 100 Medium dense, saturated, gray,
silty, fine SAND. (SM)
230 100 ... decreasing silt content ...
TOTAL DEPTH~ 24.5'
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
'--
DRILLING LOG
.-'AOJECT
BAXTER
LOCATION N198023.0600 E1662531.8135
DRILLING AGENCY
HOLE NO.
NAME OF DRILLER
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE
ELEV T.O.C.18.83
AND
ELVN:17.3
CEME
HOLE
PLUG
2· ----I~
TAINLES
TEEL
BENTO·
NITE
SLURRY
Soil Sampling Service
BAX-BB
T. Asberry
52.0 Ft.
Bi SAM %
NO. REC
34 000 100
30 015 100
16 030 0
18 045 10
10 060 100
4 080 100
23 130 100
PAOJ ECT t.uMBER
86006S
TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 15
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GAD SURFACE
DATE HOLE STARTED
12/08/88
COMPLETED
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
INSPECTOR K. Susewind
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(DESCRIPTION)
Medium dense, damp, brown,
gravelly SAND with organics
1.0
Very stiff, damp, gray to brown SILT
with trace fine sand. (ML)
... Pebbles ..
REMARKS
OVA = background
(B.G.) in Breathing
Zone (B.Z.)
FILL
OVA= B.G. in B.Z.
and in auger
4-5 ppm @ sample
<1 ppm in B.Z.
800-1 OOOppm in auger
-------------, > 1000 in sample
L:~~e to medium dense, wet, 800 in bore hole
gray medium SAND with trace O ppm in B.Z.
organics. (SW)
... silt lense ...
1 o ppm in hole
B.G. in B.Z.
0-100 ppm at sample
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
-----7-l-5/ ·-
/ "p ~
'---
DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-88
SHEET 2
OF 4 SHEETS
DPT S 8/
(FT) T
AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
BENTO-
NITE
SLURRY
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
5 180 100
6 230 100
57 280 80
Dense, saturated, gray , medium
SAND, with trace organics. (SW)
16.5
Medium stiff, wet, green to brown
SILT with organics. (ML)
24.9 -------~
Dense to very dense, saturated,
green to gray, fine to coarse SAND
with some gravel. (SP)
B.G. in B.Z.
B.G. in B.Z.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
,4-S/-_
Z, • .,o y
DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-8B
BENTO-
NITE
SLU.;_;.R:...:R...,..,,l
SAND
SHEET 3
OF 4 SHEETS
DPT S B/
(Fl) T
AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
16 330
6 380 100
61 430 80
80
Medium dense to dense, saturated,
green to gray, fine to coarse SAND
with some gravel. (SP)
... silt lense ...
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
4· 5/ . -----. ~ ~ 1¥--
' '--·
DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-SB
SHEET 4
OF 4 SHEETS
DP S Bi AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
(Fl) T
54
5
60
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
Dense, saturated, green to gray,
fine to coarse SAND with some
44 505 100 gravel. (SW)
TOTAL DEPTH= 52 FT
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
DRILLING LOG
LOCATION
DRILLING AGENCY
HOLE NO.
NAME OF DRILLER
1JECT
BAXTER
N197759.1941
SOIL SAMPLING SERVICE
BAX-9
Terry Asberry
PROJ ECT NL• H
86006S
TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 8
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
DATE HOLE STARTED
12/13/88
COMPLETED
12/14/88
DRILLING METHOD HOLLOW STEM AUGER
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 18.4 FT INSPECTOR WARREN PERKINS
ELEV. T .0 C.: 23.40
GRND
ELEV: 21.9
CEMENT
HOLE
PLUG
SAND
SCREEN
. . ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DPT S B/
(FT) T
SAM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
NO. REC (DESCRIPTION)
1
2
Fill Coarse, trap rock, gravels -
NO SAMPLES
42 023 67 Hard, damp, dark gray sitty CLAY, trac
32 038 67
31 053 50
9 068 50
18 083 85
30 098
9 124
well rounded gravels. (CL· ML)
7.5
Brown organic SILT
8.0
Medium dense, saturated gray silty
SAND ( 10-20% silt). (SM)
4.0 --------~
PEAT with high silt content and
wood fragments. (OUOH)
REMARKS
FILL
.:sz:
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
A~52 -·----·------h·-·--···--· ----
I o+ z.
DRILLING LOG (Co,,,. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-9
SHEET 2
OF 2 SHEETS
DPT S Bi
(FT) T
AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
19
20
21
24
27
8
9
30
31
2
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
11 154
PEAT wtth high silt content and
wood fragments. (OUOH)
TOTAL DEPTH= 18.4 FT
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
/-/-52
---------------... -----·-···--
:Z of Z
DRILLING LOG
)JECT
BAXTER
PROJ ECT N: .ER
860068
LOCATION N198531.0292 E1663124.0795 TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 11
DRILLING AGENCY
HOLE NO.
NAME OF DRILLER
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE
ELEV. T O.C: 22.01'
GRND ,
ELEV:20 ·5
HOLE
PLUG
BENTO-
NITE
SLURRY
Soil Sampling Service
8AX-10
T. Asberry
23.5 FT
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
DA T.E HOLE STARTED
12/7/88
COMPLETED
12/8/88
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
INSPECTOR K. Susewind
8/ SAM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
NO. REC (DESCRIPTION)
29 000 85
17 015 100
11 030 33
20 045 33
15 060 50
4 075 0
5 090 0
7 110 60
9 130 100
OVA= O ppm in
Medium dense, damp to wet. gray Breathing Zone (B.Z.).
to brown, gravelly, silty, SANO. (SM
FILL
OVA= O ppm in B.Z.
OVA = 1 .2 ppm in
hole.
... grading to sandy SILT ...
10.5
Loose, saturated, gray, silty, fine to
coarse SANO with some gravel. (SP)
OVA = 50-100 ppm
in auger.
0 ppm in B.Z.
Stiff, moist, green, clayey SILT to silty
CLAY with trace fine sand. (ML-CL)
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
,4-5 3 __
I .t z.
DRILLING LOG (Cont. -.ieet)
CAVE·
IN
DPT
(FT)
24
27
8
9
3
31
2
s B/ AM
T NO.
180
HOLE NO. BAX-10
SHEET 2
OF 2 SHEETS
% CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
REC. (DESCRIPTION)
Stiff, moist, green clayey SILT to
silty CLAY with trace fine sand.
(ML -CL)
16.5
Medium dense, saturated, gray to
75 brown silty fine SAND. (SM)
0-40 ppm in hole
O ppm in B.Z.
1 ppm in cuttings
20
hard drilling, rig
shaking
0
TOTAL DEPTH= 22.5 FT
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
A· 51. ___ _
.2 .. I~.
DRILLING LOG
,-,ROJECT
BAXTER
LOCATION N197923.6201 E1662865.6119
DRILLING AGENCY Soil Sampling Service
HOLE NO. BAX-11
NAME OF DRILLER T. Asberry
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE 25 FT
ELEV. T.O. C: 20.90'
Bi SAM %
GRND 19.4' NO. REC
ELEV:
34 000 5
HOLE
PLUG
BENTO-8 015 75
NITE
SLURRY
6 030 80
2·
TAINLES
STEEL
045 100
SAND
PACK
1 060 90
4 075 100
5 090 80
PROJ ECT NIJMBER
86006S
TOTAL NUMBER SAMPLES 10
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
DATE HOLE STARTED COMPLETED
I
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
INSPECTOR W. Perkins
CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS
(DESCRIPTION)
Sand and gravel fill
firm, brown-gray, damp. SILT wtth 2
sand seams. (ML)
3.0
Loose, gray, saturated fine silty
SAND and sandy SILT. (SM -ML)
6.0
Soft, saturated, brown SIL Twtth peat
(ML)
8.5 -----------1
PEAT. (OUOH)
10.2
Loose, saturated.gray silty SAND.
(SM)
REMARKS
FILL
sz
4 130 80 13.5------------1
Alternating 1" layers sand and silt
4.0
Soft, wet, brown to gray peaty SILT.
(ML)
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
A·SY __ _
/ ,I' z
DRILLING LOG (Cont. Sheet) HOLE NO. BAX-11
DPT S Bl
(FT) T
6
20
21
27
3
31
2
SHEET 2
OF 2 SHEETS
AM % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
... trace fine sand ...
TOTAL DEPTH= 24.5 FT
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
--------4· 5~--
2 ,,/ z.
DRILLING LOG 1 'gOJECT PROJECT NUW" -Cl I SHEET 1
OF SHEETS
LOCATION TOTAL NUMBER OF SAMPLES
DRILLING AGENCY DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GAD SURFACE
HOLE NO. r'\ I -j_ DATE HOLE I <if,!;-'Y,~ I ~/~P~TED· 9 / :5', ()
NAME OF DRILLER ELEVATION OF REFERANCE POINT
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
'\i~ ~1~ DPT s B/FT $AMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
~
1116"'" (FT) T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION)
o'1D --i' o= (D 6r <i> "'-j a-.-..•&l. ~'-"cl -,-tV. r....
'd" --
7 [, )C --,,..,., 1 .. h "!>"-"fl~ ---
. .... 5 IC> I :5""
. ~e,-d -ID f; ....._ 6-_ ., ,...1 i m\/. do.~)' . -TLc..<>•~ -
;° .... ~ --sr tr -
C -_ _NVL ---
~10 '.:>30 -
4,~LJ-7 ,:;:t -"'nZ> ~ 1" ... -x:r 4--t, -s-.· 1 t--NV"]:. -;-.. ""' t7 .t-l..1 -
!,., --j__ '-/•,. I~ -
--
~15 'rD'i5 {r;O
I-
~Jy-~ ,,. ~} h)~ up!'P' 8-'' """ ..la:• _ e,, It. GI~= . -
j D ~" "'' .ft=! ~--Nvr -
I / (i' 11) ~~"'~ -12.c-.-""' ,,,tj, ,-~·
' ~ ;....20-
t)~(l ~ ---" f P-?-...,. .:c.::.: . -
--{ti) r1-r:£ -
~\J\ -~-'( Ork ~r. ,S."ft
I .--"'/.-..J -~lo:~ilt--
--
'-25-c;lS
id)
,__
_,; ,.: -a.,,:, .... ~~L NVJ:.--
y\" \
--~ -
l. ,, ---
. --
~30 0"/0 I-
\E>O . -;J'ic,v-'2.-I"' v.:r:.. -.:,..5 -
1;'\~~ ·( ... -_, -
. _ l...b; 3t~~ ~ ,1 I -( tJ,; I=' If) t".,...t
-,.....,.,,,... 1··~......i ~-w"'t--
,. .... ~35-~~ ,__ -IOO -
""')-") A & ~I/ v~= -~f"~ ,-('/.V:C.. -
1, .. -J,._b: ="'11, -
~~ --~ ......u{ -
'd" .. -' -4~.,,/~ .... ~ -
·--~ ~40 r-o )_!>0
f-
I -r;. ~ b.s.v.Q..
..... ti .ti. i ~ <-i<aL" -
v""'' / --a.-::. ~ NVI-f,,
--.-
-,,_ 5 1"' ... 'o ::'.)a.,d-j !I! lrµ.tY' " ()r 5i w w;._,DO, 1....45--~ ~ ... 1..11 ~
-f-
Woodward-Clyde .Consultants !Dt,. -· r
A~Q.s ___ .
I J ,-, ...... ~·;..... ________________ ..,...--~··-,,,,-----.------~
DRILLING LOG PROJECT PROJ~blj %5 I SHEET 1 -_ 0 OF SHEETS -'
TOTAL NUMBER OF SAMPLES :./
DRILLING AGENCY-<: -. I <:::: • •.. -"( L:' '
...)C) I --Xl>.""f-1 ''l\q ..:R__f\ v I G le
DEPTH TO W~R~~LOW GAD SURFACE
HOLE NO. £_ f?:i -.J.. ~
NAME OF DRILLER , . ,,. I/ / I -I-ELEVATION OF REFERANCE POINT
I.A./ He.. ..1-~ I
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE ::;;1 3 I SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
"(;'I--Q..1------:='7",---,-,--....,---.-.------'-----------,-------1
ffi" l-
-+:-+3/-::FT+SA_M_P+·-Y.-j--C-:;,LA.,,-S_s_1F...:.IC_A_T....,,IO,_.N_o_F-=-M-A:....T_E_R_IA-LS-+--R-EM_A_R_K_s __ , 5:-"'~-
\b,5'
\D'J-o
2)
\O":)
It '00
~
--::5" ~-·
(\15
~4
II ;;i.o
\d--/{;-/0
I.< l, -1~ ,_
-J7 1-
-a I
s--~-/c.: CZ:
-:)-'-!-6 ,,
_,_ -0
~ z
-;:;.-1-3
"--:i -~ -:i. .....
( ' -
'~
~-C, 7 ~Lt ( v._
~
,
~
,
i<;:
/ -i,.
~ ~ "
DPT s
(F1) T
-" ---H.s --'
--
~10-
--
-,::i----
'"'20 -
1
-" ---
1-30----
f-35----
~4n-
---
NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) (JU'_
J~.l, ~'S 6 . . ¥ ~--a~e -, ~ _ ~ ~ . DV I\ :l.rP""
-(!, ,, 1.-8... -AA,..,_Q._ -7J f) --·
-E. ---r n-----\I ----
--,...;r,_ ~ ~' ~ ---
I tr" ... , t:;-' 01/A, 4,r ..._ -
flo 0/-::, ir-p. -
I-
,-t'" -citJtf,
No \J,·, 11~\0 = ~O -
l'f,,,
--
-
-~ ~ J.t.,,.....,_ -").& ,.,....__ ~ 1-
r LU-:::... f-.;f;f ~ = -;>Ice
==-J'l''~-~rr--'4-~,t--_;-
---
1-45-L-__ __.........,.u,_;.;;..i..--1..---1._J___L _______ _L ____ .J-
Woodward-Clyde Consultants e
A-'56 :
t DRILLING LOG l 'OJECT PROJECT NUMB~ q I SH:f 1
,• -~~ 'S OF SHEETS
'
LOCATION bt iQ_i,.Jo"'
TOTAL NUMBER -~ SAMPLES
. e,,,.
DRILLING AGENCY'So I s"" r'I(; h<; '5ex-v k,~
DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
HOLE NO. -SR-~ ' DATEHOLE I ,, ~7i'1l 1fJ I qf;~;/b1EO
NAME OF DRILLEF\..t)( 11 H,J t'k-+ ELEVATION OF REFERANCE POINT
TQTAL DEPTH OF HOLE SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR Hi -s
~ Blou.;:s J~~ DPT s B/FT SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS REMARKS
(I'
1S' (Fll T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTIO~)
6'~ 1-'J---O<.<ll 50 -1 . w-l.!,J• ~ ' -~~a -
\ !} --
--
-olr5" ----1-----. ,... 5---bD -~~ w;;:r;::_ .._ --:y -3-~, --:-'r :--; I . ~ d_
I ~ ·i --~ 3 ,, ,.f,....c-., ~--,_ t-~?;'' -~~ /lfllL -
--
'. >-10--~ b3c, 7,S L-
L----" 04-~ ~~ '------tv v.i:=. -
1" ,-a-. ,_ --
.,;c::::J " t),.,~ 't 047ty-...t..._.,__ )
8" --
-b'/5
-J . t:,• -,_
L_ ~1 s --1.-9'-~ ,_ -.----·
) _ a,...J) --i .. t: .«I! '---
".},, \ ,-15, -· ,_,_ , --. ,:'.) _/Vo sa.,,..p/<1-
: --~ -
. --_,,,.,,:t; .:; ,.v:t:.._-
' ~D 3'.1
.
~20---L-
v'" 1-
-~~~1 '------->'"/c) 6, /II V:;;, -
; ,,l.i !..·'"-,_ ~~ -
-1., --
r""2S-..._ -b7:$-7o .._ -,-\ ~~. -L.--=
,f ... ~ G.bG<"----+P.,,.., '.i . ,·,-.p-1'"' -
\,, I-!:; 'I/ -vppo.~ ":. "? -C,
~ / --
/
1-30-l....c.. ,__ c)1:) 1o
.._
\-"' ':)~ ~ ~ -:g:;_ 1" AJ1 ~ -~+..,.-.,.t ... c.f -
--
--rv vz. -
--~1·~-~ -
1-35---IDS 1d'~·~ -
\-)-~
. ~ -.:,1-,.4;.J
'ID J, -
-·....,._ ~"'/~ /YI, .:c... --' -
'--40-,__ -130 ~
,fj{.)L,
.._
( . -_., f ~... if, .. o:; c..lovl?_ -
: \,,-\ 9 1 --
:..., -~ / a:,<,M• -5c,."" --5 . -lo,.:c .• Ila.,\( l:iro..:.·, : I -
1-45· -... 'I -. ' '-
{O
JT II
Wpodward-Clyde Consultants ~
/
/l-S-7
DRILLING LOG I qOJECT PROJECT NU!,\' -, I SHEET 1 --------+---~' OF SHEETS
LOCATION TOTAL NUMBER uF SAMPLES
DRILLING AGENCY DEPTH TO WATER BELOW GRD SURFACE
HOLE NO.
J 1--1-.
NAME OF DRILLER ELEVATION OF REFERANCE POINT
TOTAL DEPTH OF HOLE SIGNATURE OF INSPECTOR
REMARKS '~T"~ ~ a_... DPT S 13/FT SAMP % CLASSIFICATION OF MATERIALS v/5 Jj LJ (FT) T NO. REC. (DESCRIPTION) .
. ,,s-~ t-:::i-f--1°',_,_..,:'iZ,,2~-~:riaf,;::~:;;:::;;~--:JZ;,--:::;:~~-;:::J'~~·~~/V./iiJO£'CI..J-:---~j
111)5' \6"., I:. ,, = ~ p-'L () a -d . -TU ~pie =
L-5 -
L-,0-
anlt =
.·g.G,O pp,-... ir, &.Ii-
-6.'2. c.-leo,.. --
-.NV'L -
-
-'TLC ~a.-,ilc ,_
6hl~t --
0
.• L....------t
' [.
'-30-
'-35·
I
"-40--
.
'-45·
'
f{D re=v<1,'7 i h
~ .. p le...--
~-~-~~ / 0 -;v&.J-
-}.,""-"'--~ ,,,_,_ -t 'i ... ,a~
/, -' :5" -:;i. .0 • " e. ti,_
-A.·"'l... c:.l.u:.--,_
-
-----
Woodward-Clyde Consultants ~
PROJECT: BAXTER Rl !fON 86006S LOG I BORING NO: BP-1
DATE STARTED: 11/19/92 COMPLETED: TOTAL DEPTH: 28 FT. SURFACE ELEV:
LOGGED BY: T.SYVERSON
DRILLING METHOD: HOLLOW STEM-AUGER
LOCATION: BATER, RENTON:
12' NW OF BAX-14
DRILLING EQUIPMENT: MOBILE B-61
DRILLING AGENCY: HOLT DRILLING
"' ~ -.,. 'i' 0
...J "" ~ ~ ~ .. Blow count > ,s C. E 0 (per6 in.) ! ~ C. .. ..
<!) ti) a: 0
00 5.5-4-4
00 2·2-1-1
' 00 1-1-1-2
1-1 ·0-1
90
0·1·0·1
90
0-1-0·1
90
0·1·0-1
IS
90
1-1·2·2
90 1·2·2-1
' 90 1 ·0-1-1
60
2-4-6-3
60 2-1-1-3
"
Problem wtth
hamer blows not
accurate
8-9-5-13
TD of borehole 28',
Sample to 30'
'
Woodward-Clyde Consultants~
TEMP'91JQ-26-11'~
VISUAL DESCRIPTION
(USCS)
• Med. dense brown silty gravelly sand
-8' as above then
-bottom 4' loose med. gray silty sand
-upper 1' as above
• bottom 6' dark brown very loose sandy gravelly
silt
• as above with peat and silty sand lenses 1-3'
· sand increasing
-lower very loose gray, silty sand to 10'
• as above with minor brown silt to 12', 2' of dark
brown silt at bottom of sample
-very loose brown silty peat to 14' dry
-as above to 16'
-approx. 2' gray silt at top then very loose gray
silty sand to 18'
• upper 3' as above
-med. 2' clayey silt
-lower S' med. silty gray sand
-upper 18' as above with sheen
-lower 6' is gray, sandy silt
-sand again in catcher
-grain size decreasing to fine gray silty sand
to 24'
-as above to 25 then increases. silt 'dryer'
with 1' med. sand Jense then silty med. sand to
gray sandy silt
-27·28' gray green sandy silt 'dry' getting sand-
\er at bottom
-28-30' gray silty fine med. sand
-Will pull back Jet borehole cave-in and build
well with screen 27-24' x Imp. zone at 25',
SAMPLE
KEY:
FT. DEPTH TO GW: 7 FT.
REMARKS
-creosote odor
-water -7' bgs
-creosote odor
-minor sheen in
sand
• not as wet, n
visible sheen
pe!! c~ta':!...7
---
gray silt contact
gray clayey-silt
at ':!!_d ':!..•a~Jer
-water again
with sheen at
end
-rainbow sheen
in cuttings Bentonite
-strong sheen pellets ln water
-strong sheen 21.5-23.5
on seds. Top of screen
-collect 8270 24'
sample? (Sand 23.5-27'
-Jess sheen at Bottom of
bottom of sampl screen 27'
-one 'spot" of Borehole
sheen on side, cavein 28-30
could be carry do
-no visible sheen
in sad. some on
sampler prob.
carry down
PAGE 1 OF 1
4· 5_1-_
APPENDIXB
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
21-1-20525-001
Figure No.
APPENDIXB
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
B-1 Grain Size Distribution (HQ-I, HQ-2, HQ-3)
SHANNON &WILSON, INC.
B-2 Grain Size Distribution (HQ-3, HQ-4, HQ-6, TP-15)
B-3 Plasticity Chart
B-4 Consolidation Test No. I
B-5 Consolidation Test No. I
B-6 Consolidation Test No 2
B-7 Consolidation Test No. 2
2 l-l-20525-001-R 1-AB/wp/. LKD 21-1-20525-001
B-i
.,,
!i>
Ill .:...
BORING ANO
SAMPLE NO.
e HQ-1, S-4
• HQ-1, S-9
/1,. HQ.2, S-2
+ HQ-2, S-6
0 H0-2, S-6
D HQ.2, s-8
t:, HQ.3, 5-3
I-:r:
<.!) w
3:
>-"' IX w z
ii:
I-z w
()
IX w
0..
I
N -100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
0
M
DEPTH
(reet)
15.0
40.0
5.0
20.4
22.2
25.0
7.5
SIEVE ANALYSIS
S1ZE OF MESH OPENING IN INCHES NO. OF MESH OPENINGS PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD
" 0 -~ ~ ~ ;, ~ 0 f' 0 0 w ~ M N ---~ w ~ .
' ' ' ' \
' ' ' ' \
' ' '
' ' ' ' \
' ' ' ' '
'
l \
' ' ' ' ' ' '
' '
8 0 0 :. 0 0 0 o ro w ~ M N -ro w ~ M N o ro ~ M N -N -
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
COARSE FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE
COBBLES I GRAVEL SAND
u.s.c.s. SAMPLE FINES NAT. LL
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION % W.C.% %
ML Gray, clayey SILT 99.2 27.0 33
CH Dark gray, sllghtty fine sandy, silty CLAY; trace of organics 92.9 25.9 51
SP-SM Dark gray·brown, slightly sllty, fine lo medium SAND: 1race of organics 6.8 24.9
SM Gray, slightly gravelly, silty, fine lo medium SAND; numerous organics 13.9 34.4
SM Gray, silty, fine SANO 37.7 26.5
CL Dark gray-broWn sllty CL.A Y, lrace of fine sand; trac:e of organics 97.8 34.7 48
SM Dark gray-brown, slightly gravelly, silty SAND; trace of organics 19.7 20.2
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
8 w ro w ;,,; M N 0 ~ M N -0 8 0 0
N q " 0 " q ~ " 0 " " . 0
10
,o
I-
30 :r:
<.!) w
3:
'° >-"' IX
I
w
' U)
' 50 IX
<(
\ 0
' ()
\,: I 60 w u I
IX w
0..
I 70
'
80 I
90
100
-ro w ;,,; M N -~ w 2; M N § 'O 0 " 0 q 2: 8 8 0
" "
FINES: SILT OR CLAY
Pl Pl TEST CHECKED Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility % % BY BY
24 9 PRM CTM
Renton, Washington
21 31 PRM CTM GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION PRM CTM
JFL CTM
LPC CTM
22 26 PRM CTM July 2006 21-1-20525-001
PRM CTM SHANNON & WILSON, INC . I FIG. B-1 ~.-.d ~eon.utt.nta
"Tl
i5
CJ
N
BORING ANO
SAMPLE NO.
e HQ-3, S-6
• HQ-3, S-9
A HQ-4, $-4
+ HQ-6, S-2
0 HQ-6, S-7
0 HQ-6, S-9
t,, TP-15, S-2
>-I
C9 w :;:
>-en
°' w z u:
>-z w u
°' w n_
N -100
90
ao
70
60
50
"
30
20
10
0
0
0
M
DEPTH
(feet)
19.0
30.0
10.0
5.0
20.0
30.0
1.8
SIEVE ANALYSIS
SIZE OF MESH OPENING IN INCHES I NO. OF MESH OPENINGS PER INCH, U.S. STANDARD
~ m 0 g ~ ~ s; ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 .., ~ M N ---~ .., -.
' ~
~ '
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ ' ' " ' ' ' ' '
' ' " ' \ \\ \
' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " ' . '
' \ " ' ' ' ' ' " ' \ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' .,
' " " ' " ' ' ' '
' ' '
g g ls 0 0 0 0 o m .., ~ M N -m .., ~ M N -.., .., .., ~ M N -. 0 0
N -
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
COARSE FINE I COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE
COBBLES I GRAVEL SAND
u.s.c.s. SAMPLE FINES NAT. LL PL Pl
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION % W.C.% % % %
SM Gray, silty, fine SAND 41.8 26.5
SM Dark gray-brown, silty, fine SAND; trace of organics 38.7 29.7
ML Dark gray-brown, fine sandy SILT; trace or organics 53.2 25.6
SW-SM Dark gray-brown, sllghUy gravelly, slightly silty SANO, trace of clay 11.0 19.4
SP-SM Darlt gray-brown, sHght1y sltty, fine to medium SAND, trace of gravel 9.3 35.0
SM Dark gray-brown, sill)' SAND, trace of clay: scattered organics 3B.2 27.5
SW Muttl-color, gravelly SAND, trace of silt 1.0 11.0
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
~ M N
m .., g M N 0
-0 g 0 g 0 0 0 Cl! C! 0 0 . 0
10
20
>-
30 :c
C9 w :;:
,o >-en
°' w
(/)
Cl'. 50 <(
0
()
>-z 60 w u
°' w n_
70
ao
90
100 '
~ M N -m :s 8 8 N 0 0 0 " C! ~ g 0 " "
FINES: SILT OR CLAY
TEST CHECKED Seahawl<s Headquarters & Practice Facility BY BY
LPC CTM
Renton, Washington
PRM CTM GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION PRM CTM
PRM CTM
PRM CTM
PRM CTM July 2006 21-1-20525-001
AML CTM SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I FIG. B-2 ~....:1e,,1,o,11•11:a1~
"Tl I
15 I .
I
I
Ill
l,
70
60
50
C
ii:
' X w 40
0 ;;;
~
(j
~ 30
0.
20
10
0
0
BORING AND
SAMPLE NO.
e HQ-1, S--4
a HQ-1, S-9
.A. HQ-2. S-6
+ H0-2, S-8
0 HQ-3, 5-6
D TP-21, S-3
!> 'ff'-211, 5-2
10
DEPTH
(feet}
15.0
40.0
20.9
25.0
19.7
4.0
1.6
CL CH / LEGEND
/
/ CL: Low plasticity inorganic
clays; sandy and silty
clays
/ CH; High plasticity inorganic
clays
ML or OL: Inorganic and organic / >a p silts and clayey silts of
low plasticity
/
/ MH or OH: Inorganic and organic
silts and clayey silts of
high plasticity
CL-ML: Silty clays and clayey silts
/ 6
•
/
/
/ ,_,.1
CL-M. i,. ML< rOL MHc rOH .,,~
;'
20 30 40 50 60 70 BO 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT -LL(%)
u.s.c.s. SOIL LL PL Pl NAT. PASS. TEST CHECKEC Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility SYMBOL CLASSIFICATION % % % W.C.% '200,, BY BY
ML Gray, clayey SILT 33 24 9 27.0 99.2 LPL CTM
Renton, Washington
CH Dark gray, slightly fine sandy, silty CLAY; trace of organics 51 21 30 25.9 92.9 LPL CTM
ML Dark gray, fine sandy SILT 32 27 5 36.4 LPL CTM PLASTICITY CHART
CL Dark gray-brown silly CLAY, trace of fine sand; trace of organics 48 22 26 34.7 97.8 LPL CTM
CL Dartc gray-brown, fine sandy clay 24 21 3 40.5 KXK CTM
MH/OH Brown, clayey, organic SILT 119 77 42 104.6 JFL CTM July2006 21-1-20525-001
MHIOH Brown. clayey, organic SILT 86 57 29 78.8 JFL CTM SHANNON & WILSON, tNC. l
~and~eoi.ldfa"ft FIG. B-3
~
~
'1
~
" ;,,
"' ~
'!,
§
r s
~
i,
~
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST NO. 1
SUMMARY OF TEST DATA
Boling HQ-2 Tested By I Date JFL 6-6-06
Sample S-6 Cale. By I Date JFL 6-6-06
Depth, ft. 20.9 Check By/ Date c.,-,,...... o"llo-S.ID<,.
CLASSIFICATION: SPECIMEN DATA: Before After Soft, gray, slightly sandy, clayey SILT; moist; sand is very fine with mica Test Test flakes, numerous fine to medium wood fragments; scattered wood
fragments to 3/8~ diameter Height. inches : .791 .703
SAMPLE DATA: Diameter, inches : 2.502 2.502
Spec. Grav. (meas.) : 2.65 Wet Density, pcf : 106.6 113.8
Liquid Limit : 32 Dry Density, pc! : 72.8 81.9
Plastic Limit : 27 Water Content, % : 46.4 38.9
Plasticity Index : 5 Void Ratio: 1.242 1.019
Specimen : UNDISTURBED Saturation, % : 97 101
Spec Deft Consol Coeff of Coeff of
Load d 100 Corr Pressure Settlement Void t 50 d 50 Consol Perm
kg 0.01mm 0.01mm tsf % Ratio min. 0.01 mm cm2/sec cm/sec
.3 27.4 2.4 .08 1.2 1.242 2.5 18.3 1.30E-03
.5 55.9 5.5 .16 2.5 1.213 3.4 44.9 9.37E-04 1.46E-07
,8 73.t 7.6 .24 3.3 1.196 2.8 65.8 1.12E-03 1.04E-07
1.0 88.1 9.4 .32 3.9 1.181 2.8 81.9 1.10E-03 8.95E·08
2.0 117.5 14.3 .65 5.1 1.153 .5 106.6 6.03E-03 2.28E-07
3.0 148.9 17.0 .97 6.6 1.121 .9 138.3 3.25E-03 1.44E-07
4.0 170.0 19.4 1.29 7.5 1.100 .6 162.5 4.76E-03 1.37E-07
2.0 170.7 17.5 .65 7.6 1.097 .2 171.4 1.41E-02
.8 161.2 . 14.4 .24 7.3 1.104 .3 164.0 9.46E-03
.3 151.1 10.8 .08 7.0 1.111 .5 154.7 5.71E-03
,8 150.4 13.0 ,24 6.8 1.115 .5 149.1 5.76E-03 5.17E-08
2.0 163.7 16.7 .65 7.3 1.104 .3 159.8 9.53E-03 1.12E-07
4.0 180.9 19.8 1.29 8.0 1.088 .3 175.5 9.40E-03 1.03E·07
8.0 223.8 25.4 2.58 9.9 1.046 .3 208.2 9.13E-03 1.31E-07
16.0 292.0 26.5 5.17 13.2 .970 .3 271.0 8.52E-03 1.10E-07
4.0 296.1 24.0 1.29 13.5 .963 .1 299.2 2.47E-02
2.0 287.7 21.3 .65 13.3 .969 .3 290.1 8.29E-03
.8 269.7 21.3 .24 12.4 .989 1.0 276.1 2.53E-03
.3 240.6 18.2 .08 11.1 1.019 4.3 253.3 6.01E-04
l
¥.
I
" 8 q
~ Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility ~ Renton, Washington I CONSOLIDATION TEST
r July 2006 21-1-20525-001
SHANNON & WILSON, INC. I FIG. B-4 g GEOTECHNICAL ,tr,NO EH'IIRONMEMT AL CONSULTANTS
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST NO. 1
SETTLEMENT VS LOG10(CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE)
Boring HQ-2 Tested By/ Date JFL 6-6-06
Sample S-6 Cale. By/ Dale JFL 6-6-06
Depth, ft. 20.9 Check By / Date LT,....... ti-:,/~;;:/~
0
0
e,.;
• 1
~I
~
·"-
;'sl. I " "
t! ~ ' ._: -II z-_,_ :\_ w 1--::;; -w -I\ ....I
~ w O 1 I ~ m ~ I
I l \1 ' .
\ ' " 0 "" c,; ... ........ \
' '• • --
0 .; -> ~ 0.10 1.00 CONSOL1DATl00(pRESSURE, tsf 100.00 1000.00
~
~
~
0
C
~
I Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility
ij Renton, Washington
~ CONSOLIDATION TEST £
j,
~ July 2006 21-1-20525·001 !
' SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. B-5
GEOTECHNICAL. ANO ENVIRONMENT AL CONSULT AKTS
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST NO. 2
SUMMARY OF TEST DATA
Boring HQ-3 Tested By/ Date JFL 6-6-06
Sample S-7 Cale. By/ Date JFL 6-6-06
Depth, ft. 19.7 Check By/ Date t::_.,...-,._, o"?-k!lo&.
CLASSIFICATION: SPECIMEN DATA: Before After
Medium stiff to soft, gray, slightly sandy SILT; moist: contains numerous
fine organics and scattered 1 /BthN wood fibers Test ____Tofil
Height, inches : .790 .741
SAMPLE DATA:
Diameter, inches : 2.503 2.503
Spec. Grav. (meas.) : 2.65 Wet Density, pcf : 120.2 124.3
Liquid Limit : 24 Dry Density, pcf : 91.8 97.9
Plastic limit : 21 Water Content, % : 30.9 27.0
Plasticity Index : 3 Void Ratio: .796 .690
Specimen : UNDISTURBED Saturation, % : 102 104
Spec Defl Consol Coeff of Coeff of
Load d 100 Corr Pressure Settlement Void t50 d 50 Consol Perm
kg 0.01mm 0.01mm ts! % Ratio min. 0.01mm cm2/sec cm/sec
.3 8.8 2.1 .08 ,3 .796 .3 5.9 1.10E-02
.5 19.1 5.7 .16 .7 .790 .2 15.8 1.64E-02 6.73E-07
.8 27.0 7.0 .24 1.0 .784 .2 24.6 1.62E·02 6.67E-07
1.0 32.7 8.5 .32 1.2 .780 .2 30.9 1.62E-02 4.22E-07
.2.0 49,5 13.0 .65 1.8 .769 .1 44.7 3.20E-02 6.04E-07
3.0 62.0 16.3 .97 2.3 .761 .1 58.9 3.17E-02 4.52E-07
4.0 72.0 19.0 1.29 2.6 .754 .2 69.5 1.57E-02 1.77E-07
2.0 70.6 15.8 .65 2.7 .753 ,3 70.7 1.04E-02
.8 65.6 12.5 .24 2.6 .754 .1 66.2 3.13E-02
.3 61.2 9.3 .08 2.6 .755 .1 62.3 3. 13E-02
.8 62.1 10.6 .24 2.6 .756 '1 62.1 3.14E-02 3.88E-08
2.0 68.3 14.6 .65 2.7 ,754 .1 67.7 3.13E-02 8.40E-08
4.0 76.6 19.3 1.29 2.9 .750 .1 75.3 3.12E-02 8.85E-08
8.0 101.0 27.5 2.58 3.7 .736 .1 95.6 3.08E-02 1.92E-07
16.0 136.4 36.8 5.16 5.0 .712 .1 129.7 3.01 E-02 1.51E-07
32.0 179.8 42.6 10.32 6.8 .679 .1 173.3 2.89E-02 1.05E-07
8.0 169.1 34.1 2.58 6.7 .681 .2 169.5 1.44E-02
2.0 154.7 22.5 .65 6.6 .683 .1 156.1 2.88E-02
.8 147.3 18.2 .24 6.4 .686 .1 149.1 2.89E-02
.3 140.2 15.0 .08 6.2 .690 .2 142.4 1.45E-02
• • ; .
I
8
0 ~ Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility 0
I Renton, Washington
" CONSOLIDATION TEST
i July 2006 21-1-20525-001
j .~.~~.~~.~~!;:.?.~~.i~~. I FIG. B-6 g
ONE DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION TEST NO. 2
SETTLEMENT VS LOG10(CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE)
Boring HQ-3 Tested By I Date JFL 6-6-06
Sample S-7 Cale. By I Date JFL 6-6-06
Depth, ft 19.7 Check By I Date <:::r.c:! cnt,,,tot.
0
~ I .__
" ;--._'
~
N I ' I -'-I
--I " -
-
-I ~ I !
' ;:!!.. C: ' I
0 " \ I
i-:-z \ w ::a; ' ~ w
....J
t= I Wo I
Cl) <Ji. ' I -~ -
I
I
0 I
'
I i
. i
.
.
.
0
' "' .
.
-
-
-
0 I 0 I • 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1000.00 •
~
CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE, tsf
~
~
u 0
0
~ Seahawks Headquarters & Practice Facility • ~ Renton, Washington " • ~
] . CONSOLIDATION TEST
' r • : July 2006 21-1-20525-001
r SHANNON & WILSON, INC. FIG. 8-7
~ QEOTECHNICAL ANO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS -
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
APPENDIXC
SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEY REPORT
21-1-20525-001
SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEY REPORT
SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS
RENTON, WASHINGTON
FOR
SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
AUGUST 2006
PHILIP H. DUOOS
GEOPHYSICAL CONSUL TANT
PHILIP H, Duoos
August 31, 2006
Mr. Martin Page
Shannon & Wilson
400 North 34th Street, Suite 100
P.O. Box 300303
Seattle, WA 98103
REPORT: Seismic Refraction Survey
GEOPHYSICAL CONSULTANT
Our Ref: 7 46-06
Proposed Seahawks Headquarters, Renton, WA
Dear Mr. Page:
This letter report contains the results of the seismic refraction survey that we performed at
the proposed Seahawks Headquarters in Renton, Washington. The survey was performed
on August 3 -5. The primary purpose of the investigation was to determine the depth to
rock to assist in the pile design. The seismic velocity (compressional wave) of the bedrock
was also determined. A description of the seismic refraction method is attached.
Field Methodology
The locations of the three seismic lines (Lines SL-1 through SL-3) are shown on the Seismic
Survey Location Map (Map 1 }. The locations of the three seismic lines were chosen by S&W
based on their proximity to the proposed building foundations, existing borings, the possible
bedrock ridge observed in the borings, and the site access conditions.
The map is based on the site plan you provided. The seismic lines were established in the
field using 300-foot tape measures and a Brunton compass and referenced to nearby
existing boring and test pit locations. The geophone locations were marked using red pin
flags. Elevations along each line were estimated based on my hand level measurements to
the geophone locations relative to the known elevations of nearby borings and test pits.
Estimated elevations were only in error a maximum of 0.8 feet along the line, and were ·
corrected to the known elevations.
The field investigation was performed using a 48-channel digital seismograph to record the
data, and a propelled weight drop was used for the energy source. A sledge hammer and
buried shotgun shells were also used at some of the shot locations. The seismic lines utilized
a geophone spacing of 10 to 15 feet. The seismic lines ranged from 470 to 660 feet long.
Interpretation Results
The results of the seismic survey are shown on the interpretation profiles (Seismic Lines SL-1
to SL-3). The profiles show the geophone locations(# 1 -# 48) along the ground surface,
the calculated depth points below each geophone, and the interpreted interfaces (dashed
lines). The interpreted seismic velocities are also shown on the profile. Most of the
overburden velocities are transitional in nature and do not vary greatly along a line, with the
exception of SL-2. The irregular vertical line near Station 240' is an approximate boundary
between different overburden materials on SL-2.
A relatively low bedrock velocity was observed along seismic lines SL-1 and SL-3, and is also
approximately delineated by irregular vertical lines.
l'mLIP H. Duoos
PH/FAJC (425) 882-2634
13503 NE 78THl'LACE, REDMOND, WASlllNGTOK, 98052
EMAIL: GEOPY<@.AOL.COM
The basic geologic units were identified based on the interpreted compressional wave
velocities (in feet/second) and the available site-specific information. Their probable
classification is indicated on the following table.
SEISMIC VELOCITY PROBABLE CLASSIFICATION
(P-wave, fps}
1,000 -1,600 Dry, loose fill material (SL-2 only)
1,700 -2,410 Dry to wet loose overburden
3,530 -4,400 Denser Overburden
8,700 Weathered Bedrock
10,000-13,000 More Competent Bedrock
Page2
The loose overburden velocities probably indicate very loose materials and may include
organics and fine-grained materials. Very loose materials will sometimes maintain a low
seismic velocity even when water-saturated as is indicated by the borings in these areas
(especially in the western portion of the site near Lake Washington). The denser overburden
values correlate to the denser materials observed in Boring HQ-1.
Relatively thin layers of these denser materials were not observed in the seismic data at
depth due to the physics of the method (please see the Description of Method Attachment).
In areas with a known or anticipated denser layer at depth, an estimated velocity and
thickness of the layer was used to take this layer into account. The areas where these
estimates were made are shown by the queried dashed line indicating the top of "Possible
Denser Overburden". The effect of this insertion was to make the top of bedrock slightly
deeper (usually around five to seven feet deeper).
Much of the site shows a fair1y dramatic and simple two-layer seismic model with very loose
overburden overlying relatively hard bedrock. This tends to provide fairly good interpretation
results, and is generally proved out by the relatively good correlation to nearby borings.
A lower-velocity zone of 8,700 fps was interpreted for the bedrock below the southern portion
of SL-1 and the middle of SL-3. This lower velocity zone may be related to a greater degree
of weathering, increased fractures or joints, or change in composition.
Andesite with velocities above 10,000 fps is typically fair1y competent. Some of the borings
near the seismic lines encountered moderate to high strength andesite white some
encountered very low strength rock (such as HQ-4). The rock may become more competent
at depth, and may account for some of the discrepancy in the depths observed between the
seismic interpretation and the borings. Boring HQ-4 encountered weathered andesite at a
depth of 17.5 feet below Line SL-1. The seismic results indicate a depth of 23.8 feet to
bedrock, but with a seismic velocity of about 10,000 fps at this location the rock is interpreted
to be relatively competent.
While the accuracy of the interpretation depends on site-specific conditions, geophysical
methods in general provide an accuracy of+/-10% under good conditions. The accuracy of
the depth to bedrock at this site may be on the order of+/-15% in some locations. However,
the interpreted results agree fair1y well with the borings and at the intersections of the seismic
lines and increase the confidence in the data.
Page 3
The seismic data was fair to good in quality and better than what I had anticipated in such an
urban environment. The data were noisy in some areas due to traffic noise from the highway
to some degree, but the wave action on Lake Washington created even more noise I believe.
Near the northwest comer of the site there were numerous floating logs that were bouncing
against the shore -especially in the afternoon due to the increased boat traffic and wind.
The very loose overburden materials in this portion of the site made the problem worse. The
ends of SL-1 and SL-2 were re-shot on Friday and Saturday morning (respectively) and
provided much better seismic records. The presence of asphalt or some other type of hard
layer at the surface over much of the site may have also limited the amount of seismic energy
that was generated in the underling materials. However, the use of multiple shots along each
seismic line (shots were typically spaced 75 to 100 feet apart) provided overlapping data,
which helps minimize the effects of weak or noisy data from a few geophones for some of the
shots.
The quality of the data was fairly good, and the presence of 'thin layers" of denser material at
depth is an even more likely source of error at this site. However, the presence of an
undetected thin layer would probably only make the rock seem slightly shallower (5 to 1 O feet
or so).
As with any geophysical technique, these results are interpretive in nature and represent the
best estimate of subsurface conditions considering the limitations of the geophysical method
employed. Only direct observations using borings or test pits or other means can ultimately
characterize subsurface conditions, using the geophysical results as a guide.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments regarding this
information, or if you require further assistance. I appreciated the opportunity to work with
you on this project and look forward to providing you with geophysical services in the future.
Sincerely,
~
_//'7 ,,,:;/ _/ -~ ,a,._ fl-.e2: ;.v:c_ __ .,_ .. -. ..
Philip . Ducos
Geophysical Consultant
Attachments
";_/A~-
"v-,' /''·, .
/
·,~ / ~ TP-17~~-.:
. \. 7 ----_:··1 I
l"""i,..I
. .
-----yTP-f 8---E9-i E--,--~'.TP-16,~----1
1 1 DL-01
J\n:;s '!Vitt, iower bed roe!~
s.::fs.1n~c \P·locites.
"""'-TP-21
l""""iiiio
TP-19
l""""iiiio
TP-13
---------------. -2 ~· z
~ B-1
TP-14 MS[ WA
37.0 TW
25.95 B
ENO :.tSE WAL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I .
Q-3~ :1
I
I
~ .. -
/
0 100 200 .·· /·
App~xlmall!.Shorellnet· ==3:::=S=c=a=leji=nF=ee=t===::3 1 ·
F!RE L!\NE
GRASS PAVE ADJ TO
WEST S!DE OF BLDG
di: LOADING DOCK
RET WALL
I
I
I ,/
_./_,,. ..
CJ
Sl-2. PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING ----···--
POSED INDOOR
-4 PRACTICE FACILITY
,,~~·Q:5
·B-18
~SE WALL .11,ND
TRENCH OR,\IM
RIM = 26.0
ENO"MSE W
.,1
0
70
SEISMIC SURVEY LOCATION MAP
SEAHAWKSHEADQUARTERS
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Philip H. Ducos, Geophysical Consultant
PN 746-06 August 31, 2006
MAP1
50
40
30
i 20
~ 10
C 0 0
i > -10 .,
iii -20
-30
-40
-50
SOUTH
#1 #8 .
. -L -
Intersection w/ SL-3
at SL-3, 342' (38.2')
'
Seahawks Renton Site, SL-1
Boring BAX-10 Boring HQ-4
-28' to the W. 14' to the E.
' ' Ground Surface w/ I"
Geophone Location
I
#23
"' . --' -I -'. --. --
1950 fps 2360 fps
~ Loose Overburden
--. --~--------.. -,_ _ ,_ _ ~-
. -! •• --•• -"-... --••
' " ~8,700fps ~ Possible Denser Overburden
(assume 4400 fps) ~I I I I I I I
0
'
100 200
Approximate ground surface elevations
are based on hand level measurements.
Interpreted compressional (P-wave)
velocities are shown In feet/second.
.... ,_ -
.. ....
-----,
10,000 fps
.
Bedrock
I I I
300 400
Distance (feet)
Horizontal Scale: 1" = 80'
Vertical Scale: 1" = 40'
•• •·
' -
Intersection w/ SL-2
at SL-2, 148'
#37
I
'
.
"
NORTH
Boring SWB-1
12' to the E.
~I
•· -1 •· .. ·• ... •• .. ._ ......
500
I
11,BOOfps _
600
SEISMIC LINE SL-1
SEAHAWKS RENTON SITE
Phil Ducos, Geophysical Consultant
Job# 746-06, August 31, 2006
WEST
50
Ground Surface w/
40 Geophone Location ,
30 #1 ,.I . .
-20
Seahawks Renton Site, SL-2
Intersection wl SL-1
at SL-1, 536'
~12
l -. . ? -.
~20 .
1 .
Boring SWB-1A
-40' to the N.
I I I
Loose Fill
. . . -"'-,l ' ... ·:ll . ,.
Boring HQ-1
-95' to the S.
#36
I .
~
EAST
~8
. ~ .
-I _ 2180 fps 2410 fps ' 3630 fps 4400 fps
10 --Loose Overburden -
C 0 .2
1u > -10 .S!
-' ··• •• 1 •1 " -i-,_
Possible Denser Overburden ..--
w -20 (assume 4400 fps)
-30
-40
-50
-100 0 100
Approximate ground surface elevations are
based on hand level measurements.
Interpreted compressional (P-wave)
velocities are shown In feet/second.
'
\_J ••·•••ai . .
•tr. r -•' -
-
Bedrock (11,000 -13,000 fps)
I I I I I I I I . .
200 300
Distance (feet)
Horizontal Scale: 1" = 80'
Vertical Scale: 1" = 40'
··-Denser Overburden ,. ..... :. ••
400 500
SEISMIC LINE SL-2
SEAHAWKS RENTON SITE
Phil Duoos, Geophysical Consultant
Job# 746-06, August 31, 2006
Seahawks Renton Site, SL-3
WEST Boring 8-20 EAST
50
40
30
_ 20
di
~ 10
C 0 0
~ > -10 "' iii -20
-30
-40
-50
-70' to the N.
(Rock deeper than 69.5')
Boring HQ-3
43' to the N.
Intersection w/ SL-1
at SL-1, 141'
Boring HQ-2
21' to the S.
~--·-·---·-· ___ " ___ .... ----·····---···" -·--------____ ,, _____ .. ____ ----------·-····--.. --G~~-~~d-S~rt~,~~ -;1"· --... ___ ---. -----.. ----.. --~-------· ·----------------r------·1
#2 ~14 Geophone Location #3; ,
E _ _ / _ #48 i
1 I ___ I~ _ -.1 ---j ... -..... .. ....
~. Possible ·1
· -~ 2310 fps Loose Overburden --1100 fps Denser Overburden~
I , (assume 4400 fps) J
--~~ -'-?--+--? ----.. / / I . . I
-· " -..•• , ••l • a •· 1 •1 •1 ,_ -!
l.111 -,.• ·-Ii , \ •• • i
• _ / a,100 fps 'i·T I
1 10,000 fps , I \ ' ' ' . ~ -J I I I--Bedrock. --~ 11tO~f~s i
-100 0 100 200 300 400 500
Approximate ground surface elevations
are based on hand level measurements.
Interpreted compressional (P-wave)
velocities are shown in feel/second.
Distance (feet)
Horizontal Scale: 1" = 80'
Vertical Scale: 1" = 40'
SEISMIC LINE SL-3
SEAHAWKS RENTON SITE
Phil Duoos, Geophysical Consultant
Job# 746-06, August 31, 2006
ATIACHMENTA
SEISMIC REFRACTION METHODOLOGY
Oveniew
The seismic refraction method is used to evaluate numerous subsurfuce conditioos; including depth to and strength
(rippability) ofrock, depth to water, and general subsurface stratigraphy.
The seismic refraction method uses an induced shock wave. As the shock wave propagates through the earth, it is affi:ct:ed
by the materials through which it passes. Geophooes placed on .the ground surface record the ground motion caused by
the resultant wave. Aseismograph measures the time required fur the resultant wave to arrive at each geophooe. These
geophones are located at selected distances from the wave source. Analysis of the data (travel times and distances)
provides seismic velocities of subsurfuce material and depths to significant velocity interfaces.
Geologic conditioos yielding higher seismic velocities include increased amoonts of water, clay, cobbles, and rock
fragments, greater compaction of overburden materials, and greater competency of rock. Several fuctors can affect the
efrectiveness of the seismic method including the proximity of cultural interforences (such as powerlines and traffic noise),
surface conditioos (such as loose soil), the size and depth of the target, and the seismic wave velocity contrast between
stratigraphic uoits. Seismic velocities must increase with depth for a reliable interpretation of the data.
Calculations
The description of the travel of seismic refraction waves through the earth uses the same equation that describes the
refraction oflight Snell's Law. The following is a brief summary of the basic theory for a simple two-layer geologic
model as discussed by Redpath (Redpath, 1973).
Snell's Law is stated as:
SINa V,
SIN/J V,
and at the critical angle of incidence for a refracted
seismic wave (/3=90'), it becomes:
S!Na =!..:_
V2
where V 1 and V2 are the seismic wave velocities
for the upper and lower layers, respectively.
The seismic refraction method measures the amoont of
time it takes the seismic energy to travel from the
energy source to the geophones placed along the groond
surface. The arrival time for the seismic wave at each
geophone is plotted corresponding to the distance of the
geophone from the energy source, creating a time-
distance graph (Figure I).
•
The time required for the energy to reach the geophones
-• E
t-
Slope ~l/V2
Criticol di!>tonc:e, Xe
Distance X
Figure l: Two-layer geologic model and associated
time-distance h ed 1973 .
near the source (direct wave arrivals) is based only on the seismic velocity of the energy traveling though the upper (low
velocity) layer. At a certain distance from the source, called the critical distance, the first seismic waves to reach the
geophooes will be 1hose 1hat have refracted from a deeper, higher velocity layer. Althrugh 1hese waves have traveled a
greater distance 1han 1he direct waves, 1hey have traveled at a greater velocity over most of their path, and thus arrive
hefore the slower direct arrivals to the geophooes farther
from the soorce. Successively deeper layers with higher
velocities affect the time-distance graph in a similar mann
Using the tim<>-Oistance graph, the velocities of the
layers can be calculated (based on the slope of the
arrival times), and the layer thicknesses can he
calculated using the intercept times. The equation used
in the time-intercept method to determine thicknesses
is:
z, = T,V, + SHOT DEPTH
2C0S(SJN·'v,!V,) 2
Figure 2 is a sketch of a multiple layer case and the
corresponding time distance curve showing the intercept
times.
For more complex geologic models, as is usually
observed, addmonal energy source locatioos are
required at both ends of a seismic line as was done for
this survey. The layer velocities are calculated using 1he
data from all of the time-distance curves (delay-time
method).
Limitations
Two types of geologic conditions can cause a hidden wne
problem. One type of hidden zone is a layer with a lower
velocity 1han the layer above it Energy approaching the
layer at the critical angle will pass through the layer, and
Distance
Figure 2: Multiple layer geologic model and associated
time-distance graph (Redpath, 1973).
will not he refracted back to the surfuce lffitil it encounters a deeper layer with a higher velocity, so no first arrivals are
observed from the low-velocity layer. The presence of an !ffiknown low-velocity layer will cause the calculated depths to
he greater than the actual depths.
The other type ofhidden zone is a layer with a greater velocity than the layer above it, but one that is too thin and/or does
not have a large enrugh velocity contrast. The effuct of a thin layer will cause the calculated depths to be shallower than
the actual depths.
In areas with hidden zooes, the amount of error can he determined based on direct ohservations (such as test pits or
boreholes), and can be compensated for over the rest of the seismic lines.
References
Redpath, Bruce B. (1973). "Seismic Refraction Exploration for Engineering Site Investigations." Tech. Report E-73-4,
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Explosive Excavation Research Laboratory, Livermore, CA
Rippers D9L Ripper Performance
• Multi or Single Shank No. 9 Ripper
• Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities
Seismic Velocity 0 J
Meters Per Second l( \000 ~--~--~--~------~--~--~--~
Feet Per Second x 1000 O 10 11 12 lJ 14 15
TOPSOIL
CLAY
GLACIAL TILL
IGNEOUS ROCKS
GRANITE
BASALT
TRAP ROCK
SEDIMENTARY ROCKS
SHALE
SANDSTONE
SILTSTONE
CLAYSTQNE
CONGLOMERATE
8AECC1A
GAUCHE
LIMESTONE
METAMORPHIC ROCKS
SCHIST
MlNERALS & ORES
COAL I
SLATE
IRON ORE
AIPPABLE
Selsmlc Velocity
I I I -------' ' --------MARGINAL'----'
D~O R!pper Pcr!crmancc
• Multi or Single Shank No. 10 Ripper
• Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities
Meters Per Second X 1000 ---~--~--~--~--~--~---~-~
Feet Per Second x 1000 O 10 11 12 13 14 IS
GLACIAL T!LL
IGNEOUS
GRA.NITE
BASALT
TRAP ROCK
SEDIMENTARY
SHALE
SANDSTONE
SILTSTONE
Cl.A'r'STQNE
CONGLOMERATE
BRECCIA.
CALICHE
LIMESTONE
METAMORPHIC
SHIST
SLATE
MINERAL & ORES
C0.4.L --
IRON ORE
'
R1PPABLE -MARGINAL c::::::J NON-RIPPASLE ~
SHANNON &WILSON. INC.
APPENDIXD
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT
YOUR GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
21-1-20525-001
Ill SHANNON & WILSON, INC.
Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants
Attachment to and part of Report 21-1-20525-001
Date:
To:
September 13, 2006
Mr. Tal Fowler
Football Northwest, LLC
IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL
REPORT
CONSULTING SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC CLIENTS.
Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer may not be adequate for
a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise, your consultant prepared your report expressly for you
and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first
conferring with the consultant. No party should apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first
conferring with the consultant.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECT-SPECIFIC FACTORS.
