Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA98-135
1"7"171 2s0x 1 oT 17 J —Th N 8TH ST. AREA "A" -N, AREA "B" 1 DETENTION POND ) •z \ wm / vis .......% ,<_.. .—,—_—_— 9 \\. , _.., ... , . L-Lj ' ii•:":- n,/,;;//2;,,,, ,,,,;://://„.:2'..///,/,,.‘,/,,,.re://9"4://::/?%,!;//7:-'77 2-:, 2/.,,//V.';',',/,/,' ,/,/,),V/A/,:7//,/,//'-z,-,//1 2,1-, A ] _, 11 w o o .- ❑ ( PROPOSED DYNOMOMETER PROPOSED CANOPY AND ' Q • BUILDING&CANOPY 6 NEW LOADING DOCKS CD i,,,,i, EXISTING - MANUFACTURING/ TANK o f ' OFFICE FARM o FACILITY [ • EXISTING PARKING' 1= 1 I---I--� . PROPOSED i ^ CANOPY �' I_ ' \ (% 1� �Q, O 3z H )1 ��� FLAMMABLE MATERIAL WASTE TREATMENT AREA D 'fU / qo r''4III < / I �F llr 3 , — STSTN I AREA C � \� IL_,____,„.,. _� Z — 1 ( P -- SITE PLAN e�5� • • - _ —_--- SCALE: 1'=40• prmmos MATERIAL MUMS EWEERS KENWORTH xTRUCK COMPANY L'07,im 1601 N.6TH STREET RENTON,TA 00055 T6LE208)227-6.,Ff..POO 227-6901 C5P'7.'""".' x2 = 2"I" ' DYNAMOMETER BUILDING "'xSD2 SITE PLAN MEET ..7.4.,...,..,. :r ox82c00 TOE •cT xo OF 0 e 81216 32 e8 0 2 e 6 8 16 24 0 1 2 ♦ 6 B 10 12 0 1 2 3 e 5 6 r 8 0 2 J • 5 8 0 12 J • 0 2 3 0 1 2 0 5 101520 10 60 0 10 20 30 50 60 01020 3040 BO 120 HBHHHNH1I 1 I 111111111 I 1 IIAI 11 1 1 III 1 I 1 I H1111 I I I I I I 1 11111 1 I 1 1 I - HHIHIIHII I I I 1111111111111 1 I 1111111111111 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I f 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 IAe•.I'd I/0•-Yd I/0.1.-0• 3/8•-I'd I/!-I'd /P-I'd I.Fd I I?-I'd - I•.y- 1•-,0• ,-' • NF1 CA NO PY NAN ORAA OO IAOA pN 00 0( I —I —— M.ETA1L COPNG, I � I J_L I I ,'IEN.wonntl•SOW SEE GCS FOR SDI� ABTALETER -E1EC 915TAT d BErdD YETA PANEL ASSE10)LY t I I I3 @T I I I CANOPY NOPY; EXTENSION TE NSION I -� !..A SIGN N/ " EXPANSION T�L IA ' y'/' 1 IIIllllllI1lllllllllll IIIIII IIIII I I ' ' E , "^I„I.,II tIIIIIIHn1iHluu -- LIlil IIII I llll •I'Iu..1.1 I I III IR1 II mI0l 1 ' I r I lli1 II4 € N —I J IIuuu —I l II I III I � I I I I a IIllluI } ! nc.lmi n 1♦L❑� " � I+ I1 II D Ia I W I ' oo oa oI//R a1 11111 IIf11 1 III ; ; I I 1 .1 az�. — ` TW.ww DOO -�EGST CONCRETE PANEL • SEE SCHEDULE PRECAST VERTICAL EAST ELEVATION 1 TIP.PIPE BuuPER MDR TIP' moo,Bu1Dwc SCALE MI6'-1'-0 8-1, TIPICAL O M.° SEE OWL DWG. rr''�� FABRM:003R -- i% `T-' Cr) T./ //l� (,f1 (`r Q `r' Q 'Nl i 'i� '1 1' MEW ICwOPY I I I ELEC.SUBSTATIER BEYOND I ' I/INETAL PANEL ASSELNLY I 1 EElrwlw JOHT PIPE TRESTLE r NET.COPING EMBEED I I UI 1►R III I ) I I■IiIIII �_EE�ELy 125•m • 61 I II Iii! ItiIIUL0_ 1 I.IIIpli I��I0 0 O 0 �8 WEO 0 A'.I 0 0 1 EI 0-0 • -..-. i ac. A-/ Ei o o LI 7� .-�' 'Gr>= I,_ 11111.— —I._I... ' PRECAST VENRCAL WEST ELEVATION (� • ..DINO Banc JOINT Tro. SCALE 1/16--1'-0 A-IB ' YETAL COPING SYSTEM PRECAST PAN¢w/ 1 I I I AWN.RUNE AND 1 w056 NLErt WaS PNIEI. I f.n... AC(. BANDI I I / ODUL CUSS .Y BEIWO Tm Plsusi PETAL COVLNO / 'IIIIIIIII Will 11 I FITITIT1 f 1 T/PRECAST .. I n • L IJl'-2 - �LIETAL PANEL ASSEMBLY n BEYOND O 1RAIIINC EEITIIV•IRN DIG OOO( 7/PRECAST • / / r ¢ •¢ M/PpEGST A -- , EL 117-2 6 MPECAsr..i'..J•' P L PNVA1 M [L.ILA'-1/.r• r PRECAST SCREEN WALL BUMS ALL BEYOND PRECAST PAIBi PIl I I , I O piOIEN SERVICE MEA Z /REYUL6- /I T/PRELASi a. L EL .106'-2A I / n WAIN TO / G / / / / / / O f aPRMAST PRECASTYAI1 ¢t -" M-z•(TV.) `L. Py % Frro / / / : / r r EL 100-0 Y W IRNNUY FRAME E IwTO PRECAST COLOLOI ` .E�...G amp am o BORDWG C RPM As RECONm INSULATED GLASS(TYP.) PATCH PRECAST(TIP.) awl TIP. o "a' - ENLARGED EAST ELEVATION 'TM ECRU auE-r1 CONINT PLUGS CN PRECAST 00w s Ara PItECAST CA am e.me ALWUNY STERORWT QIIE-w C0101T scALEI/O--1'-0 i�A-16 BUST wA L SURFACES 8 PLUGS ��''.�y BLAST wAuSIM/�I�ySURFACE k PLUGS ¢OI,S�%T w1YI¢ TSURFACE k PLUGS`/�� 1✓ q 113.9 Y % PANID'EL ASS EILT T rZ41 �T T WO' MEMO I I TAL COPING SYSTEM �; , PANEL ASSEMBLY METAL MALL 1 1 I �.coo .( I PAN¢A55018LY 1 1 0 ,-FwTED PRECAST IKNULONON FRAME AND ' I Pwrm PRECASI7 �NETAL CERwc SYSTEM ; ,v A-T/PEECAST CAST Pw¢W/ I MATED OASS / T/PRECAST u wow I�� I vlsusr vw¢w/8. _ �,'� TEZTURa ACOEMT... �.,,{� � �f{ II'' ��IIii�7 N'Jl'p'll - yEDI M. T/PRWGST PRECAST CO.COVER �\iIIf 1It .NI. PJ. P.L ,... 4WLl'1I.II JIII IIIGww PA PL F.d1911 �I I PRECAST COLUIwTCOVER TIP. T/PNEC T Q Dom— w� Pw¢ METAL COPING SYSTEM A n _ t —�—PAS u v ru a.u1-wI EL 123'-2 \\\ T� PRECAST PANEL T/PIEECAST \ / F A AI J ./. ' / /li.L / r% / I/ EIEYHO PARAPET =.L J O i PJ-/-1‘-7-I �NETAL COPING MTEY T�/ppECAS-T Q•a 1¢jy_2 — I - L/; �_ - - PANEL .(2, `Q o..e PACCAR.INC. EL T/06EGST P J. P,�- P.L P -1• 4 P ¢ -- - p 8T KEN WORTH TRUCK PLANT ©¢-toe-z�_ _ Ala 1 I /ET_10e.-2� REN TON, WASHINGTON o.-¢_z / / 1. �/ PJ. ' 1I n I ` .AI% / I' FL a /I' / ' G �i ` T '..1." vwn f1N.M. r I r I--II --��y," EL 1QT-2 QJ���_0--- `J II IL p AL,1 �61 I__�JL- f/�IEI � J NH Ful a: 'BUILDING ELEVATIONS PRECAST COWAN COVER ALULONW STOR080NT PRECAST Pty. \`INSULATED METAL DOER R FRANC IPRECAST SCREEN YIM1-/ ALIMINA sraRORONT--/ \PRECAST CCLUNN COVER —EL 100.-0`r EAST AND WEST AND TIN. — CONCRETE MG w/REYEA. PR[CAST SCREEN wA¢ [MIN EERY u BULGING ENLARGED ELEVATIONS ALL MIST To ENLARGED NORTH ELEVATIONs1 urt"„E,EWCN;N�I s ENLARGED SOUTH ELEVATION /s \.WALL No SCALE:I/8--1.-0 BLAST WAIL SURFACE e:PLUGS SCALE I/RE a I•_0 MATCH PRECAST(ENT TIP.) @../' I• 915011 HAST MP L SURFACE 8 PLUGS Pie A-1 6 �' I I I I,POm 11-2s- r/ I M/eP 5PD.16,P • I DHN♦HHeHHXIm ss a eIx1♦1e a IN NI11 x 1 e 1 e 1 o I R o Hii x ] I s 1 ) e o 11 x J ♦ s e o IHHH IH x I oH RRHHIH : J o IIIIIII II III x oSwSm 40 a owm a a w 010msDa m Im I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I r-r-O r-r-o r-1-0 r-r-0 r.f-0 r-I'. f.f-0 Ir-r-e T M1m r-xr r-a hid WMr501 art I MCPeou mse smn anion Tm t u[cout sxaumi (� IUD MD AS91H1 / M. � �I �� �� ((�� D V $dI __i___— 'EL Im-0 „ i — I -1 I I I I I I l I I I l I I 1I 4 a $ I7-' $ala --r— — Ro aasc I ■■■■1.i—=i.i 4 M ! m - NI: °° — 7. o° pxan eio $aMITwR-0 - I��•• ' � _ ; EL I03-0 NE male+ - Me.DWI•/I[Wf16 ME.D.V/LIMES RECAST Maul Trrr/0 rigs PRECAST Wall PAID art DP. D. NORTH ELEVATION O w se VIa•-r-o-0 DM CCP.M. 4F0,�"��\\ EIDD Dam U'M9DMr PROPOSED D DIM I[TM vM0 A597ar \1 sawo4 $°' um e,LI.DPT T VREtlaf $a I:-0 ,f 1�:NAILI NORTH ELEVATION(CONT.) s•,..I/Ir.r-o • PR..DMw BIM m'M0 MUD OP.M. / owmw SCUM.re DRAW MCA .7 $T/9NL14£f _ PREva f¢,to ° ° I �I IH ° ° I HI I I M R ` PREDaT MrouL `ME/t PR 911m a mu IADI ay. �-so AS-RE° MO TO, fIM Iml Ka ..c. a...D. SOUTH ELEVATION 2 swr:or-r-o A-15 � �D mM VMD a9Hl © eleal art .�,:.....,...,. RIM WwaII WORT DM OAG ASDI "I— ^ • A rNIAMfl I -� r ,�' N' a D -en .0 v-n,�„ L w♦v _ ♦ — I u K PACCAR, INC. III III II I I AE as —� I �MI'i--2 KENWORTH TRUCK PLANT $rAEtaT .— = . r� r-1. ,.ffi� I a nf-0 RENTON,WASHINGTON _— $LL IOC-0 -— iMVM REM 41111111111107,1 _-- 6.I011-0 V 7.,...9 mu roa / M GDE ' • SOUTH ELEVATION(CONT.) r. I T I I I I I ..o • O Q s0'-o- 0 I O 1 O o 00 D -Q a o O I O I _ 8" a If 8' I LADDER TO �\\ LIL So O- % - O oar �TCLd�iY' 'V l.- 1 G jI II N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIII111111I1I IIIII11111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl1)E o IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII_III111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(`I. _ j 1 o to 7TIE wxN Pens • /-o • c ED II I RARANWDP nE Dp�M I fD. SLOPE SLO J- PE SLOPE I - AWE 8'WOE 0'-O•Ri- I Ip'-0- TRENCH DPAW 4 S'o.SUNP I e % ® %E IIIIIIIIIII III III' / V 1 ji�iia�aiiaiaiiiiiiiiii/aiiaiiaiiiiiiiiiaiiiiaii �iiiiiifii�aiaiiiiii�iiiiiiaiiiiaiiil51 -- II I a I SLOPE O- D. SLOPE �-AWE _ _ _ _ _ _-- sr III II _ _ _-_ _ _-_ _ _ _ 1- • II = 0 B"MdE • o 'e - N TREK.DRAW 1I j T. / ,, I(IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIII II III IIIIIIIIIIIIIII III / C - LEGEND ire.SEE 0 S f Hp o e 0 wu a oc 61 1° 'E' o ® la.en6 s00608L06 5'-0' 9'-O" O I•_g-.} aro• !'A• ar_d. I•_p• o !j /i0� ------------ ---_- O i/�� --- DYNAMOMETER RLDG"FLOOR PLAN — — n --- eisi KEY FUN ® ° : : : Wrn u. KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY 1801 N.8TH STREET RENTON,•A 98055 M.H2001 a-can FAX(OM)027-3e01 49.V.. .�� 1/e7 IT a"'" DYNAMOMETER BUILDING MOA201 .,...e s.,..,r =; D: p,mL 0,Ne. FLOOR PLAN 4*811 OF • • o L Q r GAP 0 I I 0 a 154-4- „.......-EX1S11NG -' Wil 1111111 A----IIII I1 rAl, El I16-0 //11111II I- II II I = • 1II11 _ IIIIII SOUTH ELEVATION(LOOKING NORTH) EAST ELEVATION (LOOKING WEST) r II CD I _ IIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _ lil __1111111 III �� LAVER�/CAGE NRRNG 9pxG OUT �/6"YR S11A15 „�� ROW EIEC1PoCAl � unII -5001G ROgI TO R00` M OYFR Y NRRWG M St HIGH III '.�- RAMC ■ III ��� LNGER II IWIWWIIWIY- ■WIWW III r. WEST ELEVATION(LOOKING EAST) ___-____—__---= NORTH ELEVATION(LOOKING SOUTH) eisi 1.1151.1. '121 6861. KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY g I801 N.8TH STREET RENTON.to 88055 m.gsml 271-m11 nt MOO rx/-6e04 .v m FIT.e15,1P 8/1,8 11•0.No. DYNAMOMETER BUILDING croam_ A202 BUILDING ELEVATIONS s • „®,.a„ , VNNw'p oo TOL w. OF PATCH LINE N 9,400 FOR LONIINUAPPN SEE DWS m11 '°' TANK�O n 9x S�7!'� I 9 o GARY ii ( '- ilil=m'iej�°`"°ix t'' I 18 p ,. ,,..w I,// MANUFACTURING j j 0 �_� n .3�" MANUFACTURING i e O ,11 it ,11 BUILDING FE DN I • I� / j Dgi I °a —.I -1-- t -- 4� = ' 1 i vo TD IE=26 551 '10'F 1E=26.17 9/ ,n.ux p 1 iW GAS ff=2I.,Y / GAS IE=4.00 i/ yI N 9,200 • , 4 II / fm arz� ti 0 V 1 CDs Pa ,v [ I�: V w, ;;13 u I" 4...�z�( 10 • P . .I //,'�/'; T ti Jg6 To E=271D • x^7,z. e'6.c ''w'4' ii'9 i — W l l• 1E=22A0 ( ti CS 11 11 ^i IV , 5 �•fi-- / 12-FIE=25.75 - 11 x s �I• IN m3 /° g •a B•SANff 210 i[(w)-E1 izxa I hr' /sxi /li E e AN IE=22.82 6'AO IE=27.96 W (s-ro i IIt1 36•TD IE=27.0 /12'F E=2SJ7 1 n 6 i i IE=26. 6Y IE=25.25 \ N 9,000 ,ov nv[. 24'z IE-Zr0 i �.� x.,x s xw n.z � ii I -. h e-e.. IR IE=26.60 3cm W.27.2 w F , 1 y a,' .�2'F ff=25.0 8 •F IE45.0 - P)IE=27.60 i1 Trvc P< II _ rt xiu zs,NI �I •i n• � II2 FIE=2fi. li .................._... .................... ._................................. I` ........................ ..._�#Z® �I : �I 1 J° ii ..i... .. •��I ... f;I va 44- —� . ! "1>� L �` _ I` , ..5i�. �71 PI IE=.7.79 x srt� III A �r,fJ T - /1 ry F Lt.__��--' I ea _, IY F IE=2dA� 1 f-� 405 �� 9 �ll tl I+L$ 1-?7A i / m ! / ! ! / / I ill: F \ 5.p,-.221 1 I ' / „ i Y 6'RD IE=21111 / /LEAX TEST A/ C\ SAN' PROJECT I`, 5 / . 12•F IE=250 I� r ! ! s:'�..�7J / \ JI 11 = ! A,/ '!87IE=23.7 4'W 25.67N ` fi 'aN / su, r }7 II 12•F ff=25.2 10 F 26.59 � I I 0 I.w x-s x I I•o I r �" r v ! }!LAVYABIE YA7ERW. 6'RD IE=2812 Y x•m SI zz ! _ / • FFFE 31:7REAlYENT BIDG 10'F IE=1t54 �2 C1� 11'C' Ip yl n�A 24' E=27.87 Ds II tl / I 10'FIE=2451 • /2; 0' E=21.51 KEY PLAN III�In' • _ )) {if 2 ,I i y iy 8'SAN IE=21.80 • . NO SCALE iit -9�i rii' wcj3. !BC 1 \ I / r r / r 0 / ! r r 3 IDIE=26.12 / 1' ;--; r l PN IE=21.85 z N 8,800 •• u i 'Yn uv, , ❑ / r r T I jrf _1:,,4= =418 I .%I T7 I I eI .,utw�..9,x10.N..su x a...._.,7_,... ==xcu5 i. - II . o, „ �E.. 1Ia)•,.11."cm[1 -I„c�s'11 F °:sw vx. Exx1 {f :isti;l SAN• � s' io° —___-- ,,,I•„cx 93502T� sx T I % sax z I .4 . .4 4' 1900(2=4.x4, j %I iEj�-°' 9-7x 7 aE4=s�;�ta;2a11 _— --- 6_— — 0 III=_ N,..?. SD46 c 2.n`-I.00 cn 3 ;1_I _ of A Y�� —j .� r - III Etta?: CITY OF RENTON ow Sax 5 h' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS sax s.a x I n 8I II II J 8 nl - --- _. W W W Ki AREA xC COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN W AREA "C" COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN q U ®ate M6 0„F lx•x•:sollm46 SCALE.1•=40' C.H.D. • oa scar: 1•=40' ,m m. ..a. MATCH LINE N 9,400 FOR CONTINUATION SEE DWG S045 r_77 —_—_—_—_—_— _—_—_—__—_7__—�__—__—_ _ �_T__' �- ,i � ^ — .m"C�wu-i��u i�° Mii ecuo lw4n I II / «n ze1 6'So IE=27.57 !I I j / ° E IE=2d.61 �x'T ( j - F SD [IE=356 f(.7�. I i[tza �ssu dsr / 1 13.5D IE 3326ux RS' S I nvc ce,viu ass. j MANUFACTURING °°� I �ia:�e cwc o��z — BUILDING / �"`�"", 6'm IE=2a ��_ r . ai FFE 31.0 x 10'F IE=25.3 I 1 / cac j 11 / I.2 I Iw .I F'll L 1. — I j — 11 j ' � li III I I5501E li 3396 a4. „/ ..(//////1/ =38 0 .nee caw ,n.:." o 11 I 'I +OF tt ultuilIS L___J F 1" 1.2 cur xxD,zDi D,we IiwT j / .MeI AN "" / 36 0 E=za39 �, T C C a-1 sN ``s 6'SAN IE=23.62 s co.u / .r 70 au n i = • SDI rt x.09. C< - i wvc I E IE=2a0 - E U=2 00 - I•SO 6:=351d 60 N 9,000 6 FIE=2P.J0 s" II I II E 0'1 750 'ply N xr_ 11 if FI IE=3S00 mo NMI 11: 6'SANTF a27 °!_.Zl. » 3'Y �� D ciu�•"-"�'a�7:S;z,':, I �r1u•T 1 2,1 S, I - E E IE 37.00 � •,t. 91679.51 10_'M =s 1j1 _ •\ 10'F`IE=27.05 F \ \ -- S Ce , ��/d �� i 1--/-7-7-7 7 7 7 7 r r7-7-7777br SANE=23.15 10'F IE=27.77 11 anx Y r ipl ji 12'F IE=26.0C It, 9� CT �I • C C III N.m Si / j 11 j ' --jI- i 'i11�..�11 • �� A R , j KEY PLAN ,'II iI " I d q V .J i 01''8RA55 CAP W NO SAL i N 6,600 FUNK a696TT OFRCE - j_ I [AAA..J 1 IAA..ce_11I r ELEV.3a0d SAN wn uN au ae 11 o FF \ a D i" €,s` as M : °„ 29. C 1::' MAU a u9 ,71 aiu D D iC zs DD Iiiii,., I _ '✓_1_1'_?.�l_'rLZY�,CJ_1_1_1_L3L•Yu:J is. 1cxis o2_sue rN]uxFt MX .sus�' \ �� �� ����w'xooq` _____ ___ na.cw�.v_—GION evoo. m.am-en-7 s"cn_ ___ 935021 ' --- ir,-,9741.1.191+ �00 SD47or ' - - __-__--_----v'- - •\" `. _ _ r k:I' q�. .___ NUVDcx CITY OF RENTON --- ----- - --- " OF PUBLIC WORKS II j s AREA"D"COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN AREA "D" COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN s a OM{ c1Rio D"` ,m soas�o "' SCALE 1'=d0' w accxm R.LM. s •40 • • 8 g 8 WATER 1.. xcxl A w dao7 STORY W W w "it 1'PP v�� BINis s-a a. `(({ 2 c, III ! •I ''ewE Ecwc l Title ^. ' i[IEe')=15, i[t[e'EliP.a_ y [M1afi)�g, 1,! i} l a,,.a "= NQRTH 8Ih$TRE1i �� m ____� Ja� -{ w a -` ,]N 10,000 -T __� .�_ — - _ ,� S.P r, N i �,p —x—t—.�, _ x ox�x—x—. __�_�_�_X. 4, �'� _xJ 2'E7RaN2i DISC IN SW 8'FzIE=7513 \ srw+uN(.e X.XXx.au EL.28�� 36 9 IE-20.73/: 4 it n mssr - a.rw i.1x°w°Q.`i w.., I '�4z .. I I A' :k ,412g1. Ch' I•4 may, •. d-'L`-- - I • 1 1 1 i \ '°'° E.K. OETEN80N POND I r ) „Ka � \ I i IIV Iv ___ y am/ I B'SO IE=2563 rm,i a BUILDING , u s .. -Q E 1E4325 ! rrzc - _L,_-^ , ra E SD IE=25.69 '^ y I 1 23 25 i N 9,800 I _ f. e` a r P 'i —_-----_.-—_-I T' :sera.. I �'/ ! I,- ,il Ici=iglu, ,a za fix— 1 ww = y `� a SD I N em Y1 /I / Sp 18'SD IE-263] iai-m nsi:'S v`wc .1 -R--mrs - v...< i '�(/ 1 IE=23.25 r/+/%/: 1 =• o 1, yy It 1 1 18'SD IE=2641 ! = III . w ry e. ifFM b L 0 1 2 SD IE=2S08 < �14�. S.•.l ..wxo�s.n w,re o,. rz. 7!J _ ar ..... .................. r ID \ 1 - iD 11 i �- T ' m 4'SD IE=2B.0 x ern ' �u 3 i�(�Ain at{aex mty i ,t 1 E 18'S01E=26.65 EIE=2125 E IE=23.25 I -/) 1 PROJECT STE • i Fri zznm-a.n vow a 1 J J 18'SD IE=26.71 a�F1 1 4'SD IE=280 y ON sr / y7u-' _ „ „' 10'FIE=2a.0 ! 10'FIE=26.T7 p y1j N 9,600 .ec 1 1 ��s,wv - ` ' NI IIF KEY PLAN DO SCALE 2 asA . P I I '-I°x p'�■ I P P 11 Ao 1 i Iii i 0 I n I 8'F IE=12.31 I en cwz.^.s Nc w veaa.N1Orz xoe-en-zes .,� .,« ,I I ICI,�Br/ 48 SD lE=20.34 , MANUFACTURING _—_— c �„„ ir8 �-n OFFlCE -I- 935021 • ...w, '1 I I Y---— �uILGINc-- N. D44 w rwaw..rzn oY 1 �`� _ _�__� --- FFE 31.0 ,.. I' . n Nwew wr..No _—"•N—�I�� CITY OF RENTON __ _N-9,400__- MATCH LINE N 9,400 FOR CONTWUAPON SEE DWG SD46 DEPARTMENT ueuC woRxs AREA"A"COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN AREA "A" COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN ';1€1; vertu LIB. e.,,, ru mum50115044 SCALE,..40' CUD. artean SCA. i'=40' rm m r.¢ - _ °,1 § .., 5 cd FE —ra (".' CR.T'l PCOLPTO N 65:gZ:'TO N \cj I riv5,cr-=.15107 'FA's- L 30 0•CUP AliC , Atetj, ___. k. MiliW CON< ._ SO ' ''k -, NORTH 8TH STRE:T V- 1/1,0V,10.000 .. --ICE= PIM 36 98 n__.7.___ \ 1 E.27 73 =__ __ -=- /..S- L_..--,•,}3 .--_- t,' , 8.CONC PROM S I k ..., , \ I IPLT.'"gO 'oron Na"so IE=21.77! - -----4 r-- ----'4, -\ Cr,4`1 . ' r- .34 39 ...,.. iRat MAP%36 7." \ 8.CONE TO N 1,2808 V 01 35 EL 21 50 12 F lE=27.8 ,..-d,aRctuE DISC 1 \ , 6'CONC DROP'..c.,., ..N. 'S..... IELE33:1900• I 1 0 ''g''N,)/ 644 N's - 21.CONO TO W k% • I - ! ' .t I. I : —\ . .:',. r-,,,,... :1.",..,,,, 44,,,,,,,. ......... C'P4,,,,, ',.,.. \ ,, \ \ 30'SD IE=24.801 . N, 4' ........ • '' \ I 12'F If=22.30 1 N ,...., . • I'•••,,,..______ _ ,Z,,,,,,,„.. ' Pt '•/.... \ \ -- -- -. • A i ., ,N, 1,X \ TYPE CB 1 E I tt.'" ,, i ., , ...:, _ N 9,800 _'''N--1:_-1/__-„, . , I , 1.0...rr=23.7.4.3.; , ,IE-.'i..°,0.22 I &c, / ' i,, , ff P I 1 f'j I I _ :VP , '•,,... 1.--' n- 115: IL i IMII .NR..5 : If =24.20 1•;•.. ,,, 1 E= 04 I . ..IF 425 90 1 I '.• • `•\•r. :11FLIHretrf.Zr' ,, ,'L!,, 04, I, 4 Nift,4 405 '110, 11/411b,A6151 -I ' E lE=35 00 , 8 SD IE.-W.58 . 'I.1 STORM UN I I 'IE'233'32 ::',...,7 ,1 i 1 . i , I—T'llk SD 1E'7'7: \--1 i!.SD IE.25..55 ' 4 b A 7,41 i 1 ..i. .._... _... i I. _,...--...„ l•33 00(3 §I co .,..k;••• r-u- - N 601 Sl .1' I 3 ...,i ,:g I ./ r-----.- • '7:7: . . dol. E IE 34.67 W IE 37.17 _._ 1-, *lit a:1111W)11 I,r ____ _ _:r i--_, ll PROJECT /f.(3 SITE i I II C • 1 • It , ,.., 1:11"11 . i : 15' i N 9,600 'N 4T1.ST 1—I\• \-1 :..------'. 1•MOM,1 Wyci IM I (.__ 7 .,--= •^ ----' I I E lE=3.50 I----• I ='-' ,iir'44, SD IE=25.70 I F ..... KEY PLAN , I 111 6 F IE=23.70 .t''',-.. . k I , AP.) I ,..• z I I 8'SD II=25.20 II 1113.• ,/ /7.--' L' 1: 60' , NO SCALE I IF F If=23.00 ,c1 77777—_ ,—... ,;•SS FM E=7 75/ i - , IT 1E-.25•4 / s, 1 I I , • 1 I /11 FY , p L___ 1 c ---, • — i 550.E.INC. , Li . ENGNEERS ...Mc's PLANNEPs I • . : I BELLEVUE.wAS.iiNOT0t4 08004. YEL ne-827-2950 I MANUFACTURING A I t, - ---- . /OFFICE I i Q `• T __ .1----- R$4-37-19 221151-9-35021--- or _1_ I , IL 35 19 TYPE 1 CB %as? SD45 BUILDING FTE oto I _ a,, , nii.VCONC).33 71 I JAL 50,‘ -i: ‘6.,i I E(E 8-CONC).33 61 CITY OF RENTON 1,—o----------_ '—f---Zij 1 --- 4 :2.... ,___:—:____.__ DL.PARTNIENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MATCH UNE N 9,400 FOR CONIINUAIION SEE DWG 5547 AREA"B"COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN AREA "B" COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN .11,11, .`, • _ _ .s.E. H 9. 0,,,,,, nu NAME:50I15045 SCALE:l'=40' rax.on, C.H.D. CHEcKE0. R.L.M. SME:1..40' pro... .... 5 .. REMS. SHEET: Or: f�o f9'' 1 t9 �' ')- •1'�°9k -i e�1.S n}}"f ea.- da ppp•��y �.+a , f + 1 M ''PI 1 li i; V e'fl eA_=NI t ��jJ .. 'c. i "+'�'xj4'.b �t j ems- \ I. :,.` 1'. 6 (It r.,'& '1 1 .4. sue°,., e 4� "//��„ . ,, B- ,, i a I I i ;I 0 1 I1, > eve f rn • r J•v t r,,a Li a s' •\ I ° ��1 {—�AgSS; ; 4 9 v , a, ��: ` > '' '73 e e f'� �?i. miss * ��1 �_�'7 :`lJe�sid .o u" -.�: � .. ,.�m �. j : O:.Ar'00 e�@ m.m ``^• "`JR11.... \\,� p'CG?.i+�w�'u'a�t'�w',,��J'�� ,�•"Y'„-•, '- ._ [!-K :A.'? ',...c):`:0=,%4i -Iiik.-qq/c.kLI'-. -- ,,,....4 __:_:4— .,.....4 ,,,, ___ • '..orailat.,lair • 5,..,,, A, .,..„,,,...... :ir, -..... - . -._--..,;,_, ..<411‘ _ i, , .. a"sv� ' Qom•' �� -i®f"'W o'f� la, C �'`Ps� ag i e .� `. �� ''• dlw fi re; ,,,..la 1 w2s r .= � E ,e, .-c: ,• . _� ,m \e o a 1,. I iy 2f. AG.g_ iime-sJ tip:: II:ie►X11i � ����, 3 e_5 ) � f' ` <^ • I i 1 e. mail I.. a :'' 7°4 °.�. . �I "� �" f. .r _ • i, T'`s`i. -.I,_-_ ip iv SYG. `IGifiiGif°-f{ajii= 1 w.i \% .� Gfk 9199G.,..igi9Gk ;ovad m `At7Aa�'_.eli-,BEC, a_4�b g. �9�.i • a,. . -i., . I- ) s•� q : s .>. liMai 9�n• •�4i#I. §u'±Cf ... 4 \ ') . s. - - __ -I$.�°rEG9?RSF.i ". +ei P.9B°PfYE-EG' °..ed.1 i U;114 ' a ror,.,tt I o Iri aA OB := 3e 9 •:k a' .nti9 VI .d[. `Ee di 3 }3 SA. .4-a.. as ,,eco n.. fif r � •,-.a g...:A OV :tom p �. ,»� ' Y', _ -.95,5 o •t ',- V ° :if 9.aq;<a al'1l ht' ,\ - --- _=tt-_- - -� _- ��•saa 'r 1 .,.gyp • a R. e e. - - ;i erg— .1 . 1t CIT' )F RENTON • Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator { October 13, 1998 • Mr. Douglas Condit EISI, Ltd. 1900 West Emerson Place, Suite 200 Seattle,WA 98119 SUBJECT: Kenworth Dynanometer Building.and Canopies ' .:. - Project No. LUA-98-135,ECF Dear Mr. Condit: • This letter is to inform you that the comment.and :appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination`of„Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. If you haJe any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425)430-7270. For the Environmental Review Committee, ?/t (// Lesley Niihitgra Project Manager. • cc: Mr. Keith French/Kenworth FINAL.DOC I ' 200 Mill Avenue South-Renton, Washington 98055 �1 Thic nanar rnntainc Rfl%rarvrlad matnrial 9f1%nnct rnnci!mar - • . � . • U:RR:i >::::><: ::>,.> ::>:NNIN;:::>_>:>:IV>:.;<>;:<:<::::> i'MIN<' ' '>`> ENEM < » > >`<>?<<< ` i is :............:>............................................: :<:: ::»::::>::»>«::...... R . N. tN. .Q1Vt t N_...... . . .t. ..ItIlA1L ... ;;;:.;:.;:.;:.;;:.::::.:::.::.:::::.::.::.:::.:;.::;:.;:.;:.;:.:;:.::.>:.::.;:.;;:.;;;;>:.;;:.::.>:.»::.>::.;::.: iiiiiiiiiiiiiiIMMENSIMEniiiiilliiiiiiiiiill On the Zg'& day of SeFew1/4b:.e r- , 1998,•I deposited in the mails of the United States,a sealed envelope containing I SRC- ckete mmafiawhs . . • documents. This information was sent to: - Name Representing Department of Ecology Don Hurter WSDOT • KC Wastewater'Treatment Division - . _Larry Fisher I . ' Washington Department of Fisheries David F.Dietzman Department of Natural Resources • Shirley Lukhang i Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Indian Tribe •- Rod Malcom Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Joe Jainga Puget-Sound Energy • (Signature of Sender) .hdret tt. Se�rr' STATE OF W SHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I lknow or have satisfactory evidence'that 1cl de signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. �,,, Dated: /0 -S- �1� --t 7 7a.--c. ,4/ai't9 I Notary Publ' n and for the State of ,mi hington, Notary(Print) MARILYN KAMCHEFF My appointment expires: . Project Name: Ryh0.w►o w aer %t4 a.hd Cahcples Project Number: LUPr , 9e. t35.EC. NOTARY.DOC .�;m CITY ►F RENTON ..lL A ;;NeYy Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator September 24, 1998 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on September 22, 1998: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED KENWORTH DYNAMOMETER BUILDING AND CANOPIES , LUA-98-135,ECF Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size, will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in size, will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the.proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure. Location: 1601 North 8th Street. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Gra cl y Way, Renton, WA 98055.. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton.City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at(425)430-7270. , For the Environmental Review Committee, / p2/ • Lesley Nishihira Project Manager cc: • King County Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources Don Hurter, Department of Transportation • Shirley Llukhang, Seattle Public Utilities • Duwamish Tribal Office • Rod Malcom`,"Fisheries,.Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) - Joe Jainga, Puget Sound Energy ; .. - AGNCYLTRDOC\ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 CACI Thie r,aner rnr,fai„a RM.rarvrlarl malarial 90/nnaf ran [mar CITY IF 'RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator September 24,.1998 Mr. Douglas Condit . EISI, Ltd. 1900 West Emerson Place, Suite 200 . . Seattle, WA 98119 ' SUBJECT: Kenworth Dynanometer Building and Canopies Project No. LUA-98-135,ECF Dear Mr. Condit: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee'(ERC) and is to. advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project., The'ERC, on September_22, 1998, issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated With Mitigation Measures. Seethe enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055.'..Appeals to.the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. :Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-7270.' For the Environmental Review Committee, Lesley Nish! ira Project Manager cc: Mr. Keith French/Kenworth Enclosure DNSMLTR.DOC 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98055 . - . - `.L7p Thic nanar contains 50%recycled material:20%nost consumer - .. .. '. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES • APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-135,ECF APPLICANT: Kenworth Trucking Company PROJECT NAME: Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size,will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in siz , will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: , 1601 North 8th Street._ • MITIGATION MEASURES: 1.. The applf cant shall pay the applicable;Fire Mitigation Fee at the.rate of $0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is estimated at$2,947.36 and is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. • MITMEAS.DOC • CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-135,ECF APPLICANT: Kenworth Trucking Company PROJECT NAME: Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size, will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in size, will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure:' LOCATION OF PROPOSAL 1601 North 8th Street Adviory Notes to Applicant The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination.'Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. 1. S parate plan and permits are required for the installation of sprinkler and fire alarm systems. 2. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans must meet the requirements of the 1990 King County Surface Water Drainage manual as adopted by the City of Renton. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Lori L. Furnish first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 - I NOTICES'�'_'""�� "`"�..�" _T OFEN ,RONMENTAL a daily newspaper published seven (7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal = *"hpE�TERMINATION i newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months ENVIRONMENTAL`REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON,WASHINGTON prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language The Environmental Review Committee continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County �; (ERC)has issued a Determination of Non- Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper byorder of the Superior Court of the Significance - Mitigated for the following pp g p ;j Munlct under the authority of the Renton State of Washington for King County. pal Code. The notice in the exact form attached, waspublished in the South CountyKENWORTH DYNANOMETER BLDG � LUA-98-135,ECF 140 Journal (and-not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers - construct,canopies review for approval to during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a construc 1can Ni s nd a hew building:, Appeals of the environmental deter- i Kenworth Dynanometer Bldg. urination must be filed in writing on or tl before 5:00 PM•October 12, 1998.Appeals I must be filed in writing together with the as published on: the f 8 required $75.00 application fee with: • Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $35.65 south Grady way, Renton, ov ned by 9 9 9 Appeals to the Examiner are governed by Legal Number 5221 . City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- c"� r' 11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the l---69Pai.) 9 Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)430-6510. J Published in t e South County Journal Septern6era U998. y Legal Clerk, outh Cou Journal • • Subscribed and sworn before me on this L q i ay of 60<+- , 19 4_ _ _ owlviiii/, ___La / V.. Ste/ `Y Notary Public of the State of Washington residing in Renton - 'r = King County, Washington _ "a a �' : •''S/b eeeaa, uluuas° eaa NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. KENWORTH DYNANOMETER BLDG LIJA-98-135,ECF Environmental review for approval to construct canopies and a new building. Location: 1601 N. 8th St. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. Publication Date: September 28, 1998 Account No. 51067 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-135,ECF APPLICANT: Kenworth Trucking Company PROJECT NAME: Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size,will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in size, will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1601 North 8th Street LEAD AGENCY: ! City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under .RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady;Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. ;Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: September p 28, 1998 DATE OF DECISION: September 22, 1998 SIGNATURES: ,fox g Zimmerman,Admin'strator DATE `• -partment of Planning/Building/Public Works CC a_ Jim Shepherd,A Inistrator DAT7 Community Services Lee Wheeler, Fir 'Chief 741.4 D E Renton Fire Departmen • DNSMSIG.DOC • j CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-135,ECF APPLICANT: Kenworth Trucking Company PROJECT NAME:, Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size,will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in size, will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1601 North 8th Street MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall pay the applicable Fire Mitigation Fee at the rate of $0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is estimated at $2,947.36 and is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. MITMEAS.DOC { CITY OF RENTON . DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-135,ECF APPLICANT: Kenworth Trucking Company PROJECT NAME: Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size, will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet in size, will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to theexisting building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be.the same height and architectural style as the existi g structure. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: •. 1601,North 8th Street Advisory Notes to Applicant The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. -Because these notes are provided,as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. 1. Separate plan and permits are required for the installation of sprinkler and fire alarm systems. 2. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans must meet the requirements of the 1990 • King county Surface Water Drainage manual as adopted by the City of Renton. • • • • 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION . PROJECT NAME: KENWORTH DYNAMOMETER BUILDING AND CANOPIES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-98-135,ECF Kenwodh Truck Company Is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet. attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one,15,000 square feet in size,will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feel in size,will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site • I under the new canopies. Included with the proposal Is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3.641 square foot canopy.The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure.Location:1601 North 8th Street. