The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit D04-415 - SEGMENT 2 - NORMED - WAREHOUSE/OFFICE SHELLD04-415 Normed — Warehouse/Office Shell 4320 South 131st Place Due to the file size, this record has been broken down into 3 segments for easier download. Click on the following links to review the permit segments: Segment 1 - Normed — Warehouse/Office Shell 004-415 Segment 2 - Normed — Warehouse/Office Shell 004-415 Segment 3 - Plans - Normed — Warehouse/Office Shell 004-415 This record contains information which is exempt from public disclosure pursuant to the Washington State Public Records Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW as identified on the Digital Records Exemption Log shown below. D04-415 Normed 4320 South 131st Place THE ABOVE MENTIONED DIGITAL RECORDS PERMIT FILE INCLUDES (DR) EXEMPTION LOG THE FOLLOWING REDACTED INFORMATION Pa • e # Code Exem .tion Brief Ex • lanato Descri .tion Statute/Rule DR1 Personal Information — Social Security Numbers Generally — 5 U.S.C. sec. 552(a); RCW 42.56.070(1) The Privacy Act of 1974 evinces Congress' intent that social security numbers are a private concern. As such, individuals' social security numbers are redacted to protect those individuals' privacy pursuant to 5 U.S.C. sec. 552(a), and are also exempt from disclosure under section 42.56.070(1) of the Washington State Public Records Act, which exempts under the PRA records or information exempt or •rohibited from disclosure under an other statute. 5 U.S.C. sec. 552(a); RCW 42.56.070(1) 354, 378, 393 DR2 Personal Information — Financial Information — RCW 42.56.230(4 5) Redactions contain Credit card numbers, debit card numbers, electronic check numbers, credit expiration dates, or bank or other financial account numbers, which are exempt from disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56.230(5), except when disclosure is expressly re.uired b or soverned b other law. RCW 42.56.230(5) • RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. /1c/a, Me -0 9p OF DATE 14 a_ CALCULATED BY 20-14 YUC.cST etIf j &. SpA -N1 401-t)11 1 + 25opc.fLL 310 pC-F Seci/ot-/S rrd' JPA r • Af(10-4 - "1/201040-8) �p 2. 141 I _ = 49.4 6,5 I MM S 3' = 1/,L 57/ k -.ie. s-67 1 - l2 10 .‘•/q,2, W/1 --/r-1 32 _34 t EEle Q` /,O, .an/ N1 a A-70,4- /s 4E Qv/ ?' /%X . 81 NLS v157/ &!c �c.vE 'FOR- 0)01F -011-A,1 L-04 4/ of40 Capra 47.$4' S/ "�=S2.t� T ,-ey,-7/01.~4 2-a,4 /a 4cc av J7 -9M g(zo / = 7,4-k '74 +IKnn�c4 K $,4 Ra)I.tpEd I Reccr(o t4 I` iM e t�Vnv� 2 P t M. d _' _ /-22(8). 386 pcF (4o $70 &) ?ce1C e"i4 7.4 26 k' /b - 39�-�4 A%e'd o, 4.370 Aye WTL ec/Fy Sok/os �olsr- 14 -rs sEc-rio»( RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB Kip R486 En 2C SHEET NO. 91 CALCULATED BY OF DATE of - C :1 -;1ST 4 1oIST (C4,T) E. r 9/L/OS. 4.4 L=051 1.4 470 pc,F +7- - -t-----171-4rAsiT = Vid...2-e ;41 ,, M $,2,4 r I--- - 11 - -:i \V Kb, M-� 28. M = , _ 17) = 413s"' x'4,1 4.3c.x j)( 11 12•C 4f -A7 eaci/t/4-r..cir (/�//f�✓�'�c� Lp''9?J Bot -564 Gam/ esp.6/7;6,0 s ilio•./ /7 4- GG+v�f?" . 8 1 poi4JT Zc 64-4 /'ms=s 6-01` To srA-Frr) k 0144 "4(6) Cpm teQuiti � = _ = 4//fit szi (6) $706()=-11/ i kl cia- - r is of 11.17 DR UT /d/d -cmc.s84. 4/9 cert mei4gLL /Pla,./l E',4/% 4/77z �3 , g rug . ci4 F.r a,�� pt, ''P 4r' ")a/..Jr Za - o A.-7/)4 S Il rv� �o1.,d ait, ) 7� 9.3 v7v ad 77/.6 • RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. NioP.MEA �t CALCULATED BY 92 - OF DATE. lo104- VukrJr gIgDEiz-S. -r (cr, ) Tlha SCO-& L= 9 '' = *4.0 fre.4. t' i r r) 047 —74 = 63.3 t 02 = 46-r m7-4, @pro — -;' old mL94-= asa/ g,/; '� =1I2e 1 ��IIJ . - - ---' Z 24-)/i/�.v 44/ ed/vde e<#'- ameo 1 0,1 E7ipas-/774/ 70 4cccz.41)T- �-a,� 8k /00i4,er- 1a4-20 G .(404/l6e,4', (9-Aiy14,0)= Z.131` /'`e 14'Ro✓AJCA0 =t9Ist M(g) = 66, 8) MI o t.OUN (q- 006()•?- $5, X- /057 A/czo4- E- o, 5./°%a D4 4, 3t9e9- 090 *K5 38'7 " RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. rqapM00 � J'3 CALCULATED BY qrki OF DATE I i` - d i -- T qt T , sr L-=. 52 (.4'� wo pe 6inno-. .741 4 10 2. 1. �►' P • 7rs` 8 ,� y I eM a)8 4-y Nfr;r_.,T1 -741 PL VAI = I s w+ @PAIDVVV leith l L ' 52 Ls SAL 5.4=x a6 C%N/f-D,t v4 1- ; 4-God*.!T r410.470 /Wc, Aj 4, vim, (V°90) 1°- '7' at '404. / = /0.‘2/` /6,..4 E _ &(;) 1`44/ 0,e-/ WC USS 6 0/7 11110. SAcre- Sot1VE- 14;7-4 (ej M40 522 4o66,-= 4� 128.2- y v r /44.,004-s E. 4` ()stoma r24,4 1 evtirii 39 rL 25'(4D, f) 256 LL A ok 457 OD& RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. 1\inpfliV) CALCULATED BY OF n ., DATE l SO 0 E �oc3t�L CA44-ri LE. -1/4/ e..K Ael 318- 02 Lo A -Q Conilai 4 tert0^1-S , I,20+ I,6L FfxEn �. EN9 (qe40 1,2 t- Alt) .ETikt vds& -ToLST q,Stsk . 7lry ``/ 1`L i 5' a J Fl.)((d)(12) = f,/ e w Sec,. 3o�r / LL (3s/ to(25)--4.4 05+-25)( 'Z) ,®/e D,t.. DL • 4146,r 1? .c.(5-1-2.. (24 = 1 GI IcP• - P- EQuPt. 4d opf'as Rt. Co Neip i—t1t LItti 2 EQOArr FA -c ---o JZEp Le; 4 c 1aEr-LEf Oki S , Act- t ntc-i At (,,t NioN1-4umPA-rt6-E 411 = . o«1q " d � - , b p°9 P= 0 I. =(__ q16/11)-- 4011;5 �,1 = • oo 6 02r 462 ,Oo22P- ? 1 N4- 6, , 00* 4'2 : , Dots 121--• 3500 --› 4' t , oat �' • co 24 P= 3300f1- . _ '51,1�r' l .e/4 ' G= %64( Soo S 2 svppon.-y-s eg, & y (0110 ) /4 = Er7 / //X Ei4-rh/" /ecE',��,1,7-- A tr. N(.1°)(lrL (lama) _ .244" 4(4 r , 4s . 6Z.4 for (61X601C0D)(40,c- 4,0s`) z w O00 co 0 w= U)w w0 uL� �a =w Z� �o z� w w U� O N O E- w • 0w LIO uiz U= O F - z RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 1\10 124Y SHEET NO. 15 CALCULATED BY OF DATE 1 ('Zoo s ` *9 • 62 _''(do, 000)s 0c557 Er—s--(-46ra,) ee).49 01,1.7 4 4 (c/-%) s)(60, 000)(w — 457) b,,, 200 (11/4a11)(skt) tc", Doo psi .91r GAIL , tici(2) - VI( 4" a" 9,t, (I.1) .3o6 < -TOP f4. evrtoki ActeckuA-rE -BeamPro - version (6.4 - 32 bit) 9560.00# 370.00#/1f -3300.00# n r%Thv=11588.0 m= 38841.8 14.40 v M 11588.00 14718.22 (#) -3296.30 -38641.60 -0.0043 (ft-#) (in) INPUT FILE NAME ====> C:\Documents and Settings\Bill Whipkey\Desktop\Normed_beam1_cantilever.cb DATE MMENTS ====> ====> ====> 1/31/2005 12:02:14 PM Za SZ • W' U O (no J• = E- U) u_ W o LL ?. -a =W F- _ Z� I— O Z F- uj UC) O E, O H WW • U LIO W 0. Z O z 'BeamPro - version (6.4 - 32 bit) 784.00#NIf 90- Fatoa-? 8,400 3300.00# 5.00 T v= 7220.0 m= 28300.0 D 7220.00 -28300.00 INPUT FILE NAME ====> DATE -___> • MMENTS =___> ====> ====> (ft-#) (in) -0.0024 C:\Documents and Settings\Bill Whipkey\Desktop\Normed_beam2_cantilever.cb 1/31/2005 12:01:34 PM • RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB 4/0"../1/0 CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. 98 OF . 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY gpto, DATE / $/ 45 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com Et.1-rtaci spekt.m� I.... @ -4, Zs 9. IS )(44,- &pep ' D/L (,'d,'-) 4 4s4 4c _Ms- 02 so tz. n' /2 .C)t /.def ei•l ll/fr /7 7774'S t3• i ' L 5o (G.sr 4')l (1 0`' n .10"-43( C,4) V�� = 1,s ( 4- Is‘ (.'H) �N = (1,'/I)(1112 �g,�► 8 ci_ 4?ri m s6ItiC12,«)o) .f- 41.1 0 4 ('d—)c) (er)i c o)(48" •I(418"> pil 2 6„ - 7� ` RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB IVOFM C CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. 97 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY /ti 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com OF DATE I2 -2z -04k- 12 PI Z sc.ern rs 0 gtuo )ki T(PICAL CoNCUTE. LATE -ILA -L. RESIsTIn1E1 1441.4.., 4.e+5.9-" DL 9,0'4 = 5o'') : 5, 3� < 6, o oc0AU✓ tTs F PER IgcsEcrlot41908 ,/or s1vw/ A vAu.. Pl g ' DEFI I'll c 41W E.4.wet.tr ,4s A Hlact.L. "C.1 S I5- 02 1d-6, Met $ph+JOAICSPEU4c. R-t141r-o/ZC,z CoA/CJ�-E7. 1 '�o . a0 S-rgoc,-ru2+4Z k ,44.46 , 5'--0" RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. /de CALCULATED BY c � 3k O2 G.c q"5) �m DATE 12I2/"104 1 Z PIS Ec @ coLio a,2 tit= I,S D -t- 1,0E. + 1,oL P =� O �Sk -� / z ( K3��)f /. (2�, y.sCz6•/" f7.5- Cut z'` 4,1e Art. cr„,„ra 11121e- .4041111, ,2r`1 (It•2s)(sits4 op kik'4 4sra-ic I,2 (vii'( .. '')(s-0`'YISt) 41,6 ee Fix)eattie- 6A/e4g c A07o4EG S ,toss = 6142 .= 11.2 •sY1q . 33�� / 12 ie 14 = c,21( CIif1s')(1 >l1Z) _ 1.4g24co trootAyo M fr2.042 .coo - 6 or ps; FAcrVitt 5 3375 etaMild MAO 7jArAi° G EE,tntEmVV„ i'Lre4c Axrp9-t. Derr . 4c.M-c. &o„✓ ny gL6.4,726A-tir Akr- +T.110 �� 3575' --- ofr 774c/-oo f RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. /"1 CALCULATED BY OF DATE I 101'.. V . Pi etz M s•orS ® i203 AcA 3 Y- 02 21.1. - Spec. l At R.L Sil crurt-kt. 1AIPT A . 2/•7.2./ ? . 6025 2/. 7, /p. 2 IP .O25 PSS Ps) 7 ..i../s ✓e' SE. 1d.i" /i Q, .MEQ Ok To / L vE. 4�3os, s4•4/' ` '4 le. < 51 (0141c11 4t‘17t)71, ove(G41.114 Uer /wet/ 2,E"/A, Oki 'To atemicy (i// rn' Sec770,,/ / 4/3, (GxcE/a:,. /6c /90k9.4 STea-m3. <V./. A). / 4 c/ 3,V- 02) 4cG.EprA•C5 ,/1"o vs rE S--+✓O*,i.O ,mooes' . `rr .lsv sE R.Ei4ro11..ctEM evar 21,3..t 21 4.C, I rib `Critical section t Vdb t 4db Z 2 1/2" 124 4db 5db 64 No. 3 through No. 8 No. 9, No. 10 and No. 11 No. 14 and No. 18 Fig. R12.5—Hooked bar details for development of stan- dard hooks z • w O 0 WI w O 2 gQ Y. E-_ ? Z °. w no of • F- w w -11=O z w U =. 0~ z ` RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 00pMeD SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF DATE It/181°4 Pc.P1 LL) £ = 2 ( Ro.47, 44- i--ti41 - I M C/3 /1\4 0 EA S.101 (CI (ASStlIM.se) 4.tsCGf ),:sit coo . ct s 0.4s -P b--114' Fr -Ex (%!Z +l coo �,ii 4. .4�3" c� `' iii 0 Nel , avo or:0)(5 1 r, 6:4,1 ale Od- St) -rte (Z) 4 C. '15.41 ( 6 44)(60,ciA _ / 3 5 " . es(4-04 ON) (,3�y Omr, 6So(5c-`'- 2 ) � .t/e.te 4.4SC e y o3 (4.r.1) • Ss 433) z 4/2 p," 1\4U 1. (" /•/ e/ 1-/ (.4'6 OA (06 1/21`1L 2z5 e4ect -Ps r -r- (4 BAKIIS 1 Tb As .as4' •T, (4.01N/Itits-1) • sS ( ,) G' / /:), app 77 . act 3, 3 b,,,, cl 3'i 0' Mii\l - II �, 000 g '.I 601 000 ^'^1 1 OEM 1,� I • • . o1. I3 14=(60ti 11.1.0 ti RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB ! !/ OPKg4 SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /03 OF DATE I 005 c/-= 59" C0)14 = () • W = .eSD„ 0 T- As -Pi = • & (60, 000) `5. "6 , 4 Lf_, v . ds _ .52') _ / 3r1/ "___4 •8S 1, •85(4tocxyps,) ( ii ) ►,, C =V _ /, 3� /1 T A62 d�' -. ', 000 = , H = .002. A 4 7 g7,00,00o E Der'/I ii,/ 7ro/&'/t' S.4-, A✓. g` - C o a -/62) , o a 3 =, /0 3 _,_oa,5 G i /,62 Zp,sey� /0, 3,,v. 'o./ CcWr2rx.c-R/..) --e.>ro i✓- . Wer-E,t/sice ?7,4--/ A./ A/ g.e z,A.-fie .9'•3..2./ Es • • 1 o (TWIeic/C//"H 1),E5/ 9A/._sfiz�Egni - /zE-6?vr,L, 6.a r7-) OO S� 0 (L±i Rik- 5p t14.3"J . 90 > /1otisi/t/4t 5n' lc7T» SIA. = Z.4 40, xo Oese ; 0,1Ocv, 000 e r-1 • 003 z ce 00 W = -JIL wo �a =w �O w~ • w o O - O H ww • 0 LL 6 w U= o ~ z RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO, CALCULATED BY BIM LE1of- P.► CPC 8.1 0 lac. zoos Ilo2U .2,1 M -TA -acs_, 14 I E. Si) ‘,3 ,abs •��b �'� ikrim 'rE � L = ,1-(1,0)( 12') . S1.16 ti\i,,) Poor 3,NtAtIFE...1_�1��(3,4.1)09,51(60),r_ 5.4K 54,1- Y2. BOOP r rzeL isis-r r3 3 VJA FP= 2. o'( Sr,ti (sist) (11.s-')(t4t) S.,K S tio(tvq.A' • � = 3.24K Et\rgy Sp4* .rn.L (*(414.1x.iy,50).. 3.15 �r Y2 teti - / sprng-El- eowi L c(4ki5o) = .52'2`` F _ , /95u 04- E. - 2,oK '4 k EA- s z 3.15 + ,16m QM, 1.4 WuJb 8 -T roTM . v!/n/L L.o4-o as/de2i of /-64./67w ey 5 IOpsF (L) _ oerh /104/1 5 ps wall* or vfik Y/IZTIUt 1-0t0s, , k.drM t canit r_rl 5.414.44,1= a.3K 38/x'' LL 9.0`- 4 2,0 x = 21,st 21.5'/ -" Ve,ru4t. LoA ,, W O. EccgAhnicnv S.711/ CC ' RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB l\lottmEL SHEET NO. /0 5 CALCULATED BY OF DATE 12-- 2104. DAA "tD(L COIJS(06-1Z-A11 O LOQ rAccOlk C.044314ATIONIC IA:- I.41D + L o.15 (1,4D 4 110 +(1,(2‘4 cv I m E) VI = 0. p -1- (11(0k#4 og (i ot,) — u = 114D4 1,1L KIS. 4-kitrAa Book' OF- A 4p' o • Soc.cfin oris META -0 OLcq I roR v.111.1 D6614p.1 " VbC.UM E 1 LAC.. i tea K1 1! )(C.10) KcI - DtrLOc-loklovA 1 FPrurolz 085 S,-i.6.v7/c, /mss^'/0' .v5 1441eizi. a /s 3,a -5E4 pd ./zv/ce let./6-4 SE�s•�/� o/t e- S, /.44. s 4O ase4 /A/ roc/ i:1e. /. o.E . 41010/440/1/4-M Ion --#4GI V// Ao/z k' /z), Lo a s. Arg.a p,Ntiegez SEv.vic.e. Lev t e (sir 4.) &� rr -r+� . illus r.L try 1.4 FAc.,-tro (11-4-10 pgai -To Aorr vc-n M Art. VAwva Iit oik -to -tom.. Low 1 k.-rosx s c-, -4ppu . T4 E.Fog.E.. lit E.. 1 S 4ppn-oottiArE. FPcr--ro tZ F IZ E ' RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB klop4mEo /od SHEET NO. OF CALCULATED BY DATE ftq i°41° 4S1.-e\I ER Au.,. 114AU/ sl S . C 04h W1c.k 466" 32. 3' /0 KII 4/le6 43,E iow M. C °1 = (414 / 423 I _I 4; .3.... 7, slih 1.. ..,_ ` ,o, ° �` X1:0Li000 12 3 I �I 111±i1 3 m/3. .