A geotechnical/environmental report is based on a subsurface exploration plan designed to consider a unique set of project-specific factors.
Depending on the project, these may include: the general nature of the structure and property involved; its size and configuration; its
historical use and practice; the location of the structure on the site and its orientation; other improvements such as access roads, parking lots,
-.,d underground utilities; and the additional risk created by scope-of-service limitations imposed by the client. To help avoid costly
bl ems, ask the consultant to evaluate how any factors that change subsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations.
unless your consultant indicates otherwise, your report should not be used:(!) when the nature of the proposed project is changed (for
example, if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage, or if a refrigerated warehouse \Vill be built instead of an
unrefrigerated one, or chemicals are discovered on or near the site); (2) when the size, elevation, or configuration of the proposed project is
altered; (3) when the location or orientation of the proposed project is modified; (4) when there is a change of ownership; or (5) for
application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors
which were considered in the development of the report have changed.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE.
Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geotechnical/environmental report is
based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration, construction decisions should not be based on a report whose
adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests are desirable before construction starts; for
example, groundwater conditions commonly vary seasonally.
Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations may also affect
subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotechnical/environmental report. The consultant should be kept apprised of
any such events, and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary.
MOST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS.
Site exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. The data were
extrapolated by your consultant, who then applied judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. The actual interface
between materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ from
those predicted in your report. While nothing can be done to prevent such situations, you and your consultant can work together to help
rf>:duce their impacts. Retaining your consultant to observe subsurface construction operations can be particularly beneficial in this respect.
Page 1 of2 1/2006
REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY.
fhe conclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed
through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Actual subsurface conditions can be discerned
only during earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to obsenre actual conditions and to provide conclusions. Only the
consultant who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the report's
recommendations based on those conclusions are valid and whether or not the contractor is abiding by applicable recommendations. The
consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another
party is retained to observe construction.
THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION.
Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a geotechnical/environmental
report. To help avoid these problems, the consultant should be retained to work with other project design professionals to explain relevant
geotechnical, geological, hydrogeological, and environmental findings, and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative
to these issues.
BORING LOGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT.
Final boring logs developed by the consultant are based upon interpretation offield logs (assembled by site personnel), field test results, and
laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring logs and data are customarily included in
geotechnical/environmental reports. These final logs should not, under any circumstances, be redrav.n for inclusion in architectural or other
design drawings, because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process.
To reduce the likelihood of boring log or monitoring well misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to the complete
geotechnical engineering/environmental report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the report prepared for
· ''"'U, you should advise contractors of the report1s limitations, assuming that a contractor was not one of the specific persons for whom the
Jrt was prepared, and that developing construction cost estimates was not one of the specific purposes for which it was prepared. While
• contractor may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss the report with your
consultant and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost
estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface
information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent costly
construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate them to a disproportionate scale.
READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY.
Because geotechnical/environmental engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other design
disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem,
consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts, reports and other documents. These responsibility clauses are not
exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities to other parties; rather, they are definitive clauses that identify where the
consultant's responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved recognize their individual responsibilities and take
appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report, and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your
consultant will be pleased to give full and frank answers to your questions.
The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the
ASFE/Association of Engineering Finns Practicing in the Geosciences, Silver Spring, Maryland
Page 2 of2 1/2006
L A A
LARSON
ANTHROPOLOGICAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL
SERV:CES
P.O BOX 70 106
SCAT7lE
WASHINGTON
9 8 l 07
TEI (206] 782 0980
fAX, [206] 78J 2459
s
CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
JAG DEVELOPMENT, KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON
by
Bradley Bowden
Leonard A. Forsman
Lynn L. Larson
Dennis E. Lewarch
Submitted to:
CN A Architecrure
777-108th Avenue NE #400
Bellevue, Washington 98004-5118
Larson Anthropological/ Archaeological Services
LAAS Technical Report #97-7
P.O. Box 70106
Seattle, Washington 98107
March 27, 1997
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
ABSTRACT
Larson Anthropological and Archaeological Services (LAAS) conducted a cultural resource
assessment for the proposed JAG Development Project in February and March of 1997.
Examination of archival sources revealed that the Duwamish village, Sbal't", was located at
the former mouth of May Creek and is probably within the Pan Abode Cedar Homes property
or on the Port Quendall property (Harrington ca. 1909; Waterman ca. 1920). The site was
identified as a place where fish were dried and May Creek was noted as a spawning area for
"redfish" (either sockeye salmon or lake-locked kokanee salmon) (Harrington ca. 1909;
Waterman ca. 1920). The fieldwork involved a series of opportunistic subsurface shovel
probes designed to determine if buried archaeological deposits exist in the project area. Most
of the proposed JAG Development project area was either paved with asphalt, covered with
till, or access was not permitted because the area contained hazardous and dangerous
materials. Shovel probes were excavated in locations that appeared to be the least disturbed
based on an examination of historic and modern maps and consultation with Mark Larsen
(personal communication, 1997) of Remediation Technologies, Incorporated. One possibly
fire modified rock (FMR) was identified in a shovel probe at the north end of the Pan Abode
Cedar Homes property, near the old channel of May Creek. The possible FMR was recovered
from 90 to 100 centimeters below the surface in what appeared to be ailuvial deposits. No
other cultural materials or features were identified.
The LAAS field reconnaissance was unable to determine if any materials or features related to
the Duwamish village, Sbal't", are present within the proposed JAG Development project area
because less than 10 percent of the project area was examined for subsurface archaeological
remains. It is recommended that a professional archaeologist monitor areas with a high
probability for cultural resources if future subsurface activities related to the proposed JAG
Development Project are planned for those areas. An archaeological monitor should be
present during any further investigation or preconsrruction remediation related to the
potentially hazardous and dangerous materials at the sire as well as any ground disturbing
activities associated with construction in high probability areas at the proposed JAG
Development.
II
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ...... .
Table of Coments
. . ii
iii
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 1
Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................... 4
Cultural Background ............................................... 6
Previous Cultural Resource Studies .................................... 6
Ethnography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 12
Field Reconnaissance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Field Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Field Results . . 16
Conclusions and Recommendations ....
Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
High Probability Areas ......... .
Low Probability Areas .......... .
Bibliography . . . ............ .
Appendix 1: Agencies and Individuals Contacted ........ .
Appendix 2: Tribal Correspondence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .
Appendix 3: Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Cultural Resources Survey Cover Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LIST OF FIGURES
17
17
19
20
21
27
29
32
Figure 1. Project area location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 2
Figure 2. Project area map showing individual properties and shovel probe locations ..... 3
Figure 3. Historic features, shoreline changes, and former beds of May Creek in proposed
JAG Development Project vicinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 4. Recommended monitoring areas in the JAG Development Project area ...... 18
lll
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
ACK.t'IOWLEDGMENTS
Several individuals contributed to the completion of this cultural resource assessment; the
project would not have been as successful without them. Jim Spitze, CNA Architecture, was
extremely helpful in facilitating access to the proposed JAG Development property and in
providing necessary documents that LAAS needed to complete this report. Mark Larsen,
Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, also helped in securing access to the proposed JAG
Development property and provided useful information regarding the history of the various
properties that are part of the proposed project. Joe Gibbons and Mike Paulson, Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated, also deserve thanks for monitoring fieldwork at the proposed JAG
Development project area. Joe Gibbons and Mike Paulson not only related information about
hazardous and dangerous materials in the project area but also offered data regarding the soil
and fill episodes in various locations of the proposed JAG Development Project area. Finally,
Stan Greene, Renton Historical Society and Museum, gave us access to historical information
and photographs of the May Creek and Kennydale region. His cooperation and assistance was
greatly appreciated.
lV
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
INTRODUCTION
Larson Anthropological/ Archaeological Services (LAAS) was retained by CN A Architecrure
in December 1996 to conduct a cultural resource assessment of the proposed JAG
Development Project. The proposed JAG Development Project would occupy a 60-acre parcel
on the eastern shore of Lake Washington, west of Interstate 405 at Exit 7, NE 44th Street,
North Renton. The proposed JAG Development project area is comprised of four propenies:
the Barbee Mill, the Port Quendall Log Yard, the Pan Abode Cedar Homes property, and the
Baxter Property. The Baxter Property has been divided into the South Baxter Property and the
North Baxter Property. The North Baxter Property contains the northernmost portion of the
Baxter property along the shore of Lake Washington and a small wedge of property east of the
shoreline properties, called the north Baxter Property East Wedge. The project area is in
Sections 19 and 32, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Bellevue South Quadrangle, King
County, Washington (Figures 1 and 2).
The cultural resource assessment consisted of an archival and literature review, field
reconnaissance, consultation with the Muckleshoot Tribe and the Duwamish, and preparation
of this report. Published and unpublished environmental, ethnographic, historic, and
archaeological documents were gathered and reviewed. Environmental, ethnographic, and
historic information was collected from Special Collections, Allen Library, University of
Washington; Renton Historical Society and Museum; and the Renton Library. Archaeological
site forms and project reports were obtained from the Washington State Office of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation.
Field reconnaissance consisted of the excavation of subsurface shovel probes to determine the
potential for buried archaeological deposits in the proposed JAG Development project area.
No cultural resources were identified that may be eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places. However, fill and development of the area precluded investigation of at
least 90 percent of the project area. Because ethnographic literature suggests portions of the
project area have a high probability for cultural resources, we recommend that a professional
archaeologist monitor subsurface activities, e.g. geotechnical testing, remediation of hazardous
and dangerous waste, and construction, clearing, grading, and excavation in areas of the
proposed JAG Development Project with a high probability for cultural resources.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed JAG Development would be a mixed-use area containing office space,
conference facilities, restaurants, a marina, recreational spaces, retail shops, a hotel, parking
areas, and residential properties (CNA Architecture 1997). The proposed development is
projected to begin by 1999 and be completed by approximately 2010 (CNA Architecture
1997),
::;.,,.~·. ·:.~::.=---. rr~;:.~~,i. ~\. . ·, . . .• .. . . ',_.',·.''.~ ;' ', . , ...... -.. _J·;., -...
'Mercer lsland_'.Y::-
"'-.·X
-------·--c--:;:,,-...._ . •.• , . . .! ·ii
'-),,
_____ !' .:}? .,_.,,
,;
' .. /·· ·.·•,
" . ;·/~
i/.
;Ji\~;"
:.-._.:.eJ·· -.
Figure 1. Project area location.
2
,,'
.......
r-: ·-~
I
i
l
\':-
~ ~:-:~:-d:
I
./'
. I ,
\
'.\:
~;_;.':('.'.. 'x·\ , .. ,-. tr:
/~
I
------Shoreline
0
N
Base Map from USGS Beflevue
South, Washir'!gton. 1983.
0,5
Miles
)
i
N
#1
D
0 1000
Feet
ProJect Area Boundaries
Figure 2. Project area map showing individual properties and shovel probe locations.
3
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
ENVIRONivIENT
The proposed JAG Development project area is on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in a
small valley where May Creek enters the lake. Prior to historic manipulation of the channel,
May Creek dropped from a narrow meandering stream in upland locations to a braided stream
at the mouth which formed a delta. Historic and modern maps of the area show that the mouth
of May Creek naturally moved over time but was also altered to its present course by 1940
(Figure 3) (Kroll Map Company 1940). Most of the proposed JAG Development project area
was probably inundated or subject to periodic flooding prior to the completion of the Lake
Washington Ship Canal in 1916 (Chrzastowski 1983). The mean water level of Lake
Washington was almost nine feet higher than its current level before the Lake Washington Ship
Canal was built (Chrzastowski 1983:3). The mean water level of the lake probably fluctuated
as much as seven feet, however, due to seasonal and periodic fluctuation in rainfall prior to
completion of the Lake Washington Ship Canal (Chrzastowski 1983:3). An article in the Town
Crier (1917) describes archaeological and botanical remains along the shoreline of Lake
Washington at the mouth of May Creek after the Lake Washington Ship Canal was completed
and the water level had dropped. This corroborates Chrzastowski's (1983) statement
regarding the lake's fluctuation long before the Lake Washington Ship Canal was built.
Periodic advance and retreat of glaciers over the last 37,000 years is largely responsible for
the topography and soils present in the Puget Sound basin. The glacial event responsible for
the current topography of the Seattle area was the Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation
(Mullineaux 1970:27). The Vashon glacier originated in British Columbia and brought rocks
and minerals typical of that area southward into the Puget Sound area (Mullineaux 1970:27)
The Vashon glacier began a retreat approximately 14000 BP (years before present) and
allowed marine waters into Puget Sound (Crandell 1963). The glacier had fully retreated
approximately 13000 BP leaving deposits collectively known as the Vashon Drift (Galster and
Laprade 1991:252). Lake Washington is one of several glacially scoured lakes in the Seattle
area (Galster and Laprade 1991:247). The Lake Washington vicinity was a glacially scoured
trough prior to 14000 BP. Marine water filled what was to become Lake Washington as the
Vashon Stade retreated northward around 13500 BP. The Cedar River deposited an alluvial
fan across the south end of the marine embayment to form Lake Washington by 13400 BP
(Dragovich et al. 1994; Leopold et al. 1982; Mullineax 1970).
The shoreline of Lake Washington also fluctuated several times over the past 7,000 years
because of earthquakes (Karlin and Abella 1992, 1993). Large earthquakes triggered
underwater slumping on steep submerged trough walls and landslides on shoreline bluffs.
Over 14 earthquake events were identified in cores from the lake bottom (Karlin and Abella
1992, 1993). The sediment record coincides with dates obtained from submerged forests that
slid into the lake as pan: of landslide debris. A forest that slid into Lake Washington during an
1100 BP earthquake along the Seattle Fault, is off the southeast corner of Mercer Island, just
west of the proposed JAG Development project area. The landslides and underwater slumping
4
-.. -Shoreline Boundary
(United States Surveyor General 1864)
May Creek
(United States Surveyor General 1864)
Trail
(United States Sur-,eyor General 1864)
-·-·-Shoreline Boundary
{United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920)
May Creek
(United States Anny Corps of Engineers 1920) ---Former Railroad
{United States Army Corps of Engineers 1920)
Present May Creek
Marsh
I._,,./ .·
I
';1~:..-.~'f,
ef . '
/. -.. -_.,--~ A I _..
Marsh in 1920
• ~= ' '
' !'
<J
I
\
1 i . '-to 1000
/ I •
I I l '. . + \. : f \ .
N '---~F,J------_J
eet
Base Map from USGS Bellevue
South, Washington, 1903
Figure 3. Historic features, shoreline changes, and former beds of May Creek in proposed
JAG Development Project vicinity.
5
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
caused large amplitude changes in the lake level (Karlin and Abella 1992:1619). Sudden
landslides coupled with ground subsidence from an earthquake probably produced large waves
that scoured the Lake Washington shoreline, causing additional landslides and depositing
sediment. Large waves and earthquake-induced elevation changes in ground surface elevations
probably modified the outfall of Lake Washington at the Black River, south of the proposed
JAG Development project area. The proposed JAG Development project area is
approximately three miles south of the Seattle Fault and would have been uplifted during an
earthquake about 1,100 years ago.
The geological history of the proposed JAG Development project area is complex. Changing
ground surface elevations and fluctuating levels of Lake Washington caused the project area to
be exposed above the Lake Washington shoreline, washed by waves, and/or inundated by
rising lake levels. Hunter-fisher-gatherer sites in the area were alternately raised and/or
inundated. Cultural deposits were probably covered by landslide debris and/or silt during
periods of submergence. The contemporary ground surface of the project area is probably at a
higher elevation than prior to 1,100 years ago, when the area was uplifted during an
earthquake. This suggests that pre-1100 BP shorelines may exist inland from the
contemporary shoreline in the eastern portion of the project area. Pre-1100 BP hunter-fisher-
gatherer occupations may occur in the eastern portion of the project area and may be buried
beneath landslide debris or alluvial deposits.
Prior to European contact, the Puget Sound basin was home to animals typical of the Pacific
Northwest inland forest environment such as deer (Odocoileus spp.), elk (Cervus canadensis),
black bear (Ursus americanus), coyote (Canis /atrans), fox (Vulpes), mountain lion (Fe/is
concolor}, bobcat (Lynx rufus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), mink (Mustela vison), river otter
(Lutra canadensis), beaver (Castor canadensis), and muskrat (Ondatra ziethica). Various
species of salmon were also abundam in the Puget Sound basin and were a large part of the
diet of native inhabitants of the region. The Puget Sound basin is part of the Western hemlock
(Tsuga heterophylla) physiographic zone. The overstory vegetation includes Douglas fir,
bigleaf maple, Western red cedar and red alder. Understory vegetation of particular
importance to the native inhabitants of the Puget Sound area included a variety of berries such
as salmonberry, blackberry, strawberry, and red elderberry, carnas and other lilies, ferns, and
numerous other plants used for economic purposes (Gunther 1981).
CT}LTURAL BACKGROUND
PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCE STIJDIES
Most of the property on Lake Washington has been privately owned for several decades,
consequently, few archaeological studies have been conducted along the lake. An
archaeological site has never been recorded on Lake Washington despite many references to
Duwamish villages along the shores of the lake in historical documents (Harrington ca. 1909;
6
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Waterman ca. 1920). Residential and commercial development of the Renton area has
prompted several archaeological projects, however, and the data from those surveys and
excavations offers evidence of the nature of hunter-fisher-gatherer archaeological sites in the
region.
The Sbabidid Site (45KI51) is on the west side of Hardie Avenue SW in Renton along a
remnant channel of the Black River and was recorded by the Office of Public Archaeology
(OPA), University of Washington, as part of a survey for the Earlington Woods Planned Unit
Development (Chatters 1981: 1). The site contained the remains of at least three structures and
midden deposits which dated from AD 1790 co AD 1856 although radiocarbon dates were not
obtained for several portions of the site (Chatters 1981: 1 ). Archaeological deposits were
buried approximately one meter below the surface and backhoe trenches were excavated to
help determine the depth of buried deposits (Chatters 1981: 31). The precise nature of the site
has been disputed (Butler 1990), but it appers that the site was either a Duwamish village or a
fishing camp. Subsequent monitoring by Reid (1991:22) during the construction of the
Earlington Woods Development revealed the presence of seven additional midden areas at the
Sbabidid Site. The Ozbolt property, adjacent and north of the Sbabidid Site, was surveyed by
LAAS in 1988 but no cultural resources were identified despite site maps for the Sbabidid site
that suggest midden deposits were recorded on this property (Larson 1988: 1, 13). The survey
was conducted using surface reconnaissance and shovel testing and Larson (1988: 1, 13)
attributed the absence of cultural materials identified during this survey to their probable depth
below the fill. BOAS conducted a cultural resource assessment of the Ozbolt property in 1990
and produced a letter report that indicated the presence of a possible burial on the property
(Stump 1990: 1). Trade beads, buttons, twisted cedar thread, a fragment of cloth, fragments of
woven cedar bark, cedar wood, and a human bone fragment were identified in a subsurface
survey of the property (Stump 1990:l). LAAS later surveyed the Ozbolt property for a
proposed apartment complex and relocated the northernmost midden deposits identified by
Chatters (1981) and additional midden deposits in the eastern portion of the property (Lewarch
et al. 1996: 16).
The Tualdad Altu Site (45KI59) was recorded by OPA in 1980 when archaeologists surveyed
the planned development of the Black River Corporate Park located downstream from the
Sbabidid Site on the former Black River (Chatters 1988:2). Chatters (1988:50) believed the
site was occupied approximately 1600 BP (before present) but corrected radiocarbon dates for
the Tualdad Altu Site suggest that the site was occupied approximately 1400 BP (Lewarch et
al. 1996:3-5). The Tualdad Altu Site is buried below more than one meter of sterile alluvium
(Chatters 1988:37, 47). Chatters (1988: 134) believed that the pattern of artifacts, hearths, and
midden deposits at the Tualdad Altu Site represented a similar way of life to chat of the
occupants of the Sbabidid Site despite approximately 1600 years between occupations.
45KI439 was recorded by LAAS in 1994 and is approximately 200 feet east of the Sbabidid
Site on the east side of Hardie Avenue SW in Renton (Lewarch et al. 1994:Appendix 2). The
site was identified in backhoe trenches and is approximately one meter below the surface
(Lewarch 1994: 1). Four hearths containing fire modified rock, midden deposits three to eight
7
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
centimeters thick, calcined bone, charcoal, and historic period midden deposits were identified
in three trenches (Lewarch 1994:7). The site was identified in association with archaeological
montioring of the proposed location of a Fred Meyer Corporation store (Lewarch 1994: 1).
The site is deeper than proposed construction would have taken place so no impacts to the site
were expected and no further evaluation of the site was undertaken (Lewarch 1994: 10).
The Marymoor Site ( 45Kl9) is on the Sammamish River one half mile from its source at the
north end of Lake Sammamish (Greengo 1966:6). The Sammamish River and Lake
Sammamish were occupied by the Sammamish band of the Duwamish (Greengo 1966:2). The
Marymoor Site was excavated by Robert Greengo (1966) and students from the University of
Washington in 1964 (Greengo 1966:vi). The site contained numerous lithic tools recovered
from two layers of midden deposits. A Cascade Phase lithic assemblage with leaf-shaped
Cascade points, large stenuned points, and basalt cobble tools was mixed with later cultural
materials such as small projectile points. Two radiocarbon dates from the site had corrected
age ranges between 1648 and 2741 BP (Lewarch et al. 1995:Table 1.2). Site deposits were
probably mixed during one or more earthquake events that liquefied sand beneath cultural
strata and forced the sand through cracks to the ground surface (Lewarch et al. 1995: 1-23).
Marymoor occupations probably date between 3500 BP and 1000 BP based on stratigraphy,
radiocarbon dates, and diagnostic artifacts (Lewarch et al. 1995:1-23). The Marymoor Site
may have been a hunting camp whose inhabitants also lived along the shore of Lake
Washington at other times of the year (Forsman and Larson 1995:7).
Other archaeological surveys have been conducted near the proposed JAG Development
project area that failed to identify archaeological sites. OPA conducted a survey of an
extension of sanitary sewers along May Creek which terminated at May Creek's intersection
with Interstate 405. No archaeological remains were identified but Lorenz (1976: 1) noted that
an ethnohistoric village was reported at the mouth of May Creek. Archaeological and Historic
Services (AHS), Eastern Washington University, conducted a pedestrian survey of State Road
900 in the upper May Creek Valley but no archaeological resources were identified (Robinson
1990:1). AHS conducted two surveys for highway development along Interstate 405 in the
Bellevue area but determined that prior disturbance due to original highway construction had
significantly disturbed native soils and no intact archaeological deposits would be encountered
(Robinson 1982a, 1982b). AHS also conducted a survey of a proposed park and ride lot in
northeast Renton approximately . 7 miles southwest of May Creek but no archaeological
resources were identified (Robinson 1983:3).
The Sbabidid Site, the Tualdad Altu Site, and 45Kl439 are within five miles of the proposed
JAG Development project area and were probably occupied by the Duwamish. Sites such as
these and the May Creek village location, Sbal't", were identified by Harrington (ca. 1909)
and Waterman (ca. 1920) along the shores of Lake Washington and in upland locations in
several places. Archaeological features and artifacts such as those found at the Sbabidid Site,
the Tuladad Altu site, 45Kl439, and the Marymoor Site may also be present within the
proposed JAG Development project area and may be deeply buried below the surface.
8
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
ETHNOGRAPHY
The proposed JAG Development project area is within the territory of the Duwamish, a Salish-
speaking group who lived in the general vicinity of Seattle. The Duwamish lived in a series of
villages, loosely allied through kinship and political alliances, that consisted of individual or
multiple cedar longhouses on Elliott Bay, Lake Washington, Lake Union, Salmon Bay, and on
the Duwamish, Green (formerly White), and Cedar Rivers (Duwamish et al. 1933; Harrington
ca. 1909; Larson 1986; Waterman ca. 1920). The Duwamish, who were named for a group
that lived on the Cedar River known as the Dua'bs, prospered by efficiently procuring food
resources from the rivers, lakes, and marine waters within their territory.
The Duwamish were primarily dependent on salmon for food and seasonally harvested and
processed various salmon species as the fish returned to local bays, lakes, streams, and rivers
during spawning migrations. Salmon were harvested in these waters with nets, weirs, traps,
hook and line, seines and spears. Some of the salmon were consumed fresh, but most were
dried in smokehouses for winter storage or trade. Other marine fishes such as trout, flounder,
octopus, and cod were taken for similar purposes. Lake Washington hosted an especially
abundant variety of freshwater, non-salmonid species including chub, squawfish, bass, perch
and suckers. Shellfish, such as clams, mussels, and crabs, were also taken from local Puget
Sound shorelines; and freshwater mussels were gathered from lakes and streams. Waterfowl
were snared in aerial duck nets or hunted from canoes. Plant resources, especially berries and
roots, were harvested in the warmer months and processed for winter consumption. Wapato
and camas were two important plant resources used by the local native groups living on or
visiting Lake Washington (Indian Claims Commission 1955:16, 25; Lewarch et al.
1996:3.16). Wapato is a potato-like tuber that grows in flooded areas and camas is a lily-like
flowering bulb that grows in prairie environments. A visitor to Lake Washington witnessed
Duwamish canoers carrying strings of dried clams and cakes made from roots while he was
transported across Lake Washington in 1871 (Cawley 1994:3). This observation demorntrates
the accuracy of later ethnographic research and shows the tenacity of local native culture
several decades after initial contact with non-Indians.
The Duwamish focused their late summer and fall seasonal food gathering and preservation
activities towards support of their extended residence in the winter houses. Winter
ceremonials, social events, repair and maintenance of fishing equipment, and leisure were the
main activities reserved for the winter season. Several of the winter settlements on Lake
Washington were inhabited by people that spoke the Duwamish language and intermarried
with the neighboring Duwamish villages. Despite the cultural similarities this group
maintained a separate identity from their Duwamish kin and neighbors (Smith 1940: 16) and
have been collectively referred to as: the S'Ke'tehl'mish, meaning people of the Skatelbs
village t1ear the former outlet of Lake Washington at its southerly end (Gibbs 1877; Larson
\986); the Xa'tco'abc meaning "Lake Washington Indians" (Ballard 1929:38; Harrington ca.
1909:Frame 314; Smith 1940:17); or simply the Lake Indians (Paige 1856b). The Duwamish
9
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
of Lake Washington lived in winter houses at Kirkland, Juanita, Yarrow Point, Mercer
Slough, Union Bay, Thornton Creek, Bryn Mawr, May Creek and McAJeer Creek (Duwamish
et al. 1933; Harrington ca. 1909:314, 421; Larson 1986:31-37; Waterman ca. 1920).
The original shoreline of Lake Washington and the original momh of May Creek are within
the proposed JAG Development project area (United States Surveyor General 1864). May
Creek was known to the Duwamish of Lake Washington as Sbal't' meaning "place where
things are dried" (Waterman 1922: 191). The name referred to the "great quantities of
redfish" that were harvested at a point of land which was the mouth of May Creek (Waterman
1922: 191). "Redfish" were the run of sockeye salmon that were taken here each year. It is
unclear if the "redfish" noted by Waterman (1922: 191) are the resident "lake salmon"
recorded by Smith (1940:236) or a "select race" of sockeye salmon that migrated to outside
marine waters (Williams et al. 1975:8.601). May Creek was the site of a Duwamish village
consisting of "two medium houses" known as Shub-alugh each measuring "8 by 16 fathoms"
(48 feet by 96 feet) (Duwamish et al. 1933). This name, which is an anglicized approximation
of the term Sbal't' recorded by Waterman (1922:191), originates from testimony given by
Duwamish informants for the Indian Claims Commission in 1927 (Duwamish et al. 1933).
Harrington (ca. 1909:Frame 421) recorded a group of Duwamish called the Subaltuabs, who
took their name from May Creek, an obvious reference to the people who lived in the May
Creek village.
The Subaltuabs probably caught the sockeye and the smaller resident salmon using a
combination of traps, weirs, and dipnets. The marine run of sockeye salmon were probably
smoked in the customary way, either in a cedar planked smokehouse or dried on racks using a
combination of sunlight and a small, smoky fire (Smith 1940:238). "Lake salmon" spawned
in the small drainages of Lake Washington, such as May Creek (Smith 1940:236). They were
cleaned with the backbone left in, smoked and stored for later use.
The Subaltuabs of May Creek had strong contacts with the neighboring villages of Skatelbs,
Tuwe'b-qo and the other Duwamish villages at the confluence of the Black and Cedar Rivers.
This connection is also suggested by a historic trail from the Black River to the mouth of May
Creek, documented by U.S. territorial government surveyors in 1864 and 1865 (Figure 3)
(United States Surveyor General 1864, 1865). The largest concentration of Duwamish villages
was on the Black and Cedar Rivers, giving the May Creek villagers incentive to maintain the
trail as an overland route between villages for economic and social purposes. The trail was
also part of a system that included the trail over Naches Pass used by the Klickitat and other
plateau groups for trade missions with the Duwamish and other Puget Sound groups. The
Puget Sound groups also used the trail to gain access to upland hunting and berrying grounds
(Prater 1981:9-11).
The Subaltuabs lived at their homes on May Creek continuously until events related to the
increased Euroamerican settlement of the Seattle area began to affect aboriginal settlement
patterns. Introduced diseases, such as smallpox, were the first effects of non-native contact
felt by the Duwamish. In addition, settlers began to occupy gathering sites and fishing places,
10
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
causing the Duwamish great concern about the increasing population of non-riatives in their
territory (Lewarch et al. 1996:5.162) The United States Government attempted to address
their fears by negotiating treaties with the Duwamish and other Puget Sound tribes in 1855.
The Treaty of Point Elliot was signed in January of 1855 by Chief Seattle for the Suquamish
and Duwamish Tribes (Lane 1975:22-23). Original surveys of the area record the village on
the Black River but fail to note any houses on May Creek (United States Surveyor General
1864, 1865). The absence of houses at May Creek in the 1860s suggests that the Subaltuabs
had moved from their winter village and perhaps resettled at other Duwamish villages or on
nearby reservations such as the Muckleshoot or Port Madison Indian Reservations.
The Subaltuabs and the other "Lake Indians" were considered part of the larger Duwamish
Tribe by the United States Government. The Treaty assigned the Duwamish to live on the
Port Madison Indian Reservation on the Kitsap Peninsula, far from their aboriginal territory.
Some Duwamish moved to the Port Madison Indian Reservation while others found the notion
of living in Suquamish territory unsatisfactory and stayed in their homes on the Cedar and
Black Rivers. The treaty terms and occupation of usual and accustomed fishing and gathering
places motivated some of the more aggressive tribal groups to engage in skirmishes with
regular army troops and volunteers. These were called the Indian War of 1855-56 .. Federal
officials were fearful that the Duwarnish would engage in hostiie activities. They were
especially concerned about the Duwamish on Lake Washington, because they had marital and
trade ties to the plateau groups like the Y akama, who maintained a strong stance against the
military. Indian agency officials attempted to restrain the Duwamish from joining the conflict
through removal to a temporary reservation in Seattle and by monitoring their movements. It
appears that the Subaltuabs remained at or near their village at May Creek for several months
after the Indian War ended according to the local Indian Agent in his December 1856 letters.
He stated that "on the eastern shore of the Lake there are three large houses containing 38
persons" (Paige 1856a) and "the band of Lake Indians are encamped on the east side of the
Lake near the South end" (Paige 1856b).
Most of the Subaltuabs and the other "Lake Indians" eventually moved to either the Port
Madison or Muckleshoot Indian Reservations with other Duwamish people. Relocation to the
reservations was probably complete by 1930, after it became obvious to the remaining
Duwamish that a reservation was not going to be established for their exclusive use. Today,
the Muckleshoot Tribe exercises Treaty fishing rights in Lake Washington as successors to the
aboriginal rights of the "Lake Indians" and other Duwamish groups.
The types of hunter-fisher-gatherer resources expected in the JAG Development project area
would primarily relate to food gathering activities and permanent winter settlement. Remnants
of weirs, traps, smokehouses, and drying racks built for harvesting the annual sockeye runs
may be preserved beneath the ground surface. Middens and fire hearths from fish processing
and consumption of marine and freshwater resources may also be present. The project area
may also contain house posts, post molds, depressions and other remnants of former winter
11
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
houses. Projectile points, scrapers, debitage, and adze blades related to hunting and
processing land game, fish processing, and winter house maintenance and construction may
also be expected.
HISTORY
Isaac Ebey was the first non-native to observe Lake Washington while he ascended the
Duwamish River in 1850, in search of a homestead (Bagley 1929:1:27). After fo!lowing the
Black River into Lake Washington, Ebey described the lake as "surrounded principally with
woodland, consisting of cedar, fir, ash, oak, etc.. .the water is clear and very deep" (Bagley
1929:1:27). Ebey named the body of water Lake Geneva, a short-lived appellation (McDonald
1979: 15-19). · Lake Washington was permanently renamed Lake Washington in 1854
(McDonald 1979: 15-19). Lake Washington was also known as Lake Dawamish (sic) in early
United States territorial surveys (United States Surveyor General 1864, 1865). Ebey may have
passed May Creek, called Honeydew Creek in the 1860s (United States Surveyor General
1864), during his investigation of Lake Washington.
The proposed JAG Development project area was first settled by James Madison Colman in
1875 (Bagley 1929:1:413: Fawcett 1979). Colman, who is also listed as James :tvfanning
Colman by a local historian (McDonald 1979:75), should not be confused with James Murray
Colman, who was a prominent Seattle sawmill operator, railroad financier and coal mine
developer. James Murray Colman originally came to Puget Sound in 1861 to operate the Port
Madison Mill (Bagley 1929:2:48-55). James Murray Colman was very active in the
development of the Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad, a line that went from Seattle to the
Newcastle coal mines 2.2 miles east of the project area. The historical occurrence of two
J. M. Colmans in close proximity to each other has caused the men to be mistakenly
identified. The J. M. Colman of May Creek will be referred to as J. Madison Colman to
avoid further confusion.
J. Madison Colman, who was born in Kentucky, came to Seattle from his home in Georgia by
ship with his wife Clarissa in approximately 1875 (Fawcett 1979; McDonald 1979:75).
Shortly after his arrival, J. Madison Colman acquired a 160-acre parcel of land bisected by
May Creek, formerly the homestead of Jeremiah Sullivan, who, in turn, had acquired the
property from the United States Government in 1873 (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated
1996: 1.1). He cleared one acre of his property and built a house where he lived with his wife
and four children (McDonald 1979:75-77). J. Madison Colman was elected to a position as
King County Commissioner in 1880 and 1882 (McDonald 1979:77). He was murdered in
1886 while rowing to Seattle to testify in a land claim dispute. The suspect in the murder was
a neighbor that Colman had accused of illegally obtaining title to his lands. The suspect was
tried three times and finally convicted, however, his sentence was later overturned (Bagley
1929:1:413-414; McDonald 1979:77-78). Coleman Point at Kennydale, approximately one-
half mile south of the project area, was named for J. Madison Colman (McDonald 1979:75).
12
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
J. Madison Colman's widow, Clarissa, maintained ownership of the homestead after his death
but the property remained unused for several years. Lands near the northern boundary of the
project area were used for access to coal fields in the Newcastle Hills. The 1864 survey of the
area in which the JAG Development project area is located shows an unfinished wagon road
one-quarter mile northeast of the project boundary. The road runs east to west from the
shoreline of Lake Washington parallel to the northern boundary, but is entirely outside the
project area. This road was built to haul coal to Lake Washington from Newcastle for
shipment to Seattle (Bagley 1929:1:285; United States Surveyor General 1864). In 1902, the
timber on the Colman property, which still encompassed the entire project area, was sold
(Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:1.1). A year later, the Northern Pacific
Railroad acquired a right-of-way through the Colman property for construction of a railroad
spur along the eastern shore of Lake Washington that connected Woodinville and Renton. The
Lake Washington Belt Line Railroad had attempted to build the same spur in 1890, but this
railroad was only partially completed (McDonald 1979:53). The Lake Washington Belt Line
Railroad was intended to unite iron ore from the Cascades with coal from near the Carbon
River for processing purposes. The railroad route along the eastern shore was later built by
the Northern Pacific Company around 1905 (O'Hare 1905; Slauson 1976:182; Way 1989:37-
38) with five stations along Lake Washington; Kirkland, Houghton, Northrup, Wilburton, and
May Creek (Scott and Turbeville 1983:53).
The Colman family began selling parts of their 160-acre homestead after 1908. In 1916. Peter
Reilly purchased a waterfront portion of the original Colman property (Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated 1996: 1.1). This parcel of land became the Quendall Terminals
Property where Reilly established the Republic Creosote Company in 1917; later, the company
was known as the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation (McDonald 1979:78; Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3.1). Lake Washington was lowered just a few months after
Reilly purchased his parcel when the Lake Washington Ship Canal and the Hiram Chittenden
Locks were constructed in the summer of 1916. The project was initiated to provide improved
navigation to Puget Sound, to help control flooding, and to provide moorage for Naval ships
(Ballard News Tribune 1988:88; Chrzastowski 1983:7). Lowering Lake Washington's water
level expanded Reilly's holdings to over 29 acres (Kroll Map Company 1926). The Quendall
area received its name from a mistaken creosote order from England addressed to a plant at
Port Quendall and a variation of the name is still used on modern maps and by current owners
(McDonald 1979:78). The Reilly Tar Company used the tar by-products generated by the
Lake Union Gas Works to produce creosote and other refined products (McDonald 1979:78;
Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3.2). The plant was operational from 1917 to
1969.
Another parcel of the Colman property, which was eventually owned by the Baxter Company,
was sold in approximately 1914 for establishment of a shingle production facility (Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4.1). The property was owned by Sound Timber Company
in 1926 which owned and operated the shingle mill (Kroll Map Company 1926). The shingle
mill was just outside the project area and was demolished between 1936 and 1946
(Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4.1). The remaining property was owned by
13
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Peter Reilly and two other individuals, a Mr. Falk and Emil Gaupholm, who built residences
on the property, according to Remediation Technologies, Incorporated (1996:2.1). The
property was owned by J.B. Polk in 1936 (Metsker 1936) but was sold to Mr. Rydeen by
1940 (Kroll Map Company 1940). The property may have changed hands many times over
the years or county atlases were not frequently or reliably updated resulting in the
contradictions between tide records and county atlases. The property was finally leased to the
Baxter Company in 1955 which established a wood treatment facility where logs were
debarked and treated for use for telephone poles and pilings (McDonald 1979:78; Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated 1996:4.2). A few years later the Baxter Company purchased the
property. The majority of facility operations has recently been transferred to another site in
Arlington, Washington.
The last parcel of the Colman property within the proposed JAG Development project area
was held by the Colman family through 1940. From 1926 to 1936 the land was owned by
James Colman, possibly one of J. Madison Colman's descendants, or the name is a reflection
of the persistence of the deceased Colman's name in land records (Kroll Map Company 1926).
In 1940, the land was owned by George Lathrop Coleman (sic), a son of J. Madison Colman
(Fawcett 1979). The land was sold by the Colmans to the Barbee Marine Yards in 1943, a
company that built ships for the military during World War II {Remediation Technologies,
Incorporated 1996:2.2). A sawmill was built on-site to process wood for shipbuilding. After
the war ended, the Barbee Mill abandoned shipbuilding and concentrated on sawmill
operations.· The Barbee Mill is in operation today.
Most of the remaining lands around the project area were sold by the Colmans to C. D.
Hillman, a real estate developer who established the Garden of Eden tracts in the early 1900s.
The Garden of Eden tracts were the stimulus for the development of Kennydale, named for
Hi!lman's brother-in-law and best salesperson (Kroll Map Company 1926; McDonald
1979:78; Slauson 1976: 180-181). Hillman's development attracted several families which
established homes and small farms. Many others were employed in logging local timber that
was transported to Lake Washington on the May Creek Lumber Company's log railroad along
May Creek (Slauson 1976: 180-181). The first road along the lake shore was built in 1918 and
is now known as Lake Washington Boulevard (Slauson 1976:181). Interstate 405 was
completed in the early 1960s as part of the expanding interstate highway network.
Historic archaeological resources which may be expected in the JAG Development project area
would be associated with early residential and industrial development. Types of resources
would be structural remnants of early creosote refinery-structures and equipment, remains of
the first Northern Pacific Railway tracks, evidence of the May Creek Lumber Company's
logging railroad, and/or other early sawmill activity. Indications of these occupations would
be railroad timbers and trackage, historic refuse, machinery parts and components, and
roadbeds. Evidence of early residential development would be indicated by house foundations,
root cellars, structural remnants, and historic artifact assemblages.
14
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE
FIELD METHODS
The proposed JAG Development properties are currently developed as the Barbee Mill, Port
Quendall Log Yard, the Baxter Property, and the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property. The
Baxter Property is divided into two parcels; one of the parcels contains two areas. The North
Baxter Property includes the northern end of the Baxter Property and a small wedge of
property east of Ripley Lane (Hazelwood Lane) and west of Interstate 405 called the North
Baxter Property East Wedge (Figure 2). The South Baxter Property contains the area where
the Baxter Wood Treating facility was located (Figure 2). These properties were historically
occupied and recently modified to such an extent that few surfaces or exposures of native soil
were available throughout the proposed JAG Development site for field investigation. The
Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property and the Barbee Mill Properties are paved with asphalt and
subsurface investigation was only possible at the extreme margins of the properties. The
Baxter Property is currently undeveloped but the southern portion of the property was a wood
treating plant between 1955 and the early 1960s (Remediation Technologies, Incorporated
1996:4-2). Contamination of the soil on the South Baxter Property from creosote forbade
subsurface archaeological investigation (Mike Paulson, personal communication 1997).
Creosote and other chemicals were manufacrured on the Port Quendall Property between the
late 1910s and late 1960s and could not be shovel-probed due to contamination of the soil
(Remediation Technologies, Incorporated 1996:3-5: Mike Paulson, personal communication
1997). The North Baxter Property and the North Baxter Property East Wedge were the only
large parcels that were available for subsurface investigation.
The field reconnaissance was conducted by LAAS archaeologist Bradley Bowden on March 4,
5, and 7, 1997. Joe Gibbons and Mike Paulson of Remediation Technologies, Incorporated,
monitored Bradley Bowden's movements throughout the project area to insure that no
potentially hazardous materials were encountered during the field reconnaissance. Joe
Gibbons monitored fieldwork on March 4, between 8:30 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. and on March
5, between 8:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m., and Mike Paulson monitored fieldwork on March 4,
between 10:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. and on March 7, between 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. Shovel
probes were placed in areas of the proposed JAG Development parcels that appeared to exhibit
minimal disturbance based on historic maps and information relating to the previous and
current use of the properties. Reco!Ulaissance was focused primarily on the eastern portion of
the JAG Development project area because most of the western portion of the properties was
under water prior to the construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal and because no soil
contamination was in these areas.
Shovel probes were approximately 35 centimeters in diameter and were an average of 80
centimeters deep. Two shovel probes were excavated to depths below one meter and two
shovel probes were terminated between 20 and 30 centimeters below the surface because large
cobbles related to fill episodes were encountered. The shoveled portion of the probes was
15
,-
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
terminated at approximately 65 centimeters below the surface and a five and one quarter-inch
(13 centimeter) diameter auger was used to complete the probe. All sediments excavated in
the shovel probes were passed through 1/4" and 1/8" screen. Field notes, photograph
records, and photographs are stored in LAAS project files.
FIELD RESULTS
One cobble-sized, possibly fire modified rock (FMR), was identified in Shovel Probe #9 on
the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property (Figure 2). This rock was recovered in pebble-sized
stream deposits and may have been broken naturally. The possible FMR was recovered from
soils buried 90 to 100 centimeters below the surface. No other cultural materials were
identified in Shovel Probe #9. Shovel Probe #12, at the southeast comer of the Port Quendall
Log Yard, contained small charcoal deposits within the soil at a depth of 90 to 100 centimeters
that may have been related to human activities in the area. No other cultural materials or
archaeological sites were identified during the field reconnaissance.
Fill was encountered in all but two of the shovel probes and was between 30 and 90
centimeters in depth. The most shallow fill episodes were noted in the eastern portion of the
North Baxter Property near the railroad tracks. The deepest fill episode was in the
southeastern portion of the Port Quendall Log Yard, near the old channel of May Creek. Four
of the 12 shovel probes were terminated because the fill was impenetrable.
Approximately 10 percent of the proposed JAG Development Project area was shovel-probed
for buried archaeological deposits. The remaining 90 percent of the project area was not field
assessed because access to buried deposits was not possible. The Barbee Mill and the Pan
Abode Cedar Homes Properties were mostly paved with asphalt or contained existing
strucrures. Three shovel probes were successfully excavated in these areas, comprising 27
acres of the 60-acre JAG Development Project area. The Port Quendall Log Yard and the
South Baxter Property were identified as having hazardous and dangerous materials on and
below ground surface by Remediation Technologies, Incorporated (Mark Larsen, personal
communication 1997). Access to the majority of these properties was not possible due to
contamination of soils below the surface. One shovel probe was excavated at the extreme
southeast corner of the Port Quendall Log Yard within one meter of a Remediation
Technologies, Incorporated, soil probe that was free of contaminants (Mike Paulson, personal
communication 1997). The Port Quendall Log Yard Property and the South Baxter Property
comprise 20 acres of the 60-acre JAG Development project area. The North Baxter Property
is divided into two parcels; the larger is adjacent to the South Baxter Property and is 19 acres
in area. Three of four shovel probes in this parcel encountered impenetrable fill and were
terminated before native soils could be observed. The smaller North Baxter Property is the
North Baxter Property East Wedge, a one-acre wedge-shaped parcel east of Ripley
(Hazelwood) Lane and west of Interstate 405 (Figure 2). Three shovel probes were excavated
in this area and native soils were encountered in all three shovel probes.
16
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Soils that appeared to be native and undisturbed ranged from sand to loam and contained
abundant waterworn pebbles and cobbles. The soil identified in shovel probes in the eastern
portion of the project area tended to be a mixture of sandy loam and sandy silts and contained
moderate amounts of pebbles and small cobbles. These soils appeared to be remnant alluvial
deposits from flooding and movement of May Creek. Soils in the western portion of the
proposed JAG Development project area tended to be fine to coarse sands with abundant
waterworn pebbles and cobbles. These deposits were suggestive of beach deposits associated
with the changing shoreline of Lake Washington.
CONCLUSIONS A.i'{D RECOMMENDATIONS
No cultural resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were
identified in the proposed JAG Development project area during archival review or field
reconnaissance. Literature review indicated that the mouth of May Creek was in the Port
Quendall Log Yard portion of the proposed JAG Development Project area prior to modem
channelization. Waterman (ca. 1920) identified the Duwamish site Sbal't" at this location, a
village with two winter houses known as a good place for fishing and drying redfish (sockeye
or kokanee salmon). The village was recorded by two anthropologists shortly after the rum of
the century and was occupied at least until the Treaty of Point Elliot was signed in 185j. No
Duwamish village occupations or any type of archaeological sites have been recorded on Lake
Washington. Environmental factors and the location of archaeological sites south of Lake
Washington on the old Black River channel suggest that archaeological remains are probably
extant under fill and or pavement associated with the proposed JAG Development. However,
field reconnaissance of the proposed JAG Development project area was limited by modern
and historic changes to the area, including fill episodes, asphalt and concrete paving, and
potentially hazardous materials on and below the ground surface. Lake fluctuations from
earthquakes and historic modifications have alternately submerged and uplifted the Lake
Washington shoreline, burying and/or eroding hunter-fisher-gatherer deposits over time. In
addition, the mouth of May Creek has moved across the landscape leaving alluvial deposits or
scouring earlier surfaces. Predicting the location of high probability areas for cultural
resources becomes a challenge. Nevertheless, it is entirely likely that archaeological remains
are extant on the proposed JAG Development project area.
MONITORING
Monitoring for archaeological materials is recommended in all future subsurface activities in
high probability areas within the proposed JAG Development project area. Monitoring should
be included in any future activities relating to the cleanup of the potentially hazardous
materials in high probability areas of the project area as well as during any construction
activities related to the proposed JAG Development. High probabilicy areas are those that are
most likely to contain archaeological deposits (Figure 4). A professional archaeologist should
be on-site to monitor any subsurface activities to insure that no intact archaeological materials
17
i 0
N
. )
Feet
1000
I
Project Area Boundaries
Figure 4. Recommended monitoring areas in the JAG Development project area.
18
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
or features are adversely affected during such activities. If any archaeological materials or
features are identified during monitoring of subsurface activities, the activity should be halted
immediately in areas large enough to maintain the integrity of the remains to allow the
archaeologist to determine the integrity and significance of the materials and/or features. If the
archaeologist detennines that a probably significant archaeological site is present, a testing
strategy for evaluation should be developed through consultation with the Washington State
Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and the Muck!eshoot Tribe. If human
remains are identified during subsurface activities, construction must halt in an area large
enough to maintain integrity of the remains and the Washington State Office of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation and the Muckleshoot Tribe contacted immediately.
HIGH PROBABILITY AREAS
Areas that are most likely to contain archaeological deposits within the JAG Development
project area are those that border old channels of May Creek, areas that border the trail shown
on the U. S. Surveyor General map from 1864, areas adjacent to the 1864 shoreline and areas
near the current shoreline in the May Creek mouth vicinity that may have been exposed and
inundated repeatedly over time because of water level fluctuations. High probability areas in
the JAG Development project area include all of the Port Quendall Log Yard, a portion of the
South Baxter Property, the central portion of the North Baxter Property, and northern portions
of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes and Barbee Mill Properties (Figure 4). The Port Quendall
Log Yard contains the old channel of May Creek visible on the 1864 GLO map and the 1920
DNR map (United States Anny Corps of Engineers 1920; United States Surveyor General
1864). It also contains the end of the historic trail shown on the 1864 GLO map. The 1920
DNR map shows a marsh in the eastern portion of the Port Quendall Log Yard where the
mouth of May Creek formed a delta (Figure 3). This area was undoubtedly used by the
inhabitants of the Duwamish village Sbal't" to gather plants such as wapato and to fish. The
South Baxter Property borders the Port Quendall Log Yard on the north and was probably also
occupied by hunter-fisher-gatherers. The 1920 DNR map of the project area shows two small
promontories that were probably formed when stream-born alluvial deposits entered the lake
(Figure 3). The early historic period shoreline shown in the 1864 United States Surveyor
General Map traverses the North Baxter Property and may have been used by hunter-fisher-
gatherers after l, 100 years ago. Non-village, lacustrine sites may be adjacent to the shoreline.
It is likely that an old channel of May Creek was in the southern portion of the South Baxter
Property and that native inhabitants of the JAG Development project area used the area for
fishing and gathering. The northern portion of the Barbee Mill also borders the Port Quendall
Log Yard and may contain archaeological resources related to the activities mentioned
previously. The northern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property contains old
channels of May Creek that were several meters east of fluctuating lake shorelines. The
property was probably not subject to inundation and may have been occupied when lake levels
were high and the Port Quendall Log Yard was under water. The historic trail shown on the
1864 GLO map intersected with May Creek in the northern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar
Homes Property which suggests that an archaeological site may be in the immediate vicinity.
19
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Low PROBABILITY AREAS
The North Baxter Property and the North Baxter Property East Wedge were successfully
shovel probed below fill and contained no archaeological deposits, however, areas near the
early historic period shoreline may have undiscovered cultural deposits. Likewise, the
southern portion of the Pan Abode Cedar Homes Property was successfully shovel probed and
contained no archaeological deposits. These areas may have been slightly outside the use area
of the inhabitants of the Duwamish village Sbal't". The North Baxter Property East Wedge,
portions of the North Baxter Property away from the early historic period shoreline, and the
southern portion of the Pan Abode C~dar Homes Property are considered to have a low
probability of containing archaeological deposits. Shovel probes were attempted in the
southern portion of the Barbee Mill but were completely inundated with ground water and
appeared to contain several feet of fill. This portion of the project area may have been under
water prior to historic use of the JAG Development project area and is considered to be a low
probability area as well. The current shoreline of the JAG Development project area is fill
material that was placed from 100 to 1,000 feet west of the 1864 shoreline (Figure 3).
Contemporary offshore bathymetry with water depth in two meter contours (Figures J and 3)
shows a broad submarine platform west of the project area to a depth of 10 meters below the
low water elevation of Lake Washington. This is probably the submarine portion of the May
Creek delta. Higher elevations of this offshore platform may have been exposed during low
stands of Lake Washington during the past 1,100 years, but were probably not available for
hunter-fisher-gatherer use before then, when the landform was probably uplifted during an
earthquake. The current shoreline is therefore considered low probability in all areas of the
JAG Development project area. In areas that are considered to be high probability and have
shoreline portions, e.g. the Port Quendall Log Yard, the South Baxter Property, and the
northern portion of the Barbee Mill Property, a 100 foot (approximately 30 meter) area from
the shoreline east should be considered to be low probability.
20
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bagley, Clarence B.
1929 History oj King County. 4 vols. S.J. Clarke Publishing Company, Seattle.
Ballard News Tribune
1988 Passpon to Ballard: The Centennial Story. Ballard News Tribune: A Division of
Newspaper Enterprises of Washington State Company, Seattle.
Ballard, Arthur C.
1929 Mythology of Southern Puget Sound. University oj Washington Publications in
Anthropology 3(2):131-150. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
Butler, Virginia L.
1990 Fish Remains from the Black River sites (45KI59 and 45KI51-D). Archaeology in
Washington 2:49-65.
Carter, M. J.
1917 Lake Washington's New Beach Line. Town Crier 14 April, 1917.
Cawley, Martinus
1994 Indian Journal of Rev. R. W Summers. Guadalupe Translations, Lafayette, Oregon.
Chatters, James C.
1981 Archaeology ojthe Sbabadid Site 45Kl51, King County, Washington. Office of
Public Archaeology, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Washington.
On file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
1988 Tua/dad A/tu (45Kl59), a 4th Century Village on the Black River, King County,
Washington. First City Equities, Seattle.
Chrzastowski, Michael
1983 Historical Changes to Lake Washington and Route oj the Lake Washington Ship
Canal, King County, Washington. Water Resources Investigation Open-File Report
81-1182.
CNA Architecrure
1997 Port Quendall Planned Action EIS lnjormation, Proposed Conditions. CNA
Architecture, Seattle.
21
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Crandell, Dwight R.
1963 Surficial Geology and Geomorphology of the Lake Tapps Quadrangle.
Washington. Geological Survey Professional Paper 388-A. Department of the
Interior. Washington, D.C.
Dragovich, Joe D .. Patrick T. Pringle, and Timothy J. Walsh
1994 Extent and Geometry of the Mid-Holocene Osceola Mudflow in the Puget Lowland:
Implications for Holocene Sedimentation and Paleography. Washington Geology
22(3):3-26.
Duwamish et al. Tribes of Indians v. The United States of America
1933 Testimony before the Court of Claims of the United States. Proceedings of the
Indian Court of Claims, No. F-275.
Fawcett, Clarissa M.
1979 Colman Family History. Letter from Clarissa M. Fawcett to Renton Museum, 3
March. On file at the Renton Historical Society, Renton, Washington.
Forsman, Leonard and Lynn Larson
1995 Regional Wastewater Services Plan Cultural Resource Management Overview Draft
Technical Memorandum. LAAS Technical Report 95-12. Submitted to CH2M Hill,
Bellevue, Washington.
Galster, Richard W. And William T. Laprade
1991 Geology of Seattle Washington, United States of America. Bulletin of the
Association of Engineering Geologisrs, Volume XXVIII, Number 3:235-302.
Gibbs, George
1877 Tribes of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Contributions to North
American Ethnology 1(2): 157-361. John Wesley Powell, editor. U. S. Geographical
and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region. Reprinted. Shorey Books,
Seattle, 1970.
Greengo, Robert E.
1966 Archaeological Excavations at the Marymoor Site (45K.19). A Report to the National
Park Service Region 4, Order Invoice Voucher 34-703 Sammamish Flood Control
Project. Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Gunther. Erna
1981 Ethnobotany of Western Washington, the Knowledge and Use of Indigenous Plants by
Native Americans. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
22
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Harrington, John P.
ca. John P. Harrington Papers. National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian
1909 Institution. Reel 15, 1907-1957, on microfilm at Suzzallo Library, University of
Washington, Seattle.
Indian Claims Commission
1955 Defendant's Request for Findings of Fact, Objections to Findings of Fact requested
by Petitioner, and Brief, Docket No. 109, The Duwamish Tribe of Indians v. The
United States of America. Indian Claims Commission, Washington, D.C. Frederick
W. Post collection, Box 23. On file Suquamish Tribal Archives, Suquamish,
Washington.
Karlin, Robert E. and Sally B. Abella
1992 Paleoearthquakes in the Puget Sound Region Recorded in Sediments of Lake
Washington, U.S.A. Science 258: 1617-1620.
1993 A Hisrory of Past Eanhquakes Recorded in Lake Washington Sediments. Paper
presented in the U.S. Geological survey and Quaternary Research Center, University
of Washington Conference on Large Earthquakes and Active Faults in the Puget
Sound Region.