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE i ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, ' 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required$75.00 application fee with:Hearing I Examiner,City of Renton,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are govemed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-118. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Cleric's Office,(425)430.6510. • '_ it ""): If ''.s' \.l .:;$ = = ' I ill— "74' l' 44: . .. :.:•-:•, vkl..tf.-1 i, D. `ID '` / I 9 I �;', i 14.00 t,,--y,,-;z.-. I, _!J.4_ \.1 up t ;, i we:v[0V i il-,,4•4 co'm p n" °'ti '7:::: °I ' r7r 1 yPrWi 5 . ffe „ 1+ '3u2: `tI ' Itltov •.p Y `IL ,E 5 •Lkt /:�E rU . -d go A "ke •F. .k ?ye.1, / M il A I ii.?� I ° iri ; / , : .. p A;csr.;•?1 g-,44/ rif.0.Plif r/..... f-t r-85, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION 1 1,'-`- Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification.:. .. J, CERTIFICATION I, Le5-7, 1/1 N t Ill TWL , hereby certify that copies of the above document were posted by me in .2, conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on 4 t-t mi 5, 'fig 6 • Signed: 2(4,, fi 7`z' U ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me, a Nortary Public,in and fore State of Washington residing irie..,1)1-A,..) ,on the S day of x'_- I l' • • • • ex.}...t.v., ...._ . 7-79'1 -7l)---ce,--74-e-6-a----p7 MARILYN KAMCHEFF • COMMISSION EXPIRES G./29/99 1 , 1 STAFF City of Renton REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND • ERC MEETING DATE September 22, 1998 Project Name Kenworth Dynamometer Building and Canopies Applicant Kenworth Trucking Company . File Number LUA-098-135, ECF Project Manager Lesley Nishihira Project Description ' Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies totaling 47,500 square feet attached to the main building and a new 2,052 square foot building with a 3,641 square foot canopy. Canopy one, 15,000 square feet in size, will be located on the south side of the building and canopy two, 32,500 square feet ' in size,will be on the north side. Six new loading docks will be added to the site . under the new canopies. Included with the proposal is a new 2,052 square foot building. The building will house two new dynamometers and will be connected to the existing building by a proposed 3,641 square foot canopy. The new canopies and building will be the same height and architectural style as the existing structure. Project Location' 1601 North 8th Street Exist. Bldg. Area gsf approximately 84,000 Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf 53,193 square feet square feet Site Area 66 acres Total Building Area gsf approximately 137,193 square feet • RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated. . , \ - .. ole y. — :ors r...• �� ��� 1 ::,: .•• . i! ,. \- 1,-, A 6.eig.:"Lt.-. . 17Ce:CA•"Tr i s •i; ' \ ' t I -. � , � �" e - r - .r. - '.--- : . :1/4, '( 1 has. .,„J•1i: .!; ; a� � !y'fr,,<, •l JJ ,,.p III � l .,J1 i r • t I;rr �I_;._. 3. ,$.- �•i / '4 ,'4 • ,- [. Ir,'g„d - 1� -_- Af i rill Alf/ \ �:i Project Location Map l 1" .i, a a �:.,.,1u5..4 i L• ,, ': Encn noc gi.'• At�.a�: : �.1I 1::i4:•.'1./ ,/ . '�'--._:..`.\'i City of Renton PB/FWDepartment Ei !mental Review Committee Staff Report KENWORTH DYNAMOMETER BUILINA &CANOPIES LUA-98-135,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 22,1998 Page 2 of3 B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal,staff recommend that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED. Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. XX Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The applicant shall pay the applicable Fire Mitigation Fee at the rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is estimated at$2,947.36 and is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. 1. Separate plan and permits are required for the installation of sprinkler and fire alarm systems. 2. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans must meet the requirements of the 1990 King County Surface Water Drainaggl manual as adopted by the City of Renton. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. Has the applicant adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development? 1. Water Impacts: The Cedar River is approximately 800 feet to the west and Lake Washington is approximately 960 feet northwest of the site--neither water body will be impacted by the proposal. No surface water withdrawals or diversions are proposed. According to the Geotechnical Report prepared by Hart Crowser, the site has a high groundwater table that fluctuates with the seasons. During construction, ground water will be pumped from excavated areas. Stormwater runoff will flow to the existing collection trench system,through the existing oil/water separator, biofiltration swale, and detention pond and will then be discharged through the City's storm sewer system. Currently, the site is entirely developed with impervious surfaces. The proposed project will not increase or significantly alter current site conditions. The existing drainage system will adequately serve the site after completion of the project. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is recommended. Nexus: N/A ERCRPT.DOC City of RentonPBg'WDepartment Environmental Review Committee Staff Report KENWORTH DYNAMOMETER BUILDING&CANOPIES LUA-98-135,ECF REPORT AND DECISION OFSEPTEMBER 22,1998 Page 3 of 3 2. Public Services Impacts: The proposal will add new construction to the City which will potentially impact the City's Fire Department. A Fire Mitigation Fee applies to all new construction. The required mitigation fee is based on a rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. For the proposed development the fee is estimated at$2,947.36. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure: The applicant shall pay the applicable Fire Mitigation Fee at the rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is estimated at$2,947.36 and is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Nexus: Environmental Ordinance, Fire Mitigation Fee and adopting ordinance. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM October 12, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Cleric's Office, (425)430-6510. ERCRPT.DOC ......,-,1,,, ,,,„ - - ,.... • — —-J -----. N 8TH ST. - _, -,.. AREA "A" _ , N... AREA "B" • _____ DETENTION POND = .ScT3 - liii..... _ 9 i ,. 1 ,..... \ ]1 __.. ....____ . _ _. •. . , • _ . Lj (( , • ,, ...,.„,,,/.,„/,,, ///,./// ..,,/,? f / I ,,,. /./. , l';',, ., ;',Y,,,,,,',"/,'.•,!...,% .,,,', ,e",,,, ./,,,4..'.',..;,,,,,,," _, . > li Ccil I ..::( 574 El nn n 11-1 t 'i t F ._ ._ z ez. - - I....0 CI Eli P3 C PROPOSED DINOMOME1ER 1 ' PROPOSED CANOPY AND El.•N..i. r 1 1 ./Cr ' BUILDING&CANOPY 6 NEW LOADING DOCKS C.D C---; 5.1 - M I ,L EXISTING ANUFACTURING/ TANK OMCE FACILITY 111T j b FARM-,E' • EXISTING PARKING' -I If ---I--- f---I 11 • (-- ! PROPOSED ) ,•I - CANOPY 1-- —. JUL/Ul* T 1 1 . ,...::,,.,,,,„,,,„:," ,, x ,K',c-, R . ••-•—•\,\ 1 ___ • . ••••.,_ t ) v,g _____E-L,___. \ I g 1 FLAMMABLE MATERIAL WASTE TREATMENT AREA "D"1 - :.* I III' ''If '• • ›- ill IP 6 i . 3 t, M 2 N MN - - -I, n ' AREA C ST. 1.„-- (-- M r i - SITE PLAN Dennalmon WarRIAL SCALE: 1=40' COVSMINSFAVIEZIPS KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY ixo Nm.-/A 6 pm 1001 N.DTP STREET RENTON,WA 90055 Sogro,...q.ilatl, TEL.,(200)227-6811 ra MN)227-6001 ;-,`..' DYNAMOMETER BUILDING D2 . SITE PLAN Mtn i. -,.. 1 XX% srAtz,7os o• ID NO UNSIPOD OF • . . .•:::.':::::..... .:'..;:. . . . •."..,I '. ,... ..• 4'...............:. ....: . • • •,. ..... .... . • I 04800 .Y A 02101 I II 01 x 1 ° e ID 0 0 1 x ] 1 6 n l 6 0 1 x ] 6 0 0 : ] 1 2 0 0 1 2 06101eA O 60 0 1 xOD W SO 010ID]000 IA HNNXNNNIII 1 I H1111111 '1 I INN 11 I I 1 I I I 1 I'I I1111 1 1 I I I I I 11111 1 I I I I HINIHHIH 1 I I 1HH111111I1 1 I 1411111111111 I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I III 1 1 11 )E • r-r-0 r•n•-0 r-r-0 r-r-0 i.r-o r-r-0 r-r-a Ir-I•-0 W r r- -W ` I I 8at I • ®\^ ^ 1[ia AMC SK1TM / TWIA SAM\ ®WI �-R°..19165IAee1 f) 1[14 AM AMA O.1 - I-—-— —\M I �` INra[T a a(-4sr I eµevr 6L 1S-0 -- - I I€ g IaumEde _-_ I I I I II 1 I I Il I I U pik,1 M. — T TAIGA Ap � a _ =11 elk . ■1 _ _:. .AAa1W-0 Ra 1N e % 16A.RE era LOAMOOOI 10/1.106 I0.6440 DA M/LIAM M06nl MAC °SGN Du MAIM n All M. Trek rM� NORTH ELEVATION 110 SAE 1/0.1•_0 z — • IETM OPEC 6TEA CAM CMG CAM PROPOSED DTIq 9°61 vAtANAT • Ina Dun lSmnT ��(�6A SOfDR; f1 IN'-1 AOMONT FL IR•-0 $a1A-4 0- II 1❑❑1 I 1❑❑I To 1100 I rw fOt F—I 1-I--a I---1 FFFIII II I ) 45LL 100-0 411L11`—tI x. AIMAM MMCA ATM Oe a MAMA M/R6ODS NORTH ELEVATION(CONT.) sur.1An•-r-6 • oswo AM■Da NE Rill 0 61xt Moon MOM Ow. SeeOR Tao LRfa A6d�� 411.1 P-7 / eD• �CNIPI'rATA 11111111111111111111111111 _ ___I— IIIIIMEIMMIMMENEMEM ---_ �TI108-4 - p p _-- a Ir-6 fill I ❑ 0. I I=�=I 11 F'0 0 /I I III MAST 034601 MA j I n6M 1,I' �_�__ ME iiiiiiii n� mrx vrt era Wit4111,AM =EOM asamom.1200 PP. 00 �4 SOUTH ELEVATION ® �v— , sum IAr-I'-0 I a3gw rosc A. r1Eia Mt I[Lu Dun ACM © J /Y//�Deumol An r �Ta Y6RT 111 i ✓ Drum Wl�a M651eeT 1ETa 66Mn 6151m WYa>s-vr-nm �, ra a-ur_..,0 I IL A-x 9 II I IIIIII I MAY i PACCAR,INC. AI/M A �I KENWORTH TRUCK PLANT a tar, , 1 I ■I!A_�l[�I III I cv, I I I I ' Mi .... )I a nr-0 RENTON, WASHINGTON AA6M.nx11--1-1- --ljj1MILIMOC m 181h 'a 1W-0 — y- — — —- 0.1m-o V OOd Sri AIMSAP / o,...,e wv eu0 SOUTH ELEVATION(CONT.) WILE 1A0.1.0 aat I I 1 1 I 1 I ` - I ..� 04 e121e 32 .e 024ea 16 24 012 e e e l0 12 01 2 3 4 S e t e2 2 • 5 6 0 2 ] 0 2 J 0 1 2 00IOle2D 40 60 01020b 50 00 01020b10 e0 120 , ,`{ HAIXHHANII I I 1It11NIi I I HB 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 III Mill I I I I I I I 014If I I 1 I I IHINIINHl I I I H141111IIIN I I N11114111111 I IIIII I I 1 1 11 I I 1 1 l 1 1 I I ..•.r_a In-r-r vr.r-r n-r-Ir T In-Y-0. J/!-I'-V n.'C I I I I I n (Irb (). T .ep. 7 4 co) \/ :^;l 9 © 9 E.y Y lo/ % cA I 1 i ,-XENWonTN•sat sE I I J _ sPEcs roR sa�ErTER It _ INFORMATION 10111 {p 1 Yt 1 I I I RFC.slSYAnW BE1 Cv 1 I • 1 I Iflfe METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY L CANOPY EXTENSION NEW CANOPY _ ALI.SIM W/ PETAL COPING ... �TellnET //� `l LL IN-� III T ON ORIG ,. .II .•'•,FID/J19011 T - s 1 —— - — I i I II IIIIIIHINH HI�p IIIH Hil t.l I III I•,IiB., u. "I P1�III nr I I I 1 —�'J �IWUIRIIIIN1immr,r I ,IIII PA ^�' H qnn I I H I l� I I-,1 I�a�g dINI I I I �I I . I _ III I I I I II I I I �� Illlu T I C.4 - I L >��1»�t1T T IAA .R ,I II1' N I I.1� 0RIII I I If 'II.l , / \ ( o❑ ' ■�■MINE ■■NEM ■I■■■■1■■■■�1' 1W_M. - _t 1 `IN..IDrtJLL 0 LP.px ppIX ,N.{TAT,D001t� CAST VERTICAL LE PANEL --MI•, 'MIMI -- I 1 \ YE SCIIEDUIE JOINTT,CONCRETE EAST ELEVATION \^_1!/1 `rP.PSI BUMPER JOINT^P. �BUD.. SCALE:1/10'-1'-O V r0P1AL OVERNCAD SEE 0.DIMS. FABRIC DOOR ((�� l/ �i I 4 cf, q7) n (r Q Q Y (Y V 6-.) .ice `( I I 1 I I I NEW CANCvr RFC.SUBSTATION BEYOND , �YETA PARR ASSEMBLY •.T/yIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII EXPANSION JOINT PIPE TRESTLE COPING I• !IllMill IPETAL .:�; ____... .____ � �I �n� � Ji" IIII II 9' 'L '1 I - i I ,,,.„,„ Ao oR E 1 OO -iWl.M. a D� 1111.= ; -'.. PRECAST w1IC.LL WEST ELEVATION I� •RPOPSE0 DINO BL.G JOINT DTP.SCALE•E/m'-E'-O A-1e METAL COPING SYSTEM PRECAST PANEL W/ ALW FRAME AND I ANO YCTAL WALL PARR I �TEXTUOFD ACCENT BAND I + I /- SUL CUSS N55[LBr BEYaID iLUIID PIRCASi -METAL rARNG '/ I IIII III-T11�I1 I �I,' 1 T/PNECAsr� • EL EJr-2 '1 i415 iiiii llll 1.liii,i II�i iN/'1',�'IIT UII a':iI\i ,II I I1 u1!'- t . F .t7 11 '~'ERNPANEL C TR..G BLr ENTRANCE/LO G 00. / / / / . � / / / / / " III' 11 1 ,PaENT=T 1. Y C -:/.gtECAST -41/NIT-2 V PRECAST SCREEN r! eI1 PRECAST SCREEN WALL BEYOND WALL RYONp \ PJ' / EVE PANEL } I I OTFCN/.S�NCE AREA . _, ., WALL erer.ro O ID\ n / I A FJ./ / / / n J" / / Imo//6/, / / I ♦ /J I 6 I / . ,APO OR (TYP.) • _g000�07I�a►alla®OZ.'. P I n P I- DEL J_�e RA. N RECCRIXO ALUMINUM FRANC (TIP.) WML P m1AT4 PRECAST CGWYN .-CANCAETC MNG EM1N PENT 0 BUILDING CONCRETE DING '�• Num YATaI 0A T(01,) CpI(N rYP. WALL FN.TO WALL FINISH TO ENLARGED EAST ELEVATION �\ C so. nUE-01 CEMENT PLUGS TCH PRECASr a PRECAST SI.0 J .••WAA ALUMINUM STRCFRPIT OOST CEMEIIT A_IA1 BIAS,WALL SURFACES a PLUGS BEAST WALLSSURFACE a PLUGS 110q(WAIL SURFACET &PLUGS u 1Y % u IIS� `r" 1/ A+mREL ASSEMBLY I.1 (1 Q Q A• I I I NETAI TALWO SYSTEM PANEL ASSNeIY Ti I WALLI i cm p I I 1 PANEL ASSEMBLY -\I I me r ` ,-FLUTED PRECASTI ALUMNUM"1 AND 1 rLUTED PRECAST /-MEtAL COPMO SYSTEM MOD a T �CAST PrEL W/ _ INSMIW QASS T/PPECASI Y IEXNRED ACCENT BARD-� ,t� 11( III' )�( .. PRECAST PANEL / R.121.-2 ' PRECAST COL COMA `I II.411II. $N" PJ. PJ. IIII•!•1'� AEI III ICI II''. 1 WP" P P ,.,,MII I II.•�"III III PtENA5TT. �C0.Unl COVER TF. ,/PRECAST ACCENT BAND i ®.AP.a...1..m ,L P,wR N. Iglu CCM.SYSTEM 6 -t 6 vAraLCASr DI...eels" M...An.. ..,. (F R.Iu'-z PRECAST PANEL pµncAST / ✓ J / % / /L BEYOND PARAPET P / H ucrAL caPMc SYSTEM I/PRccesi am Y /� J� -I� /irl � I C / '� �'a nr-2 ` --- PAHFL PACCAR• INC. ,/PRECAST PJ. P/ P.I. P P PJ. EL IEY-2 PANEL - ----- I 7/PRECAST KENWORTH TRUCK PLANT L .• /EL Toe'-2� RENTON• WASHINGTON r/PRECAST R cAsr / / /I °Irrr/ ' Pa ` ` 111' I[ °DI n ,I%_ y / I r.x ` /17r / ®/ EU PAHE� R'100_o-' �'PPRECAST cawN cowl_ a- BUILDING ELEVATIONS 11P. ALLAONUY STOREFRONT REGST PNI�C `. ¶f�f�'-, TJ� PRECAST C0.VYN COVER 100'-0�F CWCRETE rNID W/REE£/1L5 INSULATED PETAL DOOM a INANE 11 PRECAsr SCREEN NM}, ALDuwla sroREERoxT-/ EAST AND WEST AND ALL FIN.TO �PRECAST SCRIM WALL - _ FARM BERM c NI.. ENLARGED ELEVATIONS 72 ENLARGED NORTH ELEVATION `i1 aw gmvi7oa/s ENLARGED SOUTH ELEVATION /s �_4401WAL CONCRETE MA NG WWII SCALE:f a--1'-O BEAST WALL SURFACE a PLUGS SCALE 1/e'-E•-0 CI) MAT.PRECAST TIP67S ; ' • 915011 B(AL ST reci.SURFACE A PLUGS A-1 6 DI N.M.E1,6-0 A./.W✓JPln..n `.4' L •t I b1.E w µn I MAIM I uen I n N1URE 3 t iArAI iiVI o [L 13a'1' 111101 / EaIBUADWClarAAIIIIIl - II 1►►1111 III IIII • 'Li •'I_ 11111 I _II � r,n ,,,,,-,,,,,,,c,, ,LE1, _ == == =I L,r-'. / =....m.m. 1.. ., MENIIIMMI , I SOUTH ELEVATION(LOOKING NORTH) EAST ELEVATION(LOOKING WEST) 3/Ifi-•I'-0' 3/16'•1'0- - r 1-- ol I '- Fl o ]"CAP m 1 1. m ',kil—_____ 11111I I III I1 .U/RRW6"G 906NG016 11 1111 1 1. i LADDER ODCR./L AG W QE R II ELECTRICAL,/ COY 10 RCP' I OL NRRwG .-_ RM36 • .!_ I a muuW u t !IIII I =WEST ELEVATION(LOOKING EAST) NORTH ELEVATION(LOOKING SOUTH) 3/16-•I'-0" eisi WT. °I"rHAVERS KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY 1801 N.8111 STRUT RENTON,50 08055 -Nse01.rE-Bela ru oral+n-aru gym♦^ >3'''' 0xm mu.x a em .m wwowR.'si�. IT 0niR0 DYNAMOMETER BUILDINGa A2Oz BUDDING ELEVATIONS 1I5Ir wma.w7 IL uUI D MI. AR.a Or City of Manton Department of Planning/Building/Puoric vVorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: (ce COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building &Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street SITE AREA: 66 acrs I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANSION GROSS): 53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus totalling 47,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. canopy will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. i A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing , Alr Aesthetics • Water Light/Glare _ Plants Recreation Land/SAnimals Use UtilitTranles V Animals Transportation Environmental Health _ Public Services Energy/ HistoriclCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet a 7. S poke ctiA is se(\A cc, e f'rnafeci annt tAI l , t d on sly. of- � b� � ,�o - Awl- � fl II � 196LO 1�. bL S6 u W%u-- LW 1 O . `D rL b 11 - I Ilk f�� - vU • 7o ) J p plreuent MAO LCu1L-f r- Whi La, U .- bi,ainaw ls wy,10 . con ugh cn , see,wre- all bu,l 1 OU'rtg ma OrtaUS (it- 4w1s then no-f- e—pe e REM coMMENTs in us- • DiP►►care w 11 co Hall Sc .uf 11gh�-1n� c - t OIL e.on it&FicA, St) 4o 1k4 ( uu t- Lfrh.thrs • ittcomnnoL ad ►2un91U.r cUtuxnv GO- u:< (GUN 1 in i f-- is con p l tta • C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. A"dii - Z)� . 9- �7—c� Sig ature of Director 1 Auth.rized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 • City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works . ___ ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1L5 COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building&Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street SITE AREA: 66 acrs I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANSION GROSS): 53,193 sq.ft., SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus totalling 47,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. canopy will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Ce- '4E)/g e B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS /7Z 740 /2? C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information Is needed to operly assess this proposal. / / Signature of Director or Authonz Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:--f SpA-a- ,C3v1 COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02,1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira Y PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building&Campus WORK ORDER NO: 784 0�* �9� LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street y‹A ®fs? r - SITE AREA 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANS J GROp 53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus total':,47,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. ca otp will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major information impacts Impacts Necessary impacts impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics • Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS No addiLloita LV1p GLLt�VGt tot4 C{SSo&IGtt C 1 pvoPOS9 C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS IVv 5-hied- I illflw, v'eqa. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Aid Iva etAq Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPAIRTMENT:Suvfac.e koctsieurote COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishi O PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building&Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 -R' r>�R� LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street isk, Day SITE AREA: 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXN GROS' Q,c53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus toTa4fveN,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. canoWejAialso be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics • Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation • Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS k)O dr I ill -f-ce4 c3 J pcV+44(t3 aSSOcl( /tt( Co-1 t J pVo 00S We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. A I ej a/a' 61/P-08 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 I - City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL 8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'M no t,eu3—WaltrtommENTs DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company. PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira ' I PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building &Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street SITE AREA: 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANSION GROSS): 53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus totalling 47,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. canopy will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics • Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS )J0 ��� I� r peV e5) -fee, ctssocr7 � u ter-ram P✓v„., catiwithparticular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas ofprobable impact or areas We have reviewed this application p pa where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Aid tWi t0(4,48) Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 a , City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: F''ve Pvae -briA COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira DET PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building &Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 RE- , �(R.i R 411 rfR 77 LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street pp�� 1998 SITE AREA: 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANSIR%SS): 53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a carniU attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,64 ss. . ca p will a so be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics • Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14000Feet 61- __,14 �d fs /1)19re ` ) B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS : ,�i C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Cu, a444-eval44 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas- where additio al information is needed t • petty assess this proposal. c� a e / fd/ Sign tur of Director or Authorized Representa' Date DEVA . C Rev.10/93 % CITY OF RENTON �NvN�oe FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM DATE: September 10, 1998 TO: Lesley Hishihira, Planner FRO : Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal ` ' SUBJECT: Kenworth Dynamometer Building, 1601 N 8th St. Fire Department Comments: 1. The existing hydrants are sufficient to cover this expansion. 2. A f re mitigation fee of$2,947.36 is required based on $.52 per square foot o new building and attached canopies.. 3. Separate plans and permit are required for the installation of Sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. • City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET I , REVIEWING DEPARTMENTG Se.initc.&A COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley NishilG 9 Op PROJECT TITLE: Kenworth Dynamometer Building,&Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 A'.L` 0,�`�. LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street Sep SITE AREA: 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EI Silk(`1 GROSSOR3,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus tot ll �7.500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. cano 1 t �jso be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. 'V A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major inforrnaton Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air i Aesthetics • Water i _Light/Glare Plants I Recreation LandiShorelllne Use I Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health I Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS i) 6 Co 144, We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 7(CA d . Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: aOhOW11G I1eIOpW eI#OMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-135,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 02, 1998 APPLICANT: Kenworth Truck Company PROJECT MANAGER: Lesley Nishihira PROJECT TITLE:"Kenworth Dynamometer Building &Campus WORK ORDER NO: 78429 LOCATION: 1601 North 8th Street SITE AREA: 66 acres I BUILDING AREA(NEW EXPANSION GROSS): 53,193 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct a campus totalling 47,500 sq.ft., attached to the main building, and a 2,052 sq.ft. building to house two new dynamometers. A 3,641 sq.ft. canopy will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary impacts impacts. Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet • 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additions info ation. n ded to properly assess this proposal. _ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 — Proposed Mitigation Meesu - 11' O The following Mitigation Measures will likely be Imposed on the proposed project.These recommended Mitigation G® �r � Measures address project Impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. * -- • 1.Fire Mitigation Fee-$0.52 per square foot of new construction NOTICE OF APPLICATION . 4 Comments on the I Services Division,a1055 South Grady Way,Renton WA 98055,oby 5 00 IPMNonhSept September 17,1999,Development you haveAND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact NONSIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED(DNS-M) Ms.Nishihira at(425)430-7270. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. • CONTACT PERSON: LESLEY NISHIHIRA (425)430-7270 DATE: September 03,1998 I i I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. I LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-98.135,ECF APPLICATION NAME: Kenworth Dynamometer Building&Canopies PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Kenworth Truck Company is requesting approval to construct two canopies ! I totaling 47,500 sq,&attached to the main Building,end a 2,052 sq.0.building to house two new dynamometers.A 3,641 I sq.tt,canopy will also be constructed to extend from the new building. The proposed project requires environmental review. I PROJECT LOCATION: 1801 North 8th Street • OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED(DNS-M):As the Lead Agency,the City of I `r/� Ir •Renton has determined that significant environmental Impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project, -' ` A�\ �l '•v Therefore,as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice r. I t `ry qe[ that a ONSM is likely to be issued.Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are Integrated into a I' ..•'.-\ ;it %.,4 single comment period.There will be no comment period following the Issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- ""':'`1 • F. L Significance Mitigated(DNS-M).A 14 day appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DNS-M. l I �\ \ ' PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: August28,1998 I ! . ---- .i• jI• ��q \ \` NOTICE OF COMPLETEAPPLICATION:1 September 03,1998 I 'Ertl' k' -F"'r N. \ PertnllslFteview Requested: SEPA,Building Permit I _ .+0a 11 Other Permits which may be required: • a I r • Y q NA —1•• 'I_. r. s tt �i. _ - ,, ° Requested Studies: None required. ::'-• [ J Irl r Location where application may "�9 '�_ I ill '` �, be reviewed: PI nning/BuiltlinglPublic Works Division,Development Services Department, '41�G--'i-f i It'! `I ° "a 1055 South GradyWay, WA 98055 }f :: _y i " II�,':: .' VL-'0-41, zut, or_• dry PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing is not required for the subject proposal. • � •-2a- ' o ' 3 e+• CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ,� ,-fi;'. ,•y.: I = ,t iv. Analytical process i �.4��,��j'�4 k,5 •'IV,:;�-I1 i.Y�,: . •. .. , µa Project consistency refers to whether a project is censistenl with adopted and applicable development re ulation%or In •� their absence,comprehensive plan policies:RCW 3e.708.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA) °a' '�'L ••a--t ',r �. include a statement of the preliminary determination of a projects consistency with the type of land use,level of i '• TU-' •` ,^ b y sue" Y. till •: >�,.'' . :(}4t.development,infrastructure,and character'f development If one has been made at Be time of notice.At a minimum, 'o!" '.�'5., ;::'{ �r F Ptf �'t [6 r Ih. every NOA shall include a determination of the projects consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and I@3.." r:. , r, f•� _ �j, ,,qg //��G r c development regulations. $ �:"•i• �`'•:6d Jur r/i�/� v���n Land Use: The poposal Is consistent with the Heavy Industrial OH)Zone,as well as the .40444100P1 '0y} lg,j' II f�•- 't...r r}:41 • / '' Employment Area-Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Designation f, y;;•1 rf.!-gis :' �'i'r�.•__-"C.,/ `•4'Mi9 Teel j,R,R.�aB''Se ,�_'+f/ ��,pad O 1 Environmental Documents that •/;" q�.l,c,o-f i p` d�/ i% ••\ Evaluate the Proposed Project: None known ..•�V.I• -Y �ug�j�y • v-• i 1,44 Development Regulations I i'&<;4.u«. ,:.'t': �/**/:.. '-.•i-h'I ' Used For Project Mitigation: The proposal is subject of the City's Sepa Ordinance,Zoning Code,Public afll.��.� `' Works Standard's,UEC,and UFC.These adopted codes and standards will funiction to mitigate project impacts. i GENMALOT.DOC GENMALOT.DOC __ _ , _ • - CERTIFICATION I S-C, v-A,\vt i , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document ere posted by me in g conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on Sept-. 4-, La 6 • • Signed: the State of r ATTEST: Subcn bed and sworn before me, a NortaryPublic, Washington residing ' ,on the q day of t S C/ • L.,.....,--7.....„2„.7aii.:2/. /!tom-t' j - _ MARILYN KA M1 C H E FF COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 i �•, CITE JF RENTON tall 1 � Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,M yor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator • September 3, 1998 • Mr. Douglas Condit EISI, Ltd. 1900 West Emerson.Place, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98119 SUBJECT: Kenworth Dynamometer Building &Campus Project No. LUA-98-135,ECF. Dear Mr. Condit: The Development Planning Section;of:the .•,City of Renton has determined that the • subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on September 22, 1998. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at (425)430-7270, if you have any questions. Sincerely, • • alLiadiA esley Nishihlra Project Manager • cc: Kenworth Truck Company/Owners . • • AccrFLra.00c 1055 South Grady Way Renton,'Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer >:: i:�'ii}''''�iiiiiii:iii:;:i::iii:ijiiij:'v:ji'�:;}}}iR:i$:%yi:;iiii:hiYy;i:$}::i: ;:::::j:�'��r'��"�•�':ii. �(:..y:}i:^ii{ii i'r'riii''J':�''i.�:''::`::i::i':'il?;i:i:i,�.''ii:;}:::>'i��:}}?r;J?:;�•��� ...................................:..............................:................................. . :::>``se attecfar3 .......................................................................... . ....... . •••••..••••...•••••..••••••••••••••••••....•••••••....••.....•.....•.:::••••• .::::::: •:: , Nate::>:lfiz3here:::�s:!nor.:�::ther!�ne::laaef o�Nn::T�:.P�.;:.;:.;:.;•;:;•;;:;:;�;:.;:.;:.;:.:�:.;:.;;;;;;:;;;;::;;;: natanzed:'tiffa #er:::Appliaator >far:ea�fiovrrn..................................... PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT--NAME: • NAME: Kenworth Truck Company Kenworth Dynamometer Bldg. & Canopies a division of PACCAR PROPERTY/PROJECT-ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: ' • ADDRESS: 1601 North 8th Street 1601 N. 8th Street Renton CITY: Renton ZIP: 98055 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): . 