[I. . :,/,7gis 12 I 'r -i1)/411 _J''" . ,,--- 4-E � 2 4t =-14" _ 5. b Zs/ (b = , 2„ .-t 1 t( III '/ Ltsr4"JGE rIZo+I/1 Cskl-tiZOQ i/1 ` /ba U'= I " f /L "Y �I - '�5 ` /r7. 9/to rf Sq -0J l�fl rz R) Is -4S0.! ou 4e bw 4 --T, * lO 0 , S� ' 684 tk G, ,4s=444 -s—=10 . %► ) 60101s) - 567 ca (64 04 .73-F.570) (P2 ") «) r•-• el -1- 4.4 cisc = 1056 4�� /144 ee I EA./ -'5: 1 0 C94/7 E 6 4�frfWI.) 45"C (CO, Oa))( 6137 g / z F: c_4 00 W = -JL w0 �d =w Z�. zo w w U0 oII- W 0 tL O wz co o1- z RICHARD HUDSON Se ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB JcMb SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY DATE l 3 105- 04-1?-az 5- 0-1.lc j° (ley a 87s-„ . 00(526 , g 6 y • (es)Wo 1,000 moo f ezo-r 60, oiO 6 , ooB Z6 , 0 1 1 p,(� RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 1\1 AMELI SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /D6 4371 001,AE- "& MU *r SEcr, oil or .A/A.L R» 5 4ato �C Eis LA'r egA _ A-140 era-P.m/24c. Vett:TI LAL Locos, (In -Ib) SIH = K44 4, CAtil eAccAATE. 1 Ttsgr►Ot4 0� DERR--a J I z OIL W DiAEr.r CMcr.ctmm of I (Oe1S4 Ec 4 kft.c= MIA0/ 52_3:J./L. Co, -s4 . Icy re\ As, Lc/ se. n Vi U a — VtotaAtc Ca vx *r To 4Fttcrots6 mss, 1.2 D —f 1.0E- + 1 0 L (q—.5 C+ikei'ER 1.05p 4 ItoE. 4- 1.211- (C-2) ApF c IX C RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. ilofitvfgO CALCULATED BY OF • DATE /e 410 �E OOT o f p c hK11. VN I Fol DAV. LoAQ t10E, Vark AltlS. V/ei _1 1- l"o" S'•o'' t"' .A14 \ha. COPJ ► o ER 0-0" O► I SLID CF Cot,lvEle:r PE Fbitzr LosIct I TD ( SGUIV4I-Entr ()4 I fo►ZM Lo,ka , MPI M, c- Mt. 2 F�c� � FL.coA M 2 = W IVVIA (ule,+ W) �2 + P e TM oirkal 4*s, 5 8 2. er 116,0 . Z.� Fps . 41C Sos �L _ .3114W w WEI SEIStvlic Loa-lD IN,IAc1GE. By 1A/ALL ITSSLF iboith 01- Szfrodth Gc ecadaitcrii YYY 16000/1 o Lc(kJTa r l-mn, WE= fits 2 411 . 11Y11005-.;). i5"96 1...4, 4111 t', (52-t 210 = (4.N )(' )((so pc -F) (.341().r... 52,5 4/, Wal 1, ADDrno'J Pn._ SE,ISMt( LoAtl h (S.24+ 3.15* ,I95)'Z = 2zI (.4t or l/otc - MEL = 1.2 (23(x)+ 1.0 (5/03)+ I.2l►s L` io,sa?#j &us *4 L4/1 = 1,2 D t (,O �l 4_ (/0387)3u ) z re LI U U OQ w= W O LL? • a F=ILI — _ z� ZO Lu UQ o QF_ - w uj u.o wz U� 1- z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 1\012ME/ SHEET NO. //et" CALCULATED BY otr-�i 25111 OF DATE 0,,,101. T, (2-cT heir -1-a --r-t2i G c.c, -4' As "e-@ glAkx; ,56 M 125 41 N�� 2 • 61, 75-0 ' .r . 86 (do, 000) 60400 00eD le 3 5.62 3 2-9 EL = 8, v�}-- ,EG r.• 541000"/Tc. d = a ws" C' = ff er 2 w 1.4= l2'I My ` Mto (pp l 41.4 -SPLA qcito Ps' 4/61/ 233 �� 4 / . 0323 (15)4-B& Icy �ecy v;o1/0 = 2b'1" 505, 8 2g ZSI. 5 tt 1 jc 21a -r 3,604 N" 8r3 � qVsj i 233 /St ,+ M14 =Mho q►(hMH 4e11 /, 56 Sor,vacs ir,,.# / k� 5��,32gi4• 41 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB OILMEZ CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. OF 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY BIM DATE 120 (04 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com 14.5.4-4 oktocit 1-40Ails 4. Pik FFE..crS- .9c/I./6" iScp I So q.5.11.5 Mmtwuttil mom EAT stJ Ivie/Ailes AT' s74 -41E. DapLec71o.4 1S cov% fAreo, M - VW de oftelZOIRZ 1Y4/1 iSer 0.0111 Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope: Job # H0439 Date: 4:37PM, 3 JAN 05 //2 Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Page 1 normed_IiecwFront EL panels Description Shear walls along grid A.2. Out of plane forces. LGeneral Information Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Clear Height Parapet Height Thickness Bar Size Bar Spacing Bar Depth Min Defl. Ratio Concrete Weight 22.000 ft 0.000 ft 11.250 in 7 6.000 In 8.875 in 150.0 150.00 pcf f'c Fy Width 4,000.0 psi 60,000.0 psi 0.900 12.000 in Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for Teff & Iterati Seismic Zone Min Vert Steel % Min Horiz Steel % Base Fixity Wall Seismic Factor Parapet Seismic Factor LL & ST Not Combined ng Deflections Parapet Weight Counteracts Middle 3 0.0006 0.0010 0 % 0.2650 0.0000 Loads Note: Lateral Loads Wind Load Point Load ...height ...load type Lateral Load ...distance to top ...distance to bot ...load type 44.000 psf 286.00 lbs 20.000 ft Seismic 940.00 #/ft 13.500 ft 8.000 ft Seismic Vertical Loads Uniform DL Uniform LL ...eccentricity Concentric DL Concentric LL Seismic 1" Magnifier Wind "I" Magnifier 760.00 #/ft 5,900.00 #/ft 3.000 in 1,600.00 lbs 1.000 1.000 Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered Toads to ultimate loads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Wall Analysis Basic Defl w/o P -Delta Basic M w/o P -Delta Moment Excess of Mcr Max. P -Delta Deflection Max P -Delta Moment Maximum Allow Vertical Bar Spacing Maximum AIIow Horizontal Bar Spacing Summary 1 For Factored Load Stresses Seismic Wind 1.614 461,550.9 346,202.6 1.632 466,270.4 18.000 in 18.000 in For Service Load Deflections Seismic 0.060 in 1.058 41,925.6 in-# 322,815.2 0.01n-# 205,157.2 0.060 in 1.066 42,053.8 in-# 325,224.9 Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : SEISMIC Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : WIND Wind 0.047 in 33,084.0 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.047 in 33,185.1 in-# 18.000 in 18.000 in 22.00ft clear height, O.00ft parapet, 11.25in thick Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for Teff & Iterating Deflections Factored Load Bending : Seismic Load Govems Maximum Iterated Moment : Mu Moment Capacity Mn * Phi : Moment Capacity Applied: Mu @ Mid -Span Applied: Mu @ Top of Wall Max Iterated Service Load Deflection Actual Deflection Ratio Actual Reinforcing Percentage UBC Allow. As % = 0.6 * RhoBal Actual Axial Stress : (Pw + Po ) / Ag Allowable Axial Stress = 0.04 * f'c Wall Design OK with #7 bars at 6.00in on center, d= 8.88in, fc = 4,000.0psi, 466,270.35 in-# 552,595.13 in-# Service Load Deflection : Seismic Load Govems Maximum Iterated Deflection Deflection Limit Seismic 552,595.13 in-# 466,270.35 in-# 27,971.99 in-# 1.07 in 248 : 1 1.066 in 1.760 in Wind 531,990.11 in-# 42,053.75 in-# 2,394.00 in-# 0.05 in 5,589 : 1 0.0113 0.0113 0.0171 0.0171 28.94 psi 160.00 psi 28.94 psi 160.00 psi �z W reL 00 CO a W~ U) u. WO u -Q =a I. W z= ZO W • W U� O N D 1 -- W W HF • O z W O F' z Page 2 II normed_Ij.ecwFront El. panels 1 6 Title : Normed II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Job # H0439 Date: 4:37PM, 3 JAN 05 //3 Scope : Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0801345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Description Shear walls along grid A.2. Out of plane forces. Analysis Data E 3,604,996.5 psi n=Es/Ec 8.04 Fr Multiplier for sgrt(f'c) 7.500 Ht / Thk Ratio 23.47 Values for Mn Calculation... As:eff= [Pu:tot + AsFy]/Fy a : (AsFy + Pu)/(.85 t'c b) c=a/.85 - lgross !cracked I-eff (ACI methods only) Phi: Capacity Reduction • Mn= As:eff Fy(d-a/2) - Pu (WallThk/2-Bar Depth) Sgross Mcr=S"Fr Fr = Rho: Bar Reinf Pct Seismic 1.291 In 1.899 in 2.234 in 1,423.828 in4 502.69 in4 550.08 1n4 0.900 613,994. 59 in4 253.125 in3 ‘ 120,067.7 in-# 1J 474.34 psi 0.0285 Wind 1.268 in 1.865 In 2.194 in 1,423.83 in4 497.64 in4 1,423.83 in4 0.900 591,100.13 In-# Additional Values Loads used for analysis WaII Weight Wall Wt • Wall Seismic Factor Wall Wt Parapet Seismic Factor Service Applied Axial Load Service Wt © Max Mom Total Service Axial Loads 140.625 psf 37.266 psf 0.000 psf 2,360.00 #/ft 1,546.87 #/ft 3,906.87 #/ft Factored Loads Applied Axial Load Lateral Wall Weight Total Lateral Loads Seismic 3,304.00 2,165.62 5,469.62 Wind 2,478.00 #/ft 1,624.22 #/ft 4,102.22 #/ft ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied internally to entered loads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST : 1.400 1.700 1.700 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 0.900 1.300 Add', "1.4" Factor for Seismic 1.400 Add"I "0.9" Factor for Seismic 0.900 1 RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB N1 0 GLS SHEET NO. OF � CALCULATED BY DATE 1 ( I J , 0 4- eovn1s,/ Ise l' EASE a M i 414;24a/'n/g fi S eSr5=s42Ksi _Eza(v115 • 36 e fi E #9.r =.�o els/ ist ¢17 alltAcE L 99,s- 1 ,e4 6c _ //9. s-� -- 1�t/o�2.ST C SL apaCS"8 "Gi, -- -fp /" e Non/ Agee -.4.//E S � k /0= e -43.* 9;s• w - K =A 0490 -btt = .317 36 C z �W 2 6 O 0 W= • IL w0 2 q LL =W ?� o W • W U 0 o o ID Ili 0 o .z, o o� z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com 4/0/ZAME4 JOB SHEET NO. // 5 OF CALCULATED BY it°, DATE // /6 /o 4e)( Ye, " 4 0 .1 /wear mem 44,7r) /.247 -Pte .170/06/E6 Vieci 73 WM- 146 jbiST. kleA6 &X TV -2:- 2,0 • /etti-= .3 (, Ve7)()(') ks. (t.2) &/6) L' g .3 1/4/c4 vie66 443/ 4/4-t- Ailc,ce tde-c4) 0 -4c -W S/OE, op L 444X s/g/ 40eavpere_, • RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB ,/We/fro 6,13 CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. //b OF 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 2 / /05 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY /3J%l�i DATE 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com 2oi1c VLE-rvL GoLurn ruS, Coc.unnn/ 0 6,1 /,1- \//iLr/c.?t 04.6 44-Do/rid a F,zv 1 n e-mt. WE6 gr/ie4e4, //'" • 1yietlio zitd CL Semi s �/ c s /tT TSIt.0) L04-0 C9.,/ r ' 4-0-S &,s /67.^-.4 al/PDX/11 6./.5"-)/c Low (-cee k1k, 4yi) ./33(')('X' )(fsos) = , 6,/ 9 <, /2 Cep ot/CF�m41-T- Semis A.020c. Lo 413IE To M� il, .sid✓e.0/z. , JG op.N. Gw4 o � - /2'1 / I /> , roLvNon „I ei 1)....,/ 'fr 11 - '1, /.• I 'IL (_...5..)( 51.211 4- 41731') (156 16C -r) 101; 2 ft4•/3(i")(i')(')(i5 ems) .__.► ids _ /.23 Aso, 45o, NI h Aio L 04-13 . (°°2.1-61/) (Intosac).. // S /J( . td/41es • 51* 0.00In DL=12.0, LL=23.0, ST=0.0 k - o 11.25 in o - 4, • • • • • Dst Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=0.1 k/ft From 0.00->22.00 OPt Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=1.2 k © 10.67 12.00 in Rev 580002 User: KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983.2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 2:45PM, 1 FEB 05 Lateral and Vertical load resisting system. Rectangular Concrete Column Page 1 normed ii.ecw:Front EI. panels Description 11 1/4" X 12" columns typical. General Information Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Width 12.000 in Depth 11.250 in Rebar: 3- # 5 d = 2.000 In 3- # 5 d = 9.000 in Loads f'c 4,000.0 psi Fy 60,000.0 psi Seismic Zone 3 LL & ST Loads Act Together Total Height Unbraced Length Eff. Length Factor Column is BRACED 22.000 ft 22.000 ft 1.000 Note: Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered loads to ultimate loads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Dead Load Live Load Short Term 12.000 k 23.000 k k Axial Loads Lateral Uniform Loads #1 #2 Lateral Point Loads #1 #2 k/ft k/ft k k k/ft k/ft k k 0.105 k/ft k/ft 1.230 k 12.00 x 11.25in Column, Rebar: 345 @ 2.00in, 345 @ 9.00in ACI C-1 ACI C-2 Applied : Pu : Max Factored Allowable : Pn * Phi @ Design Ecc. M -critical Combined Eccentricity Magnification Factor Design Eccentricity Magnified Design Moment Po * .80 P : Balanced Ecc : Balanced 55.90 k 315.99 k 4.37 k -ft 0.938 in 1.00 0.938 in 4.37 k -ft 451.42 k 176.29 k 5.564 in 49.00 k 117.96 k 16.41 k -ft 4.018 in 1.43 5.754 in 23.50 k -ft 451.42 k 176.29 k 5.564 in k Start Loc Eccentricity in End Loc 22.000 ft ft Location 10.670 ft ft Column is OK ACI C-3 10.80 k 21.42 k 17.84 k -ft 19.821 in 1.11 22.001 in 19.80 k -ft 451.42 k 176.29 k 5.564 in Slenderness per ACI 318-95 Section 10.12 & 10.13 Actual k Lu / r 78.222 Neutral Axis Distance Phi Max Limit kl/r Beta = M:sustained/M:max Cm El / 1000 Pc : pi^2 E I / (k Lu)^2 alpha: MaxPu / (.75 Pc) Delta Ecc: Ecc Loads + Moments Design Ecc = Ecc * Delta Elastic Modulus ACI Ea. C-1 11.5000 in 0.7000 34.0000 0.3005 0.6000 1,578.70 223.56 0.3334 1.0000 0.938 0.938 3,605.0 ksi ACI Eq. C-2 5.1350 in 0.7000 34.0000 0.3429 1.0000 1,528.95 216.51 0.3018 1.4322 4.018 5.754 Beta ACI Eq. C-3 2.2150 in 0.8334 34.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1,026.58 145.37 0.0991 1.1099 19.821 in 22.001 in 0.850 ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied Internally to entered loads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST : 1.400 1.700 2.130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 0.900 1.600 Add"I "1.4" Factor for Seismic 1.400 Add'! "0.9" Factor for Seismic 0.900 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB /(10/2-A4 OrLM go/.� SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY._.- //9 6f,W,AJS-. vV 11. 