Kroll Map Company
1926 Kro/l's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, SeaCTle.
1940 Kroll's Atlas of King County. Kroll Map Company, SeaCTle.
Lane, Barbara
1975 Identity and Treaty Status of the Duwamish Tribe of Indians. Report prepared for the
US Department of the Interior and the Duwamish Tribe. Ms. on file at Special
Collections, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle.
Larson, Lynn L.
1986 Ethnographic and Historic Duwamish Land Use. On file at Larson Anthropological/
Archaeological Services, Seattle.
1988 Cultural Resource Investigation of a Proposed Warehouse in Renton, King County,
Washington. Submitted to Public Storage, Incorporated, Renton, Washington. Letter
report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,
Olympia.
Leopold, Estella B., Rudy J. Nickman, John I. Hedges, and John R. Ertel
1982 Pollen and Lignin Records of Late Quaternary Vegetation, Lake Washington.
Science 218:1305-1307.
23
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Lewarch, Dennis E.
1994 Cultural Resources Field Assessment of the Fred Meyer Corporation Building Project
Area, Renton, King County, Washington. Submitted to Fred Meyer Corporation,
Portland, Oregon. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation, Olympia.
Lewarch, Dennis E., Lynn L. Larson, and Leonard A. Forsman
1995 Introduction. In The Archaeology of West Point, Seattle, Washington, 4,000 Years of
Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Land Use in Sourhern Puget Sound, 2 vols, pp. 1-1-1-39.
Edited by Lynn L. Larson and Dennis E. Lewarch. Larson Anthropological/
Archaeological Services, Seattle. Submitted to the King County Department of
Metropolitan Services, Seattle.
Lewarch, Dennis E., Lynn L. Larson, Leonard A. Forsman, Guy F. Moura, Eric W. Bangs,
and Paula Mohr Johnson
1996 King County Department of Natural Resources, Water Pollution Conrrol Division,
Alki Transfer!CSO Project Allentown Site (45K1431) and White Lake Site (45KJ438
and 45KJ438A) Data Recovery. LAAS Technical Report #95-8. Larson
Anthropological/ Archaeological Services, Seattle. Submitted to HDR Engineering,
Bellevue, Washington and King County Department of Natural Resources. Water
Pollution Control Division, Seattle.
Lorenz, Thomas H.
1976 Archaeological Assessment, Army Corps of Engineers, Permit Number 071-0YB-1-
002916, Phase 1-May Creek Interceptor. METRO/King County Water District
Number 107. Letter report submitted to Moore, Wallace and Kennedy, Incorporated,
Seattle. On file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation.
Olympia.
McDonald, Lucile
1979 The Lake Washington Story. Superior Publishing Company, Seattle.
Metsker, Charles
1936 Metsker's Atlas of King County. Metsker Map Company, Seattle.
Mullineaux, Donald R.
1970 Geology of the Renton, Auburn, and Black Diamond Quadrangles, King County,
Washington. Geological Survey Professional Paper 672, United States Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
O'Hare, Daniel
1905 State of Washington. Compiled from the Official Records of the General Land Office
and other sources. In Early Washington Atlas, 1981, Ralph Preston, Binford and
Mort, Portland, Oregon.
24
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Paige, George
1856a Report to Isaac I. Stevens, Superintendent ofindian Affairs, Washington Territory.
December 29, 1856, Fort Kitsap, Washington Territory. On microfilm, U.S.
National Archives, Records of the Washington Superintendency of Indian Affairs,
Letters received from Puget Sound, Microcopy 5, Roll 10.
1856b Report to Isaac I. Stevens, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Washington Territory.
December 31, 1856, Fort Kitsap, Washington Territory. On microfilm, U.S.
National Archives, Records of the Washington Superintendency of Indian Affairs.
Letters received from Puget Sound, Microcopy 5, Roll 10.
Prater, Yvonne
1981 Snoqualmie Pass, From Indian Trail to Interstate. The Mountaineers, Seattle.
Reid, Al
1991 Archaeological Monitoring at Sbabadid Site (45KJ51) During the Earlington Woods
Development Project, 1990. Submitted to the Holly Corporation, Tacoma, Contract
Job No. 947001.
Remediation Technologies, Incorporated
1996 Review of Historical Jnjomwtion and Environmental Records for the Baxter,
Quendall and Barbee Mills Propenies. Prepared for JAG Development Corporation,
Bellevue, Washington.
Robinson, Joan
1982a SR 405: Factoria to Nonhup Way-HOV, Archaeological and Historical Services,
Eastern Washington University, Cheney. Prepared for Washington State Department
of Transportation, Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
1982b SR 90: Bellevue Access Study, Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern
Washington University, Cheney. Prepared for Washington State Department of
Transportation, Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation, Olympia.
1990 A Cultural Resources Survey of SR 900: Junction SE May Valley Road, King County,
Washington. Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington
University, Cheney. Prepared for Washington State Department of Transportation,
Seattle. Letter report on file Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia.
Scott, James W. and Daniel Turbeville III
1983 Whatcom County in Maps 1832-1837. Center for Pacific Northwest Studies and the
Fourth Comer Registry, Bellingham, Washington.
25
JAG Development Cultural Resource Assessment
Slauson, Morda C.
1971 One Hundred Years Along the Cedar River. Maple Vailey Historical Society, Maple
Valley, Washington.
1976 Renton, From Coal to Jets. Renton Historical Society, Renton, Washington.
Smith, Marian W.
1940 The Puyallup-Nisqually. Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology,
Volume 32. Columbia University Press, New York.
United States Army Corps of Engineers
1920 Survey of Lake Washington Shoreline at May Creek. On file at Washington State
Department of Natural Resources, Olympia.
United States Geological Survey
1983 Bellevue South, Washington 7.5 Quadrangle. United States Geological Survey,
Reston, VA.
United States Surveyor General
1864 General Land Office Map, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia.
1865 General Land Office Map, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia.
1864-General Land Office Surveyor's Notes, Township 24 North, Range 5 East,
1865 Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
Olympia.
W aterrnan, T. T.
ca. Puget Sound Geograplry. Unpublished manuscript on file Pacific Northwest
1920 Collection, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle.
1922 Geographic Names Used by Indians of the Pacific Coast. Geographical Review
12: 175-194.
Way, Nancy
1989 Our Town Redmond. Publishers Press, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Williams, R. Walter, Richard M. Laramie, and James J. Ames
1975 Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound
Region. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia.
26
Appendix 1
Agencies and Individuals Contacted
Agencies and Individuals Contacted
Jim Spitze. Director, CNA Architecture, telephone, 9 Jarruary, 1997, 17 January, 1997, 21
January, 1997, 11 March, 1997, 12 March 1997.
Mark Larsen, Redevelopment Specialist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, telephone,
10, March 1997.
Joe Gibbons, Hydrogeologist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, in person, 4 and 5
March, 1997
Mike Paulson, Environmental Scientist, Remediation Technologies, Incorporated, in person, 4
and 7 March, 1997.
Stan Greene, Researcher, Renton Historical Society and Museum, in person, 7 and 8 March,
1997.
Jason Wear, Administrative Assistant, Duwamish Tribe, telephone, 21 February, 1997.
Walter Pacheco, Community Services Director, Muckleshoot Tribe, telephone, 26 March,
1997.
Appendix 2
Tribal Correspondence
A A
January 17, 1997
Virginia Cross
Chairperson
s
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
39015 172nd Avenue S.E.
Auburn, WA 98002
Dear Ms. Cross:
LARSON
A?C:-!.J.~OLCGICAL
S .: ~ 'i: C: 3
CN A Architecrure Group, Incorporated, has retained Larson Anthropological/ Arcb.aeological
Services to conduct a cultural resource assessment for a Planned Action Environmental Impact
Statement for JAG Development's proposed redevelopment of the Quendall Terminal Site. The
project area is a 69 acre site on the southeastern sb.oreline of Lake Washington at May Creek, a
quarter mile north of Kennydale, Washington (Figure 1). JAG Development has preliminarily
proposed development of office buildings, residential housing, a hotel/conference center, a marina,
· and restaurant space on the property to be phased over a 10-15 year period.
LAAS' cutrural resource assessment includes identification of archaeological sites and potential
traditional cultural use areas within the boundaries of the JAG Develo!)ment. A field survey will be
conducted on the 69 acre parcel to determine the existence or probability for significant cultural
resources. LAAS is currently gathering existing arcb.aeologica!, historic, ethnographic, and
ethnohistoric data from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, University of
Washington Libraries, and pertinent local King County repositories. However, we believe that the
Muckleshoot Tribe may have information gathered from elders and/or the Tribe may currently use
areas for traditional cultural activities.
We encourage a cultural representative from the Muckleshoot Tribe to cont.act LAAS if the Tribe
has information that might be useful in the assessment. We understand that traditional culrural use
areas are private, but LAAS welcomes the opporrunity to work with the Tribe regarding
incorporation of this type of information in a secure and respectful manner. Please phone Lynn
Larson or Leonard Forsman at LAAS at your earliest convenience if you would like to discuss the
matter further. Otherwise, Leonard Forsman will phone your cultural representative within a week
of your receipt of this letter.
Sincerely,
Lynn L. Larson
Principal Investigator
LLL/LF
enclosure
cc: Walter Pacheco, Community Service Coordinator
i' C BOX i0106
SEAiflC
W . .\SHINGTON
9 8 IO 1
'. io~J 78? QQS(I
0 ,U ·: 20C\ 78) 24.$9
L A A s
January 17, 1997
Cecile Maxweil-Hansen
Chairperson
Duwamish Indian Tribe
212 Wells Avenue South, Suite C
Renton, WA 98055
Dear Ms. Maxwell-Hansen:
~ARSON
SE~YICES
CNA Architecture Group, Incorporated, has retained Larson Anthropological/Archaeological
Services to conduct a cultural resource assessment for a Planned Action Environmental Impact
Statement for JAG Development's proposed redevelopment of the Quendall Terminal Site. The
project area is a 69 acre site on the southeastern shoreline of Lake Washington at May Creek, a
quarter mile north of Kennydale, Washington (Figure 1). JAG Development has preliminarily
proposed development of office buildings. residential housing, a hotel/conference center, a marina,
and restaurant space on the property to be phased over a 10-15 year period.
LAAS' cultural resource assessment includes identification of archaeological sites and potential
traditional cultural use areas within the boundaries of the JAG Development. A field survey will be
conducted on the 69 acre parcel to determine the existence or probability for significant cultural
resources. LAAS is currently gathering existing archaeological, historic, ethnographic, and
ethnohistoric data from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, University of
Washington Libraries, and pertinent local King County repositories. However, we believe that the
Duwamish Tribe may have information gathered from elders and/or the Tribe may currently use
areas for traditional cultural activities.
We encourage a cultural representative from the Duwamish Tribe to contact LAAS if the Tribe has
information that might be useful in the assessment. We understand that traditional culrural use
areas are private, but LAAS welcomes the opporrunity to work with the Tribe regarding
incorporation of this type of information in a secure and respectful rnanner. Please phone Lynn
Larson or Leonard Forsman at LAAS at your earliest convenience if you would like to discuss the
matter further. Otherwise, Leonard Forsman will phone your cultural representative within a week
of your receipt of this letter.
Sincerely,
~o-~
Lynn L. Larson
Principal Investigator
LLL/LF
endosure
cc: James Rasmussen, Tribal Council Member
"'030X70106
st Ar r l E
W,\SH\NGTON
Q 3 IO 7
•:, (':200f 73:?. QQ8Q
f.>\:( (:;:oo; ;aJ. 245Q
Appendix 3
Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Cultural Resources Survey Cover Sheet
I
Cultural Resources Survey Cover Sheet
Author: Bradley Bowden Leonard A. Forsman, Lvnn L. Larson Dennis E. Lewarch
Title: Cultural Resource Assessment JAG Development, King County, Washington
Date: March 27 1997
County: King-Sections: 12....31 Township: 24N Range: 5E Quad: Bellevue South.
Washington
Total Pages:--3..3. Acres:QQ
Site No. :
---------------------------------------------
OAHP Use Only
(For Author's review)
This report:
X
X
X
Describes the objectives & methods.
Summarize the results of the survey.
Reports where the survey records and data
are stored.
X Has a Research Design that:
Details survey objectives
Details specific methods
Details expected results
Details area surveyed
Details how results will be feedback in the
planning process
NADB Document No: ________ _ OAHP Log No:-------
My review results in the opinion this survey report __ does ___ ,does not conform with
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification.
Signed:
Date:-------
LAND USE, SHORELINE
& MASTER PLAN PERMIT
APPLICATION
North & South Baxter
Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
& Training Facility
Renton, WA
VOLUME 1
Prepared by Crawford Architects & the RETEC Group for
Football Northwest LLC
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Sea hawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
TABLE OF CONTENTS & LIST OF FIGURES
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Master Application
• Land Use Master Application Form
• Figure 1.1 -Affidavit of Ownership
• Figure 1.2 -Port Quendall Company -Consent of Directors
• Figure 1.3 -Submittal Requirements & Waiver of Submittal Requirements File
• Figure 1.4 -Vicinity Map
• Figure 1.5 -Zoning Plan
Project Overview (Narrative)
• Location
• Access
• Size of Site
• Project Components
• Proposed Uses
• Headquarters Facility Features
• Site Areas
• Public Access to Shoreline
• Training Camp
• Construction
• Construction Mitigation Description
• Figure 2.1 -Submittal Requirements
Environmental Checklist
A Background
B. Environmental Elements
1. Earth
2. Air
3. Water
4. Plants
5. Animals
6. Energy and Natural Resources
7. Environmental Health
8. Land and Shoreline Use
9. Housing
1 0. Aesthetics
11. Light and Glare
12. Recreation
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
14. Transportation
15. Public Service
16. Utilities
C. Signature
D. Supplemental Sheets for Non ProJect Actions
Page 1
Page 1
Page 1
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 3
Page 3
Page 3
Page 4
Page 1
Page 6
Page 8
Page 8
Page 10
Page 12
Page 13
Page 13
Page 14
Page 16
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 20
Page 21
Page 21
Table of Contents
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
Section 4
Section 5
Section 6
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
Partial Certificate of the Completion for the Capital Portion of the Cleanup at the JH
Baxter South Parcel
Site Plans
• Figure 5.1 -Illustrative Site Plan
• Figure 5.2 -Sheet A001.3 Site Plan
• Early Site Package 1 -Cap, Preloading and Culvert
o Figure 5.3 -Sheet CE101 Notes
o Figure 5.4 -Sheet CE111 Reference Plan
o Figure 5.5 -Sheet CE201 TESC Plan
o Figure 5.6 -Sheet CE202 TESC Plan
o Figure 5.7 -Sheet CE203 TESC Plan
o Figure 5.8 -Sheet CE204 TESC Plan
o Figure 5.9 -Sheet CE211 Site Demolition Plan
o Figure 5.10 -Sheet CE212 Site Demolition Plan
o Figure 5. 11 -Sheet CE213 Site Demolition Plan
o Figure 5.12 -Sheet CE214 Site Demolition Plan
o Figure 5.13 -Sheet CE221 Early Grading Plan
o Figure 514 -Sheet CE222 Early Grading Plan
o Figure 5.15 -Sheet CE223 Early Grading Plan
o Figure 5.16 -Sheet CE224 Early Grading Plan
o Figure 5.17 -Sheet CE245 Utility & Drainage Control
o Figure 5.18 -Sheet CE301 Gypsy Subbasin Storm Drain Relocation Plan
o Figure 5.19 -Sheet CE302 Gypsy Subbasin Storm Drain Relocation Plan
Profile
o Figure 5.20 -Sheet CE401 Sections & Details -TESC
o Figure 5.21 -Sheet CE402 Sections & Details
o Figure 5.22 -Enlarged Site Plan of Public Access
Stormwater Technical Information
(Water Quality & Stormwater Analysis)
• Project Overview
• Preliminary Conditions Summary
• Off Site Analysis
• Flow Control and Water Quality Facility
Analysis and Design
• Conveyance System Analysis and Design
• Special Reports and Studies
• Other Permits
• Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan Analysis and Design
• Bond Quantities Worksheet, Retention/
Detention Facility Summary Sheet and
Declaration of Covenant
• Operations and Maintenance Manual
Page 1
Page 3
Page 5
Page 7
Page 9
Page 9
Page 10
Page 10
Page 11
Page 11
Table of Contents
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9
Section 10
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
Stream and Lake Study
(Class 2 Stream -Hydrology/Hydraulic Requirements)
1. Purpose Page 1
2. Project Location Page 1
3. Project Description Page 2
4. Existing Conditions Page 4
5. Shoreline Planting/ Mitigation Plan Page 12
6. Resource Values to be Restored, Created Page 16
Or Enhanced
7. Coordination with Other Agencies
8. Construction Schedule
9. Site Protection and Maintenance
10. Environmental Goals and Performance
Standards
11. Monitoring
12. Contingency Plan
13. Cost Estimate
14. Compliance with Renton Municipal Code
15. Compliance with Best Available Science
16. Vegetation Protection
17. References
Existing Site Conditions & Vegetation
• Existing Vegetation Summary
Page 19
Page 21
Page 21
Page 21
Page 22
Page 24
Page 25
Page 25
Page 28
Page 32
Page 34
• Figure 8.1 -Survey of Existing Conditions (General Notes)
• Figure 8.2 -Survey (Topography)
• Figure 8.3 -Existing Drainage Patterns
• Figure 8.4 -Existing Vegetation Plan
Landscape Architecture
• Narrative
• Figure 9.1 -Sheet L 100 Conceptual Landscape & Hard scape Plan
• Figure 9.2 -Calculations
• Conceptual Plant Palettes
• Figure 9.3 -Sheet L 110 Screening Detail
Architectural
• Narrative
• Figure 10 .1 -Sheet A 1 01 Ground Level Floor Plan
• Figure 10.2-Sheet A102 Mezzanine Floor Plan
• Figure 10.3 -Sheet A 103 Second Floor Plan
• Figure 10.4 -Sheet A301 Conceptual Elevations
• Figure 10.5 -Sheet A302 Conceptual Elevations
• Figure 10.6 -Sheet A401 Conceptual Section
• Figure 10. 7 -Sheet A402 Conceptual Sections
Table of Contents
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 3
Section 11
Volume 2
Section 12
Section 13
Section 14
Appendices
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Sea hawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton. WA
Preliminary Visual Evaluation
• Narrative
• Figure 11.1 -Plan Locating Views
• Figure 11.2 -Elevation Locating Views
• Figure 11.3a -View 1 Existing
• Figure 11.3b -View 1 Proposed
• Figure 11.4 -View 2 Existing
• Figure 11.5 -View 2 Proposed
• Figure 11.6 -View 3 Existing
• Figure 11. 7 -View 3 Proposed
Traffic Study
1. Introduction
2. Existing Conditions
3. Future Baseline Conditions
4. Project Impacts
5. Mitigation Measures
Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (1PM)
(Environmental Impacts of Chemicals)
1. Introduction
2. Integrated Pest Management
3. Practice Field Staff
4. Maintenance/ Operations Chemical
Management
5 References
Wetland Mitigation Plan and Map (Updated)
1. Shoreline Survey
2. Wetland Survey
2.1 Vegetation
2.2 Soils
2.3 Hydrology
2.4 Wildlife Habitat
2.5 Baxter Cove Wetland
2.6 Wetland Regulatory Summary
Page 1
Page 5
Page 8
Page 11
Page 18
Page 1
Page 2
Page 15
Page 15
Page 20
Page 2
Page 3
Page 3
Page 4
Page 4
Page 5
Page 5
Page 5
Appendix 1 Title Report
Appendix 2 Geotechnical and Soils (Shannon Wilson 2006)
Appendix 3 Historical and Cultural (Larson 1997 Report)
Table of Contents
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 4
City of Renton
LAND USE PERMIT
MASTER APPLICATION
PROPERTY OWNER(S)
NAME. Port Quendall Company
ADDRESS: 505 Filth Averue South, Suite 900
CITY. Seattle, WA ZIP: 98104
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 342-2000
APPLICANT (if other than owner)
NAME:
COMPANY (if applicable): Football Northwest
ADDRESS: 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900
CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP.· 98104
TELEPHONE NUMBER (206) 342-2000
CONTACT PERSON
NAME: Mr Ray Colliver
COMPANY (if applicable): Not Applicable
ADDRESS: 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900
CITY.· Seattle, WA ZIP: 98104
TELEPHONE NUMBER ANO E-MAIL ADDRESS:
(206) 342-2000 office
(206) 342-3554 facsimile
ray:c@vulcan_com
0 :we b/pw/d evseN /forms/planning/ l"'l ast erapp. doc
'
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
PROJECTIADDRESS(S)ILOCA TION ANO ZIP CODE:
5015 Lake Washington Boulevard N.
Renton, WA 98056
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
2924059001 and 2924059015
EXISTING LANO USE(S). Vacant
PROPOSED LANO USE(S): Office, Retail and Sports Fields
-
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP OESIGNA TION:
Commercial/ Office/ Residential
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP OES/GNA TION
/ii applicable): Commercial/Office/Residential (Same)
EXISTING ZONING: Commercial/Office/Residential
--------
PROPOSED ZONING (,/ applicable): Commercial/ Office/
Residential 2
SITE AREA (in square feet): approximately 853,776 g.s.f.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE
OED/CA TEO.· Nol Applicable
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS.
None
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
ACRE /ii applicable): Not Applicable
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS /ii applicable): One (1)
EER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS /ii applicable).
pl,cable
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
!
'
PROJECT INFORMAT~I_O_N----'(,_c--=--on_t'---in_u_e_dL_) -------~
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable).
Not Apelicable
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): Not Applicable
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): Not Applicable
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): 215,000 s.l
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (ii applicable): Nol Applicable
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (ii
applicable): Not Applicable
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (if applicable): Not Available
PROJECT VALUE:
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN A~Y TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
o FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. tt.
o GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft
D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft.
X SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 1 887 linear feet
X WETLANDS 20 038 sq. It.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
/Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATED IN THE Southwest QUARTER OF SECTION _29_, TOWNSHIP 24N_, RANGE_5E_, IN THE
CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. Master Plan Review 3. Environmental Review
2. Site Plan Review 4. Shoreline Master Development Permit
Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $. ___ _
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Print Name/s) , declare triat I am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property
involved in this application or __ the authorized representative to act for a corporat1on {please attach proof of authonation) and 1hat the foregoing
statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best ot my knowledge and belief.
(Signature of Owner/Represen1ative)
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
Q : web/pw/dev s e rv /1 or ri s/ o, an ni ng/m aster app. doc
I certify '.ha1 I know or have satisfactory evidence that~~--~~--~~
signed th,s ins1rument and acknowledged it to be h1s/her/fhe1r free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in lhe instrumen1.
No'.ary 0 ublic in and lor the Stale at Washington
Notary (Print) _____________ _
My appointment exp,res: __________ _
24 May 2006
Revised 6 Sep/ember 2006
'
-t, ~-: 1 h, 1 r·
·(-.J / -, •·· -7 -...... ::x._
PROJECT INFORMATION continued
NUMBER OFlSTING DWELLING UNiTS (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDEN 7 1AL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): rv/A
SOUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (ii applicable): l) / A
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): l ll~, '000 ss.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): .Jj
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (ii
applicable): ,J~
.
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (ii applicable): , i,,T lyjjJIAIILE
I
I
PROJECT VALUE:
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIR0Ni,1ENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SOUARE FOOTAGE (:I applicable):
O AOU!FER PROTECTION AREA ONE
0 AOU.IFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
0 FLOOD HAZARD AREA
o GEOLOGIC HAZARD
0 HABITAT CONSERVATION
)'( SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES
).[ WETLANDS .
___ sq.ft.
___ sq.ft.
___ sq.ft.
IB87lfsq. tt
Zu. 0 3,g' sq ft.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE 5,v-1-1\w~s+-QUARTER OF SECTION Z"J, TOWNSHIP'24N, RANGE.ft;; IN THE CITY
OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. 3.
2. 4.
.
I Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage. $ __ "~·-·
I AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Pr;nt Narne/s} A-J.,, bV.. ll d,A.., i; . , declare lhat I am (please check one) _ lhe current owner al lhe property
Involved in this application or ____:j__ the avthoriz representative to act for a corporation {please attach proof ot authorization) and that the foregoing
statements and answers herein contained and the jnformation herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
l certify that ! know or have saiisfactory evidence that~~~-11~'-f~~~~
signed this instf\.Jment and acl<nol'ii edged it to be h • the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrumenl
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
{Signal'Jfe of Ov•:ner/Representat.ve)
My app<:ir1tment exp1,c,s __ _,,\+l_cl -'""'(-+[_,,,d-Oc=c.c\c.O=-/
Q: \'if; bl p "'/ de ,-scr v/form:./ p I~ uni a g/ J 11.:i.s ter:.pp .doc ' 07/29/05
PORT QUEl\DALL COMPAl\Y
CONSENT OF DIRECTORS
.,; ... , : .
( ,,.. ' 3
The undersigned, bei.ng all the directors of PORT QUENDALL COMPA.l\'Y, a
·wasliington CO[JJOi-aticfr1; hereby consenfto and adopt the following corporate resolut!on:··
RESOLVED, that:
The following is hereby appointed as an addit1onal officer of this c01voration
to serve until the appointment of her successor:
Vice President Ada M. Healey
DATED this __ day of March, 2002.
----
Paul G. Allen
<: < $' ~ re:::·
William D. Savoy ~
50297093 03-5
07/10/'.:'.006 THI.) 15:46 FAX 4'.:'.54307300 City o! Renton D5/EDNSP l;t009f,)2C
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DMSION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
LAND .USE PERMIT s.UBMrfTAL . WAIVED MODIFIED. . COMMENTS: REQUIREMENTS: · BY: BY: I .. --
Calculations 1
Colore<l Maps for Display ,
.. ~ ,O.e,,,ho/i wi!( ;:Jrt v1",v;.. · ... .··
Construction Mitigatlon Description lAND ~ 5u--, P-t-fC,,
.
Deed of Rlght-<>f-Way Dedica.ticn, .. .. . .
--
Density Worksheet~ &ff'
Drainage C:::introl Plan 1 .. .
Drainage Report 2
Ele!vation s, Archjt-ect~ral l ~ -t
·-
.. ..
Environmental Checklist, #Lt./~ ~ t,j '7 ~ ;.,,.,_,
Existing Covenants {Recorded Copy)< .. : . . .. . .
Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) , -.
Flood Hazard Data,
floo, Plans ~ .v.o ~
Geotechn1cal Report,ma, : ,· . : . :.: ., ..
... .. -
Gradmg Plan, Con::eptual,
Grading Plan, Deiaaed, . : ., : . ..
. •' .
Habitat Data Report, /'r,rr1k ?,,/.f -~ I, ,c.,,,. ,""p.n
lrnprov.ement tieferi-al ~ . ..
.~
Irrigation Plafl, elf ,<!_ ?A , ,1v/ ,, ., pf',..f"~
King County Assessors Map lridicati"lf s~e\ 8-J-t , ·, ... ·,·. .. -
Landscape Plan, Conceptual,
Landscape Plan, Detafied i :
.. .
Legar Description~
Li•I of Surtounding PropertyQw.nors, .. <r/b~ .. ;.,rt(in,i,4-.. .
Mailing Labels for Property Ov,mers i I/
.Map of Exisl1n9 Site Conditions,
.
. ,. . . . . ...
Master Application form, ;Vll-h ~(Yl'fj1r,---,
Monutnenl Cards (one pe~ monurn~t) 1
. . ,·· ... ··: ..
. ·. .. ... .. .
Netghborl1ood Detail Map 4 C:-u""'~ trrcn,v~L
' I
This requirement may be wafVe<f by:
1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME·
2. Public; Works Pfan Review Section
3. Building Section
4 Development Planning Section
f·I
Q. \WEB\? \fNJ EV SER\f\f o rm s ·,.p lal"lning \w~ive r .xis 11/04/2005
~
0712017!)06 THU 16: H FAX G'.25"1307:-00 1:itr of ?.enton VS/1::'.DNSI? [JOl0/020
-
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMIITAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
MOD!FIEb LAND USE P1'RMIT SUSMITI AL -WANED COMMENTS: REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: --
PafXing. Lot Coverage & landscaping Analysis~
. '''
Pian Reductions (PMTs) • · -
Plat Name Reservation 4
-.-
-
--,----
--IV I'// fU£L 7o Postage" w~ ti,, 1,,fwu-
Preapp!iC8tion Meeting S:;mmary ._ &,ff
Public Works Apprb1,al Letter' 2 . ::···.· ..
Rehabilitation Plan < f;?'rf .___
Sc,eening Detail , -----
-
--I.} p ,,._,, 'S fl;,_, . ~t:. •
Site Plall 2Al'O~
SI/earn or Lake Study, S.landard 4 -
--
-
:·:· :· ----
......
Stream or lake Study, Supplemental,
Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan , .·--
Street Profiles, --
Title Report or Prat Cert1fica1e, -·· -. I
---
Topography Map, --
Traffic ·study , -_---
' -----
Tree Cuttingllarrd Clearing Plan, 15-tr
Urt,an Center Design overlay Dmnct Report, ---• __ EH_ .,·-.
--
Utilities Plan, Gene1c1lized 2
'
..... :: " -e,if Q~fc,ZZ_,L / /,){)6 Wetland,_Mitigation Plan, Final 4 --,
Wetlands Mit.igaLion Plan, Preliminary~ I/
Wetlands Repru1/Delineallon ,
. .·1, . : .
----I -
Wireless: ---
Applicant Agreement Statement.:. A.ND 3
f/
--------··-
Inventory of Existing Sites z ANO~ I/
·--
Lease Agreemen~ Draft 2 ANo 3 ,,
Map of Existing Site Condiuons zAND J "
Mrlr of View Area 2 ANo.., ~
Photosimulations 2AND3
,
. o-/-1,~: v11:, vA-/ t11-1p"'--c:-r Art"'--4.rs1:s-1:5 r:c1 v1rc:.,Z .
This requ1mment may be waived by: v
1. Property Services Secuon PROJECT NAME _yL/..,,,,,v K-~ J-k_,:../_.;, tUd". ftrs
2. Public Works Plan Review Section J
DA.TE: --""-(h-"-~=L-'L,)~~'2-,J=.e:tJ_,(,,__ 3 Building Section
4_ Development Planning Seclion
,1
)
ZONING MAP BOOK
[_. x:-l./ 113 _,.. r k-'
//'GI ;:?
/4VV -192 ___ -
81 I B2
26 T24N R4E 1 25 i24N.R4~
BJ _--I 94W ' c1 c2·
_Wt
/12~ R4E
'8!51M:1i1JM
0 Re:to1.1rcc Cooscr .. allor,
~ Rc,id,1>ti:i.l I <l.11/110
EJ Ru!do'lti1d 4 du/ac
~ R.u;dcnli<>I 8 clu/•t:
93
[§ Ruid'lnl1al ld•nut<>clurcd llorno.
~ R•Jirlenli(ll 10 d1,1/ac
8 Ruid<:nUal H du/•c
§J 11. ... idanU•I Mull;-ta,n,1.~
§J Rnidenli•I lJuZU-Fam/!_y TradlUoul
§yJ RuioJeJ.llial W\1Jt1-f"a.m1l)' \Jrbo.n Center'
.wttn erst r:nm:R
8 Cenl..er Vllla1c
~ Url>ui Cool.er -i'lorl.h I
a Urban Ce11tiu--;.orlh 2
~ Cenl.er Do•olO"n'
~ Commcrd•l/Oit;c~/Rnldcntlnl
[£] Cnmrn•rc,jaJ Arl.,rJ~1·
0 Commcn:l•l OUJc,:'
~ C,:,mmcrc;•! Nct,hbothood
-~
@ lndustrhl -l\uvy
0 !nduslri•l -M<:dium
0 !J,d,alrlal -U1hl
----Renton Cll!" Llm,u:
--A<lj<1ccnl Cit)' Llmi'--"
PAGE
• lid•)' lncludtt 0-vtr!ay Oi~tnct'I. Sf!• App~r,dl)
niep•· For ad<IIU,na! •~culnUon, In Ovcrlnr
Dlsvicu. plcnae ,ce R~lC t-J
PAGE# INDEX
I-
---t_ I i
--__ _ _ -_ -_--__ -_-_ ~-WASHINCTO_t:1-__ ~---_
-_---------_--__ /)_--
-----------/--
-----------/-
------_//_.
---------·---/---
__ /
____ //_
-·-,'-
/
-_//.--
~/----
/ ------_----_7/-~ ,,
---·----,-----· --/
--------/--
--------/-' -
---------· _.,;",_ -
-_/ _
___ //_ ---
/ -----//-~ -
---(--
___ I -
I
-----,
I
I ·---l
I ---,-·-
·--__ _(
;
\ \
if
' .....
----,_ \0
CA
¥
:,:I
~
l'<fl
S'I
-~
l CDR c~ 43r
C4 • 32 T24N R5E W V2 e ZONING
P/8/PW T'ECHNlCAL HRVICES 29 T24 N R5E w 1/2
U/WO<I 5429 L--==---------------------~--------~~
0 ago 'Oo B4
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Submission
This submission has been prepared by Crawford Architects in conjunction with the Retec Group for
Football Northwest LLC. Additional input has been provided by the following consultants:
1. Magnusson Klemencic Associates -Civil Engineers
2. EDAW -Landscape Architects
3. Cedarock Consultants, Inc. -Stream and Lake Study, Supplemental Stream and Lake
Study plus Stream Mitigation plan
4. AC Kindig & Co .. Stream and Lake Study, Supplemental Stream and Lake Study plus
Stream Mitigation Plan
5. AC Kindig & Co. · Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan
6. Transpo -Traffic and Transportation
7. Shannon & Wilson -Soils and Geotechnical Report
Submittal requirements can be found as indicated by Figure 2.1. Narratives for corresponding
project components can be found in each section.
Location
The New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters Project is located on the Baxter Property in Renton,
Washington consisting of the North Baxter and the South Baxter properties. The site is owned by
The Port Quendall Company.
The North Baxter Property, known as the North J. H. Baxter Property/Renton ("North Baxter
Property"), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake
Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton, in King County, Washington. The
North Baxter Property occupies approximately 12 acres, three miles south of the junction of
Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The North Baxter Property is relatively flat and is situated within
the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline.
The Misty Cove Condominiums are located directly to the north of the Property. The South Baxter
Property is located directly to the south of the Property Further to the south is the Quendall
Terminals property. Interstate 405 is approximately 500 feet to the east
The North Baxter Property is bordered to the south by the South Baxter Property. The North and
South Baxter Properties have been determined to be separate facilities based on historic
operations, previous studies and previous correspondence and agreements between J. H. Baxter
and Ecology, which defined a "Line of Demarcation" between the two Properties. The line of
Demarcation was originally defined in the Renton-Baxter Remediation Security Interest Agreement
dated May 6, 1992 and subsequent Ecology correspondence. In 2000, the City of Renton approved
a lot line adJustment application to formally segregate the North and South Baxter Properties.
Project Overview
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
Access
Interstate 405 provides regional access to the site. Vehicular access is also provided by 44th Street
from the south, Lincoln Avenue from the east, Ripley Lane from the north and Lake Washington
Avenue SE from the northeast via 44th Street interchange. The interchange at Interstate 405 is
scheduled for future improvements by WDOT. These improvements will enhance access to the site
but is not required for the facility to operate.
An existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad line is still partially active serving a tourist dinner
train and freight deliveries on a periodic basis. The maximum number of trips per day is 4 or less.
Direct access to the site is provided via two at grade crossings.
Size of the Overall Site
The Project site is approximately 19.6 acres (853,776 square feet) in size.
Project Components
The project consists of two primary phases including:
1. Final Cleanup per the Consent Decree.
a. Final Capping @ exterior fields and site areas
b. Final Capping @ surface parking lots
c. Final Capping @ building slabs at ground level
2. Construction of Building and exterior fields above Cap.
A Partial Certificate of Completion for the Capital Portion of the Cleanup at the JH Baxter
South Parcel has been issued. Final cleanup (capping and institutional controls) will be
performed under Consent Decrees between the Department of Ecology and Port Quendall
Company as part of initial work on the properties. As a result, certain state and local permits
are preempted pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act, although substantive requirements of
those statutes and regulations will be satisfied by the cleanup approval.
Proposed Uses
Proposed uses include administrative offices for professional football franchise and accessory
training and practice facilities. Potential tenant space may include accessory retail and office uses.
Headquarters Facility Features
• A permanent indoor practice field structure
• Approximately 215,000 gross square feet of enclosed space will be constructed including
the indoor practice field
• Approximately 50,000 gross square feet of training facilities will be provided.
• Approximately 15,000 gross square feet of player meeting space will be provided.
• Approximately 48,000 gross square feet of administrative offices will be provided.
Project Overview
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
• Approximately 15,000 gross square feet of technical and support areas will be provided.
Site Areas
Four outdoor practice fields are proposed. Two of the fields are full, 100-yard (natural grass) fields.
One field is an 80-yard (natural grass) field. Another of the outdoor fields will be an artificial surface
and will be approximately 140 yards long. An indoor-practice facility is also proposed and will
include a synthetic surface that is 100-yards long with 20 to 30 feet of runoff at sidelines.
Approximately 104 secure, surface parking spaces will be provided for players and senior staff.
The remaining surface parking spaces on site will accommodate media, visitors and general staff.
A field-maintenance, grounds keeping, storage and equipment facility shall be provided on-site.
Public Access to Shoreline
Public access to the shoreline will be provided as indicated by the Conceptual Site Plan. Access is
proposed along the north property line with connections to the lakefront. The proposed access will
include seating areas, a landscaped walkway and access to the lake for active and passive
recreational use.
Due to the security requirements associated with the daily operation of the Practice Facility, public
access to the overall site is limited to the designated public access areas.
Training Camp
The new facility will accommodate annual training camp on site. Training camp will be open to the
public during most days. Training camp typically begins the last week in July and ends on the third
week of August. Parking for a training camp will be accommodated off-site.
Construction
Construction is scheduled to begin in November 2006. It will occur in three phases including:
a. Final Remediation and Cap on Overall Site'
b. Final Remediation and Cap under building footprint*
November 2006 until May 2007
December 2006 until June 2007
January 2007 until July 2008 c. Building Construction above the Cap
'Pursuant to Department of Ecology Approval as lead agency (Items b and c).
The project is required to open in June of 2008.
Construction of the "final cap" for the maJority of the site will consist of earthmoving existing soils
and imported fill in accordance with Department of Ecology and City of Renton requirements.
Construction of the "final cap" at surface parking and the building (ground level slab) will commence
after rough grading in accordance with Department of Ecology and City of Renton requirements. No
fill or dredge is anticipated to be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands.
Project Overview
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 3
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
During construction, there will be noise from construction equipment that will have minimal impact
to adjacent uses. Impact-type noises will be limited and will occur during restricted hours to
minimize any potential adverse impacts to adjacent uses. These noises will occur during daylight
hours and will vary seasonally. Once the building is enclosed, these noises will be contained within
the enclosed building.
Construction is anticipated lo take approximately 18 months with approximately 6 months of exterior
noise possible. Hours of construction operation will likely be 7:00 AM-5:00 PM, 5 days a week.
Proposed hauling/transportation routes include:
l. Ripley Lane is the main road all traffic will enter the site from.
2. Freeway access will be off 1-405 from Exit 7 (NE 44th Street)
Construction Mitigation
A detailed mitigation and operations plan will be developed in conjunction with adjacent land
owners prior to the start of construction. This will include parking controls and access to the site
plus noise mitigation.
During earthmoving and grading, best construction management practices will be in-place to
prevent erosion and sedimentation impacts to surface water. Dust may be generated during
construction activities. Dust will be suppressed by spraying water, as necessary. Stockpiles will be
covered to the extent practicable to further minimize dust during construction.
Additional measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts,
erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics include the following:
1. Dust
a. Water trucks will be used to control site dust
b. Water trucks & sweepers will be used on haul roads & Ripley Lane to control off site dust
2. Traffic & transportation impacts will be minimal. The wheels of trucks will be washed as they
leave the site. When heavy hauling is in progress a "flagger" will be stations at the
intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard to control egress to Ripley Lane.
3. Erosion -Erosion control plan will be submitted with the permit documents.
3. Noise -Normal construction noise will be per work hours in accordance with the City of
Renton standards to minimize noise impact.
4. Other -Bulletins will be placed at the main entry to the site for the neighbors to be advised
of any possible impacts to the Ripley Lane or work that might occur on Lake Washington
5. Special Hours -Based on project needs, weekend work may be required to keep the project
on schedule to meet occupancy dates.
Project Overview
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 4
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Figure 2.1
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Land Use Submittal Requirement Waived Modified
Bv: Bv: --~-------
Calculations ----
Colored Maos for Disolav
Construction Mitiaation Descriotion
Density Worksh_eet EH
Drainage Control Plan
Drainage Reoort
Elevations -Architectural -----
Environmental Checklist
Existing Q.onvenants
Existing Easements
Flood Hazard Data
Floor Plans
Geotechnical Re~---__
Gradina Plan -Conceotual
Gradina Plan -Detailed
Habitat Data Reoort
lmorovement Deferral
lrriaation Plan EH
King County Assessors Map Indicating
the Site -Landscape _Plan -Conceotual
_J.andscaoe Plan -Detailed
Legal Description
List of Surrounding Prooertv Owners
Section/ Page
Sections 5, 6, 8, 9 & 12
Renton will orovide
Section 2/ Paae 4
WAIVED
Section 5
Section 6
Section 10
Section 3
Volume 2 -Annendix 1
Section 5 &
Volume 2 -Annendix 1
· Section 5
Section 1 O
, Volume 2 -Annendix 2
Section 5
Section 5
Section 7 & Section 14
NA
WAIVED
NA
Section 9
Section 9
Section 1 , 3 &
Volume 2 -Appendix 1
Submitted Previously
Submitted Previouslv
i
'
'
I
I Mailing Labels for Property Owners
~
Mao of Existina Site Conditions
Master Application Form
Monument Cards
I Neighborhood Detail Map
Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscape
Analysis
Plan Reductions (cooiesl
Plat Name Reservation
Postage
Pre application Meeting Summary
Public Works Approval L_eHer __
Rehabilitation Plan ---
Screening Detail
I Site Plan
: Stream or Lake Stud)' -Standard !
Stream or Lake Study -Mitigation ----
I
EH
EH
Section 1
Section 1
NA
Submitted Previouslv
Section 5 & Section 9
-~
Provided
NA
City of Renton will mail
WAIVED
NA
WAIVED
Section 9 --
Section 5
Section 7
Section 7 . ---
Figure 2.1
Submittal Requirements
24 May 2006
Revised 6 Sep/ember 2006
Page I
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
-----Not Provided -No Streets --1 Street Profiles
Title Report or Plat Certificate
Land Use Submittal Requirement Waived
By:
~ograohv Plan
Traffic Stud)'
Tree Cutting/Land Clearrna Plan EH
Urban Center Design Overlay District EH
Re~ort
Utilities Plan -Generalized ---
Wetlands Mitiaation Plan -Final EH
Wetlands Mitiaation Plan -Preliminarv EH
Wetlands Reoort -Delineation EH
Wireless: EH
1. Application Agreement
2. Inventory of Existing Sites
3. Lease Agreement -Draft
4. Map of Existing Site Conditions
5. Map of View Area
6. Photosimulations
Additional Items identified by the City of Renton:
Submittal Requirement Waived
Bv:
Class 2 Stream -Hydrology/Hydraulic
Reauirements
Construction Mitiqation Statement
Environmental Impacts of Chemicals
Uodated Wetland Delineation Reoort
Geotechnical Report
Water Quality/Storm Water Analysis
Transoortation Analvsis
Topoqraphic Survey
Historical and Cultural (Larson 1997
Report)
Visual Impact Assessment
Public Access
Landscapinq on Shoreline
Modified
By:
Modified
Bv:
Volume 2 -Appendix 1
Section/ Page
Section 5 ----------
, Volume 2 -Section 12
WAIVED
WAIVED
Section 5
WAIVED
WAIVED
WAIVED
WAIVED
Section/ Page
Section 7
Section 2/ Paqe 4
Volume 2 -Section 13
Volume 2 -Section 14
Volume 2 -Aooendix 2
Section 6
Volume 2 -Section 12
Section 8
Volume 2 -Appendix 3
Section 11
Section 2, 3 and Section 5
Section 9
Figure 2.1
Submittal Requirements
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
I
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Sea hawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055
Phone 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
2. Name of applicant:
Port Quendall Company and Football Northwest LLC
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Mr. Ray Colliver
Senior Director
505 Fifth Avenue South
Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
206 342 2000 telephone
206 342 3554 facsimile
rayc@vulcan.com email
4. Date checklist prepared:
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
4. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Renton, Washington
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
a Design and Documentation
b. Final Remediation and Cap on Overall Site·
c. Final Remediation and Cap under building footprint*
d. Building Construction above the Cap
March 2006 to May 2007
November 2006 until May 2007
December 2006 until June 2007
January 2007 until July 2008
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
·Pursuant to Department of Ecology Approval as lead agency (Items band c).
The project is required to open in June of 2008.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No plans for future additions, expansion or further activity are anticipated with the proposal.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The following information has been prepared:
Past Studies
In the past, several investigations of potential contamination at the Baxter Property have
been performed, generating a large volume of chemical data and visual observations of
soil quality. Comprehensive summaries of project area historical information, regulatory
records and environmental data were provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report
(Woodward Clyde, 1990). Those data were incorporated with data collected by
ThermoRetec during the previous due diligence process and during 1998 and 2000 to
develop an interpretation of site conditions currently present These data were presented
in the South Property Feasibility Study ([FSJ; ThermoRetec, 2000) and the North
Property Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan ([FS/CAPJ; ThermoRetec, 2000).
SEPA was completed in 2000 for the site representing compliance with the State
Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") environmental review requirements for the proposed
remedial actions to be performed as stated in the Consent Decree. Ecology has been
established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA for all cleanup actions under the
consent decree. Remedial actions occurred in 2002 and 2004 at the South Baxter
property. Baxter Cove Wetland Monitoring Reports have been prepared in 2005 and
2006.
In 1989, the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan
affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993, extensive
public hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted
property owners and the general public concerning Comprehensive Plan land use
alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning Code amendments.
In addition, in 1996 and 1997, an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") scoping
process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This
EIS scoping process involved significant public participation, including mailings, formal
comment, and public meetings. The proposed development was never pursued.
In preparing this submittal, the following reports were referenced:
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Sea hawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
OTHER REFERENCES -Past Studies
City of Renton, Gypsy Sub Basin Analysis Technical Memorandum No. 2, April 1995
City of Renton Gypsy Sub Basin Drainage Improvements Design Memorandum, September
1997
City of Renton, Zoning Map, updated 10 January 2006
Washington Department of Transportation, 1-405 Renton to Bellevue Project Environmental
Assessment March 2006
Washington State Department of Ecology, Consent Decree #00-2-11778-?KNT and #00-2-
11779-5KNT.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
Remediation and mitigation has been substantially completed on the South Baxter property as
documented in the Completion Report (2005) and approved by the Department of Ecology by
the April 10, 2006 Partial Certificate of Completion. Capping of residual soil impacts to
prevent direct contact to humans, institutional controls to insure cap integrity and future
groundwater monitoring remain to be completed pursuant to the Consent Decrees and
Cleanup Action Plans which were previously subject to a SEPA review and a Mitigated
Determination of Significance issued by the Department of Ecology in 2000.
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
a. City of Renton Master Plan approval
b. City of Renton Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
c. City of Renton Critical Areas Review
d. City of Renton SEPA Review
Remaining cleanup (capping and institutional controls) will be performed under Consent
Decrees between the Department of Ecology and Port Quendall Company as part of
initial work on the properties. As a result, certain state and local permits are preempted
pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act, although substantive requirements of those
statutes and regulations will be satisfied by the cleanup approval.
11, Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site.
Proposed Uses
Proposed uses include administrative offices for professional football franchise and accessory
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 3
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
training and practice facilities. Potential tenant space may include accessory retail and office
uses.
Size of the Site
The Project site is approximately 19.6 acres (853,776 square feet) in size.
Facility Features
• A permanent indoor practice field structure
• Approximately 215,000 gross square feet of enclosed space will be constructed including
the indoor practice field
• Approximately 50,000 gross square feet of training facilities will be provided.
• Approximately 15,000 gross square feet of player meeting space will be provided.
• Approximately 48,000 gross square feet of administrative offices will be provided.
• Approximately 15,000 gross square feet of technical and support areas will be provided
• Approximately 6,000 gross square feet of freestanding maintenance/ storage building.
Training Camp
The new facility will accommodate annual training camp on site. Training camp parking
demand in excess of normal operations will be accommodated off-site The Transportation
Impact Analysis from TRANSPO Group, Inc., discusses parking and transportation issues in
greater detail. Please refer to Section 12.
On Site Parking
275 to 315 Cars (final count to be verified)
Setbacks & Wetlands
A fifty foot setback from Lake Washington for structures will be provided consistent with
Renton development regulations and the Renton Shoreline Master Program. Existing
wetlands that are constructed on South Baxter with 50 foot buffer pursuant to Consent
Decree, CAP and mitigation analysis in 2000 will be maintained.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 4
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and
section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area,
provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit
any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed
plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
Location
As indicated by the attached site plans, the Baxter properties are located at 5015 Lake
Washington Boulevard North, in the northeastern portion of Renton, Washington. They
are located in the Southwest Y. of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, King
County. The Baxter site occupies approximately 19.6 acres adjacent to Lake
Washington, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90, and
has approximately 1,887 feet of shoreline. The legal descriptions of the North and South
properties are provided below.
Access
Interstate 405 provides regional access to the site. Other vehicular access is also provided by
Lincoln Avenue from the east, Ripley Avenue from the north and Lake Washington Avenue SE
from the northeast via 44th Street interchange.
Legal Description
BAXTER SOUTH PROPERTY
That portion of the "South Parcel," as shown on Survey recorded under King County
Recording No. 20000209900005, Records of King County, Washington, lying Southerly
of the following described line: Beg inning at the most Northerly corner of said "North
Parcel"; Thence S 45 26'31" W along the Northwesterly line thereof a distance of 912.56
feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein described line; Thence S 58 13'14" Ea
distance of 918.82 feet to a point on the Southeasterly line of said "North Parcel," distant
thereon 267.64 feet Northerly of the angle point in said Southeasterly line and the
terminus of the said line.
BAXTER NORTH PROPERTY
That portion of the "North Parcel", as shown on Survey recorded under King County
Recording No. 20000209900005, Records of King County, Washington, lying Northerly of
the following described line Beginning at the most Northerly corner of said "North
Parcel"; Thence S 45 26'31" Walong the Northwesterly line thereof a distance of 912.56
feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein described line; Thence S 58 13'14" Ea
distance of 918.82 feet to a point on the Southeasterly line of said "North Parcel", distant
thereon 267.64 feet Northerly of the angle point in said Southeasterly line and the
terminus of the said line.
Please refer to Section 1 for detailed Title Report.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 5
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
Location and Vicinity Map
Please refer to the attached location and vicinity map for additional detail.
Topographic Map
Please refer to the attached topographic map in Section 8 (Figure 8.1 and Figure 8.2) for
additional detail regarding existing conditions.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. EARTH
a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, or other.
The site is located on the shore of Lake Washington and is generally flat
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)
The slope of the site is generally 1 % to 2% with a maximum slope of approximately 5%.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel,
peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and
note any prime farmland.
The Baxter Property (both North and South) is located on the eastern shore of Lake
Washington on the former delta of May Creek, which is an under fit stream remaining
within the glacial Kennydale Channel. The subsurface geology of the site is a
combination of fluvial deltaic, lacustrine near shore and constructed fill deposits
overlying Pleistocene glacial sediments and Eocene volcanic and sedimentary
bedrock. The shallow geology at the project area has been heavily influenced by
recent human activity, beginning with construction of the Lake Washington Ship
Canal in 1916. This lowered the level of Lake Washington approximately 8 feet, and
exposed a significant area of the May and Gypsy Creek Sub Basin Deltas which had
formerly been submerged.
Subsequent filling of low-lying areas was performed in 1955 to extend the shoreline
and raise the grade for construction of industrial facilities at the Baxter North and
South Properties. The source of the fill material is not well documented. The
combination of naturally complex deltaic deposits with numerous dredging and
backfilling episodes has resulted in a highly heterogeneous subsurface mixture of
clay, silt, peat, sand, gravel and cobbles, as well as discarded debris and abandoned
subsurface structures from former site activities.
Geology and subsurface conditions for the project area were determined based on
the geologic field reconnaissance, current and previous borings and published
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 6
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
geologic data. Based on field explorations, the depth to bedrock is varied with
depths from 17.5 feet to depths greater than 50 feet.
In general, the subsurface soils under the building footprint and fields consist of either
fill material, soft estuarine deposits, loose alluvial soils and underlying very dense
bedrock, or stiff to very stiff silt and clay and medium dense sand overlying bedrock.
The fill is generally 2 to 3 feet thick, while the soft estuarine and loose alluvial soils
extend to depths ranging from 17 to 38 feet below the existing ground surface under
most of the building footprint. The alluvial and estuarine deposits contain layers of
loose sand that are susceptible to liquefaction, as well as layers of highly
compressible peat. The bedrock consists of highly weathered Andesite and is a
competent bearing material for building foundations.
The professional geotechnical report submitted in conjunction with this Environmental
Checklist provides additional detail, including detail regarding constructability
concerns for larger structures on the south portion of the site. Please refer to Volume
2, Appendix 2 of this application for additional information.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?
If so, describe.
Recent subsurface exploration in 2006 included 6 borings and 29 backhoe test
excavations.
Liquefaction and settlement were identified as potential concerns. The upper 50 to
60 feet of sod within the May Creek delta are loose and potentially susceptible to
liquefaction during a strong earthquake. In addition, consolidation of near-surface
peats and clays from placement of the environmental cap fill upon this material may
result in minor surface settlement.
Please refer to Volume 2, Appendix 2 of this application for additional information.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Filling and grading will proceed pursuant to the Consent Decrees and Cleanup Action
Plans, and subject to review and approval by the Department of Ecology. Some cleanup
work and associated grading have been performed and documented in the Completion
Report (2005) and approved by the Department of Ecology by the April 10, 2006 Partial
Certificate of Completion.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
Final capping of site will be conducted to complete remediation and cleanup activities
in accordance with the Consent Decree. As a result erosion could occur but is not
likely due to the shallow grade of the site.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 7
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
Please refer to Sections 5 and 6 for additional detail regarding TESC Plan.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Approximately 40% of the site will be covered by impervious materials including buildings,
plazas, surface parking and driveways.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any:
Erosion will be controlled by maintaining a shallow grade to the site. Storm water will
be managed consistent with best management practices to prevent any adverse
effects from erosion.
2. AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if
known.
Dust may be generated during construction activities. On-site construction
equipment and hauling vehicles will generate emissions from internal combustion
engines.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If
so, generally describe.
No, there are no off-site sources of emission or odor that will affect the new facility.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Dust will be suppressed by spraying water, as necessary, during construction. Stockpiles
will be covered to the extent practicable to further minimize dust during construction.
3. WATER
a. Surface Water:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,
wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state
what stream or river it flows into.
The project area includes approximately 1,887 feet of Lake Washington
shoreline. 250 feet of shoreline is adjacent to the Baxter Cove inlet and wetland
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 8
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
which is not being altered. The current shoreline characteristics range from
gently sloping vegetated shorelines to vertical exposed dirt banks, with a minor
portion of bulkhead. As part of cleanup activities, a 0.46-acre wetland and a 50-
foot vegetated buffer was restored along the South Baxter shoreline. In
addition, the Gypsy Sub Basin drainage is located on the North Property; this
system conveys storm water from 1-405 and the interchange to Lake
Washington. A minor portion of this drainage is exposed while most is piped.
The Ordinary High Water (OHW) is approximately 18.8 feet (NAVD88) or 15.2
feet (NGVD29).
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
Yes. The following work efforts are anticipated:
a. Soil cover placement will occur within 200 feet of the shoreline on the North and
South Properties consistent with the Department of Ecology Consent Decree
requirements.
b. Construction of Headquarters Facility
c. Construction of natural grass Practice Fields
d. Shoreline improvements within 50 foot setback per statute including riparian plant
zone.
e. Construction of retaining walls and driveways.
f. Capping the site pursuant to Ecology regulations will require covering the short
stretch of Gypsy Sub Basin that is not piped. Mitigation for any lost functions will
be provided pursuant to Ecology capping approval.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
No fill or dredge will be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the
site plan.
No
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters?
If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
There will be no discharge of waste material into surface waters.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 9
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
b. Ground Water:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage;
industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such
systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
There will be no discharge of waste material into the ground from septic
tanks or other sources.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including stonn water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe?
Storm water is the only source of runoff at the site. Stormwater will be
collected and managed in accordance with applicable regulations and
best management practices. Some storm water will infiltrate or evaporate
but most will drain to Lake Washington after proper treatment.
2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts,
if any:
Storm water runoff from impervious surfaces subject to vehicular use will be treated
prior to release. Best construction management practices will be in-place to prevent
erosion and sedimentation impacts to surface water. Previous cleanup has improved
ground water quality at the site. Final storm water controls will be designed to
applicable Ecology and/or City of Renton storm water management requirements.