722300-0010-04 'TELEPHONE NUMBER: (425) 227-5861 EXISTING LAND USE(S): Industrial 4t1i:er<a:Mt PROPOSED LAND USES: NAME: Industrial • • COMPANY(if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Industrial ADDRESS: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): • 1� CITY: ZIP: • EXISTING ZONING: H1 • i TELEPHONE NUMBER: . ' ' • Cii-,OF r L(,i i(_;'s'1: PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): A G 2 SITE AREA (S ..FT. OR ACREAGE): �' NAME: Douglas J. Condit ��°'� FV� - 66 Acres s COMPANY(if applicable): E I S I , Ltd. PROJECT VALUE: ;�.." • $2,000,000.00 • =A QRESSC 1•900 :W st Emerson PI ace, Suite 200 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? • No CITY: Seattle ZIP: 98119 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA? TELEPHONE NUMBER: (206) 284-1 1.81 No ._ — Z:.i:.:•:'i.v:?:i'i:.,.:Ji:•isi:::::'i:}':.i:;::•::'i:.:':.:{.y:.,.i::::•�:.::::i::::isi:':'�?::!?Y•'vv:•::f:':i•:•:•,:.£. - ii::; ':::">:i%....:....:...�i:.::�:::i::..j''':;:':::isf:;i?it:�.:':::.�'':::!:::isi::ii:iiiiii:;i:>:`•:E:y::r:. J::::ii::::i i:iiiii::iii::i::iN::i::i::r}r::::: : : ji}: i : i. :i:': :. .: ii: . : .—. :ii:: 'i: .': }v:::vt:}:S.'v::::::::vv:: '::::::.i:': :::...::::::::.:::::::::::::::.::::... .:. :i: :::> . .:.�?F.:.PRaPERTY.::�4t �.�h::s� .:�1.�.__,.. .:she.�:t::>!.f.:tt�Ge�s;�:::1:.::.'. :. : :::: . ATTACHED: J • .;:::::.::.::.:::.::::::.::::.::. ::.<:.<::;:::i::i :>::i::i:<:>i:::;::ii::i::i::i::i::::::ii::>::>is::;:i::i: ::<:>::i:<TYP .::.::::::::::.................:.... . - O. f :. li >in. i:.if............. ...................... . :: :: .;:.:. . ;; t. .....�� .:i::: ffi::Nrllll: . rm �es�:ii::.;:; ::::>:::<::::: ::: :>:>::>;<: <::::::::>::::: ., ::::::::::::::::::::..............:.::::::::Ch . :: rl.:. 1>i. t��.n..::.:. :�;�:.:.h��.:� . .. ............ :...s...:�a:::::::.:::.:::.:�1Q#e:::::: .e...�:::.:.::..:.:::.:.........:.....:......:.::::..,..::.::.: :::::::.;'.;:.;:<;. ::.:.:.;:.;::. ::._:::::::::::+elk„�:;.;.�PP<.;ca...:.::: :'�YP::::::::'�..::::::::.PP:Y:::::.:,�Y.:.... :....... ... .......... .. .... . _ANNEXATION '$ • SUBDIVISION: _ COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ _REZONE $ • _LOT-LINE ADJUSTMENT $ _ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ SHORT PLAT $ _TEMPORARY PERMIT $ _TENTATIVE PLAT $ _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ _ PRELIMINARY PLAT $ _ SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ _ FINAL PLAT . $ _GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ • (NO. CU. YDS: ) • - . PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: . $ _VARIANCE $ (FROM SECTION: ) • _ PRELIMINARY _WAIVER $ — FINAL _WETLAND PERMIT $ . , _ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: $ MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ • _ _ BINDING SITE PLAN $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: • _SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ _ CONDITIONAL USE $ _VARIANCE $ _ EXEMPTION $No Charge X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ / s 'f REVISION $ — i::i>::::i:::'::':i::ii::i:::>:;:::<::i::i:«:i:>:::i:<:;::::::.:':::<::<:::i:«:::i::i:::<:iii::::i::<:ii::::;:i:<:i::::>::::;:<:i::i::iiii:: '.: ;Ai;�!T'�:�:Q'�111'1VE1�SH::; :.::.;':.;;;:.;:;:.::: .::'.;;;;;;:;:.;:;:�::;.;:::ii::<:i:::ii>i::ii:<::«:::::ii:::i>::i:«:i:>::::::::<;i>ii: . ����.. . .#..... ................................ .. r3a a�F4-- .� I, (Print ne� �,declare that I am (please checkone)_the owner of the property involved in this application,_the • authorized representative to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. . 164..n4 GAsat.+L l rt.e+.�.L Vl� r+ 0 / A. T V'to NIP-) r. eV%...' ATTEST: Subscrib d nd s orn to before me, a Notary Public, in and • (J •��Ah e f t e_Stat of Oy`residing at 7 (Nary e pt Ow e e early?" '9 , on the day of ;. (Signature of Owner/Representative) 44 r ( nature of ota Public) .................................. ...:.:::: :::: ................................:.:. ......... tTh C0cxian tkbe.cOMMOR1::...X.:...}ti..................... :::.::::: . .::....::.:: :..... .....�.. ..:...:::::.:::.:;':..:.:::.. .l_CF' :LLA<:::i::i::i::i:•:><:::::'>::•: :::::. ::::::::. ::. ::::::.:.::.: .. .::::.. . . :.:::.. :;;:.;:..�>•..I?-S<:.;:.isC�t�-.t�::::<:�PA>i::::iCt�.-Ai::::i:CU.-:.::::: ::::::::::::;:::.:;..: . ::..: .: .. ..: ..::::::.. . ...............A.....kAb.....SSA:.::::C�.::::....::.::....................................................: .:: ::::::. _. ..::::::::::...:...+GIs ...�II�..N�,rn��.r:....: :.:.... ...... ..•�"�...............:..:::.::::::::::::::::::.......................................................:.:::. ::::: : .:........� ; ;:i: : : :i:<;:.;:.::. .:::.:.:.::.:::::::::: :::<.;::SA;:A:.;:.;:.�A.;H:.;:.;;SH.P..[.:.�:::::SHE'�.:.#-).:::::SP..�::.SM:.::::gt�>~ TP..........;:::.....V.:B.....V.... .. ,, :::::::.;'.:::::::�NtH:P:i:::;:�P'a�t�::i:><::�P:::PP::.R.;;:>:R�M1��..., r.,.... iii itimmotAt ::.............................:..:. {)TILL.: ................ :.::::::.:::::::::•::::: .........................................: : ::::::,::........ .................::.:::::::::.::::::....:-.H..::: ............................................................... MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 8/97 PROJECT NARRATIVE: PROJECT: KENWORTH TRUCK PLANT DYNAMOMETER AND AND CANOPY ADDITION Wareh3use Canopy Addition: Kenworth plans to construct two canopies attached to the existing main manufacturing building on the 66 acre Renton site. The canopies wil add 47,500 square feet total of covered storage for parts used in the production of class 8 trucks. There will be a new 15,000 square foot canopy on the south side of the building and a new 32,500 square foot canopy on north side of the building. The canopy height will be the same as the present building (34 feet) and the architecture will match that of the existing building.. The canopies will not be enclosed or have climate control. Six new loading docks will be added to the site under the new canopies as part of the project. Dynamometer Building: On the west side of the existing main building a 2052 square foot building is proposed to be constructed to house two new dynamometers. With the new building a 3641 square foot canopy is proposed which is to extend between the existing building and the new dynamometer building. The new building and canopy are to be the same height as the main plant and the architecture is to match that of the existing buiding. Ark ids 1)A MrDI'` t 1�° �Cj rr—,s o 1 $rA 4 R r DX F , 14P -I'll im JAN, DEVELOPMENT PLANVffl•IG CITY OF RENTON AUG 2 8 1993 RECEIVED • Environmental Checkli t . A. BACKGROUND • ( T‘ 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 01C. J N" � �� D3 vio mo wiefe+* Su�I d i v►� ��� . 2. tilame of applicant: Kerii,c'orFL Truck Compaij 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: i601 N. 8111 Street Rer►tovi, WA 18055 P O. -Box 9001 Rerit , WA 98057 9001 C mfacct R icli ovt a�'d A . Sklar, Sr. Foci lid-ies EHsiieer 4. Date checklist prepared: P4iovie; 42.5-227-581 g- / - 98 5. Agency requesting checklist: . i of Revifoo . eve lopvnem-E Services DIVI51 ow 6. proposed timing or schedule including phasin if applicable): Pta Yi M ed start of consfru c1-io.i : Ocfobr 1998 Flamm ed c©vx.pl e+-70)1 February i999, • 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Novie. • 9. Duo you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No osier pro.po. IS ? "3 . 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. 131Ai d ivi3 •wleclavticaI; and fer01 Es, at a wlinilmu$t.. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. (('' aoNs4 IA�lov1 of 2- L j of c�vloYio ie+er .JKtLa!iii O l exisTiv14 ife, Used -to +est -Fruuck•J.per1 orWic<rice. . Butic�i vi 4 .J d i wi en5 i oYi s 100 . �c c ' -ft. x 3�- -ci. JJ The Kexwortlt _sife. is approx. 3S .acres. �J • 2 Kenworth Truck Company KENWORTH. P.O.8 x 9001 Rent ashington 98057 (206 -5800 A DMSION OF F19CCAR • • • 1601 N. 8th ST Kenworth Truck Company, Division of Paccar, Inc. • King Cou ty Tax Assessor No.: 722300-0010-04 UBI Tax No.: 177000505 Renton Business License# 816 All those portions of the south half of Section 8, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City - - - of Renton, Itlag County, Washington, and of Renton Farm Acreage, as recorded in Volume 12 of plats, page 37, records of said county, including vacated streets and avenues as would attach by operation of law, and of Car Works Addition to the City of Renton, as recorded in Volume 15 of plats, page 47, records of said county, including vacated streets, avenues, and alleys as would attach by operation of law, described as follows: ComMencing at the east quarter corner of said Section 8, from which point the northeast corner of said section bears N01°02'09"E; thence N89°27'25"W, along the north line of said south half, 2,647.56 feet to an existing center of section monument; thence S01°02'40"W, along the north-south center of section line of said Section 8, a distance of 60.00 feet to the southerly margin of North 8th Street, said point being on the south line of the no 30 feet of Block I of said Renton Farm Acreage, and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence N89°27'25"W, along the south line of the north 30 feet of said Block 1 and its westerly prolongation, 986.13 feet to a point on the west line of Block 2 of said plat; thence S01°05'34"W, along said west line and its southerly prolongation, 1,295.01 feet to the southeast corner of Garden Avenue North and North 6th Street; thence S89°25'01"E, along said southerly margin, 1,456.97 feet to a point on the westerly margin of vacated Houser Way North; thence N01°00'20"E, along said westerly margin, 90.29 feet; thence N89°25'01'W, a distance of 153.00 feet; thence NO1°Q0'20"E, a distance of 1,050.00 feet to a point on the southwesterly margin of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-4-way; thence continuing along said margin N59°00'0S"W, a distance of 71.35 feet to a point of tangency with a 757.01 foot radius circular curve to the right; thence northWesteriy, along said curve and said margin, through a central angle of 14°46'33", an arc distance of 195.22 feet to the south line of the north 60.00 feet of the south half of said. Section 8; thence N89°27'Z5"W, along said south Iine, 98.96 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing approximately 1,683,467 square feet or 38.65 acres, more or less. •t • �- • $ 1 1 0 i 1 P--- GARab7r A NORTII . 011O1 "'." L J S 01 O3•J4•M • CA112111( 4 I. R. . tv N • n . tt , i • Ial ik—iv—ini...._ • Ca,. • A•11 Oar . R..71201 • 10 � _-- NJf 010OVfb r`. N Of m'rd. E 7}.JS p, 4 orolaoa $so aool• Q:. I e y 1 • 13.41) PARKING COY l�r sJ �p �. --.tea c RM1gr. toms:, c -fs r • Kbim•2o'r R.—rrrzm �'Of co'-id"F • ROUsSR our RoAfr -- N�a { ---J 1100','I ez.0 LAKE WASHINGTON - SEATTLE /// 9 KENWORTH- 9 � 900 /i / / t mat'- . ‘ RENTON Z , m %m a N 8TH ST .o +� Y Z p 2 > 405 p N6TH- a L m ST Z p w / \1\ 0 • cc I pi- 0 N 4TH ST Q r • iii Q 900 • '"ORT WY I allo WY %... ® Jo 0 „lb cF FIGURE A-1 ,`r. .44II - VICINITY PLAN ,Ili _ iir SCALE: N.T.S. o z , ®Y "-..\ OfIll N. 8TH ST. - / .—.—.— . ( .. I 1 N. • ••. ` DEIDMON Pow \ �;\•: `• I ( .. I •\� MAIN '�, III I: r • �. ELECTRICAL ✓ /�(� 300,00E GAL. n '•...••• aTE�F 1JJ �ANK 6e PUMF 1\ SHUTDOWN (MOTO OPERATED) �mit - ; .4._ 1:ii• 1 I GRAS GATE 1HT5z - ] •eDYFfT'D'1" _ _ - - PROJECT FRAME SITE t — IIIJIIIIIII! 1 W•AREHOUSE• I W TRAINwO .� . FRAME ASSEMBLY FINAL FRAME LOA • ASSEMBLY I � kIlila - NtS). ' III ADMIN. . ASSEMBLY 1 ASSEMBLY 1 ASSEMBLY I �O, DRY p v �1 TFSf 1 � 7 3 1 lin .g WAREHOUSE [1.1 _ — GASMAIH o ." �' `8 m I I — u ' GTE — SHUTOFF I] r- - — C I �, • I CAB BUaD + — . . iEST TEST! FAB K • a PANT I SLEEPER BUILD _ i CAB • MIX r i , PNM' +` Y Y Y • Z wLDxo• I I I • 1 1 II i . 1 TOUCH-UP \\ .-II1 o /....__Ls WASTE 7REAlY BEN DC. FFE 1I - !MI 1 p II J,%-1,........... 1 _ r / ORTH RENTON-PL4NT DIREC OR - ' (MD OR�OPERATED) —�CN/SH u �� 1 • Environmental Checklist • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise Iodation 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 • re sonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not • •:reciuired to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. ioi N. 8-itt. 5+reet , f?errbo t Te055 Sour I,i41-c o- 3ec-l-io14 f3 '1"owltstt ip 23 North, Rare v Fasts Ult M. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one),a rolling,hillye:steep_slopes,,mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) 51fe is 5evterallj T14t. 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. 5i+t. is cu.rre t+1j p4VecL d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. • e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. 5i1-e will 1e excava'l"ed ;or i u;ldivi2 -TouKolafovt avto4 etu i pwte>1t imts-1-4l1a4loo. • f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?Ci, /' crrevtf T ioo' jWtpery ous su $e ces. Af fer cons-l-rR c-+iovl ) 10oZ impervious surFaces. 3 • Environmen I Checklist • Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: ExCAVC4 '101+ o be liviii+e4 'Iv foofpri it of I uildiYiqq. Covis-Frackio'i chi repovl ni oi1 expecU4-ed .sclnedhY1e. - 2. IR . • a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.;dust, automobile, . •-;odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and.when the project is completed? If •.any,•generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During corestruc.hon veJ.tt'de. ree is will result in wtivti 4i dust mid au mo-h've taus \. Co►ytpl efec4 project wslt result ivt No increase ivt ewt IssiO►ts iv -Rae air. • •. Are there any off--site sources of emission or odor that-'may affect your•proposal? If so, • generally describe. No. • -•Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: . None. • • 3. JVATER 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. Tln Ceaar,r River ver is 4rpro.v. 0.5 v i le lv e west tLe. site.. Lake V�1•/ail;n +off[ is 4prrox. 0.6 yn le �o e n o r Itt W est of tile_ �-l-e._, 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. .No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. • Indicate the source of fill material. - Not orrll'ca.ble. 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. 4 Environmental Checklist • . 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. . b. Ground Water: 1) ._--:Will.ground water be.withdrawn,.or will water be discharged to:.ground water? Give - ' --.".general descripti9n, purpose and approximate quantiges if known Ground wetter wtli rurmred out of excava?-ioi4 -for cotsuruc ioi4 . .. 2) ::-. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground•:from.septic.tanks or other. OnId , . . ., sources,.if.any (for.example: . Domestic sewage;:industrial,:=containing:.the=following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.)._ Describe the general size-oflhe-system;the-number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of . animals or humans the systems) are expected to serve. No wasfes tav II be, cilscitccrjeo( +o srocc.tdwcfer. • c. Water Runoff(including storm water): . • 1) ' Describe:the source of runoff (including storm watery 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. y 51-orwtwater runofF oril will flow -Ev re exl.5 I r7 code( oh -f ie-ti s .. errt *trot`,,�UK +lie �t�'sfir! of Ilwafier �e e't r, le, 1 r iON su>a "amd defertficw)' p cl. Dilscl rar eed rou tt b c e, � H • 2) Could waste material enter. ground or surface waters? .If.so,.generally describe.)► 4 S rrK ar to f\Io. �ui L Ibl is desiq nett( +o, preyent L.ak h or 4ZNd oUiscltur e_ of rvasfie rna ria'. _ d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Movie. reti t.0 red. 4. PLANTS • a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: Note. �e projec�si te. deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ,is paVed. • evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other -- shrubs grass pasture crop or grain • wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other • water plants:water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Novle. 5 Environmental Checklist c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance - vegetation on the site, if any: • Notre. • 5. NIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed.on or.near•the-site:or•are known to be on or near the site: (see next page) Novie. .Birds:.hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other . - Fish: bass,salmon,trout, herring,shellfish, other - — b List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or-near thesite... Klovte. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain No. • d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: 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. E lec4-rfci-- w;II loe. used -tor L i �t? ° r qq etiof rte . e ui pvievts. No+ural 5as u.)41�.bCeseo( - r loti'rt fc. •. � Hv1Qa --b. Would your ptoject affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. • .No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: aiki ldin old efut pwte)tt be ivlsut 4ect. G.iq�ks awd I4VAC ll be S Pe Vr'se h computerized eat jj waytccgewreKt s js�-ewt fo eoptser^ve usoje-. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 6 Environmental Checklist • • • 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. • I4o. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. • None �e�owa( exis}irt�cServices 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: NONe.. b. Noise 1) -• • •What types of noise exist in the area which May-affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Nor^w►�c� �l�� ac -iv�fIes; truck frafi'c. • 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)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the ite. rr� fr or i Plc rease rt coats'Fr c cti'ovt pr d .f 1'�C no e. ei twirlsproject. No 10r45 -Term eti-ect due •f s o Project. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: • 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE • a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? L v<d ustr i'a l. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. • c. Describe any structures on the site Truck Assam ' `i,Build i�q ,�Hazardous Materiels c5fvraae B/ /axle. Ali e1I 4eNt75ua i 1 ,`J /asfe 1-61/1d1I'YI BKi(eI h3;J Above-e r uwd Truck FCIc l'ei c.Storeve Tanks, Fire Pr'o1"echoil PdHrp H-0. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? 141 - tfeavt I i !us-fri''zI f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? E pl wievlt Are4 - LAdusf r,c I 7 Environmental Checklist g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not aNA calate. 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? 2:or 3 people will work in +le Dyowlo►ne el^ 5ui ld i HCO at 643 -I-I wle. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project-displace? - Nome. . k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. • I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible:with:existing•and-projected land uses and plans, if any: • D 1 Propos J o iLie. wj� �xi5 104 aticI pr jecfed I avid u` 4�I fl �J 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Novle.. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether'high, middle, or low-income housing. • N b te. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: • None retui,red, 10. A7STHETICS • • • —al What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is • the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. 3kf- ft. �`®rruaa-I-ed s�eet vvle�'a� wif� t,€a a erluvNe� �in is�l to vna-i-e14 exis4^ivty lost I?lugs. • b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None rer?u i red. • 8 • • Environmental Checklist 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? M i►n i mal chat/des would occur to ex 43 sc fe. b. • Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? 1�1D. • c. •. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may.affect.your proposal? Nome. d. Proposed measures to iAduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: NoHe reetu1re41 • 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate°vicinity? Nome, b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. 1'10. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation,-including-recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Nose re ii rec(. • - 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. NOLte. • c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: No vte. 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. Tie Kevtwor si is bordered b� l`i• 8t Street o C�ardevt Avenue on tl-ie west, ezac� Houser Vl2y vK tine east. 9 • Environmental Checklist • b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. • o. • How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? . Par kit is vide 4-CCecieci ioj 114is Project. • d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets;:orimprovements..to.existing:roads or. streets, not including driveways? . If so, generally:.describe...(indicate..whether.public or private? Nome retui red. e. Will the project use (or occur in •the immediate•:-vicinity:of);water,:rail, .or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No- • f. How many vehicular trips per day.would be generated-_by.the completed_project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. �1 Vela i Ct.da►r +rips are mot aceec+eci 1 y 'fLt IS j>rct ec... g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Nome rent, red. • 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. • N.oyte re?u t • 16. UTILITIES a Circle utilities currently available at the site: (Iectricity>Mirntit Mr) refuse serviceelephone Aanitary sewer septic system, other. 10 Environmental Ctecldist • b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No addi+'Eoytat Ore reTui red.. 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 willfu lack full discl9sure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Malt ctr'o A. S k I a[r Date: • 8 4-qB - • 11 Environmental Checklist D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS R:.: ese.- sheeWshoul•ci.•4nl be is. . .: ::::::::.,,:;:.::::._::::: .:: i.. ::....:... :.y». : ;>:::.:...ed for:actlons.;:involvtii :idects�ons:::::fln::: oltcte >::: :: ro rams.: You;.do not•need,to:fill::out:t P 9 hese.:sheets:for ro ect:actions``m:><:n«>:»:>:><:=>:am ::o>::::i:::. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. . - . -.When answering these questions, be aware of the extent.the proposal, or the types-of-activities • - --: likely to.result sfrom the.proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly-and in general terms. - 1. :.: -low would the proposal be likely to increase discharge.towater.lemissions.to_air,_production,• storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production.of•noise? .•.- -- • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: . • , 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? • Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish,-or marine life are: • 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. HI ow would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, Wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 12 • Environmental hecklist - 6. Holing would the proposal be likely to increase demands on-transportation or public services and utilities? • Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: • 7. . Identify, if-possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 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 disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Date: REVISED 9l94 • 13 KEN: is i,, , ,, ,r 1. ,,, , , IE:',.2,,:,',,',,,,.,,.',.,.: 4 , ,, , , , „ 6 k KENWORTH PLANT—DYNAMOMETER BUILDING ADDITION ,OWNER: PACCAR, INC. z�, A BUISNESS CENTER BUILDING '777 106TH AVENUE N.E. ;BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98004 • }:t ,tCONTACT KEITH FRENCHPHONE 425-227-5861 ;ENGINEER: EISI LTD. '1900 W. EMERSON PLACESUITE 200 , ,; SEATTI.E, WASHINGTON (206) 284-1181 '' { • SITE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 8 TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH zo .t RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. : ot t. 38.65 ACRES y BUILDING ADDITION AREA: (MAIN PLANT: 371,262 S.F.) "`" z BUILDING 2,027 S.F. ^r µ CANOPY 3,641 S.F. ' ALLOWABLE AREA: UNLIMITED, ALL SIDES 60 FOOT CLEAR 76 OCCUPANCY F-2 °; OCCUPANTS (200 ( MAX. TRAVEL DISTANCE T0 DOT ) 200 FT '` NO. EXITS REQUIRED 1 t EXITS SUPPU D 2 ., t EXISTING PARKING LOAD (PER EIS) 510 EXISTING ALIGNMENT BUILDING 5 ' ADDED DYNO BUILDING PARKING LOAD 2 TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 517 4ek)/F f TOTAL PARKING SUPPLIED 592 '<OpM t ,YOp�T p 5 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: TYPE II N, SPRINKLERED L"i - MAX ALLOW BUILDING HEIGHT 55 FT. 400 FfV ON'�/IVO i BUILDING HEIGHT 34 FL :aka. 'C r9`.98 Of/f LAND USE ZONE: H-1 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT f BUILDING CODE& 1994 UBC z 1994 UFC SEISMIC: ZONE 3 %IND: VELOCITY 80 MPH EXPOSURE B , t • 0 4 81216 32 4.8 0 2 4 6 8 16 24 0 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 0 5 101520 40 60 0 10 2030 50 90 0 1020 3040 80 1. ,.- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII `--I I I I I I I I II! I I IIIII I I I I I I- '•,-1--I IIIIII 1 I I I I I I 1 I 111 1 I I I I 111111IHHH I 1 I 1111111111111 I 1 I I I 1 I 111 11111 I 11 I 1 1 1 -1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 - 1/16•=1•-0• 1/8•-1'-0• 1/C-1'-0• 3/8•-1'—O• I/2•-I'-0• 3/4•-1'-o I•-I'-0' 1 I/Y-1'-O• 1•-20' 1'-30' 1•-40' 1 /; � Y �M) �% (T) l�) Y l;J F (;/ 9 0 `i' C` 1 (B% (Y rr "KEN WORTH"SIGN SEE I I I I I I ' ' IJ I I I SPECS FOR SIGN LETTER I I I I I I 1 1 I 0 I I I ' J—ILl- I ' ' I I INFORMATION I 1 I I I I 1 1 iS S I I I I - ELEC. SUSTATION BEYOND I 1 I I 1 I I d METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY © CANOPY EXTENSION NEW CANOPY --•` ALIGPI SIGN W METAL COPING Al-. L -� 1 T/pARAPET DR OPNG / -- ,1 EXPANSION J01lLT - - Y EL. 134'-4 I I I 1 I III II'I IIIIIII'IIIIIIIII�,�, I I II PUMP"I 1 iP�I • pnnl \ • jJ�ff1 IIIIIIIII I11 IllM 1111411111 I;i�I,,I I II 11111111111111111111I [.I N1.',, I1 "�"' I I I I ' �� t n �� �I� puuuuwuuunuuuunuuwuwuuuumumnmm�ul nil ; I I r w 11.1111 1 I6I II I I I . ii* 88J � I III III I'II IF Mt �1 �� � � JI1 � I I ; ► I_ , —I I 1 L L1 I 1 1 1 �IIIIIC 1 EL 108AST j , J` 1 , ,I' 1 I I II 1111111 I �. II II FlN. FLR. 'iiiiiii /1 4 I • Z r f00'-O HANDRAIL d)LOADiN DOCK —TIP.MAN DOOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL I _ EAST ELEVATION SEE SCHEDULE PRECAST VERTICAL / f TYP.PIPE BUMPER JOINT TIP. _ !" SCALE 1/16"=1'-0 A-16 TYPICAL OVERHEAD SEE CIVIL B G DWGS. . FABRIC DOOR ,/ 4� �� r' r' Q n Q ,� r,� �' Q I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I , I I I • I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I , ELEC.SUBSTATION BEYOND III METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY • NEW CANOPY •3_ EXPANSION JOINT PIPE TRESTLE I--I fMETAL COPING I' /PANFIP 1 I I I I 11 I I• ' I l III 1 II/f II r I I I I u�� I �EL 125' 10 �� ,I , ii 1 I _L I -1112,-Til 1 � I l I 111 �����FlN. . y I - EL 114'-0 I '1'��y�u-r,� I 1. ,;.� II 9! 1 _ I= ■..,3„� - ❑ ❑ "- ❑ ❑ L J ® - ❑ .7 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ �� Fla .. .-. -�� 0 ❑ avow ���_- '�a�' o,sr_co I' s=�- r :acca E 100l." 0 T - - .... - - - - - - _ L ��^� PRECAST VERTICAL I WEST ELEVATION PRPOPSED DYNO SLOG ' JOINT TYP. SCALE: 1/16"= 1•-0 'A-16 V 0 0 C51 4` �J r 40�jA . I I I I I I I I I 6'. - I I I I METAL COPING SYSTEM I PRECAST PANEL W/ ' I I O�� I I 1 I I TEXTURED ACCENT BAND I I I ALUM. FRAME AND AND METAL WALL PANEL /1l INSUL GLASS ASSEMBLY BEYOND -FLUTED PRECAST METAL COPING . "f� A Ilillittrmig I I IIIII III IIIIIIII I � II,■ ■111111,u" ",■�I T PRECAST', ' �"� ��/8.I' P EL 131-2 �/ /yS J ,6/, Ir 1I'�I�I �rn1�II��rI}II'-���-��n����p1y����'j r`�I�I''��n IN��II Ir��j`� f II{1�I�+I yTIL IL�N.YI �� 1!JJI-JI11LlI1Wyl�1'WI I. IYII; IL1��III.IIWI�AI •.11.. ETAL PANEL ASSEMBLY �0 /�� ©/�.I I I AN •ET BEYOND E0 TRAINING ��� Or I I ENTRANCE/LOADING DOCK • • II _I � _ I 11 I I 11 _ T/PRECAST d V PRECAST PANEL BEYOND / / I / / EL 117'-2 W t / PARAPET TIP. T/PRECAST 3 ICI PRECAST SCREEN WALL BEYOND =— -- PRECAST SCREEN L 114-1 /`I p J M _ 'IOIIIII ®KITCHEN SERVICE AREA WALL BEYOND P.J. PRECAST PANEL B I♦— • W/REVEALS- T/PRECAST -- I PANEL 1 ' CONCRETE WING _ a a a Ja / I— d J� a d EL ,08'-2 C EM WALL FINISH TO ❑\ F.J. I ' % / % % ! I % i /� F . P/ANELCAST �— MATCH PRECAST Z11\ �� '/ FIN.FLR. == (TYP.) PeL / % I / C / f �I / I / P�'' a EL 1 • ALUMINUM FRAME AND CONCRETE WING \ (� �— AS RECORDED INSULATED GLASS(TIP.) WALL FINISH TO PRECAST COLUMN CONCRETE WN `-EARTH BERM ®BUILDING CONCRETE YANG 00 sexy • \- MATCH PRECAST TYP.) COVER TIP. WALL FlNISH TO WALL FINISH TO xL�ar1 Is;� ENLARGED EAST ELEVATION (-3- EARN BERM GLUE-IN CEMENT(PLUGS ALUMINUM STOREFRONT MATCH PRECAST(TYP.) MATCH PRECAST(TYP.) - GLUE-IN CEMENT PLUGS GLUE-IN CEMENT PLUGS - - - SCALE:-1-8' - 1�-0 - - \-A-16 BLAST WALL SURFACES&PLUGS - - yxy.�■,B_ T BLAST-WALL-SURFACE-&-PLUGS--- BUUST-1YALL-SVRFACE-&-PLUW 6-4 114.5 C4� (IZ) (1,3/ ETAL COPING SYSTEM I® �`) n DESXECD A BY Y TT -r i , AND METAL WALL I I I Y ETAL COPING SYSTEM PANEL ASSEMBLY RECSI7FFD I�JA oePr.xaa p ARolrrzcr I I 1 $,ND METAL WALL I I I I I ' PR.MaL l�i-.Q.� I I 1 PANEL ASSEMBLY I I I I I IMIT Or 1211211212TON lxous vMm,,,u I I I I I I I FLUTED PRECAST- I/--METAL COPING SYSTEM r'FLUTED PRECAST ALUMINUM FRAME AND � INSULATED GLASS / T/PRECAST '- SEAL 4 T(PRECAST PRECAST PANEL W/ EL 131-2 TDC7URED ACCENT BAND _ EL 131'-2 —\ n A �f PRECAST PANEL W/ \ 1 I III II11�1111Po' Qh1 I,III �III�(�I10 I I I/ TEXTURED ACCENT BAND "° PRECAST COL. COVER I1uI1III1II1p�II{, P J. P J. n�+7 't 1 I I I I P J. P.J. _ PLANNERS T/PRECAST - +II 1 NIP ..xIl�J11101�1._� ILIP LI, II+ j 11A11 ,u,:dIIJllj11pt ___L PRECAST COLUMN COVER TYP. T/PRECAST rz� ELME (} PANEL METAL COPING SYSTEM z -iTEL zae-m-xaxo x.E. '� FAY.toe-G]T-6x11 � PANEL '■' moo. -Y EL 122•-2 -\ a a I I -n, r 1' PRECAST PANEL a a ' I a METAL COPING SYSTEM EL 122'-2 PANELCAST \ - / F.I. �� I / / IF.J.�/ ./ -- i 1 BEYOND PARAPET P J.---/ I P.J. / 1 / PANELCAST .m TITLE 46 EL 117-2 /'F,{•I EL 117'-21. p PACCAR, INC. --- PJ. PJ. PJ. PJ. P PJ. PANEL TRUCK PAN ECAST -- ^� - l ' ' /ELPROSA2� KRENOTONH WASH NG ON PLANT ra PANEL ???•••��� w T�RECAST a yy ar a a r a a n I a a —� a 1((('''���l a I a T/PRECAST PANEL .I / I // '/• I/ / PJ. r �I I[ n :I % / i F.J. /'�I I / % , �' \ PANEL �� EL 103— 2�-r��-'�t�" ��I- / -- -�-- I a a ' �I1 -EL 103•-p �T 1 WARM mu FIN. FIR. I \ L{ / *--_ 1 I __,(I� .� I _ FlN FLR u� BUILDING ELEVATIONS EL 100'-O ` \ \_ PRECAST COLUMN COVER EL 10O.