0.64 171- 4-46 Za,((-c- ��P P�' • le �.2 aid1 ,-- 1573-" cc. �EoLIT7 1 ‘r-vM.t/, -3 7 -/,ES . e S "O. c- 7,&W7 r uvAP-ist./o E/Z C? /a pro • r . fl•-/tz 1,2 air•l //t0 �SMiG L0�40 ('FSG Id6(2r ) ./3 ( )(ii)(2/(/56) r- . 03y'e/, 4 , Coir/ CI Tl2,4-ma 4 4-10 G MiD�!-KJQ L. , o 3 ( r/- 2') (//4v)(4e)(,/,s0) .2-7.-". 2e ' ofs6 ?,(-4, 4,j coy-,,/o_e. C ',',iii) Q -L Q Z 0 vie.A, Sicvoi-itica6e.-r , NOe-P-f-A- it 14trk \‘ ,/s3 VI)( 5t-2'I+413I' � /Y.S , /2)615o � /,. 5 .4. . / * (4/)(OPS)(1) _ 41 . o3�//i 'S.X/s.fv; <c 0.00 In 11. DL=22.6, LL=28.6, ST=0.0 k 22.00 ft Dst Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=0.0 k/ft From 0.00->22.00 TPt Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=0.2 k © 10.67 24.00 in Title : Normed II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 2:33PM, 1 FEB 05 fof Lateral and Vertical load resisting system. Rev: 580002 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 i._.)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Rectangular Concrete Column Page 1 normed_fi.ecw..Front El. panels Description 11 1/4 X 24 columns typical - 9.8 & B General Information Width 24.000 in Depth 11.250 in Rebar: 4- # 6 d = 2.000 in 4- # 6 d = 9.000 in Code Ref: ACI 318-02,1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000' t'c 4,000.0 psi Fy 60,000.0 psi Seismic Zone 3 LL & ST Loads Act Together Total Height Unbraced Length Eff. Length Factor Column is BRACED 22.000 ft 22.000 ft 1.000 Loads Note: Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered Toads to ultimate loads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Dead Load Live Load Short Term 22.600 k 28.600 k k Axial Loads Lateral Uniform Loads #1 #2 Lateral Point Loads #1 #2 Summary k/ft k/ft k k k/ft k/ft k k 0.038 k/ft k/ft 0.280 k k Eccentricity In Start Loc End Loc 22.000 ft ft Location 10.670 ft ft 24.00 x 11.25in Column, Rebar: 446 @ 2.00in, 446 @ 9.00in Applied : Pu : Max Factored Allowable : Pn * Phi @ Design Ecc. M -critical Combined Eccentricity Magnification Factor Design Eccentricity Magnified Design Moment Po * .80 P : Balanced Ecc : Balanced ACI C-1 80.26 k 625.65 k 6.27 k -ft 0.938 in 1.00 0.938 in 6.27 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in ACI C-2 71.68 k 608.34 k 5.60 k -ft 0.938 in 1.31 1.229 in 7.34 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in Column is OK ACI C-3 20.34 k 408.81 k 4.58 k -ft 2.704 in 1.10 2.982 in 5.05 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in Slenderness per ACI 318-95 Section 10.12 & 10.13 1 Actual k Lu / r 78.222 Neutral Axis Distance Phi Max Limit kl/r Beta = M:sustained/M:max Cm El / 1000 Pc : pi^2 E I / (k Lu)^2 alpha: MaxPu / (.75 Pc) Delta Ecc: Ecc Loads + Moments Design Ecc = Ecc * Delta Elastic Modulus ACI Eo. C-1 11.4800 in 0.7000 34.0000 0.3942 0.6000 2,945.25 417.07 0.2566 1.0000 0.938 0.938 3,605.0 ksi ACI Ea. C-2 10.8100 in 0.7000 34.0000 0.4414 1.0000 2,848.83 403.42 0.2369 1.3105 0.938 1.229 Beta ACI Eo. C-3 7.4450 in 0.7000 34.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2,053.16 290.75 0.0933 1.1029 2.704 In 2.982 in 0.850 ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied Internally to entered Toads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST * : 1.400 1.700 2.130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 Add"I "1.4" Factor for Seismic 1.400 0.900 Add'! "0.9" Factor for Seismic 0.900 1.600 /ft 0.00 in DL=20.3, LL=15.5, ST=0.0 k Dst Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=0.0 k/ft From 0.00->22.00 (,Pt Ld #1: DL=0.0, LL=0.0, ST=2.7 k © 10.66 9 24.00 in Z w �1 wiO O O No w I- ILL 0. • Q CO i d. ▪ w Z= I— 0 Z �. • Luno 0 S. 0 I— w woc' --o wZ U N' O Z Summary Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 2:39PM, 1 FEB 05 Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580002 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Rectangular Concrete Column Description 11 1/4 X 24 columns 9.5 & A.5 -@entry _General Information Width 24.000 in Depth 11.250 In Rebar: 4- # 6 d = 2.000 in 4- # 6 d = 9.000 in LLoads Page 1 normed_Il.ecw:Front El. panels 1 Code Ref: ACI 318-02,1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Total Height Unbraced Length Eff. Length Factor Column is BRACED fc 4,000.0 psi Fy 60,000.0 psi Seismic Zone 3 LL & ST Loads Act Together 22.000 ft 22.000 ft 1.000 Note: Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered loads to ultimate Toads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Dead Load Live Load Short Term Eccentricity Axial Loads Lateral Uniform Loads 1 #2 Lateral Point Loads #1. #2 20.300 k 15.500 k k k/ft k/ft k k k/ft k/ft k k 0.038 k/ft k/ft 2.700 k k In Start Loc End Loc 22.000 ft ft Location 10.660 ft ft 24.00 x 11.25in Column, Rebar: 446 @ 2.00in, 446 @ 9.00in Applied : Pu : Max Factored Allowable : Pn * Phi @ Design Ecc. M -critical Combined Eccentricity Magnification Factor Design Eccentricity Magnified Design Moment Po * .80 P : Balanced Ecc : Balanced ACI C-1 54.77 k 625.65 k 4.28 k -ft 0.938 In 1.00 0.938 in 4.28 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in ACI C-2 50.12 k 195.77 k 21.91 k -ft 5.246 in 1.22 6.398 in 26.72 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in Column is OK ACI C-3 18.27 k 56.52 k 23.10 k -ft 15.175 in 1.09 16.562 in 25.22 k -ft 893.79 k 353.49 k 5.440 in Slenderness per ACI 318-95 Section 10.12 & 10.13 Actual k Lu / r 78.222 Neutral Axis Distance Phi Max Limit klJr Beta = M:sustained/M:max Cm El / 1000 Pc : plA2 E I / (k Lu)^2 alpha: MaxPu / (.75 Pc) Delta Ecc: Ecc Loads + Moments Design Ecc = Ecc * Delta Elastic Modulus ACI Ea. C-1 11.4800 in 0.7000 34.0000 0.5189 0.6000 2,703.49 382.84 0.1908 1.0000 0.938 0.938 3,605.0 ksi ACI Ea. C-2 4.4300 In 0.7000 34.0000 0.5670 1.0000 2,620.43 371.08 0.1801 1.2196 5.246 6.398 Beta ACI Ea. C-3 2.3150 in 0.8095 34.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2,053.16 290.75 0.0838 1.0914 15.175 in 16.562 In 0.850 ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied internally to entered loads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST : 1.400 1.700 2,130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 Add"I "1.4" Factor for Seismic 1.400 0.900 Add"I "0.9" Factor for Seismic 0.900 1.600 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB / V O/Z.7G �J SHEET NO. / CALCULATED BY .Erni c /� 2/ 5'1/0 // /4 OF DATE (EAJC4 C A5../< (.. /O// 1n/Au/ t348- o'L 6464 GAGS. Vas/2r fc r c3 -e " hoc. 1'J LL -----7 oPEo/, Got. _84-s Frx,T`/ - - - h/27-/C04•L o s? O c 772,D 4/C � U L = (52 .)(12 PSft> = (522) (25951x) z (d5o plc P tlli p L = 31 n C (3 ,5 /7/6 6 r\( VJ L (05o l 13 , ) ' 2&'/a / OUT O/ /v 6.4-A/ -tp SECT -�rp ---72_)(( )(3,51)(So)4.))( (1)(91)( 0)( /�4 /.1t .n lh/og s r- F ) d = C=1-"- 1'%.''- . s q 43'1 0 =d4/�54D5 --P - Asa /.4 /r) r/ Title : Normed 11 Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 2:34PM, 2 FEB 05 Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 . User: KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Page 1 normed_ii.ecw..Front El. panels Description Panels 1,2,5,10,11,14 - General Information Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Clear Height Parapet Height Thickness Bar Size Bar Spacing Bar Depth Min Defl. Ratio Concrete Weight 22.000 ft 0.000 ft 6.250 in 5 9.500 in 4.430 in 150.0 145.00 pcf fc Fy Phi Width 4,000.0 psi Seismic Zone 3 60,000.0 psi Min Vert Steel % 0.0020 0.900 Min Horiz Steel % 0.0012 42.000 in Base Fixity 5 % Wall Seismic Factor 0.2660 Parapet Seismic Factor 0.0000 LL & ST Together Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for teff & Iterating Deflections Parapet Weight Counteracts Middle ' Loads Note: Lateral Loads Wind Load psf Point Load 655.00 lbs ...height 20.250 ft ...load type Seismic Lateral Load 187.00 #/ft ...distance to top 13.000 ft ...distance to bot ft ...load type Seismic Vertical Loads Uniform DL Uniform LL ...eccentricity Concentric DL Concentric LL Seismic "I" Magnifier Wind "I" Magnifier 1,110.00 #/ft 2,320.00 #/ft 3.000 in lbs 1.000 1.000 Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered loads to ultimate loads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Wall Analysis Basic Defl w/o P -Delta Basic M w/o P -Delta Moment Excess of Mcr Max. P -Delta Deflection Max P -Delta Moment Maximum Allow Vertical Bar Spacing Maximum Allow Horizontal Bar Spacing For Factored Load Stresses Seismic Wind 1.631 214,743.2 33, 521.4 0.603 221,087.1 18.000 in 18.000 in 22.00ft clear height, 0.00ft parapet, 6.25in thick with #5 Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for teff & Iterating Deflections Factored Load Bending : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Moment : Mu 221,087.13 in-# Moment Capacity 377,593.55 in-# Mn * Phi : Moment Capacity Applied: Mu @ Mid -Span Applied: Mu @ Top of Wall Max Iterated Service Load Deflection Actual Deflection Ratio Actual Reinforcing Percentage UBC Allow. As % = 0.6 * RhoBal Actual Axial Stress : (Pw + Po ) / Ag Allowable Axial Stress = 0.04' fc For Service Load Seismic 0.060 in 0.755 43,296.7 in-# 151,969.0 0.0 in-# 14,532.3 0.060 in 0.352 43,296.8 in-# 154,625.3 Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : SEISMIC Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : WIND Deflections Wind 0.050 in 36,015.0 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.050 in 36,015.0 in-# 18.000 in 18.000 in Wall Design OK bars at 9.50in on center, d= 4.43in, fc = 4,000.0psi, F Service Load Deflection : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Deflection 0.352 in Deflection Limit 1.760 in Seismic Wind 377,593.55 in-# 345,700.02 in-# 221,087.13 in-# 43,296.82 in4 50,420.98 in-# 43,296.73 in-# 0.35 in 0.05 in 750 : 1 5,294 : 1 0.0074 0.0074 0.0171 0.0171 56.81 psi 56.81 psi 160.00 psi 160.00 psi z • z W O 0 W= F- WD LL co =d W Z= o W E- U o O N OH W W O .. Z W co O~ z Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Job # H0439 Date: 2:34PM, 2 FEB 05 /26 Scope : Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Page 2 normed li.ecw:Front El. panels Description Panels 1,2,5,10,11,14 - Analysis Data E 3,604,996.5 psi Sgross 273.438 in3 n = Es / Ec 8.04 Mcr = S * Fr 103,762.2 in-# Fr Multiplier for sgrt(f'c) 6.000 Fr = 379.47 psi Ht / Thk Ratio 42.24 Rho: Bar Reinf Pct 0.0285 Values for Mn Calculation... Seismic Wind As:eff= fPu:tot + AsFy]/Fy 1.718 in 1.662 in a : (AsFy + Pu)/(.85 f'c b) 0.722 in 0.698 In c=a/.85 0.849 in 0.822 in (gross 654.492 in4 854.49 in4 'cracked 185.81 1n4 181.85 in4 i-eff (ACI methods only) 854.49 in4 854.49 in4 Phi: Capacity Reduction 0.900 0.900 Mn= As:eff Fy(d-a/2) - Pu (WaIIThk/2-Bar Depth) 419,548.39 in4 384,111.13 in-# Additional Values Loads used for analysis Wall Weight Wall Wt * Wall Seismic Factor Wall Wt * Parapet Seismic Factor Service Applied Axial Load Service Wt @ Max Mom Total Service Axial Loads 75.521 psf 20.089 psf 0.000 psf 3,430.00 #/ft 830.73 #/ft 4,260.73 #/ft Factored Loads Seismic Wind Applied Axial Load 4,802.00 4,123.50 #/ft Lateral Wall Weight 1,163.02 872.27 #/ft Total Lateral Loads 5,965.02 4,995.76 #/ft ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied intemally to entered Toads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST' : 1.400 1.700 2.130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 Add"I "1.4" Factor for Seismic 0.900 Add"l "0.9" Factor for Seismic 1.600 1.400 0.900 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /1? OF DATE / f�/ESC G4GC /fig v/L /»/ khti_ 4-74147,41 S ( G/ 8j6 - oz 0 VE/2 r/ c L 0 S c± p.4r/E L. Tel / 3 5 6,6 io44 ✓ ©vim e:4.G e,vckT, o,�./S 3/2PCP 0L 6 So pc -K 6 c. . ...1 _t = , Olt , 266 vi /.y I'e1 P. Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 2:35PM, 2 FEB 05 /A Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Page 1 normed_Il.ecw:Front El. panels Description panel #13 - typical panel center vertical steel General Information Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000 Clear Height Parapet Height Thickness Bar Size Bar Spacing Bar Depth Min Defl. Ratio Concrete Weight 22.000 ft 0.000 ft 6.250 In 4 12.000 in 3.125 in 150.0 145.00 pcf fc Fy Phi Width 4,000.0 psi 60,000.0 psi 0.900 12.000 in Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for Teff & Iterati Seismic Zone 3 Min Vert Steel % 0.0020 Min Horiz Steel % 0.0012 Base Fixity 0 % Wall Seismic Factor 0.2660 Parapet Seismic Factor 0.0000 LL & ST Together ng Deflections Parapet Weight Counteracts Middle Loads Note: Lateral Loads Wind Load psf Point Load lbs ...height ft ...load type Seismic Lateral Load #/ft ...distance to top ft ...distance to bot ft ...load type Seismic Vertical Loads Uniform DL Uniform LL ...eccentricity Concentric DL Concentric LL Seismic "I" Magnifier Wind "I" Magnifier 312.00 #/ft 650.00 #/ft 3.000 in lbs 1.000 1.000 Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered Toads to ultimate Toads within this program Is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Wall Analysis Basic Defl w/o P -Delta Basic M w/o P -Delta Moment Excess of Mcr Max. P -Delta Deflection Max P -Delta Moment Maximum AIIow Vertical Bar Spacing Maximum AIIow Horizontal Bar Spacing For Factored Load Seismic 0.175 21,073.2 0.0 0.177 21,297.7 16.000 in 18.000 in 22.00ft clear height, O.00ft parapet, 6.25in thick with #4 Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for Teff & Iterating Deflections Factored Load Bending : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Moment : Mu 21,297.68 in-# Moment Capacity 38,486.79 in-# Mn ' Phi : Moment Capacity Applied: MuMid-Span Applied: Mu ao5 Top of Wall Max Iterated Service Load Deflection Actual Deflection Ratio Actual Reinforcing Percentage UBC AIIow. As % = 0.6 RhoBal Actual Axial Stress : (Pw + Po ) / Ag Allowable Axial Stress = 0.04 fc Stresses Wind 0.018 in 3,469.0 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.018 in 3,469.1 in-# For Service Load Seismic 0.135 16,061.7 0.0 0.136 16,182.1 Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : SEISMIC Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : WIND Deflections Wind 0.015 in 2,886.0 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.015 in 2,886.0 in-# 16.000 in 16.000 in Wall Design OK bars at 12.00in on center, d= 3.13in, fc = 4,000.0psi, Service Load Deflection : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Deflection 0.136 in Deflection Limit 1.760 in Seismic Wind 38,486.79 in-# 37,284.87 in-# 21,297.68 in-# 3,469.05 in-# 4,040.40 in-# 3,469.05 in-# 0.14 in 0.01 in 1,947 : 1 17,880 : 1 0.0053 0.0053 0.0171 0.0171 23.90 psi 23.90 psi 160.00 psi 160.00 psi z ;tom z c 6U U O f)O H N W WO �cnQ �w z= H O W uj Uc) to O — O I— w W - H I'O w z = O~ z Title : Normed_tl Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Job # H0439 Date: 2:35PM, 2 FEB 05 /7 Scope : Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0,1-Dec-2oo3 Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Description panel #13 - typical panel center vertical steel Page 2 normed_ii.ecw.Front El. panels Analysis Data E 3,604,996.5 psi n=Es/Ec 8.04 Fr Multiplier for sgrt(f'c) 6.000 Ht / Thk Ratio 42.24 Values for Mn Calculation... As:eff= [Pu:tot + AsFyj/Fy a : (AsFy + Pu)/(.85 fc b) c=a/.85 'gross (cracked I-eff (ACI methods only) Phi: Capacity Reduction Mn = As:eff Fy (d - a/2) Sgross Mcr=S"Fr Fr = Rho: Bar Reinf Pct Seismic 0.242 in 0.356 in 0.418 in 244.141 in4 14.54 in4 244.14 in4 0.900 42,763.10 in-# 78.125 in3 29,646.4 in-# 379.47 psi 0.0285 Wind 0.234 in 0.344 in 0.405 in 244.14 in4 14.19 in4 244.14 in4 0.900 41,427.63 in -ft Additional Values Loads used for analysis Wall Weight Wall Wt Wall Seismic Factor Wall Wt" Parapet Seismic Factor Service Applied Axial Load Service Wt @ Max Mom Total Service Axial Loads 75.521 psf 20.089 psf 0.000 psf 962.00 #/ft 830.73 #/ft 1,792.73 #/ft Factored Loads Applied Axial Load Lateral Wall Weight Total Lateral Loads Seismic Wind 1,346.80 1,156.35 #/ft 1,163.02 872.27 #/ft 2,509.82 2,028.62 #/ft ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied intemally to entered Toads) ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST " : 1.400 1.700 2.130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 Add"I "1.4" Factor for Seismic 0.900 Add"I "0.9" Factor for Seismic 1.600 1.400 0.900 • - RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB /1/0 /Z ^eI/..� CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. /*, 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18� SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com CUr 6E_Ismic. LokiDs0 Opeillt.1,4S. 3'7/t4 k/ = • 4 /E, Sc s bc�t✓ = .391h( t -4")(-0')0S-4/6 ) = . 37"I1e6e. 47 = (• 7 )(zz. —)2 zet 6 O • • -y 1-4 K � 0/2, 00oo- /, q 9" T� .77.11d- )5./15-- . 3125 /2( *- . 69 /2rf48 -r(J # 7 got -4 sYEEL2-0 CHORD RE: M -2.y V '. Ui u u U U RE: A-1.7 — — -- HaRiZ / 1: \ * 1 4-44 r, • eK' JJ 6K- ?� I /$x 2 -0- ' AD DONELS (1 • term TM. RE PANEL. 1® FOR REINF. 1 RE A-1.2 TYP. PANEL ELEVATION 0 GRID® SCALE: K• - 1'-0- TYP. 9 1f gpel >47 17 if ak, y� @ / 2 Cm-/ /Z .s / 57' ,ezm)/ 44E-0. c,JT op /4_.4-1,//' fro/2.c .s 4 /1,.? 5,7S U,JJ Typ/cAu(.f ' / ,LOLL , -R/•EG S RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 02-141 S.,2) SHEET NO. */ CALCULATED BY OF DATE I ! 10 0 SO/G �E4.e/../ 4.34- 5.4K bi- 1,1" DL. Mgt, i/ I/i bL dOT ace.diaea. OveitivRA//4/4 E =9.24 UIT E - .t. e e Asr 1.4 SEzv/CrE.. (EvEL- Lorrro..✓• . (4)46 ,,,_‘P B41? 7,.S2 I / • / bel= 6.6 (air 1-6'1) ss E. C LCvEL 3 FS or -,-, 58,24' 73e5 MR M=(?)Q,?K(9•0)+3(1I)('�'-4(44114° 55,7' r2 �(j)(3)(s(g4)(9 -0) •s aMR oT 1 123 ,2 S a � pS f- Yc. " 64 - x) ± _ a I 1 L S= iz(310")(\V o")3= ►455a 4 '1- .102. 2.10 ./9Si •/ (8-0 XIY-0 1! , ig, o ,� M.S . 2 �. 1 • • 1 • I • • • • g ! / o f/ �4 spa /2"D,c. T( g. ✓.E/e.SE /460 ' .Y.S lust 2.a»/a5r• /4/s3 .4 . 960 �4G7' O 0.-0e /..) SO, L I%LE SS✓/G'CS 1A%-. I, ZD -1- 1, 0 E + 1 , 0 l_ 99S Ps _ �,��3��) + I.o (2Q,,3J<\ 0 _ 4-4.//e gyp. /,%o ' Z (/,11) .1666 • RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB / hiedr SHEET NO. OF j CALCULATED BY DATE / /id (O s' FGE)/(l m/Fc Pe,/ •5,'^rl' (C11/4/7:1 r s,� /2 KA -0)(k3) # /. Z (. /DD'/ L 0 ') 34o"(W-19') rse + .'23'( + , 1'2 + /.o6 �S= 274, /d7/5 �4 e4 0"./ 121_0i1 f /72 2 / discs Ft 41 (2z691/116)= 17%4.'7' /8,o"iv-0" .../441/!/�� 9 / ?'Y S = /,56 2 s F C.0+.Jsio i 6 C - ..=o" u./ae 0,7 -O07 -/a•0", .5.4e 770 *t j ?iki I ES?ihwrEy (c/-)) , q (,am)(I147:--1. t,) 4.:_ Ps. 1vl /6//.1t6- /air: //.6Z >-,Ic4Ass -r 1.16► o -4%'Q 4s el .,✓ s c7 i5 >. `,1 , = (.0if -•y 2241 f? . S 1�_ 3,o(go.ev)t/,yd N I/ a L �� ter( V FAGTO'zed 64.77MA•Te SO/ L. ; G 1\ l0 Pize.5.swg..e, cp...-Z4.1/40`" 32-..At.s -e 8,0411 V_,' .04t1 \r111\40\4"(0-4-) SPill ✓S.AIC7 $EA Ai /30 To .TL/tivii../e_ /' % b = 3 6" A7,t04s- (d )6 �� = 100(ga,004(//61S- 2 (1/'` �, a° _ /94 lei 044, > xer,, CAA/7- / LE /C 8e, -n.11 C,w v, ti/El 4i./ (461,./4 Az Gr/A.,9, /t 4A/ (4e.//, !on,7 OiSTi2/3vr7 t/6 d,s �--� I S62.- 4•70 2524.s4 k) Gvc-c3Lon 1/%1n1. '14q!11'flw1�f�T.i74sltlti+&7??;3i%iQir4 J RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB / M oizir4E6 SHEET NO. /04) CALCULATED BY P. .)etJ/ZE, A/i0/LG M ts..../r (arr. ) "Tay 24 0" ,vor,t,t7 T•�•uc,✓�ss d- e4-- 11/ . 2 /9.62r Mu /281 gait) _ / 62a Esn M�4(L\') . 7(0, 000x62r- /.96 /) ./cicA96 0113f.e/,94 4 SrT Q.04/r.14,S ›r.7 v e. ,4S j ` % 74°760, ouv) - 1./S-" as i� • kr (a. t2) (34 ^) °1/11# = #4S4 (e/ c .7 (ixviyKo, 000)69:ar- cr) /6b.7k" /'✓hod//#i vi i Zie7 71 71 <= aA = its <• _- . 2 r d -c S • l ,001 (*.6a.c•-• •97ac" .17 j 37 7 E -z. 6.41 L 7-tge,wiat=ie 4 i Vr4E STE,6-4. . 00iY(2'-o")(3 ) /.vEfise- ss As -? • coo/ r e%r. (,)Irt 8474. ,00,5),(24601)=.52 To G 8077vivi Pe vec. op rn 1'r GE.. -/6771 # Ilia /2 o,c., 741", t S. S2 a" ek. 3 a);' 2►n 3( - 3q,y" off( So niT ►,' (so)41:—.. RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY f r�. 8J� OF DATE Vidor ,•!c1 14 C/o( VTc/%M/A/C ► FS =R > I,� M = .52.4 (221) w-1153Kt dT 52.4 5CRvieE. LEv>EL M (S3��z)(12J fidl(0'')(,ISk ±(3)(g)4)(Zg)(. 1So)(4/0 4 (f) I')(10d) (17.'i\ Ea 441 6�4 v 4- (()• z 14,‘,k P2 i)(I 3,1s( 2.,)(150) 9•-)gt = 23,4," 4.(3)1,m 12) WALL PAkt�L@ PIVOT —um imultimmlui Fo o -n nl h EITI its SEc-n ot.l Mt4e-1101C1 Bekf.n.t PRo. STIZIIo rr1 nl C1 DL Polklr Low) DL Poi Low v , 1 1 - >r g-E\iEK-S �S lex* Mi0". = I8 / 5-6 7 /, o% or 053 LOADS P1 - P2. WILL. C.)cIs-r iN 14E. CSF oVE. (LTV IZA1 I t.161 (foo- - tJ `I P 11 OTI rJ 4 A -4%o jT Pol►JT St 0i 41AJ, PICKix.11 Ur, 6eT!Z-A ceprt,-.o44 @ PARI ELCcnitiles.? to l Porn1TS 2i ori ��►_0`► s000 Fsr- S = Ps 4 � h +)/5(14414_ ("3: _� qq ) 0 A ( 5o . /o Ms = 5t,' -(2i' = 1153 B = 44' 3 4 n (31--0'1) ( 41) t 2q c t >?� L. kik-C S12 P i ()Vett Ps= 22,3+ 23, 344K + ,ck+ IIS �'"\ ! Igo' 9 !C . / n' - /(4¢/)=/ 9 -3 ONSEMEEMEEMESEMBEEV ?nrt:u.,�r.�o'aS�+VSfi'.�i'?Sc�ro�v[s �.�e�a�Ma`u�h+��vrgw+�:wn�•c•,.�,i�r RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /lz� OF DATE //0/Or 61/6R 7-c/2.01//A+ • So.c,. 8 �2.�✓E� _ f'r�' �5�'/ . COtkir, 1 oo ,cl + .150(e -01)-t- ,1 (i + 14' 2.112.9C, . 99 + e % + / /• // F��2 SoIC..S 4 -io,vr P. 1.0,x(/.33) s = 2.58 Is mai( 2, .( 2, .44 7!s Atter ek . 20/ le -1#. iece Re/A/ t'/L C4.5.-e1/7A/T, ('G70, d#/ 1 E.4/�/../4 ) 1.1 )17 A rr. e( / 59') /. (/,/7) 4.. = 0 14 M ‘r\ LO,/S/DE--/G rwo i /..../E2 `3 L0" T'iCK e ) 0-0 (Esiimitis) ti(ct 44,1b 7 ,%"— 5ii'� - I - 2 •/d"c3.IC %3I�c, WiJO of Seism c. DK, .L 17 o ( CoweiesioAl k "4 i, (Vo 4t) teco)(11- it = s23 4 .—cf7Loicoo (3/,6 -3.14 pS`i 1(07sQ.c, 31, Cos2 ' 5-.25 9.-4 6 lod/, /'71/(3 h Assnhk) h > = As *el S.23 (go, OUc.)) 2,S -61! .S -61r 14t1 7b(Joa,)( 4Y16') 14/.---c vIh>KA=610KFthe _ ,7S/44',„i(cP/2.).c (si 2.1`) /! - K1 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF j 4E170 DATE ///Q /vf -rh & sv E42s E Tri P ( CeAcz C oanza e. • op 1 ¥ 'Z`( 3e) = , %g �i 'Tb l2 4/g C /2 "o. c .1o►fl oe 80-4 . RICHARD HUDSON Se ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY E Co►1 k1 c -r I U N1 @ 111-10 1 4. 9 -no. 1 _ K coded ec.-r i oNt & PAAN.... C4leck co 1.114 Ex --n aNi C kl"'A-c. rr,( . L 2x'2 K k'g" x-01.14" _____ ,pC 4"K4" )e °Lb" 2-tkx2'-O'1 0411614 L 3x3 x VX0 - 4 s c a( u' 4'' C A Ci4e ctc. W 6w, As b ?W.= . 3 (.909 "4‘) . 0/ 000 = 3.7 V/^ 4rn = /4.6 (2) Co/,c%iaS = 29, . 29.7" > 23.6 Ea 4'OEG . -r1E 610-/c s1/004 -#V C4J S 8-4-K , 0) i (51 C2j 80+1-0,,e, Co a/a0 G -r ' o �l , .4 F .4 /(o, 000 psi) - 29 v s Ac,r- •3i9" 1,2v*" (fie" tl4 = 24ts; (1,2`1p") - 20614 (4 - gds koset-ArIE cr1e,te 5 M @ L ve x4" I y , �{ (1(..').E -(1(..').E- 14,4-A 14 4 O4''�(4 \ gagensmismaszsmemmEgommply 2 /d4/19ci - gro" _ ( 1 4-Vadd „. „. ' r RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB NOILM SHEET NO. / �4/ OF CALCULATED BY -3?)3 1 DATE /7 0 /0 S - So► t_ 8 A' t a P Cais�c v s WAtU @ eilua Etxr Es✓icIE-+- 114 Ply r. .21 'Xt.14 /,Yiesf 2,k Lo' rtu Qi4t 5U . = R.F a t2E-W I-ol zcei 1 10, 'ktJ i 17=(4)(S )(22+ ")(.I o) (') (a 5 () (.150) (1)(1.$)(1X• 1) c+ x °v wsl1*f. Mg! e(vIt.c- 3*44-4► M =? (6L)(9')(21)(,IS0) (1.20 � 3 E ? (2')(4Y )(.1st3)( ;'v 3 olyss-lay.its)(ie)& 3 (114K)(I�') LEA/ CAS E SipE piverr Pr. 141z ` (*)(611)(1.9.1)(.15c)(11,C > WA. � 3 t STRIP roan nlEi tA/E.12.6vrzpC-r( FS= 646, 1,0 >I5 oT tom- o k , (04)(14-5(.1s13)( tits) e -n �► h 3(5')(33)(1')(.1) (l6s (ItA(61) 4 g .s� vtoe .' oyEia3uwo61 aT' s03 �s zt go 3� 2, / y /. r 0 k ori 70lL t3Et4 i..// et-fss✓ez. /s 4 foma cam. _ f . rS f , a'77 /r/4P' / 33 (24wo) • r.M'".Z�Y2f:ra 03/ !Soho./ RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. A/o/2/K E.-6 7:t CALCULATED BY u 214 Loo -nuaJPr . trr.k. Ess tP-14 1 Poet otsktr, Fc.e.xu ruE I 14Fo FAcror2,e4 Sort. 6t-ArizI* 7 , -1,bwod URdisr120 4.1-N161 t4130- wok( L WIFOOM 214°= IVI laeoM QP -O' FV af- Aftt o'kesJt " ' L0 " w ,/ - S 7 B 49110 -gyp Bim: 5 ( /2" O. C. -rap 4i eor 1.2(.1284.34, -) 4- 1,4( [roll) 2.31 KA.. 2(.I2tr+. 3+.s' ` I 4(. tri fSP 4, (vt) 3.44k 1F-51- (d-h� 1(Goiow) (►� �� i 4614)4.24-x- 5,1-. I "- is/2. = l q, 101 -e- 11%14 (.440T 64Z sv+AA t�&I es >L 3 G �,► .854Lb .rs-(3oc 46k) 01,44s 034)-= 1,,, . (a,4 ‘010A(1910- etitsw c� )2IL.WCC.* t /.116 a� St•E, �c = . oo/ r (/)45— —P ¥ C sr dor z . G2D-, t > • 3-1;a41 4e5-$. �s 4 . so3 /d -c .O36 3 • O /9.6-1,5/9 /.l6 eye 7-0.a✓Troo Sic y6:n So eg _ As- IS C'Q(La-T .�T;PlbI - P • o L. tw .✓.?.ana%F.+:i".'i"`=1{ xiJ ','. at*va:^ RICHARD HUDSON Se ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. A4/4,066 7Z - /40 CALCULATED BY OF DATE JIA /Or WEILTVPAINlC. 5014. i3E4+/z-/,✓C7 Pit-6560el "44/01/242.ff,Ei,I P - Mfrac. wee afiRDER RunikDL) X72... DEME 1-d kb Sp �p e, col s, 24.1 K DL 0Pt) 2,1 PI- NE � 414 61E. Fbi. A god Fekdort.M scr aviGE pZ V pd• - • - I 40' 30.6( bL E c 53K e3oK LL e U(r 53K e 38K vse ios. la . 96 eSF /12 3vK 14= v(ZZ = g61,e I t4 GIS poi NIT o.! LEFT , (487' 1,1 3 (12 b1 (7d(221)(,1 301) Wal -1# enyi ("5 41.)