4. PLANTS.
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
1) .__1L deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 10
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
a. Including Red alder saplings, sapling and seedling sized black
cottonwood, red-osier dogwood, sitka willow, Pacific Madrone, Pacific
willow
2) _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine other
a. Including in restored wetland and buffer area: Douglas fir, Sitka spruce,
western red cedar
3) _X_shrubs
a. Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom, willow
b. Restored wetland and buffer area: willows, snowberry, nootka rose, black
twinberry, salmon berry, vine maple
4) _X_grass
a. Non-native grasses and soft rush , bentgrass, red fescue, rye grass, white
clover
5) __ pasture
6) __ crop or grain
7) _X_wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other: soft rush.
yellowflag iris, reed canary grass. small fruited bulrush. slough sedge
8) __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other
9) __ other types of vegetation
Please refer to the Stream and Lake Study in Section 7 for additional habitat data.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
A great deal of pre-existing vegetation was removed during cleanup activities as
prescribed in the 2000 SEPA. The North and South Properties are largely devoid of
vegetation -approximately 10% of the property contains trees/brush. Almost all
vegetation on the South Property will be removed to facilitate final cleanup and capping
activities; however, no native vegetation in the restored wetland will be removed. Most
vegetation, including grasses, invasive shrubs (Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom),
and trees (sapling red alder, willow, and cottonwood) on the North Property will be
removed prior to placement of the soil cover.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
To the best of our knowledge, there are no threatened or endangered plant species known
to be on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Previous mitigation for wetland removal included creation of 0.46-acres of enhanced,
forested wetland. Previous planting in this wetland and the any new planting in the
associated 50-foot buffer will be maintained with native vegetation as described in the
Mitigation Analysis Memorandum.
If removed due to construction, existing vegetation along the shoreline, whether invasive
or native species, will be replaced per the City of Renton Critical Areas Ordinance and
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 11
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
associated Shoreline Master Program. Mature native trees immediately adjacent to the
shoreline (outside of the limit of grading) will be preserved where possible. All invasive
shrubs along the shoreline will be removed and replaced with native shrub species as
indicated in the current drawings. The proposed vegetation for this area will consist of
native riparian species found in the King County Native Plant Guide and the King County,
Washington -Surface Water Design Manual. Existing concrete and pavement debris that
currently exists along the water's edge will be removed and replaced with large woody
debris such as root wads and large trunk sections. Preserving mature trees, removing
invasive species, planting native species, removing shoreline debris. and providing large
woody debris are all actions that will provide enhanced functional habitat compared to pre-
development conditions along the shoreline.
5. ANIMALS
a. Circle or underline any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
1) Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
a. Red-winged blackbird, snipe, mallards, Canada geese, osprey
2) Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver other
3) Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
a. Lake Washington contains Chinook, Coho, and sockeye salmon, steelhead,
cutthroat trout, bull trout, kokanee salmon, speckled dace, three-spine
stickleback, northern squawfish, yellow perch, black crappie, largemouth
bass, smallmouth bass, mountain whitefish, large scale sucker, longfin smelt,
prickly sculpin -See Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AES, 2000).
b. Crayfish, freshwater shrimp, freshwater clams -See Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum (AES, 2000).
c. ALSO: Turtles (painted and slider)
Please refer to the Stream and Lake Study in Section 7 for additional habitat data.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Chinook salmon, bull trout, bald eagle
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
Adult Chinook Salmon in Lake Washington migrate past the site on their way to the
Cedar River each summer. Juvenile Chinook pass the site on their way back to
Puget Sound, and may spend some time rearing in the site vicinity Sockeye
juveniles rear in Lake Washington and may utilize the shoreline and offshore habitat
along the project for rearing.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
None
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 12
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for
heating, manufacturing, etc.
Electricity will likely be used for cooling. Natural gas will be used for cooking and
potentially heating. During final capping and construction, the only energy to be used
is diesel to operate construction equipment. No manufacturing will be conducted on
site.
No. The project will not affect potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if
any:
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of
this proposal? If so, describe.
The South Baxter remediation will restore a contaminated, abandoned
industrial/manufacturing site to allow project redevelopment Adherence to
institutional controls will minimize the potential for releases during development
construction and thereafter. Where warranted, a site-specific health and safety plan
will be prepared and used to limit worker exposure to hazards on site.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
The site-specific health and safety plan will include emergency contacts and procedures.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Adherence to institutional controls will minimize the potential for releases during
development construction and thereafter. Where warranted, a site-specific health
and safety plan will be prepared and used to limit worker exposure to hazards on
site.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 13
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
There are no noises in the area that occur on a regular basis that will adversely
impact the project. Interstate 405 is located near the site, although traffic noise is
not expected to adversely affect the project. There is periodic railroad traffic on
the adjacent rail line.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the
project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction,
operation, other)?
During construction, there will be noise from construction equipment that will have
minimal impact to adjacent uses. Impact-type noises will be limited and will occur
during restricted hours to minimize any potential adverse impacts to adjacent uses.
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
These noises will occur during daylight hours and will vary seasonally. Once the
building is enclosed, these noises will be contained within the enclosed building.
Construction is anticipated to take approximately 18 months with approximately 6
months of exterior noise possible. Hours of construction operation will likely be 7:00
AM-5:00 PM, 5 days a week.
Based on project needs, weekend work may be required to keep the project on
schedule to meet occupancy dates. If this measure is necessary, adjoining property
owners will be notified in advance.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Any adverse noise impacts will be minimal and will likely be lower in frequency to
the adjacent Interstate 405 and adjacent railroad. Exterior construction will be
limited to daylight hours as permitted by the City of Renton. Contact with
adjacent neighbors who may be adversely impacted will be made and information
provided when loud noises, if any, will occur. The applicant is evaluating a
request for restrictions on horn operation by the railroad at adjacent crossings.
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Current Use of the North Baxter Site: Vacant
Current Use of the South Baxter Site: Vacant
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 14
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
At the Baxter Property, wood treating operations ceased in 1981, Adjacent properties
include:
• Quendall Terminals, a former refining facility that is currently used
for log sorting and storage, is located to the south;
• Barbee M,lls, a former lumber mill, is located south of Quendall
Terminals;
• Pan Abode, a cedar homes manufacturing facility, is located to the
southeast;
• Lake Washington Boulevard and 1-405 are located to the east:
• Lake Washington is located to the west;
• Condominiums and residences are located to the north,
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
No, the site has not been used for agriculture in the recent past
c. Describe any structures on the site.
Asphalt pad, a small one-story office building, and a small dock and boathouse are
located on the North Property,
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
The small one-story office building will be demolished,
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
Commercial/Office/Residential (COR-2)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Commercial/Office/Residential
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Urban
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If
so, specify.
No
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Daily on-site personnel -approximately 200 people on a typical work day.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 15
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
Not Applicable
I. Proposed measures to ensure that the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
Adjacent Use to the North Landscape buffers and potential fencing will be provided to
buffer the project from adjacent residential uses
Adjacent Use to the South: Landscape buffers and fencing will be provided to provide
necessary visual separation between the project and adjacent
logging operation and storage and remediation activity.
9. HOUSING
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
No housing will be provided.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
No housing will be eliminated.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Not Applicable.
10. AESTHETICS
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what
is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed.
The bulk of the building is approximately 52 to 55 feet in height. The indoor practice
facility is approximately 120 feet in height from its lowest elevation.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Views from the lake will be altered because the site is currently vacant. Views to the lake
from adjacent uses located to the north and south should not be adversely affected.
Views to the lake from structures located to the east, across Interstate 405 may be altered
above existing tree lines. In this instance, approximately 30 to 40 feet of view above
existing trees could be obstructed by the highest building masses. Visual simulations
showing the view impact on nearby residential properties are being provided to the City of
Renton in conjunction with the submittal of this Environmental Checklist.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 16
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
The design of the facility has maintained view corridors to Lake Washington from adjacent
properties. The bulk of the building on site has been sited furthest from the shoreline to
mitigate visual impacts to the condos located to the north. The ma1ority of the site has no
structures above grade, thus preserving views to the lake. As detailed design proceeds,
these view corridors will be developed further.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Traditional architectural devices to reduce the apparent scale and mass of the project are
being explored including:
1. horizontal expression lines at changes of materials and fenestration
2. roof treatments
3. fenestration and glazing systems
4. Setbacks of building mass from the shoreline
5. Maintaining view corridors to Lake Washington.
At the lakefront, the office components are placed in front of high mass elements
associated with indoor practice facility in order to minimize view impacts from neighboring
properties. This approach occurs at the south fac;:ade as well. To the north, landscaping
will be incorporated at the building perimeter as well as the property line to buffer the
facility from the adjacent residential uses. The majority of the site will have little or no
structure above grade, which will effectively preserve a view corridor to Lake Washington
over the majority of the site.
The building has been set back from the north property line, and the higher element of the
building has been located on the furthest landward part of the building, in order to mitigate
view impacts from the residential use to the north. Significant view impacts are not
anticipated from that site. The building has been sited to take advantage of the most
stable soils and to minimize deep foundations.
The south portion of the site is the area containing the soils of most environmental
concern, and the applicant does not wish to disturb the Ecology-approved cap with
foundation elements on that portion of the site. And functionally, the south portion of the
site is further from the site entries and other structures, so it is more suitable for the
training field elements of the proposed facility.
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
No permanent field lighting will be provided. Thus, no glare or light is anticipated that will
adversely impact adjacent land uses, or land uses located in adjacent municipalities to the
east or west with views of the properties from upland locations or across portions of Lake
Washington.
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 17
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
No. It is not anticipated that any light or glare will pose a safety hazard.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
There are no off-site sources of light or glare that we are currently aware of that will impact
the project.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Not Applicable
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate
vicinity?
Public access to the shoreline will be provided as indicated by the Conceptual Site Plan.
Access is proposed along the north property line with connections to the lakefront. The
proposed access will include seating areas, a landscaped walkway and access to the lake
for active and passive recreational use.
Due to the security requirements associated with the daily operation of the Practice
Facility, public access to the overall site is limited to the designated public access areas.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
None
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Not Applicable
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
No
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific,
or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
A Cultural Resource Assessment (Larson, 1997) was performed for the Baxter Properties
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 18
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
and properties south of Baxter in 1997. This assessment did not identify any cultural
resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were identified in
the area. Literature review suggested that a Duwamish site may have been present at the
historic mouth of May Creek, assumed to have been located on a nearby property south of
the Baxter Properties. A copy of the Larson report is being submitted with this
Environmental Checklist.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Monitoring for archeological materials will be included in development activities
involving excavation in portions of the site designated "High Probability Areas" in the
Cultural Resource Assessment (Larson, 1997). Monitoring could include having a
professional archeologist on site to monitor any subsurface excavation to insure that
no intact archeological materials or features are adversely affected by such activities.
14. TRANSPORTATION
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access
to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Greater detail on all transportation and parking issues can be found in the
Transportation Impact Analysis (TRANS PO 2006) in Section 12. A more general
discussion is provided below.
Interstate 405 provides regional access to the site. The site is served br, Lake
Washington Boulevard, the primary access to which is via exit 7 (NE 44 h Street) from
1-405. Other vehicular access is also provided by Lincoln Avenue from the east,
Ripley Avenue from the north and Lake Washington Avenue SE from the northeast
via 44th Street interchange.
Two existing on grade crossings provide access to the site as shown on the attached site
plans. Preliminary discussions between the Seahawks and the BNSF Railroad have
commenced regarding a third (new) crossing, located halfway between existing crossings.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to
the nearest transit stop?
The site is not served by public transit. The nearest transit stops are located at Park
Ave N/N 33'0 and 116 1h/76th.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
New Parking: 275 to 315 cars
Displaced Parking: No parking will be displaced or eliminated
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 19
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private?
Improvements will likely be required at the following areas:
1. Ripley Avenue
2. Existing at grade crossings @ BNSF Railroad right of way
3. Potential new at grade crossing @ BNSF Railroad right of way as indicated above
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
The Seahawks will continue to use commercial and charter air transportation at their
current levels.
Please refer to Section 12 for additional information.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Please refer to Section 12 for proposed measures.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
No.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
Not applicable
16. UTILITIES
a. Circle or underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,
water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate
vicinity which might be needed.
The following utilities will be provided by municipal systems :
1. Water
2. Sanitary Sewer
Other utilities will be required including.
1. Electricity -Puget Sound Energy
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 20
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters & Training Facility
Renton, WA
2. Natural Gas -Puget Sound Energy
3. Fiber -Qwest
4. DSL or T1 Telecommunication Lines -Qwest
These utilities are available immediately adjacent to the site. Please refer to Section 5 for
preliminary utility plans
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above
information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may
withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance
upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful
lack of full disc lo re on my part.
Proponent:
::::~~;
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
Not Used
Environmental Checklist
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 21
','.' i: .
i\pril I 0, 2006
Mr. Clint Chase
Port Qucndall Comrany
c/o Vulcan Jnc
,,
505 5th 1\vc. S .. Suite 900
Seattle. WA 98104
Dear Mr. Chase:
lk l\irtial Certilicatc of the Completion for the Capital Portion of the Clca11:Jp at
the JJI. Baxter Soutn l'arccl. f(cnton. WA
lccology certifies that the capital portion of the cleanup required under the Consent
Decree and Cleanup Action Plan (CA I') dated April 4, 2000, has been completed at J.H.
Baxter South Parcel, l,cnton, WA, in accordance with applicable environmen'.al laws.
The capital r ,rtion of the cleanup consists oftl1c following cleanup activities:
• Removal and off-site disposal of impacted sediment above the cleanup level of
1 Oil mg/kg Iota! PAI-I from Baxter Cove;
• !Ze-creation oi'wellands adjacent tu Lake Washington ,md buffer resloratilln and
enhancement; impact nvoidancc to species listed as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act through hydraulic isolation orthe pro_1ccl work and the
timing of in-water work;
• Drnsc non-a4t,cous phase liquid (DK'\l'L) removal Ii-om so,ucc monitoring v:cll
BAX-14;
• [xcav0tion or light non-aqueous liquid (LNAPL) impacted soil in the tank farm
area based on an acti,)n ievel or 1,000 mg/kg total PAH and off~site disposal of
soil lo remove the long-term source of grounchvatc.r impacts;
• E,cavation and off-s i tc disposal of I isled hD,.mdous waste from lhc Baxter
J ,agoon area;
Mr. Clint Chase
March 28, 20116
March 28. 2006
Pngc 2
• In-situ soil siabilizution of impacted soil near the Butt Tank anJ Baxter Lagoon
c1rca h!!scd on an 3clion Jc-vel of 1 :000 mg/kg total PJ\1 I. to remove the long-term
source of groundwaler impacts
The ,1bovc remedial actions were defined as 1hc capital portion of the remedial action in
the CAI'. which includes source rcmccfo1tion (DNAPL removal, soil cxnlValion and
disposal or lreutment. in-situ stabilinition) and wetland mil igat1on.
Eco 1ogy received and reviewed three qm1rtcrlv groundv1atcr monitoring rcpo11s by
Rfc~T/.', dated November I Cl, 2005. December 22, 2005 anJ March 31, 2006. The
groundwater data collected to date have met t'.1c Model Toxics Control 1\ct (IVITCA)
cleanup levels. Port Quendall Company (PQC) wtll continue the groundwater monitoring
accmcl1n1: 10 the schedule specified in the C:AP.
Ecology also received and reviewed the "Baxter Cove Wetland Monitoring Rcp01t. Year
I, Year 2 anc' Year 3" by RETEC, dated October 14, 2003, November 3, 2004, and
December 22, 2005. Ecology rccngni,.cs that PQC is meeting tile requirements of Corps
of Engineers Wetland Permit Number 2000-2-00512, and PQC will continue the wetland
monitoring program according to the schedule specified in the CAP.
I lowcver. the following remedial actions have not been completed.
• Capping of residual soil i1rpacls to prnent direct con'.act by humans and
institutional contro.ls 10 ensure cap integrity into the future on both South and
North l'arccl:
• Implementation of institutional conlro1s to ~)!'event future groundwater extraction
and provide for the continued intcgri1y of the cap
Ecology understands that the cupping uf rcsidllal soil impJcts may be dependent on the
s:te redevelopment schedule since landscaping, parking lots. and building foundations
used are all projected to comprise portions of the eap.
If you have any questions, please call me at (425) 649-7187.
Sincerely, s~{/<~,r eu,'-/ /z{!,-1.///
Sunny Lin /J;/eckcr, P.E.
Toxics Ckmrnp Program
p
"
H
C
r
(
0
e
lll!IOSCIJ'[
evr•Ot
&!C:,tE["N
flliC(
._ • .,,tNT1rt,1.~Ci
""'°
"-
I
~ -·-z::;;;
___ ,,_
~
.u:ITlflQAl TURf PltJoC11CE f1£LD
--------~·
14 1~ 16 11 1e
-r.°lr ,::-
m cx;oP •W.C·i<:t •Aett 11.,,
---
r .A.: h ~ f ,.~ . ~
19
t< I
,1
[
D
I
(._.,..(.A,. ..... I ~ '• • u:.1---~ .:,.,.:,,, .,, ...
-' •.... ,.-J .... ,., ,~ ......
~
,,·.\
US ~'l"EHE~I A\oE
WTE .)00
sl.Al rlL 'N4
"""" rn l'04f ,,, '11""
,.,.,. ..a• "4}1"o:11 ...., ........ ~
>, _.
·u
cu u
LL :::l z
(l) t;, 0
I-uw ('.) ·-~ z _. I I U1-ti) cu a: ~
!.... 0 s Q_ z z _J
CJ) _J 0 ~~ r z ~s w a: mo _c LL
rn
(l)
(/)
... Sell>~".,,~~.
,._ ..
IU.USl R:;1l'V E
Silt P\.'-N
.,·
·-.. , . cc ,,
·-j~
j NOH)NIHSlfM 'N0.LN31'
'.)11 .LS3MH..LlJON lllfll.LOO~
A~!l!OB::l 6U!U!8JJ.
'!? sJa:µenbpeaH S)1Me4eas I -_r.n,,,r,_ ...... ...._ ...... _,..,.. . ·1
N0l1Jn81SNOJ tJOd lON : 1N:3l''idOl:lJ\:30 N81S:l0 ........
'· ___ ,
·7 .. ,_,_
·,.
'. ,-. ·~ ·Cf.:·::=:
,(:, :--~ --'-~
/
~~ , __ .
,.,
!,
/~,:,.;_:."
<=)I
\
[_.
fie'. -
----~
_-:_-.--_ ~----~-.. /'~
-::, ~~ z c..1 ~:::
11 r2i
,;==.::...__,.... J~ /
/,
,.
'·' u
v,
(:!I
,
,,
r· ,,, c,
'" u u .,
0 ':2
;§
:J I'..-
'
I I
/ I
/
-:-,
u
//
lw;t 'f
I q
I
I
T
n-r:. ;c
.:,-,,
'\'
" " (
' l,
I
T
'.£
\ ',
'
l:
I
;·
C
"' .,
L.'l
" 0 ~ , . .J
~~<J > ..... ·<...:..
L. ::, V1
(_) ,,
I
I
I,
I ·,
/i
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
, I
. ~1 ;-
I
,{_ -~-
ilf/~ ·~: ? ...J ...
! ~~: ~r' _'c,
~.,.,
1;1
!)
f.: ·I
. "· ..
11
'I ii
'I' .r,
" [I
' lj
11
>· ·:f
1 I . r 11 I r,
'~-t' -~: -J_i [ __ i -----i I I .,.---
/ I
.,.: ,_;:
'" LI~:,_
~-:' t. _J
~ ~:
'I !
: [
: '
r •
I
a
' i I
'I
r r
i I
I
i
I I
L
:·I
s:.;,
2'!
._., 1/1
~ ~
·' •(
' ' 1-·-v•
' ·I ,·1 ·_.:.: 7
~
,. ll'
::, ~J
,:-:--
!: ~:
< I,!
y Li'~
,.: r_) ....... ,.,
-_-. V'
"'
-~. ~'·
''I. . .. ' '
I'
D
CJ
' C,
~~-r
'
' , .. L • ,--.,
< ~1 -
, __
I
I ~I. a..,
w: ,
!:: 1· '
(/) ' -I! .,: II
N
LO
w
0::: =::,
(9
LL
\ . .'
' '
,
i
" ~~~:~
... :i _;;.
~:(-. ;.
';;i~'=,~ ;·
:;' .-.. ~~ ;-_,f:··r
tfli:~· :a,
~'.;!~,:-,
iJ~~-T'
""-,. ~-"' !";
T
,.
I
--· NO!!)NIHS\IM 'NO!N3l:I
:Jll !S3MHll:ION 11\18100~
N!IP8::! 5U!U!8J.L
'8 sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas
-·-·1 :I 'I , ,.,,, ,c,, h • .• 1tnl m,:-ta , •1:u,.-.'o:,
I
I
I . , ." l -, .
I
I
'
' -i .:. •• i •
I !
ft:= .
.• -::<;' :,..-. :ii'"'
i~~ i!
.I
·1
!
• .•
... . .
'
.. ~ r(~; ~ .. ;.,~-~ f~~ :A,~~.: :~i~
' ' II: e, "' -" : \;I.. ~ ~
~!!:I ~;. "~ . ~ £ ~
~g~~~dt:~~~g~ ~ •• ~u ~~~~~~~ii~~~~ e~~~;~i
" -•·•o•t•,J,, n •.. i.,c-i ..... .,.s ...... .,
=
:::~,-,;.".',_;P,.~ .,:',-~ ./~·~:~;,~b: ~ :?~;;t~ ';,, -·:. ::' °!:
" :,: ! ~
~ '( :,.:
·-
NOl18ncl1SN08 c!O.:l lON
, .•
:"S
0
?':~.~c'
'i~~i
·;C.. .••.•
:~~~~
~2i~
:;-:: ......
. :·!;l.i:,:
~.!'~e '""'' ~ C.'-'i":;;
'.;'"~-~~
;.i.J
·" D Ii 'i 'i ;:;, I .Li i
J: "'!,; I -·· u· . ~=~ ~ I I~
;_ •
•
'
P~t t
; tjLlt~
' :i: :;::;;:;:;;.
:::~:::; .:,...., .. ,
"'""',!.'<j:":.f; ,
~ ~~~~
<1,.-::.
I
'
i
• .
'
(")
IJ')
w
0:::
::::::J
(j
LL
\
' \
NOlSINIHS\IM 'NOlN3!:I
::111 lS3MHHION 11\llllOO~
A+!IPB.:J 6U!U!8Jl
'!? sJa:µenbpeaH S)!Me4eas
/ , ,
/ /
/
I
I
\
,_
,_
I .
I
I
I
I
I
/
_ .. · ____________________ j__ ~1----·--"------,Lj.-----J:..--' . . . I I . I
. T""""
0
c3
0
,-------
I_ ---
I I
I
i
!
I
I
!
I
I
j ·t
I
I
· ·· ·· ·· ·· ···· '.I 'I
I • • I I
·--··--__J
C\J
0
C\J w
0
I
I ·,
I I
(\J---c\j
C\J C')
C\J C\J I ww,
: I 00 I I
I 1
---~ .. L ..
I
i
I
~J ~ I
.___ I ,,...,
L I -~-~J __ .:: . ·:/·I,
__ J / --'. ~I ··.'\·
,. I ' I
I I
--~~ '
i '
I { I · .1 ' , ~ ~
! ~ ~
I ' I ~
--·--------J_, I -, • ....._ _________ _
, ______ I--I -:-1~.
------
C') C') C') C')
0 r-C\J C')
C\J C\J C\J C\J wwww
0000
; i
. ·1· •. , .•
j 'I
-· z c;' l 9G·~.
~! '1:._,Z .. 1
" z~'j l ! ; ·--<~ • :E
\
NOWNIHS\/M 'N01N3~ I
..__,,. __
I '.)l11S3MH1~0N 11\/8100~
fil!IP8:J 5u1u1eJ1
'1? sJaµenbpeaH S)lMeljeas
NOl1Jncl1SNOJ c!O:l lON
'
"\\
c: r" •
,-' . I ~~-
~
'I
. IJ
J
' r:n:· ;J~ •~ 1'.·'t!.:,111 ! ----, ------·-----------------------------·-----------------------------·------------------------------------------------------·---------·r·---
l()
l()
w er:
:::)
(.')
Li..
I;
i
I r
!
i -i
i
k
I= 1,
1;--f> I,
it
i'
i
j
i 'i I !I
j1f!! · 1!ji1 ' "
./
--c:'-i--
I
I
I
t
-· zv ou ~z :i~ z:ic vu.,
-<;.! :;
--B-
'I
!
J
l
---~ -
N0l.8NIHS\fM 'N01N3lJ ~., ... , .. ~:, .... u ,tJ' ,. : •• ·.I'll tr•JI,,
:)ll .1S3MH.1H0N 11'<'8.100,
Al!IPB::I 5U!U!BJ1
'!? sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas
i
I
I
t
i-
I
I
I
t
NOl1:JnH1SNO:J HO:l lON
,,
t' :,
::.·1
'
j I
'I
\
' \
..
--·-·t--·----------·--------·----------------------------------------------------·--r-·-··---------·----·-----··------... !Cl.::2.J.-1:·,f. 1::£..hJ.<=1•~ __
co
I.O
LU er: =>
(9
u..
j
« 'I
NO.L8NIHS'IIM 'NO.LN3~
1··: '.I ·1
t I • '
. I I ih, -· zu 1 I,_, oi ell, 11 ~ • 11'1 I . ur~),~ ' ~1!i .! o-:)ll .lS3MHlliON 111/lUOOal .,,u zid 0 .,,z ! Al!fP8::J 5U!U!8Jj_ :i~ : 11! ~ \_ / 1r1r: z::l: l .• i l!i o~ 'l? sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4ees <;.!
::i:
l I NOl18ncl1SN08 c!O:l lON t---:
•-·--r--·-------•-•-••-•-••---·•-•-•-----·-·-------------••-·--·---,_·-•-•-••----·--·--+--·-•--M---·-··-----------,,;.-,) lJ_ ... ; _!£ .-JJ ~;,,;.--l{)
• -
-
/·1,~;.
\ff,
·:, -
/ c.....__----
i'
1
-_··-r~ __ ···~.·
~--
l
'' I.
---r
I
.£.
-~
,. ,.
'
I w
\
' \
'i,'
..
~-
'
..
0:::
:J
(9
LL
j
ii
l•
I ill!! !1ii ' .. j -· N018NIHSVM "NO!N3lJ
:lll .1S3MHHlON 11\18100~
i.im::ie:1 Bu,u,eJ1
1b' sJaµenbpeaH S}1Me4eas
~i1 ~I
)
I •
1 -,!lu iffi~ N
if~~ w
__ _;_ ______ . -------·---------------------______ NOl18nH1SN08 _~0:1 lON ______________ _!. __ ~
~
. . .
· IU! J: , cJ·~ al: · J\11.._..1~ ! W. J
.• I W
. i
\
.; ~ ,.., ·,
'-
\
-
1\ 1 0::: ' . ~ ' I (_'J
' ,,
I
l
!j'
1
' J
'
LL
1'
',
l:s,
t
I
l
i -· zu iq ~-
' 1• :;:v
I Ill! ~z :o~ ; I•'" z~ ; ,u ci~ --I " <;;!
2.
<
' ' , ~i z ~1 j ~ ~ ~ g
t . z 01 Q ., ·~ t:: ~! ~.
0' c,I
E' , •. ::;; .,;
~ ~ ~,
~ o. 0 , -,,
\
\
\
'I
I
1
l
l
l
• z ~ g
§ ~
i's ' z r, ,, i
~ ~ ~
i1 " ~"· '" a:-j
NOl8NIHS\IM 'NO!N31:J I"'~ --1 ,,..,,,,c,: h •• '"'I {T>Jle
~ll !S3MH!l:JON ll\f8l00,i
Al!IP8.:::I 5U!U!8J!
'bl sJalJenbpeaH s>1Me4eas
NOl18n~1SN08 ~Q,:j lON
-I _,
<
'I
' !
i
i
'-~1 i i -;. 't-
i
i
!
I
·--.,' ___ t·.l]~:..l:il!W!" ---------------~-·-·------' .. -~--------------------·-·----------·--·------------------------r-----._
O')
lO
w
0:::
::i
(9
LL
--~i'T':i;:;:r'-ti ,,:c.'i7:7! -------------··-··-----------·--·---'-------------------~-------··---------------------------------------------l-------
i
; ,·;.
'
-n -
G)
C
::::0 m
(]l
.....>.
0
() . .. m eoo
t\) g =i ,m .......
\
' \
· 1~
I~
I" t0 ~ !II. 1 I ~ 1, , • , , ' .
:~j
V;
(-1
-.,J
--:>
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
I. I. ..... . ....... .
I :··'
Seahawks Headquarters &
Training Facility
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
RENTON, WASHINGTON
~]
II
,!
,1
:~j
:i! ,1
:'I ;i
i
i
I
i --~~-----J,
i".,: I~~ . ~~ r z\,,l 1 r.15 r.z ·-
~ I -i
i
i » "1'1 -.. H ,, .. \ ~!!:I .. / ·; °\ • n. r· · ..... ·t '. · .. ' '1 .. i
l
i 1
NOl8NIHS\fM 'NO!N3~ r·: -· ·1 'I ·1 ' !l" ,' ··) '. -r -.• zu l ,,-,t1..v,1,•,.lt<'fl o-::Ill lS3MHJ.llON ll\f8l00.o '; \ l• ~u z ....
1
,ii, ;,iZ ! At!ll::>El.:l 5U!U!8Jl w~ N :,~ ~B W \ 1trt z::, l ·In ~~ '8 sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas • ~ C) ... :;;" • C
i N01l8n~1SN08 ~O:J lON ;: ·----r------------------------·-·------·--·---·-----------------------1-------------------·-·---· ~.(:) J.H<l l~ ~-•r.J,,--
I
i
i
I
I
i: '" Jc, ,,
I'. I,
i'.' ,•
J ---
-'
0
' ,-,) v
,·
V
\
I
/ ,,. .
-I
1rf:
\
' \
I.!)
UJ
0::::
:::J
(.')
LL..
i
N0L:;>NIH$\IM 'N0.LN3!;
'I
I I , ' ' l ---I ~ [ "<ti , -I ' -,, -· Z'.J ! ,i~, .. ~,o:, ,,...'1,[J !: .• ",111', . 1:n:11,
I _.; ...
111i,
~o ::lll .LS3MH.LllON 11118.100,i ~5 .....
J"JZ ! Al!IPe.::J 5u1up:u.1 N ::,w iii§ w ,,o z::E ·In ::,w l '8 sJalJenbpeaH S>fMe4eas " < 0 --~ 11 <;2 ~
Q :;,
No118nH1SN08 Ho:110N : N
·--·, ·---1,!l'. ! 'J·f, ,Ji .J,11-'J.1~ ------·---------------------------. --.-------·---------------··-----------·-·----------~--,-·--·--·-··---'-------~
;
;
..
\
' \
-
I
0
'
·,
I '<'./
<)
-:/
LO
w
0::
::>
(9
u..
l j ,,
J : ,' -!Ji!,
. -/ l]'U ---., ..
'
'
\ ;.,:,
' \
-'• zu l ::,-~u :.,,\z ! =i~
z:li l "~ <~
:i;'"'
NO.L8NIHS\/M 'NO.LN31'l
:)ll .LS3MHHlON 11\fS.LOO,i
Al!l!OB.:l 5U!U!BJ1
'8 sJaµenbpeaH S>tMBljeas
·~l!-tl, 1,•,.1!'1)
NOl18n~1SN08 ~0:1 lON
C
'' ''
•
1 1 1'
Ii ,i.'
I I ·1·
' ,,
I' I'
,') ,I
// /.
,' / /' // /.
/'./ ,/,. ,,_ /,' /·
.... "' ...... )/' -,,,,,,I
---..J,':.,., I I
-_,I.'.' ' -'I ' //
<>"' :;
I ~:
-£ ":-1 •
.... .;.</ ,..:' ~ -1-
•
·/
I
1--
'./ / ' ' f l ,.,
:/ /
/> --
j" --.. ' --1'
~--.,-
'
/
/
',
---,./
I r
I
I
'
/
:'\I
_.
"
I r-----.,J '-'---:lu
•
> N ~ ii , . ..l
5!~ N ~-w ~ 0
I.!')
w
,-0:::
' ....., I _ __,
(9
\\ /1.' l .
_______________________________ ::(;}~L-_, ----~ _: ____ --------------,.; ---i/ ___ ----· ---=:i::::-=
i_'ll// /-·:/ • i
I , [ :
,_1 [
j
i 1ih, -·
1'0 dlt ·--"
---1---·-·--t·---
'
II zv ! o-,,v ,,z ! ::, ... z:l, l :.:i~
<Q j
~
'
NOlclNIHSVM 'NO.LN3?:i -
-·1
~; .. , .. ~:, ,"'1,l•IU 11'.,llfll
:Jll J.S3MH.LHON 11\fS.LOO•
Al!l!OB.::l 6U!U!BJJ_
'8 sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas
NOl18ntl1SN08 cJQ:j lON
_,
I. (
I
I
I, /
"1 ./ :, k
I
I
1,.'
:, '1
I
j" I
I[//
'I "l''·· '' .ti,
~: "'"
--li
'
I 1,
'
/
~ --,' .. -
\.
/ ,,
/
•
' .
. ,
..
"
'I
\
' \
----------------------------·--r-i·----------------~---------------_ --·-·------,,, ,11,.,, _l'• "l'"' __ -r------i I • I
I --,_ ---~ . -'1 "~~ •
LO
LLl
0::::
:::>
(9
LL
] NO!ONIHSVM 'N0JN3l:!
ff 'I
-· zu l I' ' i~ ' ·. ·, l• ou ::J11.1S3MH.ll:!QN 11V8H)Qc!
: ·, 1111 :;:;z ! AJ!IPe:l 5u1u1eJ1 :, "' \. z::i: .. / f!jH l ::J"' '!? sJa:µenbpeaH S)1Me4eas I u <:.! l ::;:
---~ -----;-----__ j
•
i ,,-
J;; • i ,~ :i· l-,~-----_-___ ----" d-'
=""ii.,,._; -------.t•-r~ .. ~-. ·~~ .. ---, ..
r_, ·.. ~· 1L.~ ___ j 1
, \.·.· If]
t i.l g: i
-.'(-
r~Jo .·!
--I . I '
---l '. /
.. \~./ ···::-~ 8: '---.~· --
,..,.:·
/' _, ~ o;:. -~ --~•, --'"'i_.-~. ----j ;--, • --,-------:...! ----_/ 1----
' I
,._: ~:
:-: ~ :::,;::
~:.,",' ;:,
I
; I
l
,,..,1,fJ 1.:·,.1,11 (it•:11., . -·1
:1
'
'I
' '
•
\
" \
I • ' ~ r rri'
C\I ~~ C\I
~ w ~ C)
' 0
".ii' -
'"
"
"
' i
NOlSlNIHS\IM 'NOlN3H
r-= ·-·1
I I Jt I
I ,, -· zu 1 '""'''"'' 1,• •• 1, .. 1 o-Oll lS3MH.LHON 11\18100~ ll• ~u
: 1!1!' ~z J Al!l!~e.:1 5u!U!BJ1 i~ N :,w z:i: -w
/ l''' l ~ ~ 0 ;J;; CJW 18 sJaµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas <;;! :,
~://// /' / f'\·\.11·· ----. i ! -\/ 11 NOH.:Jtte11SNO:J ~O:J lCJN ___ j/ --i--. co
,· !~:J:·1:lt, d'.-jl,IHJ.7,-//_:,I/_/.-/ e i --~
'f 1 · i r I
I I
..
\ ..
\ >
\
..
i '
'
• •
.. ·--·-------
I +-,,·--
r.:l (-01
• • -.! ., ,, ~,
,!
!.j
•i ,-
LL
'.lll 1S3MHU!ON 11118100" . ~ ~ '<:t
Al!IPB:I 6U!U!8Jl l~i Gj
l
I il,11 -· zu ! oo ::sz ! ; :,~
.' 11n z:i :.:,~
'I NOJ.8NIHSVM 'NO!N3lJ I"'" ;:-....... "· .. '"' ""'"' -1 :I I 1;5~ ~ ~'11.L')i
~ sJa:µenbpeaH S>1Me4eas : ~$s O ------~---...;;~--------------------------------------------------u B (·· I .· Ill
I " -( ;;i :,
"
:
!-:
r
\
~ s
\ 0
• 1
r--
NOl1Jn~1SNOJ ~0:1 lON
---·--~ --· --··-----
_,
,'
!
,/
---
... .,
r ~~
i'! ~~
--------· ----·· -
;,
:':
., ,_.
•, .
' :.i .. ' -~-:·:,· . ·~~ ,;. ,..
:1 ......
I
!
.s
' ~--1-1 -:\1 / II
~ ~-A-. --'I i . ·-\:
,·
•. =:'.'·· .. ". ~t
\
L.!)
LLI a::
:::i
(9
LL
i ·r .,,,, ,
/
"i, /
.,, i
G)
C
:::0 rn
u,
->.
a)
-
Ori,· g < m ~ ~
w ;r
1~ I~.; i ! l ., . '
.... :<!~ .....
;~J': ~~ 'i-'
. ·::,:; ;;:~ ~r .. ; "-~-
:i·.,
I I I
I :'
I -' 1,/
11
c-i,."!~, ~-:-.:t~
~2·~:~
~:~
;4 ;1
-~·.1
'<_,.-!
r ' -
I I
/
11-:1--
'
i'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I i
I I
I, I
ti I I
I I ;
I I
-ii
(ij
/:~
·g
j ,' ---~-~-
cc, ,-~
-,:;·~"'f_f.~ ~
____ _____,,
.~if~:~ '\
<.
,·ii
----
·"'"'·:_:
. -~~
;;:;;::o::=:
~; ' .; \. (''\
---------------I
--___________ ]
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
'--
I. I. ·-· . '" ---:'·I '
Seahawks Headquarters &
Training Facility
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
RENTON, WASHINGTON
',,
/
II
-,
----. --------
--------
r ~~ » l 3:: z . :.:,.,.,r::
i gZt; .no f ::nz ·.-
.. ,., -... ~ / ::i~ ' iii!!' ' ,,
~
'
l -· zv r· ii, oo J ;;iz J ::,-. : / !ptr z::e
'...'.'} .... A~!l!:>8.:J 6U!U!8J! -~~ i i'm .,H ... <;.! :,
11 '.Jl~~~::::~~~~:::~" I"'•"'--: .~ ... ;,• .. ,., · "'''''" -1 ii II l1~11.i1g~·
,g SJaµenbpeaH S}1M8LJ88S ____ _::: ___ :;______________________________________ ~
:,;u • ~IU
(In, !W',
JB:f< I'll:,
1,:t.. I ~:J;
, .... 1:.:1, • <I
•'.J:,Ui II
l)
NOl1Jntl1SNOJ t!O;j 10N
n; ,_-·. ft~
.....,.. '""·''
,l ~! ":"
rcr>,, -ft);
u:,;,: . ~ ~ ......... -.,--,;
i I
_I
'
Vi .:. ,. .•.
IN.I 1-;e
.. : ~· , ..
r~. ~,' .
. r .. "·':
-·-·----~·=L._. _l __ ·---·-·-----
w
_J . LL =-.,.
0 ,c rr ,,.
a.. 'i'•
LO
w
0::
::::>
(.'.)
LL
I:
1
i' ', l• · Ill! ; 11•" ; ·IH ! u
..
., ,,,
j
;
1
-· zu i 00 ::::z J :,~
z:::;: l ~3 ;:
,,
,.
.1 ' '
,;
;
NO!EJNIHSVM 'NO!N3~ -'1:.-,,,;;;, ..... .,,v. 11• •• ,~, . (;p~1.1
::lll !S3MH!~ON llV13!00.cl
lil!l!:Je::l 5u!u1eJ1
'8 sJaµenbpeaH s>1Me4eas
NOl18n~1SN08 ~0:1 lON
' '
' . .,l,t,.l , ... -~
,
·.'
.,
" .~,,.
;.-
' t: c"IL
!iS .·,'> z ~; 0
F
0 !' c• ::) ..
a:
f--
<ll • z
0
0
"' 0
0 a: '
',
, ,
I
l
'
;:,'I
,-'.1
cm,
c'1ii
CL .,:
f--
::) o·
~I si
...J
lU w
T :;:
O' z·
<1
"'' 0
::) a:
f--
w
f--w a: u z
0 u ,
w
~
(/)
a:
0 f--. o..,
uJ• Oi ffil f--1 ~~
'I
. ' . ;'
\
I
' \
'I
•• " •
z
Q
ti
t>I
~
cl ~ u
·1
,. ". ;; '•
ii,·~
:;·;:: ~.;-,·
:!'i}:.
:;;,.
,;~
:.;·~
"' , . . --'":
el .t
!J. l·,:;
.,,l'i'
!,,-,
·:•
:'14 :.~
;~
~~ ... , .. .... ! ...... .
w z w _. i
>-z1
i!:ol
W~I ;,.u
6~ o..o
>-il:
lLU1 2~1 ::; ciJ
I::'~. ~~1 tu l -w! a. :r: I
~<l>i',
~ g:i
~;
w:
::i
O·
UJJ -
(1) :·;.
0
N
lD
LIJ
0::::
::J
(9
LI..
.'JI.
' -:
~l
-__ _j' -
o,
...,. -~.._ r~:r 0;,,. :;. ,. 1:'t
1~: .. :i ~ '" ·:= ~, ... :
M: 1· :, :~,.. ',.-,) '""·''
IM-1"."--.-'>1 .•.
'1.''1-:.II',_, .'.l•.1:-·l,'li
,:,:J1: U 1·;-1•, , .. 1, ~' JYl•
!J:.: ,:,1·· "":-.,')"'",\foal':
:i:•yrr:u--c,:;.,::·r
:;);>:~
: I ,t .._ O ,j L •• :: :t.
SUBGRADE AT NATURAL TURF FIELDS ,,,,
~·~ c=:;,, c0 :: ,.n ~:.~_i,:;L,
::a:
i
-.,,, ko.. ::,~-,:.c 'l'-I ·i,
/11.(, ,i,,.c::,-.,,_
r..;::i:,
J:IL W" :lt::'L ,J. IL:l•;
-;(;f:,F , · l ·,-,:
~' ·,. .,, -=--~· rt· = _ _:_:_;--,--rs,-.:; I ' ·:.i1u -,·---t, ----
' -1
1:-
OIi·::. ' ' .~ ?<::il
1 ;i_;,_u :.J....;;: •,:,. ~If\'., L:W::1 1!..
lliM·.\ :,.;-, ;~I! l~'l'
.'.I:!'~ U'il. l
il __ ;i,, :t.L.:q .. v,:1_:,
··=II(_,·· 1"1'1-•,\ ,'.ti::, ;·i
SUBGRADE A~ NATURAL TURF FIELD COLLECTOR P,PES ... ·:. ---------------ii?:~rr•::·
----
' -------------------·--~ -
SUBGRAOE Af SYN1HETIC TURF FIELD,
HAROSCAPE. ANO BUILDING SLAB
~:'.
-·
L·.'i' ll
-----
' ,\.<:'" -11~:' :·.~ '.:. ''
o ;· L l.lJl'.'j:Jl-'t. ~"l.t'.' l' ,:,_'• I.'{_' ~lil 1.(-c' :> :, ~
•!;; ''l~'t:'.•:~·"l"l'l>iA: -r,i, l~cl:-,·.; 1,;,;:,·:~
, ~;..:: I~ ' :: ,:. !It a
SliBGRAOE AT GRASSPAVE. iNDOOR
FIELD, AND LANDSCAPE
;-r,11-. ·;: I'.* l ,.;, •.11'.ll'o~'
'.!Cl'~~~ c'; . .c.:;~: c.>il :;:I '.II
,.,,,:i,,·,:.,·:,,-.,,,_:,
' ' {l" ,,;, L ~:.'
•·,:;:1'•1' ''f"<i'.~ ';.•
,:,: I ,..~','tr" S'1" :.0,
,., ' ~ ~ ' '
:~;-_(,,:,
~
!"
'
I Wl':•I , tP!'' ~/,• [I_ 1-1.:•.U~ '' "-' I:,.._
LO\ " : : '.'t '. ~ lll'_ \1 I ~IJ•:·:
'-'II: t "'' i.r_ •),
Ill'•)-··!,. •;
:r:f·11,-~:, (Mil '1;(·
,, . .,:.:Q ··' ,,, '.,'' :,., .. ,1,,.,-,.
'. ,I 1,C,: :~:1 · 1 T·~ -~_JI
SUBGRAOE AT SAND FILTER {J:},.,
-'
i' --~ ··~-
I:."
<
··:,
._.,,.1,··1'1"'
! , ... ,, 11,
Ir•, ~-. 'l'l:.I .,
n]/•,',,\' ---4• -1,,,(,lill,
-·--· ----:::2-=--y--~ _ J.~ --·)_ . .(-"·
___ . __ /
SECTION A
•
" ., ~ C, L~
· /[!711:.( -<\--r=~,--
-. ---· -~ -. -.'~------\ _____ .)----
' -~1:::~----~~---.1
"'
L
T-----
' ··,
I ... •j
SECTION B
•
--...... , __ .,,,.
;,,_
/ -...... _
..,.. ..... ·
. ··-~-
... ..-· .--
/
-;,,-.~
' .
OUT _ET /OUTFALL
, ...
""
,...
\ .,
j:,
; .. i
;_
··---.> ---------·-----
I
/
Ii.. f'
----. ,-,?~~·u.
z
0
1-u => a:
1-
(f) z
0 u
a:
0
LL
l-o z
FIGURE 5.21
-.. -··· -~·,.: ,.., __ ._. ....
-a,.""'"""" . ,,...,,__, ....... ,q,_
I •
MAGNLJ.).)ON
KLEMENCIC -nee •111 -·--
oil
~ Q) 0
t::: >. j z rn ::: t-o
:, :-= f3 r-
0" u:;:: ('.)
'O ro i" ;e ro u.. ti'. :i:
Q)oio~ Ic::z:;:: (/} ·c ..J z ..-x: ·-...J 0 ~ e: ;ii t-ro I-1-~ .c: 8 I>'. ro u.
Q)
(/)
I
• ' •
: l
SECTIONS ANO
OETA!LS
CE402 __
I
' '
' ' /
I
/
I
-ll NOl:>NIHSVM 'N01N3~ I
'.Jll lS3MHl~ON 11'18100:l
Al!IPB::I a::>!l::>BJd S)IM8488S
'
'-.~ -'--, . ~ -J ~ -f,-~---:=;:= · ..:.:.._-_·_~_--:::-_-r_-:_-, --_i-= -~ ,...=:_ .... -=----__ ---.-.__=:.-_ ---J-.~. -· ---
I 1,>) I ' ' . . -. ----/
-./.// /,.j, 1--, /:// )'./ ' ' ' ' '·· .... --·. ---
/ ./ / .1 , 1i .-,
// i ,-~
i' I ~
I I / ,<>· // I
. " ----. -,f ,, I/
;'---..:.,.;!' ./
/
/ '/
/
·-, ____ ,..\-,
I
'
!',.
. 1\:-:
. -[-.CL'.
' ii '
_I/ Jl '•,
--------,---------
•
' >-w
1~
, ',,t
-,
' '
'
I
I I
I' . I
" ' I
I.
I
I
I
I
l
J I 0
' '.,'!<,
I
I
J
' I -I
--1 I
l
z
Q
t-< >
Ul
...I
Ul
Cl)' ~I
0
,c(
0
...I ~l
r· ·,
\,-.' ._J
N
N
LO
UJ
er'. :::,
(9
LL
<1'.
z
:5
(L
•
STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION
Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington
August 30, 2006
•
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
.t\SSOCIATtS
STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION
Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington
AugJst 30, 2006 •
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
ASSOCIATES
I JOi fiflh ,\v~"~"'-s~ire 3200
Sta Ill~. Wc,~,ng·on 9a· ::ll -2699
T.206'29212CO F:2062921201
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
SIDJ?.',,\~TER TECH C'll CAL lN FORMAT I 01\.
Ssction I: Proiect Overview
Section II.
Section 111.
Section IV
Section V
Sect ion V!
Serl ion VI I:
Se cti an VI 11.
Sertion IX
Se ct i an X:
References
FIGURES
Prelim:nary Condit-Jns Summary.
O'fsite Analysis.
flow Control ond Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design
Co~veyonce System Analysi<; ond De~ign.
Special Reports and Studies
Other Permits.
Construction Stormwater Pallut,cn Prevention Plan Analysi~ Qnd Design ..
Bond Quantities Worksheet, Re'ention/Detenlian facility Summary Sheet, end
Derlaro1ion of Cavenrr'.'11
Operations and Maintenance Manual.
figure I-:: Techn1Cal 111ormotion Report Worksreet
Figure 1-2 S,te Locat:on
Figure 1.3-Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Chara()eristics
figure 1-4: Soils
Figure il-1-2-year, 24-hour Precipitation
figure 11-2 25-yeor, 24-hour Precipitot en
figure 11-3: 100-year, 24-hour Precipitation
Figure 111-1: Ollsite Flow (onveyonrn
Figure 111-1· G1esy Subbasin
Figure IV-I: W:•er Quality Treolmenl Areas
Figure V-· Conveyance Sy;1em Overview
figure VII-' Temporary E,::ision and Sedlmen~o·i::in Central Plans
Appendix A: Sand Filter Sizing
Appendix B: Onsile Conveyance Calcclotions
Appendix C o;isite Conveyance I.Gypsy Subbas,n) Calculations
Storm v, ::iter Tech n I co! Info r·m GTi o ::
Seohowks Headquarters and Training Facility. Renton 1 VVoshington
I
3
s
7
9
9
10
10
12
•
STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION
•
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
ASSOC!ATfS
SECTION I PROJECT OVERVIEW __
INTRODUCTION
~l,\CNUSSON
KU:MfNCIC
7~is report doo...,rnents the stcrmwater arid droincge design appmach and proposal for he Sea hawks
:-1eodquarlers and Troir·ng Facility project. The report has been prepared concu~rently with the
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Sucmittal using the guidelines for the Stormwoter Technical
Information Report (TlRJ from the 2COS King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM).
Figure 1-1 consists oi" the standard TIR worksheet, completed for the project.
The proiect ;, located between Lake Washington and Ripley Lane, northwest of the Northeast 44•h Street
and Interstate 405 interchange n Renton, Washington (see f:gJre 1-2). The east side of the site abuts
the Burlirgton Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way. Tee site is located in the Gypsy Subbasin.
The pro~osed woject includes construction of a 'lew headquarlers and sports training facili·y on a
:armer industrioi site which has been 1ar·gely remediated pwrsuant to negotiated Consent Decrees with
·he Washington Deportment of Ecology (Ecology).
EXlSTl NG DRAINAGE
The existing site is ct.Jrrently vacant land with weedy brush cover. T~e existing site runoff sheet flows from
east to west, toward Lake Wosh;ngton. There is an existing degraded storm drain crossing the site that
conveys offsite stormwater from ·he Gypsy Subbasin, from the east side of the siie to Lake Washington.
A created mitigation wetland exists at the southweste:-n corner of ~he site. The wetland is predomirantly
a lake-fed wetlanc.
PROPOSED DRAINAGE
The proiect stormwater management approach 'S based on the 2005 KCSWDM. Enhanced water
quality ·reatment is proposed for site stormwoter runoff. As with the ex:sting site conditio'1s 1 all drainage
trom the site will discharge ciirectly to Lake VVashington, a direct discharge receiving water. No flow
coritrol is proposed or 1·equired_ Several stcrmwater management treatments ore proposed to ser;e
different developed zones of the site. The treatment areas and systems are as follows:
Synthetic Turf Field, Pedestrian Hardscape, and Building/Roof Areas
These areas a,..e non-pollution-generating surfaces. Stormwcter runoff from the synthetic turf fie:d,
pedestrian hardscape, and b1/lding roofs will drain ·o Lake Washington as direct discharge
Precipitation tha-: lands on the field will drain verlical y ihroJg~ sand a'1d gravel to subdra·ris that will
convey ~he stormwater to a site storm drain sys·em d1schcrging to Lcke VVashington.
Natural Turf Field(s)
oi~ilar to the synthetic turf field, prec,pitat,on that lands on the natural turf fields will drain vertically
through sand to suborains. The natural turf fields, with an 18-inch layer of s:md, will function as a very
large sand filter An Integrated Pest Management (1PM) Plan wil be prepared that describes turf
managemen· prcclices for these practice fields. One-hundred percent of the storm runoff from these
fields will poss though tt'e underlying sand, which exceeds tf--.e rnquirements for large sand filter
treotmert
Sta,mwoter Tecnnical lnformat,on
Seahowks He:::idquarlers and Trair·ng Focility, Renton, VVashington
Mitigated Constructed Wetland
Mt\GNUSSON
KLEMENCIC:
The Baxter Cove M1t·,gation Wetland is located or "he Lake Washington shoreline at the scL.tr'west
co~ner of the site and is hydraulically connected to the lake. The site drainage is collected, ccrveyed,
and managed in onsite drainage systems that ace not hydraulically connected to tne wetlocd.
Paved Parking and Driveways
Stormwoter runoff from paved parking and driveway areas will be collected and/or directed to four
large sand fillers. Three of the sand f,lte,s will be covered wi"h grass, which will istercepl fines and
provide pre~treatment and aiso is expected to help maintain the surface permeability of the filter;
pretreatment in ihe fourth sand filter will be p;ovided by on cdditioral layer of sand The extra ayer of
sand will be used for football practice octivit'es. As a result, the top layer of sard will be maintained by
removing pol:utants on on annual basis (and sometimes more than once per year) to ensure the health
and safety of the team's payers. The large sand filters nave been sized per the 2005 KCSWDM.
Subdrai11s frcm the large sand filter will corvey water ro the site drainage system.
Discharge to Lake Washington
S•ormwater from tile site will be collected and discharged to Lake Washing+on. Discharge will occur
through five new coris'.rL..cted drair.age system outfalls. 'he new pipe 01..,tfalls will release water above the
ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of Lake Washington and will drain over rock-1:ned channels to the
OHWM of Lake Washington. Outlets of rock-lined channels co11s!ructed to proviae energy dissipation
and pro'.e:::tion against erosion hove been located at a recs where existing shoreline materials are non-
e~os:ve, to preve'lt impacts when the Army Corps lowers the lake's water level below the OHWM.
Gypsy Subbasin Conveyance Relocation and Upgrade
Improvements also will be mcde to relocate and increase the capacity of the existing storm drain that
conveys the offsire flow from the Gypsy Subbasin. The relocation is required because the proposed
building will be located over ~he existing pipe. Eariier studies by the City of Renton determined that
increased capccity is required to convey the current and future flows from the Gypsy Subbasin.
LIST OF FIGURES
• Figure 1-1. TIR Worksheet
• Figure 1-2· Site Location
• Figure 1-3 Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics
• Figure 1-4: Soils
Storrnwater Technicai information
Sea hawks Headqumiers and Training Facility, Re~ion 1 Wash:ngton
SITE CONDITIONS
M AV-J USSON
nt,M[NCIC
7 ne project will create approximately 8.3 acres of sporls 1ieids, 3.3 acres of building(s), and 3.7 acres of
riew vericular impervious surface. The 'oial p:ojed are:J will be slightly under 20 acres.
SOILS
figure 1 -4 shows the soi1s map for the area that w:Js prepa~ec by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) in
the 1970s. The SCS hydroiogic soil group designa:ion nos li+tle relevance for the project, however.
Past site activities generated large amounts of organ c materials ibark ard mulch) that wo•ked into the
native soils. Fill also like y was placed over native soils to ;ccil:tate the operations at the site. Most
significantly, because of the impacts of past operations O'l the site soi s, Ecology hos established a
Consent Decree that mar.dates the placement of "ill to "cap" the in-situ soils; the runoff potential of the
developed si1e will depend on the characteristics of the 11 cap 1 moteria· rat~erthon the nat:ve soil.
For the purposes of the d"oinage analysis, oll of he soils were lreotec as belonging to Hydrologic Soil
Group C, moderate runo" soils (till).
RAINFALL
Design storms for the project location ore shown in ~able 11-1 end Figures 11-1 to I -3.
Table 11-1 : 24-haur Precipitation at Sea hawks Headquarters and Training Facility
Rainfall
Storm Recurrence (inches)
6-month 1.27
2-year I. 99
10-yem 2 90
25-yecr 3.43
I 00-yeor 3.89
CORE REQUIREMENTS
A pre-application meeting was otte11ded by the Owners, Design Team, and Ci:y staff on May 3, 2006 1
one conditions for the project were identified. A subsequent meeting was f-.eld or ~uly 19, 2006, at
which time it was determined that Ecology would be the permitting agency for most of the site work and
thct ·he design would need to conform to City standards The drainage ncoruol officially adopred by
Stormwoter Technical Information
Seahawks Headquarters ard Training Facility, Rento11, \Nashington
•
M1\GNIJSSON
KLUv\lNCIC
the City of Renton is the I 990 KCSWDM; however, for •his project the s·ormwater management and
drainage design will mee· the 20C5 KCSWDM criteno to the extern p,acticable.