-0`r• PRECAST COLUMN COVER �=ALUMINUM STOREFRONT PRECAST PAN�C \ INSULATED METAL DOOR &FRAME PRECAST SCREEN W ALUMINUM STOREFRONT \ EAST AND WEST AND TYP• • ' CONCRETE WING W/REVEALS - EARTH BERM 0 BUILDING ENLARGED ELEVATIONS WALL FINISH TO PRECAST SCREEN WALL '1 MATCH PRECAST TIP.) ENLARGED SOUTH ELEVATION \_ CONCRETE YANG • ENLARGED NORTH ELEVATION (/ 4 GLUE-IN CEMENT PLUGS �s WALL FINISH TO SHEET SCALE: 1/8"_ ,'-0 1 A-16 BLAST WALL SURFACE&PLUGS SCALE 1/8- = 1'-0 A-I6 MATCH PRECAST(TYP.) x " 915011 `� GLUE-IN CEMENT PLUGS rc OF I 1 I I BLAST WALL SURFACE&PLUGS UPDATED 11-25-91 x°�we""m A-1 6 I I I , , I PLOTTED 11-25-91 /us/Og1/3011016.O91 0 4 8 12 16 32 48 0 2 4 6 8 16 24 0 1 2 4 6 6 lu 1[ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 / 8 0 1 2 3 4 0 6 u 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 0 5 10 15 20 40 60 0 10 20 30 60 60 0 10 20 30 40 80 120 11111111111111111 1 I 111111111 I I IIIII I I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I 11111 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 I i I I 1111111111111 1 I 1 1111111111111 I 1 1111111111111 I 1 1-I I I 1 I I I I I I I 11 I I I 1 1 f. . ?"=1-0 - r`1•_p r=1'-0 r=t'-0 r=t'-0 ?"=1'-0 1'=1'-0 1?'=1'-0 I I I 1 I 1 ' b r"�1 ink" A-I6 OPANSON JOINT OVERHEAD EXIT FLEC11C11L SUBSTATION \ METAL COPNC SISIFN OVERFLOW SCUPPERS- DISCHARGE I lEYOIm 1 METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY IMP. 1 I! —� T/PARAPET dap AT/PRECAST _ 1 EL 134.-4 EL 131.-2 I-—- S B/CANCPY At EL 126.-0 1 3 5 T/PRECAST -I— N I I I I I 1 I I I I I [.T s gz0 '� '� FL117-2 -T �FN.FIR. I = _ T/PRECAST 40 EL 114'-0 I "'�1 I I I �� � ❑ 1 ��Ts ❑❑ jfjF� ❑❑ ❑❑ , ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ELI08'-4 di ETL RR I U I -D— .li- - R - FIN ' EL 100'-0 - , tnt EL 100'-0 \_ PPE �G��/LEYEl7t5 LOADING DOCK W/LEVELERS PRECAST VERTICAL / PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL JOINT BP. DOOR NORTH ELEVATION 1 SCALE 1/16'=1'-0 A-15 - METAL COPING SYSIEII EXTEND EXISTING CANOPY PROPOSED PANS BLDG.-\ 7 METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY \ / OVERFLOW SCUPPERS, di, \\ // ?' FL 134'-4 \ �, f 6 IF • diB/CANOY EL 126'-0 di V/ CAST - - -- LL108'-4 8 erg ❑O��❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ 9 AN.Flit 2 NEW LOADING DOCK W/LEVELERS PRECAST VERTICAL OTT 4 NEW LOADING W/LEVELERS JONT IMP. NORTH ELEVATION (CONT.) SCALE 1/16•=1'-0 • PROPOSED DYNO BLDG.\ SEE DETAIL ����ii►✓� ETEC.SUBSTATION BEYOND OVERFLOW SCUPPERS. METAL COPING SYSTEM T/PARA.PET TIP. CANOPY FASCA Y EL 134'-4 III 1 • - - liEL 108 4 FIN.FIR IM ❑ ❑ � 0000 1 1 L. ❑ ❑ i j' �EL 00'-0 I / PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL PRECAST VERTICAL TYPICAL PPE BUMPER SEE 1 A39A � DATE SUBJECT JOOIT 11P. FOR ADD(ADDIINFO. F 0.O. 09-01-93 AS-RECORDED tax R1TTSaJ OR ISSUE SOUTH ELEVATION 2 o Ea® - °ca m DEPTJACEL PROLIX. METAL DYING METAL PANEL ASSEMBLY ak wax.IRO g" �EXPANSON JOINT 'd : TV DICKERS AwoDTECTS PURRERS -PABIIED CONCRETE MASONRY METAL COPING SYSTEM diT/PARAPET 1 a'� BELL 206 Awwc M.O.S01 1.21 ' F.134-4' iii _ - - T/ CAST B1E-20.TUS«nron oeUzw t1i zoK-ez>-20LD rA><zoe-az>-e.rz -- EL 131-2' !uDe TITLE P` 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 T 1 PACCAR, INC. EL 117-2 Iliil 7 KENWORTH TRUCK PLANT • FlN.FR. I �j T/P1eECAST I L EL 114'-0 RENTON, WASHINGTON V FL 108'-4 _ '1 �-, I' -ffi1'fffi� �FXE FIR.. - / .-9 - 1 1--1 1'" ❑ 1- -- - I —: ,— 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �`— RN.FIR - EL 100'-0 r -- 7YPCAL FABRIC / `� r ,f FL 100'-0 DRAY.TOE DOOR MAN DOOR pl.,SEE SCHEDULE --• /LEVELERS I W.NFATNERSEALS SOUTH ELEVATION (CONT.) A,F.1/16'=1'-O (S¢. NUB��oRwitoracIlll or 1 I I I I I I I I f ...I . • PAR[NO.LTIL1 REVISION 1 DATE BY FUTURE 1 [—1 (7.----.) Q3 Q --1-•-3'GAP I I �\_� T - EL 134.-4" II I / �I II�!r jEasnrlc /�BUILDING TA/ ao -. 1 EL 126.-0' /, 1E / 111/ / jIII! /, Il I I I I I I I 1 I• I 1 t j I 1 1 1_1_ I 1 ) M��', 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I / I f I I 1 1 1 MEN= 111111111 IIIIIII - 11111 NIMINII �= I I I I I I I I I l I II111III1 11I1I1 IIIII I I 1111 MIMI �M= IIIIII 1 1 1 / - 1 I I C -I I MENE - - I1I11111 I1I1t1 I II 1II 1III1_ — I1II M=== ,.. • - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 I 1 �11111111I1I I - . % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 { 1 / _.LL B 1 1 _ . SOUTH ELEVATION (LOOKING NORTH) EAST ELEVATION (LOOKING WEST) 3/16"=1.-0" 3/16"=1'-0" • Fl Dq 3"GAP _� I I ' E 4 I I I Q I I 7II1'' 1 - 1 L I I L \' n 1 --- I .1. 1- _I -I ` I li \II III ,III I -- I i ,LADDER w/CAGE I FURRING SIDING OUT w/6"MTL STUDS OVER ELECTRICAL • Mn_-SIDING • III I I„ ROOM TO ROOF ! — OVER 2"FURRING - 42"HIGH e 7 J _ 1 RAIIJNG o �i 1 LAOCE2 _ � I1IIInn1_1I'�J-u, — -- - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I i 1 �7 r �I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I � Im- ---7■ �� -�1 I I 1 I I I 1 I ■I �� 1i 1 l I 11111 11111 MN MI 1 I 1 1 I 1 I ■■ M1 MN .E�'i I I 11I111 IIIII . f l 1 === 111111[1 - I Y \ [ �� NMI EN = 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ME _�' jr , WEST ELEVATION (LOOKING EAST) NORTH ELEVATION (LOOKING SOUTH) 3/16"= 1.-0" 3/16"= I'-0" .eisi ITEM 0'YY.• DESCRIPTION 11ATERL4L • . 111/s11/ s KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY 1900 s Oowm1 R ROO 1801 N. 8TH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 Wk.*IN*:98119 7131_/(208)227-5811 FAX(208)227-5804 PR4P,gI TARYDE� TOLERANCES DRAWN BY:EISI/NPW DATE: B/1/98 DWG.NO. <m ..esr=r yr t.X CHECKED BY: EISI/DLC DATE: DYNAMOMETER BUILDING A202 vtsomrm m MA ±ic[ APPROVED BY: DATE: IN.Rear VARA.OR USED ±ACCC SCALE: m NO. BUILDING ELEVATIONS SHEET 0E'asow°1 weunTZE w10"D1 fL UNSPEC'D TOL _ACT N0. OF - PARI NO.LTR. ,i REV670N DATE f I BY -3 I O • ci--) . -8" I 8 50'-0" L 50'-0" 1 T 4. O o•E I I 9'-4" 16-8" I 0 1'-4"I 6.-4 1-8 1-6" 6-4" .1-6" 6-4" 1-8 Tn LADDER TO ROOF ..---y---- = 1 1, �^. I i O o 2:4, IL:d Yy/\� �'. %IlilIHI Illllllllllllll IIIIIIl1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIuiHHHU11I11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII(IF 4IIIII111Illllll�lllllllllll IIIIIIIIIIII iu1 111111111111111111 1� =� �' 27 O /� N n / 0 TIE DOWN RAILS •I 1 n L I ///// I A REAR ANCHOR I - / zap I I F.D. I F.D. SLOPE O _I - - - - • - - - - - - - - - J "i _ SLOPE f- c o O a O SLOPE I ' I SLOPE I I - - E.WIDE 8'-9"PIT 10' 0" O 0 i TRENCH DRAIN 1.-4"x5.-4"SUMP O I. • V—o / (� r e jl/i%/////////////////////////////////%//////////////////// 0 }Y///////T////////// /////////////////////// =� n I • /_0 i AI I SLOPE - I I F.D. IN •i O - - r F.D.- - SLOPE - - - - - - - - - - - - - I SLOPE �- r m lo -< I O . I I _ I I 8.-9"PIT p -0 p P' ?'W1DE c 1 III ir 0 c •�' j I TRENCH DRAIN /1 I 7n A I -c / �I I 1 U Illu I I ;:iwil III O 11 IIWIIIIIIIIhII1111I1I1 IIIIIIIIIl1IlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiimill 1 i i r L -- --- - p — I— LEGEND .N RAMP CO BOLLARD Q TYP.SEE Q I ° O 0 r A CMU BLOCK 0 5-0" 9-0" �0 o 111119.9.!' }ac rry ©ro�R t-is,.11 U I' 1'-0""-ti _ 27-0" 3'-4" 21.-0" _ 1�-0. ° i% q9 12. 0" 3'-6" 53' 4" fCf 0 '�/,.//e.-4 o AUG 2 6 1293 DYNAMOMETER BLDG FLOOR PLAN ECG:'VED I/4"=1'-0" 0' . PLAN ® O REY MY., DESODP SON YATERLU. ' 7N6 KENWORTH TRUCK COMPANY S9I4 a�1a'PI ROO 1801 N. 8TH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 Swale tAdugM 9BI19 TEL/(208)227-5811 FAX(208)227-5804 PROPR ARY TOLERANCES DRAWN BY: EISI/NPN DATE:8/1/98 DWG.NO. . '69.. , tX CHECKED BY: EISI/DLC DATE: DYNAMOMETER BUILDING A201 !tote ou.osm tXX APPROVED BY: DATE: fir n a P. C. ±.XIDC- SCALE: 1/4-= 1-0- ID NO. FLOOR PLA��T S}teur v s a v.cr r e"°`''''1 tL -1UNSPEC'D TOL ACT NO. OF **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Reprinted: 08/28/98 14 :21 Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9805301 Amount: 1, 000 . 00 08/28/98 14 :21 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #647082 KENWORTH Init: LN Project #: LUA98-135 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 082305-9176 Site Address : 1601 N 8TH ST Total Fees: 1, 000 . 00 This Payment 1, 000 . 00 Total ALL Pmts: 1, 000 . 00 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 .345 . 81. 00 . 0007 Environmental Review 1, 000 . 00 • • -DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION • WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS • ':...:;:LA D.USEP I: ::SUB ITT L.:::::;:: : ;::WAIVED:<:::<MOD:I5-IED Calculations, Survey, Da n o z Drainage Pa a Re ort 23 craEwe kO%-S c., Elevations, Grading 2 • EXIstI.n. :Gove.riants Reeorded.C.. 4,1111111111111 .........................:.......................:..........:::::.::........:::::::::::::i Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 • Floor Plans 3AND4 G.eotechnical:R.e Ort.2.ANp3.. ... .. . .: . .:.::::. ::::..::.:.:.:.:.::::.:::::::..:::::::::::::::::.::::.:..:..:.. Grading Plan, Conceptual 2 King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site.4 <>>< >: >;:»::::€':Lands•,ap,ng.: f ..,.;�;..;nc.:pt..,. . . :: .............................. Legal Description 4 Lisf:;ofSurrounding Pr:.pertY.... wne.:::.a........ . : .... . :_.:. ... :;::. :.:..;•.:.::::::::.:::.> ::. .................... .......... ... ....:.;.:.::>::.;:.;:.:: ...........................::.::.:.::.:.... Mailing Labels for Property Owners 4 Ma of::Existi Site:Coriditioris:a Master Application Form 4 - soe> e . e Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 :: :> :'':; > : Postage/We)," /AI i1/1 �cJLe('_,,everke mate-- Publicks:Approval Letterz ,: ::.......:.::...:..:.::::: '�� '.: ;:;;:::.;: ..:�`� ::.;.;;::.:,•:.,.:.:;.:;: . Title Report or Plat Certificate 4 • Traffic Study 2 e •C i e e a G e la Tr e uttin N t tion I grin .P n.a 9 . . 9 9 ... Utilities Plan, Generalized 2 WetlandsDellneatlo ::Ma"4 . n Wetlands Planting Plan 4 WetlandsStudy a This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: DYivAtActikgrEk $ .4d J - 2. Public Works Plan Review Section .IEXPAA .'�)641 kEitltt-riitT+ll 3. Building Section DATE: )-13-G?IS? 4. Development Planning Section h:\division.s\develoo.ser\dev-olan inrl\waiverxls • 416'. 135 ) 11 • fil,IRTCROWNSER Earth and Environmental Technologies , - • • Geotechnical Engineering Design Study Proposed Kenworth Renton Truck Plant Renton, Washington Prepared for PACCAR, Inc. July 171 1991 J-2330-02 v nECED ••• • • t , Seattle • Richland • Anchorage • Portland • San Francisco • Long Beach • San Diego • Denver • Chicago Hart Crowser J-2330-02 CONTENTS Page OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT 1 PURPOSE OF OUR WORK 2 SCOPE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES 3 LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO THIS STUDY 3 SUMMARY OF OUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 5 Soil Conditions 5 Groundwater Conditions 6 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 7 Site Preparation and Grading 7 Preload/Surcharge Design Recommendations 8 Pile Design Recommendations 11 Slab-On-Grade Design 20 Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations 20 Excavations and Dewatering Considerations 22 Retaining Walls/Subgrade Walls 26 Drainage Design Recommendations 27 Pavement Design Recommendations 28 Structural Fill 28 Use of On-Site Soils 29 Seismic Considerations 30 Other Environmental Considerations 31 ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS 32 Page i Hart Crowser ''- J-2330-02 CONTENTS (Continued) Page TABLES 1 Groundwater Elevation Extremes from May 1987 to September 1989 6 2 Estimated SIab Settlements if a Preload/Surcharge Program is Not Used 9 3 Pile Tip Elevation and Vertical Compressive Capacity for the Different Structures 12. 4 Uplift Pile Capacity for the Different Structures - 13 5 Pile Group Reduction Factors for Coefficient of Variation of Horizontal Subgrade Reaction. 16 6 Recommended Soil Parameters for Design of Temporary Shoring 24 FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 Site and Exploration Plan 3 Legend for Generalized Subsurface Profiles/Cross Sections 4 Generalized Subsurface Profile E-E' 5 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section F-F 6 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section G-G' 7 Groundwater Elevation Contour Map 8 Assumed Slab Loading Conditions 9 Preload/Surcharge Plan Showing Duration and Height 10 Settlement Plate Location Plan 11 Settlement Plate Installation 12 Pile Tip Elevation Contour Map 13 Laterally Loaded Piles in Elastic Subgrade Deflection and Moment Criteria 14 Laterally Loaded Piles in Elastic Subgrade Deflection and Moment Criteria 15 Subgrade Wall and Permanent Foundation Drainage Design Page ii Hart Crowser J-2330-02 CONTENTS (Continued) Page ATTACHMENT 1 1-1 OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPOSED KENWORTH TRUCK COMPLEX Manufacturing Facility 1-1 Tank Farm 1-1 Flammable Material Waste Treatment 1-1 Tank and Pump House 1-2 Pipe Trestle 1-2 Guard House 1-2 Detention Pond 1-2 Substation 1-3 ATTACHMENT 2 2-1 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Manufacturing Facility 2-1 Tank Farm 2-2 Flammable Materials Waste Treatment - 2-2 Tank and Pump House 2-2 Detention Pond 2-3 Pipe Trestle 2-3 Substation 2-3 APPENDIX A A-1 FIELD EXPLORATIONS METHODS AND ANALYSIS Explorations and Their Location A 1 Standard Penetration Test (SP7) Procedures A 2 Use of Shelby Tubes A 3 The Use of Cone Penetrometer Probes A 3 FIGURES A-1 Key to Exploration Logs A 2 through A-10 Boring Log GT-9 through GT-17 A-11 Principle of Dutch Cone Penetrometer A-12 through A-1S Probe Log GPR-9 through GPR-12 Page iii I Hart Crowser J-2330-02 CONTENTS (Continued) PY APPENDIX B B-1 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM Soil Classification B-1 Water Content Determinations B-1 Atterberg Limits (AL) B-1 Consolidation Test (CN) B-2 FIGURES B-1 Unified Soil Classification (USC) System B-2 Liquid and Plastic Limits Test Report B-3 Liquid and Plastic Limits Test Report B-4 Consolidation Test Results • Page iv Hart Crowser J-2330-02 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN STUDY PROPOSED KENWORTH RENTON TRUCK PLANT RENTON, WASHINGTON This is our final geotechnical engineering design report related to the design and construction of a new Kenworth Truck Production Facility in Renton, Washington. This final report is based on findings from our January 29, 1990, report entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Design Study: Proposed Kenworth Renton Truck Plant, Renton, Washington" Hart Crowser job number J-2330-01, and on additional subsurface investigations completed for the final phase. In this report, we present the results of all studies completed to date. The primary focus of the report is foundation support for the main facility and the out buildings. Other components of the report include excavations and dewatering, site grading, permanent drainage, and seismic considerations. Following the introductory sections, we summarize the key findings and recommendations contained in the report. The body of the report then discusses these conclusions and recommendations in detail, and presents figures in support. In Attachment 1, we present our understanding of the proposed Kenworth Truck Complex. In Attachment 2, we present a detailed discussion of the subsurface conditions. Finally, the field data are presented in Appendix A, and the laboratory data in Appendix B. OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT Our understanding of the proposed Kenworth Renton Truck Plant is based on meetings and discussions with SSOE, PACCAR Inc., and Kenworth Truck. The site is located at the PACCAR facility in Renton, about 1/2 mile northwest of the downtown area. The site is within the Cedar River Valley, with ground surface elevations ranging between 25 and 40 feet. Figures 1 and 2 show the PACCAR site and the proposed • manufacturing facility and out building locations within the PACCAR site. Page 1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 All of the existing buildings have been demolished for the construction of the approximately 280,000-square-foot manufacturing facility. The current planned slab elevation is 31 feet. The Kenworth Truck complex will consist of the following: ►- Manufacturing Facility; ► Tank Farm; ► Flammable Material Waste Treatment; • ► Tank and Pump House; ► Pipe Trestle; ► Guard Houses; ► Detention Pond; and ► Substation. Attachment 1 describes in detail our understanding of the different structures comprising the Kenworth Truck complex. The plant will also have internal roads and parking. The plant development will be associated with remediation of contaminated soils at the north end of PACCAR property. Isolated small areas of the site have had remediation work completed. However, the remainder of the north end remediation is to begin in August 1991 and be completed by the end of the year. Refer to the Hart Crowser RI final report (dated September 1, 1989), FS report (dated February 23, 1990), Ecology Draft Cleanup Action Plan (dated June 1, 1991), and remediation plans and specifications for more information. Remediation design will address handling of contaminated soils and water, worker health and safety, and other issues. PURPOSE OF OUR WORK The purpose of this phase of our work was to provide PACCAR, Inc., Kenworth Truck, and their structural engineering consultant with geotechnical engineering recommendations related to the design of the proposed structure. For this design study we make specific recommendations regarding: ► Site Preparation • Page 2 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► Preload/Surcharge Design ► Pile Design Recommendations ► Slab-On-Grade Design ► Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations ► Excavations and Dewatering Considerations ►- Retaining Walls/Subgrade Walls ► Drainage Design ►- Pavement Design ► Structural Fill ► Use of On-Site Soils ► Seismic Considerations ► Other Environmental Considerations SCOPE OF THE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Our scope of work for this project included: ► Reviewing the preliminary and draft geotechnical design studies; ► Completing nine additional hollow-stem auger borings, and four cone penetrometer probes; ► Completing geotechnical engineering analyses; ► Presenting preliminary recommendations and ideas in meetings and memoranda; and ► Producing this geotechnical engineering design report. LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO THIS STUDY We prepared this report for the exclusive use of PACCAR, Inc., Kenworth Truck, and SSOE, Inc., for specific application to this project and site location. The work was accomplished in general accordance with the scope of work outlined in our proposal dated February 11, 1991, and under the terms negotiated in the contract dated March 29, 1991. Two change orders were made dated April 16, 1991, and May 22, 1991. We completed the work according to generally accepted geotechnical practices in the same or similar localities, related to the Page 3 Hart Crowser 1-2330-02 nature of the work accomplished, at the time the services were accomplished. We make no other warranty, express or implied. SUMMARY OF OUR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ► The upper 65 to 115 feet of compressible soil limit the foundation type: • A preload/surcharge program will be required for the manufacturing facility in order to construct the slab-on-grade. • Augercast piles (18-inch-diameter and 70- to 120-foot-long) will be required to support column loads at the manufacturing facility. Piles will also be required for most of the out buildings except the guard houses, where the loads are light, and the substation, where bearing soils are near the surface. ► Existing foundations should be removed; old piles should be removed where possible to reduce the potential negative effect on new foundations, slabs, and earthwork. ►- Pile test programs are outlined for both the manufacturing facility and the out buildings. ► The high groundwater table as well as its large fluctuation with respect to location and season will need to be addressed for any excavations. ► On-site soils can probably be used as backfill if construction proceeds in ga conditions. These soils may be suitable as backfill in wet conditions after stabilization with cement or other additives. Select stockpiling of excavated material, according to grain size, will also increase use of on-site material. ► Grade-supported structures could experience some damage to their foundations during an earthquake; pile-supported structures should only experience minor damage to their foundations during an earthquake. Page 4 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► During plant design, consideration should be given to environmental issues such as worker health and safety; and handling, testing, and use/disposal of soils, surface water, and groundwater. Remediation design will address these issues and should be incorporated into the overall plant design. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Soil Conditions Alternating and interbedded layers of loose to dense or soft to stiff sand, silt, clay, and peat underlie the site to depths of 65 to 115 feet. See Attachment 2 for more information on subsurface conditions. The soil stratigraphy at the site can be divided into four groups, listed in order of increased depth (see Figures 4 through 6): ► Upper Interbedded Soil. This material is 30 to 55 feet thick, consisting of interbedded loose to medium dense sand with varying silt content, and very soft to medium stiff silt, organic silt, and peat. This material would be responsible for any settlement of grade- supported structures. Pile loads are transferred below this unit. ► Intermediate Sand. This material is 10 to 30 feet thick across the site. It consists of medium dense to dense sand with varying silt contents, and occasional thin, medium dense to dense, peaty sand lenses. ► Compressible Clay. This material is 15 to 40 feet thick, consisting of stiff to hard, silty clay, with occasional sandy silt, peaty silt, and silt layers. This material would also be responsible for any settlement of large grade-supported structures. ► Deep Sand. This material is found from elevation -35 to -85 feet beneath the manufacturing facility. It consists of very dense, slightly silty to silty sand. This material is the bearing material for the deep piles supporting column loads. • Page 5 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater conditions were evaluated using the data available in Hart Crowser's September 1989 Remedial Investigation (RI) Report of the PACCAR Site prepared for PACCAR, Inc. (Hart Crowser job number J-1639-09). Groundwater within the Upper Interbedded Soil group is of concern for any anticipated shallow excavations. Data collected from 21/2 years (May 1987 to September 1989) of monitoring indicate near-surface groundwater level fluctuations of approximately 6 feet can occur. Table 1 gives the extreme groundwater elevations found over the 21 -year hydrologic study for select locations. Table 1 - Groundwater Elevation Extremes from May 1987 to September 1989 Location Groundwater Elevation in Feet Maximum (Date) Minimum (Date) Corner of N. 8th St. 221/ (3/89) 20 (9/89) & Garden Ave. Corner of N. 8th St 33 (3/89) 32 (6/89) & Houser Way N Corner of N. 4th St. 27 (3/89) 24 (9/89) & Houser Way N Note: Groundwater conditions for these two locations were directly observed only from December 1988 to September 1989, when additional wells were added. Figure 7 is a groundwater elevation contour map for March 1989. The groundwater contours shown on this map represent relatively high groundwater elevations observed during the 21/-year study. It should be noted that higher elevations could be possible. The groundwater gradient is in a general west and southwest direction. Table 1 and Figure 7 are intended to illustrate the groundwater elevation's dependence on both time and location. Page 6 Hart Crowser J-2330-02. The near-surface groundwater level generally is higher in the late spring and mid-winter and lower in the late summer and early fall. However, it must be noted that fluctuations in the level of the groundwater occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature, and other factors. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS After meetings with PACCAR and SSOE, the project team felt that the optimum design alternative for the manufacturing building foundation was to use a preload/surcharge program allowing slab-on-grade construction and to support column loads with 18-inch-diameter augercast piles bearing in the deep sand. Within this section we present recommendations keyed toward this foundation design alternative and the foundations of the out buildings. All subsections contained within this section apply to both the manufacturing and out buildings except: • PreloadlSurcharge Design Recommendations applies only to the Manufacturing Building; ► Pile Design Recommendations applies only to the Manufacturing Building, Tank Farm, Flammable Materials Waste Treatment Structure, Tank & Pump House, and Pipe Trestle; ►- Slab-On-Grade Design applies only to the Manufacturing building; and • Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations applies only to the Substation and Guard Houses. Site Preparation and Grading We recommend that initial preparation of the site's construction and pavement support include the following: ► Demolish existing pavement down to soil subgrade, including removal of old footings. Old piles should be removed where possible to reduce the potential negative effect on new foundations, slabs, and earthwork. Page 7 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► Prior to any construction, compact the exposed subgrade to a dense, non-yielding condition. Proof roll the exposed subgrade. Soft areas below building slab or pavements need to be overexcavated and backfilled with compacted structural fill. Site grading is expected to range from 1 foot of cutting (near office) to 31/2 feet of fill (near west end). Fill placement will also be needed in localized areas where overexcavation is required for existing foundation removal, unsuitable subgrade, etc. Some of the out buildings may need some site grading in the form of fill. In the areas where fill is required, place the material as recommended in the Structural Fill section. Preload/Surcharge Design Recommendations In order to construct and have confidence in the performance of the slab-on-grade a preload/surcharge program is required. This program will produce the predicted large settlements induced by the high slab loads and site grade fill before the building is constructed, thus limiting long-term settlements. Preload/Surcharge Definitions A preload fill is designed to weigh the same as the proposed structure. A preload is left in place as long as required to reduce long-term settlements to acceptable levels. A surcharge fill exceeds the weight of the proposed structure. By surpassing the weight of the proposed structure with the fill, the in-place time is reduced. The main concept of a preload or surcharge is that the anticipated long-term settlements are induced before the building is constructed. Anticipated Slab Load-Induced Settlements The majority of any site settlements will be induced by the high slab loads and site grading. Figure 8 illustrates our understanding of the expected slab loads. Table 2 outlines the expected settlements for the corresponding four slab load conditions and site grading, if a preload/surcharge program is not used. Page 8 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Table 2 - Estimated Slab Settlements if a Preload/Surcharge Program is Not Used Slab Load Condition Estimated Final Estimated SIab Elevation Settlement with Respect to in Inches Existing Grade in Feet 70 PSF Office -1 to 1 31 150 PSF General 11/2 to 3 31 to 8 750 PSF Storage 11 to 31/ 11 to 121 1000 PSF Storage 11 to 21/ 17 to 181/2 Differing subsurface conditions also have an effect on the range of settlements. In areas where the compressible soils were thicker (greater depth to deep sand) we expect higher settlements. This would generally be near the western edge and central portions of the building. We anticipate that the predicted settlements in Table 2 would occur over one to six months. The six-month time period corresponds to the occurrence of the thicker compressible clay unit. Again, this would generally be near the western edge and central portions of the building. The settlement values presented in Table 2 indicate the need for a preload program in order to construct the slab-on-grade. In areas where the six-month wait is too long we recommend using a surcharge to reduce the time required for the settlement to occur. Preload/Surcharge Design - Locations. Heights and Durations Figure 9 illustrates the recommended preload/surcharge areas, heights, and durations. The location of the preload/surcharge boundaries are a function of floor slab load and subsurface conditions. The time required for the intended benefits of the surcharges to be realized, as well as the total and post-construction settlements, can only be estimated during design. We will monitor the settlement progress Page 9 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 (as subsequently discussed) to determine the actual required preload/surcharge time. Fill Placement Criteria We recommend that the preload/surcharge design include the following: ► Place all fill used to raise site grades according to the structural fill criteria; ► Place the preload/surcharge fill after the site grading has been completed; ► Extend the preload/surcharge full height 5 feet beyond the - structure's footprint; • Place the toe of the preload/surcharge no closer than 25 feet to existing structures and utilities; ► Within the general slab load, office slab load, and 750 psf slab load areas, place the upper 12 inches of preload/surcharge according to • the same criteria as structural fill. Place the upper 18 inches of preload/surcharge as structural fill within the 1,000 psf slab load area; and ► Place the remaining surcharge fill in lifts and with some compactive effort. A measurable level of compaction is not required. Preload/Surcharge Monitoring We recommend the settlements be monitored during surcharging. Without settlement monitoring, the surcharges must be-left in place the full time planned, and predicted post-construction building settlements would still be regarded as approximate at best. With proper instrumentation, the settlement progress can be more closely monitored, future settlements predicted with more confidence, and the basis of the design can be verified. Through analysis of the monitoring data, we can implement design revisions, if necessary, or remove the surcharge early, if possible. An early removal or design revision decision would be based on the settlement rate, the construction benefits, and the settlements predicted for the building. Page 10 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 We make the following recommendation concerning settlement monitoring: • Install settlement plates at the 15 locations shown on Figure 10. The recommended locations are based on the following factors: • Preload/surcharge heights and durations • Subsurface conditions • Grid locations. For