(.14)(15)(2t0 577,4„,44f 4-kkaw .' • ? (zz.6X 4o) /g;• .. f r 65-* = ?,s > 4-1i0 E Polar o- Iu 4 44.1-, °I< 6%►I 3(tt(I4) lir zi)(4)614) 15)(11) (t-5,. (2t,2) te) - p _ P /672 _ ovi •a.c. S = 2,0 y/S ►r � f oma, KTWIP 2' Cf.eaa0 %, IkIclLAA-SE ifI SoILS ,Lli✓c� (p) op 2 ieSF .4cc e fi 3 c,E Pyr .mss '22 e6, So (L SE.4-12IkIC7 PRE sS u- � r -r4 -tt7g E 2,64 I SF o 0133) KsM 64KSF 2,66 esF ';- P344-/4/ ,4-cteprA316 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB 44,14Ev 7L. SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF j 1 DATE / os Moity4troDE.. op 12 Eti ItE5ucT4i're By STA -7-1 CS . LoC.4r i 4&i OF is 9, =r0 0t _ 1--46 3161 -{- 24.(*t K)(+ $06 - M -o PZ 124(= &ors -M SO, Cr + 60k LL 24.311U- 4- 25.(:)14 LL -F ( 'p2')(20')(• i5) '4. (42)(31)(44" (• is) + 0(44 wha.. 5-rW P F -can µa QVeteulLze-ti/ tlft;d1 77.21e /5. •°- R=- ts7es- Xc 6.o6 -M t,il LA IMP $O (4) 'I-' 54.4-0241 4-- 'Mil ( 1.t) 4- t s . #(22) 25.(0(1Jcb — $3 t 4q —M 4i 5 I4022 2 efl -Teit-vt1 K/E —Mt 'rt l 4()C.A112 Sol L PIE -E )(Z -E t , 44-!_(1_0124E) 2 FviuE _ 2 13► 214 .44 4� ditt E- rcankki Ksic 4 n c-, . Do E.= 1;4 t,Ff�lc5F 2 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com .108 gat at SHEET NO. /4x CALCULATED BY •, e. sic aid, + 4151 + M = o R X 49S1+4 41st+vi _ 4qs` G ci ►� nl rrvoe. or r, , r2 r- (rOt* rte. 44 (1 c -E. 2 269,3.6rr L 4,, ('4. ~ll'.11( r,=2io.z`` giOit 4,eN 1+ 14f fi v e o / "/C7 Sy W/o77/ oie otpvnx% 4,51( . 9d Ws,- _ _r.2 cE.x,61(7 3�6-,I z . 14r- -1- 3 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB sY(Il EP SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY J3 Bym OF DATE / /3/os . _TIE1.m1 N fl: F4 -G -t . Sot L. B iZ.1 til �►t�* BSc) K ., REsuc.-rA-,tr - bet6ANr fl By Z?j, -rI (Bq EM B STAT IGS ` `• =c (� II I I01t:+ 24.31( � 14.11-1‹ -k- 19. el` 4- /s.��) DL r too (So1�4-25,6K"R =o LL i�►��kr 514E OF ST12 P 'PccsnnU:1, N St) eGcR.112T SFoR 11 S iEla./I c.E. ►1 REPcA.1 WI M W cat 4 ccu PLtE. MOM t r . Mg- S X , . 2o' Com Q 2 Ms= o 1,4�St FAX s''`J' )(- tot ST I Ctc taw f .' S I 1 Ce/ -ro L na 1S- o f . 4c 1 g OAC rL ' t 4(€0() =�rkp ! 5-85 ( m Wall 14),,, X01 S�ra OVEKCi�1/LQE 0= •"Rx+ 36,99 (4')+ e`�(4`) + g-i,'(t + 95.0(2x')+ Is,s(tz') + 2 ,? ') ÷ t5.40( I) P - 55.5 (40 -+- 58 ..5 (2A- f2 h T kit RX 6/Lo 44)= _ 68 49 I E., catiIVEM4Tb 1T �► CQVP o tel. 2/ tZ F -c --r I o r.ir� Wu_ C Ekr . A-04 DI t4 Co/JD m otil i'* r vcl lu_ I N �t1 G - t F,4cE c* SW LsFr s►.n 6F &IC 3 F ro2Eb P(t-E-s i i2Es 2g2 rt, = 4.4.(p.0124 .) �2G�n = 4.A K I�SF x,41` = 1,2� Li 5 Loo rt -ro=R-stc. U 146, r11,0r,(6.34 he8 ks# 7.34 r4N= 32tc, re,‘„‘ = 94 k a,, r4 7,$Z 4�K r 4.1 -(Foto Ie \\ 4H 4) 2. IA d z 2Y- 0'4 - 5 Lo" P orss.ytg . 4- RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /44 OF DATE ///5L 05 F.4L-rcIMO SoI L •41211JfR PRESsvf2.>z.S , (Ac{ Loottal (A= 1i2D 4-14E+- I,o L Coknibiki O S) 4 *)At.... I s -Po pi IJ1 too( (mu U ki Mom > t G S44tAK 14.1.. I t`l C(4 -1't7 pss f � rq ( I r4 F o rz C. 1 ekt r 1 d Srr - I)o-rl a , GM p(,1:ST W cis! 41zAwrE- Rrtrrovt. Mod] tsar (>1 Ar f NI rAlE E.t l Pg. ar op- l -Lt. /0A/ /SES ,,,Ldetz 4.0 ocoof QR.ir PONT o / #/Tie / S 7- 144- dr 2-2 58,5 51 o WIDE �a /, 2815F 1-215(4) . 6.4 5/1 Z 0 t4 ES 36,1 KCL" 5msP ov�l�gUR.DEl W C , _ 2.6k XPi ' 1t(7q,2K+ I5.4) so K LL 411 E3.5_ ► i X tA) . . K/ t WALL. r.2 ( S4,4) �C .61(/ 54 8.44= /. 6 Y/-) 2. 3 4 w2 RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB KlotzmEz SHEET NO. 14* CALCULATED BY &pit OF DATE IB os of /t4F �4ik . /5? RhePOSE-S of SiyA./G'oodfo: =0 M +z . e(/�� 4- 45, 6 65) -� 2. c (�)((o) 4,4(20360) — , M + /14'2 — 440, = 0 /)//144g7/r 017/41.. Tom..Ey,417vE.. Avo.wo-Air Co TWA. T// RICHARD HUDSON Se ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 !/ rhudson@hudsonengineers.com x JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY l� OF J DATE / f is f OS 4LO6ort. eooPf-1WATh �'TEM1 Z0JE -I To X.c. 5/ , oppoSE To y ` P L t] • • o• 1)Wl+ coop& J MTS Sys. K/► M.1: -Rx)--' 4.44,04S gra 0 <s \I@o=o X zp 1 To XC=S� RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB tdolemEn � SHEET NO. I 41. OF � CALCULATED By 837I1 _.__....--..---_-.--_ ---- DATE _ C4e.c.t<1 poi ar of new/�Ir�, tutor 1 -ru4> ki Prz: M, X 4_5o Oz4'4 13,6 T • • Q aolL Lowy cot4c.rnoti %.1K oN 44 5212c:so- 14,61( tAJ-K S . - _ 2,/b ICs F . 5 2,6/91 ,i31$4.1. -rw -toe* -isoo Z • Z. re 60 O 00 W I- COL w 0 g 11 u. LLI1 Z I. h 0 ZI- UJuj n o. O • N D ,- W W W.. O 1- Z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. tiorumo CALCULATED BY 1-0 OF 2 SIM DATE f I I S los V s t 2 D t. + 1.01,.1 +-1A-E. C rgoin , 13 4 oc.vtir4h Fig An 0 20/= �C 2v/(15+ Car2°I,2 Dc.Kk �,2s `S�°)e =O• ,>25.6�1S)-F2,6(t0/10>_( X7 )(s,a) 2 .6KU. 5 + M O 1.41%Me.M - _ t021 k -rte, � 1/4) rte. i�a= o Z'� K I @ �Er�►E' 4 F 4 C ! oo n til6.1 , 2,6 1,4r , Iyty (i< c) dui Ke - Som 4-3 _ 2_4 14,8 te4.0 + z,6(5)(2,$) - . vs-5it,4) (,s> +M =o 2. M_ RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. tkinp4E-0 CALCULATED BY /49 OF DATE 1 14 tiloorEilr gn j(e F4 '4_4.0' 1 EQ a -t- 4 on', Mo gut .�rs, (114r Pc.,) St../rS \IP4 , nito.ks.+.)- s A-+ocrr '1011 4i 2.G 412) + 13,31 (4)(4..)-1- +M =o A+93.I K1=0 lr614_' Mi c9 4k' — tar - 12,31 Sim 4s 41.4 L 6/4 14.S (YlP)1i3,31 k�F RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. UoiImIF-4 CALCULATED BY 00 1��CU 12 e-sAni go124.1 Ott" C t4SICU eiNRI s -l -o" Esr, gs Cd-)> Focrri Nl i '4u1 -)L ICS K»t# i (1009 (1000(1Zi = 8,05' • (460 aD' (3/4 - 3. - el= st .625-a .1d = 3•z" Sr- 9.14`ros,000)=;.i'l • 8's 'G L .8s•(6100)(60') 4. .1 8.0s Cao) s £Mrs 8 . ,ern /i ( d •• 0, -, 4 7.94" (j 01,=CAs-h (°(2%) •°jl�°+"��kao) (3131/1.)- 31� 0101,11:: 1068 > 1021 x I _ M (lo) s $ gS —T' 1_o 1.1 (4 rrV 1 DtIAc Q)pe. , /065 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 .. 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY %r2 1 OF I4- 05 e+lecK 1,2bL + (. l-041CoM,Qvt4Ai110r4 1oR grizzATIEK Holm. beg( ho.o. zvrvJes...4.1 Sc/ppo RTS '6,1)K 1 ( 21%3) c 1,2C3Dg- Leer Z 1,6 r �o . 261,Zw + ' X41 + 36.g,,(44),2 4' I SK rr r I-2.1/' LI r R=-371. 1. 1 �41 L1' le— P-1•17 left Fe o l e) �o 50,712..)+ 3(40,1 . 4(1'+ 1245) 401 ,ucz, + .I(o)(I4) + 2.6(44)(2 22' 2q.L" -t€1@ M�tOSpAt( , 40.E 2.‘ 1407 i 11121111111011 16.3(' 4 C/coa- R `o 5.1ra ra+ ra,1k 1,2 t^d 6,1(ra) rQ = 5,4 re 6,1ra 3q� raiuo(` Fo1Zl.t. = 494 rar 14, k/' .2-Mt=0 arni) + 2�l (2)(i� + 4o, q (� 9') + 9 /•5(2z)(li) Zil9'q5.)( 73 + M ` 217 scci r -a=324 11 MAP 2.°IfI�GS� RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB i "'i(/e/N -.) SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF DATE i/e/ / 05 Iv4-C.c 7. .S' 4/ 5 / in 1 2o► 1• .17=1)(63) '13A Act 313-o2 (1.10 Pte& -ir. 1g,z'� 493k tt 20' /3(r')L .4-- • d 9sK \. _ BASS CoNN><L.TIok( SEE 1\1E T. PA-E7E r -7R C.A,c..c_vcarIb(4S s I r -P -i ►_ `/ / �y I� (2o I 'I �i..I e4 ` t.\ V c 4 vs (I I -2-) it %" Q 8,9w - 16 = Iq 2 \/C h ci = 2 fV4aCO t (1,41)( lb( 012` 1)) = I %i< i0k4 Icw *a5vX36 - (.-7 ) 19- = 66 oK Q,,I (11- o = > '73K I_ 4qZ �--� Vii,.: %/O2c- g.e-f 6iv Mk)?, S(+ef It z.r kiE-rri Pslr.rn Pfi'SrL) O 10 "l c II ok. .15(Io)( 4o00 )(CI I41)( V 0 0V, 4 (11-2q) Vc .3 /1:417:: hc� -+ = 3,31 ( 71/4-'')(I°l7,") -;'ickIis (i ( — Q Yc = ; b. 6 -)/f Z -f' L (/, z5 -/?c -`- 022 i Io i, r O. C,')/ 4O00 I + 240 1.251/ .1°0.7 t. -r 0 ..P, tat 21'5000_ 2qD \h 1,. "7-1 oo° 2- G� �IWiMn IOot tC \0o6(ttoO' V. I°I211 oc 4 -7 U intc (T‘,1 c) = 3 yl RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB /14/1/0.6n SHEET NO. l�3 CALCULATED BY ejtvi OF //�� DATE //ei! oS � 1 \he - 1'/q" (Ustik-i 11 -el 5 t j - ) d (.7 5)(4') = 8(9.� 4ottro k.t Z i RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB K10/2,114E0 SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY 134-s rte. 4-TrAc>: 10' r^0 IL VN 1? (6) 5 A -7o6 8412..c @ gm OF DATE 1 tS � OS _rte^ 4/4/0 I I 0 ( /z0A1) Y (so (3;•) +F a) .9(eo) 4 91/ 65 ) s 8412,s o f< /&?/r/ Ole (/j 's- $ ote d = 414h - 70" �wL 3(icri)bo) = 4, 4/I Tt`��) S 1/1s if s , 74 = 2.151 =-i - �S Sig ksp t -, 1 (2.)t4- 5 BAfz.S F = -"Pul - • . 6 (%) - 21.6 ids i • 48"ok, ' `4- 6'7. _ 2 /// /54A, /4/4/. -f+18-a--1`. 5- 21, 6 16.s1 •'. -� ?" .17 (-Ei)( 5" ft 1:?1/4'X3'R mc-xIc1 f -Ao ` IY.2' 3Y70)r�, u 12-(A.i 71. 3 •701X��6 -- "�N, �" 6,s— '../ o% 3/r,, X 3 x �! 2" TL _d • s_ 3y`c 2/2,7'6 y •-/ 3 `C 'd V..4 %S; / . 4&� • b� RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. 00/2 -MSD CALCULATED BY r OF DATE 1,zs1os PAiVa.et evr ."/851:x X15' 11-2" RA) .7.-- 5(10-))(Pa:)('/0) 4,(,4/1" T _... x 1k,11 so. (c)/11")(i4'�� L,4-� goC IJIOitr @ P 166 .< I co"sa I14 76? #D 2 54'64 oole:ole: 5.33" 3 S.33" -2-1,s,3(1,2= 3 b 1k2_ 5,33(1,2c) = l' 37 /n/ 6 1r+1 f2, E.4.1 -t1 si) (7,r?r'') 2�,3k z��.2K N Asb 3 = IS ( ) ,/5C3Q= 27I‘Sr = m 26,2.x" „r /6 / ' 5 /. 39 /A/3 VS I/q''Xt1-41 XML 19 < V<' = . 33 � = i•K56k5'i) I91(.4tcsi _ 54, 2, SS = 4,1 al gl/A0095- tr, AI1 - -Tr( -; .) - , z z w 00 W1- (0� w0 ga. LL =a I- w Z= I- 0 Z~ w 0 CI oma, wW u. O z w = 0 f - z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB KloraneQ SHEET NO. /06OF CALCULATED BY .a`1 DATE { C+ 1 OS to*Iisc, of Lir OA 1.It{ ebT -ro CoJc ... a.. �TK= 6.SK licked 1.14e b I To TAt-te.s. o r r\it Te.4 SroKi FOrZcE, OVn' `f 4 S-rt2-Eki c-Iin4 pr- A-n1ct-l0 & ► -Ts-dls i o n,i (D, S .1) k S = Y Ase _ (Co) C60/ 1119 ( 55 ILSi) 20ci 45e = TT( 11))2- ` , 60/ 01\is��LA 1351c ok IMO t.t c rl ETE. g ri sA-,C X 5Tt?- JJ ciT+ or . c. +orz a s i o t A4cti e) As 4 s t ►kc.E. t\i„6 - 4± Y. q)3 r b 3i„ 31„ A�� = �'.c P1e4T + !.Cile + 1Co'� = 11 651 0 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB NIOILMFA SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY arrm OF DATE 1IEs- (OS Ai/e?.tigf N c o_ N T� l 3 Lib 4,J Akio= II , k$I 31'1 31" (.C1c;')( ItCtle(P.p 1.71/1eP(P EL") ' _ 0.14 3 L....."),._ . s- y2 2. _ $)3T.1,25 Uti1c1ZAtilcisa 1414 Mcg 1 �� SEcn oL : �' S" 1`14- z t,516 Ob-= 14 ,30� ke 7=-.•, I Id. (D-5) (D-1) / (l r 7-- .54-i0 (.1( /2) C4 0 26iC k' ' /lT //,-S- N ,G�c ‘21A'`'..�_g �, C6 ; - ��, Soli` ,�/ It / N/ M 11 K((b e54o (.��Z)(1�2��(zz�> I I ,e:8I 8(1 4 `` lAN - -26-s 4e2%i /cc_ tEt/E.L 1,311_x 12. x-. 1 I 41, I woo IA IaLin i�1 4 44,3 .6`1/61.1")(q1) -6,0k 11 tir RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB k1012-mt0 SHEET NO. /6 / OF CALCULATED BY DATE 120C l O5 PAiroc, At< 5116-41‹ p ,GT/C �6o IGs\ z•-• A M tz#i-5 i\z1,0 = 3.i2°" KtoYLMPt. LJ. . 0\4 ilr( 1341c) ICOV— too"_ \44,t n . tJsc S akK @ l3`' 0.c, sum czuiL RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY X59 OF . tdos 0,0LikleCrtak I To Co id c tZ„r&TE- ---- k '� i k = Ci T yP. oldta6 /Nr cod AecTioki CA-pALti.j PSK LFAErrt, CGNiatc,-n u ra COktracc,E CogGR-tETE. Pt2.9 oar ST1't.e_kic-,- 4. � L STA -64/67-4 d4Tlc, /pis-.4.4_4-e< (A6./> Vs= h '4se -�' - (Tr2)( 5 Ks) •) = se),41' �t tv- , 6s(51.4) = 3/,3 4 C -o c -t& s-rtze t -sA o F MA.kos l nl S B IZ . (D.4, ,z) Vct, AY- LP/ ,4\4 = 4,5 (C, - o 319 ASK IISTr Lockre8 Ai EuI L Co&LCR.ETE Ettg-m ,r FOR 5t-fF__2 tS ter uk6c.E RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. doK44F,a CALCULATED BY 160 OF DATE Co ACTLEXE. P j e STIZs'ir lcR int s -e, Cp �cp cbcoq ° ‘% 5 = IISk �r `4'• 5,1r- (41"40 44 G elft �225 `� Z 2(I.51e:i(i1/41) 10CI l�Z C, it 14" c, Cwt t►i klekore hittkoa. 2 0'1 4 CrwiJ `C3 — l n -r CA-sT t til 410-0-011,s — J G �sJ3 = 12.x'`` e qh\iG6S)I1,5`` ` 02,5k Coo -bile Brio J 10,24av/OES Mia/iA.Avx•, %g—a/ *iT AvE T ..17,e -a Loin./ Ay oar- RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF DATE ` k` or %I�I��t bdh�t�nl lcays ' 4 7DZC cy ,/ar1Z 41_43/4 • 46' Pr Ole Y,� -R/ Ik .1' leo (2/ lr//1 ? \xH = i fi 2 t ��_ • �S 6°� • 6 0.0) "(r)'Et/ 19 /s12 Ay M ENit, 224 d73K E PtAJ BASE. coniNs.rio i SES 1E i- pAbc-6/E.. Fob ck-c.c_e.ickr 1 en4 L' 714-(5 CEf"Pc-t G-- . s-Y6o X xl ) s sem', • 614 = • 3> ,Do K/ ck= • 6 (414 -Ma S S2' \404, 44-07:0 ,s- 60) fi 4/70—.0a (N1(17-210%) = 111'c' ?Li 0K 2.0Vc.= ±(1T)111-fc: hct q 4a a g% 411; tc •6 �,�,, ,t H > z b'/c.. � et -21) Vc = 3.3 -Fc k j -i- NU. = 54,e r 4 o00 zi2iiAs., 2$�` a„p 4 1(Pk.Z125 )9+ c tko° 1 — 'ti Vt., 2 is \ 41��II 4'1,”�c 1 i 'Iv ,� �, `� + —)-y,(1P." = �3, TOIL= ( VII( (u-°) Vc 01) = ,18#414*- : I8rZK(21)= = 51trf 6700 Ill# V` 1711 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB qta p.iknC-C SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY OF I DATE .,� l OS. 3rACILA0.41%.. iC A,c-O M4.4E"ir. 4kM 100 2. L 4.120-1C.A1.. (L4.JForux_hdg. ' Aae- .Oo12 /2"(51/4 1.00z. 10,(611/4') ,002 = 13.7.1Et- 440 atIc\14)(colt)z- • f 334 `le 4 c.ext)rl.E. 4 JA 1s1s. W.