Core Requirement I: Disthorge ot the Naturol Location
The drainage from the improved areas will continue to drain to Lake Washington. New pipe
out els/outfalls will be localed above the OHWM. The receivirg body for this system will not be
changed. The onsite flows will be kept separate from the offsile Gypsy Subbosin flows. The proposed
Gypsy Subbasin pipeline relocation maintains the final segment of existing 24-inch corrugated metal
pipe that outfalls to the lake
Core Requirement 2: Olfsile Analysis
An offsite aralysis was concucted for the Gypsy Subbasin drainage that crosses the site.
Core Requirement 3: Flow Control
Peak rnte runoff codro :s not required or provided for he project because the site discharges directly to
Lake Washingtor, a moior rece·ving water body.
Core Requirement 4, Conveyance System
New conveyances have been designed to accommodate the 25-year design storm. The conveyance
pipe for the offsite Gypsy Subbasin flow has been sized for the I 00-year design storm for future basin
conditions
Core Requirement 5: Temporary Erosion ond Sedimentation Control
A Temporary Erosion ond Sedimentation Cortrol (TESC) pion hos been prepared for the project and is
included in this report as F gure VIII-I
Core Requirement 6, Maintenonce ond Operolion
Mainterance and operation requirements will be identified when the stormwater management and
storm crain system des gn hos been completed and permitted. This information will be added to this
repor" as on adderdL..'Y'l.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
Speriol Requirement l: Other Adopted Area-specific Requirements
The Seahawks headquarters and lrainirg facility include the North Baxter Property and the Soule Baxter
Property, which are covered under Eco ogy Consent Decrees #00-2-11778-?KNT and #00-2-11 779.
SKNT, respectively. The Consent Deuees require that the conditions of the CleorJp Action Pion
approved in 2000 be app·ied to the site. Tf-·.e Cleam.,p Action Plar for this site does not have specific
requirements for the perrronent stormwater controls for the site, bu• addresses management of existing
site soils during construction. The p:an requires that ex·sting so1's be ccpped to prevent incidental contact
upon completion of 1re oroject. The capping mater:als include pavements, building foundation pads, the
S:ormwater Technical Information
Seo hawks He:::idquorlers a'ld Training ;:aciliry, ~enton, \'Vcshi;1gton
•
v\AGNLI\SON
KLLMfNCIC
athletic field section, and ircooned fill. Where the copping materials are pervious, a worn ng barrier will
be buried (for example, a geog,id buried 3-feet beneath the pervious grourd surface. The special
requirements for the projects construction have bee'l implemented in the grading plans and TESC plan.
Special Requirement 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation
Does not apply
Speciol Requirement 3: Flood Prote<tion Facilities
Does not apply
Speciol Requirement 4, Source Controls
Source con·rol requirements will be identified when tGe stormwater !T'Onagement and storm drair system
design hos beer completed and permitted. This information will be added to this reporl os on addendum.
Special Requirement 5, Oil Control
Does no• apply; project is not a high-use site.
LIST Of FIGURES
• Figure 11-1 · 2-year, 24-hour Precipitation
• Figure 11-2: 25-year, 24-hour Precipi•ation
• f:gure 11-3: I 00-year, 24-hour Precipitation
S_E_C_I_LQ N 111 · OE E S~l.S---~----
A down-stream analys:s is not requirea for this project because the site is adjacent to Lake Washington
and improvements O'l site will not impact downstream drainage conditions.
A review of offsite, upstream conditions wos conducted for the Gypsy Subbasin. The Seahawks Training
Facility will be constructed near the final, piped segment of the Gypsy Subbasir. Because of h:storic
flooding withir the Gypsy Subbasn area (the flooding occurred on tne east side of 1-405), +he City of
Renton retained a consultant to conduct engineering studies in the 1990s to study and prepcre
engineering design concepts to reduce the flooding ;::iotential. Hydrologic/hydraulic simulations
estimated peak :low rotes within the Gypsy Subbasin and incuced preliminary engineering conceptual
designs for capital imvovements to reduce flooding occurrences. Investigations showed that some
flood·ng relief could be attained by increasing the hydraulic capacity of the piped Gypsy Subbasin in the
area between the Burliogton Northers Railroad and the Lake Washington outfall.
Tne existing and proposed Gypsy Subbasin drainage at the site is shown in Figure 111-1. The exte11t o;
the Gypsy Subbas n is shown in figure 111-2.
Storr--water Techniccl Information
Sea hawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Wash 1ngton
'
MACNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
The cffsite analysis for the Seo hawks project consicered if the 1997 analyses of tee Gypsy Subbasin
odecuctely reflect the cJrrent end projected future basin conditions and assess whether the earlier
engineering alternatives appear valid with today's l.'rderstandi'lg of the basin conditions. Four points
are considered the modeling method; the modeled future lard use; the basin ex~ents; and t~e
assumptions about !mplementation of stormwater c'etention cs the basin develops.
MODELING METHOD
Earl·er analyses csed the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrogroph (SBUH) method with he projedec future
build-out conditions to compute flow rates associated with the typical design storm recurrence intervals.
While ,here have oeen advances in hydrologic modeling, the S3UH method is still valid for estimating
peak runoH rates from basins of this size and relo·ive imperviousness/development (the known
shoricomings of the SBUH model are primarily related to long-duration storms and to modeling runoff
from forests, neither of which are vital to the Gypsy Subbasin flow analyses). The design flow from the
SBLH analysis of ,he l 00-year, 24-hour storm is · 62 cubic feet per second (ds), which does not
include flow frcm the expanded 1-405 tributary area, discussed below.
FUTURE LAND USE
n,e land use modeled in 1995/1997 was based on Renton and King County zoning maps. MKA has
compared the modeled future 'end use to the current City of Renton and City of Newcastle Zoning maps
ard has determired ~hot all o; the current zoning densi:ies are less than or equul to the densities used in
the l 997 analysis; tr'ere is no need to update the assumed future land uses considered in the
1995/1997 analysis.
BASIN EXTENTS
The basin extents are projected to expand because of the Wos"lington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) plan to widen 1-405, which will create new lanes and shoulders from which
d,cinoge will be collected and conveyed to the NE 44th Street interchange for water quality treatment
end celease to "ake Washington. The 1997 Gypsy Subbasin study es'imated that 1-405 improvements
would increase ihe basin exten· by 75 acres to a total of approximate·y 94 aues, increasing the
1 GO-year flow in the system by approximately 9 cfs. The study also noted that if WSDOT released water
into t~e Gypsy S·ubcosin conveyance system, then t'rie Ciiy of Renton f ow control stondords would apply.
Based on MKAs cursory review of the 2006 Environmental Assessment for the project, WSDOT is
plcnning a new storm droinoge collection system and conveyance trun~line to collect, treat, ond convey
freeway runoff to •he lake, aligned across the prope1y to the sou1h cf the site. Considering the extent of
·he planned improvements, and assuming that WSDOT's hydraulic oesign will comply with the WSDOT
Highway Runoff Morua: ond -iydraulic Design Monuol requirements, we believe tho! the previously
computed 9 cfs allowance for WSDOT's I 00-year runoff is reasonable
STORMWATER DETENTION
The earlier stucy assumed t'lct 85% of new commercial developmert and 50% of forest-to-residential
conversions would provide new stormwater flow control facilifes sized to maintain predeveloped runoH
rotes, the level of control established by the current King County sto~mwater manogemerit code. These
asSL·mptions appear reasonable and may even be conservative considering that l 00% of new
commercial development wiil likely have to follow the drainage code and that changes 1r: thresholds that
Stormwater Technical Information
Sechowks Headqvorters and Training Facility, Reriton, \A/ashirgton
•
.,11\GNlJSSON
KLEMENCIC
hgger flow cortrol requirements will lir<ely ensure that al least 50% cf forest-to-residential convers:ons
will apply flow control practices.
CONCLUSION
Bcsed on these speci'ic hydrological elements (model method, future land use, basin extents, ana
detention assumptions), which have not changed significantly between 1995/1997 and the presert, ir
appears that re-computing f'le basin hydrologic conditions would not yield SL,cslanticlly different results
than what was obtained in the previous studies.
The estimated I CO-year, 24-hour flow rate for the of/site flow entering the Seahawks Training Facility
site from he Gypsy Subbosin is l 71 cfs
The deslgr. of t'le relocated Gypsy Subbasin storm drain pipeli'le is discussed in Section V.
LIST OF FIGURES
• Figure 111-1: Offs te Flow Conveyance
• Figure 111-2: Gycsy Subbasin
SECTION IV: FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN --·---------------·--
Peak rate runoff con~rol is not required or provided for the project because the site discharges directly to
Lake Washington, a major receivirig water body. Therefore, retention/detention analysis and design is
not included in this report
WATER QUALITY TREATMENT
The 2005 KCSWDM designates areas draining to Lake Washington as subject to t'le require•"Y'Jerits of
11 Basic Treatmert'; however, this project is sizing the water quaiity treatment facilities in accordance with
the "Enhanced Basic" water quality menu of the manual. The Enhanced Bas·:: water quality criter"o
requires treatmen 1 of 95% of the total runoff from the site to achieve 50% total zinc removal and achieve
greater t'1an 80% totul susper·ded solids removal. ·Jsing the lc(ge sand fi ters that ore proposed will
also achieve compliarce with the "Sensitive Lo~e Protec*ion" water quality menu because large sand
filters are expected to provide at least 50% reduction in total phosphorus from t~e site's runoff.
n,.e water quality trectment for the site foils ·nto three categories (Figure IV-1 )·
• S+ormwoter runoff from the nctcrol tuf f:elds will be collected torough a subdra;nage system. The
depth of 1he sand substrate in ·he field (18 inches) effectively provides trca•men· for the stor,..,.,water
generated from the field, ond no further treatment is proposec.
• Stormw:Jter ~unoff from the roof ureas, sidewalk and plczc areas, synthetic turf fields, non-field
landscaped areas on ·he south and west sides o; the site will be collected and conveyed to the lake.
The roof designs do not incorporate ur.painted metal, so no t~eatmert of rod runoff is proposed.
Stormwater Technical Information
Sea hawks Headquarters :Jnci Training Facility, Rerton 1 V/asr:ngton
•
,\IAGNUSSON
KLLMENCIC
• Stormwate; runoff from t'le vehicular impervious surfaces will be col 1 ected and treated in Large Sand
Fiiters s:zed in accordance wth the 2005 KCSWDM
Sand Filter Design
The sand filter sizirig computations are included in Appendix A Table IV-l summarizes the sand filters
designed for the project A total of 6,592 sqcare feet (s~ cf sand filter area will provide treatment for
3.85 acres of tributary area thut is 14% impervious. The tycical depth of the filter sand layer is
I 8 inches.
Tobie IV-L Sand Filters Design Summary
Tributary Tributary Filter Ponding Filter Surface
Filter Area {acre) Imperviousness Filter Surface Depth (ft) Area (sf)
SF-I 49 920% Sand 2.0 2,195
SF-2 I 72 80.2% Turf I 0 2,886
SF-3 0.40 85.0% Turf 1.0 1,045
SF-4 0.24 95.8% Turf 1.0 467
Additional requirements for large sand filters are addressed below.
• Pretreatment: Piped conveyances include a catch basin with a sump and tee to provide settling and
spili con!"rol before runoH enters the sard filter. Turf grass established on three of the sand !ilter
surfaces will act as a fi"ter strip tc provide pretreatment of rut1off The root structure of the tL .. rf wil
he 1 p prevent the sand surface from clogging.
• Sand Filier 1 will be used +or •earn training exercises (e.g, running in sand). To support this
function, the dep:h of the sand bed will be 24 inches instead of tee typical 18 inches. The surficial
sand layers wil, be loose'led or replaced once or twice onm,olly to maintain the quality of the sand
for the trair·ng exercises. This maintenance also will prevent "blinding" of the sand surface and
remove fine pa..-fcles that accumulate in the upper horizon of the sand filter. The proposed
pretreatment regimen for Sand Filter l therefore consists of the intensive sand surface maintenance
regime in conjunction with the spill control tee located 1...,pstream of the focil:ty.
• On-line versus off-line: Sand Filters 2, 3 1 and 4 will be constructed on-ine, which is to soy withm,t
an upstream flow splitter. Flows exceed:ng the design capacity of the filter wdl overlap a grated
overflow structure and be conveyed to the storm drain system outlet. Sand Filter l will have an
upstream bypass structJre that diverts water wt°'e'l t''le sand fil·er peal exceeds the maximum design
water surface.
• Spill conlrcl: A spill control tee will be proviced within the storm drain system for upstream of Sand
Filter I .
Stormwater Technical lnformctio'l
Seahawks :-1eadquarlers and Training Fadity, Renton, Washingtori
,\ I AC NU SSOc-1
KLEMENCIC
• Flow spreading: Flow spreaders are provided at ecch filter to disperse stor'Y'water across the filter
surface, and where site surface ruroH is not collected, the site will be graded so that the ruroff
enters the filter as d:spersed sheet ;low
• Overflow: In oddit,on to a primary over-flow structure consisting of a grated catch basin riser, t~e
sand filters proxirr-ate to Lake Wcshngtor use a rock-stabilized emergency overflow The sand
filters proximate to the athletic fields are graded so that overflow will enter the athletic fields and
eventually be collected and discharged through the field drainage system.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure IV-l · Water Ouality T reotmen· Areas
.S.ECTION V CONVEYANCE SYSI.EM..ANALYSIS AND DES1G1'L
There are in essence four differencr sformwater collection/conveyance systems on the project site: the
Gypsy Subbasin offsite 11 bypass11 pipeline, the parking lot and driveway storm drcinage system, the roof
droin/iandscape/pedestrian drainage syste!:'., and the field drainage system (FigJre V-" ). The onsite
drai'loge system sizins; is documented in Appendix B.
Hydrologic analyses hove been conCucted for the conveyance and water quality treatment sizing ana
design. The basins used in these analyses ore shown in Figure 1-3 and the major storm drains are
shown in Figur·e V-l.
The Rational Method was used 1n sizing pipes that convey surface runoH. The 25-year rainfall intensity
used for the design is 2.7 inches per hour
The offsite Gypsy Subbasin bypass pipe sizing computations are provided in Appendix C. The design
f:ow for this system is 171 els, which is provided by the proposed design, with the future outfoll by
ott'ers. Analyses showed that the exist"ng sysrem con convey approximately 1 3 cfs before overlapping
the existing railroad ditch. The proposed design, which uses the existing 24-incr corrugated metal pipe
lo oclfoll, has capaci"y for 30 cfs.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figve V-l. Conveyance System Overview
SECIID_N VL~~ECJALREPORTS A~D STlJDJ.f.S_
The Gypsy Subbasin analyses from 1995 and 1997 were reviewed and considered ir the preparatior of
the proposed drainage design.
The WSDOT Environ.niental Assessment for the 1-405 Renton-lo-Bellevue Project was cursorily reviewed
to assess WSDOT's intended stormwater management plans for the upcomi:g highway widening thct
drains in-part ·o t~e Gypsy Subbasin
Stormwate~ Technical Information
Seo hawks Headquarters and T rc:ning Focili•y, Renton, Washingtori
•
MACNLISSON
KLlMENCIC
See Section 11, Special Requirement I, for d,scussion aboJt <he Ecology Consent Decree and Cleanup
Action Plan requirements for the site
SECTION Y'.lL OTHER PERMITS
The following permits/approvals also apply +o this project:
• Hydraulic Project Approval
• Ecology hg,neenng Design ,eport Approval and Certificate of Completion Under Consent Decrees
SECTION VIII: CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION
P R.E Y. E NT ION P _LA1'LAHAlYSliA!'ilLDfS1Gli
A TESC plan has been prepcred for the project and is included in this report as Figure VIII-I. The plan
wil· meet the minimum TES( requirements as discussed below.
TES( REQUIREMENTS
TESC Requirement 1: Clearing Limits
Clearing limi1s will be shown on the plans.
TES( Requirement 2, Cover Measures
Cover measures will be addressed in the TESC Plan Notes.
TES( Requirement 3: Perimeter Protection
A sediment retention barrier will be shown on the plans
TES( Requirement 4: Traffic Area Stabilizotion
The stabilized construction entrance will be shown on the plans. T :re TESC Plan Notes will indicate that
S1 ate water quality stondo(ds ore applicable to constrLction site ruroff
TES( Requirement 5: Sediment Retention
A sedi'T1ent retention system will be srlown on the plans
TES( Requirement 6, Surfoce Water Control
Interceptor swa!es w:11 be shown on the plans.
TES( Requirement 7, Dust Control
Air quality will be addressed in the TESC Pion Notes.
Stortr1woter Technical lnformot1on
!?i!iffiPWMM t•I
Seahawks Heodquariers end Training Faciliiy, Renton, 1Noshingtor.
•
TES( Requirement B, Wet Season Construction
Wet season construction will ce addressed in the TESC Plar, "Jotes.
TES( Requirement 9: Construction within Sensitive Areas and Buffers
MAGNUSSON
KLEMFNCIC
ConstrJc'.ion within sensitive areas and buHers wiil be shown O'l the ploris and addressed in the TESC
Plan Notes.
TES( Requirement 10: Maintenance
Mo:ntenonce will be addressed in the TESC Plar '.oles.
TES( Requirement 11: Final Stabilization
Fina stabilization wi I be in accordance wth the landscape plans for the pmject.
LIST OF FIGURES
Figve VIII-I: TES( Plans
SECTION IX: BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION
F ACL LJJY _SlJ.MMARY SH E EI AN D D EC LARAllO N O E CO 'l.E.HA N.I
None.
OPERATIONS
The project provides stormwater treatment facilities to treat runoff Irom the 'lew vehicular impervious
surfaces. The stormwater will be treated primarily by settling enc/er filtering suspended pollutants from
the runoff.
The operatiori of the treatment facilities will be passive and cor.trclled by gravity There are no actions
required on the part of tf'e Owner aside from maintaining tf'e fccilities.
MAINTENANCE
The stcr'T'.woter freolmenl facilities will require perico1c inspecion one cleaning to function properly At
o rninimum, the facilities should be inspected each yew. \\/hen the cept~ of sediment accumulated in
the bottom of conventional facilities exceeds 6 inches, the focilit'1es should be cleaned oy removing the
accumulated sedimert Natural systems should be scarif"ed and replenished on on annual basis lo
ensure proper function
Stormwater Technical lnforma:ion
Seahawks Headquarters ord Trainir.g Facility, Renton, V.Jashington
•
\IAGNl/SSON
KLEMENCIC
Catch basins and manholes also require periodic clecning. This typically consists of using a vactor truck
to remove accumulated sediments. Drainage structures should be cleaned when sedimerit
accumulation reaches within 12 inches of the outlet pipe invert or when pollL:tcnts are observed.
FIELD TURF MANAGEMENT
A lcncscape management and PM plan will be preoored for tre othlek fields. This pion will address
·he use of ferilizers, pesticides, and herbicides and will 1dent1fy l'le procedures to be used when applying
and handling these substances so the quality of runoff from the f"eld subsurfcce drcinage systen" meets
applicable water quality standards.
REF EREl'K£_S_ --------------
Surface Water Design Manua, King County Surface Water MonageMent, 2005.
Pre-Applicction Meeting W'tr City of Renton Stoff, Moy 3, 2006.
Pre-Applicot;on Meeting w;th Washington State Deportment of Ecolcgy and City of Ren·on Staff, July 19,
2006.
Port Ouendall Comcany, Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter North Property, April 5,
2000.
City of l\;ewcos·le, Comprehensive Pion, Figure LU-5 Zoning Mac, amerded July 5, 2005.
City of Renton, Gypsy Subbosin Analysis Technical Memorandum No_ 2, Apr:11995.
City of Renton, Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Improvements Design Memorandum, September 1997.
City of Renton, Zor'ng Map, updated January I 0, 2006.
Wasrington Departmert of Transportation, 1-405 Renton to Bellevue Project Environmental Assessment,
Morch 2006.
Washington State Deportment of Ecology, Consent Decree #00-2 11778-7<\IT and #00-2--1779-
SKNT.
Stcrmwater Technical Information
Seahcwks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, VVashington
•
FIGURES
•
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
A'"',SOC11~~rs
KlNG COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESJGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Proiect Owner l="'"•-r84-L. ~ Nol"Tf-/W!!!~
Phone {106) 34 Z -Zooo
Address ~ aS-r,fi'h A>'"-S ·; S!e 'loo
~ Se..tlk WA "!~!114
Project Engineer
Company M"3nv,s<•n Jt/e..,,.,c-r<-J.s.stJe,.
Phone l ,-06) "Z~.]-I Zoo
D Landuse Services
Subdivison I Short Subd. I UPD
D Building Services
M/F I Commerical I SFR
D Clearing and Grading
D Right-of-Way Use 0 Other Slwc:l/1(.. ~vbsf..,N:( I:»,do-p.,.,r+-
Type of Drainage Review
(circle):
I
Project Name ~t9J, • .,4j If.a J,T-.11;; 'fiw/. 1
DDES Permit#
Location Township Z 4 N
Range S' E
Seclion -~2~"1~---
Site Address __________ _
DFW HPA Shoreline
D COE 404 Management
D DOE Dam Safety D Struclu ral
RockeryNaull/ __ D FEMA Floodplain D ESA Section 7 D COE Wellands
0 Other
' Type (circle one):
Date (include revision Date (include revision
dates): dates):
Date of Final: Date of Final:
Type (circle one): Standard I Complex I Preapplicalion I Experimental/ Blanket
Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2)
Date of A roval:
2005 Surface Water Design Manual
P11J,:r-'.l. 1
l/l /05
KING COUNTY, WASHI1'GTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Monitoring Required:
Start Date:
Completion Date: --· ·---
' Community Plan : __ _
Special District Overlays:------------------------
Drainage Basin: 6YPS'i Sue;w,.,_,._,NL_ ___ _
Sto rmwater R equ iremen ts: __ _,C.,_1,,:f-J+-"""-',F.--'tq""""uf.ec,.,,__
D River/Stream ________ _
6y.ke 1,,/o,shl,,~,'C:.L-____ _
u:f Wetlands -~¥,:,}, i>,,/..c,c.ho-, s'./.c
D Closed Depression _______ _ D Coal Mine Hazard
D Floodplain __
!JI ~ S 'le uns111+ h,,.~ ~
__ __,C=le..,.,a'l''4""" _4«;,:.._ Pl~,.,
D Seismic Hazard ____ _
Soil Type Slopes
(h,sfc~,<) So.,,fl/e /!1voJ:;. .(l .. f
D Habitat Protection
D
Erosion Potential
n I°"
~' S"-· f':11 1-x,L ,,,..,,; •·::~.:.,s."'/e,"'-------··--···----
&.•fMd) '"'rw.l-""'f h\C,~,-:~'""-'----
0 High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet)
D Other ---
0 Additional Sheets Artached
2005 Surface Water Design Manual
Pl t,, :i: -I , 2
D Sole Source Aquifer
D Seeps/Springs
1/1/05
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
REF.ER ENCE
i;ii" Core 2 Offsite Analysis
D Sensitive/Critical Areas
D SEPA
D Other
LIMITATION I SITE CONSTRAINT
Cone-( bu,s1 . $<-'~/x.$;,, r~s
D ---------------
D Additional Sheets Attached
Afah"12 TJrt,SUMMA:J;\.Y SHEET· .. '1 ~fC>Mide gniTIR $1Jmrna'~~~~l~;1f\ie~ti~ia flilch;;~J;AieaW -· --· "' .
Threshold Discharge Area:
(name or descri~tion}
' Core Requirements (all 8 apply)
I Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharae Locations: <;
Offsite Analysis Level: 0)1 2 I 3 dated: "'' Z-" '0 I,
Flow Control Level: 1 I 2 I 3 or
;...·-, ~·t·:,
'•, -~· ~-· ..
I incl. facilitv summarv sheet\ Small Site BMPs
Exemylon Number N -1), . _j,, .£.,,-..:kl..
Conveyance System Spill containment located at: S"1!<Ji r::-ll#"'--
Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: -rrJo Contact Phone:
Arter Hours Phone:
Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: ~ I Public
-~
l_t Private, Maintenance Loa Reouired: Yes I No ---
Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes I No
Liabilitv
Type: Basic I Sens. Lake 1€@ianced Basic'9 I Bog Water Quality
(include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No.
Landscaoe Manaoement Plan: /YeiY I No
· Saecial Reauirements lasaeelicable)
CDA I SDO I MDP I BP I LMP I Shared Fae. 1& Area Specific Drainage Type:
I ReqtJirements Narre:
Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption I~
100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range):
Datum:
Flood Protection Facilities Describe:
Source Control Describe landuse:
(comm.lindustrial landuse) Describe any structural controls:
2005 Sur:'ace Water Desigr1 ::vLrnua!
i:;'1 & , I -I • 3
I /1/05
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIO;\" MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
Oil Control High-use Site: Yes / (1::19)
Treatment BMP:
Maintenance Agreement: Yes/~
with whom?
Other Dralnaae Structures
Describe:
Rart 13~'ER0Sl!ON AND SEDl~ENJ;C:ONTROL J;JEQUIRE>MEIIITS; .--~ ·:·:} -:~:?·:· ~,i\;·;...;~-·-.>::n+
MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS i!1 DURING CONSTRUCTION ~ AFTER CONSTRUCTION
~ Clearing Limits ~tabilize Exposed Surfaces
Cover Measures Remove and Reslore Temporary ESC Facilities Iii Perimeter Protection Q/c1ean and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure
~Traffic Area Stabilization ~peration of Permanent Facilities
~ediment Retention ag Limits of SAO and open space
preservation areas
~urface Water Control
I D Other
usl Control
Construction Senuence '
~4-···STi:)R>lWAT..ER·fi)'l;GJWIY OES6:RIPT10N'·-"Note:·.lh.clude:facilitvs·umma:mand!S.Ketohh'::!1.·.1.
Flow Control T "r.e/Descrintion Water Qualitv I T"'·•e/Descrintion
D Detention
I D Biofiltration --
D Infiltration D Wetpool
D Regional Facility i Media Filtration ~e, ~!'-"'.·lie--
D Shared Facility D Oil Control
4-pfc.ce>
D Small Site BMPs D Spill Control
--
D otoer D Sma;I Site BMPs
-----
0 Other
2005 Surface Water Design Manual F='it.,, J-/,4 J/1 /05
KING COUNTY, W ASHI1'GTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET
'i ST··•,~~ .. · -,,-. :ii; •:,,~J.~ "1,5• ... ·. 'iiil'f:''_,"
~¥M"'-~~~'--~~=~~'-'-"+-'-·+.}""Pt"'-Ji-l-"."~=-· §.:...:r"-' •. ~£...JY: :,r: ~LtA~~L;<~f'.u •· ~r-i~kt·
Drainage Easement
D Access Easement
D Native Growth Protection Covenant
D Tract
D Other
D Cast in Place Vault
D Retaining Wall
D Rockery> 4' High
D Structural on Steep Slope
D Other
Part'itfi'. SIGNATURE Of/PR, F · SSIQJ',i~L ENGINEEl'f ·.
I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited tre site. Actual site conditions as observed were
·nto his worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report. To the best of my
0
'-·'''·-""'ormation provided here is accurate.
/.-----1•2.4--ot.
Si ned/Dare
2005 Surface Water Design Manual .,:;,t,. 1-1.s 1/1/05
PROJECT S.ea_hawks HQ and Training Facility
TITLE :"19L:re 1-2: Si!e locolio1
DATE
ORAW~ BY
smrn#
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
~5'.,0CIAIES
••="'""'"'"''~-· 1:;o,,., __ s.. .. :rn:q
~,-_...,,e,oi1•%
1,c.,,1n•100M&'Ml>Cl
PROJECT S,achawks HQ and Training Facility DATE
llTLE Figvre 1.3, Dro,noge Bosins, Subbasins, DRAWN BY
anJ Site Chara1..terislics SKfTCH#
i
/
I
\ /
\\ / y
1\
/ \'
\
\_
----\----
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
\
I
\
AOSOC'AIES .-.-
,.,,. ... 01 ·~"'' b ........
"°''"" ........ ·""'"""' loooo,.--1'!101M<
rr..,m11<Cr""'""""''
P!l.OJffT Seahawks HQ ond Training Focility
Till£ f:s~'e 1-4· Sotl.,, ___________ _
DATE
DRAWN EY ___ _
srnc".'H-'# _____ _
MAG>JUSSON
KLEMENCIC 11s,cc1,,1:;
"~'""''' '"'''-"'"" ,.::.,,.,._,,,i-JN: '--.,,. ... ,..,..,.,ci , • .,,
.,.,.,.,,,mr:,,:,c.?011,0:,
I --.-
J
~
,,.,'~J
----~( . .. ~
I
WESTERN
KING COUNTY
PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training'--'---'Fa"-'c~il~ity~ ______ D-'-A~TE'-------~
TITLE Figure II-I: 2-Year, 24-hr Precipitation DRAWN BY
SKETCH#
..
----3.S
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
ASSOCIATES
S!rodural i CiYil En9inaars
1301 F,~hAY~n"'I, s .. ~~ 3200
$e,:,Hle, Wo,hinglon 98101-2699
E2062921100 F:2062\J21201
...........,.,ml;oc,i.m
I •
PROJECT
TITLE
WESTERN
KING COUNTY
Seahawks HQ and Training Facility
Figure 11-2; 25-Year, 24-hr Precipitation
o 2 4M~es
DATE
DRAWN BY
SKETCH#
Stt !!~8_H..=2~~
ltlNQ COI.JM'TY
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
ASSOCIA'"ES
Slructural "'" CMI Eng;~.,.rs
I 301 F,~h A,e.,.,~, S..~e 3200
Se.:,•1!.,, Wo.sJ,,,oQIOO 98101·2699
le 206 292 1200 f. 206 292 1201
WWWft\~.a;>m
WESTERN
KING COUNTY
O'=a=.t'==i4 Miles
~---
PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training FacilityL _____ -----'D"-A-"TE'--------
TITLE Figure 11-3: 100-Y:.:ec-a .. r,_, =-2 ~.:.·..ch.._r.:.P:__-re'-'c'.'.li p,._i l,:-ac_:ti,con.._ _____ _:De,RA:.::Wc::N.:.:B::.:Y _____ _
SKETCH#
MAGNUSSON I
KLEMENCIC ---':;........
ASSOCIATES a
Struthm:i! + Ciy;I Engin""'
lJOl F,~h .lwenuo, .!i~~• ,:1100
S*<l"le. Wo,hn]ICn 98\01-7699
T: 206192 1200 f• 206192 1201
WESTERN
KING COUNTY
"q---·
PROJECT Seohawks HQ and Training Facili DATE
TITLE Figure 11-3: 1 00-Y'-ecco:c.r,_, =-2 4-'---'-h-'-r-'-P'-'re'--'c"'i Pccit'-'o'-'ti-=-on"-------"D-"RA-'-W-"N'-'B'-'Y--___ _
SKETCH#
MAGNUSSON I
KLEMENCIC
ASSOCIATES --:.:---
Siruc!lrn:,I + Civil Engi""l"i
I JO', l',~h A,enue, ~u~& 3100
Se<,ttle, Wo1~;nglM 98101-2699
le :Z06 292 12("() f· 206 '.192 I :ZOl
wwwm~" com
I
(
60"
.~·
I
!
';/. >
'I
(
I
·-· .-
PROJECT Seahawks H9..E!l_d_Trair,~9 Faci\i .. ~---_.,,DA,eTE~-----
HTU Figure 111-1 Off-sLle Flow Conve~"="'=' ----~QU"'W"'N,_,S!._ ___ _
smCH# ----------------
I
r /
~
C
~
§
ie
~
~
~
r
p
;:,::
rn
:E p
U)
I
z
C,
-l
0 z
i I ;,:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MAGNUS.ION I
KLEMENCIC ____ _
,,ssoc ,.rtS •
s...__..,,=1 ..... ...... ,.,, __ ..... ~:.L>
,._-..,....,.,~,1,,0
'""'""'""''""""''"'' --,"·
I
I
I
I
1~;;.;
,.·.·.· .
~ 1.. d
! SE 72nd St. J LAKE WAOHINOTON • · ·
OUTl'ALI. // .
/
/
/. •.\_-.·
/.
36th
,ooo 1
PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Facility
TITLE Figvre 111-2 • Gypsy Subbasin
\ :--·~ ..
®
st• 86th.
··'€,-··-·,, _.I
. I
DATE
DRAWN BY
SKETCH#
• I
.I
"' >
··6·.
I •
SEE
SE 91st St
MAGNUSSON I
KLEMENCIC --=--
Assoc1ArEs •
S!ru<tur<il -1,-Civil Englnnrs
130 I f,!Jn ""'""'· Sv~e 3200
s-11,,, Wo,f.i,91on 9!1101-2699
r 206 2,n 1100 F. 206m 1201
\
I i
"' ~
~
:;;
' / p
;,;;
CTl
'-:;;,
\ p
·~
U)
I
z
C)
( --,
0 z
I
I
~~~ t I
8 I
/1rn~~ I
i ~ f<i ~ <;; >
~ i!l ! ;a ~/ ;= § 0
;a ZS ~ ~ ~ -~ ,:
i CTl .
~ z·
!l o/
~ :, ~
ill 0 ~ > ~ ;a
0 ~ I ~
_ PROJE(! Seahawks HQ and Training Fa0 ,~;1~; ~----D~A~TE ____ _
JJ~'!.r_e IV-l Water Ovolity Treatmenl Areos DRAW~ BY
SKETCH#
ivlAGNL5SON
KLEMENCIC
1,.>SQ(,1AT[5
1 .... ,'"'.'""''""'"'"' ,x,,,.,,.._.._s....,),W ,......__,.,o,:,w
r,o.,m,1<X)1~:m;,o,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I --.---
i
I
~
D ~
C,
~
~I
'!1 w
\
I
·'
----------1 ~r !''----
. ~:ti
i Lg_
% . --,di
i!i
S'
~
---i
I
I
~: t
p
C
~ !
I" ~
"I > :'!~
p~ c>
>i;--~ ~ eis
~
"' ~
~ !!
w ~ :a
~
5
§ .e
~ //
~
~ p
C / I
I
\
I
/:2 ,~
5 ..
i
~
%
~~~""",;;;~A-----JJ.~~
~
I
.:..-.-.. -.
__ ,
.
PROJECT _Seahowks HQ and Tr_~a·='"='"~s~Fa=,i=lity~---~"="~--
llTLE f,gure V-1 Ccnve_y_c1::e System O.ervisw DRAWN BY ___ _
____ SKEl<II'" #'---------
' J>
;;,;;
en
"" J>
(j)
I
z
C,
---;
0 z
I
I
I
I
[>
" " rTl ,-----
0 rn
C C,
---< rn r z rTl C) ---<
z
rTl
.§
I
I
I
I
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
,1,;;ocrATES
,,.,.,,.,.,:,.., ..... ._.. ''"' __ ,,_,,.,,,
...... __ fl10'""
'"""""'""'~"'·""""''°'
I
I
I
I
I
I -.-
I
r
i
i ' . I
' I .
' i
I
f I
1.
I , I
i
i J
j' ! .-.I
' ·1 p.
I I
!. ·i .
I
;, I
i i I·,,·
! I
' l
I ',' 1· , r~~::.
'' ·\::· ..
' ·--··-· ~··:-:··-··---~~·-;--'"·
'• \
. I
:/
!! ,,
f).
l
' J
'
'I
, ":-_"'A . ;.;: +~-JO; .. i . .,~
·------__L_
0 m
NI
0
(
NOT f OR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Fa~ility ___ o~•=n ____ _
_!I!~ __ ___Bgure '/111-l -A: Te1,p-0ro~i_<22_ ~r~d ~edimentolio" DRAl'/N BY ____ _
Centro! Plc::,1 SHICK#
' ---'---! ) :
. ~~-,a: knit{~ 'i'-=t-
I
I
I
,.
' I
I
I
I
!
I
I ; ...
_, ii
MAGNUSSON I
KLEMENCIC
AS(OCIATf.<; -.-
....... ,,..,.o,.,, ... ~-,,.,,-.,___ ... ..,,.,'-"
,_.. ---.. ,,, ,, ..
1.x..m,mr-,o.,m·7'l1
I
I
\
\
;
C
i_
'
J
i;
l
I
1:1 --~-;·~r:·_____L__~--
i r-loi>ll(ll:il"Rt{cb!>1'~ ·.--!y-• i : ,
'
.
' j
a
' i
l
!
() m
"' 0
I '
' ' ~ 1'
! •
i'
\.
\
1'-
·1, ~~
l
l
i
!
I ;
.. I "* i .: -,
I
'
~-
'· :"
}1' . f /{:~
'i i(
I , : l
,'-t
I ~1
I'
I ,'
I '~-, / ')". ' r-'· ./
l •;
! ;
-.,,/·'
' I
._.,....,:..
i"' PROJECT
nm
Se(lhawks HQ and Training Facility______
Figure VII!-1-B: T en,oorary Erosion tJl'J Si;;-c:irner•o11an
Conlrol Pion
,l,
'·
'/f
' '
DATE ______ _
DRAWN BY
SKETCH#
·-.'·"-·
'·
'
";
MAGNUSSON
l<.LEMENCIC
A,OGUAlb
,.,,,.,,.,.,.c,,,o,__..
,,o•-.... ..._,;.,..;:<;,'.) __ , .. ,,, ...
,,.,.'.1'17,,,,,,.,.,..,.,,1')1
""""1'"·-·...,_
··; I
·( '~ J
<
I
' '
--.-
'
. I·,;_.
I
• I
I
i
I
I
' l
~ i ,
i
I·,.
·'
:~~-'------.'.'. .. o_i C C -r~~~ i i :\ j t
\~rc~4~_;_=-J~:i~ ~cc,~
L::____ .t-cj
: i
, I
,/
·.·'l
I
' ,,--i-,
\ ,-
\
;~
!
I
;
l · I
'I
l
·1·=·· .,
'
' 1·'~1
I
t 'i; -j
'I' (
I
!
I
' ~
f,;
!
I~~(
; )._, ·,. !
'i
'i
, . -,-' ~ ,,
• .. -
PROJECT Seoha_~l<:s HQ and Trainin[.f~ DATE
____I!I!!___ Figure Vlll-1-C Ternporory Eros,on and Sedimcnlol1c, DRAWN B_! __ _
Cantrel Plan '"SK"'ET,::CH.c,# ____ _
.,... ___ ;,'I >-
-.· t -
•. . . 1/--.
-: ,---~-.!-~
-/---------
. -"7•'.:: .
-;:,_:L____,
/ 1
I
~ ·"'11'1 II
<it!, ' , "'I
. ',[~
-::.,
MAGNUSSON I KLEMENCIC __ _
AS~OCIA.ES •
._,., ............
..,, .. ...,,...!,,,><.:a,;., ___ .. ,, ..... ,,,,.,,..,,,..,,,,,.,..,.w
f
I
:ii
I
'I
·I
,I
! i
L i
.
' i
l
' ~-
'
.!
'
!
I
! ;
1.
I
I
I
I /
/
1· /
.I
I;
!
I
I
I
/
--·-.. c ---.-----
. ..,...,., -
/
///
1. >,-.·.··. ' . ,. ..
. , ',-'
'1 I.•
_i~OJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Focility ~ ___ _
1/TU Figure VIII-~-D: !._e_moorary ~-r-:i_s~on arid Sed1ment,:,lion _O'CRAecWc:Nc,Bc_Y ____ _
Cc i1rol Pion -----~~--____ ---~'=KETCH#
i
I
--~,]
MAGNUSSON I
KLEMENCIC ----,.~scc,,,,ns •
~"""'""""""'"''"-· ""·""'-"""'""' -·-01,llll, ..
1 ,.,,,,.., lil;l:l ~-ia.= 121';•
I
I·
t
l
L
APPENDICES
•
MAGNUSSON
KLEMENCIC
ASSOC ATES
Appendix A
Sand Filter Sizing
Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility
Sand Filter Design
A,1 -0.7C,(rA: + T1,iA 19 ---. l 0 qA 0 g)
r\1 = Suno filter oreo (fr2)
C 1 ...c;; Regional scale factor
060818
T,,tg,og = Tributary area per soil/cover type (acres)
A,.ti:i.og Filter area per soil/cover type (sf/acre) from table
Tributary Area (ft 2)
Tributary Area (acre)
A,1, Filter Area Required (ft 2)
Proposed Filter Area (ft 2)
Magnusson Klemencic Associates
060724Seahawks !PF sandfil1er Coles.xis
8/24/2006
where 1 = impervious area
tg cc" till grass
og --our.Nosh grass
Sand Filter l
L
59,464
1.31
2.156
2,195
Le
5,037
0.12
Sand Filter 2
60,006
138
T1 9
14,874
0.34
2,7 l 0
2,886
Sand Filter Area Increments From KCSWDM
Tobie 6 5 7 A
Storage
Depth (ft]
Sand Filter 3
L
14,874
0.34
662
1,045
Ls
2,716
0 06
2
3
4
5
6
A;,1 9 ,ug
6, A,o
2,654 629
2,212 524
1,769 419
1,572 372
1,376 326
1,179 219
Sand Filter 4
T.
10,213
0.23
441
467
Li
~04
0 01
&,,
550
460
370
330
290
250
Total Filter Area
5,968
6,59?
Poge I of I
Appendix B
Onsite Conveyance Calculations
(This information will be provided in a
future addendum.)
Appendix C
Offsite Conveyance (Gypsy Subbasin)
Calculations
Scenario: Existing
"I'
0...
r
I
Existing Outfall
1-1
l:\ ... \angineers\ajv\gypsy bypass proposed.stm MKA
08/23/06 02:33:33 PM @Bentley Sysiems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666
StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00)
Page 1 of 1
Calculation Results Summary
---------------------===--------====-==-==·-======================
Scenario: Existing
>>>> Info: Subsurface Network Rooted by: Existing Outfall
>:>>:> Info: subsurface Analysis iterations: 1
>>>> Info: Convergence was achieved.
c.;i,cuLATION SUMMARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS
Label Inlet I Inlet I Total I Total I Capture I Gutter ! Gutter
Type I I Intercepted I Bypassed I Efficiency I Spread I Depth
I I Flow I Flow I 1% I I (ft) I (ft)
I I I I (cfs) I (cfsJ I I I I 1-------1-------· -------1----------------------1-------------1----------1 ·-----------1--------1--------1 I I-1 I Gene~ic Inlet I Generic Default 100% ! 0. DO I o.oo 1 100.0 I o.oo I o.oo I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALCULATION SlJMI-.1.ARY FOR SUBSURFACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: Existing Outfall
Label / Number I Section ,I Sectio:-i. I Lengt.:_>-, / 1'otal I Average Hydraulic I Hydraulic
of / Size I Shape I (ft) I Syst.ern I Velocity Grade I Grade
J Sections I I I I Flow I (ft/s) Upstream I Downstream
I I I I I I lctsl I lftl I lftl I
1-------1----------1---------1------·---1--------1--------1---------------------1------------1
I P-8 I 1 I 24 inch I Circular I 495.00 I 13.00 I 4.14 24.77 I 18.91 I n:. o. oz.4
Label I Total Ground I Hydraulic Hydraulic
I SystBm Elevation I Grade Grade
I Flow I ftJ I Line In Line Out.
I (cfs) I (ft) {ft)
----------1-------------------1----------· ---
f.:xisting 0·.1tfall I 13.00 22.00 I 18.80 18.80
I-1 I 13.00 25.00 I 24.77 I 24.77
------------
========================================---=-======~=---=========
Complet.ed: 08/23/2006 02:33:37 PM
i:\ ... \englneers\ajv\gypsy bypass proposed.stm MKA
08/23/06 02:33:41 PM © Bentley Systems. Inc. Haestad Methcx:ts Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666
StormCAD v5.6 [OS.06.005.00}
Page 1 of 1
--g g~ --No
C: Ji il
' --~ .
1),00 1•00 2•00
Profile
Scenario: Existing
Profile: Profile -1
Scenario: Existing
3+00
S~tian(ft)
-' I
I,
1 .•
4•00
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass proposed.stm MKA
08/23/06 02:33:51 PM © BentkJy Systems, Inc. Haestad MethOdS Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666
! ~ ¥ ""«>8'° >"!'~"~ --i§.ii1!!f.;;
" I
~ 20.0J E:levauoo (fi)
15.00
S+OO
StonnCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00J
Page 1 of 1
Scenario; Existing
Combined Pipe\Node Report
Label Upstrearr Downstream Length Section Full Average lipstrearr bownstrean ~onstructe, Hydrauli Hydraulic TotaJ bownstream
Node Node (ft) Si2e Capacit) Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade System Ground
(cfs) (ft/s) Elevation Elevation (ft/tt) Line In Line Out Flow Elevation
(ft) (ft) (ft) (tt) (els) (ft)
P-8 1-1 Existing Out 495.00 24inch 4.34 4.14 18.23 17.61 0.001253 24.77 18.91 13.00 22.00
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass proposed.stm MKA
08/23/06 02:34:00 PM © Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666
StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00]
Page 1 of 1
~),
GB3
<D
CL
GB2
,(:,
'7
Scenario: Proposed
"'+/,\ t:a.s,'.i f,C, Uvrf't,..LL
CL '
GB4 p~ •
0----~:,.-----E0 J-4
GB1
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass future.stm MKA
08/23106 02:28:05 PM © Bentley Systems, Inc. Haeslad MetMds Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1·203-755-1666
Sto,mCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00J
Page 1 or 1
Calculation Results Summary
----------------------==================================----'-"===-------
Scenario: Proposed
>>>> Info: Subsurface Network Rooted by:
r.x: ;,J;~ o"'i~,_\\
>>>> Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1
>>>> Info: Ccnvergence was achieved.
CALCULATION SIJMl,'.A.RY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS
I Label I Inlet ! Inlet I Total I Total Capture \ Gutter I Gutter
I I Type I I Intercepted I Bypassed Efficiency I Spread I Depth
I I ! I Flow I Flow (%) I (ft) I 1ft)
I I I (cfs) I (cfs) I I 1-------1-----·---------1----------------------1-------------1----------------------1--------1-I snl I Generic Inlet j Generic Default 100% / o. oo I Q _ 00 100. o I o.oo I 0.00
---------------------------------------------------
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSURFACE NET!h"'ORK WITH ROOT: Ful. ··Jre Outlet
I Label I Number I section
I I of I Size
I Sections
I
1--------------------------
1 P-8 1 24 inch
I P-? 1 24 inch
I P-4 1 72 inch
I P-6 1 60 inch
I P-1 1 54 inch
Section
Shape
Circular
Circular
Circular
Circular
Circular
I Length
I 1rt1
I I
I I 1--------1
I : s. oo I
233.47 I
49. 98 I
400 6s I
149.69 I
Total
System
Flow
(cfs)
30.00
30.00
3 0. 00
30.00
30.00
I
I
I
Average
Velocity
(ft/s)
Hydraulic
Grade
Upstream
Hydraulic
Grade
Downstream
I I iftl 1 :ti I
1----------1-----------------------1 -O 01", I 9.5s I 20.46 19.47 IV\ -'
I 9.55 I 2s.so 21.so I"'" o.o,:,
I 1.06 I 25.97 25.97 1...,~ O,¢ 1;:,
I 1.s3 I 26.o4 2s.9s 1.-, s o,o,">
I 1.89 I 26.10 26.07 In ,.0 .o"7~
I Label I Total I Ground I Hydraulic J Hydraulic
I I System I Elevation I Grade I Gra5e
I I Flow I (ft) I Line In I Line Out I
l--l=,'{•S+:30Y,-\r,1:_ 1 _ (cfs) --1-----------1---(ft) ----1---(ft) ----1
I I 30.00 I 22. oo I 10 .so I 1a.00 I
I J-4 I 30.oo I 22. 30 I 21.so I 20.46 I
I GB4 I 30.00 I 26. 37 I 25. 97 I 25. ,o I
I GB3 I 30.00 J 2?.00 I 25.98 I 25_97 I
I GB2 I ,o .oo I 2'/. co ! 26. or I 26 .04 i
I GBl I io.oo I 26.eo I 26.10 I 26.10
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass future.stm MKA
08/23/06 02:27:58 PM © Ben1ley Syslems. Inc. Haes1ad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666
StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00}
Page t of 2
Scenario: Proposed
Combined Pipe\Node Report
Label Upstrean Downstream length Section! Full Average Upstrean bownstrear bonstructe, Hydrauhi Hydrauli Total Pownstream Node Node (tt) Size Capacity Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade System Ground
(cfs) (ftls) Elevation Elevation (ft/tt) Line In Line Out Flow Elevation
(tt) (tt) (tt) (ft) (cfs) (ft)
P-4 GB3 GB4 49.98 72inch 133.94 1.06 17.79 17.74 0.001 ODO 25.97 25.97 30.00 26.37
P-1 GB1 GB2 149.69 54ind 62.25 1.89 18.35 18.20 0.001002 26.10 26.07 3000 27.00
p 6 GB2 GB3 400.69 60inch 83.31 1.53 18.20 17.79 0.001023 26.04 25.98 30.00 27.00
P-7 GB4 J-4 233.47 24 inch 3.92 9.55 17.74 17.67 0.000300 2590 21.80 30.00 22.30
P-8 J-4 15.00 24 met 7.75 9.55 17.67 17.61 0.004000 20.46 19.47 30.00 22.00
lx~U-J,
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass future.slm MK.A
08t23/06 02:28:26 PM @ Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666
StorrnCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00]
Page 1 ot 1
s~2§ ~~in ~~~Iii! . -~;, --a-i;ut-
Profile
Scenario: Proposed
Profile: Profile -1
Scenario. Proposed
; .
~ ::i~ .; !'.:i
ijJl !l>'I'
I
..-;, .. .. ~~~"-~~j;;:i 1;1,1! ..
'
I ---. -. • I ---1---=t--. ---,--_ . ' -. ··. --~ ·;.!·, P-~--,'-C~ . f~~., ~~--,---~t'~! --..
"'''" S,>,a, "'"°"'
@>S•••-1111
,~ ,~
-· Ill-Cl!<loa · -----·-on~w,,;mu, -
.~
·~-1"1
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass future.stm MKA
, .•
____ "J.;•u __ .n_ ------
~s.o.<K11000 ... ·
'--~!._'t~__M_ __
,~
08/23/06 02:28; 15 PM © Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666
---
l(jlS•~'*OOt&oo
rol/1 r ...... n
t!'lf' __ ,. -'\.I.O)
'•• ·~
StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00]
Page 1 of i
<D
' (l_
Scenario: Proposed Future
GB3
GB2
I
GB4
~ GB1
lJ
Fut ure Outlet
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass luture.stm MKA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00]
08/23/06 02: 1 0:08 IYJ:lentley Systems, Inc. Haas!ad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
Calculation Results Summary
Scenario: Proposed Future
>>>> Info: Subsurface Net.work Rooted by: Fut ure Outlet
>>>> Info: Subsurface Analysi~ ilerations: 1
>>>> Info: Convergence was achieved.
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS
----~-------------------------------------------
Label Inlet
Type
1 Inlet Total I Total Capture Gutter Gt:.tter
I Intercepted I Bypassed Efficiency Spread Depth
I Flow I Plow I (%) I (ft) 1ft)
1 I I (cfs) I (cfs) I I I I
1---------------------I ------------1-------------1----------1------------1--------I--------I I GI3l f Generic Inlet I Generic Default i00% I O. 00 I O. 00 ! 100. 0 I O. 00 l O. 00 I
CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSUF.FACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: Fut~re Out.let
Label I Number
I or
I I Sec':.ions
I I 1-------1------
1 P-5 I 1
I P-4 / 1
/ P-6 I 1
I P-1 / 1
I Label
I
I
I 1----------------
I Futrure Ot:.t.let
I GB4
I GB3
I GB2
I GB1
Section I section
I Shape Size
Length
(ft)
I I I
I I
------1----------1--------
1 Circular I
I Circular I
40.00
49.98
72 inch
72 inch
60 inch j Circular \ 400.69
54 inch I Circular I 149. 69
Total Ground I Hydraulic
System Elevation I Grade
Flow I ft) I Line In
(cfs) I (ft)
-------------------1-----------
172.00 22.00 I 18.80
172. 00 26.37 I 22.12
1 72. 00 27.00 I 22.73
172. 00 27.00 I 25 .23
172.00 26.80 I 26.43
Total
System
Flow
(cfs)
Average
Velocity
lft/s)
Hydra'-<lic
Grade
Upstream
Hydraulic
Grade
I
I
Downstream I
1 1tt1 lftl I
172. 00
172.00
172.00
172.00
----------1-----------------------1,., -o,)'"
I 6.08 I 21.74 21.27 I ~-O·"""
I 6.oa 1 22.27 22.121"-001 -,,
I e.76 I 24.47 22.73 I"'" '
I 10.01 I 26.41 2s.2a I ""0,01'3,
Hydraulic I
Grade I
Line Out I
(ft) I
-----------/
\8. 80 I
21 .74 I
22. 27 I
24 .47 I
26 .43 I
===--==--=~====-=~=--==-=· ====-----=========================-----
Completed: 08/23/2006 02:10::2 PM
MKA StormCAD vS.6 [05.06.005.00] i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy byoass future.stm
08/23/06 02:10:18 IDiEentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Cen1er Watertown. CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 ol 1
Scenario: Proposed Future
Combined Pipe\Node Report
Label ~pstrean Downstream Length Section Full Average µpstrean bownstrear l:onstructe1 Hydrauli Hydrauli1 Total bownstrean Node Node (tt) Size Capacity Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade System Ground
(cfs) (ft/s) Elevation Elevation (ft/tt) Line In Line Ou! Flow Elevation
f--
(tt) (It) (It) (tt) (CfS) (tt)
P-1 GB1 GB2 149.69 54inch 62.25 10.81 18.35 18.20 0.001002 26.43 25.28 172.00 27.00
P-6 GB2 GB3 400.69 60inch 83.31 8.76 18.20 17.79 0.001023 24.47 22.73 172.00 27.00
P-4 GB3 GB4 49.98 72inch 133.94 6.08 17.78 17.74 0.001000 22.27 22.12 172.00 26.37
P-5 GB4 Fut: Jre Out I 40.00 72inch 133.92 6.08 17.74 17.70 0.001000 21.74 21.27 172.00 22.00
•:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass future.s!m MKA
08/23/06 02:16:20 PM © Bentley Systems. Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666
StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00]
Page 1 of 1
Profile
Scenario: Proposed Future
.. 5;~ r~~" "':'.a!
r---
1
·~
·~
·!.-1411.00l'!III
'-+
-1----
2S~z5
a~fiJ j
I
..•
-00.,!U Mt.;,
-, ---@T'11QJHl'11'-"
·~
~-
Profile: Profile -1
Scenario: Proposed Future
-i-·-
... -
.. _l'I
i:\ ... \engineers\ajv\gypsy bypass tuture.stm MKA
& ~ •• ~~-;.e ~~;,,~ .,.,d m;,: !_;!
l" "' !.i:~ !J -
-"~~=;::~t-' .f .. -----::.:r:--~----. t~lai,. .-~------::_ ' ... 1,tl!i,l';. ~ . --" ------...,...__ I '7nf.!--~ 1:'m
·~----i,t-~001000, ...
...
__ ,,~·0.~'!!' __
·~ ·~
~
OS•=""I
~11(1 , .... _1,;
'Lim
,,. -
08/23106 02:27:01 PM © Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA + 1-203-755-1666
StormCAO v5.6 [05.06.005.00)
Page 1 of 1
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC.
Environmental Consulting
A.C. Kindig & Co.
STREAM AJ\D LAKE STUDY
SUPPLEME!\"T AL STREAM AND LAKE STUDY
STREAM MITIGATION PLAN
SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
AND TRAINING FACILITY
Renton, Washington
Prepared fur:
Football Northwest, LLC
505 Fifth Ave South, Suite 900
Seattle, Washington 98104
Prepared by:
Cedarock Consultants, Inc.
19609 244th A venue NE
Woodinville, Washington 98077
and
A.C. Kindig & Co.