convenience the recommended settlement plate locations can occur at the intersection of grid lines; ► Use a settlement plate installation similar to the one given on Figure 11; and ► Monitor the settlements with conventional surveying techniques. The settlement plates should be installed after preparing the subgrade and prior to placing any site trading fill. Obtain initial settlement plate readings immediately after placement of the plates and prior to placement of ate' fill. Readings of settlement plates should be taken by standard differential leveling to the nearest 0.01 foot, and should be taken at regular intervals. Take two measurements per week during filling and for the first two weeks after filling is complete. One measurement per week is required thereafter for the entire surcharging period. Pile Design Recommendations The project team has concluded that 18-inch-diameter augercast piles tipped within the deep sand is the best design for column support. Pile Tip Elevation Figure 12 is a contour map of recommended pile tip elevations. The map is based on subsurface explorations completed across the site and an assumed 10-foot embedment into the very dense sand unit. Figure 12 shows piles ranging in length.from 70 to 120 feet across the building footprint. Deeper piles will be needed near the southwest corner of the footprint and shorter piles will be required along the eastern footprint edge. Page 11 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 The contours on Figure 12 are guidelines, and can be modified slightly to correspond to the building grid pattern. We recommend piles be designed to be slightly longer than the contours show, when_ interpolation_.between.contours is_needed. Table 3 presents recommended pile tip elevations and corresponding compressive pile capacities for the manufacturing facility, tank farm, flammable material waste treatment, tank and pump house, pipe trestle. Note that a pile load test program is required to use augercast piles of these lengths. We recommend you allow time early in the schedule for these load tests. Refer to subsection Pile Test Program within this report for specific pile test recommendations. Table 3 - Pile Tip Elevation and Vertical Compressive Capacity for the Different Structures Structure Design Pile Tip Allowable Vertical Elevation in Feet Compressive Pile Capacity in Tons • Manufacturing See Figure 12 115 Facility Tank Farm -90 60 Flammable -60, 60 Materials Waste Treatment Tank & Pump -50 40 House Pipe Trestle -60 60 Vertical Compressive Capacity 'Total allowable pile capacity for tip elevations shown on Figure 12 is 115 tons. However, if an area is not preloaded before site grading or slab loading, some settlement of soil will occur after the piles have been installed resulting in downdrag loads on the piles. We estimate that the allowable pile capacity considering downdrag reduces to 40 to 60 tons, Page 12 Hart Crowser J 2330-02 with the lower value on the west side of the site (where the consolidating clay unit is thickest). Note that capacities for the out buildings (Table 3) are reduced to account for potential downdrag loads. We do not expect to preload these areas, since the pile can support the necessary loads even with downdrag, and the slab loads and expected resulting settlements are smaller. Uplift Pile Capacity Table 4 presents the recommended allowable uplift pile capacities for the different structures within the project, assuming the pile tip elevations shown in Table 3. Table 4 - Uplift Pile Capacity for the Different Structures Structure Allowable Pile Uplift Capacity in Tons Manufacturing Facility ► Piles Tipped Deeper 60 Than Elevation -60 Feet 50 ► Piles Tipped Shallower Than Elevation -60 Feet Tank Farm 65 Flammable Materials 60 Waste Treatment Tank & Pump House 50 Pipe Trestle 60 Page 13 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Estimated Pile Group Settlement For the loading conditions stated in Attachment 1 and piles tipped in the deep sand at elevations recommended within this report, we estimate column pile group settlements of less than 1 inch. Lateral Pile Capacity Lateral forces developed during an earthquake or as a result of wind or other forces can be resisted by the passive resistance of soil surrounding vertical piles and/or the pile cap. Piles. This section presents a recommended method of analysis and appropriate soil parameters for laterally loaded vertical piles. Lateral resistance and deflections of vertical pile foundations are governed primarily by the lateral capacity of near-surface soils and the strength of the pile itself. The design lateral capacity of the vertical piles will depend, to a large extent,on the allowable lateral deflections of the piles. Use of the procedure discussed below, incorporating the design charts on Figures 13 and 14 will allow the structural engineer to estimate the pile deflection and moments within the pile at any point at or below the pile cap for a given loading. Development of lateral pile criteria requires an assumption of the degree of fixity at the pile head by the structural engineer. A pile is considered free-headed if the top is free to rotate. If the top of the pile is fixed against rotation by embedment in a pile cap that is sufficient to develop a fixed-end moment, the pile is considered restrained and fixed- headed. We expect that the piling would be structurally connected to the pile cap and therefore fixed to a great degree against rotation. We recommend that the structural engineer evaluate the degree of fixity and then linearly interpolate between results outlined from Figure 13 (true fixity at head) and from Figure 14 (true free-headed condition). In addition to the pile head fixity condition, the following information is required to determine lateral pile deflections and moments: Page 14 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Moment and Deflection Equations Free-Headed Condition Fixed-Headed Condition AyPaT3 ByMT2 A7PaT3 Y = + Y = EI II El M = AmP.T + M. M = AmP.T Where: Y = Deflection at any point at or below the pile cap, M = Moment at any point at or below the pile cap, • Pa = Shear applied to the pile at pile cap (x-x plane), Ma = Moment applied to the pile at pile cap (x-x plane), A,,B,, = Deflection coefficients from Figure 13 or 14, Am,Bm = Moment coefficients from Figure 13 or 14, El = Flexural stiffness of the pile, T = Relative stiffness factor = (EI/nh)115, nk = Coefficient of variation of horizontal subgrade reaction, in pounds per cubic inch, 2T = Assumed depth to point of zero deflection. The rate of increase of horizontal subgrade reaction, nit, is related to the stiffness and density of the soil. The soil above about 2T (2 times the relative stiffness factor) usually controls the lateral capacity of the pile. Page 15 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 For the loose to medium dense sand and soft to medium stiff silts near the surface of the PACCAR site, an appropriate general value of nh is 8 pounds per cubic inch (pci). The coefficient of variation of horizontal subgrade reaction should also be modified for pile group effects. Table 5 outlines the recommended reduction factors depending on pile spacing. Table 5 - Pile Group Reduction Factors for Coefficient of Variation of Horizontal Subgrade Reaction. Pile Spacing in Subgrade Reaction Direction of Loading Reduction Factor D = Pile Diameter R 8D 1.00 6D 0.7 4D 0.40 3D 0.25 • In order for the pile to develop fixity, it is generally considered that a total embedment of at least 4T (four times the relative stiffness factor) must be attained. With 4T or greater embedment the ultimate resistance to an applied lateral load is governed primarily by the strength characteristics of the pile and not the strength of the soil. In contrast, should the pile be embedded to a depth of only 2T or less, the ultimate resistance to lateral loads would be governed primarily by the strength of the soil with the pile acting as a rigid member (or pole). An embedment of between 2T and 4T would be considered an intermediate case, i.e., the ultimate lateral loading is dependent on both the soil and the pile strength. For the typical case at this site the piles will have an embedment greater than 4T because of the embedment requirements for vertical capacity. The moment formulations calculated using the procedures do not contain a factor of safety. The structural engineer should incorporate a Page 16 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 suitable factor of safety in the lateral load design, and should verify the strength of the pile to resist the applied lateral loads. Pile Cap. The pile cap, upon deflection, will contribute some lateral resistance to the foundation system. We make the following recommendations concerning pile cap lateral resistance: ► The ultimate equivalent fluid weight for passive resistance of compacted fill above the water table is 300 pounds per cubic foot. The lateral resistance against the pile cap assumes the confining soil is compacted structural fill placed as discussed in the Structural Fill section. ► For pile caps cast-in-place on compacted fill or on the native silty sand, use a friction factor of 0.35. This assumes a factor of safety of at least 1.5. Augercast Pile Construction Recommendations Many of the recommendations in this section are appropriate for inclusion in the project specifications. Recommendation: All piles should be spaced no closer than three pile diameters center to center. A contractor constructs an augercast pile following these steps: ►- Drill a hole with a hollow-stem auger. ► Pump concrete (grout) under pressure through the auger as it is slowly withdrawn. ► Push reinforcing steel into the wet concrete. Once the concrete has set up, the contractor constructs the foundation in the typical manner for a pile foundation. If the pile is not constructed properly, soil may collapse into the hole during withdrawal of the auger, displacing grout from the pile. This can also happen if a pile is installed near (within 5 pile diameters) a recently installed pile. Page 17 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 We make the following recommendations to help with quality control during installation: ► Allow at least one day between installation of piles within 5 pile diameters of each other. ► Require the contractor to provide a pressure gage in the grout line. ►- Minimum pressures should be those required to maintain a steady flow of grout to the auger. A typical value of 100 psi should be used for this purpose. ► Rapid drops in the grout pressure of 50 psi or more occurring when otherwise accepted procedures are used should be specified as a possible cause for reconstructing the pile. ►- The rate of grout injection and rate of auger withdrawal from the soils should be regulated so as to maintain a positive grout head of at least 15 feet above the bottom of the auger. Withdraw auger from hole at a slow rate so that pressure on the grout column is maintained. ► Require contractor to provide a means of monitoring quantity of grout used per pile: A stroke counter on the group pump. • Require contractor to rotate the auger after initial grout pumping (about 2 cubic feet) prior to beginning of withdrawing the auger. Augercast pile installation requires an experienced contractor and careful observation. We strongly recommend a geotechnical engineer or experienced technician from Hart Crowser observe the pile installation. Also, we suggest that all contractors considered for the project be required to demonstrate previous satisfactory performance on similar scope augercast pile installation projects. Many of the existing buildings are pile supported. As demolition proceeds many of the piles will not be able to be totally removed thus leaving the potential for underground obstructions during pile installation. We recommend that pile relocations be anticipated due to potential sporadic underground obstructions and that there be some Page 18 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 degree of flexibility with respect to pile location. With this potential problem understood before construction begins, pile installation delays can hopefully be minimized. It should be noted that soil cuttings derived from augercast pile construction in near-surface soils (say upper 5 to 10 feet of soil) may be contaminated. File Test Program Purpose is to Verify Design. To verify the pile design we have presented herein, we recommend conducting a pile testing program during the design phase. A design level program can result in higher allowable design capacities because a lower safety factor is generally used with load test verified capacities. The specific purposes of the test program are to verify the following: Pile capacities/safety factors; • Pile tip elevations - quantity estimates; • Difficulties with underground obstructions during installation; and ► Depth to Deep Sand. Pile Load Test Program. We recommend eight pile load tests be completed for the project (see Figure 12 for location): ►- Four within the main manufacturing building: • One group of two piles tipped at elevation -90 feet in the southwest corner of the footprint; and • One group of two piles tipped at elevation -60 feet along the northern edge of the footprint. ► One at the tank farm tipped at elevation -90 feet. ► One at the tank and pump house location tipped at elevation -50 feet. Page 19 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► One at the waste treatment location tipped at elevation -60 feet. ►- One at the pipe trestle tipped at elevation -60 feet. The acceptability of the load tests will be based on the magnitude of the ultimate load and the shape of the load displacement diagram. The structural engineer should determine acceptance criteria in consultation with the Hart Crowser. We recommend the piles be load tested in general accordance with the quick test method outlined in ASTM D 1143-81. Complete the tests to failure, half the critical buckling load, or to a load of two times the design load, whichever is less. We recommend at least four reaction piles each with an ultimate capacity of 60 tons for each load test. Test piles should be the same diameter and length as planned for production, and should be installed according to the same criteria. Slab-On-Grade Design For a slab-on-grade preceded by a preload/surcharge we recommend: Place at least 10 inches of compacted structural fill beneath the slab. This material will serve as a cushioning layer and as a capillary break and drainage layer; ►- After preload/removal recompact subgrade to a dense non-yielding condition; and ► Design floor slabs on compacted structural fill with a modulus of subgrade reaction (1-foot-square plate) of 200 pci. Shallow Foundation Design Recommendations We expect the guard houses will be supported by a shallow foundation system, because of their low loads. Due to the shallow depth to bearing material at the substation, the substation can also be supported on a shallow foundation. We anticipate that all footings will bear on compacted structural fill at the guard houses and on very dense in situ soils at the substation. We Page 20 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 make the following recommendations for design and construction of shallow footings for the structures: ► Embed all footings a minimum of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade for the guard houses. Construct all footings for the substation on very dense in situ sand. We estimate this depth to be 3 feet below existing grade; ►- Design all isolated footings with a minimum dimension of 24 inches; ► Design all continuous footings with a minimum width of 18 inches; ► All footings for guard houses can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot. A one-third increase in allowable bearing pressure can be used to resist transient loads such as wind and seismic loads; • All footings for the substation can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 6,000 ps. A one-third increase in allowable bearing pressure can be used to resist transient loads such as wind and seismic loads; ► Provide a compacted structural fill thickness of at least 2 feet below each footing for the guard houses. If necessary, overexcavate beneath individual footings to provide the 2-foot thickness. Backfill the overexcavation with compacted structural fill as detailed under the Structural Fill section. The minimum lateral limits of the overexcavation and structural fill placement beneath footings should be defined by a line extending downward and out from the outer edge of the footing to the top of the bearing soils at an angle of 1H:1V; ► If foundation subgrades become loosened or disturbed during construction, remove the loose material and replace with structural fill; ►- For resistance to lateral load imparted by footings, we recommend using an equivalent fluid to represent the passive resistance of the soil. For a typical footing poured neatly against medium dense granular material, we recommend an ultimate passive equivalent fluid weight of 200 pounds per cubic foot (pcf); Page 21 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► An ultimate coefficient of friction to resist sliding equal to 0.45 can be used for footings poured neatly on granular material; ► A factor of safety of at least 1.5 should be used in computing the resistance of footings and walls to translation (sliding); and ► Have a qualified geotechnical engineer or geologist observe exposed subgrades prior to footing construction to verify suitable bearing surfaces. Settlements at the substation can be estimated when loading conditions are known. Excavations and Dewatering Considerations Excavations will be needed for the construction of certain portions of the project including but not limited to: ► Pile caps; ► Truck way for doclq • ►- Pits within the manufacturing facility; and ►- Detention pond. Excavations It is our understanding that deep excavations are not planned for this project However, shallower excavations should be anticipated. The deeper of these excavations (deeper than approximately 4 feet) will likely involve both open cuts and/or shored excavations. Open Cuts. Stability of cut slopes depends on a number of factors including: ► Type and density of soils; ► Presence and amount of any seepage; ► Depth of the cut; • Page 22 Hart Crowser 1-2330-02 ► Proximity of the cut to any surcharge loads near the top of the cut, such as stockpiled materials, traffic loads, or structure, etc., and the magnitude of these surcharges; ► Duration the excavation is open; and ► Care and methods used by the contractor. Stability and safety of temporary construction slopes depends on all of these factors. We make the following recommendations regarding open cuts: ► Temporary slopes and the need for any slope protection or shoring should be the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor is in control of the construction operations and is continuously at the site to observe the nature and conditions of the soil. ✓ Final design should not allow any unsupported temporary excavation slopes steeper than 1H:1V under any conditions, or steeper than 11/2H:1V in the loose to medium dense or soft to stiff surficial soils. Flatter slopes may be needed locally, especially where seepage is encountered. ► Shoring or a trench box should be required if the contractor elects to use steeper cut slopes. Local and state safety requirements may also apply, and the contractor is expected to be familiar with the current practices. Lateral Earth Pressures for Shoring Design. Lateral earth pressures for design of shoring depend on the type of shoring and its ability to deform in response to soil loads, soil parameters, surcharges which may be present, and groundwater conditions. Recommended values for shoring design parameters are given in Table 6 to provide a basis for design. The magnitude and distribution of loads on the shoring may vary, depending on the method of designs and construction. As previously indicated, we anticipate selection of the type of shoring and actual design would be accomplished by the contractor, subject to review by the owner's project engineers. Page 23 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Table 6 - Recommended Soil Parameters for Design of Temporary Shoring Condition Value Active Earth Pressures 0.4 Coefficient, K, At-Rest Earth Pressure 0.55 Coefficient, K, Passive Earth Pressure 2.5 Coefficient, IS, Moist Unit Soil Weight 120 pcf above Groundwater Level Buoyant Unit Soil Weight 57 pcf below Groundwater Level Average Unconfined 0 psf Compressive Strength Notes: 1) Values in Table 6 do not include a Factor of Safety. Recommended minimum Factor of Safety is 1.5. 2) Effects of sloping ground or surcharge are not included in values in Table 6. The values presented in Table 6 are based on an assumed condition where fill or weaker surficial soils are encountered from ground surface to the bottom of the excavation. If dense or stiff soils are encountered near the ground surface, the values presented in Table 6 will be conservative. In addition to soil pressures, the effect of buildings or traffic surcharges will influence shoring design. The contractor should retain an experienced engineer to review conditions along the excavation to develop a safe and economical shoring design. Page 24 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 • • Dewatering Considerations Dewatering will be required in the excavations below the water table to reduce uplift pressures, prevent water-seepage-induced slope instability, and to provide reasonable working conditions. As stated in the Groundwater Conditions section, the groundwater table is very dependent on the season and construction location. Because of this variability and the lack of specific excavation plans, dewatering considerations can only be generally addressed in this report. Soil Permeability. Hydraulic conductivity testing in the soils at the PACCAR site indicate that the soil permeability can range from 5 x 104 to 5 x 104 centimeters per second (cm/sec). The higher permeability would represent the coarser materials — typically slightly silty, gravelly sands. The lower permeability would represent the finer materials — typically very silty sands to sandy silts. Dewatering Systems. Two dewatering systems we recommend considering are open pumping from within the excavation during construction and/or well points. The open pumping system would consist of drains and sumps. This system would be more suitable for excavations with low water inflows, however, and would not allow for pre-drainage of the soils prior to excavation. The well point system would consist of installing a number of small diameter wells at a close spacing. A single stage of well points could be employed as typical suction lifts are within the range of 15 feet. An oversized hole would be desired for placement of filter pack around the screened section of the well point to prevent clogging of the screen. Well point spacings on the order of 3 to 10 feet would commonly be employed to drain the site soils. Well points may require a week to a month to achieve a dewatered condition. The dewatering methods presented are an assessment of the practical methods available for dewatering within the conditions imposed by the site. Other methods may be suitable for dewatering. We recommend that the specific dewatering system design be the responsibility of the contractor. Contaminated Water. Any water removed from the ground by a dewatering system should be considered potentially contaminated water. Page 25 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 As part of the remediation design, a procedure for collecting, sampling, testing, and disposing of collected groundwater will be addressed. Retaining Walls/Subgrade Walls Structural Design. For retaining walls backfilled on one side only, the structural engineer can estimate the lateral load and resistance on the walls using an equivalent fluid to represent the soil. We make the following recommendations for walls with backfill material placed per structural fill recommendations above the water table: ► For a yielding wall (active horizontal soil pressure coefficient) with level backfill, the equivalent fluid weight of the soil is 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). We define the yielding wall as one where the top moves, when loaded, at least 0.1 percent of its height. ► For a non-yielding wall (at-rest horizontal soil pressure coefficient) with level backfill, the equivalent fluid weight is 55 pd. Note that the equivalent fluid weight does not consider any surface loading conditions. Estimate the resulting lateral loads as 35 percent of the surface load for a yielding wall and 50 percent for a non- yielding wall. Drainage Design. We make the following recommendations concerning drainage behind retaining walls/subgrade walls: • Place an 18-inch width of well-graded sand and gravel with less than 3 percent fines behind all retaining walls and subgrade walls. ► Drain this material with interior drains at the base of the walls which are connected to storm sewers away from the structure. An alternative to the recommendations above would be: • Place drainage material Miradrain 6000 or equivalent against the subgrade wall, completely covering the wall (see Figure 15). Note that the non-woven geosynthetic should be facing away from the wall and the solid plastic side should be facing the wall. ► At the base of the wall place a 4-inch-diameter perforated discharge pipe. This pipe should be encased in the non-woven geosynthetic to Page 26 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 protect it from clogging with silt. The pipe should lead into a suitable sump or outlet. Drainage Design Recommendations We make the following recommendations concerning drainage: ► Construct a capillary break beneath the finished manufacturing facility's slab. It should be at least 10 inches thick, consist of clean sand or sand and gravel with less than 3 percent fines based on the 3/4-inch fraction. This capillary break should tie into the subgrade wall drainage discussed under the Retaining Walls/Subgrade Walls section. ► Construct a capillary break beneath the finished out buildings' slab. It should be at least 10 inches thick, consisting of the same material as discussed above. The capillary break can be considered part of the structural fill recommended beneath some slabs. ►- For the manufacturing building provide subslab drainage by using a combination of perimeter and cross drains beneath the eastern third of the slab-on-grade. ► Install cross drains on about 50-foot centers. ►- The drains (with cleanouts) should consist of 4-inch-diameter perforated pipe wrapped in filter fabric and placed on a bed of, and surrounded by, 6 inches of clean (less than 3 percent fines based on minus 3/4-inch fraction), free-draining sand and gravel. The drains should be sloped to carry the water to a sump or other suitable discharge location. ► Grade the site in such a way that surface water will not pond near the structures. ►- Slope roof drains to a suitable outlet away from the proposed buildings. Do not connect the roof drains to the foundation drainage. Page 27 Hart Crowser J-2330-02. Pavement Design Recommendations A concrete apron surrounds most the manufacturing facility. It is our understanding that its surface elevation will be the same as the floor elevation (elevation 31 feet) except where the pavement lowers for the truck docks. It is our understanding that the detention ponds will also be constructed with concrete at a slab elevation of approximately 20 feet. It is also our understanding that the remaining pavement sections, including parking, and interior roadways will be asphalt constructed. We make the following recommendations concerning the sites subgrade: ► A CBR value of 20 percent should be used for pavement design; • ►- A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (1- foot-square plate) should be used for pavement design. Structural Fill Structural soil fill will be required for backfilling of overexcavations, pile caps, subgrade wall, utilities, as well as beneath slabs and pavements. We make the following recommendations regarding structural fill: • Place all fill in lifts (maximum 10-inch loose thickness) and compact it to a minimum of 92 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (as determined by ASTM D 1557 test procedures); compact fill to 95 percent when the lift is within 2 feet of structures or pavement. ► The moisture content of the fill should be controlled within 2 percent of the optimum moisture. Optimum moisture is the moisture content corresponding to the maximum Proctor dry density. P- Import a select soil to be used as structural fill if on-site soils do not suffice. We recommend using a clean, well-graded sand or sand and gravel with less than 5 percent by weight (based on the minus 3/4- inch fraction) passing the No. 200 mesh sieve be used. Compaction of material containing more than about 5 percent silt may be difficult if the material is wet or becomes wet during rainy periods. Page 28 Hart Crowser J 2330-02 ► In wet subgrade areas, clean material with a gravel content (material coarser than a U.S. No. 4 sieve) of at least 30 to 35 percent and less than 5 percent fines may be necessary. ► If small, hand-operated compaction equipment is used to compact structural backfill, fill lifts should not exceed 8 inches loose thickness. Use of On-Site Soils On-site soils will predominantly come from three sources: ► Materials generated from the site demolition and remediation including: • Crushed concrete • Bioremediated soils • Solidified/stabilized soils containing arsenic, chromium, lead, and cPAHs. • Material excavated from surface excavations, including pile caps and utilities; and Material excavated from deeper excavations, including pits and detention ponds. Grain size analysis and visual observation of samples taken throughout the site indicate that: ►* Materials from the site remediation generally have a high fines content. These materials appear to be marginal at best for use as structural fill in dry working conditions, but would be even more difficult to work with in wetter conditions. These materials may be suitable for use as structural fill in wet conditions after stabilization with cement or other additives. The crushed concrete has the best potential for use as structural fill. The crushed concrete may need to be "washed" to reduce the fines content to a workable level. • Soils from surface excavations will be in situ fill materials. This soil is predominantly sand and gravel with a variable silt content, and occasionally having pockets of silt. This material also appears to be Page 29 Hart Crowser I-2330-02 suitable as structural fill in da working conditions. These materials may be suitable for use as structural fill in wet conditions after stabilization with cement or other additives. ►- Soils from deeper excavations will be in situ fill and natural soils. The in situ fill is discussed above under surface excavations. Natural soils will need to be selectively stockpiled. Peats, saturated silts, and very silty sands, plastic silts, and clayey materials should not be used as structural fill. Damp to moist silts and silty sands appear to be suitable as structural fill in dry working conditions. These materials may be suitable for use as structural fill in wet conditions after stabilization with cement or other additives. Sands and gravels with low fines contents should be usable as structural fill in most conditions. All near-surface, on-site soils should be considered as potentially contaminated. Refer to the RI and FS reports for more details. As part of the remediation design, procedures for temporary stockpiling, sampling, testing, and use/disposal of excavated soils will be developed. The plant design should consider this procedure and criteria (based on chemical constituents) regarding available use of soils. Potential contractors should also be aware of the above requirements, and of health and safety requirements. Seismic Considerations An in-depth seismic study was beyond the scope of this study. However, sufficient design parameters can be estimated from other Hart Crowser seismic studies within the Puget Sound. The project site is located in a region subject to moderate earthquake activity (Zone III, UBC). Three earthquakes of a Magnitude 6.5 to 7.3 (based on Richter Scale) have been reported in northwest Washington since 1872. These past earthquakes as well as other smaller ones indicate that in a 50-year span a probability of non-exceedence of 90 percent would correspond to a design peak ground acceleration of 0.17g. Page 30 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Response Spectra • The design engineers believe that the Uniform Building Code's (UBC) normalized response spectra curves are the most efficient and effective means of analysis within this project's scope. The soil stratigraphy at the site is best modeled by UBC's Soil Type 3 - soft to medium clays and sands. The site is located in a Seismic Zone 3. Liquefaction Analysis indicates that the site is not at significant risk for earthquake- induced liquefaction damage. Any liquefiable material at this site would be loose sands in the Upper Interbedded Soils. Liquefaction analysis was for a magnitude 6.5 earthquake and a ground acceleration of 0.17g. Under such an earthquake we would anticipate the following: ► Structures supported on grade, including the slab, pavements, and utilities, could experience some damage due to liquefaction-induced ground settlements. The damage from these settlements is not anticipated to be from the total settlements, but rather from the differential settlement common among isolated areas of liquefaction. ► Structures supported on piles, such as the manufacturing facility's column loads and out buildings, could experience less damage. The building's load is being transferred below any liquefiable materials. Also, since the soil is confined and should not flow upon liquefaction, lateral loading on the piles should be minimal. Other Environmental Considerations Numerous elements of the plant development will be addressed by site remediation design. Earlier portions of this report mentioned environmental considerations for: ► Potentially contaminated soil cuttings from augercast piles; ► Potentially contaminated groundwater from dewatering operations; and Page 31 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► Use of potentially contaminated on-site soils. Other elements of the plant development will be affected by remediation design, including, but not limited to: ► Worker Health and Safety requirements; ► Equipment washing, ► Dust control; ► Collection, sampling, testing, and disposal of surface water, ► Discovery of previous plant underground features, such as diesel pipelines; ►- Discovery and control of contamination; and ► Cleaning of debris (e.g., demolished foundations) prior to disposal. ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS Hart Crowser should be consulted during the remainder of the design phase to refine our recommendations as more information about project requirements becomes available, and as specific project elements change or are refined. We make the following recommendations: ► Provide Hart Crowser the opportunity for a general review of the final plans and specification in order to verify that geotechnical recommendations presented herein are properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. ► Retain Hart Crowser to provide geotechnical engineering services during construction phases of the work. This would include: • Site preparation; • Preload/surcharge data evaluation; • Dewatering and shoring review; Page 32 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 • Backfilling; • Proof rolling observation; and • Pile installation. The purpose of these observations is to determine compliance with the design concepts, specifications, or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from that anticipated prior to the start of construction. HART CROWSER, INC. G ham..- XRte't,/:„,,Le.:...--tt:t_--: DAVID G. WINTER, P.E JOHN R. VERDUIN III Sr. Associate, Sr. Staff Engineer Project Manager +a�° G. i+1f s ys �ge''.:9EciSTEst°.�� i 4NAl l 1/4 AMES IL KLEPPE, P.E. Associate ,I1, - ` f1f,;` 'g H. K(, i i it I . t.:\ � ^I'4, ., �` ` u,liTt.... Fsy' ;Arr }y. .. 'liilN/J// DGW/JRV/JHK:ob rmwmfr Page 33 - Vicinity Map LAKE I • • . —•- - ---- • WASHINGTON ‘• . I�_ : : •2S5 - I� •-• t:V ie.L i JOHNS' , ��•• •-.�- ' •— - -,;••••.,•4;r. .. '-1Bryn Mawr •1' ._._ CREEK . I •' ''}�� • • I 1 e., •cc...13, •�_ ' �, 'Power Plant • '."',‘-'1iiih.:, -_.e.. - • • '' '� `i, mil• - •• • • ••.I ;i•-',may �. - rsyt l\PEO V -• .�, — G„' • >f - 'Ir. ICI tY�RENTON iI r4' 1 I % 1 a• •. 7.,;;E-1. -•'914t - -1,"' 71• 17711117;/.i.j.*:::/,:r:t•zrzi:,•, --...=-"- - - - - --!!...7 - 1. - • ....i.. „„s .7 .I . ..""1 ‘\(-• ■.■ , .:�!-,� �' • .f; 1 w, . ----...•----:. �r6BTH S I'v '+._ •1rj t� I �.'., .; . • • • 1IN • -. .. . 1:-. "4',ph' _i — 1: ... 1'1 -'we%h iy;:?: V"• ••Q 01 1 I,— ‘••��•-� r i ' •%�! e .77:'''-' '''NE117-\\ " ' 'iii A R .ORT'''.. I ILO. 1 LI;10. ... p. -1.:•?..I .;Y•77.-"--i 1.".r$;ii.'--; •-• -p,./4.i r.. . Ar• ...-••• • —• \I—d`:11 J , ..., ,',„e3;' __ . . _ ._, 1 • •�/� '; .�. I•■ Le1�ae-.mac Ir U ?ithleG � . a I�/ • �g1L1� _n 'IBM 1 ,s 1I' :.. ,: fieti 1.�'© g§tr/••. �,i i 'PixG 1-� f1 ` . - ' _...,._ _..... ,..., „__, . ..:.:•.. \ : n 1•�ri, •�1 -/ ,. -. -�`. ;Greenwaid_Ceni, ____, -.a . •••.. ,,„„r„,-.,. $,, ,,,s, ..▪ • - •.-A,--',.,_-'1, Wit Alit ... . ." . • '''---7•-,=-'i MitiN ... i.” 1. par.--1 • ''' . .1 -,,.. ,/,4 ,,: .,,,.-,. :41t Orry.f‘ ,:-•,.4- : . • � ----22/• - - y 4Park 4 • \.•r�I.a '• I '.. 1 • /. r 1,.4 o.'..,-0„.,.7..-_.•:..j;.i1'_ 8 `• t;jiIai• Lt .:./1,'r!r ik`/i‘7 - A7 -; 4':- 321:• • / `_.(•lam • • •A. I:•1.1 1 • ) r.-.',-az...-....e..._...7. .'.....•.t-.n .. -._-,1-.A-:--•--.,4,Ui6•„---.:,o7..L-n.--..:_..:-k.4-1 .. M. � 1 •.. •��: " �` �j l:� vim' `:=---- - !•" -- `_-.-.- .:,,•. I.-.:_..7.-.,I-,, 7J is. .. r / �. ' ••.... r I -i J !: • .1 - j 11 IF Base map prepared from USGS 7.5—minute quadrangles of Mercer Island and Renton. Washington I 0 2000 4000 Scale in Feet • /��; PACCAR Site V • HARTCROWSER J-2330-02 6/91 • Figure 1 ,. Site and Exploration Plan \-% -3. — ' Existing . & D — i 1 ] f i. —+=nk Perm L—1[2 i guard tooth Existing ^�� . • 3 i . �7 `,. uetention ' 1 S 1 -- — — GT�3 ®DM-2 GT-6 Flammable Materials —,i �, GT-4 guard 5( ,th .Ei — Waste Treatment GPR-4 i GT-14 GPR-1 E O :D —. , Existing 1 — GT-91 j i . : TP-106: Exploration Location and Number GPR-2 -a : • ® 1 0 67 • I` GT-1 . DM-3 GPR-9 . 510 0 Kenworth N,anufaciuring i : . — ® GT-15 Hart Crowser Boring, Current Study j 1 Building j • .L�— • ®GT=1.1 --• 0 GPR-12 Hart Crowser Cone Probe, Current Stuc % I i i .; • .'Pipe Trestle — l i s. 1. LW-10 GT-8 F ;' ��iPR-10 F' _. & GT-1 Hart Crowser Boring, 1990 Study i W; O' GPR-8 GT-2 i' i 'a: i'L i ^ i GPR-5 , �: GPR-11 LW— J 61 TP-1 Hart Crowser Test Pit, 1990 Study i—; GPR-30 ' j : •,i ° . 1 i=: >I i-Fire Tank & 0 GPR-1 Hart Crowser Cone Probe, 1990 Study GPR-6 ! lL Pump House • >-7 GPR-70 0. T-10 7 1 • LW-5 • Landau Associates Boring, 1986 Study o • a >-5 z, a i i 1 La 1—1 :D TGT--12iGPR-12--i f Guard Booth e DM-2 . Dames & Moore Boring, 1984 Study _ GT-3 �4 ----, - TP-105 1 I i G' is it E E' Cross Section/Profile Location and Designation I NT-P-104 JFuture Division ' L--__J Kenworth Parking B Z:.' , Office Building TP-102 - 9 DM-5 'PACCAR Renton New Plant:Master Site Plan'dated September 8, TP-101 T., 16 1989 and modified per SSOE January 23, 1990 Correspondence. \�� TP-103Paccar tarts Parking -•" 417 TP-8 TP-7 a TP-6 TP-5 TP-4 TP-3 TP-2 TP-1 ' . Note:Borings,probes,and test pits from previous studies are ® 61 61 19 61 IQ,. -<-� included in Hart Crowser report J-2330-01. ROUSER WAY; . Paccar Parts Paccar Substation Warehouse Parts Existing q11:1:1 Li 0 250 50 Scale Feet Existing . Note:Base map prepared from drawing provided by Paccar Inc.entitled'Site Plan',dated July. 1991 t/ iiitgraowsER J-2330-02 6/9' . Figure 2 Legend for Generalized Subsurface Profiles/ Cross Sections GT-13 Boring Number (80'E) Offset Distance and Direction Boring Location ATD Groundwater at Time of Drilling 2a Standard Penetration Resistance in Blows per Foot Shelby Sample • Hydraulically Pushed not Driven immimmis Contact Between Major Soil Units GRP-11 Probe Number (80'S) .Offset Distance and Direction Probe Location Cone Tip Resistance, oc, in tsf 0 400 Mechanical Cone (Logarithmic Scale) Note:Contact lines,between sod types are based on interpolation between borings and represent our interpretation of subsurface conditions based on currently available data. /7 Nil Hj. / C OWSE J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 3 Generalized Subsurface Profile E - E' E E' 40 — GPR-4 GT-9 GT-14 GPR-9 GT-13 -DM-2 • (50"E) (110"W) (125W) 30 — 10 ■Alternating layers of 12 C . 2 C ?O C �_ 10■Sand.Silt.Peat and Gravel C 366 C - UPPER INTERBEDDED 9' SOIL 20 — - 5 : � \ 7 C 13C 1C 121• \�18 C I .3 L . 10 — — I 8■ 5C �0C_ � ? Silt „1 9 low 6 II 14 C. Sit � — 9 ■ 21 C^Silt and Peat f 15 C� 8■ 14 C 9 Cam___ ? • —10 — Sand 1 [ 3■ 18 silt INTERMEDIATE SAND I 6 Silt � I. 12. ,3 C � ---��� � 15 �� —20 — ! r6-cr— C imp 12 i7 CO Sand 50/ 33 C ✓ '/Peat - -30 m l'11111 /12 Silt i c 11l 27 / '24 C 1 — • . —40 — •6 N_ COMPRESSIBLE CLAY • --: 23 ■ 22 C Sand ' ' 4C —' . -50 - 8 • — �� 10 C DEEP SAND • z2 ■ • 12 ■ 8 C Clay 75/9' — it15 II12 C 221 asC C — . • — 1311 C • 13 50/5'C Sand — —80 — 50/5' I 50/5'c 50/5'a 27■ 50/6'4 — _ Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolation Horizontal Scale in Feet between borings and represent our interpretation of subsurface 0 100 200 conditions based on curreotly available data. �i JJ 0 20 40 Vertical Scale in Feet Vertical Exaggeration x 5 A LI H/J?TCROWSFI? J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 4 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section F - F' F GPR-5 GT-1O GPR-11 GT-11 F' 30 (140'E) (140'W) 6C 4C - 7C 17C 6C 2C 20 - - 17C Alternating layers of Sand, Silt,Peat, and Gravel 4 C UPPER — 3 c 2E INTERBEDDED - SOIL 24C 12C 15[ 7 C 0 - Silt and Pea - - -t - 24[ ..... -, : _ • .•; ilt and Peat 13 68[ Sand 0 Silt,Peat J -,c and Sand,`�4C ` Sand and Peat \ 25 C SAND MEDIATE 19 45C o -20 — 'San. -----` 28C 50C it - a>i 16C 3 Sand and w -30 - Clay and Silt Peal - 78C - - 20C COMPRESSSIBLE -40 - 50/2r 9C CLAY _ 50/2 t 16 - 50/2 c. -50 - Sand _ 20 E DEEP SAND 50/5= -60 - - 50/3 r- 'n < —70 — _ ref 41 W t 1 th CI I ` ' Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon Ninterpolation between borings and represent Horizontal Scale in Feet 0 our interpretation of subsurface conditions 0 100 200 based on currently available data. C 0 20 40 vi Vertical Scale in Feet Vertical Exaggeration x 5 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section G - G' G G' 40 — GT-13 GPR-9 GT-11 GPR-11 GT-15 (60'N) (45'S) (100'N) (55'S) (50'N) 30 — 2C 4C 2C 20 C 17C Alternating layers,ot Sand, S 36 C Olb 42 C Silt.Peat and Gravel 11£ — 20 — 4C 2[ Pea 11C 13C 1C , 7C 23 C` 2 C — 10 — �� UPPER INTERBEDDED �� _ SOIL 12t 15t 0 — 9C 4 7C _ f `6C • - 15 C p Silt and Peat 13[ • 9 C- Pill 16 nd 45 E -- - -10 — / 11 C Silt 25 C / 21 C Silt 1111 tv 15r- ,----'Silt' 45 C 22C —20 — / �� �� r- Clay — c 50/67: INTERM SAND slit \ 50C Sand and Peat ?32-b-- — — 67 C C Sand N' 50/6 C sin —30 — _i 9• 1/111C Sand m 1 ' 20 C — LU 31 [ Peatt 1 Clay and Silt 9 C \ ?50/3 c Gravel _ . —40 — 23 C-GOMPRESSIBLE CLAY I 16 C ? ?50%5 sift • 14[ 72C 50/5= — —� — 50/5 10[ 20C c. 75/9 50/5 c 50/5 c — —60 — Sand \ '65 C DEEP SAND 50/3 L 50/6 e ?C 50/5=h-_=_70 _— - \ — so/1rc 50/5t — —80 — 50/5'a —90 — Horizontal i Scale n Feet Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolation 0 ZOO between borings and represent our interpretation of subsurface conditions based on currently available data. 0 20 40 _ Vertical Scale in Feet Vertical Exaggeration x 5 A u HN?TCROWSL-R J-2330-02 6/91 Figure 6 Groundwater Elevation Contour Map • Upper Interbedded Soil Unit March 27-28, 1989 • 23 . 22 1 3i .\ 24_. ... v .AVENUE NORTH ' - — - _ Exi -ing R & D; �i -Tank Farm 1 Guarc Booth 22 t Existing 23 _ s i '; Detentions-; 23 ! g Guard Booth Pond• i —�22� Groundwater Elevation l Z..Aammable Material It ! ; I iI ! Contour in Feet I - - Waste Treatment \j- ` -- j Existin �6 i - �� a l r i I 1• �! 24 24 , 26 F I i i i i i ~-2$ Note.Contours represent high or near high groundwater • i I elevations over 2-1/2 year RI study. A safety factor 27i�en Manufacturing I U'' would be recommended for any designs based a I �_ rW j; cuI 1 i - 26 =j on these elevations. This map is intended to show 5 !-. Q 9 . 1 ? 1 variable with respect to location. Z cn �� 2g'! �--29 ; I ^ 'o; 27 rn i 21 I! I J• � e Tank & Z G d j �I�JO _ Pump tto- . _ \ I -28 of o� 3y L,. I I Z ;6 Guars. ' oih : I 26 j v k i a 9-2 I 30 Source: Remedial Investigation Report: PACCAR Site: Rentor i 1 Washington Appendix E. Hart Crowser i I 3� 1---11----.77 . ` \ September 1. 1989. Future �� sion—� _tfic ' ilding a - - • ',Os Ke•_ -rth Pa '� \ rac =r Parts arking411111111111i'411L H• SER WAY "u' IN / parr 17-raCC-ar Su•.tation —� v�� . W�rehou _ Parts /xistin ! i rAry wa, 0250 500 /.1o, 7 A -`-� l�//,IttTCI�oVI/SFJ1 • �Y �xi :r:, Scale in Feeto ^3 rs 03 n3 J-2330-02 7/9' �6 �� M Figure 7 .. . Assumed Slab Loading Conditions . . . . , J . i • -.;ARDEN AVENUE NORTH L _ Existing R & D— . Th r , • F. f ----7,...„---Tank Farm .. . I N..— •._..i--....sr,. Booth / , • , I / , . I • Existing I .'---‘ — • 750 psf . / Flammable k Material— 1 . , : n.itarri P., .th I / , ------ •• ' Waste Treatment 2 . .. sA,..0 , - 1000 psf Floor Area and Load in Pounds per. .'• . .., . 1• .Square Foot (psf) . , • .• , Existing . . . . • • I..---- 7— ,r—i , . 50 if r t _ L i - I • I . . i I I , . • •• Kenwerth Man_ aztu-ng 1,...,- 2 • : . : Sti d ng I illJr"-- i ,-- I- - I. 1,c53,t - c . Hipe ;restie — /. Th. 1,---.: . - cn! .. '\. • I= . ' .6 T 1 ______- _ 1 G> .i .P, ._;) 21 Fire Tank & I.z . C f; !•-•--1 C I - __'- 'Pump House j I 1 I )00_iie -1 ( - • _ - I . : Ca u a r d Booth I 1 =1 ________, i Th:1 e ' : ' • cc 1 , , • - . . ! • ! 70 psf . E : • Future Division-------r-' , • Kenworth Parking • Office Building g ---- _ . . 1 • E .• // . . • P Partsaccar PaHOUSrking I : _____.._)\_•______._.__ i AdIMMW-14— imm""-- E L ,R_WAY_ r -- I rm.a---1.- . Paccar PartsI I Paccar __. i Substation WarehouF_-•e 1 I Farts Existing - 0 250 500 ........... .........., Scale in Feet f Existing--/ • Note:Base map prepared from drawing provided by Paccar Inc.entitled Site Plan',dated July, 1991 • N7I _ ILII HARTCROWSER J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 8 • Preload/Surcharge Plan Showing Heights and Durations , '...-- --- avARDEN AVENUE i•i..7..P.;!-! — 1 • i ' ; i — --Tark =arm Existing R & D- ( 7 ., --- . i 1 ! : I; . 3 .. - -- I l ! Existing I a -N. c- I i • I I I Detention---: i : 1 i I.: •. • 1 Pond !. . :—...---..-1. • / 1 I Flammable Material—, 1 i : , 1 • I • / i ! . - l • Waste Treatment ..."---. F. (--'.!.!FE::',., ./th 71-----4-.\..._,...0 , ./ i ,, . 91/2 Preload/Surcharge Area Height in • . Feet/Duration in Months l - . . ..--- : ; Existing --- i 3V2 1 . !-- — ! ' 1- 4 -'-- • ' i '...... • : I: 1,--C4-P2Ft2Aani 4acturing - :: f Building . I —!: 4 ;l:: 1 J •,.._ ! 1 . _ 12!;^!•-= Tr.,;t1.-- ---. ..._1:: i • .p:. • ..- i 1 • •:-. . • ;::/:;• il---. 91 2 ! i I—I • t .— .: 121/4-- i I::' •Z: P . 3 A 2 1 !TP Fire Tank & g _ i - . I r-•: I I I __ !Pump House ; =• , . , 7. , _ 312 _ ,.,....„! i -- • •- , • ; _. : i Guard Bocth— j / , cc i . - • / 1 • i • • ----- 7 , , Future Divi.sto _ r Kenworth n . . Parking • --------, /2 Office Building : i __ j z ,• ..,_, ' /------4---- .__ ..., ----. , .., • / :'7" -.. i Paccar Parts Parking 12( , ,......._- --- -- • ; . . .. HOUSER WAY/<" ___-------<-----; i ),..-- - -- r% -- --Th i • —. . Fa car Farts i I Paccar T H . vv..re r:;Duse i I Parts Substation Existing— i —i I ; I 0 250 500 Scale in Feet Existing—/ • Note:Base map prepared from drawing provided by Paccar Inc.entitled'Site Plan'.dated July. 1991. . WWI WI . HARTCROWSEJ? J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 9 Settlement Plate Location Plan l ` J• J l J ,GARDE-N AVENUE NORTH 1 ' 11 1— Existing R & D 1I' lk _ J ,Tank Farm 7 t .ivar Booth / Existing I E . . Detention 1 i , . and -� Flammable Material Guard B: Atho • Waste Treatment \_ e r �J • Proposed Settlement Plate Location I ; r (-- r" ,- i I . • °i t .,......---Existing g-� i 1 •__� i I ti • ' j I I 1 Kenworth Manufacturing • { i`•— I ` Building j i I wry Hiee Trestle a H • ' !�• 1u;; , i i ip. a � • • I Q . I-i `! a • • I i 1 1 Fire Tank & Z! C 5 __ • • •J Pump House _ o' J ( , �Zi �o : ! D 1 Guard Booth • ! 1 cog < , e . JI Future Division Kenworth Parking ! _ Office Building c L--—- • --,___ i • 7,iZ- ,. Paccar Parts Parking / �� e • / HOUSER WAY/), \ 1 i i 1 —7-----] /X Asimow-- - - --• __Paccar-Pa-r-s '• Paccar Warehouse PartS Substation Existing I 0 250 50 Scale in Feet Existing R V • HAR cROWSER J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 10 Settlement Plate Installation • Additional pipe and -4411: coupling as required Install plate and 5' pipe riser 7 to this point before placing fill ■ Existing ground surface See detail below "�•:..: Concrete;•.•:•.•, sand :.• ;:¢- 2" standard pipe 4 r/ 10 Pipe coupling 0111.111/ 01.10 Weld all around ►/A r///'i///%/Ir//.%/I I%//////////AI4 21 x 2I x I/4 plate 4 -I/4" holes A H/.IRTCROWSER J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 11 Pile Tip Elevation Contour Map , - . . . . . i 'L j '\.' •. , i •-- i''' .,- _-- GARDEN AVENUE NORTH ) Existing R & D 7 L — - 7----1 —Tank Farm --. i `.— Guard Bootr. i II-gb N . Existing 1 -,- g , ..____ --9°-6-0- Detention--7 01 g 1 • i . k "7010 1 Pond --, I i - . • . 1 . i /_Ji1I; •._ . ,...L-i'". Existing FWlaamstme Tarbelea tMmaetnetr ial .,,,. - j;i1g1 --..._--- .01-68 0i;1• NL,', .,N1.,), ----_....6.r..0 _ t, — -90-- in Feet dd Pile Tip Elevation Conto ur in / r I ! uilding.60 II N-60 , i,_. c: i ' g Pipe Trestle -74'6° ! ' mf ;co!. , . I ri.:! • : ;-,- • I cr,•! -i : C111.5.150 cc! • k 4 01 - — 'Pump House 1 • ,_1 .. . : ._..) cc g ! ! ; i ) , - Future Division . : . Kenworth Parking Office Building _ _- / . H. jl.. ----..„............2.,__ ------.:------..._ i : ;-k --__ ----, --- 1 , Paccar Parts Parking \------ . . I : . ---- , — _ HOUSER WAY/-X, I -1- I i /7/1- \ -daMMIP-14- 1- 1111mm--- 1 Paccar Part,. 1--- --- Paccar . • Existing I Warehouse. I L Parts SubstTiao-n---\ I I 0 250 500 =miming. gmmigggwggiggmmmgm Scale in Feet Existing---' N71 NJ/ . . . . HIIRTCROWSB? . _ J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 12 Laterally Loaded Piles in Elastic Sub grade •- . Deflection and Moment Criteria Free-H▪• eaded Pile Condition •• (a). Deflection and Moment Coefficients . Deflection Coefficient (AY ) . • Moment Coefficient (AM) -1 0 1 2 3 -C.1 0 0.2 0.4 • 0.6 0.8 1.0 p .,.- T '''. 1 i ^• 21 I i a2T • --- . a2T 2 3, • i _. j ! i I i i I . , 1 3 .r - •3T _ r/ 3T i 1 I ' I 4/ 1 4T 41 4T ( • . ' I . . . •Deflection Coefficient (BY ) Moment Coefficient (Bm) • • - 1 • 0 1 2 3 -0.1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 • 0 0 i � j i I I i i ' . T =:2 �••• . . 2 a 2T —� a 2T T , '� ���� • 31i 0 • ..3` . . • • L / , 3T 3T / • , 4&6 I•4 4T 1 4T I i 5 i I (b) Typical Deflection and Moment Curves Mxx Deflection ' Moment Pxx Pile Shear Pxx Y M at Ground Surface ►� + X-- -- ------- --X Mxx Pile Moment at Ground Surface T Relative I— Stiffness Factor v • n �� Q AN Loading J-2330-02 7/91 • Figure 13 Laterally Loaded -Piles in Elastic Subgrade Deflection and Moment Criteria Fixed-Headed Pile Condition . (a) Deflection and Moment Coefficients • - Defleonon Coefficient. A v -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 11 • • • I 2T -2 c I • ,/ i • 3T 3 / • 4T /4 . I I Moment Coefficient.AM -1 -0.8 -0. -0.4 0 0.2 • 0.4 • : 6J2 er_ _ . i a 2T p`=2`� \) • • 3T I 3 . • 4T /I • • (b) Typical Deflection and Moment Curves . . X—PAX . . •- -- - - -- • • -- Y --- — M- . • • PXX Pile Shear at Ground Surface • T Relative Stiffness • Factor D LOAD • DEFLECTION MOMENT --— — !LI/.Yi/ CROwsu1rn J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 14 • • • Subgrade Wall and Permanent. Foundation Drainage Design . • • • • Subgrade Wall . qQ,a 6' Min. Cover Nonwoven ■; Geosynthetic Filter Detail • '1° I Miradrain 6000 Subgrade Wall °o • • or Equivalent • • o• 'O ' Perforated Miradrain 6000 n" ='' •00:: � Discharge Pipe Q•o... or Equivalent ° 'o • a•• ° o•.o• - .- • • .. .8! ■; O:a0:o �:o• o ;° Nonwoven °•�•; . 13 Geosynthetic o :v•• Perforated • Slab °� 1 �; Filter $ ., Discharge Pipe • °o o;' .o•o.o a Q.d!,o' o 'o o,•• ., Q°p 9o.: 8rd o•O°• Qjo.ap oU;o:•o:Q.o 1 o• .il'• PoO:ri4.. I ' Footing See Detail • • • • • Not to Scale • • • • LI HN?TCROWSER J-2330-02 7/91 Figure 15 . . . • , • .'• . . . . . , . . . .. . . . . ,. . .. . . ., '' .. : • • 4 •:.•„" •:`''....'•-; ....•• .• :. •'. • ;.• •'.. ."'.•• .. •.. •••••• :‘• ' -If%,.•••. !' ••-. ;, :••• ••'....'•;••• ....••.(:••:•••••.:'''..•;..•'‘..••••••...2.,;.;!;:-.••3.:.... ..,,''....',...'•....:.ii'•.•,.:,.,'?"..'.....:.•,‘,0;.!.7....,•.,,''i,...,•••....:••,....,..'•.....••• ..... ...• % . . .... • • • :, •.•••'. . •:'.,•:,..f •,. : ,,••,!.'.:,',,it .%..:.:.,', i:s:,.,..!...-,,,...:,.....;1,.:;:::•:,....,:•.•1.:.;•,•:.,i,,,,..............,', :::.,,-....„-......:',..,.: ..-.;:,•,... •is.s.,,.... ....'.; 1...-ic.r.•,.'„....., C.:..t.:'.-.*;:i..;'...‘f•••••.!.''... ;f7.•;f.'..-•':•'?. ...';•.::r..,•••.....;4`...r.•:'.:.:A.::::•.'.....":rif.::(:s ::-•'::••::•:1....';'•'.;••'••••••••••.:••••••:• ..• ••• • ,' ,i.:..r•.i. ::I•••,......1!;%. ....,...c.i.•,...,-: .;:!•',,%.;.is.'. k'..,•:,..•;,;2;1.1,:•:.....i•i,.:y.t.,',..il. t.i,•..•••,?,.,..:: t•;' . :.;:.::::-...,:••••••;'.,••%•••,'•,;,:'••••::•-:.•..•.'..r....‘.,-..;.,....,i=•:':'••,......P;••••4?3••J:.....:...:',...,•..i•::•••F.•:•:... ..::•••:i• •.;!..14.;•1 ••••••,•',•;1;.•.:kr.:!....1.`.•'•,.';••.•:."'... '.'"'.i......',•'.:•.'..„.;.:•'',.;••••',.....,;.:..;••;:',,.•..:,';•••:•.•,.;...... . . t•:••;!!i•.'• •''•:.;•,.••''i'h:.i.:4;•.•.:':iil.e..'''61%.,i2i!..".'.,•;.'::!./4,...,;1:,1-;;;••.1..4..:Ire;•'61; :. •-•.'•-•••' !".• .:•'•.•••••••‘..•:':',"•••''.e`' .•••••••••••1'.2.: •'.1.'.•' 1..3'.'•!:' • .....''.••- .,: .••':..'''.r i''' :.•,,:•••1.•::..::4.:,..?1•.r.::;,t•:?Y:!..:''..%:•.'.4 '..•'.: ?.••• •::,••'...::`.• •''. ',,'..—.•'..• • . ,: !'... ..1;!%..:. "' ..."..L.!. z;1•..,;!I•f"•••ji•Zi.:4':;1'•%•-•;-•;iril.4.((;!!!.• ii7:11 .i.V:*;:1:1;•••': • :;• . .Ca.1•11;4'.. :' ••,••.:••.:. ...••';',••';':••••:::'..t-::'•••'•;$.••!•-'s• '•''.•••,'''....!..i.,::-.'.•';.;' •'.'••....,.':'•4..•;':1'..'1" •••••','•••'•••••••:',-,...::•‘":•I':::':''-.Y.-:i•.•••:"'••'',?,•',.•.::••...-•:•:';•••• ,.: ..!,..:.'••••••::.:-... • ;: . : • . ‘,.. .7f. .. ;•!i ..c.‘,;..y.,..4::-.V.K•ii.,:,55•:.)5'..1;0 . •;,..-,..t„-,..c,:.;•..,,,z).•:.....,:: .......,...,•,..,....,....,..,!;;;,..„.••:! ;7,:.:...,..q:..:,:j!.......:,..i.`•;•?:,..i;:„.„:.;•-..,,.. •......,:y.:',:,,••••••.'-.'.,..i:.: .,;-. .,........ •A•..::,:•,.,:::..,..,...,, ,,..,,,...., . .., •,...,;.... ..,,.!;•:;;,::!,•,.v::,,...,,. ,.... ,..... •... • . . r.? : ••••••• , .:pc,.. .....-:•.c.,. ..',',;,-;15.,!1.1.:.:. : Ii'.,•4'i-..,.:••,;;.4:,•,...',;,-... ,74;:',..• :',:•,i17., ';'.Q,.. -:-;.•"::.?::.,.4-::,:;-.:';...,,-...,,,::-;-.,...::',.::::s.....,...-.;:: .....i::;,..!:.:.:-,::,...,,-...,...,..i.:.7. ,:,..:,',,.... ..',... .;: ::•:": ;,..;L:.:.,.. ..,::.i....,;.::41?.'<.,..;:',','.-:;.i.',.';,!..":."',:si:',...n.',...:.,.:'.....".'‘..,.:..s........,... .,,...'.:;:.::,....-.: ": •-• . . 1 , 1 '..s•,':,...'..... ...tze,,..,:,: .;;;?-,......hpL..i,,:iftv.,,,.t“, ;;;;....1..-,...,.....,: i,„..1:...,;1,.. ;,... :..k.4.,,. -::,..1.; .:....,s,,,•••:: ..-,-:':.:;t".;,."-.:4.-;:•::.;,'',.';,`....i:'..;F.''...;si--i....•i...4:::,.."7.'''..."':.,:!.,.:;-.......,::: .::.:;';,.;,..,.:.,.;‘,..::,-;....:40,;;:",-ti.t,,,,.....$:f,.,...:y:-...;:..;.:•4.-,'' ..,;'::::: •;;.,;',....:..,::,:.:,.....,.,......'..: ,;..,...:. .:: , .:: . . ... . "•;.:..',:.•.-..t..... o,.,r;f'',':,....i.',.';',..7.:'):‘,?.0 ti.:1!.',,.,,-;:.„ei,v:/„f..!!....':..0::::....3.J• .t,w.4,-.0..-,.1-:::,..•, ... ili.,i-.":•..•,;..,:',;...,. !,‘.:::,...,;::,..". ;;',...',4...;..i:,..:-.', /i.:s., ...... ...,!..1.?.!..;....,,...,,......,..:,:.:_:.,...,..,:;:,,.,,.:.:. .........v....,,,,:,..,,,-:,,;,.!..;,,,;.......,....,-....-.."......; ...:.,...,.„:.....,.:.:1::...,,:k,, : ... - ...;'...t..:, .h..,.,:..4...,:k;;...p.:0.-..i,,,.41...e.,,..1.1,..., ,ii,,,...,,,,,,, .pw.r..);•!'•,'.....5.1..,„ .:',....:;........,••:,,, :‘•:•:••..•,, i.,..,!4. . - ......,•, :, , !..,....•r•.•'...••?,.....,,,'!; t !..'..--..,•.,...';••.•-, ....;•,•:.• ..::•.,•.••• ..••`.•-.. - !•: •••/ ''i..!.'..' i.';''':,.!,.:';'4,4'0.0'% ••••..:.r.;?):::.:;•.:1•.'C'•4••••rtf...4:.•.••,'' •, r...M.•:•.;1 .•',•....,...*; ,•.7...•:.;.‘;,' ,,•,.1. ••;•'?.•'.•;•• :... ....,•• , .:::.,•,`...••• ; ..;•'••'•.' . •'.';'•!.'‘••.•••:•••:•••••••••2.%",;.•....';'j•.•:.:e,.7••••:.,:..'. '. ...;..;.''.•-:• ..."•:'.'...••••°•..• . . • . !••.•.•;.., ' I••%•.;."••:....t 4..'i•3%X:" : :•;.•:•::i t!•.4'T:14':.',....:1!,i•?.•,.:•,%, :'t 1',.,$.• .,,,....'''.;,;. • ',..i.•.'..!...... I1..• •,..'••••., 'O...? /1..3.1..,1'. '!'•. : •,_,(6): .:•:•;•.' ‘:.'i.;.,.''• :.• •.•''..,•i•• i'•,it •:..:.....•.. ;•••:.'••. ; •• ::''••;•••. i••...;.....;•'•• •''' ...I.• '''.-:•••:''....../'.•••••'.•••'''•••:;:l,••''•••••• ..., :•1.•...1%....:?'":••.:.. • ';.s'•'....* ••'.'•'. ••• • • ..••.1.•' •.•••••••...1.:,,•'•;...•' .ri. •;••••;;'..")•'%:•.; ••:•••.'..•:•; .;•'!:1•.?..•:...44 :•/".P ''.•...%•••••••::!• '''•• •"•;'••••t.. •„.. • .......',.'•.•:.• •••.:•.;'•...; : r.:::.....,:.H.•.,.-....•;:•' ,••'::;.....•...:.‘.....•••••,'....: .•,,....',.•!.'.l'...... ..:.•-••; ..•••••;•....•-•.•.'•• .,.'„' . :, .. . ...''';..• ••'.%:'f; 41•. ••••••::.;''.f:,:'•:•••5.4.'...;•'•••: ...4!•'•••••''.:•:•••.V.P.':.••••. i'.1 • . M. ..• •':'•.•':.. •!::'' . .••, ••••.:. • ..' •• •• ,; ••• ••••...:;•.•••:•.•••.*:••• :•:‘1. ...••••• :•:'• ': •. s''j"*.• .'...'•'•'•.•-•.* :'..'.."; ••.• ...-, •• '•.••• • •.': ••••• . ... • ' ' • • ,1: %. •:•.•:,:!:‘.'4.!...!".1...-,...•,•••.••••••••.'•'7,;•'..'•••••.::•.‘'''''!' .''.......',..:•.i•::.:J5••• *.•(;)• M s'.•••.."...iii'.•.'•'• ,•• :.'.'.... .% .'. '•,••N ' '. • •••• ,••• • .. ••• . ...• !..•••'':•: •••••• ' .:.•••,i.:•........''.. .•.••••l ••••• ..::.1 ...... '.• •..•••_••.: • • ' • " -.:.'....; •'.. : '..•..;....'...........' ;•;..t..:.,:-.1'..•;-;.:;:..,. .'1..*......'...,...'-..:' .;.*:•,,...,"-:,';`'''!'i;,1`. •(;):7'. 7'...'...''•..:.•••..' :.• ..:.:•.-.•••••.'• •-..;':•:...1'y:'..'•::... f...?..•',...'.•''::..../.!'••'/.:%I.i'.,• ..:.:;••••'.':.•-,.:•r:.::::•.•;:::'::i-...*:?...::'..::;..,•..`1,',...•'. .:,:: :.;::.•'•••i:, ,•::•.,.':*.'.•.•::;:`;:i.'• .;!.••: •. • • .:(•!.: ...'',r -.:' •':.••. ''s '.:,...:,.••••'';''.:••••''':::;f.:.''''.:::•i;:•?;:,:!..:''.;sic....::!....;ii i:;:.:' 'It:i. • , •si...';‘':::::':ii.....:.".1. ':,...::::.•!..:-.;,'Ir'.'t.;.....,:,..:•.-.1•:•'...1:: ,,:. ....,17..,:.:**: • ....1;::fi:ji.i.:*::iffi'•",,:.••••, .''...,,'•..,..:•:,,•••;• '.•;',..' ...,:i..,-,;•:::,':•!;,;:-....',. . .„ ..::' ::.. , ,.,.:*!i:;•:,: :,.'..:::,:, ..,......, ! • , . . • ..?,:. ,t ...;..':.•;.7.i1::•'!...i•••:..:i.i . .:..... !.,ic . ..;. :e..' [i;.:::.k,•.;:: :::...:' ..• -:•......:21.,.... ;.':1'•'.';...•...:.. ...ii.l...': .4 . ..:: :•2!:'•i i: ;••••)-: ;t:')2;t:;'::.•: .••••'!'...::7:;:::;;:::- ..';'•"'":::: '•:.•!-:::.•!.;;:'..,V'",; -•' ;?:•• ••;:•, .•.'.. .''...z.''';::::. ..=:•':.:.:::•:..'. -••:.:. '' - . ..- .. t f,' ,'••• ','•,': :',2'7;3-::-,-.: s"-..;‘,,It',..;':...•';'..1 t'.:"I'"••••i.',.":.::..-1:".".':'',•:•.•''.iV,C-,': :. ...,`•,-„.c.:,:•••.•,''.... :?..,• ":'.....'.,....f'-'...:i '';''':;•.....•:''::'' ',.:;:• .‘,•••••':••':.?".v,•'•?:••••':... ..• '•':`';•'!•.1••:-.••'• •'' 1:.;1••••-••••••••1••••• :••••''''•••••%"'•:'•••••‘1 '••'•••;•• :•••• • •'•' 't ' ... • • • 1.'........!.. ;.1.,...'''•:.•••:';T.•,',....'1":::•••‘.;•"!;;.. .....4•p••:.4...7',..).;-;.$..-;....;:i•tilL':-.1...'i ;;/;:'...••i'k1.5?...i.S•:.2:1i......•;;ij. -,•1.4.!..c.:/...•''.\iffl....!•••!7!••••4::•..........,.....!;;;;,':r.'•r!';'•.:J:ji•:.;,:.•••'.3..j,:::'•i;:;-•.."::;•'•••?f,i.•(•••;•.'••••:';'.1.,.'•.:•;'-•••••.••••••:••1!i";•:.••......;•'•' •-•;•'-...;-.•'' .'•••••!;...',.`''. :•-':•:::.;::`.r..!:''',...• :-..''.;•*.-:-..' ....':•:;: ..,':••';•.::*•' .:..•4::,:ti:!`;:•. ••;.....'. .!• ...• . • • :• : '.: ) • ..-"•': -;;:::'7•',.:'-';•:::.•':•tfru'': -.....Ar.'., ...,,• . ., .,: 1=1 •••:•:-....q•••:..,:.t....., •:•••••••,....;•,•it,':::,••••:..s,-:-•::7..:.'.•-- :•••t. .•:;':"'•,• . .1:: ',.::::-..: ,.;'•:. ,j.:4-'•ii,;.••*.::•t'a••:•:,.:'s T..;=:••• :,:•'.-.;•;'...,••:,..........''... ,.;..; ,..,: ,,',;;' •', t. ..•• .•• .. • ....• 3,, !'.,.. •;'...-1,..........!...1L...",,•'-,?,1,:: :1 •;••42.....a '•:•'k.:f:•••4.•'.qt.'.:±t,5•",:::./..••• 'It 4,','a"..-•••••••,‘ ',...:. ••••••:'.. );:'.7•....,.•..'••.:•:,-.: :',•4'.'•,'•••''...•;.!.