= lie • a �4'4tt Ill .7 '2" (nM) (d-•\ ) , i (yr) &imp yr &0":s>,455.44E-G, 2.614 x060, oao (11/912 iitit 000 y 1 0 ttl„.7- (fz.\ 2 "/ 6o, oco r t • s oto, 61`+ 1 �s 29a ,- d.&'4TS' +701 (4014-6 6 � 45 = 2.6y S`Z, til O at to A-t-tiAcL. rrti S;o3tS C=ea/B,z 93 e5 r- . ao3 ZLIC22:3 _ ,02 `7,3 S ,4 14 • O° L. i ©as"- -TEA../ 5 • °A-/ r',./ tx,p . z E re 2 OJF) O 0co 0 W= CO u_ w 0 g u a �W Z= �0 W~ W 00 00I- WW wz z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB ilop-mle4 SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY �.✓�c g.+sAzrAwklw+EA177 elm 443111 41412 Me. 6 " CM V1/441 CC*(1411)(44 PMdEi., 12. _ ._ "1 �, 4 OF DATE _ 49.2(az �-AS.41( :1 1,0 p N x,(41.,4) Coaie,1rioI TV Evac.., -4 Peg. . i2R-E.V 1 OL) CA-r.Gi cater t 0 tai S _tz \xi1()c Fc•oTtNitet ,PS Klebs Fop 8514 - RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. ogm ,ccs OF 1 � CALCULATED BY DATE 1 f 2& l OS PJEc. LEFTS o F 45St## 6t %+ E_Alt. `Ai Or17:a 1E114, caiD 4,2 5'-0" 10 jAni w/4t0(000(.,r) l6.2" 9 2� Co a t1/411641- I ONA # iz. 4 4/c 4s,eaf.6 SF - EA Tt pusx u po ►zc.F.n.� �-+� P►z•isv 100 s 9,246143) 416.2(2,$) - i=4„,(5‘) =o IZvp R t 2 ,, '` N BASE. Sc,ora Pc:AAJ Tak+J s F( Coakle.crokl K Si E- r- vc.J bo q,2 = V/ QSVh z /C" 4y p M `.6(I,0 (... 4 g,Z Tb Con4 G2I-TE i s-rp-r�.4t,-r4-1 op A...1(.40K Iot-r . (4s = A Ase = 4 (. 6o144,)158iGs1) c- 13 6 159'`.e=Tr( i�'4401 ' t ftivri 4G1%"nk, �w��Ipi (z) /g" A%-ne, Dr, RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB IVO CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. ,A4 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY BREI DATE 1/ t8 f 0 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com OF 1458 461 I 1#G5 , 61r, LOA.) c1zs itILA.tc 0 3r STIt.J a -n4 , trito At4j (,5 ( # I,\e4 4 20 ') eaciq = (60")(%").=. 2880 /A/c. �2= 0.140,3 10! _ Y �3 z 1,0 To Si-rIr. r. k S"3 3003 ,z.o t29K.. aglIED 412, 441S- 11"4hey a'1 Oe b = 2=O (• 1r) (I,D) (11A ") t tie,t K 400 . 6s ( 4/e."` z 6 o,2 s Ck sc,tc II `— 0, Mc,Lg Icitt 1 s S�� MSEKvIt ID 20 (MY-.1.Ck c o4 �' 2 ertAtAt-1 IJh �-/ l*'En-E.. 2 I, S" I -r IIs Slop FoorI J j. 0(3) = Iot° PI,P S5i) CO - Ibco riff .r--- -- 6.51 --- Pty Psi �N = 26.9K 36 i2y1�) 411 &l?Z r I Z n 12t1 165 ((At = 13.2. > Wicit 6 — 0.h LOr..1 I s Crt.ft.iceea G SEruoc,c. Jam,ort c L? t (. o RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB 14004,6 4,6 CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. 47 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED By B1 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com OF • DATE 4�2lS,oS A -S$ f 61 t # 65 clot 4'7 S CokieJ Dcs tbvS, FP 26Ale- 24.11e •- IQ�Z'c. K MO is 4E -e4 -A, 4s T z 26.q . = . 6 v0 c . (6v) 14 z 4 (1444) z 064"" y , ts'yo 4" ok, We -co . k. , s C .101(s/g6)Cco "/,M As A. /-42J• _ k/6 4 -n. 1446 4 i&vA'r5 1- r6Ao -s 3" x gt' —rAsc 11.24f1 — Q6" !%6 L './6 /GSi, tote (81 T+ -ed Ito Ltc cLiq 1451 .od'/ y`1 F_ oK 33 icK = , 33 (sr kill) 4` Tr4)3 — . Nqa" Cy) //if 7d 4'' /y%,✓� tr G % "X 2 2 /,)e /6 ,, II/vg- . (t*.) . 7.4e" -I-11—'1 VI Aso ,11 , � /2..rk5i < 27 k s 11 ! _ _. O ss, -)s --/A � L • 7s-64) ` 27 166 2 8►f(3j4 �� ` , 3 /4. Os 0?-34lixolic 16t 1 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB klo E,6 SHEET NO. /61? CALCULATED BY -STM. 1 OF os DATE *I/6 74E8.S 9,1,,tcas t 9,4" go 'e 4A4 , difte-_ ., = P3.1— • -/ Alt�44 •(e0)(") ( C.� '-/ 64x lt,o ESE Calk' .cn ora , 01= • • Is (f-,') = 2 o Jc=2 kGI= 66.E 4 Coo 6'/ ' 14cl c6,\/c. = 2A/7 % VIA _ 2s,vu /-4/2-/ -8--o •-Jr /2.0f._/•JFo 2c- ' r� = . 00 2- 44. . = .amZ,. Ai. ZSj(,2.') a , /- 4' , 20 t . i4 4 ''. (4-A, sit VEi' 7citt. - fj Gi //' D e, W../ c' /2 `' °.c. 44./PG A $1 v /Lt E►-• Al o % , 23.7Vt4 l All = ai) r- etc etc C% /0-a //N./ ET/N rE 0.6(d - k 4�0 4144 6 4' 3 (/2,d00) • ? (d0, 0,0 (/Qo - /o) . 4-Iq 6-0 49 cat . 0,76'140,a�)(co-) A( 77Z d�z Iu <77e.. ( 61741 C 6 6471-' ) oh 6 re 2 U - OQ W= Cl- ). w0 u.a =• d �w Z= Z ▪ o. w • w UQ o 1- wW 1-F "z w U= O~ z RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB LL'' CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. i0 9 ..1605 12TH,AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 `ci�icuuTED BY " 8 ........ _,_. _.dATE .1Ag...OS_ ._ 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com 4/o a10E-6 OF 34/ /6 40- sts. Bp t ATV 14roU ,.JT. _W8%11)(1111%1'1) = Wc4),1 Lok I f°,14 1-4 cc1.0j = 0 j ,V�(2Z, r. oto 1 �� \ �-Z) F4,0 l . M) -= to 'L, P,, k o Z. 51 �..J I ° ♦--� AS 94: 5ANt, 4 1,214" . 116" or- 444 g471.5 Vgi ./(60) ote. SievtG knA Sgm. To pi •-!r 6 , 6lGE .6 3'-o" 114k roc twc., s RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. JOB N04m6113 CONSULTING ENGINEERS SHEET NO. / / O 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com ‘e -S/6,✓ 16' OF Ij� lI DATE 4/ o, 4t 492_ 4 'L Etik53k 4 ,9j2, 2)e z.ci9 // '" 62 - st 2.y// akie Orote fie( g 50#' 64Wx/era CO 'co -cc p4ried. Go-xiA164 r/od, Art, r�lt,Nr'/' 140 112 11 k 1`VJT7� b�� (Lea�) isL 2 -LP W..' Sd •, = 6\ \J5' - 4.@(2.1' 43,00,1 -L (zJ) .s3 (z2) ` //ets ' 04 /9 / 0 (e/- /� , // 6 _ `�'� i2, 00o) ,� �, Q �5T (S- . 9 (60, 000)(2Z6 - Zs) - ?/(4)v hs cigi/ P,4 -v,10(.. 64-5G err'4 44E -dr (e64DoE • 0 kik) RtAik -E-C61_/+.)(2ziVi • I C-Yi) 3c, 9 lc E 5 3(?ni 3�9 (- �I o�Lt.n(2d • o = 4226 - 5-021) ?C/-1(-171) I1b) (20) - �i (20') 1So)v• '' W (C`L I)(ILIx q) (8 p //,?1 ,yt.A/iM Ott GO. '*-1 /2 aPej" 1 _(►z 1( 27 K N X.S) RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB ' `' ©01 SHEET NO. il/ CALCULATED BY '30/ OF / DATE e`g /D S diclpgf�1L me - Co F`e 42y- rcia Z ;C1 le - z �� /b (.4)146 ) (12‘)(4) bejao 4i%e ,_ 011/41,6 > 44. = 4t 11 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98122 CALCULATED BY JOB SHEET NO. / 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com 5/2ao X51-01, 01/ r4(?Yq(51113) (,ISD Watt f,,,.ievs 4 . 1 ka 1'4 t' OF DATE / / S `63 /Q. Syk > \4 =39.3, •?� qQ frzJ c'4,1itityLoNavrt.. aiarte d /34.01— Alm qo c-/ i�, civ) _ /. ;,Y„ 0-41-(S- A> , 9(1e, ace)(j Tom -16) -21:- 611 /,., y. • S -s" c b '(y°a')(6'/Y) 0#142 . (1,2.1.411`) )(t��" 3Z) = 7‘2 ,e e� l y = 90 fr/ "� Pi.4-a des 417- •4c.-/-1714 c -,Yr 39,3(113)- oC )CZ)- Fi.c 005)= 0 /Tri €44:3= > 1,1 S/414 m-5 ,c) grid qzts RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB M /tA- J SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY /13 1,4 4GG D,. S, 44 1 ��4 2 �-�- .w, r( %2v Oleo 10t4(2,121) - 0(°323)(SI) F16 (Id) -- o tkiLei ►: : X0012VA.15) 37,3`' 1 _\/,140'/_ ,7f (4vo) �S 23v/'/ = .50Qt, g /-0 ,(/ A) 60 A; )/14 -e. 6) S 84i F . 6.0 .60.(1j .t5(/.o vo I.l. ' /°(2.t) z3o 1G tea/ vr? C 7 zirrTa,d vc 2(I ('/q')10 = //?/e 12 (,/C) 5/ /o k . .r/ k. ,. /77h 6rT (A1/4/) 71)(11//419(60/L) ST��G C MiAdit (y )(/il/y/I)(, 00/2) /i /a/ .5*zreAt ver. Op .Fi ,csk-c ' j72‘LerejEf1 r� =7, ,EAChi Feq-c ST74F lgre, I L•t//77. eA/ /_c/1'c; RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. il/oxxe.2) CALCULATED BY OF DATE / /41/ OS 41.4,,a>,%/774t.V,E/477c: & ems/ A4-eFLG mit./ i. /T ‘544/30.7,-472- 0 0 a r , S,/S•v7/C /o =6" /o/L (AtsO) — — ..f /it /�s-� r 46/ / ti g. L/ 4> /D n i r /Z,E/A1C . w ,_d , . CL krt 6225 Z ,e1/c0 /..- @Qp4/a /2) ) 24/1 /) (. /5l/ ) /d �L�.✓6-T� D/e. GcIAGC %b'W E 4c. /2" ST2/P. Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Scope : Job # H0439 Date: 4:23PM, 31 JAN 05 r�� Lateral and Vertical Toad resisting system. Rev: 580000 User: KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983.2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Page 1 normed_ii.ecw:Front El. panels Description 1.2 & A.25 shear wall out of plane design. General Information Clear Height Parapet Height Thickness Bar Size Bar Spacing Bar Depth Min Defl. Ratio Concrete Weight 23.000 ft 0.000 ft 11.250 in 4 36.000 in 8.940 in 150.0 150.00 pcf fc Fy Width Code Ref: ACI 318-02, 1997 UBC, 2003 IBC, 2003 NFPA 5000' 4,000.0 psi 60,000.0 psi 0.900 12.000 in Seismic Zone 3 Min Vert Steel % 0.0012 Min Horiz Steel % 0.0020 Base Fixity 0 % Wall Seismic Factor 0.1330 Parapet Seismic Factor 0.0000 LL & ST Not Combined Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for teff & Iterating Deflections Parapet Weight Counteracts Middle Loads Note: Lateral Loads Wind Load Point Load ...height ...load type Lateral Load ...distance to top ...distance to bot ...load type 10.000 psf 78.00 lbs 10.500 ft Seismic #/ft ft ft Seismic Vertical Loads Uniform DL #/ft Uniform LL #/ft ...eccentricity in Concentric DL 11600.00 lbs Concentric LL 10800.00 lbs Seismic "I" Magnifier Wind "I" Magnifier 1.000 1.000 Load factoring supports 2003 IBC and 2003 NFPA 5000 by virtue of their references to ACI 318-02 for concrete design. Factoring of entered Toads to ultimate loads within this program is according to ACI 318-02 C.2 Wall Analysis Basic Defl w/o P -Delta Basic M w/o P -Delta Moment Excess of Mcr Max. P -Delta Deflection Max P -Delta Moment Maximum Allow Vertical Bar Spacing Maximum Allow Horizontal Bar Spacing For Factored Load Seismic 0.041 28,074.3 0.0 0.042 28,471.4 14.815 in 8.889 in Stresses Wind 0.020 in 12,676.2 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.020 in 12,813.6 in-# For Service Load Seismic 0.016 10,333.2 0.0 0.017 10,433.3 Parapet Bar Spacing Req'd : SEISMIC Par�pet Bar Spacing Req'd : WIND Deflections Wind 0.012 in 7,935.0 in-# 0.0 in-# 0.012 in 8,016.9 in-# 14.815 in 14.815 in Wall Design OK 1 23.00ft clear height, O.00ft parapet, 11.25in thick with #4 bars at 36.00in on center, d= 8.94in, fc = 4,000.0psi Using: ACI Eq. 9-7 for Teff & Iterating Deflections Factored Load Bending : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Moment : Mu 28,471.38 in-# Moment Capacity 175,481.98 in-# Mn * Phi : Moment Capacity Applied: Mu @ Mid -Span Applied: Mu @ Top of Wall Max Iterated Service Load Deflection Actual Deflection Ratio Actual Reinforcing Percentage UBC Allow. As % = 0.6 * RhoBal Actual Axial Stress : (Pw + Po ) / Ag Allowable Axial Stress = 0.04 * fc Service Load Deflection : Seismic Load Governs Maximum Iterated Deflection 0.017 in Deflection Limit Seismic Wind 175,481.98 in-# 98,916.32 in-# 28,471.38 in-# 12,813.58 in-# 0.00 in-# 0.00 in-# 0.02 in 0.01 in 16,700 : 1 22,274 : 1 0.0006 0.0006 0.0171 0.0171 97.91 psi 97.91 psi 160.00 psi 160.00 psi 1.840 in z z reW aa� 00 W I F- • W W O u. to � d z= ZO W • W U0 O N O I - WW H 0 u -O W . • z' O F... z Title : Normed_II Dsgnr: BJM Description : Tilt up Job # H0439 Date: 4:23PM, 31 JAN 05 Scope : Lateral and Vertical load resisting system. Rev: 580000 User. KW -0601345, Ver 5.8.0, 1 -Dec -2003 (c)1983-2003 ENERCALC Engineering Software Tilt -Up Wall Panel Design Description 1.2 & A.25 shear wall out of plane design. Page 2 11 normed ii.ecw.Front El. panels Analysis Data E 3,604,996.5 psi n=Es/Ec 8.04 Fr Multiplier for sgrt(f'c) 5.000 Ht / Thk Ratio 24.53 Values for Mn Calculation... As:eff= [Pu:tot + AsFy]/Fy a : (AsFy + Pu)/(.85 f'c b) c=a/.85 (gross (cracked l-eff (ACI methods only) Phi: Capacity Reduction Mn= As:eff Fy(d-a/2) - Pu (WallThk/2-Bar Depth) Sgross Mcr=S•Fr Fr = Rho: Bar Reinf Pct Seismic 0.375 in 0.552 in 0.649 in 1,423.828 in4 208.50 in4 1,423.83 in4 0.900 194,979.98 in-# 253.125 in3 80,045.2 in-# 316.23 psi 0.0285 Wind 0.298 in 0.438 in 0.516 in 1,423.83 in4 170.67 in4 1,423.83 in4 0.900 109,907.02 in-# Additional Values Loads used for analysis Wall Weight Wall Wt • Wall Seismic Factor Wall Wt • Parapet Seismic Factor Service Applied Axial Load Service Wt @ Max Mom Total Service Axial Loads 140.625 psf 18.703 psf 0.000 psf 11,600.00 #/ft 1,617.19 #/ft 13,217.18 #/ft Factored Loads Applied Axial Load Lateral Wall Weight Total Lateral Loads Seismic 16,239.99 2,264.06 18,504.06 Wind 12,180.00 #/ft 1,698.05 #/ft 13,878.04 #/ft ACI Factors (per ACI 318-02, applied internally to entered loads) 1 1 ACI C-1 & C-2 DL ACI C-1 & C-2 LL ACI C-1 & C-2 ST ....seismic = ST • : 1.400 1.700 2.130 1.100 ACI C-2 Group Factor ACI C-3 Dead Load Factor ACI C-3 Short Term Factor 0.750 Add"! "1.4" Factor for Seismic 0.900 Add"I "0.9" Factor for Seismic 0.900 1.600 1.400 RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB SHEET NO. n4/2/110-10 CALCULATED BY $2 14 OF DATE ',/A -LL La-ra-2Act. 5Uhpo-r ds /set" Pte, fed' pcs 'AT ZS=o'1 is 04-6s a do/or- k/.4 -G -L , 85O5/,E Wu/ = .74/3 k!. ."h13(. )( )(i Lo")(ISo��,.