12501 Bellevue-Redmond Road, Suite 110
Bellevue, Washington 98005
September 20, 2006
19609 2H AVENUE,~[ WOODINVILLE. WA 98077 P425/788-0961 -F425/788-5562
Seahawks Corporare Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, ~Vashington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
TABLE OF CONTEI\TS
Page
1.0 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................... l
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................................ l
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 2
3. l Description of Proposed Action .................. 2
3.2 Alternatives Analysis.. .. ..................... 3
4.0 EXISTII\G CONDITIONS ................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Routing and Flow .... .4
4.2 Stream Classification ......................................... 6
4.3 Physical Condition... .. ......... 6
4.4 Vegetative Cover .... 7
4.5 Ecological Functions ..... 7
4.6 Fish Use.. .................. .. ... 11
4.7 Wildlife Use............... . .. ll
5.0 SHORELINE PLANTING/MITIGATION PLAN ........................................................... 12
5.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Mitigation ................. 12
5.2 Lake Washington Shoreline Planting. .. .. ............... .. ........ 13
5.3 Maintenance and Monitoring ...................... 14
6.0 RESOURCE VALUES TO BE RESTORED, CREATED, OR ENHANCED .............. 16
6.1 Habitat Improvement Opportunity. . ....... 16
6.2 Function and Value Comparison........ .. ............. 16
6.3 Summary ......... 19
7.0 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES ............................................................. 19
8.0 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDl'LE ........................................................................................ 21
9.0 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE ................................................................. 21
10.0 EI\VIRONMENTAL GOALS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ...................... 21
11.0 MONITORII\G .................................................................................................................. 22
! I.I Sampling Methodology.................................... .. ...................... .22
11.2 Standards Of Success ......................... 24
12.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN ................................................................................................... 24
13.0 COST ESTIMATE ............................................................................................................. 25
14.0 COMPLIANCE WITH THE RENTON :VIUNICIPAL CODE ..................................... 25
14.1 Planting Location .......................................... 26
14.2 Planting Type......... .. ............. 26
14.3 Contiguous Corridors.. .. ................ 26
14.4 Non-Indigenous Species...... .26
14.5 Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions ....... 26
September 20, 2006
Se,:~awk,ir)~-20-06 Lal-.e1 SM1a111 Repr;n dee
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and AC KJNU/G & CO
Page i
Seahmi,,ks Corporate Headquarters and Training Faciliry
RenLOn, Washington Stream and Lake St11dy/lvfitigation Plan
Page
l 4.6 Minimum Planting Plan Performance Standards ..................................................... 26
14.7 Based on Best Available Science ..... 27
15.0 COMPLIANCE WITH BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE ............................................... 28
15 .1 Review of the Best Available Science Supporting the Proposed Request.. ............. 28
15.2 Report Authors Experience......................... .. ............ 32
15.3 Analysis of the Likelihood of Success of the Compensation Project..... .. .... 32
16.0 VEGETATION PROTECTION ....................................................................................... 32
16.1 Design Considerations ....................................... 32
16.2 Significant Tree Protection during Constrnction .......... 33
17.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 34
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Plant species selected for Lake Washington shoreline. . ....... 15
Table 2. Cost Estimate Worksheet.. ................... .. .. .... 25
Table 3. Riparian Habitat Functions Comparison, Existing versus Proposed Conditions ............. 29
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure I. Vicinity Map ............................. 2
Figure 2. Details from City of Renton Water Class Map. .... .. ................................................... 5
Figure 3. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on-site looking upstream at beaver dam.... .. ...................... 5
Figure 4. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall at Lake Washington........................ .. ... 6
Figure 5. Vegetation and woody debris along the Lake Washington shoreline. .. ......... 8
Figure 6. Upland vegetation looking to the west across the site from the railroad tracks. .. .. 8
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Plan Sets
Sheet l
Sheet LlOO
Sheets CE301-302
Sheets CE201-202
Sheets CE221-224
Sheet CE245
Resumes of Key Personnel
Site Map /source: RETEC)
Conceptual Landscape Plan (source.· EDA W)
Gypsy Sub basin Plan and Profile (sowce: Crawford)
TESC Plans /source: Cra»ford;
Grading Plans (source.· CraHford)
Conceptual Utility & Drainage Control Plan
(rnurce. Crawford)
Appendix 2
Appendix 3 Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Form
Seplember 20, 2006
Seaht,wlis/()9 !0-06 Lakes Si ream R~pm-1 dar
CWAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page ii
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton. Washing/On Stream and Lake Stud,v/lv!itigation Plan
1.0 PURPOSE
Capping and institutional control remedial actions on the North and South Baxter site will occur
under Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees approved by the Washington Department of
Ecology (Ecology) in April 2000 Remedial activities will be implemented with a goal of
achieving enhanced water quality in Lake Washington. Capping of the entire site to within 25
feet of the Lake Washington shoreline requires eliminating an about 125-foot open section of the
Gypsy Subbasin Drainage that is otherwise conveyed by culvert through the site. The aging and
degraded culvert carrying the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage under the site will be replaced and
upgraded to accommodate capacity requirements of the upstream and offsite contributing basin
at buildout. To accommodate placement of the Seahawks Headquarters building (which will
serve as part of the remedial cap on the site), the replacement culvert will be realigned around the
building foundation. This placement will require lengthening of the pipe from the existing 490
feet to approximately 860 feet. The culvert upgrade and realignment does not include
replacement of the existing outfall pipeline to Lake Washington, which will be retained in its
current condition.
Aside from capping required under the Consent Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action
Plans to within 25 feet of the lakeshorc, project features proposed under a Master Plan approval
for the site and within the Renton Shoreline Master Program jurisdiction include public access,
practice fields, a building, parking, sand filters for water quality treatment, and some roadway
area (see Appendix 1, Conceptual Landscape and Hards cape Plan, Sheet LI 00). All featmes are
allowed under the Urban Environment designation afforded the project site under Renton's
Shoreline Master Program. Shoreline planting will include replacement of exotic plant species
with a diverse native shrub and tree riparian zone.
The proposed development triggers the need for both a Standard and Supplemental Stream Study
under requirements of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) because:
• The proposal will alter a waterbody (Gypsy Subbasin Drainage), and
• The proposed development site contains a Shoreline of the State and associated management
area.
Requirements for the studies provided in this report are described in RMC 4-8-120(D).
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located on approximately 19 acres at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard
North, adjacent to Lake Washington in the City of Renton, King County (Figure I). The two
properties that underlie the project site are fom,ally known as South Baxter and North Baxter.
The project is located in the SWY. of Section 29, T24N, ROSE, W.M. The Gypsy Subbasin
Drainage crosses the site from east to west before discharging to Lake Washington. May Creek
located off-site to the south is unrelated to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and will not be affected.
Seprember 20, 2006
Seaha.wi,;s,-()().;!(!.(16 lakes Str,'am Rep,;r! de,
CED.4ROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A C KINDIG & CO
Page 1
Seuhmvks Corporate! leadquarters and Training Facilir:y
_[?.entan, Washington
[_
_,
-;:. .,
:,:i
' .. -·,
~ Ldke Washington
I
'
Figure 1, Vicinity Map
Stream and Lake Srudv!Mitigation Plan
·----.
,.:.:; <ill 11 l ,.:.:
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Description of Proposed Action
Soils across the site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline will be capped with up to
three feet of clean soil as part of the remediation action. As pan of that capping, the remaining
open ponion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the project site will be placed in a culven, This
action will have a direct benefit of protecting and enhancing water quality in Lake Washington.
The existing Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert under the site is in poor condition and undersized
based on a history of flooding upstream (Entranco 1995, 1997). The culvert will be replaced with
a larger pipe prior to capping of the site. Portions of the pipe will be rerouted to accommodate
future building and facility locations (see Appendix 1, Plan Sheets CE301 and CE302). The final
culvert length will be 370 feet longer than what cunently exists (Magnusson Klemencic
Associates, 2006).
September 20, 2006
Seah.awk:d)9.::0-06 Lake., Str~am Repor! doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 2
Seahawks Corporate Headquartets and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
The Lake Washington shore I ine area will be replanted to improve functions and values and
mitigate for the lost habitat value adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage (see Appendix 1,
Conceptual landscape and Hardscape Plan, Sheet Ll 00). Where native plants and large trees
currently exist, they will for the most part be preserved. The dense stands of exotic blackberry
and Scotch broom will be removed and replaced with native riparian species.
Included within this document is the Stream Mitigation Plan. A description is provided in
Section 5 and the draft plan is shown in the attached Conceptual Landscape and Hardscape Plan,
(Appendix 1, Sheet LlOO). Native plantings along the Lake Washington shoreline will increase
functions and values of the riparian area over existing conditions and will improve the shoreline
role in protecting aquatic habitat values important to Lake Washington. Net improvements in
water quality, production of organic matter including insect and vegetative material, large woody
debris frequency, bank stability, and wildlife habitat are predicted. More detail on the proposed
riparian planting program is provided in Section 5.0. The functions and values comparison
analysis is provided in Section 6. The proposed monitoring plan is provided in Section 11.
The Site Map required under RMC 4-8-120(D)(l 9)(a) and Grading Plan required under RMC 4-
8-120(0)(7) are attached (Appendix 1, Site Map Sheet I; and Grading Plan Sheets CE221
through CE224).
3.2 Alternatives Analysis
Three alternative project layouts were evaluated to avoid and minimize impacts to the Gypsy
Subbasin Drainage. These included:
• Daylighting the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage into an open channel across the site.
• Maintaining the existing open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage m an open
channel.
• Passing all of Gypsy Sub basin Drainage through the site in a culvert
The only available alternative to satisfy the capping requirements under the Consent Decrees is
also best suited to protect fish and Lake Washington habitat. The selected alternative places all of
Gypsy Subbasin Drainage passing through the property into a culvert. This conclusion is based
on the following rationale:
• The capping requirement under the Consent Decrees is premised on avoidance of direct
contact with residual soil contamination on the property. The cap will also serve to
protect water quality in the drainage and lake Washington from potential effects due to
erosion of surface soils. The capping an<l culvert completely isolate Gypsy Subbasin
Drainage and Lake Washington from the site soils.
• The on-site open section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is a man made ditch well below the
grade of the site with steep sideslopes. This ditch provides minimal fish habitat. Riparian
function is limited by the steep rocked channel banks. Elimination of the open ditch will
have water quality benefits and will not adversely affect fish habitat.
• The minor loss of riparian function can be mitigated by additional planting adjacent to
Lake Washington. Planting at this location will also enhance wildlife habitat by providing
September 20, :3006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO.
Seahawks/09-.'0-06 L,1kes S1,·eam Reporr.dor: Page 3
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Re,~ton, Wushington Stream and Lake Study/k!izigation Plan
a larger block of contiguous habitat, particularly along the southern shoreline where it
will abut a restored wetland and buffer adjacent to Baxter Cove.
• Flow can be diverted out of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel which means all
culve11 construction can be conducted "m the dry" after the flow is bypassed. This
reduces the potential for adverse construction impacts.
Because of the low quality of existing onsite habitat (described further in Section 4.0) and soils
subject to required capping and institutional controls under the Consent Decrees, the proposed
action will result in a net improvement in fish habitat quality in the Lake Washington Drainage.
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section provides a description of existing habitat conditions of the Gypsy Subbasin
Drainage channel on the property, the associated riparian buffer, and the Lake Washington
shoreline area. Known fish and wildlife uses are also described.
4.1 Gypsy Subhasin Drainage Routing and Flow
The various waterways known collectively as the Gypsy Subbasin Drainages consist of a series
of largely man-made pipes, ditches, ponds, and open water habitat draining an area of
approximately 320 acres north of and independent of May Creek (except by flood overflow east
of 1-405). The drainage collects at a single point just west of the BNSF railroad tracks west of 1-
405 before discharging to the property (Entranco 1995). The culvert under the tracks is 55 feet
long, has a gradient of approximately 2 percent, and is likely a barrier to upstream fish passage.
Near the property boundary but still offsite, drainage is discharged to a small (approximately 10
foot diameter), quarry-spa][ lined pond. From the offsite pond, flow enters a 24-inch, 46-foot
long concrete culvert extending on-site and beneath a dirt haul road before daylighting again to
the open channel section located on-site. The open channel is a highly confined, steep-walled
ditch/trough, with a channel bed approximately JO to 15 feet below the surrounding ground
elevation and 3 to IO feet wide at the bottom. Substrate consists primarily of a deep anaerobic
mud except where bank sloughing and rocks spilled into the channel have replaced the mud with
a firmer bed material. The banks are heavily vegetated with a narrow strip of young hardwoods,
Scotch broom, and Himalayan blackberry. Total length of the open channel is approximately 125
feet. An approximately 4-foot high beaver dam located near the downstream end of the open
channel currently backs up water upstream to the railroad tracks (Figure 3). The drainage next
enters a 490-foot, 24-inch CMP which discharges directly to Lake Washington. The 490-foot
CMP drops approximately 0.5 foot (0.1 % gradient) and at low lake elevation is perched about a
foot above the lake water surface (Figure 4). During high lake elevations, the culvert is partially
backwatered and upstream passage is possible, though not known to occur.
Seplemher 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC. and A.C KINDIG & ,O.
Se,1h,1ll'!,;.,/{)9 _'() 06 f.okd Stream Report due Page 4
Seahawks Corporate Heudquarters and Training Facilily
Renton, }Vashington
----------------------------~ _________ ,,,_
--------~
·-------------·---_____ ,,_
------~ ·----.-
GYPSY /'.
SUBBASIN ;
DRAINAGE
Stream and Lake Srudy1Aiihga1ion Plan
MAY Nt {Jrd
• I
' --~EEK
LEGEI\D:
Class I
Class 2
Class 3
Class 4
w
2
~ <
~~ C
0
~
--------· [>ipcd or culvcrt...::d (doh) q,'
Figure 2. Details from City of Renton Water Class Map.
0 > <
0 u
.5
~
Figure 3. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on-site looking upstream at beaver dam.
Sertember 20. 2006
s,,alwwi....,:'09-.'0-06 Lakn S1re<11J1 Repurt Joe
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 5
Seaha"v.-k.s Corporate Headquarters and Truining Facility
Re1:to'}, Was'1ington Stream and Lake Siudy/Mitigation Plan
Figure 4. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall at Lake Washington.
4.2 Stream Classification
The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property is shown on the City of Renton's draft Water
Class Map (Figure 2) as a Class 2 water. Class 2 waters are salmonid-bearing perennial waters
during years of normal rainfall. Lake Washington is a Class l water. Class l waters are
salmonid-bearing perennial waters also classified as Shorelines of Statewide Significance.
4.3 Physical Condition
In general, upland and aquatic habitat value of the site is low due to the disturbed nature of the
former industrial areas which currently support only limited vegetation and contain residual
contamination. The shoreline areas provide the highest habitat value in the project area, but the
habitat value of these areas are limited due to the dominance of non-native invasive plant
species, lack of vegetative diversity and structure, and lack of special habitat features such as
snags.
The portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property provides virtually no value to fish
with 80 percent of the total length in a small culvert and the rest encompassed in a narrow ditch
some 10 to l 5 feet below ground surface. The short open stretch offers some potential rearing
habitat, however, habitat quality is entirely dependent on the existing beaver dam. Without the
recently constructed dam, shallow depths, a muddy substrate, no instream structure, and little
instream cover limits the overall habitat value. With little protection from high velocities, winter
September 20. :l006
Sealiawk.1·1')[).:;(j.()6 Lak,'5 S1,em" R,,pon dvc
CEDAROCK co.i.,rs[JLTANTS, INC and A.C KJl•./D!G & CO
Page 6
Seaha\.vks Corporate Headquarrers and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Sn·eam and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
storm events would likely flush any fish from the system if they were present. Summer
conditions produce extremely low flows which also severely limit habitat quality.
4.4 Vegetative Cover
The project site is periodically cleared of vegetation and was last cleared in 1990. Young red
alder, black cottonwood, willow, Himalayan blackberry, and Scotch broom are present on the
steep banks of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel. The vegetation provides good shading and
a fair source of allocthonous material to the watercourse. However, water quality, bank
stabilization, large woody debris input, and other functions are minimal due to the steep eroding
banks, young and exotic vegetation, and a narrow functional riparian zone, because the ditch is
so far below grade elevation.
Lake Washington shoreline vegetation within about 20-feet of the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) is dominated by Himalayan blackbeny, Scotch broom, red alder, black cottonwood,
and various willow species which grow up to water's edge (figure 5). Beyond this narrow
vegetated buffer, on-site vegetation consists mainly of various grasses interspersed with small
islands of trees and shrubs (Figure 6). The upland trees and shrubs are similar in character to the
immediate shoreline vegetation.
4,5 Ecological Functions
Ecological functions for the two areas impacted by the proposed action: the open portion of the
Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property, and the Lake Washington shoreline, are described
below along with a description of existing conditions for each function.
Water Quality
Vegetation adjacent to streams and lakes can improve water quality by filtering pollutants,
removing nutrients, and preventing sediment introduction. N alive planted areas of approximately
l 00 feet in depth are noimally required to preserve riparian water quality function where natural
routing of water through buffers is preserved and relied upon for water quality protection.
However, source control and water quality best management practices are recognized as more
important for urban settings where stonnwater nmoff is not reliant on riparian conditions for
treatment before discharge. Because water quality treatment function is provided by the proposed
developments in these cases, and not by the riparian areas, riparian depths can be much narrower.
Water quality function of the existing on-site riparian areas is poor. The only vegetation adjacent
to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington is relatively young (10-15 years old) and
primarily exotic. There are also steep slopes adjacent to both watercourses so the nonnal water
quality treatment process is virtually absent. Surface water runs directly across the narrow
riparian areas and receives very little natural treatment. In addition, residual contamination in
soils on the property can degrade water quality so flow running through the riparian buffer over
such soils is not a benefit and presents a risk to aquatic species habitat.
September 20. 2006
S1!<1hawA.."",'O').]O.()(i Lakes Slream R~po1/ doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 7
Seaha.vks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facili(),
Renton, fVashingron S1ream and Lake Studv/.Mitigation Plan
Figw-e 5. Vegetation and woody debris along the Lake Washington shoreline.
Figure 6. Upland vegetation looking to the west across the site from the railroad tracks.
Septemba 20. 2006
Seohnwks/09-20-06 f.akes Sr,eaw Reporr.dor
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC andA.C KINDIG & CO
Page 8
Seahavvks Corporate I leadquarters and Training Faciliry
Renron, ~Vashington
Organic Material
Stream and Luke Studr!Afi1igation Plan
Overhanging vegetation contributes leaves, vegetative litter, and small woody debris directly to
the channel. This material forms the source of food for aquatic invertebrates, which are in turn
eaten by fish. Terrestrial insects, another food source, also utilize riparian vegetation as habitat.
The majority of material comes from directly over the stream. Function diminishes rapidly after
about 25 feet from channels edge though some benefit is still realized up to about 50 feet away.
Vegetation overhanging the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage provides a small amount of organic
material to the watercourse. The material is carried downstream and deposited in Lake
Washington where it provides some benefit to aquatic species located there as wel I. The young,
sparse, and partially exotic composition of the buffer significantly reduces the overall value.
Vegetation adjacent to Lake Washington consists predominately of exotic shrub species which
overhang the water in some locations. The volume of leaf litter is minor as is the contribution of
woody debris. Because many of the species are non-native and the overall shoreline area lacks
diversity, the nutrient contribution and value as insect habitat is poor. Overall, the value of the
existing riparian vegetation is low relative to its ability to contribute food and nutrients.
Microclimate
Riparian vegetation protects streams from climate changes caused by widespread development
away from the stream, including soil and air temperature, humidity, and wind. There is no direct
link between microclimate and the condition of salmonid habitat, however, it has been suggested
that microclimate needs protection to maintain desirable assemblages of plants and animal
species, including insects, beneficial to fish. It is estimated that a riparian zone between
approximately 58 and 345 feet in the Renton area is necessary to entirely preserve natural mature
forest riparian microclimates.
The lack of any significant vegetation adjacent to either the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage or Lake
Washington provides almost no microclimate function under existing conditions.
Temperature & Shade
Overhanging vegetation shades streams, until the channels become so broad that, like Lake
Washington, most of the water surface is exposed to the sun. By intercepting solar radiation,
vegetation prevents heat energy from reaching streams, maintaining cooler water. Vegetation
also shades soil, cooling water introduced to streams through the hyporheic zone. Cool water is
an essential habitat feature for salmonids, and increases the amount of atmospheric oxygen that
will dissolve into the water, which also improves salmon habitat conditions and is essential for
salmon spawning.
Under existing conditions, 80 percent of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel across the site is
contained within a culve1t where riparian shade has no effect on stream temperature. The open
portion of the channel has a naiTow riparian corridor that combined with the slope aspect of the
entrenched channel, provides fair shading of the small channel.
Sep/ember 20, 2006
Seahowks/09-20-06 !.ok>".< Strrnw Repon dr,c
CEDAROCK CO.VSULTANTS. !NC and A C KINDJG & CO
Page 9
Seahawks Corpora1e Headquarters and Trainmg Facility
Renton, ~Vushington Stream and Lake Studv/Mitigation Plan
Riparian shading of Lake Washington has no effect on water temperature due to the large size of
the lake.
Human Access Control
One function of protected riparian zones in populated watersheds can be reducing the direct
encroachment of humans including refuse dumping, trampling of vegetation, bank erosion, and
noise. These function most effectively when the adjacent land use consists of low intensity
development; when the riparian areas are greater than 50 feet wide and planted with high quality
mixed species of native vegetation that discourages entry; and where there was a high degree of
resident education on the value of the protected riparian zones.
The blackberry covered slopes adjacent to the open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and
position of the channel on fenced and signed private prope,ty prohibits human access.
The steep, densely vegetated Lake Washington shoreline is not conducive to human use under
existing conditions. The property is currently fenced with locked gates so vegetation has no role
in access control.
Large Woody Debris
Large woody debris (L WO) consists of dov,.11ed tree stems and branches and is a functionally
important structural component of stream channels in the Pacific Northwest. In non-fish-bearing
stream channels such as on this project property, L WO acts as a surface for biological activity
which contributes to the productivity of a stream system. Jn a manire coniferous forest, the
majority (70 to 90 percent) ofLWD in a stream comes from within 50 feet of the stream.
The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel contains no LWD either on-or off-site. The channel is
located in a relatively urban environment and intercepted repeatedly by culverts, including
passage through the drainage system of the adjacent l-405 interchange to the east of the site. Any
large woody debris entering the system is removed once it works downstream and blocks a
culvert. So L WO recruitment has no practical potential in this drainage.
The Lake Washington shoreline contains an abundant supply of L WO that has washed up over
the years. The logs come mainly from old timber log booms and escapement from milling
operations rather than recruitment from along the shoreline. However, the existing shoreline on
the property contains no trees large enough to provide L WD recruitment for scores of years.
Channel Migration
The Gypsy Subbasm Drainage channel is highly confined hy culverts upstream and dov,.mtream
of the property, and within a steeply sloped below-grade channel on-site. Channel migration is
not possible at this location.
Bank Stability
Roots from vegetation growing along the streambank help stabilize soils and reduce erosion.
Root strength benefits are normally low beyond 40 feet from the channel.
September 20, 2006
Seahawks/09._'0-C·6 Lake5 S{l'eom Rep()rrdoc
('EDA ROCK COVSULTANTS, !NC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 10
Sealwwks Co17Jora1e Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton. Washingron Stream and Lake Stud.,lAiitiga1ion Plan
The existing steep banks adjacent to both sides of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel on the
property have poor bank stability because the channel is so far below grade, and are constantly
eroding. An old road near the top of bank along the channel contributes additional sediment.
The Lake Washington shoreline is slowly eroding due in part to the lack of stabilizing
vegetation. Other factors such as the changing lake levels (winter and summer) managed by the
Army Corps, boat wakes, and the relatively young shoreline (due to lowering of the Lake
Washington water level in 1917) also influence erosion rates.
Wildlife Habitat
The cleared and graded property provides little wildlife habitat though the area immediately
adjacent to Lake Washington has moderate value due in part to the proximity of the lake (see
Section 4.7). The lack of a mature native canopy limits nesting and foraging habitat for most
species.
4.6 Fish Use
Fish use of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage by resident salmonids is assumed. There is anecdotal
evidence of fish sightings by a City of Renton street maintenance crew (Larry Fisher, personal
conununication, March 17, 1997). No use of the basin by anadromous salmonids is known to
occur and presumed use is unlikely because of the lack of suitable habitat on the property and
poor upstream passage conditions beneath the BNSF tracks and through the l-405 interchange
and roadway stormwater systems to the east.
Lake Washington supports a variety of anadromous salmonids, including Chinook
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (0. /cisutch), and sockeye salmon (0. nerka), and steelhead
( 0. my/ass) and cutthroat trout ( 0. c!ar/ci). Rurs of non-anadromous kokanee ( 0. nerka) salmon
are also present (King Courty, 1993). Lake Washington contains a wide variety of non-salmonid
species, some of which are considered "warm water" species. These include both native and non-
native species such as speckled dace (Rhinichthys oscu/us), three-spine stickleback (Gasterosteus
acu/eatus), no1them squawfish (Ptychochei/us oregonensis), yellow perch (Perea jlavescens),
black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth
bass (Micropte111s dolomieui), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), largescale sucker
(Catostomus macrocheilus), longfin smelt (Spirinchus tha/eichthys), and prickly sculpin (Coitus
asper) among other species (Pfeifer and Weinheimer 1992, King County 1993, Wydoski and
Whitney, 1979).
4.7 Wildlife Use
Canada geese (Branta canadensis) were observed in both the vegetated and hardscapc shoreline
areas. The geese were observed nesting along the vegetated shoreline and in the osprey (Pandion
ha/iaetus) nest located near the PSE substation nesting platform. Puget Sound Energy moved an
osprey nest from a retired distribution pole on the Baxter site to a new nest pole platform erected
on the south side of the substation in 1993. Puget Sound Energy also placed a crossbar on top of
the first transmission pole leading away from the station to provide a safe place for the birds to
perch. The osprey successfully nested on the new platfo1m from 1993 until 1997 when the
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULT4N7S. INC and AC KINDIG & CO.
s~a/wwk.s/09-20-0fi I aker Sn-eam Repnrl doc Page 11
Sea hawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facilit;.
Renton, Washingron Stream and Lake Study/,\,/itigation Plan
osprey built a new nest at the top of the wood chip elevator located on the Barbee Mill site to the
south of the property. This nest was eliminated when the mill was torn down. Osprey are present
in the area from mid-March through August. Osprey have been observed hunting small mammals
(likely mice) on the North Baxter site as well as fishing the lake. Canada geese and bald eagles
(Haliaeetus /eucopha/us) have occasionally been observed perching on the nest platfonn during
tile winter months. It is assumed the bald eagles used the perch site to forage for fish and
waterfowl along the lake shoreline. Three bald eagle nest sites have been historically reported
between 0.8 and 0.9 miles west and northwest of the site on Mercer Island (WDFW 2006). Two
of the nest sites are not known to have been used for the last several years. The third nest was
reported active in 2006.
Beaver (Castor canadensis) have been observed in wetland habitat along the lake shoreline and
in Gypsy Subbasin Drainage east of the site. Pond sliders (Pseudemys scripta) have been
observed on floating logs. Red-winged blackbirds (Age/aius phoeniceus) were observed using
cattail habitat in the project vicinity. Snipe (Capella ga//inago) were observed in the cottonwood
sapling-dominated areas. Other species of passerine birds and amphibians could be supported
along the shoreline and the nan-ow red alder-dominated upland shoreline area. Numerous duck
species also use the offshore area adjacent to the site.
5.0 SHORELINE PLAl'l"Tl'.'!G/MITIGATION PLAN
Project actions that will affect aquatic features and adjacent shoreline vegetation include:
1) Filling of the on-site portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Dramage and elimination of
existing riparian vegetation on the open channel portion,
2) Lengthening of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert under the site,
3) Removal of structures and roadways on the site.
4) Capping of the site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline pursuant to
Consent Decree requirements,
5) Alterations to vegetation along the Lake Washington shoreline area, and
6) Construction of stormwater sand filters, five stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington,
parking, fire lane, building, practice fields, and public access within the shoreline.
5.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Mitigation
Consent Decree requirements that include capping of the site and filling of the open portion of
the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage are mitigation designed specifically to avoid human and habitat
contact with surface contaminants and will improve water quality by eliminating ground/water
contact in this area. This action will directly improve fish habitat in Lake Washington. No
additional mitigation for the loss of 125-feet of stream channel for water quality function is
wan-anted or proposed.
Lost riparian functions from removal of vegetation adjacent to the Gypsy Sub basin Drainage
channel will be mitigated by new plantings near Lake Washington contiguous with the Baxter
Cove wetland protected riparian buffer. It is estimated that vegetation within approximately 15-
feet of the steep ditch in which the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is located currently provides some
functional value to the watercourse in terms of leaf litter and other organic material. To mitigate
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC. and A C KINDIG & CO.
Swha,.,,h.'()9-H!-06 lakes Srq:am Reporl doc Page 12
Seahawks Corpora le Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, 1:Vashington ~)tream and lake Srudyi}vlitigation Plan
for the loss of function of 0.09 acres of primarily exotic vegetation, approximately 0.21 acres of
area adjacent to the Baxter Cover wetland mitigation site located within the 200-foot Lake
Washington shoreline area will be planted with a high density tree and shrub cover. This area is
currently dominated by lower-value grasses and exotic vegetation.
While the culvert carrying Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is being lengthened, much of it is also
being enlarged (see Magnusson Klemencic Associates 2006 for details). Because there is a fish
passage baJTier immediately upstream of the project site, the culvert does not cuJTently function
as an upstream fish passage conduit. If the off-site baJTicr is removed in the future, the longer but
larger culvert under the project site is expected to provide the same or better fish passage
conditions as currently found on the property.
5.2 Lake Washington Shoreline Planting
The Lake Washington shoreline planting plan (see Appendix 1, Sheet LlOO) is being developed
to enhance functions and values along the shoreline. Under existing conditions, approximately
1.23 acres of the area within 100-feet of the Lake Washington shoreline is vegetated with
exotics, upland shrubs and trees (this excludes the 0.36 acres of Baxter Cove wetland and its
regulatory buffer). This area of coverage will be maintained or extended under the planting plan.
In addition, virtually all existing shrubs are non-native and will be removed and replaced with
native species. The area of tree canopy coverage, (0.82 acres under existing conditions) will also
be matched or exceeded under the planting plan.
The planting plan contains the following features important to improving habitat quality on the
site:
• Existing non-native and invasive vegetation will be removed from the entire site.
• Existing large trees 10 inches or larger in diameter at breast height (dbh) within 100-feet
of Lake Washington have been mapped (see Appendix l, Site Map, Sheet l) and will be
preserved wherever possible consistent with site remediation and the land-use plan.
• An area located within lOO-feet of Lake Washington will be replanted as needed to meet
or exceed existing vegetation coverage (approximately 1.23 acres) along the shoreline.
• Tree canopy coverage within 100-feet of Lake Washington (approximately 0.82 acres)
will be matched or exceeded.
• Planting soils will be amended if necessary to provide suitable growing conditions for
new plantings.
• Plantings along the shoreline will consist of a multi-layered approach consisting of
groundcovers, forbs, shrubs, and tree canopy layers.
• Shoreline plantings will consist entirely of native species typically found adjacent to
lakes and streams within the Pacific Northwest. All plants will be selected to provide a
combination of moderate to high shoreline protection and wildlife function.
• Landscaping plantings selected for the project will be dominated by native species that
provide moderate to high wildlife function.
• All plantings will be established at a density that can reasonably be expected to thrive
under the growing conditions present on the site and achieve the cover objectives within
5 to IO years.
September 20, 2006
Si!ah.awksi09-.::.0-06 Lakes S!ream Repar/ doc
CED.4ROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 13
Seahawks Corporate Headquar/ers a.nd Training Facili~v
Renton, Washington Stream and lake Study/..Hitigation Plan
• Supplemental watering will be provided along the shoreline until plantings are well
established and can survive on their own.
• Because of the high visibility of the project, all planting, both shoreline and landscaping,
will be maintained indefinitely. On-going maintenance will occur throughout the year.
Dead and dying plants will be replaced as needed. Non-native species will be removed by
hand. Some pruning of larger hardwood trees (rather than plant removal), particularly
lower branches, may occur to facilitate slrrub and groundcover grov.1:h and provide lake
views from some po11ions of the Headquarters Building, while retaining tree canopy.
The shoreline zone planting will take place on a declining slope, some of which will be graded to
accommodate capping of the site, training fields, and building development upslope (see
Appendix l, Sheet LI 00). A typical topsoil profile (whether existing in the non-graded area or
imported in the graded fill area) will be between 12 and 18 inches. Vegetation in shoreline area
will consist of native riparian species that will be selected from the list provided in Table l.
Landscaping for the planting beds, parking lots, and perimeter screening will also be based
almost entirely on the use of high value native vegetation and will include many of the species
noted above.
5.3 Maintenance and Monitoring
Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the Lake Washington
shoreline area is provided in Section 9 of this document. Monitoring is described in Section 11.
September 20, 2006
Seahaw!.:;,09-J0-061.akcs Stream Rcp(}r/.doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 14
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renlun, ~Vashington
Table 1
Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
Plant species selected for Lake Washington shoreline.
Dry Zone (upland)
Herbaceous Species -hydroseeded
a. Deer Fem
b. Pearly Everlasting
c. Trailing Snowberry
d. Dewey's Sedge
e. Thick-headed Sedge
Blechnum spicant
A naphalis margaritacea
Symphoricarpos mollis
Carex devveyana
Carex pachystachya
Woody Shrubs -5' O.C. in groups of3 to 9
a. Bald Hip Rose Rosa gymnocarpa
b. Evergreen Huckleberry Vaccinium ova/um
c. Low Oregon Grape Mahonia nevinii
d. Mock Orange Phi/adelphus lewis ii
e. Red-Flowering Currant Ribes sanguineum
f. Snowberry Symphoricarpos a/bus
Trees -12' O.C.
a.
b.
C.
d.
Pacific Dogwood
Douglas Fir
Madrona
Big-leaf Maple
Camus nullallii
Pseudotsuga men=iesii
Arbutus menziesii
Acer macrophyllum
Wet Zone (adjacent to the shoreline)
Herbaceous Species -hydroseeded
a. Shorta'-'11 Foxtail
b. Water Foxtail
c. Slough Sedge
d. Sawbreak Sedge
e. Hardstem Bulrush
f. Small-fruited Bulrush
g.
h.
Slender Rush
Spike Bent Grass
Alopecurus aequalis
Alopecurus geniculatus
Carex obnupta
Care."'K stipata
Sci,pus acutus
Schpus microcarpus
Juncus tenuis
Agrostis exarata
Woody Shrubs-5' O.C. in groups of3 to 9
a. Black Gooseberry Ribes /acusn·e
b. Bog Laurel Kalmia microphylla
c. Bog Rosemary Andromeda polifolia
d. Hardhack Spirea Spiraea douglosii
e. Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera
Trees~ 12' O.C.
a. Red Alder
b. Black Cottonwood
c. Sitka Willow
A/nus rubra
Populus trichocarpa
Salb: sitchensis
(adapted from the King County Native Plant Guide and the King County, \Vashington -Surface Water Design
Manual)
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSVI.TANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 15
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Studv/lv!itigation Plan
6.0 RESOURCE AND FU~CTIONAL VALUES TO BE RESTORED,
CREATED, OR ENHANCED
Aquatic and wildlife habitat on the site consist of a Class 1 lake, a Class 2 stream, and associated
riparian zones. All three features have been heavily impacted by the long history of industrial
land use and associated contamination at the site. To avoid direct contact to hwnans and preserve
and protect water quality in the lake and stream, the approximately 125-foot remaining open
pottion of the watercourse will be culverted so that the entire Class 2 watercourse will be
culverted through the site. No further enhancements are proposed to Gypsy Subhasin Drainage.
No stormwater from the developed site after capping will discharge to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage.
The Lake Washington shoreline riparian planting plan focuses on restoring habitat function to a
degraded area. Aquatic functions described in Section 4.5 are targeted for enhancement with the
primary purpose of improving nutrient contribution to fisheries resources in Lake Washington
and providing a higher quality wildlife habitat corridor along the shoreline. This will benefit
small wildlife species including birds, amphibians, rodents, and mammals.
6.1 Habitat Improvement Opportunity
Key to the restoration value of the riparian planting plan is the existing degraded condition of the
Lake Washington shoreline (see description in Section 4.4). The project will not disturb or
remove any si1,,'Tlificant functional benefit of the shoreline as the existing condition provides
minimal value. The net change provided by the project along the shoreline will increase habitat
value for both fish and wildlife.
The City of Renton has designated the shoreline an Urban Environment. Urban Environments
have the objective of providing for water dependent uses, including human access, along water's
edge. Under the new City Shoreline Ordinance, protected riparian zones in Urban Environments
are a function of how the shoreline is used and can range from O to 100 feet in width.
The proposed action will match or exceed the total area of existing trees and shrubs within 100-
feet of water's edge and will create much higher habitat quality by removing exotic species and
replacing them with native plants. Because much of the shoreline area currently consists of
asphalt, bare dirt, and patches of exotic grass, development of various project features that will
occur within the shoreline area (practice fields, building, pavement) can be completed without
adversely affecting existing habitat quality.
6.2 Function and Value Comparison
This section provides a description of riparian functions and values to be provided under the
proposed project action and compares each function to the existing condition described in
Section 4.5. Function and value determinations are based on best available science as described
in A.C. Kindig & Co and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. (2003).
September 20, 2006
St1ahu<',k.1i09-~0-G6 l,akes Stream R,0 por1 doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. f.VC and A. C'. KINDIG & CO
Page I 6
-
I
Seahawks Cotporate Headquarters and Training Farility
Renton, VVashington
Water Quality
SO"eam and Lake StudJ,'/A1itigation Plan
The Consent Decree remediation requirements will benefit water quality because capping and
development of the site will protect rainfall from conveying soil into Gypsy Subbasin Drainage
or Lake Washington.
The project stormwater management approach is based on the 2005 King County Surface Water
Design Manual. Enhanced water quality treatment is proposed for site stonnwater runoff
(Magnusson Klemancic Associates 2006). Six stormwater management treatments are proposed
to serve different developed portions of the site. The six treatment areas and systems consist of
the following:
Synthetic Tmf Field and Building/Roof Areas (one system) -These areas are non-pollution
generating surfaces. Stonnwater runoff from the synthetic turf field and building roofs
will be drained to Lake Washinb'lon as direct discharge. Precipitation landing on the field
will drain vertically through sand and gravel to subdrains that will convey the stonnwater
to a site storm drain system discharging to Lake Washington.
Natural Turf Fields (one system) -Similar to the synthetic turf field, precipitation that lands
on the natural turf fields will drain vertically through sand to subdrains. The natural turf
fields, with an 18-inch layer of sand, will function as a large sand filter. An Integrated
Pest 'vlanagement (IP'vl) Plan will be prepared that describes turf management practices
for these practice fields. One-hundred percent of storm runoff from these fields will pass
through the underlying sand, which exceeds the 2005 King County Manual enhanced
treatment requirement for treatment of 95 percent of storm runoff.
Paved Parking and Driveways (four systems) -Stormwater runoff from paved parking and
driveway areas will be treated in four large sand filters. Three of the sand filters will be
covered with grass, which will intercept fines and provide pre-treatment and to help
maintain the surface permeability of the filter as shown by research data (A.C. Kindig
1999). Pretreahnent in the fourth large sand filter will be provided by an additional six
inch top layer of sand, which will be removed and replaced once or twice annually. The
large sand filters have been designed per the 2005 King County Surface Water Design
Manual.
Overall, the net effect of remediation and development on the property will be improvement of
water quality in Lake Washington.
Food
Tbe enhanced Lake Washington shoreline area is expected to provide significantly better nutrient
contribution than under existing conditions due primarily to the increased presence of native
species along the shoreline and the more diverse source of leaf litter and insect habitat this
provides. The existing 20-foot wide swath of Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom
interspersed with a relatively sparse native tree canopy layer provides little of the normal year-
round organic nutrient contribution or supply of small woody debris contributed by a native
species buffer. The insect population and benthic invertebrate community is different than native
fish evolved to require. Because most organic material falls vertically or is carried a short
distance by wind, the region providing the greatest nutrient benefit to the aquatic environment is
September 20. 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. TNC and A C KINDIG & CO.
Se<J)w,.,.k,,G9-]0./J6 !.ake; S1reom Repon doc Page 17
Seahawks Corporate I /eadquarters and Training Faciliry
Renton, rVashington Stream and Lake S1udy/lv!i1iga1ion Plan
directly over and within SO-feet of a waterbody. Therefore, the enhanced shoreline area ranging
from between 20-feet to about 200-feet and averaging about SO-feet will provide an important
new nutrient source and will improve habitat quality along the lakeshore.
The loss of the narrow riparian buffer adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will slightly
reduce the amount of nurrients contributed by this drainage to Lake Washington. However, the
primarily exotic and relatively sparse nature of the buffer is not a significant source of material
and the loss will more than be made up by proposed planting adjacent to Lake Washington.
Microclimate
Microclimate is a big picture climate control issue extending for up to many hundreds of feet
from the lake. Neither the existing buffer nor the proposed buffer will have much effect on this
habitat variable.
Temperature and Shade
With large lakes such as Lake Washington, shade is not a significant variable influencing water
temperature. The proposed shoreline enhancements with some overhanging vegetation will
provide localized shading along the shoreline and should benefit temperatures in shallow areas
immediately adjacent to the shore, but the overall effect will be negligible.
Placing the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage into the culvert essentially provides I 00 percent shading
for this creek though the difference in water temperature being delivered to Lake Washington
will be negligible.
Human Access Control
Urban Environment designated shoreline areas are intended to encourage human access to
water's edge, though in this case access will be controlled by walkways, fencing, and perhaps
some thorny native vegetation, rather than solely reliant on vegetation. The proposed shoreline
area will have little function in limiting human access control in this situation. This is
comparable to the existing condition where fencing rather than vegetation is used to limit access
along the shoreline.
Large Woody Debris
Large woody debris contribution is not a significant function of riparian buffers in the urban
environment due to the liability of allowing large old trees to fall randomly near densely
populated areas. However, smaller woody debris can function as substrate for macroinvertebrates
and as an organic nutrient source. Under the proposed enhanced shoreline area, both coniferous
and deciduous trees will be planted as future sources of organic debris. Neither of these benefits
would occur under the existing condition where the site is periodically graded.
Channel Migration
Channel migration zones are not associated with managed ditches and large managed lakes as are
found on or adjacent to the property. The proposal will have no effect on channel migration.
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CO:VSULTANTS. INC u,id A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 18
Sea hawks Carpomle I !eaJquar/ers and Truining Facifitv
Renton, J:Vashington
Bank Stability
Stream and Lake Studr/lvfin·gation Plan
The immediate shoreline will remain relatively unchanged. With the types of plants proposed for
the enhanced shoreline area arrangement, and the relatively low energy lakeshore environment
(relative to flowing channels), root strength in the enhanced area is expected to provide good
protection of the shoreline from wind-induced waves and boat wakes. The proposal will have
little effect on bank stability.
Wildlife Habitat
Wildlife habitat for most species will improve significantly under the proposed condition as the
relatively sparse and exotic shoreline vegetation is replaced with a diverse native planting
regime. Native plantings in a multi-story canopy provide a much higher wildlife habitat value
especially when they are planted in large contiguous groupings and are associated with aquatic
habitat as is proposed in the southwest comer of the site. Native species provide superior
feeding, roosting, and nesting opportunities for birds. The resultant woody debris and
herbivorous ground cover is better for amphibians, reptiles, and small rodents. The loss of
riverine habitat associated with filling the 125-foot stretch of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will
result in less habitat opportunity for species preferring moving water. But other than the beaver
that has established a small dam in this system, the rip-rap lined banks and exotic species
dominated shoreline does not provide good quality habitat. The proposed shoreline enhancement
area along Lake Washington will improve the overall quality of habitat for most wildlife.
Wetland
The only wetland on the project site is in the Baxter Cove area which will remain untouched
under the proposed development action. The buffer of the wetland will be altered to no less than
a 40 foot width, and averaging will be used to maintain an average buffer width of 50 feet as
allowed under the J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (Associated Earth
Sciences, Inc. 2000). Uplands contiguous with the protected wetland buffer will be planted with
high density tree and shrub habitat (see Appendix 1, Sheet L 100).
6.3 Summary
Value for all habitat functions under the proposed development is expected to be equal to or
greater than under existing conditions. This is primarily due to the relatively sparse and non-
native dominated vegetation along the shoreline, and the low value of the remaining pmtion of
the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage currently existing on the property. The quality of vegetation will
increase greatly as native groundcovers, shrubs, and trees are planted and maintained.
7.0 COORDINATION \VITH OTHER AGENCIES
Ecology is the lead agency under the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) for all cleanup
actions under the Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees between the State of Washington
Depa1tment of Ecology (Ecology) and the Port Quendall Company dated April 2000. The SEPA
Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on April 2000 for the capping and
institutional control remedial actions to be performed under the April 2000 Feasibility
Study/Cleanup Action Plan for the J.H. Baxter North Property and the April 2000 Cleanup
Sepiember 2V, 2006
Se<1~awk.,/OY-]0-06 Lak~., S1ream R~port J1Jc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.C Kl.'!DIG & CO
Page 19
Seaha1,1ks Corporate Headquarrers and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Srudr!Mitigation Plan
Action Plan for the J.H Baxter South Property as required by the Consent Decrees. The Consent
Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plans require capping of the entire site to within
25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline. An Engineering Design Report (EDR) for the N011h
Baxter property and an amended EDR for the South Baxter property are under preparation for
Ecology review and approval to implement the Feasibility Studies/Cleanup Action Plans.
Ecology's approval of the EDR will include its determination that substantive requirements of
state and local permits and approvals are met under the Consent Decrees, although
implementation of Consent Decree requirements procedurally exempts these permits and
approvals. These include a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and site grading, filling, utility trenching, and building approvals
from the City of Renton. A Notice of!ntent to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit for discharge of construction runoff and a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan for construction will be submitted to Ecology, however all stormwater runoff
during site construction will discharge to the sanitary sewer under a Sanitary Discharge Permit
from King County Industrial Waste as required by the Consent Decrees.
Discussions with the Army Corps began with a pre-application meeting on January 15, 1997 for
remediation of the combined Quendall and North and South Baxter properties. During
subsequent consultation, the Army Corps indicated they would decline jurisdiction over filling of
the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. Consultation to confirm the Army Corps continues to decline
jurisdiction over Gypsy Subbasin Drainage alterations is being sought by the proponent. No
other actions require federal approval.
Ecology's approval of the EDR documents will procedurally exempt WDFW requirements for an
HPA. However, the applicant met with WDFW, Ecology, and the City of Renton on August 9,
2006 to discuss preliminary plans for fill of a 125 foot section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage
pursuant to capping requirements of the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan, realigning the
culvert and providing for conveyance of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage flows through the
property at full buildout of the basin upstream of the North Baxter property, construction of new
stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington, and substantive mitigation requirements for the Gypsy
Subbasin Drainage fill. It was agreed for the purposes of complying with WDFW's substantive
requirements that a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) for the various
improvements will be submitted as part of this Lakes and Streams Report for the City of Renton,
This Lakes and Streams Report is a requirement of the City of Renton under its Critical Areas
Ordinance for the development planned for the North and South Baxter properties. Renton must
issue a Shoreline Substantial Development permit, perform SEPA review, issue a Master Plan
approval, and issue other building permits for construction elements of the proposed Seahawks
Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility that are not requirements of the Consent Decrees
with Ecology. This Lakes and Streams Report is required to assess impacts and riparian
functions and values for alterations to the Lake Washington Shoreline, and includes functional
impacts and mitigation for the alteration to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage required by capping under
the Consent Decrees.
September 20. 2006
Seahawb,09--'0-06 Luk.eJ S1reu111 Repor! doc
CE DA ROCK CONSULlANTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 20
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton. Washingwn Stream and Lake S1udy!Atfitigarion Plan
8.0 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Construction is expected to begin in November of 2006 with demolition of existing strnctures,
clearing and grubbing. Capping and grading will begin soon thereafter and be complete by June
2007. The new Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert will be constructed and placed into operation
during the fall/early winter of 2006 and the existing open portion of channel will be filled once
the new culvert is active. Building construction will begin in January 2007 and be complete by
July 2008.
9.0 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE
Riparian plantings in the shoreline enhancement area and throughout the site will be monitored
and maintained continuously after construction under a landscaping contract the project owner
will maintain. Maintenance will proceed consistent with Ecology restrictive covenants in place
after completion of cleanup activities under the Consent Decrees and will include replacement of
dead and dying plants, removal of exotic plant species, watering as necessary, and trash
collection. Riparian planting maintenance and monitoring will occur for 5 years after
construction, but on-going maintenance will continue indefinitely as the site is maintained for the
new Seahawks headquarters.
10.0 ENVIRON:VIENTAL GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORl\1ANCE
STANDARDS
The overall environmental goal for the Stream Mitigation/Riparian Planting Plan will be to
provide a viable riparian plant community adjacent to Lake Washington that increases habitat
functions and values for regional fish and wildlife. Specific functions are described in Section
4.0. More specific objectives include:
• Create 53,453 square feet of vegetated shoreline area consisting almost exclusively of
native plants.
• Remove and control invasive and exotic plants from the site.
• Eliminate water contact with surface soils.
• Additional important features for the riparian planting plan are listed in Section 5.2
Monitoring will be conducted for the purpose of ensuring the plant community as designed and
planted complies with these objectives. Monitoring and performance standards are described in
Section 11.
Septemher 20, 2006
Senfumksi09-2Q-06 Lake; Stream Reporr.doc
CED.1ROCK CONSUL7:4NTS. INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 21
Seahm1-1ks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/A4in"gatwn Plan
11.0 MONITORING
The purposes of the habitat monitoring program are: ( l) to ensure that design goals and
objectives along with applicable permit specifications are met; (2) to document physical and
biological characteristics of the newly planted riparian shoreline area, and (3) to ensure
consistency with Ecology restrictive covenants in place after the completion of cleanup activities
under the Consent Decrees.
The monitoring process will consist of three distinct phases: (l) construction monitoring; (2)
compliance monitoring; and (3) long-term monitoring. The following sections describe elements
of the monitoring program.
11.l Sampling Methodology
Monitoring of shoreline vegetation will be conducted using the techniques and procedures
described below to quantify the survival, relative health and grov.'th of plant material as well as
the successful creation of an area meeting goals described in Section 10. An annual monitoring
repmi submitted following each year of monitoring will describe and quantify the status of the
riparian planting at that time.
Construction Monitoring
Compliance success is increased with early and frequent coordination and communication
between the appropriate parties. Coordination meetings could include the fisheries biologist,
landscape architect, project engineers, regulatory agency representatives, and contractors.
A pre-construction meeting of personnel responsible for the design and those responsible for
establishment of the riparian planting and construction along the shoreline is recommended. The
purpose of the meeting will be to review the intent of the riparian planting plan, establish a
pathway of communication during construction, agree upon the construction sequence, and
address and resolve any questions.
The landscape architect and project biologists should be present on-site as necessary to review
project implementation. Duties will include: (1) assist in identifying and marking the limits of
clearing and grading, where applicable; (2) inspect the plant materials and recommend their final
placement before planting; (3) determine the correct type and application rate of amendments to
the soil, if needed; (4) make adjustments in planting plans, as needed, in response to field
conditions; (5) ensure that aquatic related construction activities are conducted per the approved
plan and pennits; and (6) resolve problems that arise during restoration, thus lessening problems
that might occur later during the long-term monitoring phase.
CompJianceMonitoring
Compliance monitoring consists of evaluating work areas immediately after planting and
restoration work is completed along the shoreline. Objectives are to verify all design features
September 20. 2006
Sea~.r.;.ks/09-20·£16 L,1/.:ei· .Sir<',m1 Rqmrl.doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS INC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 22
Sea hawks Corporale Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Srream and Lake Study/Afitigation Plan
have been correctly and fully implemented, and that any changes made in the field are consistent
with the intent of the design.
Evaluation of the planting areas will be done by the landscape architect using evaluation
standards and criteria discussed below. After grading and planting of the shoreline area is
complete, a walk-through survey will be completed to ensure species selection, plant location,
and planting methods met all requirements of the landscape plan and any additional permitting
conditions.
A quantitative assessment of the plants established in the shoreline area (including plant counts
and cover-abundance, as appropriate) will be recorded in representative sample plots for baseline
data. This information will be used to document "time-zero" conditions from which the long-
term monitoring period will begin. At each point, fixed-point photos will be taken during
monitoring visits to provide physical documentation of the condition of the riparian planting
areas. Photographs will be taken from all sample plot locations established during the first
monitoring site visit (compliance) and thereafter each visit of the monitoring period from the
established location points.
The compliance monitoring phase will conclude with preparation of a compliance report from
the landscape architect and project biologists. The rep01t will verify that all design features have
been correctly, fully, and successfully incorporated. Substantive changes made in the planting
plans will be noted in the compliance report and on the drawings for use during the long-term
monitoring phase. Infonnation on changes should include details describing what was done,
where, why, at whose request, and the result of the change. Locations of monitoring stations
established for the compliance monitoring will be identified on the as-built plans. The planting
plans, with the compliance report, will document "as-built" conditions at the time of construction
compliance. The compliance report and as-built drawings will be submitted to the City of Renton
and Ecology.
Long-term Ylonitoring
Long-term monitoring will begin after acceptance of the compliance report by the City of Renton
and will be conducted for five growing seasons. Monitoring will evaluate establishment and
maintenance of plants in the shoreline area to determine if goals and objectives of the
mitigation/riparian planting plan have been met.
Monitoring will be conducted annually each year during the five-year monitoring period. A final
site check and summary report will be prepared in the fifth year of monitoring.
At each sample station, plant species will be identified, individual shrubs and trees counted
(where appropriate) to document survival, and an estimate of cover and abundance made using
commonly accepted methods. The plantings will be examined to document survival rate of each
species planted, signs of stress, damage, or disease as well as signs of vigor, and rates of
colonization by other plants. Special attention will be paid to species considered to be exotic or
invasive (e.g., reed canarygrass, Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom).
September 20, 2006
Seaiw,~ksi09-20-06 Lake, S1ream R,•pGrl.dm.
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A C KINDIG & CO
Page 23
Seahmvks Cmporale Heudquarlers and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/A,/itigation Plan
All wildlife observed during the monitoring will be recorded, with notes made regarding habitat
use patterns and activities. Any evidence of breeding or nesting activities will be noted.
Monitoring reports will be prepared for submittal to the City of Renton and Ecology at the end of
each monitoring year. The monitoring report will document the changes occurring within the
mitigation/riparian planting areas and make reconunendations for improving the degree of
success or correcting any problems noted during monitoring. Monitoring reports will document
how the riparian planting is meeting the goals and objectives of the plan.
11.2 Standards Of Success
Success standards for the Lake Washington riparian shoreline area are relatively simple and
straightforward due to the absence of complicated hydrologic regimes. Of primary concern is
ensuring the establishment and viability of a functional plant community dominated by native
species. As such, mitigation/riparian planting success will be determined if the following goals
are met:
• A total of 53,453 square feet of mitigation/riparian planting is present within 100-feet of
the Lake Washington shoreline and 9,005 square feet of mitigation planting is present
between 100 and 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline.
• Within the mitigation/riparian planting area there is ninety-five (95) percent smvival after
Year 1, ninety (90) percent smvival after Year 3, and eighty (80) percent survival for all
planted woody vegetation (shrnbs and trees) at the end of Y car 5.
• Within the mitigation/riparian area there is not more than 2 percent cover of non-native
invasive species at the end of each year.
• No significant areas of erosion (defined as shoreline material loss of greater than one
cubic yard) will occur along the Lake Washington shoreline.
Volunteer native, non-invasive species will be included as acceptable components of the
mitigation if they are thriving at the end of Year 5.
12.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN
If monitoring results indicate any perforrnance standards are not being met, it may be necessary
to implement all or part of a contingency plan. Such plans are prepared on a case-by-case basis to
reflect failed mitigation characteristics. A contingency plan would he developed based on a
specific failure to meet success standards described in Section 11.2 of this plan. The contingency
plan could include recommendations for additional plant installation, erosion control,
modifications to the watering regime, and plant substitutions including type, size, and location,
consistent with Ecology restrictive covenants in place after the completion of cleanup activities
under the Consent Decrees. City and Ecology approval would be requested before
implementation of the plan.
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, iNC and A.C KTNDTG & CO.
St'ai,.1w.l..-,o~.JO-Oti Lakes S1•-um1 Reparr d{)c Page 24
Sea hawks Corporate Headquarters and Train mg Facilily
Renton, Washington
Contingency/maintenance activities may include:
Stream and Lake Stud}'/Afitigation Plun
• Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary.
• Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater monality rate with a similar
species approved hy the City.
• Irrigating certain areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too
dry, with a minimal quantity of water.
• Reseeding the shoreline riparian planting area with an approved grass mixture as
necessary if erosion/sedimentation occurs.
• Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the wetland and planting areas as
necessary.
13.0 MITIGATION/RIP ARIAN PLANTING COST ESTIMATE
Table 2
Cost Estimate Worksheet'
I Items Units Unit Cost Total
Trees 134 $50 ea $6,700
Large shrubs 1,274 S30 ea $38,211
Small shrubs 1,330 $17.50ea $23,275
Native grass 26,144 $1.25 sq.ft. $32,680
!tTigation 52,289 $1 foot $52,289
Fine grading 52,289 $0.25 sq.ft. $13,072
Topsoil 1,292 S26 cu.yd $33,592
Mobilization 1 $24,768 ea $24,768
Landscape architect oversight 100 $100/hr $10,000
Maintenance 5 $3,000 year Sl5,000
\1onitoring 5 S2,000 year $10,000
Base Cost -$259,587
3 0% Contingency -$77,876
Total Cost -$337,463
' Based on September 8, 2006 planting plan prepared by EDAW.
September 20, 2006
Seoha1<. le.:,·, 09-20-06 L/11.es Stream Repor/.dr,c
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A.C. KINDIG & CO
Page 25
Sea hawks C0rporate I Ieadquarters and Training Facilrt)
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
14.0 COMPLIAl'iCE WITH THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE
RMC 4-3-050 L(3)(c)(ii) provides criteria for approval of a Stream and Lake Mitigation/Riparian
Planting Plan. This section discusses how the conceptual plan meets those requirements.