‘...:,.i•.A .:..!:.,..1..'.......:1..-',...'r.„•''...•".:,•,'i;•';f:...../•,..••;•;..•.•?.',..•'.: i••••.;, .. . ••' ...';,...,:•.•2.••',•,•,.`. •-_,s. ,.,•:.. , - • ..•- ,., . ,...., ,i•••4:•,..: t......,:i,...j:;.••••;..7 ,...!..•.: .:.'•,: :'...,:.•:•;:.t'i•••••'''•:i, '..1.•,.',"-:•i. :2* *: .,..•';1'......'•;'tr;% . •'';'...•'....?:'r 1:',..'...-:..?;•-,./.;,',/•'',"!.....:.'..•;r1;;••••.*•.:::,'.••'.1.?...,',...4•J':;,..,`2. ••••'',...:';••;:'.••:•"••,.....!. •....t'r••••:',,k'''';''.•,,,,':..•• • • .'.. ' . . ..' . .... . '''''';'':%!4'r....‘ '':'.. ..:;."-:;;'.2.•'•.':I!":i.;i;.. ..:.'' •:.•;Z).;.\:'•'7:'.::,'.•'•;*:•::. '...'::...'1,;.::,,L,"!:';',7•;,.:!.../;.,',,'''':;;?;11•.:'!.......1..!:,•if.'j;....?.,?,3•;!,..y.c...:,.,, . ..,.. ,....):.,..,.it,.., ,•;•.:.,,.,:: .,•,,, .;•:::;..-.,•;•,,:,.••....,......,..‘,...; 1.:...:.;t.:...1,,,'........ .,,. .. • , .. 0 ... '•,....,....i.... . i.r:,.......:::::....:,...4::.......!::; :: ,-..!1. :.t.i.i....,;...1........ ..i ; . .;-.,... ......:.;:;:i'?,;,-4..,...71,5).(..,„;:i...:;.:i ,...:.5...:....N..,,.,:i.._;,•..:.ri..::,.....: ;,:!....-::.,...,....!„....., . ,., .,,...,.::.:.,....i.r:,...,...;;;,....,1.;:y.;-...i,;,:..,..,,. ,.. 0:1;...., . .,;...? 1, :•„,.::,...,:...t.::: .:• ,;;:r.,..;..i.i..t:,....,. ...: :.i:1-,.i.i..;y;12::i:.....::...,...1......:...,....: ..,..,....,i,,.:,.,..;:,.....-..•••••,.. :Ii7.),....:,..7,..,..:1/4•.-:..:....,.:.:...;,...,........::::.:. ,. ,,..,-. ,i..,..,. ....:1 ... .?:1•?-,,,.:1-:•,:i:,,,;•!•:!...,•.., , ,... .....,..-..;...,;,....;.. ;.:::....1-...:i.,,,;. ....-...,.....?;.... .•;‘,.., ..,.%::.,..:,..,,..,_:. ,.: .ii,..1.,.. ,..:Ii.,...1.,..........,•;,-.,...- ,.,;..,.r:.::...., ...F... ..:,....5)._,;....:._.....,.,,c.........7.,,,......,.;......i.:..........._,..:7 • .... -: .. • :.. • . ..i., .„;....„. .:,..;.,.,.:-..,-.: :_.): ::•:rie7.f.,g•:E•••••,7•. .-.1•••"4 .'?•!X,.i.:•:-.Ftfl.:',,?:•'•1•!-;'.i•-.'•:';'i...2•1•::::' -i;".•:-i: ':',../•••••;.:....,:'... ';,•', ..,!....; .,::4:::•::'"'•.::).•;t:„,',-,:',!..'i•!,, :": :'•";::::', •: ";....:•:!.4:.1.1:-!.;t''..:.;1:;''.4,:!::,...•:..:,;::::,,.....!...::.'s: ,7:•i-':•R.'„...;..;,....,...i:,. ,!;..-'..i: .. !&•i.,:::.:1.••••'.;', ,i.: .;.. 1.......,:,...v.w.i.it,;,.. .ir:;.:0 -1,,;....t?..14.:?4 •?,;.i•s'•:•..14,..'.•!',.......;•::t it"....4.,.!•!•i.7.....•.i•i:'.'; .4,."'•-•-•••••••'/Pe'l'',..... .i.../.: •:••••'•:•.',..-1'..);;:;:'•111,;.>r ,r..),•'-i't•,!..': .';,.,:•;;.:••1,,:'9:, ,,,.1....: ,;.•fA4i.•,„ii ;,,i•,•.i. ..i....„;:;• ••;;.•t•••,,:. ...,;,... •••,..•.!:•., ....; , ;.:..4.%•.4....:. i i .'.-. :-•: ';"..1.:..V.f.e. .:...e.,:',.' 1•(;.„,,.••••,',:'A.;‘`..,.-',4 L'•‘; 4'5.-!•••',..ii"ti••• !,\.i.:•;•,','',:i"-•i,;`:1;•id•!•::ii'f'•:.;4 - V::;•-;,.‘•1,:-.'<:7:'•••4 'F','''''.‘t.:.:gle' '-'•‘;;;;;i::11:1‘;:'.':.'•;• .;.r.'4X.: ,J'!it' ..0.1.,.;•:;i:f!..:i';''•'4 u.,• '4;'''.',;.•.:•::: :.:....% %1:4;,';,•:::..1'...•••••'''•::•'''; ':.: '••'''''• :.• • •j•'•• • •-• ..'',,:.•%•:••••;:i.r:,:/.•,;if,Y-:,:ifF•;:••4,!!•;Z.,:-, ,t.',•;,•••r:, ''..;s: ..'4•7;;:f.,`..t.:•.••••••erf.,-;•:;,•:. 04.',.;?•"1.r.•:'1•1,1;.,•- ,•••:•••,:;`:!,,,i,•,...,?,:.';v.•..f.';!;`1'.,'.. •'4.;:';',' 14,'..,i'.,',::•'.7.,.:{.(,t•V g 4 t'. ••••'•,,A 1''''•• ',VP-L'A,",(,,t,*,:‘..,1••'0, 4'IV.'•;•••,'• INA I'''.0.'2.....,I t. •''.. • :. •• • •'i• '' ;.:••••".....4"?' Cir5-..,1g4'..9A.;•12:JiN. l''):!-Y.ing.41":1•Pi,..,;,i:;;.(17v ;' .?::'•;;:t'f• .:,..1.:11%;•••-i:!.."...i.).:; : .•'''.:o''''''‘•:; ?.i ti .j7i.l..;i";16i4: :, .4....t".'1.i....r,....,1:.'i...:., ,::, .,;,...i..k.,..,.,..-.,. :'...::j ::‘..1:!..:;:.•:',.....:i:-:::''.`"fli1.4'4:iii!.....ZiA`2,01: 45.14,14:1;i1:14,1*.t.:al.A",4-2'.e.,::•Tt;'-'3:.'1,14i:: !0*:::1.4.fi'?",,';h1.14W.,t'it..:.:%,:i:V..:4,3'..?;:1:14. ,•k,:7,./.Ii4fi,i4rittl'i,..a.,,,i. 44.ic.9: 11;41;g4tk*Cifill.i..P..„45;:,.::-17.;;:!;';;711,yvi,:, ,!.:;:•.;:',A-i`•!;4:,'.'.....n I. .'4.;:iit.."-:•;'.;111'.1,'C.':ir'''''.V;.'-'$*??7(7;:24'..3-14ja0.;',3%;"'','. ,.c4ftt-e.474,:11 $ 4;4f1:: :144;t51;Rotpp. 4if ;tigir,',.,,,,,.-,.*fil, 't''.',4 '..a,01.4,4figltatigiii.ap,15,6•Twied'AIWAY.171;,,t.. .i...'.,..,i.:.."91i!i:.;',. twif„.i.4.1 .0 .....; .,..:4:‘,. : ..:/r.w,-„,,,,nq kiista7.,•:' 27.1.1Z,C,."“,,,,,,. ,_,_14„,,,,t,,,,....,,,,.,,,p!,;:s•• 44,0 ,,,..,...,,,...,..:,,A." ... , .,, ,•-m-,t.Jo, , v,,,,,,,,, ,4,..,,,,,ie,4..„.}-.!::-(4‹...141:::,,44.g .,,,.....?.,.-...y:5p. '-i,-;.tx;,f..p.....;-4,11.:ktztt.4,:igor kwiNN,..."...," .?::.,,,,,,,,.,-v 2:7. •-,R'' l'i'.1''4, • eirt...4,1.11,•-•,*444`04'.•-1.X..' .A.':i41.64:444`... ..7.„7„, *?, l' 1 441.74,i, 01/0,.ilq,e‘ivq. 'skit;-.491;;:.:e.,'Tj..c.,.)q*...-,',...:;.4.:,‘,.L.:',•kg:,14,. kqii,<;44r..N, \,.:A.*...'.g,,. ..rI.(44.1..41,41‘Nwit.,:a . .. ,,.....t,:„..1.,0.41 ,7-,,.,.: '', ' •:.':••• • ''., .4.'.••. ' "4'..0,:••,•4•::• . -1'b;•.!7!‘•,t; 4,"/•: • - *-• "_4y it• •••!p f••.**IS••IV'XIOi•4:('''''14.1 .4 .t7,-it: ti.V cit. '''." I „iy i14-....,:lrli.' 1A.7i'r•;•,4:. "4-4* .:V'0,*1%•t.'1'''"Aii14..;'-. , J1/: :'•,' • tv;•,•4'''''‘'.1,,,...,11-1t"7 tof •fr .. • -•- - : , 14-:;fri.j:;s.,Y.tx- ,R1.1,vtirl.e0.14-if...iiii.x,,•:\q, •'its:4:i '... -4r.ii: -1f.-.4,0#,w,c;e:1:441..L.64A::4 i..st•• .....-.:?..til-.4,::,..,...-„A..A.-.:.,.,44-1 .. 1 ..,...: . ..:1,4151:„;,, , ,,,:i. .. ''is; .. -i- - •.`ii:tovr,4.*ii.,,,vg-gliil,.. ,: i-.:,f/.17:P..‘....., 61,...I. V -4,... '4'4 • :,f's‘"A--411,,'1114'grig,.'0001.R.,M1 .,.•141 'CP;: '''',• l't 4.ttA Vs,ai. : . jet 4,.,...ri ,-.N;,,,,e.;,),,ci ,,, . ,„-,/..c" ..t.... .c;,1/4.:!:.,:t1./1.,;.. .4....V•!;.,..,`,,.-.3••:,..';r-71,-.'I,..•-1...•:' !.t1''.14'k2i••,1'0..'#4`.I"!.`t..1..'.4,/;01.'.,.x..t.•.•t4i7••..,t.;-.:,i•::,,.''k.,.•e..'j.•o•,1k•.,t.,'..'-n.,.:.•:1.,4:.'':,5._i;'`1',:.-:1•.:..,'.1?/t.7'..•:1,,!•. ,,g..'^..;.•::t,.:".fe,'::•:,7-:..•,Sf,Av';e•;6 5:r'•.7'_.',:..'.1,f•''11,.1s1'17V0'(r4..V..,I,)Mt..,0i'viii.4 ).Vt•lAl.,c:?it.ir•',N,*•,t,g,7kiqf4r0:..•'•.4..;:":'-'tf,t,.'ee•‘4t'.,,••A..:':..if''-•:`J 4•^,t4..ter*/.i.l4f,i,''•..:,.'.:,•.:c.rtl:t ii.,''1%.‘`.ixp-;1.. 3 4!:-1,?...‹:Fa.'::,;r.:‘..!.•'1•,• '•iA„.1i,.`-:-4"i.,;-)E...;..`1.!)..,':•',];''''...,4i',..•','1•".V,',:,,•,;,.•.:•:i•4:iz:i•:';,;•...-.•.•.-.!%:.!r"i.T'.;.4.1-•%•c•,-4!,;...,,4 .;-:,.1•.•?t1:;•.••.o.'.'.t9.•.'-1•?T,;7'.-!iX,,:'%:%i\1•.l1--.1.§',...1..‘,1:/:'";n.4i••4•'•,?•',.!..':!::,:.....•.:P.•..•.,):1-,•::.%,!':-,:r•''.('•''...iC.'•;•.•r,.'`.:f.•;C.'c•::'•.....t:.,!...1...Y,,.,a.../;.:',•.:-6.''04',,;..•.',V•-.•.,,•!:,.4j!'-‘1-;':Y;:.:'•,.I7A,..‘.'4'.i•:.•.‘.,,'•;Z•''n.••''4;)o•'.:.!.i,I,•.•'i t*-e..•.•.,.-V"''',•:•'it..e.:••!•t•:.••:.f'i`..'."*',...'!i%':;.:'0"(;',. •.1•..•,.-:;'i.F4..•C'.•...'':•i'•:.'?,..:,-f.*....'.:.)!..•.:1••''•••;'';:4..1'.Ng•.:;r;'::.'.•,•'•..''?,:.'?:•-.%:'-•;•4:1,.•:•;•4-.•;'''';:.;i•`;•'."ss::.tf.-.:'•.!..-',,••;?••'••':•'.i•::.••.?.•,.,•;-!.'':1.1.'•...•':,%',•'•.••'•4.%'.'•'•!.;•i,.,•-,"•..•':• :•••;i-','..•.•,'..•:.••..''•.;...r•..''.;',.,:,•':',;•-,:..1;..,.:'':..:,;.:..•X:.:1••':••••.•••••.:•''-'.''....:'::s'':•'•%,•..'....-.••r•i, . .:i ,, , '...'t.•••• • .•': •• 'f•'•••'•••••':;•.•••.••••;!';:••••-•''•".. ••-•':• ::.•• ••••••'.,: .-• ••••••;•• ••••4 ••,,A.:••::.•••••,•'',• . - ! ,, If! -,,..-k. • *.,,.,•!••••,.,•••.; . .' •- .t;, • • .:; •,.,: ... ., : •. , ,. . •. ., . 'i ,•;:. .'• .:;•• .!..''...-:'-•••;:',.,.;::!.'-';',••••.:1',r:.I:•.:::,:"i":(T.' '`'.'f',-'•••'''...'- ''1'':4':. 7.'••••••••' •••••••••••';''' ••;-• ,,,• ! -"'. • "-'::'•'' •;':; ': '•'; ' ..•-..:;.:':.:;.:•:7.•..'••-.! ..,.....,2...S., ::„ :•.';•':.:.: ,,'•,,•,,....,;•;' ..:'.... -,, , . , '':•••: '.• . . . ' .: :...'. ,......••",• •• •••• ): ...1.. !;.1',..:1;`,-!...;1.!::, ,,,.:i"•!. , ...:'::•'::';•,;,,',',:.,.,:.. ..,,::.-.0..;:••::.'• 1.•••': .:• .:, •;.:::'s•;.? i...:•,t • I., .. ' .%.: •••• • !•• .: ';• •• •. ::•-: .•'•:',...; .. .` •'. , . • ,. •-.....: ,.. . .- . • • : •: • ••'•--.•'•'• '''--1: : "' . ''''''•-•‘.!•.: ' :•••";:•••••.•• • •• ".... '' 1;•• ,4 - • •• •. •".• '' •,. , ,...: •., •• • •.• .'...'•.• . • -;: '• • • :'••• ",.i'•` ,!••••1:.. 1•;:,•.A.,••:;•-•:::: ;.- •••••• ; ' :•*:.,.'.•.',• • ''.•..•••• • ......' •' .:\• ,• ..1.:•. '., 1. •--•.;•• ..' . : ,:•••:;,'' ...:,•-•' . •'.. •• '., .. ",• :'.;: '.•1::.•"'-• e••••••:; ;.-,- '•-.' '..•..';':‘!•.'i...:•i':' ?:f.•-..•';,.,•'':',1,:,•••'•e'..',-:.• •..,• -.-. :'.:, ,,' . • - •• • .• .. - . . . . . .. ,•, .. ......,.. . .. • • .. .• .... ..... , .. .• • ,:.. , , . . .. ••: ..• . , ..,. .,. ..,-.•,.. • ., •• , , • ); •,•• • ••,....i.. •...'‘• ........ : -..-...:.! Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ATTACHMENT 1 OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPOSED KENWORTH TRUCK COMPLEX Our understanding of the proposed Kenworth truck complex is based on discussions with SSOE and PACCAR during this final design phase. In some instances, when information on the out buildings was lacking data obtained during the draft report preparation were used. If any of the conditions have changed we recommend allowing Hart Crowser the opportunity to review our recommendations. Manufacturing Facility Figure 8 illustrates our understanding of the different slab loading conditions. There are basically four loading conditions: - 70 psf office slab load; • 150 psf general slab load; ► 750 psf storage slab load; and • 1,000 psf storage slab load. Column loads are estimated to be 200,000 pounds. Tank Farm It is our understanding that the tank farm consists of: ►} Five 8-foot-diameter, 20- to 30-foot-long tanks; and • Pumps. During our draft geotechnical study, it was assumed the tanks were each 50 tons in weight and the pumps had a slab load of 200 psf. It was noted that these loads may be reduced upon further study. Flammable Material Waste Treatment During our draft geotechnical study the building was assumed to consist of the following: Page 1-1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ► Four 12-foot-diameter, 800 psf tanks; ► One 6-foot-diameter and one 61%-foot-diameter tank; • ► Column loads of 221/2 tons; and ► Slab loads of 375 psf. Tank a ' Pump House The tank and pump house consists of: ► One-half million gallon tank; and ► 25- by 25-foot pump house. During our draft geotechnical study it was assumed that the tank had a 2,400 psf footprint load and the pump house had a 300 psf slab load. Pipe Trestle There is a proposed pipe trestle from the manufacturing facility to the flammable material waste treatment building. For the draft geotechnical study we assumed the following loading conditions: ►- Each trestle supports 50 feet of overhead pipe; and ► Each trestle imposes 50 tons to the foundation. Guard House There are 2 to 3 proposed guard houses consisting of: ► Estimated 100 psf floor slab load; ► Five kip column loads; and ► 1.4 kip/ft wall load. Detention Pond It is our understanding that the detention pond is to be a 40,000-square- foot concrete lined pond 10 feet deep. Page 1-2 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Substation • At the time of the report no loading conditions were known on the substation. Page 1-3 • • .L ,r ' :. .'Y^ :r,' 1 r r. i; ':\ • tr'• r1. f 1 1 r v •7� arr 'r; J -z J ;n ,l.....,. .",.:•••••! ,:..,..,....,•,...,. ...,..., .- .• . . . . • a, ^r,I r•'a ' ; t„,..., i',• .M• - • fl•' • f� • , 'lU• �•1 1_ •,..,.... ....,. .:•••„--....:-•,.;:;.i.. ,•':: .:...,•,•:..... .. .[•,..., ,•"•- ....,• . . . . ‘ 1 • • • f' . t^r. : :,7 •3, •i:r 1�1• S' •1 , U• ,A 1 ), _ r•.• r'f,.• .Iw•J •, rl • I. S :1 • r'f t., J. , Y• f '.a .t. •Y 1. �:N x• r 3ir r:t, :'1 1 d .•i,• t: :A • ▪ 'i. :A ..1t �.j. 'am, •J' •sue '�Y `i' .Y i r ' ,'Y • -•r' .t�?.• v'i' ..w• t'is 1 ':F:. rl,a... • • • • r :'tt • ,-'�: • • ii i L' l• ;,•,' N • ip { • .1 r' •f ,i '7 4I �• u' ./ Ala° ��.. I �i • .w' t '�F ry v.yam. l f[ { L Y. p r, rr;,. ( }!.• r •1. • {▪ ..1'•,�� .,..;vat'��� .l �" �.r. r� • .l r,r::•, .`•�:. 1'ram .,D'• I: t• S•.yy{�`• ,hf a\.. ..,1::- .I:�'.... :'1'. 't J"'i'' .,•`�: ,r,;.• •.i. i:i4. .:• t r• :6•• f a'1' `L •,r' A' Y i '',`.,•'1,` • ). "' .t, .is•'.t..:,:' :j�. ';+•':•L .I'' .�1`: � .G,'.I r.4•••T. h11 {h •:r.J\; '•it •i�� •,:S_.•. i:j:;\-.X, 1 ,-j'I r 1.` L .t1.;• �:rf:,r. s I� 'r•r. •a: ��� J• f. �f•. .?' L r .,(': ':k.. ;t .,b a:v[,'? +,. .t:.' •i7:' .,i,J' .t ),.w, n• •s'•.. 'r• '!1.;1'. J?!'� � a°7i+' h„?1' <, Jr.i ',. .S i-r. F• t+_6.t;..ti, .y.. :f ..r: r:J'L" r ,n •Jlr Y \ ,t..R :•'i t••�r.•, !'t� .-W. 'i t./• •t ,r." >'•�..• ,.c :1'.� s{�.'!•, tR(:�• ,,.,c; 1 \ i'%." f •f1 .5.. .A' .r''Z.� .a •� .,i, . :.� •tN .!, ddr 'At- �S{��, fJ .S•': ..31' 'C4 i'ir'7i11"� .�..I .J:' 'd If',.. �.^ J I,.n S'• 7 'a, f L:•!•.S:': i.f .A.,.11 i•i: ,�. t:�` j'.S f .1. Jn ,Z'Y` a j ,l :1 .PYq 1•;.,. .•1• ti'J .J• ,J,:r::.' Jw:; -,. '•� ') •a.. r:Z. Hr3:7 n i., :Y. >�i•:' .:7:`:+�: °r' 1.. :r: s.' i•1 i ::t].�.. ,�': J4 ti .'tiS' J) tP. •i•° • 5 40 , r.. .('FYI. :1. �. '�51,• .+ if �4' .`1 .,,. ''sJ' J' y <t' ,+a�'4 d 1'i.r jy� r I .3 Y Y,. :r:` r•,5'4., dY, .l 'rNv�' °4, t3 n'. .l''. •�s. ," ^rC• n -L=''•-... h• .. � ,:?: :{'.. 'x �?, - �.N .+�'P�.. '7 •la.. �f:''� � .' 1' r� + .1'� `r.' ='� :^h�' tt ^,, qq.0 .t. •�.L z�:fi'.'a' ^"t W.'. c: s+ .1:- .`'F';J•z..,... ::�i.•. ,,"=r.. � u a J!"' ...1.tt .•!..•''t., ..i rA ,, ?w S ..)•' }f:•' ,y;:•+.• ..r. li J,r�•^r' Li J; a.T ) _ ,..f•.. ,1a.+jlC f:wi ,. 7�� tr ,fat "l °i•."• �.� .r• :'A ':�''+�•.) .f, ny,•,.. .,r ,r.' _t _ '.i t ,- ',�, a•.' :i ::•7: v ::4'R ,� h! ;43 . .G��'�tdiJ, F -7fi''�'' ,u:•. .: 1 ;� tn,. ••.r a.- ..1.i-:C`a ,4 �+1��=' t .f .f_,, G }, ,� ,y.• .«}, ." :a ,,:, :� a':�•':' .Y•J'.]sir t. :'7` 'a t J •t. ,:a .v , T. 1" f! '-7- ':' ', f'r ..[,r.:.'+.,i ,j, j i di �: ..tnva�,r `xt' „j .1.'.:t: .t. 'Y.`r<' ▪ -at'^' ,`t n 1... .!.1•^tt ��. Jf .., :1• y.�r:'..� :•'.t,l' .d^... +'A�• `t�-•' ..r �:.Y+J:'.'''.tJ .t rl tt:"r' t,�; S �,• .4+1 • :l•a�..'r'.��1%' t, n; ^`) -C..t' '' r'. `y'y. ,t. r:• om'' .f:" :� •t'• .•/' ff" 4 rev '\.�'/� •.,i: , is ., F" �y, o�• - :!.+-s' ,y: ,J•'K.;`°t. `� •.t.r.^ „).r • •s•' y i} _t•rly n y[ �'ss• 1':.= a, - :,.,' .�• r ,• ..� ,�, Y;. �P is :/i'1 f tt :.d.p` ..(' tll'. Y�✓ i'Y, ,:,Yt', %' .1....• 4 y.r.'� •{ht J'. •:ItSR°.. •.<''f d•�d. .l :.+. .l ., }._- aJ,, -Z, -•y .G•;i .Ir;.•_:, :i:..• VR .h•." .i'., il! r. l ;3r':iJi ..l' „''.^+,.: 1.. .\.^2t nt r .,.r r' i + P� .r_ Y . •. 1 '% "iIr e rC. j ( ".'•. . ,J.;6. 1r.�_, u.. , ^i'r.:�' ••h: ,,,,11Y•.d'-' .. :,I"�`h •'r r_+ .,y¢an ..\ ,_. !::i•I f.-'df.".. %'dv .f .,.,ate- . ,...,,,, f•r.�;4�.;��•!,.:r,� ;..,.. -•'r. ; ]•.i;,,r • .•.T•t'. i r,, ,,.•,. {4.1t .i YY� . : '•.r.:' 'Vt'. .r,.-::•.• ar ,°Pi' '�7f¢a :...• J,•ti'lu Y •.o-. 'b' w / .t,. t 1. / rU!l',4. .ri.Jiir. '4,• .7•' •'��.'., ',,. ��5. ,r..: ':9::d'I:•4 kr•�r� +f. ! - i),` ,SL. a y i t•, + 3. r;.3';;,;TJ.,;..,, ▪1j ,.l L ':'a' a�[d' 'i :) j ,n y`, st° jr• yp ;: .. �,, r, _.t .,�•.. �Y^7!'• r t!. ^a:.y� .�,- �+�i►r�.r,Z'. .,,,.. •S .;, ar '�y:' n ni,..f� f• i _ '- 'F.^. ". n — '?: k• is ,1. S=1:T "� .r ._r ':,•.. �:f:t:r •Yr. ,4. .-/ %' .,�'••+1' a "i ,- , r;., ..4-. .tl :�� .i'•i. 'f ,f i'l J' x i "gip i�_::., ,'�•°'� ',;r r. .-J° � •ti•• 1 1 r�' L. ',: .Y 'Asp r.• .r^^.a l'- L. c: •fir •,J, a �2+ 't• /\Y. t y, • l rL� �^ • �i 1•• .i� �r �rf •-i' 7a••1'".• yiir $I:l' 'r y • J. .y.a• y .�,t\'�: V t' J 1 �7 9� 7+ J... l`, p,,.j.., ,.flij it-., ".• ,:'.T'!:C�. •./•i: ,;• S' ,_ ,'%•`.:.'� f f'� .\ :Y,J. 4.�• , d• .r ,�• T 3. .tk�: •f's,•4,t.•✓ ft,.. ••:t•. • •.,, i' t: .i, °.'hr.. ..]..' '•-i, :;i•::•j 1.. 14�'�- •.•J I'; rt#li} •-1, ,. :i• .r .•,t,:'' ;'�.rr:c.:• v • ^',•i )� jr.: 1 ,;r' .,d• •,+' r. ') ,riti.t••:C" ,r.•1 •L • J" "x� •n+ 7' .',. C:'•:` J..' ��tt • �lr. stt t s T •'N? i • 1 t ;t. '1'�'A '1�r °t' • .J! "t. is _J .i, T ''r •t yyy .t �. a4 �• +[1' .M... .f. ri'� .J J. t J .t' n•• �k '7• :•:iv C t .. ,•'`j:+ is 1''` "tr .�. •i:="i:'�.,;".. t L< .i;'' 'Y. .t. } 1 ait i ''r- - r _ s r - Z- } �A • �i''• r' "t• �J,, .J! t ,r,. 'l u oLl. •, v ','. r. '7:%` ▪ is��^ ,T k 1.• .y,,. 1, 'f°mil_ :_7` -••t; i • J i• 4 rfT� - • `Zt: •�I ir• :�'' :S�i '•S h J' ,' 'i': ,[ ��. xrt ;li''%: ,' Y•,.r. t'• 'i?�J �a•M1t ..>' j. �n iT ••a'4'' qq '•, y r /: :ITa•. Jh ,( .:, 1'! ..s:,.. •.:��: %i i1+. Ir•+ ::1, �•J� •� t`� r•�,f i9 <•! �r ,•i.', B+>-',,s J..,s ! .p. •tr•d .•i� � [f' 1 5j •::Lti•, • �s•�, i.�`'� 'lip ..J•:T, a�c. .+-1 3;.�. j'::.,' ]t.; .>♦ - ,,) t fi••• 4• f•:•• Ti ]{ r. i' -:, •,R, 'r? r ..-. •','t;ii'j Y1' •'.' ..{•4J: F .,l.. f.. • �.'•'f: ~r•''t. •.•.l:ctt,tit � -tr ,F• 'A�: air., ..i.,'.[: ..7'' ,L' :•t •,I • r • .t. S1', • :u. • a Y -1•° L µ. • tY �i'• .air• - 1 `i'•. a' at L•Y'E:'rI .r� •I .r :r: 1: • 'ail • .t. r' 'i' Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ATTACHMENT 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions were based on 36 deep or moderately deep explorations; 17 hollow-stem auger borings and 12 cone penetrometer probes all accomplished by Hart Crowser and seven borings from previous studies (see Figure 2). Two profiles and one cross section were completed based on these explorations (see Figures 4 through 6). Subsurface soil conditions interpreted from explorations accomplished at the site and soil properties inferred from the field and laboratory tests formed the basis for developing the site preparation, foundation design, and construction recommendations contained within this report. The nature and extent of variations between the explorations may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report. Details of the conditions observed at the boring locations are shown on the logs included in Appendix A, and should be referred to for specific information. All previous Hart Crowser borings not contained within this report can be found in report J-2330-01. Soil descriptions below will refer to the four main soil stratigraphic layers when possible: ► Upper Interbedded Soil (UIS); ► Intermediate Sand (IS); ► Compressible Clay (CC); and ► Deep Sand (DS). See the Soil Conditions section within the main report for specific soil characteristics of these four units. Manufacturing Facility ►- Interbedded deposits of loose to medium dense sand, soft to medium stiff silt, and peat exist in the upper 30 to 55 feet below the ground surface. (UIS) ► Ten to 25 feet of dense to very dense sand with sporadic peat and silt layers and thicker stiff silt layers. (IS) • Page 2-1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 ►- Six to 35 feet of stiff to very stiff clay to clayey silt to silt. The clay is thickest to the west and thins toward the east. (CC) ► Very dense sand exists at an elevation of-35 to -85 feet. As seen in Figure 12 the sand is deeper toward the west and shallower to the east. (DS) In borings GT-15 and GT-12, dense to very dense and very stiff to hard materials were observed at elevations of approximately 0 foot. These stronger materials are roughly 30 to 45 feet higher than was observed in borings to the immediate south and west. Tank Farm The closest subsurface data for the tank farm is boring GT-14: • Fifty-five feet of Upper Interbedded Sand; over ▪ Fifteen feet of Intermediate Sand; over ►- Thirty-five feet of Compressible Clay; over Deep Sand is at elevation -75 to -80 feet. Flammable Materials Waste Treatment The closest subsurface data for the flammable materials waste treatment is probe GPR-4: ►- Fifty feet of Upper Interbedded Sand; over ► Ten feet of Intermediate Sand; over ► Twenty-five feet of Compressible Clay; over ► Deep Sand is at elevation -55 feet. Tank and Pump House The closet subsurface data for the tank and pump house is probe GT-11 and the northern edge of the constructed profile F-F: j ► Forty feet of Upper Interbedded Sand; over ►- Twenty feet of Intermediate Sand; over ► Fifteen feet of Compressible Clay; over ► Deep Sand is at elevation -45 feet. Page 2-2 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Detention Pond • The closest subsurface data for the detention pond is test pit TP-106 (see Hart Crowser J-2330-01 report for log): ►- Four feet of loose to medium dense Fill material; over ► One foot of stiff Peat; over ► Loose very silty Sand. The test pit was completed to a depth of 6 feet. Moderated groundwater seepage was observed at 5 feet. Ground surface elevation of test pit was approximately 281 feet. Note that the bottom of the detention ponds is approximately elevation 20 feet, or 10 feet below the ground surface. Pipe Trestle See description for flammable materials waste treatment above. Subs 'In Borings GT-16 and GT-17 were completed within the substation area: ► Two inches of asphalt over medium dense Sand; over ► Very dense Sand at a depth of three feet with interbedded layers of sandy Silt. Page 2-3 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATIONS METHODS AND ANALYSIS • This appendix documents the processes Hart Crowser uses in determining the nature of the soils underlying the project site addressed by this report. The discussion includes information on the following subjects: ► Explorations and Their Location ► The Use of Auger Borings ► Standard Penetration Test (SPT) Procedures ► Use of Shelby Tubes ► The Use of Cone Penetrometer Probes Explorations and Their Location Subsurface explorations for this final design study include eight borings and four cones. The exploration logs within this appendix show our interpretation of the drilling, sampling, and testing data. They indicate the depth where the soils change. Note that the change may be gradual. In the field, we classified the samples taken from the explorations according to the methods presented on Figure A-1 - Key to Exploration Logs. This figure also provides a legend explaining the symbols and abbreviations used in the logs. Location of Explorations. Figure 2 shows the location of explorations, located by hand taping or pacing from existing physical features. The ground surface elevations at these locations were interpreted from elevations shown on Topographic Survey by Dodds Engineering, Inc. dated February 1990. The method used determines the accuracy of the location and elevation of the explorations. With depths ranging from 18.4 to 119.0 feet below the ground surface, nine hollow-stem auger borings, designated GT-9 through GT-17, were drilled from March 21 through May 24, 1991. The borings used a 3-3/8- inch inside diameter hollow-stem auger and were advanced with a truck- mounted drill rig subcontracted by Hart Crowser. The drilling was continuously observed by an engineering geologist from Hart Crowser. Detailed field logs were prepared of each boring. Using the Standard Page A-1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 • Penetration Test (SPT) and thin-walled Shelby tubes, we obtained samples at 21 - to 5-foot-depth intervals. The borings logs are presented on Figures A 2 through A 10 at the end of this appendix. S d Penetration Test (SPT) Procedures This test is an approximate measure of soil density and consistency. To be useful, the results must be used with engineering judgment in conjunction with other tests. The SPT (as described in ASTM D 1587) was used to obtain disturbed samples. This test employs a standard 2- inch outside diameter split-spoon sampler. Using a 140-pound hammer, free-falling 30 inches, the sampler is driven into the soil for 18 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches only is the Standard Penetration Resistance. This resistance, or blow count, measures the relative density of granular soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. The blow counts are plotted on the boring logs at their respective sample depths. Soil samples are recovered from the split-barrel sampler, field classified, and placed into water tight jars. They are then taken to Hart Crowser's laboratory for further testing. In the Event of Hard Driving Occasionally very dense materials preclude driving the total 18-inch sample. When this happens, the penetration resistance is entered on logs as follows: Penetration less than six inches. The log indicates the total number of blows over the number of inches of penetration. Penetration greater than six inches. The blow count noted on the log is the sum of the total number of blows completed after, the first six inches of penetration. This sum is expressed over the number of inches driven that exceed the first 6 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the first six inches are not reported. For example, a blow count series of 12 blows for 6 inches, 30 blows for 6 inches, and 50 (the maximum number of blows counted within a 6-inch increment for SPT) for 3 inches would be recorded as 80/9. Page A-2 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 • , Use of Shelby Tubes To obtain a relatively undisturbed sample for classification and testing in fine-grain soils, a 3-inch-diameter thin-walled steel (Shelby) tube sampler was pushed hydraulically below the auger. The tubes were sealed in the field and taken to our laboratory for extrusion and classification. The Use of Cone Penetrometer Probes We used a cone penetrometer to probe the subgrade soils for this study. Completed by Subterranean, Inc., of Gig Harbor, the probes, designated GPR-9 through GPR-12, were advanced to depths ranging from 37.5 to 85 feet below the ground surface. They used a Begemann-type cone (See Figure A-11). The system is mounted on a truck which provides the necessary reaction for the applied loads. The cone and its sleeve provide information by which we can interpret the density and consistency of the soils. A direct correlation exists between the point resistance of the cone and the bearing capacity in the soil. Another direct correlation exists between the friction registered on the sleeve and the friction characteristics of the soil. We use the penetrometer results in conjunction with the soil classification chart developed by Schmertmann (1978). See Figure A-11. Friction Values and Soil Type. Generally, a friction ratio less than 2 indicates sand; a ratio between 2 and 4 indicates a silt-sand mixture, clayey sand, or silt; and ratios greater than 4 indicate a clayey silt or clay. Logs of cone penetrometer probes are presented on Figures A-12 through A-15. Page A-3 a, Key to Exploration Logs Sample Descriptions Classification of soils in this report is based on visual field and laboratory observations which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates and should not be construed to imply field nor laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual-manual classification methods of ASTM D 2488 were used as an identification guide. Soil descriptions consist of the following: Density/consistency, moisture. color, minor constituents. MAJOR CONSTITUENT, additional remarks. Density/Consistency Soil density/consistency in borings is related primarily to the Standard Penetration Resistance. Soil density/consistency in test pits is estimated based on visual observation and is presented parenthetically on the test pit logs. Standard Standard . Approximate SAND or GRAVEL Penetration SILT or CLAY Penetration Shear Resistance Resistance Strength Density in Blows/Foot Consistency in Blows/Foot in TSF Very loose 0 - 4 Very soft 0 - 2 <0.125 Loose 4 - 10 Soft 2 - 4 0.125 - 0.25 Medium dense 10 - 30 Medium stiff 4 - 8 0.25 - 0.5 Dense 30 - 50 Stiff B - 15 0.5 - 1.0 Very dense >50 Very stiff 15 - 30 1.0 - 2.0 Hard >30 >2.0 Moisture, Minor Constituents Estimated Percentage Ory Little perceptible moisture Not identified in description 0 - 5 Damp Some perceptible moisture. Slightly (clayey, silty, etc.) 5 - 12' probably below optimum Moist Probably near optimum Clayey. silty, sandy, gravelly 12 - 30 moisture content • Wet . Much perceptible moisture. Very (clayey. silty. etc.) 30 - 50 probably above optimum Legends Sampling Test Symbols BORING SAMPLES GS Grain Size Classification ® Split Spoon CN Consolidation El Shelby Tube TUU Triaxial Unconsolidated Undrained ® Cuttings TCU Triaxial Consolidated Undrained 0] Core Run TCO Triaxial Consolidated Drained ' * No Sample Recovery GU Unconfined Compression P Tube Pushed. Not Driven OS Direct Shear TEST PIT SAMPLES K Permeability ® Grab (Jar) PP Pocket Penetrometer Approximate Compressive Strength in TSF 0 Bag I TV Torvane Approximate Shear Strength in TSF Shelby Tube C8R California Bearing Ratio MO Moisture Density Relationship AL Atterberg Limits Ground Water Observations 1--e-1 Water Content in Percent 1.7 Surface Seal Liquid Limit I Natural v Plastic Limit Ground Water Level on Date (ATD) At Time of Drilling Observation Well Tip or -- Slotted Section /tom Ground Water Seepage ■ R w'0WS . ER (Test Pits) J-2330-02 7/91 Figure A-1 , Boring Log GT-9 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Deoth • Blows per Foot • in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 T 60 Very dense, wet d gray, slightly silty SAND. I _ I- S-15 ►M _ • 0/2 35 - /1� El - • — Grading medium dense with interbedded S-t6 " - • layers of peat. f70 _- - Grading dense. — S-17: " - • Very stiff, wet, lark brown, silty PEAT.— - } — 75 Very stiff, wet. gray CLAY with interbedded~ - - I layers of sand. _ r S-18 =, • ` I d0 r - S-19 ' - • 1 — Layer of silty sand. r e5 I — Grading stiff with interbedded layers of siltL L S-Y0 _ 71—..-11 ` -AL I - --90 'r I -AL - S-21 t��P _ S-22 a P _ -AL L95 - \Hie, — Grading very stiff. - 5-23 =' : —100 — Grading stiff. - S-24 " : / r —105 _ 5-25 ' _ • —• — t10 Very dense, wet, gray, silty SAND. - - y 1- ' \ 1- S-26 _ • A60/5 I thts — Grading brown and slightly silty. I S-27 „ _ Bottom of Boring at 119.0 Feet. r Completed 4/15/91. L 20 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-t or explanation of descriptions /'7 and symbols. Psi,'r T PLIONMY 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 4/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated. is at time of -inning Figure A-2 2/2 (A TD) or for date specified. Level may wry wrath time Boring Log G T-1 o STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS - Depth • Blows per Foot Ground Surface Elevation in' Feet 30 in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 •Medium stiff, wet, brown, sandy SILT with L 0 rubble and organics. (FILL) F - ,.5 •S-1 «-- L- oose, wet, gray, very silty SANG with 1 S-2 ' organics. r - e — Grading interbedded layers of silt. i S-3 • • ro • : — Grading mediurr dense. • — S-4 " - • Very soft, wet, brown SILT with interbedded I layers or sand and•peat. S-5 F15 I _ I : Grading medium stiff. • S-6 • -- 20 1- i Very stiff, wet, brown, silty PEAT with — r — interbedded sand and gravel. S-7 �a-/ - o 25 — Grading stiff. r S-8 /' - •359 r Medium dense, wet. gray, silty SAND with I� peat stringers. ' = I 1- S-9 0 • • - 35 H \ I- I - L _ grave- ing lly. very dense, slightly silty and 5-10 " _ • LI-s0 _ /V . _ • / Stiff, wet, brown, silty PEAT with I- S-11 // - •113 interbedded layers of gravelly sand. f 1 45 - L - F5-12 /, i— 50 . Very stiff, wet, gray CLAY. F I : I\ [ 5-13 - _ • r E• i =5 -I r t L 5-14 0' - II-s,4 V I L a0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A—I far exolanation of descriptions /�p and symbols. H/1RTC-' OC> LR 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive • and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 4/91 3. •(raundwater levet, if indicated. is at time al drilling Figure A-3 1/2 AID) or for date saectfiea. Level may vary with time Boring Log GT-11 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth • Blows per Foot Ground Surface Ele •don in Feet 30 in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 Very loose, wet, gray, very silty SAND with stringers of organic material. - - 5-1 [I - . Grading medium dense. —5 • _ S-2 '/ — e — . — Grading very loose and gravelly. _ 5-3 • � _ - ..