14.1 Mitigation Location
Mitigation for all proposed environmental impacts will take place on-site as recommended as the
prefetTed mitigation location under the RMC.
14.2 Mitigation Type
Proposed mitigation/riparin planting consists of several of the preferred options under subsection
L3c(ii)(b). These include a net reduction in impervious surface from the Lake Washington
shoreline area, improving biological functions of the shoreline, increasing native planting along
the shoreline (which is a recommended watershed improvement), and improving water quality in
Lake Washington. There are no options to daylight streams or remove manmade salmonid
migration barriers within the project site, however, the larger culvert being provided under the
site may improve fish migration characteristics somewhat. As demonstrated in Section 6.2 of this
report, the riparian planting provides for equivalent or greater biological functions of the Lake
Washington shoreline.
14.3 Contiguous Corridors
All riparian planting has been located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian and wildlife
corridors to the greatest extent practicable along the Lake Washington shoreline. All proposed
riparian planting consists of one contiguous habitat corridor along the shoreline.
14.4 )';on-Indigenous Species
No non-indigenous plant, wildlife, or fish species shall be introduced. All species to be utilized
for riparian planting are native species selected to provide a combination of moderate to high
aquatic protection and wildlife function.
14.5 Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions
Existing and proposed ecological functions of on-site riparian habitat is discussed in Section 6.2
of this report. Compliance with best available science is discussed in Section 15.0. The
evaluation of functions and values found a net gain in riparian habitat quality.
14.6 Minimum Mitigation/Riparian Planting Plan Performance Standards
RMC 4-3-050 F(8) contains additional mitigation requirements which the applicant must meet.
The applicant shall:
• Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory~~~c~a_pability, and the financial
resources to carry out the mitigation project. To this end the applicant has contracted with
EDA W Seattle to provide the riparian planting landscape design. The plan was reviewed for
functional benefit to the aquatic environment by Cedarock Consultants, Inc. Both firms have
September 20, 2n06 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC a"d A.C. KJVD!G & CO.
Seaha,d.;;;i/)9-.'fJ-06 lakn Stre.im Repon d(n· Page 26
Seahawks Corporate Heudquar/ers and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake St11dy//vfitigation Plan
extensive experience designing, supervising construction, and monitoring results of riparian
planting projects. Resumes of key personnel are provided in Appendix 4. The applicant,
Football :\'orthwest, LLC, is a large established company with substantial financial resources.
• Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and to make corrections during the
monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals. Monitoring for this
project is relatively simple. No complicated wetland, hydrologic, or fish surveys are required.
All corrections will consist of replacement of dead and dying plants as necessary and
possible minor repairs to infrastructure (fences, signs, etc.) and the shoreline along Lake
Washington.
• Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management, of the mitigation area to
avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long-term persistence of the
mitigation area. The applicant is developing the project as their future headquarters and will
be located on-site. They have a vested interest in maintaining the vegetation in excellent
condition as it will be visible from the headquarters building and practice facilities.
• Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections. The applicant will contract with a
consultant to monitor all the shoreline planted areas. City inspections will be allowed.
• Avoid mitigatio_n proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or regulatory
requirements for adjacent properties, unless it is a result of a code requirement, or no other
option is feasible or practical. The proposed riparian planting does not move the location of
any natural feature towards adjacent properties. Thus no off-site property owners will be
affected.
• For on-site or off-site mitigation proposals, abutting or adjacent property owners shall be
notified when wetland creation or restoration, stream relocation, critical area buffer increases,
flood hazard mitigation, babitat conservatign mitigation, or geologic hazard mitigation have
the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent
properties. For example. if a created wetland on a (Jroperty would now result in a wetland
buffer intruding onto a neighboring property, the neighboring property owner would be
n2tified. The development potential of abutting or adjacent property owners will not be
affected in any way by the proposed shoreline planting plan for this project.
14.7 Based on Best Available Science
Compliance with best available science is described in Section 15.0.
Sep/ember 20, 2006
Seaha1<ksi09-.'0·06 lnkn 51,enm R.:port.doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and AC KJNDIG & CO
Page 27
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Train mg Facility
Renron, Washington Stream and lake Studv!Mitigalion Plan
15.0 COMPLIA!\CE \VITH BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE
15.1 Review of the Best Available Science Supporting the Proposed Request
Mitigation plantings proposed for the Lake Washington shoreline are both wider and better
vegetated than under existing conditions. Functions and values of both aquatic and upland
riparian habitat will be improved over existing conditions based on wider buffers, native species
plantings, and water quality improvements. A summary of proposed riparian functions in
comparison to existing riparian functions is provided in Table 3.
Riparian areas are generally recognized as having four major elements necessary to protect the
aquatic environment:
• Maintenance of stream baseflows;
• Maintenance of water quality;
• Contribution to in-stream structural diversity; and
• Contribution of biotic input including insects and organic matter.
Best Available Science (BAS) is unanimous in its recognition that wider riparian areas provide
increasing value to aquatic habitat (Pollock and Kennard 1998). Since the relationship between
riparian width and riparian function is exponential, the incremental functional benefits of
increasing riparian width decreases as buffers become wider. Under proposed conditions for
Lake Washington, the riparian planting area will range from a minimum of about 20 feet to a
maximum of about 200 feet (horizontal distance). Because the planted area will be wider than
under current conditions, and because species quality, quantity, and diversity along the shoreline
will be improved over existing conditions, the proposal is consistent with the RMC requirement
to utilize BAS to improve water quality, fish, and wildlife habitat. As described below using
BAS, the proposal will create a functional riparian corridor fully capable of protecting the major
habitat elements.
Baseflow
The proposed shoreline area will have no effect on baseflow because of the size of Lake
Washington and its position at the downstream end of the watershed. Water levels in Lake
Washington are not controlled within the immediate riparian zone of the lake.
September 20, 2006
Seal,aw/cs,'09-.?0-06 laki', 51,eam Report dor
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 28
Seaha11·/...:s Corporo/e Headquarlers and Training Faciliry
Renton, Washingwn
Table 3
Stream and Lake Studv/,\1itigation Plan
Riparian Habitat Functions and Values, Comparison of Existing versus Proposed Conditions
---------------------------------------------~ -
Function
Habitat Potential Existing Shoreline Proposed Shoreline Habitat Value
Function for Class Conditions Conditions Comparison
I Lakes
Vv1ater Quality Low to Existing condition lacks Future development is not Eguivalent
Moderate width, plant density, and plant dependant on riparian function under
diversity. Lack of native function for water quality both conditlons
vegetation also a minus. because it employs the
2005 King County Surface
\Yater Design Manual, so
width for water quality
treatment is not required.
Native vegetation is a plus.
Food Low Sparse non-native vegetation Vegetation optimized with Pro(!osed action
provides little beneficial leaf a diverse mix of native will have higher
litter and small organic species. High habitat value value
debris. near lake.
Microclimate Low to Existing shoreline area has Proposed shoreline area Eguivalent
\1oderate little effect on microclimate. will have little effect on function under
rnicroclimate. both conditions
Temperature Low to Not a significant issue for Not a significant issue for M1Jiy_~kr1~
& Shade none large Class 1 waterbodies. large Class l waterbodies. function under
both conditions
Human Low Lake Washington is a public Lake \Vashington is a Egulvalent
Access access area so access control public acce.s.s area so access function under
not a habitat functlon issue control not a habitat both conditions
function issue
Large Woody Low Site periodically cleared so Planting that will contribute Pro(!osed action
Debris unlikely to have any some minor woody debris will have higher
significant future L\VD in the future. value
contribution.
Channel Low Controlled lake level and no Controlled lake level and F.guivalent
\1igration surface channels on-site. No no surface channels on-site. function rn1der
potential for channel No potential for channel both conditions
migration migration
Bank Stability Low to Exotic species dominated Root strength increased ProHosed action
Moderate shoreline. Banks partially with native shrubs and will have higher
protected by large logs. trees. Banks partially value
protected by large logs.
Wildlife Not Rated Patchy exotic species I\"ative plantings in a dense PrOQOSed action
Habitat dominated riparian vegetation multi-story comiguous "'"'ill have highest
of relatively low value as canopy will provide high value
bird, amphibian, reptile, and wildlife habitat value.
rodent habitat.
Adapted from: A.C. Kindig & Co and Ceda:-ock Consultants, Inc. 2003.
Septemher 2(), 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page 29
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Wushin ton
Water Quality
Sn·eam an~ !.ake St1uly!Mirigation Plan
Water quality as it relates to aquatic habitat consists of various components including chemistry
(pH, D.O., metals, etc.) and temperature (the beneficial dissolved and particulate organic
nutrients that are also a component of water quality are discussed in the Biotic Jnput section).
Water Chemis/ly
Riparian widths ranging from 30 to 100 feet are described in the literature as satisfactory for
removing the majority of sediment and pollutants from surface water (summarized in Knutson
and Naef 1997). However, under the cunent conditions, on-site natural pathways to the stream
are largely absent due to the flat nature of the site and the isolated steely banked below-grade
channel. Under the proposal, the site will continue to avoid discharge to Gypsy Subbasin
Drainage because the hydrologic flow path through the site will be a piped drainage systems that
will bypass the riparian area and convey offsite discharge directly to Lake Washington. For Lake
Washington, sheet flow drainage that occurred in the past will be intercepted and treated as
required by the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual before discharge at outfalls
constructed to Lake Washington. Much of the natural riparian functions for hydrologic and water
quality functions (peak flow attenuation, base flow releases, and water quality treatment) will be
removed from riparian area control by the storm drain system. Stonn water detention and water
quality treatment requirements are regulated for new development and redevelopment within the
City without reliance on riparian buffer function. The proposed riparian zones will provide
equivalent water chemistry protection as existing riparian areas, and remediation including site
capping and fill of the remaining portion of the Gypsy Sub basin Drainage will result in overall
water quality improvements.
Temperature and Shade
Stream riparian zones provide shade and absorb solar radiation that would otherwise reach
streams and increase water temperatures. For these reasons, shade provided by riparian zones can
be important to maintaining water temperatures that are favorable for salmonids. However,
research on the effects of shade on stream water temperatures shows a considerable amount of
variability based on topographic elevation, adjacent land uses, vegetation type, and numerous
other factors (Pollack and Kennard 1998). Sullivan et al. (1990) concluded that once streams
traveled 25 miles from their watershed divides, they were generally too wide for trees to shade
their surfaces or exercise control over water temperature. This is particularly true in large, deep
lakes like Lake Washington. The proposed shoreline area will provide equivalent water
temperature protection as the existing riparian zone.
lnstream Structural Diversity
In-stream structural diversity is provided by large pieces of wood falling into the waterbody.
Large woody debris (L WD) consists of downed tree stems and branches and is a functionally
impmtant structural component of stream channels and lakes in the Pacific Northwest (Bisson et
al. 1987, Beschta et al. 1987, Sullivan et al. 1987, Bilby and Ward 1991, Fetherston et al. 1995,
Naiman and Beechie 1992).
Sep/ember 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 30
Seahawks Corporate Heudquarters and Training Faciliry
Renton. Washington Stream and lake Study/.Witigation Plan
The existing riparian zone contains no trees that would potentially contribute L WD to the lake, in
pat1 because the site is periodically cleared. Under the proposed shoreline area, conifers capable
of reaching the size necessary to function as L WD will eventually grow to maturity and senesce.
Some of these trees will fall into Lake Washington and increase structural diversity.
To help protect the shoreline from erosion, the applicant has proposed adding a few pieces of
L \VD to the shoreline. This will contribute to L WD accumulation in the area and provide some
immediate benefit. The proposed shoreline area will improve habitat quality provided by L WO
over existing conditions.
Biotic Input
Vegetation and insects falling into the creek form an important component of the aquatic
ecosystem food chain, especially in smaller stream channels. The majority of material comes
from directly over, or within a very sh011 distance of the stream. FEMAT (1993) suggests most
leaf material is contributed by trees located within approximately 50 feet of the channel edge.
Under existing conditions there is very little biotic input to the creek. Vegetation is generally
sparse and non-native. With the proposed future riparian shoreline area being wider, more
diverse, and consisting almost entirely of native species, the contribution of vegetative litter and
insect population abundance should increase significantly. The proposed shoreline area will
increase biotic input over existing conditions.
Noise and Visual Disturbance
Riparian zones protect sensitive areas from direct human impact by limiting easy access to the
stream and by blocking the transmittal of human and mechanical noise. Riparian zones provide
visual separation between streams and the developed environment, blocking glare and human
movement from fish species (Young 1989). Riparian zones function most effectively when the
adjacent land use consists of low intensity development; when riparian areas were greater than
50 feet wide, and planted with high quality mixed species of native vegetation that discourage
intrusion (Cooke 1992). Other authors recommend controlled human activity within riparian
zones, such as restricting human disturbance to footpaths, or roadway crossings within 25 feet of
the stream, and allowing active recreation and bike paths within 25 to 50 feet of the stream
(Schueler 1995).
However, the City of Renton has designated the portion of Lake Washington in which the project
is located as an Urban Environment under its Shoreline Master Program where human
recreational activities are to be encouraged. Therefore, the shoreline area is not being designed to
function as a division between the lake environment and controlled human use. The proposed
shoreline area will provide equivalent disturbance protection as existing riparian areas.
September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULT4NTS. INC and A.C. KINDIG & CO.
Page 31
Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington
15.2 Report Authors Experience
Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan
The applicant has contracted with EDA W to provide riparian planting design and with A.C.
Kindig & Co .• which included Cedarock Consultants in the biological analysis for the project.
These firms have extensive experience with riparian planting design, construction supervision,
and long term project success monitoring. Resumes of key personnel are provided in Appendix
4.
15.3 Analysis of the Likelihood of Success of the Compensation Project
The proposed mitigation/riparian planting project is relatively straightforward and will benefit
from having the applicant situate their headquarters on the site. The development is a high profile
project expected to receive extensive and ongoing media coverage. With the Seahawk's
headquarters on-site and the playing fields and players lounge immediately adjacent to the
mitigation/riparian planting area, it is in the applicant's best interest to provide long term
maintenance of the riparian plantings beyond what might normally be provided for a similar
project where the site is sold and the developer leaves.
There are no fish habitat or high quality wetlands involved in the riparian planting project.
Riparian planting consists primarily of planting native species in good quality riparian soils. The
area is watered naturally throughout most of the year and supplemental watering will be provided
as necessary. Upland plants will be selected that have adapted to the normal Pacific Northwest
wet winter and dry summer seasons.
The mitigation/riparian planting site will be monitored for five years to ensure plant species
selected and utilized for the project are thriving. Those that are not in satisfactory condition
during this period will be replaced. After five years, all healthy plants are expected to continue
growing without additional maintenance. However, maintenance will continue as needed to
remove debris and replace dead specimens, and manage understory branches of selected
hardwood trees.
Overall, the likelihood of success for the riparian planting project is considered to be high.
16.0 VEGETATION PROTECTION
16.1 Design Considerations
The Consent Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plans require capping of the North
and South Baxter properties to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline. This will
necessitate removal of all existing vegetation under the capped area. The site was last cleared in
1990, so existing vegetation consists predominately of grass, shrnbs, and young trees. The largest
existing trees consist of 8 to 10-inch diameter cottonwood which are found within 25-feet of the
shoreline. These trees will for the most part be preserved except where slopes necessary for
grading will bury the rootballs.
September 20. 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC andA.C KINDIG & CO.
Seahaw;.,,,,·,09-20-06 l,a(..s Srr~,1m Repor1.duc Page 32
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renron, Washington
16.2 Significant Tree Protection during Construction
Stream and Lake StudJi/A1itigation Plan
As noted previously, all existing trees will be removed from the site as necessary for capping
except those found within approximately 15 to 25-feet of the shoreline. Within this area,
Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom form dense thickets which have to be removed to
accommodate conversion to a native landscape under the shoreline riparian planting plan.
The following measures will be implemented during construction to protect significant trees
found along the shoreline while all other vegetation is removed:
• All significant trees on the project site within 100 feet of the shoreline will be identified
and located (see Appendix 1, Site Map (Sheet I), for 10 incb and larger trees).
• Prior to clearing, all trees to be retained shall be flagged.
• Prior to grading and throughout construction, a temporary plastic net fence shall be used
to identify the protected area of any significant tree designed for retention. The height of
such fencing shall be adjusted according to the topographic and vegetative conditions of
the site to provide clear visual delineation of the protected area. The size of the protected
area around the tree shall be equal to one foot diameter for each inch of tree trunk
diameter measured four feet above the grow1d.
• At no time during construction shall the following be permitted within the significant tree
protection area: (a) impervious surfaces, fill, excavation, or storage of construction
materials; (b) grade level changes, except in limited circumstances where proposed
improvements are determined by an arborist to be non-detrimental to the tree root
systems.
September 20. 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, I?'iC. and A.C KINDIG & CO.
Seah,,,,,,);prJ9.20-Uli l,1/c~, Slieam Reporr.doc Page 33
5'eahawks Corporate Headquurters and Training Facility
Renton, VVashington Stream and Lake Study!Atfitigation Plan
17.0 REFERENCES
A.C. Kindig 1999. Sand Filter Turf Cover Testing, in Chapter 5, MountainStar Master Planned
Resott EIS Water Quality and Fisheries (Associated Eatth Sciences, Inc.), June 30, 1999.
A.C. Kindig & Co and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. 2003. Best available science literature review
and stream buffer recommendations. Consultant report prepared for the City of Renton.
February 27, 2003.
Associated Eatth Sciences, Inc. 2000. An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties
Mitigation Analysis Memorandum dated February 17, 2000. J.H Baxter Propety
Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. October 2, 2000.
Beschta, R.L., Bilby, R.E., Brown, G.W., Holtby, L.B., and T.D. Hofstra. 1987. Stream
temperature and aquatic habitat: Fisheries and forestry interactions. In Salo, E.O and
T.W. Cundy [eds.] Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions.
University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 4 71 p.
Bilby, R.E. and J. W. Ward. 1991. Characteristics and fi.Lnction of large woody debris in streams
draining old growth, clear-cut, and second growth forests of southwestern Washington.
Can. J. offish. Aquat. Sci., 48:1-10.
Bisson, PA. Bilby, R.E. Bryant, M.D. Dolloff, C.A., Grette, G.B., House, R.A. Murphy, M.L.,
Koski, K.V. and J.R. Sedell. 1987, p. 87-94. In Salo, E.O and T.W. Cundy [eds.]
Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. University of Washington,
College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 47lp.
Cooke, S.S 1992. Wetland buffers-a field evaluation of buffer effectiveness in Puget Sound.
Pentec Environmental, Inc. Prepared for Washington Department of Ecology Shorelands
and Coastal Zone Management Program, Olympia Washington.
Entranco. 1995. Gypsy Subbasin Analysis. Technical Memorandum No. 2. City of Renton. April
1995.
Entranco. 1997. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Improvements Design Memorandum. City of Renton,
September 1997.
Federal Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) 1993. Aquatic ecosystem
assessment, Volume 5.
Fetherston, K.L., R.J. Naiman, and R.E. Bilby. 1995. Large woody debris, physical process, and
riparian forest development in montane river networks of the Pacific Northwest.
Geomorphology 13:133-144.
King County. 1993. Sammamish River corridor conditions and enhancement opportunities. King
County Surface Water Management, Seattle, WA. 54 p. plus appendices.
Knutson, K. L. and V. L. Naef. 1997. Management recommendations for Washington's priority
habitats: riparian. Washington Department offish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 18lp.
Septemher 20. 2006
Se~'/w.,,,k,'1)9-::0-:ifi lake.~ Stream Repor!.doc
CEDAROCK CO/,(SULTANTS. INC and A.C. KINDIG & CO
Page 34
Sea hawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/lv!itigation Plan
Magnusson Klemancic Associates, 2006. Stormwater Technical Infomrntion. Seahawks
Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington. August 24, 2006.
Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, et al. 1992. Fundamental elements of ecologically healthy
watersheds in the Pacific Northwest coastal ecoregion. Pages 127-188 In R.J. Naiman,
editor. Watershed management: balancing sustainability and environmental change.
Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 127-188.
Pfeifer, B. and J. Weinheimer. 1992. Fisheries investigations of Lakes Washington and
Sammamish, 1980-1990. VI Warmwater fish in Lakes Washington and Sammamish
(draft report). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA.
Pollock, M. and P.M. Kennard. 1998. A low-risk strategy for preserving riparian buffers needed
to protect and restore salmonid habitat in forested watersheds of Washington State:
Version I.I. 10,000 Years Institute: Bainbridge Island, Washington.
Schueler, Y. 1995. Site planning for urban stream protection, Washington D.C., Metropolitan
Washington Council of Governments and the Center for Watershed Protection.
Sullivan, K. J. Tooley, K. Doughty, J.E. Caldwell, P. Knudsen. 1990. Evaluation of prediction
models and characterization of stream temperature regimes in Washington.
Timber/Fish/Wildlife Report TFW-WQ3-90-006, Washington Department of Natural
Resources, Olympia, Washington.
Sullivan, K, Lisle, T.E., Dolloff, C.A., Grant, G.E. and LM. Reid. 1987. Stream channels: The
link between forests and fishes, p. 143-190. In Salo, E.O and T.W. Cundy [eds.]
Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. University of Washington,
College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 47lp.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2006. Priority habitats and species
database search (T24N, R05E, S29). August 18, 2006. Olympia, Washington.
Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington
Press, Seattle, WA. 220 p.
Young, M.J. 1989. Buffer delineation method for urban palustrine wetlands in the Puget Sound
Region. M.S. Thesis, Cniversity of Washington, Seattle.
September 20. 2006
Seahmd:s.:09-:!0-06 lilkes Sn·eam Report doc
CEDAROCK CONSULT4NTS. INC and A.C. KINDIG & CO
Page 35
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Faciliry
Renton, TYashington Stream and Lake Slt~dy,/Mitigation Plan
• Sheet J
• Sheet LIOO
• Sheet Sheets CE201-202
• Sheets CE22 l-224
• Sheet CE245
• Sheets CE301-302
Septemher 20, 2()Q(j
APPENDIX 1
PLAN SETS
Site Map (source: RETEC)
Conceptual Landscape Plan (source.· EDAW)
TESC Plans (source: Crawford)
Grading Plans (.wurce: Crawford)
Conceptual Utility & Drainage Control Plan
(source: Crawford)
Gypsy Subbasin Plan and Profile
(source: Crawford)
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A.C KflYD/G & CO
Page 36
N01-8N1HS1/M 'N01N3ll
:Jll 1S3MH1la0N llV8100:l
Al!IPB::! 8:J!l:'.>BJd S)1MBL.j88S
.~
!a:~ -'
0 •
; ., t-• ' ....
p .~
-__ --· 1
0
I
I
I
I !
~ J I I 0
I
SEAHAWKS -.:i~
= 5:HMYHY31S
C
J .,
.....
tc ! :; l!)
LU
0:::
::::,
CD -LL
~ • i!
l
!
,,
I
I
I
!:
;r
:r
'l !
'
,
'
' ) ~ ..
l
'
-· NO.L9NI HS\IM 'NO.LN 31:1
0ll 1S3MH1l;0N ll\lB.LOO~
Al!l!::l8.:J 5U!U18Jl
~ sJaµenbpeaH S)jMe4eas
NOl18ntl1SN08 tJQj 10N
.
:--i •
I
\
\
/
.~_-.
LJ •
/
-u
I ,_
i
i
i
!
I
i
I
i ·I .,, ,l
~1
'i jj:
!
·-·-;-··--Y'f' I~ 'l_Y. ..... ~·,,.. -·-··-··--·-··-··-··-·-·-··-··-·--··-··-·-··-·-·--.. -··----------··-··-··--·---··-·-··-··------.-··-··---··-·-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··-··--------.. -·--------·-1··-··-
I
I
I.!)
I.!)
w
0::::
:::)
(9
LL
' !
i
I
i
i ,-
i
!
-·
--§--
NO.L!'JNIHSVM 'NO.LN-:ll,J
::Ill .LS3MHl!lON llVS.LOOc!
A+!l!::le.:J 6u1uJeJ1
~ sJaµenbpeaH S)fMe4eas
-
'I ·1
,1111,,.i;, 11!,,'>l>I • !1ro:·1.1
N011Jnc11SNOJ clO:l lON
' I L ___ _
I~---::
. . :
I • _ _;!:··
·,.:,
I
'" "*'
\
J
:-:..
0_, 1,
0 , -
' \
, t1~ ~~ 0 ~r N -~ • ~eij w ; Ii.I"' 0
co
I.!)
w
0:::
::J
CJ
LL.
?. •;
---·-··~---·-·--·--·--·-----·-·-·-----·---·-··-------·-·-··---··---------··--·---·.' •-•-··-·-----·-----~-----------··-··--·----·-··--------··---f•'.?::1 :.,;If, ,1;> · ), ,,-, '" __
I !
! --·-t:---·-----------·-·-------·-·-· -· -,.-1
I I '
t-
.. -.--
.-~ I
I
. I I' IT ~~l<f -------------·---------~:;:~""'7,~~T,;·,
!~
I: ,;
"
-~·
I,. '.
!'
•
.
:1-~
I
,.;
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
1'
I
I
-J
I
I
j
i
, IJ,;
'r
I I
I
: 1/r i
I :d r'
I .//'.' ... ·/
I :/ ,' '_: ·, I I I, i
1! 1' !ifi:' :;.. '-i I 11,
,I I I,~-~
', , I ·tt~ I "_·_ '[ /1'·1·,s:~ I I •. -~ ' 'I
1 ' •.er.--·*l-1 --r'
I ~ i I ' I I L
\ ,' <i); I
I It -· ·; ·:' :0 ./ '
J _Jj· I /-·'-/ ;/_
·1 ' ; /;.//::.,
r---· r/_ ;/_ ';), '] •1-
J~;·_/ i
. . /O/ · · • 1
/1/' ·1 J1
'·\ '1\' \\·:>,·. ·: I
\<'\ I:• I
,-_
.,
j~,
i~ t
iC
i
l:' w
\ \ ::,,:: '1 ii, 1,
I I 1.'. 1'
, ', I r ·1
. = -.=.., !'
i
'i·(·
I,
ii'
i'
I
J
'· ~·-~-
·-is
\,.
',
' / ~ ' /
'\ y ,J·
-" ..
'1
/
-,;,,.·
--·~
1'-,1.: '
~_{>
'I I : ;6' ,, ,i.,l,i-t'•
·~---->::,,~ /~}'
' ' .. ' //1'.-1•
"' __ !J /? i ~ t' 1/)~/
I. ,' .. .' .. ~j' '////~
/ /: .... ./' /,// ,/ ~
, :..~· ;/ .///l ,.. .; ,, ,f /_II/ •s., },/ l>:~;y;~ . ;·/! /--.. ,"', /;,
\ : ) f ! \ ';I /._ :,
\
~~'.'I\
Cr U-,--·· ~ i ! :,
,;v-..1 m i
(J1
/ /:
·I'.
,{
'/,,
/ '
" -
'' '
'·--~ f::(·~· t //// ~',I
' /. /';/;'.·/ ~E
/,.-r/;:;/·
c;_.I' Ii/
,./ l/i
/ :///
j' I I:
i' /:'/'
~/,0('~';\
\ ·'·
_,._
• -··
I
f·
I· '-'
/;' /
,.'/
.//,.-, -
.:/l;/;ik~
'I "I :/ //
./ I/
'/// . '
. ' , I 1'
... 1 1 I
,,;> I
, I I I
I '
'1 1 I
, I , I
. I'
' '' 'I
' '' '' 'I l ,'
•
~~
··.;
• '
....... NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION (,.)
I Seahawks Headquarters &
0 j ; I m "~ Training Facility
f\.) a Ft N < FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
:~ ! ~ I i ! ' I
"ICt~!) I l>s: • '• II : (l. ">Ill . ,;~,,,,c,, . -RENTON, WASHINGTON I
s: r ;,-: :,. l ::;;~
, ;i:z
i' "'c f z~ "·c nz •'-I
\
.~
' \
7
9 .... ~
'
f,
.ii
;:,~ / I' ' '"1'1 mr 11 • • •• ij,
h
~ ,~
I 11 ,,,m
' JO , Ii .. . ! l;j
j I i ·-~
I
j_,
i F
i"
i' j: ri
I
j -· zu J OQ
~z
::i~
z::i
~j ·"" .,_
-.--
~:
NO!ONIHSVM 'NOJ.N'3ll
:>ll lS3Ml-llMON 11\l!UOOJ
A~!IPB::l 6u!U!eJ1
,llt1 .. ·l.'1 lo',.:,,i)
'? sJaµenbpeaH s>1Me4eas
'
,' ,,
---------
t-_:::.:;~/
I• -
11
jl
:i-
I
I
I /,
I ,
1._I
',
'
NOl1Jnt!1SN0J t!O::l lON
·1:
, ',, 11 ·, I
1 I ,
J I
I'
Ii
(
----'~ --·-·--1
'
/I "
I ,
i
' I
"' )_ .. ,·
/
"
i;..
I ~·.
//·r·I ~--', '
'
i ; I ,':
f :.
;r,
' ~.
'I
I
/
,/
/
•
:
/
/
/
•
I
I
•
/,.,,_,f_>, 1·-----., _ _
1 -~--: \._-:>~~fZftf)\~
I ,/' ('--,,,·., 1,c~,"\
_,
I
r
,!.· .. ·.,,,. I.,,.,
• ' . ' ·, ·, '1 \
~;, '~~
/ :,:::.ci-}0 ·-
,/,,, --f;;,; '
•
-' ' ..
\
' \
•
Jlg:' ~~ N ~-w ~ (.)
V ...
l.()
w n:::
::J
(0
LL
! -• _ f p,· I"' ' >, 1," r ..... ------·-:---. -: . ~ -4--.+-·-,-~ ~ ---. -
i --,,___ ,,, ·.,J
i
-j
!
i
~ \ i~· llll ; , .;, ,' ,,!! ' ..
! __ _
I
-i-f:--
i~
L L
i
i' 1:
(
1
fi -··
.
~~ I
~~ 1
:,~ !
zl l ·-~ u~ ;~ j 'I
NO!DNI HS\fM 'N01N3~ r": . ,.,-,. o(:' <, ',•'!~I '"" ·1 :) 11 1S3MH.H!ON ll\f8.100.:l
Al!IPB::I 5U!U!8Jl
,g s1aµenbpeaH S)1Me4eas
I I NOl18n~1SN08 tlO:l lON
' --__ .,.__
;-:
. .___+----_.,.....I
, ---,
.. -" _J ___
f :-3:. --l_·
'f---
-
P' ~-.. ~
:-l ,0:: E ;':
r~ :>: r: ,::
-1!
;r,
/
~---io
" ''
-~---
I :;
I
, I
11
' I:
'I
. I
I
I
l
/'!
:/ .. " '·
; -·
'· \
',
'
I
'I
l I ' ' ~ { l;')I
> N 11 0 N
;:i~ w • ~ 0 0
ID __ ,.....
,,,, • 1 ,..>f; J,' ri ~:_,,.
\
~!
9.
'
...
, .
.
\
"
'
"
LO
w
et:::
:::)
('.)
LL
~
i 1
NOlONIHSVM 'NO!N"3l,J -··-" .. .. .. ·1 'I ·1
' 'Sti I' r;; -· zu 1 •:i.·,,·_.~:, ~ { 1,, oo ::n1 !S3MH.lli0N llVB.lOO~ ,• N 1m ~z ! "l!IPe:1 6u1u,eJ1 11 ~ N ::i~ ~a w I 1 ,c;s z::E ~ I· I[! c:,w '!? sJaµenbpeaH S)!Me4eas • ()
" fl <~ 0
::E"'
ii-NGt.l3A~1SN08 c!O~ IONL __ v,----I --------,M~:;;-~7;;7,.----------------------------?r(?•------------·----------------------·-;-·---·----------· ---:;
1 I w
)
'
\
' \
•
'
I ~ (')
I
I
'"
'1 ··-·. \ ·,
• •
--~------------
"
"
i T--
+--q!-
LL
] j iN l•
1
1m 1«:,::i ·IH ' u
'
\ =
' -
\
1 -
-·
·,
~-
y
I
zu ! ::,-~u ~z J :::i~ 7.::;: c:,~ -<~ -"' _,.
)'.::!, ~-'.:, ·-"" ,.
~-·--. /
~;
.i.
••
NOWNIHSVM 'NO!N:ll:l
3111S3MHll:lON 11V8l.OO~
"l!IPe:l 5u!u!eJ1
'll sJaµenbpeaH S)tMe4eas
/lt1 _, ,c, 1, •,. 1~, l . M•"i,t
N0ll8nH1SN08 HO:l lON
"
''(\ e
...
j
__ , .. -
L:> -•-.
I ! ' I
I :
.LI -ti--,-,, ':
+ 1:-I
~-ii
'
::.;
---· i----
t ~
i ~-~:::
;<; -~~
1· ' gnr i.o'
'<I" ~~~ N
~ ,~§ w
()
f'... ..-
l!)
w
0:::
=>
(.'.)
u..
i ;: :. i -··
----------
N<:ll~NIHS\fM 'NOJ.N"3lJ
:Jll 1S3MHlli0N ll\f8J.OO~
Al!l!:'.>B::I 6u1u1eJ1
'l? SJaµenbpBaH S)1Me4eas
'
1 ,_., ~ 't,I • I ', . 'f"T I (IT>'.!<I
N01l8ntl1SN08 ~0:1 !0N
-l --
/
(-----.,
, . .;.
--------···---------·--·
. /
l t I z ~, ' I -, I
ih .,....
0
(")
i iH w
~ (!> ~ ()
co ...-
LD
w
0:::
:::>
(j
'I' LL
,,. r ..
C :,
-1 ;
l j II
NOWNIHSIIM 'NO!N:ll:l 1-: ·1
. ,. -· zu J ,.,,,,c, U ~.,,.., I , 11u:1.; o-:Jll 1S3MHHION 11\18100~ . · l• ~u
,i1ll! ,....z ! At!(!::>e .::1 6u1u1eJ 1 ::i~
· 11jli z:l: u;.l,J '!? SJaµenbpeaH S)1M8l.lB8S ! 0 <~ ~" ~
N0ll8nti1SN08 tJQ;:j lON
--.,, ,_ -r--·------_
Ii,., · ~ e
,...-: .. .-,, rr· C• 'c) 1111; I.',' , !I
:w•,, •! ,' ' !I
~:
)., ;• · ~Ill
1 n:. ..,.-1
(~}: .....
'", All;
,
I ~i
1-.. ---
,H,1 ):"1
.... ;1~,
:~I C\91
.<.1,1-:,r,.,:11,
.1 ti ,,,~
~,, .. n'·
·1;;,: •fl,
;;.;:~ n.:}:
I
I
I
I
I
I
~I ii; •
:n,:.·.
r I 2 ~j ' ;·15 NI
,J~ 0
C") ~~~ w i~~ 0
"
0)
~
LD
UJ
0:::
::i
0
LL
Seaha.vks Corporate /leadquurters and Training Fucilit_y
Renton, Washington Stream and lake Studv/Aiitigation Plan
APPENDIX2
RESUMES FOR KEY PLANTING PLAN DESIGN AND
AQUATIC/WILDLIFE FUNCTION ANALYSIS CONSt:LTANTS
September 20, 2006
Seahawb/()9-lU-06 l.a/ies S!rimm Repcrl.doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTA.VTS. INC and A.C KINDIG & CO
Page 37
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Jlitigation Plan
CARL G. HADLEY
Principal Fisheries Biologist -Cedarock Consultants, Inc.
EDUCATION
B.A., Ecology
Umversiry of
California
at San Diego
/vf.S. Graduate Studies.
Fisheries
University of
Californ1a
at Davis
PROFESSIONAL
REGISTRATIONS
1Vashington
Departme11l of Natural
Resources
Watershed Analysis
Analy.wSpecialist
Fisheries, Channel
and Water Qualiry
Modules
lnstream Flow Physical
Habitat Simulation
(PHABS!Mj Modeling
Course
NAU! and PAD!, Open
Wacer Scuba
PROFESSIONAL
ASSOCIATIONS
American Fisheries
Societ:y
American Fisheries
Society -
Bioengineering Group
September 20, 2006
SUMMARY
Mr. Hadley provides over 15 years of experience in assessing and mitigating land
development project impacts on aquatic habitat. Mr. Hadley has been the principal
fisheries scientist on several dozen Environmental Impact Studies under
SEPA/1'.tPA. Much of Mr. Hadley's current practice specializes in working with
clients with exposure to fishenes resources impacted by the Federal and State
threatened and endangered species programs. Past experience has included field
analysis and authorship of fisheries modules for over a dozr:n Washington State DNR
level 2 watershed analyses, a half dozen Habitat Conservation Plans for incidental
take pennits under Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), and
several dozen Biological Evaluations and Biological Assessments for consultation
under Section 7 of the ESA. Mr. Hadley has also provided design, permitting, and
construction oversight on several dozen urban and rural stream enhancement and
restoration programs.
REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERJENCE
CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE DEVELOP'V!E'.'<T
City of Reaton
Hired by the City of Renton to provide fisheries biology expertise to the City during
development of their new Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program
regulations. Developed best management practices for stream, lake and riparian
habitat based on Best Available Science review. Worked with Department of Ecology
and City to ensure new regulations met Gro\atth Management Act (G'.'v1A)
requirements.
WATERCOURSE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
Skagit County Department of Public Works, Washington
Provided permitting and mitigation design assistance in support of various projects
designed to alleviate flooding and enhance fisheries use of farm-related watercourses
in Skagit Valley. Designed stream habitat restoration features, fish passage structures,
and riparian planting schemes. Prepared permit applications and supporting
documents (JAR.PAS, Biological Assessme11ts, etc.) as needed for local, state, and
federal permits.
SNOQUAL:\11E RIDGE PROJECT
\\!e)'erhaeuser Real Estate Company
Prepared fisheries sections for the Master Drainage Plan and multiple EISs. Assessed
salmonid fisheries habitat in 21 drainage basins on the 2,000-acre development site.
F.valuated project impacts on each stream and provided design input for fisheries
mitigation. Conducted long-tenn monitoring studies to evaluate construction and
land-use change impacts and develop appropriate responses based on adaptive
management concepts.
TREE'.1-10'.'<T RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Port Blakely Communities,
Prepared fisheries sections for Environmental Impact Starernent. Developed and
implemented fisheries study plan to support a King County EIS and Master
Development Plan. Assessed impac:s to fisheries and developed appropriate
mitigation for all streams.
Seahtiv-ksiV9-20 Oli Loki's S1rc.im Repon do,
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. I.VC and AC KINDIG & CO
Page 38
Seaha\1-·is Corporate !feadquar/ers and Training Faciliry
Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Studv/Mitigation Plan
Sep1ember 20, 2006
MOUNTAINSTAR/SUNCADIA RESORT
Trend west Resorts Inc.
Authored aquatic affocted environment and impacts sections for this 5,000 acre
residential and resort development. Developed conceptual mitigation options for
potential effects to resident and anadrornous salmonids. Worked with \VDFW,
\VDOE, NMFS, USF\VS, and local Tribes to establish fishaies protection measures
for new bridges, water intakes, stream crossings, plats, and golf courses.
REDMO!',D RIDGE DEVELOPMENT
Quadrant Corporation
Redmond, \Vashington
Evaluated existing conditions and developed aquatic habitat protection measures for
this 460-acre land development in western Washington. Authored fisheries sections
of EIS. \Vorked with CoUilty staff to identify fish-bearing stream reaches based on
sire-specific protocol.
SKAGIT HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT
Mount Vernon, Washington
Provided fisheries support during the EIS and ESA consultation process for this 209-
acre project in the City of Mount Vernon. Conducted field reconnaissance, developed
mitigation plans, prepared SEPA and BE documents, negotiated permits with city,
state, and fedaal agencies, and testified at public hearings.
CLEARVIEW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT-BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Snohomish County, \Vashington
Prepared a biological assessment for bull trout and Chinook salmon in support of a
8.2-mile water supply pipeline near the tm:vn of Snohomish, Washington. The
pipeline route crossed numerous fish-bearing streams including the Snohomish River,
a major salmon bearing water course. Potential impacts to bull trout and Chinook
salmon were assessed.
MA TS MATS QUARRY EIS A'\'D BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
\lats Mats Bay, \Vashington
Prepared DEIS fisheries sections and a hiological assessment to address potential
impacts of expanded hard rock quarry operations on aquatic species. Puget Sound
runs of chinook salmon, chum salmon, and bull trout were addressed in the BA.
PALMER-MONROE SAND AND GRAVEL MINE
Snohomish County, \Vashington
Completed fisheries analysis of existing conditions and po!ential impacts of proposed
gravel qc1arry ill the Snohomish River floodplain. A fisheries restoration plan was
developed for the conversion of an agricultural ditch into a stream section as
mitigation for the removal of another ditch during gravel excavation.
LO!',E STAR GRAVEL MINE -SEPA CHECKLIST
Maury Island, Washington
Completed fisheries technical report as part of expanded SEPA checklist. The
document analyzed potential project impacts to regional Esheries resources from the
applicant's propos,d to reopen an historic gravel quarry on Maury Island.
S~1Jhaw0si09·10·/!6 Lukc1.1 S1,·ew11 Reper! doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A C KINDIG & CO
Page 19
Seuhawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, fVashingtan Stream and Lake Siudy/Jditigation Plan
EDUCATION
M.L A., Uni•1ers11y of Washington, 2000
B.A., Natural Scier,ces, emphasis 1n
Biology, Westmonl College; 1991
AFFILIATIONS
American S0c1e1y of Landscape Arch11ec1s
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS
landscape Architect. Washington, 2004
HONORS + AWARDS
Honor Award, Physical Plans Category,
American Planning Association,
Washington State Chapter, "Tollgate Farm
Cen1ral Meadow Master Plan,· 2005
Merrl Award in Research, American Society
cf Landscape Architects, "Residential
Impacts lo Water Quality and Aquatic
Hab,tats," 2004
Merit Award, American Society of
Landscape Archilec\s, "Acaderr>ic Award
2000"
Design Award. American Society of
Landscape Architects, Washington
Chap1er, ··Lewis & Clark Memorial at
S:ation Camp" 2000
Oeslgr'. Award, American Society of
landscape Arcnilects, Washington
Chapter, "Reduct:on of Impervious
Surfaces In New Development for
Snohomish County," 1999
Design Award, Amerbm Society of
Landscape Architects. Washington
Chapter, 'Vision Plan far Pathfinder
Elementary School-Stormwater
Management Opportunit1es: 1999
Oesigr Award, American Soc:iety of
landscape Architects, Washington
Chapter, "Green Wall Park," 1998
Seplemher 20, 2006
JEFFREY K. BOUMA
Landscape Architect
EDAW Inc.
ivtr. Bouma is a landscape arCh.itect with over six years of experience in
landscape planning and design. He holds a Masters degree in Landscape
Architecture and his professional experience includes landscape analysis,
conceptual design at various scales, design and construction document
production, construction administration, public meeting facilitation, recreation
plarnting and design, and project management for park, college campus, civic
campus, rest area, and other public and private projects. He is interested in
crentive ways to integrate natural systems vvith the meaningful design of space,
particularly in the context of urbanizing settings-thus providing unique,
functional, and sustamable places for people to live, play and learn.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Seattle Seahawks Football Training Complex, Renton, WA
Project Manager/Landscape Architect
CLIENT: Vulcan/Seattle Seahawks
EDAW 1s currently providing landscape and hardscape services as part of the
consultant team led by Crawford Architects for a new headquarters and
training facility in Renton, V'./ A
Poison Creek Day Use Area 1 Lake Cascade, ID
Project Manager/Landscape Architect
CLIENT: Tamarack Resort
EDAW is currently providing conceptual master planning and design services
for the proposed redevelopment of an existing State Park campground and boat
launch located on the west side of Lake Cascade 90 miles north of Boise, Idaho.
East Capitol Campus, Phases IV and V, Olympia, Washington
Landscape Architect
CLIENT: State of Washington Department of General Administration
Mr. Bouma assisted in the preparation and organization of construction
documents and construction administration of a 12-acre landscaped plaza that
sits above two massive parking garages and a bisecting street that lie beneath a
main portion of the Washington State East Capitol campus.
Shoreline Community College Pagoda Union Building; Washington
Landscape Architect
CLIENT: State of \-\>'ashing ton Deparbnent o( General Administration
Mr. Bouma is currently worki.ng with a design team lt-d by Opsis Architects to
renovate the student Pagoda Union Building (PUB) and the surrounding site.
Wanapum Turbine Interpretive Park; Washington
Landscape Designer
CLIENT: Cr ant Public Utilities District
Mr. Bouma managed the developed of concept plan, section, elevation, and
detail drawings for this park ,vhere the centerpiece turbine, a 128-ton steel
monolith, will be set upright on its nose, allowing visitors to walk beneath it and
its large blades.
CEDAROCK CONSUUANTS, INC and A C KINDIG & CO
Page 40
Seaha·.1-ks Corporare Headquarters and Training Facilit;,·
Renton, IYashington Stream and Lake Study/Aii1igation Plan
Septemher 20, 2006
5,,11hawks/09.::0.06 [ak~,, S1ream Repor•.d(n
Clark1 s Dismal Nitch-Lewis & Clark National Historic Park; Washington
Project Manager/Landscape Architect
CLIENT: Sta~e of Washington Department of General Administration,
Washington St3te Department of Transportation, Was:'..ington State Historical
Society, \:ational Park Service
l\.fr. Bouma b currently working with the design team of Perkins+ Wili
Arc:'itecture on a !\faster Plan for the redesign of a \VSDOT safety rest stop and
interpretive park near the mouth of the Colum'::iia River along SR 401.
Tollgate Farm-Central Meadow Master Plan
Project Manager/Landscape Designer
CLIENT: City of :,...;orth Bend
~fr. Bouma was responsible for the development of a long rangl' management
plan that complies with City policy, i~eets a broad range of community needs,
and balances priorities for open space, active recreation, trails, v,:ildlife,
agriculture and historic preservation.
Pit 3, 4, and 5 Hydroelectric Project: Recreation Site Concepts and
Interpretation Plan; California
Project Manager/Landscape Architect
CLIENT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
!v1r. Bouma ivas responsible for developing site concept plans for improvements
to more than hventy recreation facilities, including campgrounds, day use areas,
boat launches, and trails in the Pit River basin in northern California.
Marvin Alexander Beach Park; Lake Alminor, California
Project Manager/Landscape Architect
CLIENT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
Mr. Bouma was responsible for the design and construction document
development for a 5-acre day use area on the south shore of Lake Alminor in
northern California. A.n ecologically sensitive design of the park minimized site
disturbance, grading, and tree removal while providing parking for 30 vehicles,
a restroom, and ADA trail to th(' 1-acre beach area.
Valley West Subdivision Park, Phase II; Bozeman, Montana
Project Manager/Landscape Designer
CLIENT: Aspen Enterprises
:Vtr. Bouma was responsible for the C.eveloptr.ent of construction documents,
including a site plan, planting plan, and irrigation plan, for a 10-acre park
contai.ning a new 25-acre lake, wetlands, and an existing stream.
Dillon Readiness Center, Dillon, Montana
Project Manager/Landscape Designer
CLIENT: United States National Guard
As project manager, !\1r. Bouma developed construction documents and
specifications for planting and irrigation ir. coordination with the architectural
prime consultar,t. A palette of native plants, supplied with irrigation from a drip
sy..,.tem, \'Vas used to provide viability and reduce long-tenn landscape
maintcnann· and replacement cost.
CEDAROCK CONSULT4NTS. INC and AC KINDIG & CO.
Page 41
Sea hawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility
Renton, Washington S'tream and Lake StudrlHitigation Plan
APPEND1X3
JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION
(JARPA)
September 20, 2006
S~ahawb/09-20-06 Likes Streuu; Reporr.doc
CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS. INC and A. C KINDIG & CO
Page 42
'
AGENCY USE ONLY
Agency Reference#: Date Received:
Circulated by (local govt. or agency)
JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA)
(for use in Washington State)
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK
Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.55.290. You must submit a copy 8 . .
>
of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local
Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same d3y.
Based on the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply)
D Local Government for shoreline: D Substantial Development D Conditional Use D Variance D Exemption D Revision
D Floodplain Management [] Critical Areas Ordinance
[S] Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) Project is exempt from procedural reqts of HPA
D Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office-Federal Permit Unit)
0 Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification
D Corps of Engineers for: D Section 404 D Section 10 permit
D Coast Guard for General Bndge Act Permit
D For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology/Department of
Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement
SECTION A -Use for all permits covered by this application. Se sure ta ALSO complete Section C (S;gnature Block) tor all permit applications.
1. APPLICANT
FOOTSALL NORTHWEST LLC, ATTN: MR. RAY COLLIVER (Purchaser of the property)
MAILING AODR!::SS
505 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 900, SEATicE. WA 98104
WORK PHONE
206 342 2000
E-MAIL ADDRESS FAX,
206 342 3554
If an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Section C (Signature Block) for all permit
applications
2 AUTHORIZED AG!::'\'T
CARL HADLEY, CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC.
MAILING AODR!::SS
19609 2441h AVENUE NE, WOODINVILLE, WA 98077
WORK PHONE
425-788-0961
E-MAIL ADDRESS ; HOME PHONE
CARL.HADLEY@VERIZON.NE r '
J RELATIOJ\SHP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY O OWNER 0 PURCHASER O LESSEE O OTf-<ER:
4 NAME, ACORESS. AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(SJ, IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY. 505 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. SUITE 900 SEATTLE, WA 98104 342-2000
5. LOCATION (STREET ADDqESS, INC~UD1NG CITY, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE. WHERE PRO;:,OSE:! ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR)
5015 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N, CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY
LOCAL GOVERNMENT Wl"'."H JURISDICTION iC·TY OR COUNTY): CITY OF HENTON
WATER800Y YOU ARE WORKING IN-GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAINAGE & LAKE TRIBUTARY OF
WASHINGTON LAKE WASHINGTON
IS THIS WATERBODY ON THE 303(d) LIST? YES O NO 0
lF YES. WHAT P:\R.'\..\CETER(Sj?• _______________ _
ht:p·//W\\ 'W.-:cy.w:1 g,1,1pni,g@J1Jc"~~.,__j_n12.:ij_r_~_;L~VI:S .. ~J~,J .iOJd LIST 1Vf.3S:TE
FAX#
425-788-5562
WRIA#
08-UNNUMBERED
------------------------------
'.!, SECTIQr,, I SECTION I TOWNSHIP I RANGE I GOVERNMENT LOT IS"1QRELINE DESIGNATION
SW 29 24 05 URBAN
~------------'-------
LATITUDE & LONG:TUDE N47.536 W122. 199 (WGS 84) ZONING DE:S1Grs,A'"ION
1AX PARCEL NO JNR Sl Rb.AM TYP:, IF KI\QWN
PARCEL #S 292459001 ANO #2924059015 !GYPSY 3 -FISH BEARING: LAKE WASHINGTON. 1 -SHORELINE
)ARPA, Revised 7/02 Cont,ict the State of Washington Office of Pennit Assis.ta nee for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 43
6. OESCR13E THE CURRENT USE OF THE P~OPERTY, ANO SHUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY HAVE YOU COMPLETED Ar-.Y PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ON THIS
PROPERTY? 0 YES GI NO FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH ANO YEAR OF COMPLETION
THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF VACANT LAND COVERED IN PART WITH OLD ASPHALT. SCRUB SHRUBS AND TREES GROWING
SINCE THE PROPERTY WAS LAST GRADED IN 1990 COVER PORTIONS OF THE LOT
IS THE PRO:,ERTY AGRICUL ;"URAL LANO? 0 YES GI NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? OY~S ~'>;0
7a DESCR:6E THE PRQPQSEO WORK THAT ._EEDS AQUATIC Pf'RMITS COr".'PLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE O~INARY
,H,GH WATER MARK OR LINE, ll'>ICLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TQ SE USEC. IF APPL YING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT, DESCRIBE ALL WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 200 FEET OF THE
OR::l"JARY HIGH WATER MARK IF YOU HAVE PROVIDED A TI ACHED rvATERIALS TO DESCRIBE YOUR PROJFCT vou STILL MUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED WORK HERE. ATIACH A
,SEPARA-E SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED
I· APPROXIMATELY 125 FEET OF THE GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAINAGE ON THE PROJECT SITE (ALL REMAINING OPEN CHANNEL ON THE SITE)
WILL BE PLACED IN A CULVERT. . THE EXISTING CULVERT UNDER THE SITE WILL BE REPLACED WITH A LARGER PIPE AND THE ALIGNMENT WILL BE MOVED SLIGHTLY (SEE
APPENDIX 1, SHEETS CE301-302). . FIVE NEW STORMWATER OUTFALLS TO LAKE WASHINGTON WILL BE BUILT (SEE APPENDIX 1, SHEET CE245)
PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS AND GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGINAL OR GOOD QUAl/TYREPRDDUCIBLE DRAWINGS MUST
,BE ATTACHED. NOTE: APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE. BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
ANO COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8·112 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRAWINGS MAY BE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES.
7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK ANO WHY YOU WA,.,_T OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUE/IICEO
THE DESIGN.
. SOILS ACROSS THE SITE WILL BE CAPPED WITH UP TO THREE FEET OF CLEAN SOIL AS PART OF THE REMEDIATION ACTION. TO
ELIMINATE ONGOING EROSION OF THIS MATERIAL, AND REDUCE GROUNDWATER FLOW THROUGH THE SOILS, THE REMAINING OPEN
PORTION OF THE GYPSY SUBSASIN DRAINAGE ON THE PROJECT SITE WILL SE CULVERTED AND FILLED
• THE REVISED ALIGNMENT WILL ALLOW THE NEW CULVERT TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE DRY WHILE CREEK FLOW REMAINS IN THE
EXISTING PIPE. THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT HAS BEEN SELECTED TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FEATURES.
• STORMWATER FROM THE SITE WILL BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY TO LAKE WASHINGTON AFTER TREATMENT. TO PREVENT LARGE
QUANTITIES OF WATER FROM BEING RELEASED AT ANY ONE LOCATION, AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE FLAT SITE, STORMWATER WILL
BE DISCHARGED AT UP TO FIVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ALONG THE SHORELINE
:7c. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. T'1ESE L.'SES ~AY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY.
RECREATION. and AEST'1ETICS. '.:lENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE. AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS. AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQlJATIC
LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GL'IDANCE DOCUMEN1S YOU HAVE USED_ ATIACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED
SEE ATTACHMENT 7C
7d. FOR IN WATER CONSTRUCTION WORK. WILL YOUR PROJECT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WATER QU.6.LITY STANDARDS FOR TURBIDITY
WAC 173.201A-1107 l'iJ YES ONO (SEE USEFUL DEF .\1TIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS'
8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? 0 YES 0 NO
PROPOSED STARTING DATE: November 1, 2006 (FILL' NG THE OPEN CHANNEL, CONSTRUCTING THE NEW CULVERT, AND CHANGEOVER FROM THE
OLD CULVERT WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE WINTER PER THE ATTACHED CULVERT CONSTRUCTION PLAN DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT
7C)
ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY· TWO YEARS ending June 2008
9. CHECK IF AN'-' TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED
0 WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH W~TER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS: AND!OR
0WATERWARD OF MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS
10. WILL FILL MATERIAL \ROCK. FILL. BULKHEAC. QR CTHER MATFRIAL) BE PLACED
~ WATERWARD Of-THE CROlr.ARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS7 Gypsy Su~ba~ir-Or<1in~ge IF YES. VOLUME (CUBIC YARos: 105 !AREA 0.03 (ACRES)
0 WATERWARD OF TH£ MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TICAL WATERS? IF YES. VOLUME :cue1c YARDS] AREA (ACRES)
JARPA, Revised 7/02 Comact the State of Washington Office ofPcnnit Assistance for lat~st version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 44
\1. WILL MATERIA_ BE PLACED IN WETLANDS? 0 YES 0NO
IF YES
A IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES
B HAS A DELINEATION SEEN CCMPLE.,.EO? IF YES PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICAPQt'-; 0 YES ONO
C HAS A W.:TLANO REPCR-BEEN PRE.,AREQ? IF YES PLEASE SUB~ITWITH APPLICATIO·'s 0 YES ONO
D -ypE AND COMPOSITION OF Fill MATERIAL (l::.G., $ANO, ETC).