(>1, Soft, wet. gray, very sandy SILL —10 _ S-4 // - • • Grading very soft, and brown with interbedded - 5-5 ■ / - • organics and Layers of sand. - -'5 Grading gray. -_ S-6 /I -- 20 Medium- dense., wet, gray, very silty SAND - with interbedded layers of peat. E I :I S-7 // _ • • 25 Grading loose and silty. F- S-g 'I : • ✓30 I \ , Stiff, w-et, brown, silty PEAT. - a •276 • r35 I { _ _ \,11\441 Medium dense. wet, gray, very silty SAND. S-10 11 - -i0 Grading interbedded layers of sandy SILT - S-11 „ - • organics. - - --t5 Grading very dense and slightly silty. _ 5-12 " _ • \1 —50 Grading interbedded layers of peat. _ 5-13 MA _ • —55 / Stiff, wet, brown, silty PEAT. - _ , 5-14_ 'I - / •235 44, Very stiff, wet, gray CLAY. 1 00 I 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. HARM*?0 Nr L, 2. Soil descriptions a d stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 4/91 3. Groundwater level. if indicated. ,s at time of drilling Figure A-4 1/2 (AID) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Boring Log GT-11 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth • Blows per Foot in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 h 60 _ Very stiff, wet.r gray CLAY. S-15 I P _ F••I•1 —AL � CV 65 S-16 ■ — Grading slightly sandy. g_17 =' _ • 70 _ K\,,,, S-18 A - • --75 \ . Very dense, wet, gray, silty SAND. - I S-19 a = • I . • eo L I _ — Grading medium dense and without silt. r 5_20 // _ 85 I I — Grading very dense. E 5-21 = • 0/5 I . 1-90 C S-22 ►M — 460/3 Bottom of Boringat 93.3 Feet. _ Completed 4/11/91. �95 I _ Ft - +1o0 . _p105 — —110 -7 115 I i 120 - 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A—I far explanation of descriptions and symbols. 0.N/3' 2. Soil descriptions anti stratum tines are interpretive and actual changes' may be gradual. J-2330-02 4/91 3. Groundwater level. if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-4 2/2 (AID) or for date specified. Level may vary with time. Boring Log G T- 12 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth • Blows per Foot . Ground Surface Elevation in Feet 30 in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 Predrilled to 37.5-foot depth. • —5 —10 —15 • —20 --25 - —30 -�-35 Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty, very - g-1 - • • gravelly SAND. -- 40 Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty, very sandy GRAVEL _ S-2 _ • • —45 . S-3 /' • - 50 Hard, wet, gray SILT. S-4 �� - • 0/6 55 S-5 - • .60/4 Bottom of Borng at 58.3 Feet. _ Completed 4/15//91. —60 t 2 5 10 20 50 100 • water Content in Percent • 1. Refer to Figure A-1 far explanation of descriptions !n . and symbols. A/� ORO 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 4/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling Figure A-5 1/1 (AID) or for dote specified. Level may vary with time. Boring Log G T-13 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth A Blows per Foot I Ground Surface Elevation in Feet 0.0 in Feet Sample 4-0 1 2 5 10 20 50 t00 Very loose, wet. light brown, silty. I gravelly SAND. [ LI- S_lA A _ • L Arno Very soft, wet. (brown, silty PEAT. Medium dense, wet, gray, silty SAND. 1 ATO S-2 „ - I • ■ - — Grading dense. S-3 — Grading very loose and thin layer of peat. i 10 S-4 a - riS • • ` . - — Grading medium) dense. - 5-5 a - • Very soft, wet, gray SILT with peat . stringers. —t5 S-6 Medium dense, '(wet, gray, slightly silty S-7 • • SAND with a trace of wood. r 20 II / . — Grading stringer of peat. [- S-8 =' - 5 Stiff, wet, gray SILT with interbedded peat L layers. I'-- I - S-9 - •163 r t30 = \ Stiff, wet, brown, silty PEAT. • S-10 " - •385 -1-35 I / L Stiff, wet, gray SILT with interbedded S-11A 0 •261 layers of sand. : _40 1 . — Grading interbed ed layers of peat. _- S-12 " _ • -•-45 ' - - 5-131! 0 _ • •Stiff, wet, brown PEAT with interbedded - layers of silt. 50 - Very dense, wet, gray, very gravelly SAND. I- _ E5-14 �li - • +60/6 -1,-55 L - L S_t5 '/ - • . 60 2 5 10 20 50 100 • water Content in Percent I. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symbols. UU 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines ore interpretive vuC.r�u and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated, is at time of drilling Figure A-6 1/2 (ATO) or for date specified. Level may vary with time Boring Log GT-13 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptio-is RESISTANCE • TESTS • Oeo1h . Blows per Foot ' in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 60 Very dense. wet. gray, very gravelly SAND.' -r- _ Very soft, wet, 'ray SILT with interbedded layers of peat. 1 _ S-t6 a - Hard, wet, brown. silty PEAT with � interbedded layers of silt. i 65 -r L r S-17 I: _ •I21 . r —70 Very stiff, wet, gray CLAY. 5-18 II /I• -ALi r }75 : • Grading stiff an interbedded .layers of silt. r S_19 I I - L _ - - • tao _ r S-20 „ • i ` 85 - I r I Very dense, wet.' light brown, silty SAND. 5-21c /./ N:N775/9 I-90 _ r — Grading slightly silty. r 5-2211 - • E • _ r S-23 a : • --100 — Grading gray and slightly gravelly. - 5-24 " - • 0/tt t 05 - E S-25 _ 460/5 I 110 I i Bottom of florins at 112.9 Feet. 5-26 _ • w50/5 Completed 3/21/91. - -= 115 l20 I 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions i TAME and symbols. 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may De gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-6 2/2 (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary w,th time. • Boring Log G T.- 1 4 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS oeoth ♦ Blows per Foot • Ground Surface Elevation in Feet 0.0 in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 Medium dense,' wet, black. silty. sandy T 0 GRAVEL. - - l - S-1 a - it• Medium stiff, wet, brown SILT with trace - - fi brick fragments. _ 5 7 I _ A i0 - r S-2 a - L • Loose, wet, gray, sandy GRAVEL with trace t0 peat and silt. - S-3 _ • —15 Medium dense, wet, gray, silty SAND with I[ trace peat. - • s /1 _ Medium stiff, wet, brown SILT with interbedded layers of peat. - - //1 • _ S-5 ` Z5 — Grading stiff. _ S-5A a • Medium dense, wet, gray, slightly silty SAND. - : 1 • 30 1 \') Very stiff, wet, brown PEAT. _ - _ S-7 = : •338 —35 Medium dense, wet, gray, very silty SAND - / with interbedded layers of silt and peat. - ` S-8 a _ A 1 _40 \,[ _ S-9 a _ • —45 Stiff, wet, gray SILT. : 5-10 =, - • \7 Stiff, wet, brown PEAT. - -50 — Grading silty. - - Very dense, wet! gray, slightly silty SAND. - S-11: " •182 _ l S-12 a _ P 1 —5C 2 5 10 20 I 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-I for explanation of descrptions �t� and symbols. . 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-7 1/2 AM) or for date specified. Level may vary -ith time Boring Log GT-14 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth • Blows per Foot • in Fet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 Very dense, wet, gray, slightly silty SAND. • Te(111 - .Stiff, wet, gray, sandy SILT with trace PEAT. S-i3 03 ' _ T'S Very stiff, wet, brown, silty PEAT. 170 E I - • S-14 " : \ •213 Hard, wet, gray CLAY. - S-15_ =' - •153 —75 — Grading very stiff with interbedded thin 5-16 " - layers of sandy SILT. r _ 90 L- Grading stiff. S-17 3 -_ ,.-:-, -AL 35 I- I - I _ I- 5-18 • r•90 \\* F95 Hord, wet, gray ILT. _ 5-20 " • NA Very dense, wet, gray, silty SAND. - - 5-21 El - 0/5 —105 — Grading slightly slty. - •S-22 - •60/5 —i10 S-23 _ 4 -50/5 • 115 L I - FS-24 r� _ +60/6 Bottom of Boring at 118.0 Feet. _ Completed 5/22/91. I 20 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent I. Refer to Figure A-1 far explanation of descriptions and symbols. C' 2. Soil desenotions and stratum lines are interpretive • and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-7 2/2 (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time Boring Log G T- 5 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth • Blows per Foot Ground Surface Elevati n in Feet 0.0 in Feet Sample 1 2 5 to 20 50 t00 Loose, wet. brown, gravelly SAND. T Q - I :TD •• Very soft, wet, brown, silty PEAT. F S-1A p _ I 135 I - \\A . Stiff, wet, gray, sandy SILT with interbedded layers of sand and peat. S-2 a - •135 10 1- - 5-3 -�� - iL I _ 15 r — Grading medium stiff. - S-4 =, - • r 20 - Medium dense, wet, gray SAND. I I _ S-5 o _ ♦ Meaium stiff, wef, brown, silty PEAT. � 25 - r I— s-6 ' - 411( ♦295 _F 130 Dense, wet, grayf slightly silty SAND. - r I- S-' " Dense, wet, gray, sandy GRAVEL with 35 _ interbedded layers of sand. 1S-g L.4 • . Verystiff, wet, 40 gray-tan SILT with trace of sand and pebbles. - 0S-9 - -45 - 'Very stiff, wet. tan CLAY with interbedded layers of silt and sand. = S-10 " • 1 50 — Grading stiff. s-liA FrA •\\,\\ Hard, wet, gray SILT with interbedded layers I- : of silty sand. I 55 L I _ I- _ — Grading trace of pebbles. 5-12 - a50/6 60 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions and symools. HA - T@RONER 2. Sod descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive • and actual cnanges may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level. if indicoted, is at time of drilling Figure A-8 1/2 (AID) or for date so l.cified. Level may vary wilh time Boring Log G T-15 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS Depth ♦ Blows per Foot • in Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 Hard. wet. ith interbedded to T 60 _� graySILT •/ yers of silty sand. Very dense. wet, gray, slightly silty. E - gravelly SAND. I- S-t3 1/ - •I .9t/1l 65 I 1 Very dense. wet. gray. silty. sandy GRAVEL l S-14 I • A60/3 rr - i 70 _ Hard, wet. gray) sandy SILT. - S-15 ►rti - II •60/5 —75 T 30 5-17 wzaii _ • •50/5 L 35I - L i 5-18 I = • 450/5 90 _ — Grading interbed•ed layers of sand. 5-19 " - • +60/6 —95 5-20 - • 4160/5 Bottom of Boring at 97.9 Feet. Completed 5/24/91. - - -- 100 —105 —110 —Its -E 120 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 • Water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions 0� 8�` and symbols. �c' S 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Crounawater level. if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-8 2/2 (ATD) or For date specified. Level may wry wan time. • Boring Log GT-16 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptions RESISTANCE TESTS • Oeoth ♦ Blows per Foot x Ground Surface Elevation in Feet 37 ,n Feet Sample 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 2 inches of asp halt over medium dense. S-I moist, tan, silt,, fine to medium SAND. ` - - — Grades to very dense, tan-gray SAND with l S-2 - 0/2 interbedded layers of sandy SILT. - Z _ S-3 - i S-4 - 0 S-5 — • i _ 1 S-6 - • — :5 i- S-7 _ • 0/6 I — Grades to fine to coarse sand. - S-8 - • 460/5 Bottom of Boring at 18.4 Feet. - - Completed 5/24/91. —20 • — 25 I - :0 l - 1 I- - l 35 1 _ E _ I 1 F _ ,5 II F F .. 50 - 55 r - r - -• '0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 ` • • Water Content in Percent I. Refer to Figure a-I for explanation of descriptions HIM and symbols. Gt.��J�,U 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines are interpretive and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater 'eves. if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-9 1/1 (AID) or for date specified. Levet may vary with time Boring Log GT-17 STANDARD PENETRATION LAB Soil Descriptiops RESISTANCE TESTS Oeoth A Blows per Foot Ground Surface Elevation in Feet 37 in Feet Sample t 2 5 10 20 50 100 —,0 • 2 inches of asphalt over dense, moist. taxi, i gravelly, fine to medium SAND. 5-1 Z _ + i � — Grading very dense and moist to wet. S-2 — r AID — T5 1 S-3Z _ — Grading slightly gravelly. • _ • — Grades to tan-g-ay, fine to medium SAND I- S_aA - • with interbedded layers of sandy silt. 6-L _ • 1 -4-,0 I S-5 Z _ •• 5/11 S-6 X.... _ • r15 !� - r - 1 • I- S-'� _ I: 1 Bottom of Boring at 19.0 Feet. I Completed 5/24/91. /-20 L _ L _ 1 r - —25 i i_ _ k - 30 k - E. _ _ �35 - -40 • -45 _so . 55 . i I- - 1'0 2 5 10 20 50 too • water Content in Percent 1. Refer to Figure A-1 for explanation of descriptions rU7 _—`— and symbols. Q IUY,L!/`,L)-9..K` 2. Soil descriptions and stratum lines ore interpretive • • and actual changes may be gradual. J-2330-02 5/91 3. Groundwater level, if indicated. is at time of drilling Figure A-10 1/1 (ATD) or for date specified. Level may vary with time Principle of Dutch Cone Penetrometer GAUGE • • HYDRAULIC PISTON likk/ CONE ' CONE a TOTAL ONLY SLEEVE SYSTEM GROUND v 4. T Y /SURFACE _ IIII 7. 111,nr III ( - T • ' I • 0 O OUTER CASING.--- •3 f 'r • PROCEDURE INNER ROD • - a I. The cone as shown in position I is, • . e .• pushed down by the inner rod for a depth of 4cm, and the ' 4 CmL Point reeie tone• measured. • I FRICTION - ,� 1' \ 2.From position 2 the point is again pushed 4cm SLEEVE t I ll . and the combined paint resistanu and aide .• • •.' f I ,, friction is m d by causing the Ueeve to be �• mm 4cm e lowered as shown In position 3, CONE — II ., III . I • ) " a 3. The total system is then advanced 20 cm o/ .,t ` IIpushing casing position 4 r • • , ° / p ` • by the outer 10 ,• •,� • /' 1111 from which the nett test is ' 4cm— -v_,/ 1 /• lu`t , J a accomplished. 4cm — — — — — — ° 1 P • 20 cm NOTES: //IIII`\, I. The cone apes angle •60° • r• s section area • 10 cm t — — _ — — — — _ — — - ,1,,ry',i • 2 Length of friction sleeve • 13 cm diameter • 36 min Dutch Cone Soil Classification Chart Sand (After Schmertmann, 1969) 200 (Very oense) 1 I I I I l I 1 Nolen : E•pect same overlap In the type - tones noted below. Local correlations are Cana I I I preferable I I ---I--- --�- -.um- I 100 I [ i ( clayey sands 1r 80 1 l and slits I-- ! 60 j l I I I ( I sandy and ,lift I I I I Medium Cents 1 I I ctays I 1 50 I I I I I I_ I I 1 1 I I a.. 40 - - -- --- I I I insensitive non-fissured I 1 I 1 I r inorganic cloys I I I u 20 ---- 1I �1 _ I 1 I300. Loose I 1 I I I I I1 Iu l-J- � ivory ,lift a5 Vary Loose I I I I ..8 , I `o sslflI 1 c10 F I 1� r I I • Y I 8 �I IiI l i I meatum 1 I I L ! u I I 1 organic clays and 6 1 I 1 -4. I rimed sods lend to 5 ---1 so l � , Ly.. fan in here 4 !Friction ratio values II�ec4IIaI seIII IiI m accuracy - 3 I I I --1. I with low values of a, and when wttnin a t I I very salt I I I few feet of the surface. I I I 2 I I 1 TT i I I I I 1 I I I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 T 8 9 IO N_ Si Friction ratio - (sleeve friction/cone bearing) in °/ /I YllG0W J-2330-02SER 7/91 Figure A-11 -?robe Log GPR-9 -;OIL CONE FRICTION .ITERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO Oaoth Tone/SQ. Ft. Approximate Ground Surface Ete.etton in Feet 30 Feet 0 t 2 s +0 20 50 too 200 400 0 2 . e e .0t1,4 Alternating layers of (loose) SAND and (soft), - I clayey SILT. _ I i t I I r I II --10 (� - I f 1 - 1 _ ItIIII - (Possible peat layer) -15 S. - 1 1 I I i -20 :� i i (Medium stiff to stiff), clayey SILT. t- (Possible peat layer) _ 4 I Layer of (loose) SAND. -25 �� i _ 1 I 1 - (Possible peat layer) -30 t . - - _ ' - L.,, i (Loose) SAND. - 1 - Grading (dense). ,,4Q rj.. - 4 y� , I-- Grading (loose to medium dense). - jr7 1 [- Grading (dense). -.a5 / / T . 1,..„-- ,� 1 (Medium stiff to stiff), clayey and/or sandy SILT. 150 ! I ! o.' 0.2 0.5` t 2 5 '0 0 2 4 e 3 '0,21. Tone/Sa. Ft. ——— — SLEEVE • FRICTION A lI HIIl7TCROWSUl J-2330-02 5/91 Figure A-12 1/2 • Probe Log GPR-9 • SOIL CONE FRICTION INTERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO • Own Tons/Se. Ft. Feet 50 t 2 5. 10 20 50 100 200 400 0 2 4 S d tOt2 to (Medium stiff to stiff), clayey and/or sandy _ • I i 'II I j! 'Hi I i SILT. i/lf I III I I H `L 1,�` II. I ..I' , . —55 ----- -- --____ - - - - - --- I ! 1 I (Medium dense) SAND 1 Pi _ �/ ,I L (Stiff to very stiff), clayey SILT. I i I 'I I tfll II --65 �I Fr 1 I II I , 11 - (Possible peat layer) - ) Grading (stiff). - I / I I 1 I C70 I l'I I I I i I4 1 I I { II I1II _ _ _____ ____ -- ---T I I _ I _• Hi 75 (Very dense) SAND. 11 x I I IIIII I I I I- ; I r I I . I I I Ili 3ottom of Probe at 79.5 Feet. 80 - Completed 4/10/91. I I I i it I 1 I I I I _85 I I I I - I I—90 I.I ! 1 I -95 _ II • I 1 ! I I I I _l00 I 1 I •• I III I I I O.t o.2 0.5 t 2 5 10 0 2 • d d tot214 Tons/Sq. Ft. _ — _ _-- SLEEVE FRICTION n MUM HARTCROWSER J-2330-02 5/91 Figure A-1 2 2/2 Probe Log GPR- 10 SOIL CONE - FRICTION INTERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO '.o Oeofn Tons/Sq. Ft Aooro■,mace Grounc Surface Elevation in Feet 30 Feet ---0 f 2 5 10 20 50• •00 200 .00 0 2 . 5 8 101214 ;Loose) SAND. 1 _ I Ill I.I 1 ' JH 1 �I~ i -Gracing (medium dense). -5 I I �t I •I f i I- I ( III' I ' I f I 1 -Grading (loose Co medium dense). �10 i - r--irl -,•,�III1 I l -Layer of silt. 1 NI ! I - (Possible peat layer) < ,< I I I I )) I I T15 - h — ——f , . 1 I (Medium stiff), clayey SILT. • I • - (Possible peat lay r) (Dense) SAND. 1-= I I III - ill''' 1.10 T25 I- 0 J _ IiiJo1 (Sttff to very stiff), clayey SILT. - ;il 'rill 11111110 -30 I - (Possible peat layer) - 1 - - - - - ---- - - - -- -. 35 I,_ (Loose) SAND. ` ; 1 1 Ali -Layer of silt. I f �,' r- I 45 !II► (Medium stiff), clayey SILT. - (Possible peat layer) L �� �' IA11 � t 1 j i - Gracing (stiff). 50 I i . 0.1 0.2 0.5 I 2 s 10 0 2 • 0 a 10,2‘1 Tons/Sq. FI ------ SLEEVE FRICTION st Li HAnTCRoWsur J-2330-02 5/91 Probe Log GPR- 10 ..r, SOIL CONE FRICTION INTERPRETATION • PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO % Oeotn Tons/Sq. Ft Feet 2 S I0 20 SO WO 200 400 0 2 + 6 a 1O t2,. 50 (Stiff), clayey (SILT. i „ I ITS I I i j I ' I I I t:ril l • ;Medium dense to dense) SAND. ......... I I �55 I I I , I I I . . _ 1 1 , ,1 1 _ If.) , , 14 L. C 1 ——— — — — — — — — — — —1-60 ' ! k J , .rt"'"r (Stiff), clayey Ana/or sandy SILT. _ �� ,. H. . r �, , I --65 <� I- I _ 1 4- - 1 i j• (Very dense) SAND. - —70 ? I 1 IIII . .I —Grading • f'''.\1 I _ ��� (dense). i T" 1 __ i '_1, -II il ' _ I (Stiff), sandy SILT. - 1"' � T80 ►. a..............:::„\ (Very dense) SAND. -65 . Bottom of Probe at 85 Feet. Completed 4/10/91. —90 , —95 ., , j I I I 100 I _ j o.t 0.2 0.5 I 2 5 to 0 2 4 6 8tote14 Tans/Sq. Ft ---- SLEEVE FRICTION an sJ H1 RTCROWSrf? J-2330-02 5/91 • Probe Log GPR- 11 . , SOIL CONE FRICTION INTERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO Deptn Tons/So. Ft. Approximate Ground Surface Elevanon in Feel 30 Feet —0 I 2 5 I 0 20 so 100 200 .00 0 z . e 3 v0 :f. Alternating Jaye s of (loose) SAND and (soft). - i i I !IIi clayey SILT. _ I I 1 11:1 I i _• i I ; - (Possible peat layer) -5 ' ( r „f d [ 1w ,,, I �l (Possible peat lay r) -10 T �I I I I t IIli (Loose) SAND.—— — — — ————— — —— T -15 I / I I l I/ lei I (Soft to medium tiff),sl clayey SILT. [1 I I !l - (Possible peat layer) _ I i I •H (Loose to medium dense) SAND. I 14 II ;I. .1 -20 J' ill :i I — 1 • (Medium stiff), clayey SILT. _ I ,; I I1! - (Possible peat layer) -25 dip I - ! I !I 1 l i '' (Loose), silty SAND. — — — — — — — — � � ! ,I 111 II (Stiff), clayey SILT. — — — — — — — 30 i I I ':I•- j ', 1 I _ 4 . --35 I t i ' (Medium dense) SAND. - I I I 01 . -40 l' ' J I. (Medium dense), clayey SILT. _ ( 'II I (Possible peat layer) IIP Layer of sand. _45 I , - 111111 z(Possible peat layer) - / ,�I I - - - - - - - - -- - - - - --5° / ! , _ ! I ! o.l 0.2 0.5 I 2 S to a z 4 5 a .0iz,4 ions/Sq. Fl.---- SLEEVE FRICTION am • H1 RTCROWSER J-2330-02 5/91 Probe Log GPR- 11 J ', SOIL CONE FRICTION INTERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO % Doom Fee: Tons/So. Ft SQ ' • 5 ,0 20 50 '00 200 .00 0 2 .15 9 '012'. (Dense to very dense) SAND. HI i I I I I I I ,I I Ili' (Stiff), clayey and/or sandySILT. I i I 1 I I ! I� 1 , I _ I 11 I ' I ' i II ��I _ i 1 ill T55 I `I I I I _ \ , I I IP- I - I - I Ili Too I _ I l A IN I 1 I , ;I, 1 -65 1 I� �f i i t 11 1I- , 1 lelltall"" , II - Grading (medium stiff to stiff). —TO I '-'.1i,r` I 1 , 1 I ; I 1 '1,1. E 1 illi1 1 II _7, .., . , 1 1 ) __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (Dense) SAND. I i 1 —80 I I l — Grading (very dense). — - • � t 8 `5 Bottom of Probe at 85 Feet. - Completed 4/10/911 - • i —90 I . . , I I I —95 i i II _100 I I I HI I . , 'II I , I a 02 0.5 , 2 5 '0 0 2 • 61 a '012'• ions/So. F: -- SLEEVE FRICTION sw Li H/RTCR0WSEJ? J-2330-02 5/97 Probe Lo GPR- 12 SOIL CONE FRICTION INTERPRETATION PENETRATION RESISTANCE RATIO 0eotn Tons/Sa. Ft Aooroximate Ground Surface Elevation m Feet 30 Feet TO I 2 5 .0 20 50 100 200 400 0 2 4 59 •0' !I 12 iix (Loose) SAND. - I I 1 ! , I ll! II I 1 I ;ii - 1 I i I ! I) I j 1 i!i "I- `�I I III I I 'I ! I I r Obstruction at 3-1/2-foot depth. I • ! I 1 ! {II I , ,_ I I I �I;l I-- Ii 5I"'f "�:r ---1I t I I I!II . 1 ill I I! 1'1 h 1 II. It III : • j i .II . iI111 :11 — Layer of silt. - j� : - 11 L ! !• II !Ohba — Grading (medium dense). _ I i' j n• II 1 �I!.'I:, —,5 I v^r �It I I I;II 1 I i °I I ! 11j/ i ' ,I I ' I. 1 . - Iill II I II ! I!I 1 ! (Medium stiff to stiff), clayey SILT. I I ! I i '1 11 1 ' r � ' 1 I I I II.. l i (Possible peat layer) 20 I `'' I � .I� Iliil I,, I,". • L I �TII ; III ! 1 IIi ; �� I'' I li MI j Iii! i 1. 1 I .1 IIIII ,I !vii 1h!liilli 1 I I' — Grading (stiff). j ��v= I ll I II —25 I ! ! 1i111 1 1 I II, Ij 1 ! I II11 . 1 Ii j1,i 1 jIII - Alternating layers of (loose) SAND and (soft) I `0 1 ' 1 1 I i !1 SILT. /' i I (Dense to very dense), gravelly SAND. IIr ! ,II , -35 ! I Bottom of Probe at 37.5 Feet. - Completed 4/10/91. - 1 - I - ' I a5 , I . . - II I _ I 11 ! —50 i 0.1 0.2 0.5 I 2 5 ,0 0 2 4 5 31012‘4 Tons/Sa. Ft. _ ___ ___ SLEEVE FRICTION ors Li HMTCRQWSLfi J-2330-02 5/91 Figure A-15 i/1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM A laboratory testing program was performed for this study to evaluate the basic index and geotechnical engineering properties of the site soils. Both disturbed and relatively undisturbed samples were tested. The tests performed and the procedures followed are outlined below. Soil Classification Field Observation and Laboratory Analysis. Soil samples from the explorations were visually classified in the field and then taken to our laboratory where the classifications were verified in a relatively controlled laboratory environment. Field and..laboratory observations include density/consistency, moisture condition, and grain size and plasticity estimates. The classifications of selected samples were checked by laboratory Atterberg limits determinations. Classifications were made in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification (USC) System, ASTM D 2487, as presented on Figure B-1. Water Content Determinations As soon as possible following their arrival in our laboratory, water contents were determined for most samples recovered in the explorations in general accordance with ASTM D 2216. Water contents were not determined for very small samples nor samples where large gravel contents would result in values considered unrepresentative. The results of these tests are plotted at the respective sample depth on the exploration logs. In addition, water contents are routinely determined for samples subjected to other testing. These are also presented on the exploration logs. Atterberg Limits (AL) We determined Atterberg limits for selected fine-grained soil samples. The liquid limit and plastic limit were determined in general accordance with ASTM D 4318-84. The results of the Atterberg limits analyses and the plasticity characteristics are summarized in the Liquid and PIastic Page B-1 Hart Crowser J-2330-02 Limits Test Report, Figures B-2 and B-3. This relates the plasticity index (liquid limit minus the plastic limit) to the liquid limit. The results of the Atterberg limits tests are shown graphically on the boring logs as well as where applicable on figures presenting various other test results. Consolidation Test (CN) The one-dimensional consolidation test provides data for estimating settlement. The test was performed in general accordance with ASTM D 2435. A relatively undisturbed, fine-grained sample was carefully trimmed and fit into a rigid ring with porous stones placed on the top and bottom of the sample to allow drainage. Vertical loads were then applied incrementally to the sample in such a way that the sample was allowed to consolidate under each load increment. Measurements were made of the compression of the sample (with time) under each load increment. Rebound was measured during the unloading phase. In general, each load was left in place until the completion of 100 percent primary consolidation, as computed using Taylor's square root of time method. The next load increment was applied soon after attaining 100 percent primary consolidation. For selected tests, loads were left in- place for as long as 24 hours to record secondary consolidation characteristics. The test results plotted in terms of axial strain and coefficient 'of consolidation versus applied load (stress) are presented on Figure B-4 . Page B-2 a_ Unified Soil Classification (USC) System Soil Grain Size Size of Opi 1 (US Standard)_laning in Inches I Number of mesh per �ncn °� Grain Size in Millimetres , a - N - n.ten - - n F.. 0 - y 3 O O 7 0 0 > > O O J I II , I . : 1 I 1 I 1 1 . 1 I I , I I l i , . , I 1 , 1 . , I I 1 , I I 1 , 1 I I • I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 �1 1 I O 0 > a > J a a 0 a J 1 n N - a 0 a n • N. - a 0 a n r.a - a ,D a n N - O O O a I an N - • O O 9 O 0 O O > > > 0 J n N O O 0 7 0 0 Grain Size In Millimetres CCSBLES I GRAVEL I SANG I SILT and CLAY Coarse-Grained Soils I Fine-Grained Soils Coarse-Grained Soils G W G P G M G C S W S P S M S C Clean GRAVEL <5X fines Y GRAVEL with >12X fines Clean SANG <5X fines SANG with >12X fines GRAVEL >50X coarse fraction larger than No. 4 SANO >50X coarse fraction smaller than No. 4 Coarse-Grained Sails >60X larger than No. 200 sieve i p5i >4 far G W O10J>6 for S W (D3o z G W and S W ` 6 tE� 3 G P and S P Clean GRAVEL or SANG not meeting 010x 050j< requirements for G W and S W G M and S H Atterberg limits below A Line G C and S C Atterberg limits above A Line with PI <4 with PI >7 * Coarse-grained soils with percentage of fines between 5 and 12 are considered borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols. 010. 070. and 050 are the particle diameter of which 10, 30. and 60 percent, respectively. of the soil weight are finer. . Fine- Grained Soils M L C L 0 L M H C H 0 H Pt SILT I CLAY Organic SILT CLAY I Organic Highly Organic Soils with Liquid Limit <50X Soils with Liquid Limit >50X Soils Fine-Grained Soils >50X smaller than No. 200 sieve 60 1 I I 1 I 1 1 50 - C H X . v 40 - -, c C L �;��,e 30 - w - .1 c 20 - M H or 0 H a 10 - CL - ML ML G,\\.,.N\\\\\\\,.\yr or 0 L 0 SO 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit -- Li H tRTGIOWSL-R J-2330-02 6/91 Figure B-1 • 7 "'• . : 7 -"'' ., ' --7 ""--: ."-..7 77 7.7 : 7 r- : -7 —7:7 77 77;7"'7' ••7.r•—•' ..7 ,--.77 Li I:•!I_: :. . .i ••I''.'..; :-.',...r-,.7.: ; - .... .-_. .:.. •i .....' i a:l Z.' 1 "71:Z..t..'. ...•IM : : ! ' ;. _ . : I • : ,_:',-.t c,r ;...!H . . i ! . • . . . , -- ______ ______ -- , _ 1 . ! • . . i I .... i - , . : . i ..- I • 1 ' -. I • . . ...- . . 1 . ,- • 1 i . 1 • . ..... . i 1• ..,.... t . ....,"-I 1--- • - ; •-• i . I !•••• i • i ../.. i i 1 i CO ! • • I .' • • ..= . i L.17 ""n — 1 1 • ;. 1 1 A AFE IS / • •. . . t 1 , ... I ML--i .1 --- • _a • • • - • I . .--- - . -- - - __ --• • I ...- 1 I _ -- • .. .• • • . : ' L ..:, -DI_: r • : Pli-i 74' CH i.. i . . • 1 I • I : . • I • 0 10 20 Zil 40 50 60 70 : 4",b 90 100 i i • LIQUID LIMIT . 1 1 .-aticn + D;=....cription • t ! _- _ pi• --7: .40 , . AS11 D 2487-S.T. . Is ST-9, :-.:,-. CL, Lean clay tz-.7. :•---,, -p97 11 PR TH - ,.: . , 23 16 100 • . I . , NAT. W. C =42% t t r-4-7--c.., !:::-I-.).7, • CL, Lean clay i 97' -94. 5 DEFT;- iT .,.e.::, 133 NAT. W. C =.7,0% . ____ la GT-9, S-21 • CL, Lean clay 92.5.-93.0 DEP 7-4 42 24 12 100 1 . i NAT. W. :...--7. =71% . GT-I , 14 • , . . • , ' CL. Lean clay 57.5' -5';' DEPTH , 47 25 13 , 130 : NAT. W.C1r=76% 1 , . • , ! . • • i 1 _ _ — • . . i:Remar.ks; - P-c..ict: PACCAR MANUFACTURING 2UILLING I; II . 11 101int : PACCAR 11. L.-..cn: RENTON, • “ .. . . . Ili . I; 1 • .. 1 J-d J-7=7:71--7/2 - IF 4 . --.J.. :i y-1..e• i .: N./V ....-/ ...1!---...--r? -71 ,?•-'-r'? 2-1 - • - - - - - _____________.... _ - 1 ........ T'. . .. . . . I __________________... _______ . . I SI ID I - 1 - 1..1 (TO •-•4 CO 734 1 11 CO U t 1.0 LI 14 •-•4 I I (r) N C C •tj .., 1 i Pi 05 CO -• • • • ••• 0 O. L. II. _..i 14 i...) . X F.-- ••• .._ 1/. E. I-. I ... ...1 - fr. 1.11 (f) (....) (...) :I II II r • `....• • . • • • m if 1- .. . . .. . . .... ...... .. . yr I i •, i 0 ...,. ID r Cy) at I ti I I.1 • ' •N,.' ' • I— .4 --4 ••-I I ''.4e 0 , . ... . .. . . .. ... . . ...... .. . ... i AP' i)) ... I(.,) r-4 ri li) 'XI l• - c. i e.., CI_ 11 .•.1 ,I a 4-4 \ .... . . . ... . r-- s. 0—..,, , c_ • !!!‘) ..-... 4...) I-1 _1 1- nt. -i •. i• . N. ...1 (I. (-I (s1 C..1 4• •• CI t.-1 .. i .-I12 •.I C; If I Pi •-'' " •., .. . ... .... . .. . 41 C 4-' '11 r: ... J -) ..I Ii) 0% e.4 C.) 0 lac _J II) 11 I s_. .I _ i I C 1 I P•i;'i Ift'' FA • ••- •• . ... .. .... . . il. f 1 .1 .. ..___................ .. . ._.. l''- . .... . .. • • ••• . 4. , • • t. 0 ...1 iri 1 ...... .. _ . (.1:1 „ <1; , -' • E , ... I •, • I-1_ . . . . . . ...... . • • C • 12.1 .-I \ 0 ••-4 • C) • •... ''.• ', . •:..I. L . . . . .... ...: .. . '*•• ' 0 -4 ID i (I L. ii-. I::1 ..i ,i i. I_i r. P. (i. ) e n (..0 i til '-'4 _I I. Ul I. ;!. 1 ; .. Ill (II 0:)1.1) t\- •0 r.:1 1 -..T: (,) '• ...: 11 I IO I 11 0 1: 1 0 I'••• ,.. co .. 11)r. 1-- Lill__L. •.: •-.4 "I' ,-4 10 PI -4 If) II ---4 lc) II 1.•1 41 CC E I c . • :T: •:•1 1 r C 0) CI • i.f) CI • (.9 1. 1:) • I 0 0)C.) 1•••• 0 ••0 • •r tr. It .1. " -i•P 1 :.T.::3 t,) :I.: ...3. -,r• •••• •II, '"4 1"' "-I I- r-I 10 • Iii Al rSI in SI U I IL T-• I IL I I . t- N. , _., .. C.) .G.1 n • 0 I- lila I-- Ill 41. I.-4:1 •::I: t. / •c, IiI 1 11 c.II •r-4 " ..I Er f.-):T. (I': CI 7 if,.4:1 Z 14 , X3,11 II .1,J.I.'..-)1 1.51.:11,.4 I . tl• . V -4 161 it . . . . .. ....... ..... . ...... ..... . ...._________.______________ ...... - •----------------••-••"••• .. •- -— • st-,,' r-co'r , , .... •• . , . . .