E MATERIAL SOURCE
F LIST ALL SOIL SERIES iTYPE OF 50:L) LOCATED AT THE PROJECT SITE & INDICAT: IF T-tEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LIST OF HYDRIC SOILS S01 LS INFORMATION CAN 8E OBTAINED
FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CO"JSERVAT Of\ SERVICE (NRCS)
G. WILL PROPOSE'D ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOOCING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? DYES [BJ NO
IF YES, IMPACTED AREA IS
~
ACRES CF DRAINED WETLANDS
NOTE If yov P'O.'eCl will ,mpact greater than /3 of an acre of wetland, subri ta mitig;rnon plan to the Corps .ard Ecology for approval alorg wi\h t!ie JARPA form
NOTE:;; 401 waler qualP!ycertlflcc1r,on wr/1 be roquirad from Ecology m 8dd1/10,110 an approved m,r,9a1,on plan •f your projec! ,mpecrs wetlands rlla/ ere: 8) ;merer t.~e/1 ~ ecrl!J m Stzl:J, or
b) 1,dal M'lllanas 01 wetfBnds edjece"I IO 1,dal war er. Plee58 5ubmil the JARPA form and m,1,gar,on plan 10 Ecol09y tor en ,ncfi¥idual 401 certifies/Jon if e) or llJ applies
12 STCRM\,i/A TER COMPLIANCE FOR NA rlONWIDE PERMITS ONLY:
THIS PRCJECT IS (OR WILL BE) DESIGNED TO MEET ECOLOGY'S MOST CURRENf STORMWATf::R MANUAL OR AN ECOLOGY APPROVED LOCAL STORMWATER MANUAL 0 YES ONO
IF YES -WHICH MANUAL Will YOUR PROJECT Bf= DESIGN/cl) TO MEET --~-----
If NO-FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION .:101 AND 404 PERMITS CNL Y-PLEASE SUBMIT TO ECOLOGY FOR APPROVAL, ALONG Wl!H THIS JARPA APPL'CATION, DOCUMENTATION THAT
OEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT OR ACT!VJ7YW!LL COMPLY WITH THE WATER QUAUTY STANDARDS, WAC 173.2Q1(A)
13. WIL'_ EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WI-' TLANDS7 0 YES OlNO
IF YES
A VOLUME· (CUBIC YARDS) .'AREA (ACRES)
' COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED·
c. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL
D. ME-:-HOD OF DREDGING·
" HAS THE STATE ENVIRQ".MENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA: BEEr<i COMPLETED? ~YES ONO
SEPA LEAD AGENCY Degt of Ecology sEPA DEc1s10N: DNS for North Baxter· MONS for South Baxter
SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LET-ER TO WOFW AS ~EQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION
DECISror,, DATE 1END OF C:JMMENT PERIOD): April 5, 2000
---·-----
15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS. APPROVALS. OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER Fl:DERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR A'I.Y STRUCTJRES. CONSTRUCTlON, DISCHARGES. OR OTHER
ACTIVIT!ES OESCRIBEO IN THE APPLICATION (1.E. PRELIMINARY ;:,LAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL. BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY
COMMISSION LICENSE (FERC). FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION. ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED ANO INDICATE ALL EXIST'NG WORK ON DRAWINGS.
!'.CITE. ~OR USE WITH CORPS NATIONWIDE PERMITS. IDENTIFY WHETHER YOL,R PROJECT HAS OR WILL NEED AN NPOES Prn\.llT FOR JiSO•ARGING WASTEWATER AND/OR STORMWATER
TYPE OF APPROVAL ISSUING AGENCY DENTIFICATION k:iA TE-OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVEC k::OM?LETEO?
f.o.
(TARGET OATES)
Engineering Design Report Department of Ecology September 22, 2006 No
Foundation Permit Crty of Renton November 24, 2006 No
Building Permit !City of Renton April 5, 2007 No
lsite Master Plan City of Renton September 20, 2006 No
16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTl'JITY YOU'RE APPL YING FOR OR FOR A-'ff ACTIVITY OiRECTL Y RELATED TO THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED
HERF.IN? 0 YES OlNO IF YES. EXPLAIN:
JAR.PA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for la~est version, 360/407-7037 or 800.'9]7-0043 45
SECTION B. Use for Shoreline and Corps of Engineers permits only·
17a -cTAL COST OF PROJECT. T'11S MEANS if-<E FAIR vlARKET VALL,E OF THE OROJEC'.", iNCLJDING MATERIAl S, lABOR. MACHINE RENTALS, ETC
17ti. If A PROJECT OR ANV PORTION OF A PRO"ECT RECEIVES FUNDl'JG FROM A FEDERAL AGE,\CY, THAT AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESA CONSULTATION. PLEASE INDICATE IF VOU
VILL RECEIVE FEDERAL Fl 'JDS AI\C WHAT FEDERAL AGENCY IS PROVIDING Tf-<OSE FLNDS SEE INSTRL'CTIONS FOR INFORMATIQ!\' ON ESA··
FEDERAL ."UNDING O YES ONO If-YES. PLEASE Li ST -HE FEDERAL AGENCY
16. LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURIS0,CTION
19. FOR CORPS, COAST GUARD. AND l)NR PERMITS PROVIDE NAMES. ADDRESSES. AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. LESSEES, ETC.
PLEASE NOTE SHORELINE MANAGEMEN r CO~.APUANCE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NO TICE CONSULT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
----
NAME DDRESS hOI\JE NUMBER
f ~~I
--~--------
SECTION C -Th;s section MUST be com,:, eted for anv cermit covered bv this ann/ication
20. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREIN I CER"'."IFY THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE
INFORMATION CONT AINEC IN THIS APPLICATION. AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, SUCH .'NfORMATION IS TRUE, COMPLETE. AND
ACCURATE I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES. I HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH
HIS APPLICATION IS MADE, THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE-DESCRIBED LOCATIOi\ TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED, IN-PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK I
AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTER ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT bATE
DATE
I HEREBY DES,Gr-.ATE
TO AC-AS MY A3ENT IN MATTERS RELATED TQ THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S} I UNDERSTANO THAT IF A FEC!:RAL PERMIT IS ISSUED
I MLST SIGN THE PE;;iMIT
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
SIGNATU!.E OF LANDOWNER 1EXCEPT PWBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS. E.G. DNR)
THIS APPLICATION ML;S"'" BE S'Gl\f:D BY THE APPLICAI\ T AND THE AGENT. IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED
16 U.S.C § 1001 provides that· W'loever. ,~ any manr.er w~hin the junsdiciian al any department or agency of the United States knowingly 1alsiries, con::,,ea1s or covers up by any tnck, scheme. or davice a
material facto, makes any false, ~:::1t1m1s, nr fraudulent statements or •eP'esenl3\ians ar makes or uses any false •...mt,ng or document knowing same ta co~t.air any false. ficht1ous. or fraudulerl state,.,,ent o"
entry, shall be rined not mare than $i0,000 or ,rrpnsoned nat more than S years or bo:h
COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL
A. Nature of the existing shoreline. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp, flood
plain, flaodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, clay,
rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any)
B. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height of thirty.five feet above the average grade
level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view:
C. If the application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that
the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a variance, from which the variance is being sought:
These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Acl;on errployers.
For special acccmmodation needs, please contacl the appropr ate agency in 1he instruc11ons.
JARP A, Revised 7/0:2 Contact the Stale of Washington Office of Permit As.'>i.s;tance for latest version, 360/407 -7037 or 800/917-0043 46
Attachment 7c. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE
USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS
IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID. MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER
PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A
SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED.
The proposed action will eliminate approximately 125 feet of open channel, will result in a
slightly longer culvert across the project site, will affect existing riparian vegetation along the
Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington, and will result in some disturbance to the
shoreline of Lake Washington above and below the ordinary high water mark.
The remediation action is designed to improve water quality in Lake Washington and is funded
by the proposed development. Culverting of the on-site open channel is a remediation measure
required under the Consent Decrees with Ecology to eliminate erosion of soil into Gypsy
Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington by capping and institutional controls on the North and
South Baxter Properties. \Vhile resident salmonids are reported through anecdotal reports
upstream of the project site, the short piece of open channel on the site is not known to contain
fish. Anadromous fish are prevented from moving upstream past the project site by blockages
within the railroad right-of-way. So the small increase in culvert length will not affect upstream
fish passage. In addition to the increase in culvert length, the culvert diameter will also be
increased to accommodate higher peak flows and reduce upstream flooding which occasionally
floods parking lots and roads east of 1405 which leads to further water quality impacts.
During construction, Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will remain intact until constmction of the new
culvert is complete (refer to the Gypsy Creek Culvert Replacement section which follows).
Perimeter barriers to sheet flow and other construction Best Management Practices from the
2005 l(jng County Surface Water Design Manual will be employed as warranted to prevent
unintended sediment discharge to Lake Washington or beyond any of the site boundaries (see
Appendix I, CE201-204). All stormwater from the site will be collected in a temporary sediment
trap and discharged to the sanitary sewer per the Consent Decrees. No constmction stormwater
will discharge to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage or to Lake Washington.
Post construction, no stormwater will be discharged to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage from the
project. Treated stormwater will be discharged to Lake Washington after treatment meeting the
Enhanced Water Quality treatment from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
To enhance riparian function along the Lake Washington shoreline, all exotic species will be
removed and buffers meeting City of Renton critical area requirements will be replanted with
native trees and shmbs (see Appendix I, Sheet LIOO).
Gypsy Creek Culvert Replacement
To protect water quality and any fish in the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage, the following conceptual
culvert replacement scenario is proposed. Final design will result in refinement of this proposal
with the overall goal of avoiding environmental impacts.
a. Install all new structures and pipe with the exception of connections to the existing
system. The existing system will continue to function normally while construction of the
new facilities are underway (3-4 weeks)
b. Remove fish from the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage
c. Darn up the culvert at the east property line (or east of the railroad tracks if an access
agreement from the railroad can be obtained) and pump flow to Lake Washington (will
run bypass line through existing culvert or over tracks, depending on train schedule).
Pump intake will be screened to provide appropriate intake velocities and avoid
entraining fish.
d. Install structures connecting new pipe to existing pipe (3 to 4 days).
e. Remove dam and bypass/pump.
f. Fill open portion of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage once new system has been shown to
function appropriately.
The Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Calculation of existing vegetation cover within the shoreline zone and Gypsy Creek zone is as
follows:
SHORELINE ZONE COVER
Approximately 142,000 sf in 100' zone (including existing wetland and wetland buffer)
Wetland 21,638
Wetland Buffer (existirg restoration planting) 6,555
Riparian Tree+ Shrub Cover 35,664
Riparian Shrub Cover Only (primarily invasive) 21,177
Grass (native and non-native) 35,364
Building 2,129
Pavement 26,148
TOTAL 148,675•
EDAW Inc.
·Note: Total equals greater than 142,000 sf due to tree/shrub cover overlap with both water and asphalt.
GYPSY CREEK COVER
Approximately 24,000 sf in 100' zone (on either side of 120' long stream segment)
Riparian Tree+ Shrub Cover
Riparian Shrub Cover Only (primarily invasive)
Grass (native and ran-native)
Landscape Planter (native plants)
Building
Pavement
TOTAL
14,403
2,156
6,831
0
0
0
24,000
Landscape Calculations by EOAW
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
,., ,, ... ,._.:, ,.. , " I .. . -.1: ,_, ,,,, .. -. .-.·:,,;.,, -. ",,-.. ' ~ ,'. ..... ~ "" ~ ,.
u,, ,-:; ~-·, L .~ I J'•• ... i,,n f,.>•I
Sll0A]l',cJ(1S omn :V S~ffjNl:JIU 1~,IJ
'ONI 'SONIHO!IH 'I>' 03011 'Hsna
............ ·•l'rl ......... .
13'.)tJ\f d tl31XV8
31 ~[JJrl AHdV~80d01 03111~11
' ., .• a 11_,,,., ..•
-------~--
\ \
\ \
\ \ I I
\ \
\\ \
---
\ \
' ' I ',
\ \
\\ 1\ \ \
\ I
\\
\
. I \,\
'\
\\
\
I
\
r ,
' ! ~ ~ ...
CX)
w a:
::::)
(9
LL.
! • ' ,,
• ' l
\
l
~
~
!
.::.~-
' \ , .. _,J
L_
I
./ "'-
',,_j .'
. ' ~.
~1
. 1J
'/ ~-
..... <:(·
__ J
'
...
--. ' -,_.
'
.---·
, .. .-' ''
~·
/ I
(
I
/ ,
' .
r,_. _., '"'j(), •'
, '• •,n , .. , . ,., . . . . . •,, '"''¥ I ; » ~ .. ,. ,.·, , . I'• ''· ·,"' ' .. ~ !
S~OJ.3-',HtlS mNl .,. S.~).3Nl~m ~i~.!'.)
":)NJ 'S\)NJH:lllH 'i' 030!1 'Hsna
'
\
.·, 0
,r
·' ... .s-. .. ,.
' >.J': , I ' ' i ~'. ~ I ;
13:>tl\l d tl31X\18
•-)! V0dl1 '-Hd\'~~Od01 O)!IV.ll
\
.
'
co
w
0::
:::i
0
' '
.•
,· ~ I'
_,,,...-,·
,· \
' ...... _.,/
I-
C .)
./
L__
t r··
\) j
__ .-
;J
. .,,,-.' .·
/
'
:Plf i1i· !
t.
n:~-•. ·.
, . ., "•I•• • ..... , ... 1,.,_,,
•• • ~-•," ~·.<. !
5~.J..l·\bnS GNVl '1i SM33Nr.>t·n :L,r::,
':JNI ·s~NIH:lllH 'i 030l:I 'Hsna
·r, . >.;.t
I ..
• ,
' ' I
..
I
)'
: ... ····k
~-• .!. ,,-.
'
..01'.)NIHSVr, t;QJ,Njtl
l ..
ii·:,·,, ;
13::lcl"I' d cl31X"l'8
"Jl VOdri J.Hd~~clOdOl 01111'<11 -c I'.
o1, •. ,
'
co
'W
' 0:::
"':)
~ (9
a: LL w.
I-' ,_1
<C
Q.. \" w
<.')
<>: z
w
I-
"' (/) o::i <.') wz
et: j:::
:::J (/)
<.')-_x
u.. w
.
' •
' l
i /1:", 1· I ( r': \ \ 11!1
' ', \...!) )1!1',1 ! "-.__., I II
"'
•
•
i
,
' ,,
•
i,: ,.
!.
! ' ·"'
\'·~~ \
/ 00
W,
D'.!
::i
(!)
u. I
i
' !
I
!
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE CONCEPTS
1.00 INTRODUCTION
A. VISION
1. Landscape will consist of primarily native plants and hardscape will be materials
consistent with the character of the building and sensitive to the context of the
Pacific Northwest A variety of strategies will be integrated including: the use of
native plant palenes in the landscape beds and shoreline riparian zone, water-
saving drip irrigation technology and the incorporation of local materials and
products where appropriate.
2.00 DESCRIPTION
A. LANDSCAPE
Landscape areas of the site include are listed below and are described in more detail in the
paragraphs that follow. Landscape areas include:
• Planting Beds, Parking Lot Canopy Trees, and Perimeter Screening
• Parking Lot Sand Filters
• Shoreline Zone
• Parking Lot and Perimeter Planting (Buffering & Screening)
Planting Beds, Parking Lot Canopy Trees, and Perimeter Screening
The amount of planting required in the parking area is "egulated by Renton
Municipal Code (RMC) 4-4-080-F.7. The planting bed layout as shown in the
current parking lot plan meets tne requirements provided in the RMC with regard to
landscape. The square footage of vegetation required per number of parking stalls
(35 SF per stall), for example, is provided. Shrubs will be planted at a minimum
density of 5 per 100 SF to meet RMC requirements. The number of canopy trees
(1 per every 6 parking stalls) will be provided as well. Planting beds within and
around the parking lot will contain a base palette of native plant species with several
regionally adapted ornamental species included in order to enhance color and
texture. A typical topsoil profile for these planting beds ranges between 18" (for
ground covers) to 3' (for canopy trees). Additionally, a layer of organic mulch (2 to 4
inches) will be placed over the topsoil to control weed growth and retain moisture
within the soil. A preliminary plant palette for the planting beds includes:
Groundcovers & Ferns -12" -18" O.C spacing (90% cover in 3 years)
a. Redwood Sorrel Oxalis oregana
b. False Lily of the Valley Maianthemum di/a/alum
c. Epimedium Epimedium spp.
d. Bunchberry Camus canadcnsis
e. Sword Fem Polystichum mundum
f. Deer Fern Blechnum sp1cant
g. Maidenhair Fern Adian/um macrophyllum
Grasses and Perennials -18' 0 C , 1n groups of 3 to 9
a Silver Grass Miscanthus sinensis "morning light''
b. New Zealand Flax Phorm,um tenax
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahaw,s Headquarters
Renton, WA
c. Hosta Hos ta spp.
d. Coral Bells Heuchera spp.
e. Hellcborus Hefleborus spp.
Shrubs -5 per 100 SF planting area, min.
a. Red Flowering Currant R1bes sanguineum
b. Mountain Laurel Kalmia latitol,a
c. Winter Daphne Daphne odora
d. Witch Hazel Hamamelis x mtermedia
e. Common Snowberry Symphoricarpus alba
f. Doublef,le Viburnum Viburnum plicatum 'Tomentosum'
g. Rhododendron Rhododendron species
h. Winegreen Barberry Berbens julianae
Trees -1 per 6 parking spaces, min.
a. Pacific Dogwood Cornus nutalii
b. Western Redbud Cercis occidentalis
c. Apple Serviceberry
d. Vine Maple
e. Douglas Fir
f. Western Red Cedar
g. Western Hemlock
h. Purple Robe Locust
Amelanchier x gamdiflora
Acer circinatum
Pseudotsuga menziesii
Thu/a plicata
Tsuga heterophylla
Robinia Psuedocacia
Black Hawthorne Crataegus doulasii
Canopy Trees 30' 0 C min., 1 per 6 parking spaces, min.
a. Red Maple
b. Norway Maple
c. Birch (Indian)
d. Katsura
e. Southern Magnolia
2 Parking Lot Sand Filters
Acer rubra 'Armstrong'
Acer platinoides
Betula Jacquemontii
Cercid1phyflum japonicum
Magnolia grandiflora
Sand filters are stormwater best management practices (BMP's) that capture and
treat stormwater runoff. The planting of the sand filter consists of two areas: the
sides of the basin (almost always dry) and the basin bottom (frequently inundated)
A preliminary plant palette includes (adapted from the King County Nalive Plant
Guide and the King County, Washington -Surface Water Design Manua~:
Dry Zone-Basin Sides
Herbaceous Species -hydroseeded
a. Redtop
b. Creepi.ng bentgrass
c. Meadow foxtail
d. Pacific reed grass
e. Northern manna grass
f. Common velvet grass
g. Fowl bluegrass
h. Kentucky bluegrass
Tapertip rush
J. Soft rush
Wet Zone-Basin Bonam
Herbaceous Species -hydroseeded
Agrostis alba
Agrostis pa/us Iris
Alopecurus pratensis
Calamagrostis nutkaensis
Glyccria borealis
Holcus lanatus
Poa palustris
Paa pratensis
Juncus acuminatus
Juncus effusus
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
a. Colonial bentgrass
b. Buttalo grass
c. Tall fescue
d. Dwart tall fescues
e. Red fescue
f
g.
h.
3. Shoreline Zone
Perennial ryegrass
Korean grass
White lawn clover
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Agrosris tenuis
Buchloe dactyloides
Festuca e/at,or
Festuca e/atior "Si/verado"
Festuca rubra
Lolium perenne
Zoysia tenuifolia
Trifot,um repens
The square footage of existing shrub and tree cover within t~e shoreline zone
was analyzed in order to accurately propose an adequate square footage of
replacement of that function with native trees and shrubs. It is assumed that
replacement of existing cover, for example, will take 7 to 10 years of plant growth.
Invasive species, such as Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom, and native
trees such as cottonwood, alder, and willow currently dominate the shoreline.
This vegetation, whether invasive or not, provides habitat function (primarily
shade and cover) along the shoreline Mature native trees immediately adjacent
to the shoreline (outside of the limit of grading) should be preserved where
possible and locations have been identified on the plans. Certain areas within the
shoreline zone are currently designated as low density (herbaceous and low
woody shrubs only) so as to provide views of the lake from the facility. To ensure
views, these areas will need to be managed through periodically hand removal of
new tree seedlings. View corridors from the site out to the lake are identified-
planting of new large shrubs and trees will not occur in these corridors and
existing trees to be preserved in the view corridors will be thinned and the bonom
branches pruned to provide filtered views. Preserving trees will limit the amount
of new planting that will be required. Invasive shrubs along the shoreline will be
removed and replaced with native shrub species.
The shoreline zone planting will take place on a declining slope, some of which
will be graded to accommodate the field and building development upslope. A
typical topsoil profile (whether existing in the non-graded area or imported in the
graded fill area) should be between 12" -18". The vegetation in this area will
consist of native riparian species that include (adapted from the King County
Native Plant GUide and the King County, Washington -Surface Water Design
Manua~:
Dry Zone (upland)
Herbaceous Species hydroseeded
a Deer Fern Blechnum spicant
b. Pearly Everlasting Anaphalis margaritacea
c. Trailing Snowberry Symphoricarpos moll,s
d. Dewey's Sedge Carex deweyana
e. Thick-headed Sedge Carex pachystachya
Woody Shrubs -5' 0.C. in groups of 3 to 9 as designated on plan
a. Bald Hip Rose Rosa gymnocarpa
b. Evergreen Huckleberry Vaccmium ova/um
c. Low Orego.o Grape Mahonia nevinii
d. Mock Orange Phi/ade/phus lewis1i
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 3
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
e. Red-Flowering Currant
f. Snowberry
Trees-12·-15· O.C.
a. Pacific Dogwood
b. Douglas Fir
c. Madrona
d. Big-leat Maple
New Seattle Scahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Ribes sanguineum
Symphoricarpos a/bus
Cornus nuttal/Ji
Pseudotsuga menzies1i
Arbutus menziesii
Acer macrophyflum
Wet Zone (adjacent to tne shoreline)
Herbaceous Species -hydroseeded
a. Sho1awn Foxtail Alopecurus aequalis
b. Water Foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus
c. Slough Sedge Carex obnupta
d. Sawbreak Sedge Carex stipata
e. Hardstem Bulrush Scirpus acutus
f. Small-fruited Bulrush Scirpus microcarpus
g. Slender Rush Juncus tenuis
n. Spike Bent Grass Agrost1:S exarata
Woody Shrubs -5· O.C. in groups of 3 to 9 as designated on plan
a. Black Gooseberry R,bes lacustre
b. Bog Laurel Kalmia microphylla
c. Bog Rosemary Andromeda polilo/ia
d. Hardhack Spirea Spiraea doug/osii
e. Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolomlera
Trees -12·-15· O.C.
a. Red Alder
b. Black Cononwood
c. Sitka Willow
A/nus rubra
Populus trichocarpa
Salix sitchensis
B. HARDSCAPE & PARKING LAYOUT
Concept
Site design of the plazas and walkways is to be rectilinear in nature-a pattern of
gr,ds corresponding to architectural features and utilizing different suriace
materials for visual interest and clarity for the pedestrian. The goal is to provide a
set of suriace materials that highlight a change from vehicular to pedestrian
space and that provide a hierarchy of importance to these spaces giving visual
clues to the user about ent,y locations.
2. Plaza Locations
b. Main entry plaza
This is the corporate face or 'front porch' of the Seahawk's
Corpocate Headquaners. The rectilinear design enhances the
perception of ocdec ocganization and stability. The entry road is
on axis with building axis, creating a plaza space to the south
that contains horizontal and vertical features of interest, including
stained concrete paving and ipe wood decking as suriace
materials and large quarried native stone blocks. A permanent
screening fence between the plaza and the practice fields, (likely
decorative metal with vegetative screening) will provide privacy
for on-field football operations.
a Player's entcy
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 4
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
lpe wood decking is proposed at the entry to correspond with the
proposed overhead wood pergola. A planter and vegetated
screen wall block the view of the loading dock.
b. Player's patio
This area is integrated into the fire lane but distinct in paving and
ipe wood decking. The patio is oriented to take advantage of
views of the lake and southern exposure.
c. Transition between fields and facility
The apron between the building and outdoor practice fields will
be a combination of concrete and rubberized walking surface.
The apro.o will highlight architectural components such as entry
doors and weight 0 00m garage doors with banding of stained
concrete
3 Hardscape Materials
a. Concrete Material A
The suriace treatment of the sidewalks and plaza between the
parking lot and building w,11 highlight the change from vehicular
space to pedestrian space. It is appropriate to include the
pedestrian surface treatment in select areas of the parking lot and
access lanes that will have significant pedestrian use associated
with crossings or drop-off areas A potential material would be a
typical broom finished stained concrete (subtle earth-tone, for
example) for these areas.
b Concrete Material B
Su rt ace treatment of the main entrance (lobby and retail store) and
player's entrance will be differentiated from the surtace treatment
of the surrounding sidewalks ad1acent to the building. This will
provide a hierarchy of importance to these spaces and give visual
queues to users and visitors. This material is proposed as
concrete as well but differentiated from Material A in two ways: a
more frequent score Joint pattern and a different stain tone or acid
wash treatment.
c Specialty Material C
4. Site Furnishings
Material C is anticipated to be a specialty surface treatment, used
primarily ad1acent to the main entry area to provide spaces of
significant visual interest. The material proposed is ipe wood
decking, which will correspond to the use of wood in the structure
and be a subtle reference to past use of the site as a lumber mill
and lumber treatment facility. In addition, wood decking is an
appropriate aesthetic choice for the site's location along the shores
of Lake Washington. lpe wood (which has been ce~ified as
sustainably harvested) is naturally resistant to rot, decay, insects,
and mold. lpe is an incredibly strong, dense wood that stands up
to high traffic use, will not splinter or check, and is resistant to fire.
Benches, lighting, trash receptacles, and bollards (if necessary) will be consistent
with the architectural style and materials used in the building. These elements will
also be consistent with each other with regards to character and materials. Also,
screens that support plant growth may be appropriate in locations where there are
tall. blank walls (either building or retaining) or between the player's entrance and
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 5
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
tne delivery dock. Proposed materials include:
a. lpe wood containing metal accents (painted galvanized or stainless
steel) for benches
b. Painted galvanized steel, stainless steel, or aluminum for trasn
receptacles, bollards, screens, and light fixtures.
C. IRRIGATION
1. Drip Irrigation
A standard drip irrigation system is proposed in all typical planting beds associated
with the parking lot, as well as the canopy trees planted along the perimeter of the
property.
2. Temporary Sprayhead Irrigation
A temporary spray irrigation system is proposed for the shoreline/riparian planting
area. This area will be put on a separate irrigation zones so that they can be
operated in accordance with lhe specific water regimes that will occur. Once the
native vegetation becomes established in tnese particular areas (which typically
occurs in 2-4 years), the irrigation can be decommissioned as these plants should
be adapted to drought conditions during summer months. The rotor spray heads
would be removed and the irrigation lines left buried in the ground. Removal of
valves and valve boxes is an option.
3. Permanent Sprayhead Irrigation
A peroianent sprayhead irrigation system would be appropriate for the west side of
the building where grasspave/grasscrete has been indicated for the fire lane.
4. Gene·al lrrigatios Notes
The point of connection for the icrigation system is yet to be deteroiined. The
controllers should be located ,n a convenieot area yet screened frooi view.
Irrigation for the fields is to be designed by others but will be coordinated so that the
water supply comes from the same main line. Whether there are two controller
sys;ems (one for the planting areas and one for the fields) is yet to be determined,
as are the locations. Future irrigation plans will designate zones within each of the
areas described previously. each with their own valve for timing and volume control.
Sleeving under the pavement will also be designated to supply irrigation lines and
valve wiring.
Landscape Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 6
>
i
~ !
"
I
<I ,,
I
.
\ ,-
u ---
'
I
II N018NIHSVM 'N01N3~
:'.lll 1S3MH1~0N 11V8100~
Al!IPB.:::I 60!lOBJd S)1MBL!B9S
!
! i
?
I
'
I' ' 'i /
1':' _;
i ,,
l
I
,1
)
II
·1
~
{ I I I
, ~:~ o' ~w 0
w ~ ,--~ it _J
... ..-
0) '
LU
0::: •
::::>
(!) '
u.
i
Seahawks Corporate Headquarters & Training Facility
Preliminary Shoreline & Gypsy Creek Vegetation Zone (100') Calculations
EDAW. Inc.
August2g,2006
SHORELINE ZONE COVER
Approximately 142,000 sf in 100' zone (including existing wetland and wetland buffe(
Existing Conditions SQ. FT. Currently Proposed Conditions
Wetland 21,638 Wetland
Wetland Buffer (existing restoration planting) 6.555 Wetland Buffer (existing restoration planting)
Riparian Tree+ Shrub Cover 35,664 High Density Riparian Planting (native tree & shrub)
Riparian Shrub Cover Only (primarily invasive) 21,177 Low Density Riparian Planting (native shrubs & grasses)
Grass (native and non-native) 35,364 Field Turf & Grasspave
Landscape Planter (native plants) 0 Landscape Planter (native plants)
Building 2.129 Building
Pavement 26,148 Pavement
Sand Filter 0 Sand Filter
TOTAL 148,675 TOTAL
Notes: 1. Overlap of tree canopy and pavement or water cause total to equal more than the approx. 142,000sf buffer area.
2. 10,074 sf of high density riparian planting is proposed at SW corner of site adjacent to wetland buffer (within 200' of shoreline).
GYPSY CREEK COVER
Approximately 24,000 sf in 100' zone (on either side of 120' long stream segment
Existing Conditions
Riparian Tree+ Shrub Cover
Riparian Shrub Cover Only (primarily invasive)
Grass (native and non-native)
Landscape Planter (native plants)
Building
Pavement/gravel
TOTAL
SQ. FT.
14,403
2,156
6,831
0
0
610
24,000
Currently Proposed Conditions
High Density Riparian Planting (native tree & shrub)
Low Density Riparian Planting (native shrubs & grasses)
Field Turf & Grasspave
Landscape Planter (native plants)
Building
Pavement
TOTAL
SQ. FT.
21,638
6,555
42,919
10,534
30,984
4.211
6.159
18,188
7,612
148,800
SQ. FT.
0
0
0
6,796
963
16,241
24,000
FIGURE 9.2
Diff.
0
0
7,255
-10,643
-4,380
4,211
4,030
-7,960
7,612
Diff.
-14,403
-2, 156
-6,831
6,796
963
15,631
en
:l
0
LLI u <
in
a::
LLI
I
>-c
0
0
~
en
LLI
LLI
a::
I-
RIPARIAN ZONE · DRY
Madrona -Ar butus menziesii,
Ht 25-80 ' x W 15-45 '
PLANT PALETTE
Trail ing Snowberry -Symphoricarpos
mollis, Ht 2-4' x W 2-4'
Low Oregon Grape -Mahonia
nervosa, Ht 2'
Snowberry -Symphoricarpos a/bus,
Ht 3-5'
Pacific Dogwood -Cornus n u ttallii,
Ht 7-45' X W 6-36'
Mock Orange -Philadelphus lewisii,
Ht 5-10' x W 3-5'
(/J
:>
0
Lu
u
<(
in
a::
Lu :r:
>-c
0
0
3::
RIPARIAN ZONE-WET
Ha rdh ack Sp irea -Spirea douglas ii.
Ht 3-4 '
Sawbreak Sedge -Carex stipata,
Ht 1-2 '
Bog Laurel -K a /mia microphylla,
Ht 3'
Small-fru ited Bulrush · Sc ripus
microcarpus, Ht 3 '
~.; .,, .
Bog Rosemary -Andromeda polifolia,
Ht 2'
(/)
z
a::
LIi
LL.
Cl z
<(
C/1
a::
LL.I
>
0 u
Cl z
::>
0
a::
l!)
PLANTING BEDS
Maidenha ir Fern -Adiantum
aleuticum , Ht 3 ' x W 3 '
Sword Fern -Polystichum munitum ,
Ht 3 .5 '
Deer Fern -Blechum spicant,
Ht 3.5'
U)
Ill
:)
0::
:I
(/)
>-c
0
0 s:
CJ)
lJJ
I.LJ
0:: r-
PLANTING BEDS
I
ITl=lcific Dogwood -Cornus nutta/lii,
Ht 7-45' x W 6-36 '
Mou ntain Laurel -Kal mia latifolia,
Ht 4-12 '
Snowberry -Symphoricarpos a/bus,
Ht 3 -5 '
t estern Oedbud -Cerci·s
occidentalis, Ht 20-30 ' x w 1 5-25'
t inter Dap hn e -Daphne odora,
Ht 4' X W 5'
Doublefile Viburn um -Viburnum {Jlic a-
tum 'TOtnHntovum ·, Ht 7-10' x W 10-15'
Apple Serviceberry -A melanch ier x
grandiflora, Ht 20-25' x W 15-18'
PLANTING BEDS
hatsura -Cercidiphyllum japonicum,
Ht 40-60' X W 4 0-60'
Norway Maple· Acer platanoides,
Ht 35-45' X W 25-35'
t estern Red Cedar -Thuja p/icata,
Ht 20-7 0' x w 15-25' Fon re[)Fh 150'+
Bi rch -Betula jacquemontii,
Ht 30-50' x W 20-35'
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
1.00 INTRODUCTION
A. VISION
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
1. The vision for architectural design is to create a new headquarters facility
that meets the Seahawk's functional requirements and is aesthetically
striking. The design seeks to create a signature project that reflects the
Seahawks Brand and is sensitive and responsive to the context of the
Pacific Northwest and the Baxter Site.
2.00 DESCRIPTION
A. Location on Site
The office building and indoor practice facility are located to achieve the following
goals:
• Minimize deep foundations associated with poor soils and substrate
conditions.
• Locate office building (lower mass) in front of the Indoor Practice Facility
to minimize the apparent mass of the Indoor Practice Facility at lakeside
(West Elevation). This will minimize the massing adjacent to the lake to
the fullest extent possible.
• Maintain view corridors to the la~efront from adjacent properties
• Maximize views to Lake Washington from office spaces
• Locate the front door of the facility in close proximity to a new at-grade
railroad crossing, approximately halfway between the existing crossings
The outdoor fields are located@ widest portion of the site to accommodate
dimensional requirements. Also, this area of the site is not suitable for building
construction due to the poor quality of soils located in this portion of the site.
B. Cap Components
Elements of the building and site comprise the "cap" as required by the Consent
Decree including:
• Office Building -ground level slab
• Indoor Practice Facility -ground level slab
• Surface Parking
• Roadways
• Hardscape areas
• Outdoor Practice Fields
Architectural Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 1
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
C. Floor Plans
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Approximately 131,000 gross square feet of office space is provided on three
levels. A three story office building is proposed for the following reasons:
• Maximize adjacencies (vertically) between team and administrative uses
• Minimize footprint and extent of deep foundations
• Minimize footprint to accommodate future expansion
Plans are organized as follows:
• Level 1 -Player facilities, equipment rooms, storage, mechanical,
auditorium and lobby spaces are provided on Level 1. Player and
coaches entries are located at the northern entry with secure connections
to the dedicated player parking. Public access to the public lobby,
auditorium and indoor practice facility is provided at the southeast corner.
• Mezzanine Level -Offices, technical areas, meeting rooms and dining
facilities are located on the mezzanine level.
• Level 2 -Offices
Plumbing will be concentrated in multiple zones of the building as shown to
accommodate player facilities, kitchen and general toilet facilities.
D. Atrium
A multi-story atrium is proposed to achieve the following goals:
• to create separation between the office building components and the indoor
practice facility to reduce assembly requirements for occupancy separation.
• to accommodate simultaneous construction for the indoor practice facility and
the office building
• to promote internal team communication between floor levels
• to promote the creation of "left over" or informal meeting spaces
• to use volume, light, shadow, and color to eliminate the long corridor feeling
• to minimize the number of piers and/or piles, especially at double columns@
the linking of the indoor practice facility and office building.
E. Structural Systems -Office Building
At the office building, the primary structural systems consist of a steel frame,
with a composite concrete/ metal deck floor system.
F. Height of Office Building
The bulk of the building is approximately 52 to 55 feet in height. The following
finished floor to floor heights are proposed:
a. Ground Level -27'-5"
Architectural Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 2
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
b. Mezzanine -45'-5'
c. Second Floor -59'-5"
d. Typical Roof -73'-5"
e. Optional High Roof -79'-5"
G. Elevations -Exterior Wall Systems
The design developed to date features the use of traditional architectural devices
to reduce the apparent scale and mass of the project are being explored
including: arcades, horizontal expression lines, special roof treatments plus
fenestration and glazing systems. At the lakefront, the office components are
placed in front of high mass elements associated with indoor practice facility to
further reduce the apparent mass of the facility. This approach occurs at the
south fa<;ade as well.
To the east, the building is entered at the ground level with the "front-door" of the
facility located immediately adjacent to the new (proposed) at grade crossing of
BSNF as indicated on the Figure 5.2. To the north, landscaping will be
incorporated at the building perimeter as well as the property line to buffer the
facility from the adJacent residential uses located to the north.
The leading roof edge of the office building is sloped downwards to minimize and
screen ground level views of rooftop mechanical equipment from the site,
adjacent sites and Lake Washington. Metal sun screening devices are being
studied for the south and west facades.
As indicated on the attached elevations, a range of exterior wall systems are
being evaluated including:
a. Base of building -synthetic stone, masonry, storefront systems, cementious
wall panels and/ or metal panels.
b. Upper Levels -Windows consisting of anodized aluminum frames, clear
glazing and spandrel panels. Spandrel panels being considered include
cementious wall panels and metal panels.
H. Color of Exterior Wall Systems
A range of color palettes are being studied for exterior facades including:
• Metal Panels -Nickel to light gray
• Synthetic Stone -Buff/ Sandstone to light gray with a blend of warm
earth tones
• Synthetic Wood and Wood Panels -similar to the finished Cherry wood
• Cementious Panels -Buff/ Sandstone to light gray
• Glazing -Clear
• Translucent Panels -white to off white/light gray
Final color palettes will be based on selected materials.
Architectural Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 3
North and South Baxter Site Development Plan
I. Roof Systems
New Seattle Seahawks Headquarters
Renton, WA
Proposed roof systems include mechanically attached membrane roofing -white
in color.
J. Indoor Practice Facility
The Indoor Practice Facility (IPF) is configured to accommodate either a pre-
engineered or an engineered solution. Approximately 80,000 g.s.f. of interior
space is provided. 95 feet clear height at the center of the field with overall
height of approximately 120 feet.
A variety of exterior wall systems are being evaluated for the IPF including:
a. Base of bu tiding -cementious wall panels and metal panels.
b. Upper Levels -a combination of translucent wall panels (for day lighting),
cementious wall panels and metal panels.
Architectural Narrative
24 May 2006
Revised 6 September 2006
Page 4
'
'
u
fc"-
~-
·.:..:.· ,m,
,,
< ~ ..... ,
' :I•
0 (·."•
0
0
0
(;..
,.
I A 1 ~IR.S.T ~.~VEL FLOOR PLAN
·--.... --..
•·
.:r
I
. I . "f·
0
I
I
~ ... 1 .. · .. 1.·_, __ j_~,~--•. ,.~.-
] 11 I II I !1111[
-·~ '
I
c:::: ......
1,,,1111e,:i
t; ::·t
•O " " .,
=
f ... CA.I ~.
1 :., • 0...-..; -1;!-~-,. ~
-_ • ..; ~ : , r Ii -... ~ t;-'.f·~. I _ , ;_ 11flllll~ fl"::=-'~"..
.1 1 . ~· . dli±H:±J ~ '<::V 0 g -----
# ! ,.--, --' .. .. .
., ... , --I I• -. , "=": aL" -
" 1'., "
ADMINISTRATION
COMMUNICATIONS &
8ROADCASTING
COMMUNITY OUTR[AC~I
-----TEAM '-'EETING
FAC1UT_IES
TEAM su/r'E_
TRAINING
NUTRITION
• GENE/RAL.
/
-,tll:)
"
CIRCULATION
.~_,.. l ' ... . . ' ·(T) ~..;....-.,_.·~---.:·t. -~...;.t'· :_:-----~-~ ~ •j•;•!,~~: :'\ ~ ·-\:.-'~ ~~J .... : ... ::•·· -~--~~----~--_;;;-·~ . _ __,, ....... _ ~-__ .:.; __ _;. . 'f · I ··. •··7j·. -·~"'' .· ··· · · l ;' ' l,J ·· · '·" : .. tl -r •··[.;•;.,. ffi.,\"i)•,;t::". ,. ''-· .. f,,, l · .r · ··Jr:·• I l I ··
~; -. ---:,, • --~--
4
: ·<_···,,~-:-~ .,. . -·~ :~~,-·., ~, :~< ~~1
_::.·;~'._ >·7 .!~~,,·-;----:Y:~···;/~-~:;~-.. ':_:~Y. • -· _,·~·,·q::~ ... _,:~~ 7-i <.:~.:~~,~:_:"":~~~~~~-~~~· .. -~-,_,,:,_ ·.' T ... T, ... ;,t . '1,., .,~,·····" .,, .... L~, .. L.,-~-.. ·.·,' ... ,,.~_,., .. ,,-r . .i ... , .... ~-··,,.I •. , ... '.'. T_ ··'.··. ~j .i, -~.L.,. ··-, ..... . . • . . . . . .. ~,.,. .. ,,.,.. , 1'"'P"Trr'Jf'~·p·,·;"··1'ft't'lf-, -· -n·. a 1
I. I I I I : t ! I I ' I ' I I I I I I I I I l I I •, j·' t +-' • • I : • -. • . --,--· -• • ---'"-i"""l · -' . _. .. i I
' : ' • 1· '1 !" '"'~, .-,,j.·:., · I ! I , i
. '.-' • I I i I I I I f I I • I I I
!
I ;
:
J'{;-
--:--.
r
I •
I
-
•.' . ·--'-· .i.. -~ . -· ·--•·-,.-·-t-·-1·+-·+-~-t---1·-·+l-t-·!-:·-·+·-+-'-·-·--+. . . '
•' . ; 11·1·111·,,i 11 11 jlC·1 •• fl ll~I f•ft• ol,l .,l, l•f~ 11,, t>•I t!l14 ,lf.lfltll ,1ro : , ,._,,.J--1+---("~_j}I
I • l I I I . ' I . I II . '
ti.1J~•, tfr'•••ltH
i
·· •· ·1"1 I ' j . ' · · ,.,.,, i: l I I I :lo... . . . . . . . . , . . . . .. ··.· ........ _ .. _.. f ·j ·· ·: .. · --t --· ~,..q,..,,.,:~ ,--l -j.. I ... +; I ;..l ... ~-. .i I • -~ , .. ,_ '':.£;',\,.~B ~ . . ' . I t : I ' I I f ! l I I I : :;,4 . J I I -1 f f·-
} ·. li, I 'f" ··1·· .... "" 'f'' .. i, ....... , " . l I 1 · .. -. . l . ' .
. I , I . : ... : i.··· ...... l ;·. 1· tl· • ' • • • • • !
T ;, i' : I ! ! 1 • .· . ) L " , ; L '" , . I I . .. I I : , , J • ; , ' .. , ,..-.,,.1 ~ • -l O I•
--~,.-
~
---.
n t" ~t t n i
r +----";--
1 IJ •
l . ,. _ __.., ·~. ' ' ,.,.;.,
·:.:..j I I !l i ! ;/1 ·.c··,,,-11_, . j,.. iJ1'·. . ·.} . . . ·>, I .. '· "',j·•~" --1--~. ··f ·-·T'· '---. -. -,, -' '. ' ,, .. " ·:::..:.·._ -·--~---.<~-·· -..
x:Aef~~m:J\w ··::rr·L-:e·:A~:ee::rdl -== t . ·= ·Ar .,.;.r&'.== ;,6-::ce··=B CTltf
-...,, ..... -
"' .
"
...~ •• 1
FIGURE 10.1
'
•
'
"
'
,,
0
'.Jo......--"""~·--·, .• -.--.-:,~ --·· ,, .... .... .,.,... ..... ,..,.,.....
oll
~ (.)
(I) :j z
t:'. >, .... 0 ro .-::: u:, ~
~ ·-w '-'
0-(.) ~ ;;
'tJ C1) I I
roLLti~
(l) O)o ~ I C Z ·
·-.....J z (/)c~o ·-< .... -"' C1) al z
~'--1-w
C1) f--0 a:
.s::::. ~ ro
(l)
(/)
l'-C.Jol,..it
:•.,-~
-: ..... i
'•r· ,.,
ILOOH:~S
A 101__
'
u
,.
C
'
0
'
'
'
I
~I
"'--1.
'
. ..11--4 -~· '
I 'i I' I ' ·. I ·-
~re·. -.-·~JT---,
L .J.-\. _:~·.i. --_J
·._1
I +i;.f, L,J.,1
i c::,F~L I •.. c I -I
ti :_ j ~; f"T t¥t. i:~ ~~ ~I
L:: J _ I.'.. L .!.. l''.:. L-.J
·~··· ...
·---,,
' -----'o.L-l
!
4; ~-
I
I
..J
t~ ··:_
I , • • . -l~
,..,
•
i ]~ t • . ~
*
'q •. }
.. ~1·· f c~.:..rJ_
. ' i 1,
'
~
I A1 i ~E~~INE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
'
(,;
-··
~
·"' =
"
i
. .:1-
L-
"
!:
" .. ,
.ti J
~
~
" " "'
COMMUNICATIONS &
BROADCASTING
RE TAIL/PUBLIC AREAS
• COACHING STAFF
SCOUTING
FOOTBALL SUPPORT
TEAM MEETING
FACILITIES
TLAM SUITE
NUTRITION
" "
CONFERENCE ROOI.IS
II GENE:RAL
CIRCUI AJION
'
"
L _____ _ ~ ""·'
~-..:;, I
\.._ :-.
FIGURE 10.2
'
.,
'
.:,,_..-c...,,,.,.-.,. ... _'
•N -.-.-.,-., --·~ .. "' ........ , ... ..... ,-<1·•,c
.. §It)
o6
f:'.? u
0) ::: z
t:'. >, >-o
C'O = Cl) r;:; :::., •-WV
0-u::: ~ -::>Cllr:c
CIJ u... ti: ~
ID Ol O ::, I C: z .
·-_.I z -~ C: _, 0
IJ.I ·-s:( f-
..:::J::.. rn (Dz
~L--1-IJJ rol-oc::
..c:: 2 co
Q)
" Cf)
'
'
'
~LOOH f-"l.Ni~
A10~--
'
•
•
' .
•
" . ,
'fi..._:;.1 ·:,_ -~-,., f >.-; /.,, . . . .. . .. Q ~-, .. · -,-·----~-::-~ .. ~~ ~-~, .. ~-~~ :A 4:, . .. T-.... I -~
,., ' Q "' ·u ~ii!' 'r'=:f'-,~-• •• t I I n. r:-:--~
I ·l_·ri o·r, I I I '
. -~ f-----
1•"" .....
' ' ~--
~,:.. ...
:;~
0 0 II ·~· " ... ,.-..·,I
.,
..1··1.-H~· -~· 1
:," -8-[ .. f-j i 1'" :
~~~:.~·_._'••:• •:I:: I ' .. -r .. -:-,-1':. -~-? f I
. ,:..::.... ---~
~ ':
,......,u..--.,,-.... u ·=
L-~--.1.,-----, •--• • .. -
. , ..
ADMINISTRATION
FINANCE
INFORMAT10N SYSTEMS
COMMUNICATIONS &
BROADCASTING
COMMUNITY O\Jl REACH
CORPORATE
r"ARTNERSHIP
FAN DEVELOPMENT
GAME DAY
PRESENTATION
.. .,
l lCKETS
NUTRITION
CONFERENCE ROOMS
CIRCULATION
i_;~ 1: :·-,~· I~~ .i:;::;;;;::;:;~~:;::a('--.i:;:::;::;::;:~·~:·~:-=--[;\~-'I 1.-.l 11 '11 I !<I. ul " "
L--'-----------. -~ _____,;,,...__. ~ !. \ I I I I ,_ I 1 --re> n u rt 11 ti o o 11 11 o
a '., . .-,.:., ·o ' .... <~d_-· ....... _ '' .. : '. L;.;.~~µ-:··-~--I f .. · ·-= ·_-:1-
• :::::. I·--1
L----1,------+---
· ·_· ·r T··r· ·--1-r·a ·"· :-t:,::_-I ; : ct: ·1 ----·r . -·-t.4-:.:. ·~T;..~-r;
~·:: I.;-' .. I. -• • 1•.:.~ j•,;•
. __ 1__'_1 ____ --'---1---
----T-,--•-----E. . ~-: I • .• • I ;·;~
.. I·' I ••
--.:-,1.--o-L-------.•
:.= : 'I
. .. .. . -
~ ... ,::.:·:3.i'-i+~-::::
raO --f' --~ . --i '.·;. :.:! ~~ J -~
'
., :,-~ ~r . ; i° ~ ;-
•. ~ .. '1 I 1 l
. ·"
~
4,) I~ ~~ • '<·
~~~c.?_N~ LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
0
0
T~ I~
~10::
:...J.:'-'
,,;:
t
,~ w
.... :., .. '~ .•w, '-~ ... ,,,
~
& ~J-
-"[· .. ;_ .. -
.
·..:.· u
FIGURE 10.3
,·
, ........ , .. -~-' .. ,_ .. ___ .. ,.
:."";".;:.;.~ " ......... """
"
'
,,
o6
(/)
<.) '-
(1.) j z
t .C1-~ m="'0 :J ·u w z
O' mi I'
"O u.. >-U) m o: "' a, rno 3:
I c z ·
·-_I z C _, 0 ''f ~ ·co ~ ~ ;:'-1-w ml-oa:
.c :? m
"I~
{
•
' n.ocri r-... ..,s
A103
> -
i!~
~1cn
"r-1
~lpc
~
i5 z
"Tl -G)
C
::0 rn
....>.
0
~ -
I 1 ·
~ I
:i> ~~
I~ J ~~ . '
C
------, '1 ,: : .. I. I i~
' _J __
I
-~ ~ ,-
• I
·'
I
I I
' I
I ! ! , 1 s • I ~~ f-1--I . • _,
-,· i; • I V +--1,-.,1~
' I ' ·L i1;i
. --TII_J ' k, -~ ~ r,;: 1--------V
, " I ·' \!
.,r·-.
V
r,, '<:::.,
(;J·-.
. -~. ',t:.,
(.-..,:
/
rt==
in ---
'. "
i ---!-
{ti>
-d----· -.,,,
G) -
!!
' --< ;m -~ >
:;j
~
~
' 3
' i
r )_ /-t ----11·---,d!!
!:J~
,liir
:~ 1'(! ~,,;r ! Ii., I .-".r
:)_·' ~I
~~ ,,
' I
·-4
----j
:-
'-;--
< '
<"'. ·-...~ \
-. i ~i
~:.: ,t
; -,. .I ;) li
:·~
'-~
"-, ,,
-----'· ·,,
,... "·
---_:,, ···1
fj 11
~t ?~
;i ~~-,. _ . .'•
. E
v
!/_,··
,-:• C ;.
'~ [_L
!
--------OJ,
' ! :i ,--
1---
~ I
!. 1; ,----
,-i ;'T-.... -------r-~
i
r1:<
idi •' t 1!
I
--t--------:_
/ -----------::______::ci_ I -I ~-------
-.. ___ _
_,--· I -111:::::-·-/_--_---
___ -~---____ _j
I--------i i
! I
I
I '
-l\ 1.~f;
' ,-
1
1
_L
I : I :-=l :
~
!
----T:
___ TI! __ __
,-,·--' -
T' ,J r 1----l ,;_ +·-'I' v,t ~ -
~-~ j
i~3
w
I
\ I
i ~
I'
I',
,,., \
-1
[~ !
,/ ;
__ ,
_..:.~=---.. s·,...::::_:---... ___ .J"-. ____ , :-..._
·1. I I
I Ill µ_J;1¥1
p
;~ ~~
• •ii i l : ' "
! ., -• C• )' ,C" a ! }
,l,
"
~
'<
·~ ·:-1: ~ ~ ._.f. ·_·t -:;~ .,
:!°;. a: ·.ii , . 1. ·~... "
,i DE~ Iµ N DEYE~OP_MENT ,-NOT fOR°CO~STBUCTIQN
I Seahawks Headquarters &
Training Facility
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
RENTON, WASHINGTON II
<
'tl.
' ~
'
B
(~)
'~=_::
.-.: ... :·,
,:?,
--
i.-.,'-,-_.r
,..-:;\ -~·
(:""'_,'
/ ....
·-··
I,<-
·~~;_::
,' _\ -,
: :1 '! tt, i ~
1iH1
it~ \ J2 '-.
f
'
,
'
'
1 Lu J
'
'. _;
'I
NOWNIHSIIM 'NO.LN3i,i
:lll 1S3MHJ.i,i0N 111/8100~
Al!IPe;;J 6U!U!eJ.L
'li' SJa:µenbpesH S)1ME4eas I -
N0l1Jn81SNOJ cJOd lON: lN:lV'J'dOl:lA:30 N91S:l0
~ I f,;
:1 r
, ,
i .l. L: t
[_~ ' ' ,._ ~ .L nn I
r--
l 1"-
l~
A f c-~-~'
I i ,.
I ~ t1f I ~ ~~L
I
,. !..u(
•· k,. a ! ir.t
lJ
i I
i-,-
[ ___
I I [ :/1)
I _I I
··-!
~ I I
I
I __ J_·:
l
. ' 1 ... ~)
,· ··._
1'111
\_ /
,·;;·)
'··-·
n 1,,,1
,--.._
1./)
,
>ii ,l, -~
.,.~':.' , . ".\, r
' i
~~ !
!.1 ·;, ~ ; l ·' j ~~ \, ' •, •
I: ' ', I ', \i= l_ ______ L
! I , , l---1 \
\ I' I I '1 / ! I I '
.Tl==~-=t---
I ' 0 -----------.
\
\
~-
I \
I
I I
I
!
'
Ji' 'F' 111; < •
z
0
~ w
...J w,
I" ....
a:: ~
~ ! I
-11 <a
l!)
0 ..--
w
O:'.'.
:J
(9
LL
I :,, I ~
I i""' : "I~
"Tl
G)
C
:;;iJ
rn .....,.
0
0)
sz : en
'?·~
;>J en ,m
en m
()
:j
0 z
-;:o
0
0 ;,; z
G)
en
0
C -<
2,
I i
)> ~~ I ~ p;s ,~t ~i , ' I ! ·,
t
--r-
ijn
,. I
. l -.'ii
. r-.
>---I -1 -,
~ ~
r-+-----
~ '1
:;_ ,,i
l !-T'
t' . ,-h']
'. d_·11·-' ' ~'-. ~ --_----!;! -~--i
r 'I . ~ r:; I \. . cf
I ' i q ' ' <-f' ~ ..
'
, 1 ti ~ ; t_ :_ i:-~
·., .,
I " ~ ,/; ' ;
" ,.
I p --.. -.~
0 >I, ~
...
,{
. '•,
:i
'
----, r
I
I.
I
I ,.,
11 !i
I ~0 . "'-~
' . ' 1111 I , ;
/ ,, ·,
11
I:
I
j")
,--:.:.-
r.:_-..
,--~·· ..
'·-;
:'= :,
I. --• ---.i\T,·.
11 -'V
I
' ' -', . ..... ~)
11
11
I
11
11
.,,
'II l
1,
f.
~
,:.::\,
:~~)
\. :r.:,
DESIC.,N DEYELOP_MENT.-NOT fOR CONST8UCTIQN
I. --I Seahawks Headquarters &
Training Facility
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
RENTON, WASHINGTON II
<
< » ;;,~ "'1• I nt! · s;3
f,
11 :,. I:_.
! i ,...
0 ~ ~ z • !!! • ---< ~c
Cl
;Z
i~
1en m
0
=' 0 z
?
0
0 :,:. z
Gl
en
0
~
I
11 -
G)
C
:;:lJ
rn
.......
0
-..,J
> "
I l ' I
)> ~~ .P,. ~r
1l:3 I i~ l ! l ·,
' '
-
I
' ~ I
' '
----·~-I
' '
I
' I l , i I . '
' I ,,
I
i •,
/ / I
I
I
I·
i
I ,
j
/
•. i
:'
t
,.
I
f' ' : -~ ~
: ; \~
•,; -~
I~ i
··,,
'·,
/I
,.,./ i; ~
,,i
l i
1
' ' ' '
C
Gl
~
1!5
'.iiZ :~
~ c! g
z ~
en m
(')
;j
0 z
?
0
0 :,:. z
Gl
m
6i
.::!
<<·:
'
r
.~~,.
\::: J
-,
.--·-,.
. )":)
_,~
'-.....,,,
•,../
',
' '
.. ---.,.
__ 1
·,. __
-c' L_
'1 .' ·.r
! J ' ! ,.
' H
=-= ;:i
·1 -'
1,/~ ~--' t;!.~
I,;,.
(
.,. :,,.
J;
I 1~ ....
ft,
T
' l
1·
1.
' ' j{
~~
l
f
i
I ,i
q
i
\~.
~\.~:
,·'{ ' 1, t ..
i~'
f~
' .1l
~
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT -NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
,_ ,.. -C, !: ' ct; ,--
I Seahawks Headquarters &
Training Facility
FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC
RENTON, WASHINGTON
'
£
'
fi .
.
'
()
.-,
i...1.'·I , ___ .
(~\I
'-_I
(a
·--··
lee)
(~l
::-:-( ' '·, \..::_V
I L-·:
(-..;\
'
(.', , __ ,,.,
B ::,.,, ;;.,13 i I 11:!1 ', .
i ;3 '-....,
c
26