� V ` ��.x.55�1� z 6.9k 9.8/ -1.70\k. )(2l cr) 20V< <Vt4 35/ k� 4Z12 - 4 Z/)2 M 6/4-0/g Nor Rpt u/rte . 4 4_. /2, 0o a = /10Y411. avVr • q ((o, 000)(9. . 9fr1) g, , ok. RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB WOAMIED. SHEET NO. is)/ OF CALCULATED BY ESTM DATE / ! fo 5 �.►1tc 1. Stt<�� C40,..1% 1 0 6- 16.ite4-o Top o- , 1 p (14") 41/1/ = r(3r21) L 44xq-w r 3A" 6,01`-`t = r 2. 3 k Vb0T?t 124 L .3 (4o)(Te)C-i ) z cc/ %i, Wea 44-4EavA-rz, / d-PY4bdiAVi,) : /6"b' . spowpt2.E.l_ 8E1_O0 Lova e. ( Roo FS, aileac L 4W4 -x 1/4" 7 `i41' I�L� 2��y,,� �,� ',Iso L5K 4At I— I- = (tq $,3 l 2s psi) = goor. z Oh. (')(5.')(/ps.)goeig l t ,15 � .is(344) tig6 b ail = M = Z 2e. Ks b s .0640'43 M 5. off 31 rid oft T MomEAtrPt;rL1404OF �• I?'I�X3�SX i . o -1t1 t�3 eft 1C/c. vi- . / %'J is s/ • s.z "_21.1q) . 6737r ! 71 psi 31/2,N W.�4=. ,b033�i .Q 0k./ 8 E. 1 0 C.taT'i LevE-,q vtee psis' 3 ! clth(3/4 ,o35t5 1.0 12 - RICHARD HUDSON 8e ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE 18 SEATTLE; WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB (AMMO SHEET SHEET NO. CALCULATED BY e97 PA-4ISL SES- Cir --->S Oorylst7 . 1 ( ‘54: t5f°) il(n-7-1")( 12 16'6 L 4 `t>C4tit 1/2\ OK ELI WISp I t - RICHARD HUDSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. x;f i CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1605 12TH AVENUE • SUITE. 18 i' SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98122 206-324-6160 • Fax 206-324-6248 t rhudson@hudsonengineers.com JOB / V (/ /E%, SHEET NO. ` CALCULATED BY DATE si*Aft.t. Sa,40 r te ,@ Fpr 8 soy wP TL1P rpm . 141 \A/• /r)( ")C 2M1� C Ise a/r- , 2431 12 / 245, 14// olt 5.61/044W -s- • 44l44h,fi S @ St ! 0 - /45/P4/ /4i/ 412,1 5.E7 Ark, s - s z " 7 oK 4." EkrJE-J 12ca , 9/1(:)" DV -t C.C_ g 4:4" EikAgstivissiTt Crow) P�'s-t7 #/#41/coicvc 0/#7 9e.- c c S1ZEc S PERMANENT FIL 1112121m1 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT Proposed Normed Project SEC — 42nd Avenue South and SR -599 Tukwila, Washington CODEREVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE SEP 19 2005 C Of 1U wfla BurLDTNG DIulsloN Prepared for: Normed P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, WA 98124-3644 October 25, 2004 Revised July 18, 2005 Our Job No. 6719 P1' c\v..) YOFiI!:,',' SP 1 PERMIT CENTER • CORRECTI LTR# Z' 'EXPIRES 10/10/"Yo 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SouTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com -44 is' TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics Figure 3 — Soils Map 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology B. Developed Site Hydrology C. Performance Standards D. Flow Control System E. Water Quality System 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL 67 19.009.doc [JPJ/tepl 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW Z ae W WU O 0 N 0 111 W= }- CO LL W o. 2Q LLco nciQ W Z Z F--. H- 0 Z W uj UU 0- o } -- W W. H lL �" O; tii Z • = O 1- z 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW The proposed project lies within a portion of the northeast quarter of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Tukwila, King County, Washington, and is approximately 6 acres in size. The site is bound on the west by 42nd Avenue South, on the south by South 131st Place and 44th Avenue South, and on the east by SR -599. More particularly, the site is located on the southeast corner of 42nd Avenue South and SR -599 adjacent to a wetland area. Please see the attached vicinity map (Figure 1) for an exact location of the project site. The proposal for this development is to construct a warehouse -type building with dock high loading, parking, drive aisles, catch basin collection, pipe conveyance, water quality and flow control facilities in accordance with the requirements of the City of Tukwila. This project has been proposed for approximately 6 years and was originally designed under the 1992 Department of Ecology Surface Water Manual, now detention and water quality are provided based on the current 1998 King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), as adopted by the City of Tukwila. Level 1 Flow Control is the detention standard followed for this site. The water quality facility was sized based on the 1998 KCSWDM that utilizes an equation based on the amount of various types of ground cover proposed under developed conditions and the precipitation rate for the area in which the site is located. These calculations are contained within this report. This site only allows 2.3 feet of live storage in the vault based on site constraints. Please refer to the calculations and the plans for an analysis of the flow control and water quality for this project. There is an existing building and parking lot located in the southwest comer of the project site that will remain with this development. In fact, portions of that development will be routed into the wet/detention vault proposed for this development. The area of the new improvements is located over the top of a wetland and considerable negotiations have transpired between the wetland biologist and the City of Tukwila about how to mitigate for the wetlands that are being covered by a building. An adequate mitigation plan has finally been worked out and the City has required that Resource Stream Protection Menu will need to be followed for the water quality features on the site such that a two -train treatment system must be utilized. This project is proposing a wet vault below the live storage in the wet/detention vault plus a stormwater filter, which utilizes a perlite media for water quality. The site tends to slope in a northeasterly direction toward the northeast corner of the project site where runoff is conveyed via a large diameter pipe underneath SR -599 that discharges directly into the Duwamish River. 67 19.009.doc [1PJ/tep] FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP Z Z J0. UO y 0 WI W O. 2 u.N � =a Z� F- O Z F- W U0 O N. 0 H. W w u'O. WZ U =': Z. SEE/" 625 Hn' ., ..5 �..::: .' 655 f.o,i•It. •,G 41•• f . . JAS" •'i"�� ''S"t� '�n�': s.• j� Y.•: ='1. z;. 'x �`.•:. LJ )S:;,rl'Y.iis:r.� � .�F. rfiY,. •1. ;,'}•:i+��.r, ...-i ..�.e. •T7::•��4 �:• .�)ii. \/.- ;,'{`fl•1-�' ,,.. .. Cis`: �;�:i i�.'��.: x:��!:3,:''�'j`''i�:��..:\ =Hill 111 'rZiQU�pENIE1 N,%.\ \ '\ v_. - < .. _ .... d'.1.'ia",,r:y rte i l,ly`j nalL'7 _/• FYI' J� ��\\;l:\\ s A�� 5 12471 L12171�RN., / -r, 'or 5•,+, 15'S V7�5 -' ,_, .)�y ' €i!, i 't ;I 1 1i �a\ ?S '.17••.711' .' �aT!, r: i' ` SS.. "r � >P i �`•6^� ) ` :L.3 : 1. ,�"w. 041 fid£'.,' rt1' E%Y, ' Aj :•r.; {r it: ...• Y• ,)'•.' °ay.: r11f.'Pi' p s' : ...r(�VI`ILIIN 'Joilt, >�\ „t ..� i` Iszbrli- sr S A 1, �\\ <JTh 5 12511 'a s 126TH s sr 126n 'e, �� 6 ST �� BPq 1 \�� ( i g ° v �: i st �o° N ,i -.•-• C\ �' 5 127TH ,\ >/ , troll! ,,•,�� S fI -s p 124TH i. ?� FS LIB v1 ;5� +/ \ �i � �y s - Si' N6, ` 1151 \�, - p s 1261 \� o ; ��a�y / ST 1/ H( 128111 ¢ ST d S sP J 1I 6h S s"• iT1 l N t• 'ti? I ST ' �+ .�/?.\ _ t !1•‹J�, r- s,°0 4. ST > i)rIOO Vl `i � .L z\ a a 1[S 129 ". 5129tH 7200 7600 N PistI S...12_0111 ST 5 �� p� /! �X B0, ` TT- F 110 )1 0 �I S 13071 1' 'I1�i : `'/.: ' % ��`�� 'Q� o sr -3)(5 1Tl I 1 iO RD ('o r5/s nrH: �: ''''* '• :...4.), S :133RD' < '" �� 599 = ST... '?t:' 9• ,'S'"'' ""4i ,/ 09 #, ,. �;..; Ja \ S M _ %�1 ND -1TINO sr BLACK R ER r ¢t ` s utst 5T ALriIIS ■ J�' 9 tiva , 0" �\• //, } •• n ' :..� �� Ty S 133'D 15 132ND ST , 114 ,4"- 1r t � • i r � Rkj`r ea3ij ? 4. 1'9 s i g tt €. 0�• . ,, alar! 4•0q, ', \ Sc:•� e �% ��\�Gq 14 v �\ f��FQSTfR .•E' m-• A F 'Q 47 \7o°p �� i �B L ° �S of sT s _135TH__ ST g -__ .... `, 1,3 --�. 7;r wy, ;y •S� • +Sa ° .� p . , "',179 • s -R bti'<tLil z, s, ..., bM. t, t ® J, Si a1 v7r. .. R' SS �F,�G�F •fj . 'Q� . LINKS. ,; �� ' t .. I�v.L-a ' TT 1 ( �4 �i 13 ..� 8 . 11 900 : s �, T ..• 1 �7! 140TH a1'Ye' ST• L < 'pi( ^-1a9T �'. ' x;•••rurK , • tt J 7 d9 '`' O r� N r It I51' :8 •", Ci@ 146TH r ;_:5- NZ H• 7C r•�I ! tti ..,..J4Z H FOSTER NS,r:,S= D in k\` fi� � .' S� .. > MID < 144TH .' `s ... . • iti.145TN ►r 1 p fir. ; �i �.+ jn ,'I, Sg � r \\ „n\^ 0 ¢ 14.ND-ST ' S 140n t,1 . tY 5300 O 1�3 i' •• 1�\ ,E:� tvQSslpf l41S+'•s , � .� .142ND 'v� a • •,,� si $T - - v! `.. .¢ t .�, ' /� S I 'a i 1,5•14154 - � '+?cU 'grin , S!" -IN '' �('- „ •:- :',1 wIZELNU> ` PARK LIB FS PL 't� + �e \,\. �S .+� � 43R.P .• . �" ; 4. str -'1-4-/.�Ro P \„I,' � NS7ER' " 5' 14.ini• '':PT\\v ...si \1 ti,7 9 Ji r \.•® ,� .. �`1.-'''F,201?",!,',•,. .\ ..F i �:�rt ; io' 1 t1PAR(AN f:�. - rr 'i L l'7�0 ®, N 5, �LA.iC'RIV$R •"%.°'' . - J,o• •o ,t'islt. ,j; 2 FR T`s,,rY q Nrai•� ';° 7r , • Stlii cn¢ Sjy 5 4. 4v •1(9 .!m •,.'v orrt c,' ...:• •} :. • ST ' ¢. J .,:w:!. 5. ;ti � •N.ei..S:.15D7 ♦ r ''• ST �o S .149TH•S { • .•ry IO t• -s 149TH r srp ,'• b);• s': :y`DE 1 1 ,',• •6$ .. r E"r; '''P.1tK r t �� S '.'�,:. 149tH.• :`"r. sr ' "".jy��yj..•,,..��.. . • 151ST •S 22 • �: ' S 2110 Mr ®I , 75157 SL'' si' r �m . ;EJ''u1 PL ', S Z3' a S t . 'S '751 \ L E4 ,,;�.'ti•,'• ..Srf z°\\� < Y3. \ y4 a P J` '•\ P\. ,t `>f_'_�-1-1 ,(. • 1 ®. w 1 RND 152ND --_- ST ; 5,515 r, _ `:4;0 44; �� ->� Q o�� . , ---.7--...„- 4200. . S 152110 PL. �� ° ,...:,,'.o.4, -.. rt i • G : °4.. \I 0. '•.' �.. '.518 slob 1 .. Qa0...5 153RD. ,`174 -01"414 .'S\A '+/ 1611! ••• S 167 ST • CF.. .q.,',1"'frai'Q►�'g05' N• , �\ _ �.P ... ,Lot it Nart 5., a • • - '(1 ,.1 § 18TH•' �q10. .elf, C] , ;t: : ATH �+^ F.' : ST yg T�r SI ins a rsl,4,., coni c s.1.4... P K 4 �� 13 P' \` UK�I SOUTHCENTER -- ___.- .p►CwY rvANs w w LI z _ ESUITES �: $.LON +� ,1 3 , Izsra S4 rATCA• OEs 1 1 ,l �1'x S. ®I� 9p 4 n •.•.14Fht . 11} •, z f67•., 1«>:••'Q S PL a'=- a 1s � .. 161St: pm sr sT `., Sl ST.; r. W r 5'I, :' © © © MALL 3.11x, PNx .,Y. SAICER BLVD j� d a ,1 GRf EII r" r 1" atsroc Yf' `es . St't v. a i. ;Lis 4 r NMI v . „ 4 i "'` . 6164111 STRANDER B'',,,•';',,,-.,,...-4;......, VD..., ardor ` �' t T ST ' I r• Sy�Q c i• ®.+••. CCI, LSIXHIICENT PEAT R Y 4' .f { .;' ( D NON 366D ST pp, . 7■ , . {L , r s . m Z% . S .16111 ST uo I W o1. i C' ■ 41 .. ,' CCVka E y -•1TRE6k'} UyPa .168TH .. • ST ..1... , I�surrfs i . , TUKWIL4 .1 TY 1- > s`�• t "' • 168tH tN s .5 170TH 16�t,Tll LN • 3 ' I ST is• S 168 1` S7 1 - ' 4 �, t 5 t d t (AP C � , . POND• ,s 1 , 1 / a � BY iiUWOiT ,� {•0'' cc t. c,gi,sit ' #` `l1 01.`f'<.• .. `",'�,� , +z . " � , 1 VI 6 l ) L r 'S1 ,., r'r. ' 172N0, .• ST . 5100 ,n ,„) ' }. i t ,:.:I u ,' w, z ,- ..PR 111 . ;.t FS fz carctear PNLI' ;.',;. l�•" Z yrl4sf .f `T.d• r ".i i�j1k)4IA .. . '. : .a 5T; ,• R ,., . rs• S 172ND PL r CQRPORAT • 173RD o $T 'a v) - 1 ''NiNKLEtt,.....,..,.,.,,-;:::,••:: 5 " 3 a, 7 w PAR70/A(. - .'N -.1J ..� ; . BL4D... t> . A cn I Y' i $W''+ 175TH ST r, ; A a138Ta+ ,SY silk 5,N2 v, 176TH _ S 1 7T1 sr: u, 300'- .s > N� ♦ ST 6" r s,�- •.,,i. T- ' <'. i,...,. -si.7 ' ,k Lre ►d1i+178TH i,.r ti r r . fiIr •r I r! r'� .., + 1 '} w.c.../42.$ �tI. =r z 1 a \ ) , 5 181 I • , r MENTON 4 ` I ,� :f!�iill 0• ^ ,7 t� Y ` ST ?e i- 178111 ST �' P 550rn h r } � r it Favi ',L 5 179711 •S crs'i79IH Ir '< �3 :TRI ND 1 4 ;1. r,: -..-,;.,...ed . 4g t .� y. A, r J' 1f. ! a q( Ll igi. �'r?t%? r'F P+[ ,, m{�i1F� ci . E4i�� '' ®, sm. 1 .: 'e,...kr Tin .. � ,• , ' ikk .'1t'`1n`" ..�'' 4?F • SEE 685 MAP '1. .14•• i 1;14157 : • 0 .125 .25 .375 .5 miles 1 IH. - 1900 ft. x�k s: kt • 6j 1. j. 4,1 • -0 FIGURE 2 DRAINAGE BASINS, SUBBASINS, AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS ;= W re 2 rU U 0 N0Lu. J W 0 g u_ Nd �W Z H- O. ZI-- U� O to O I-. W w ter.. `�z' w 0~ ' Z File: D04-0415 35mm Drawing #1 FIGURE 3 SOILS MAP 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY U O - 1 N u. W o u. = d. W Z �... I- 0. Z1" W uj .o N. C WW z W 0) .o''' z 2.0 CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY Analysis of the Eight Core Requirements: Core Requirement No. 1: Discharge at Natural Location. Response: This project site will discharge into the same location it currently does with the streambed being rechanneled in accordance with the wetland mitigation plan, ultimately discharging underneath SR -599 through the same pipe the project currently discharges to. Core Requirement No. 2: Off -Site Analysis. Response: An off-site analysis was prepared on March 30, 2000 and is attached herewith. Please refer to that document, which was previously submitted to the City of Tukwila for the off-site analysis. Core Requirement No. 3: Flow Control. Response: As allowed by the City of Tukwila, this project is providing flow control based on the 1998 KCSWDM and Level 1 Flow Control. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System. Response: Since this project is less than 10 acres in size, the conveyance system for the site must be sized based on the Rational method as required by the King County methodology and adopted by the City of Tukwila such that the 25 -year storm must be conveyed without overtopping any manholes. However, this project is proposing parking lot ponding for the dock high loading areas adjacent to the building to provide further detention that will be less than 6 inches in depth and it still meets the requirements of King County and the City of Tukwila. Core Requirement No. 5: Erosion and Sediment Control. Response: This project will concur with all erosion and sediment control requirements of Appendix D of the 1998 KCSWDM as adopted by the City of Tukwila such that perimeter protection will be provided in the form of silt fences, a rock construction entrance will be installed, and temporary v -ditches with rock checkdams will route runoff into a sediment trap prior to discharge from the project site. To the maximum extent possible, sediment -laden water will be treated to settle out fine particles prior to discharge from the site. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance and Operations. Response: This project will concur with all maintenance and operations requirements of the City of Tukwila for projects of this nature. Core Requirement No. 7: Financial Guarantees and Liability. Response: This project will concur with all financial guarantees and liability requirements of the City of Tukwila for projects of this nature. 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] Core Requirement No. 8: Water Quality. Response: The City of Tukwila has previously indicated that Resource Stream Protection Menu water quality must be followed for this project such that, due to site constraints for this project, a two -train treatment system must be provided in the form of a basic wet vault with a stormwater z filter downstream from the detention vault to provide a two -train treatment system. These z. projects are sized in accordance with the 1998 KCSWDM. ;�- W rt 2 Analysis of Special Requirement: 0 O Special Requirement No. 1: Other Adopted Area -Specific Requirements. w = 1— U) LL., Response: There are no known other adopted area -specific requirements for this project site. 0 This project site is not part of a critical drainage area, basin plan, or master drainage plan. W J c ZH 1— 0. Z U O N • — W W • diH LI 0 .. Z W —1 0H z 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] 3.0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS ZQQ 1-, 11- Z w W, J0 0 O. • 0 W I J WO 2 g J' LL Q CO = d FW Z= 1- O Z1- 0 0 -; • 1- W W' 1- • 0 -Z LLJ U 2. O~ 1 HA ALL&. IC CIVIL 'ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES `Z OUR JOB NO. 6719 APRIL 16, 1999 , Prepared By: BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (425) 251-6222 &HAG OUR JOB NO. 6719 APRIL 16, 1999 REVISED MARCH 30, 2000 Prepared By. BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (425) 251-6222 CCIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ' '41‘Q ENo Q,C�HgCi, OUR JOB NO. 6719 APRIL 16, 1999 REVISED MARCH 30, 2000 Prepared By. EXPIRES 6 -It- 6 BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (425) 251-6222 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 4' TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION A. GENERAL INFORMATION B. RESPONSE TO CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 2.0 UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS A. UPSTREAM AREA B. DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS C. ON-SITE SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER FLOW APPENDIX EXHIBIT A: VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT B: DRAINAGE AREA MAP EXHIBIT C: OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE EXHIBIT D: BASIN STUDY EXHIBIT E: SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO EXHIBIT F: WETLAND INVENTORY MAP EXHIBIT G: UPSTREAM AREA MAPS 1.0 INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION A. GENERAL INFORMATION The proposed project lies within a portion of the northeast quarter of Section 15, Township 23 z North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, Tukwila, King County, Washington, and is =1= approximately 6 acres in size. The site is bounded by 42nd Avenue South on the west, SR -599 on ui the north, and South 131st Place on the south. The eastern portion of the site is bounded by undeveloped property. The south portion of the site contains one existing building and a parking -J UO lot. Most of the remainder of the site is covered with grass and low brush. The site slopes co 0 UJ downward to the west toward an existing drainage swale near 42nd Avenue South. This drainage w = swale flows into an existing 66 -inch culvert at the northwest corner of the property adjacent to u) H' SR -599. w O0 The proposed project is to construct a second building on the site, which will be a warehouse g Q distribution facility of approximately 37,000 square feet, and associated grading, drainage, utility, co a and landscaping improvements. _ I -w Z= B. RESPONSE TO CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS z 0 11.1 w Core Requirement No. 1: Drainage at Natural Location v 0 (12The drainage produced from the proposed development will be collected and discharged at its natural a'- location to an existing 66 -inch -diameter storm drainage culvert located at the northwest portion of = w the project along SR -599. The proposed development will not alter the existing drainage course nor 1— H divert stormwater onto or away from the adjacent downstream properties. u" Z iii co Core Requirement No. 2: Off -Site Analysis Hc—. H O This report contains an Upstream Area Analysis and a Level 1 Downstream Drainage Analysis for the project site. The final site development plans will demonstrate that the development will have no adverse affects on the downstream drainage system. Core Requirement No. 3: Runoff Control This project is located within the Green River basin. The storm drainage detention and water quality systems will be designed in accordance with the requirements of the King County Surface Water Design (KCSWDM) Manual, the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Manual, and City of Tukwila standards. The preliminary design concept utilizes a wet/detention vault followed by a leaf compost filter in accordance with Resource Stream Protection menu of King County to provide storage, release, and water quality requirements. Core Requirement No. 4: Conveyance System All of the storm drainage runoff produced from the proposed project will be collected by catch basins and underground pipe, and tightlined to the northwest portion of the project for detention and water quality treatment prior to discharging from the site. Water quality treatment will be provided by a wet vault and sand filter vault. The proposed storm drainage conveyance system will be 6719.002 [KUsm/ph] Z designed to convey the 25-year/24-hour design storm in accordance with th Design Manual and City of Tukwila standards. Core Requirement No. 5: Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan 1990 ing County A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan will be prepared for the project in accordance with the KCSWDM, DOE, and City of Tukwila development standards. All runoff during construction will be collected by temporary interceptor ditches with rock check darns and conveyed to a proposed temporary erosion and sedimentation control pond prior to release from the project. Core Requirement No. 6: Maintenance and Operation A maintenance and operation manual will be prepared as part of the final Technical Information Report and provide instructions on how to maintain the water quality wet pond and biofiltration swale, along with a schedule for maintenance of the storm drainage conveyance and catch basins. Core Requirement No. 7: Bond and Liability Bond and liability insurance requirements will be addressed at the time of plan review and construction. Special Requirement No. 1: Critical Drainage Area The proposed project site is located within the Green River Basin. A stormwater detention facility will be designed and constructed on site. The site does not lie within a critical drainage area as depicted by the KCSWDM; therefore, this requirement does not apply to the project. Special Requirement No. 2: Compliance with an Existing Master Drainage Plan The proposed project is not located within any existing Master Drainage Plan; therefore, this requirement does not apply to the project. Special Requirement No. 3: Conditions Requiring a Master Drainage Plan The proposed project does not meet the threshold for the Master Drainage Plan; therefore, this requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 4: Adopted Basin or Community Plans The proposed project does not lie within an area with an adopted basin or community plan; therefore, this requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 5: Special Water Quality Controls The project proposes to meet this requirement by providing a water quality wet pond and biofiltration swale northwest of the proposed building, and then discharge to an existing 6719.002 [KUsm/ph] 66 -inch -diameter storm drainage culvert under SR -599. The wet pond will be designed to provide volume and surface area to treat storm drainage runoff from the project. Special Requirement No. 6: Coalescing Plate Oil/Water Separator The project does not propose to create more than 5 acres of impervious area subject to high vehicular use or petroleum storage; therefore, this special requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 7: Closed Depression The proposed project will not discharge runoff to an existing depression that has greater than 5,000 square feet of water surface area; therefore, this requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 8: Use of Lake, Wetland, or Closed Depression for Peak Rate Runoff Control The proposed project does not propose to use a lake, wetland, or closed depression for peak rate runoff control; therefore, this requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 9: Delineation of 100 -Year Floodplain No portion of the site lies within the 100 -year floodplain as depicted on the FEMA floodplain map (Exhibit D). The proposed project does contain a wetland, which will be mitigated, and the existing channel through the site will be realigned. The 100 -year floodplain for this channel will be calculated and shown on the site development plans. Special Requirement No. 10: Flood Protection Facility for Type 1 and Type 2 Streams The proposed project does not contain or abut a Class 1 or Class 2 stream that has existing flood protection facilities such as levies, revetment, and berms. The project does not propose to construct a new or modify an existing flood protection facility; therefore, this special requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 11: Geotechnical Analysis and Report The project does not propose to construct a pond or any infiltration systems within 200 feet of the top of a steep slope, on a slope with a gradient steeper than 15 percent, use a berm higher than 6 feet, or modify existing flood protection facilities; therefore, this requirement does not apply to this project. Special Requirement No. 12: Soil Analysis and Report The existing soils underlying the proposed project are in an area not contained in the King County Soils Maps. A geotechnical report was prepared by Pacific Testing Laboratories, dated March, 1979, and confirms the content of the on-site material and underlying soils. 6719.002 [KLsm/ph] Z }�—Z rtw QQ= O O w f- w O g• � d =• 0 jW Z= I— 0 Z • w O — O I— wW ~h • O Z .0 F. Z 2.0 UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS A. Upstream Area A portion of Southgate Creek is located within the subject site. The catchment area to Southgate Creek is approximately 510 acres in size, and is located within the northwest region of Tukwila. The Southgate Creek drainage basin is highly urbanized and generally slopes to the northeast towards the Duwamish River. It is bounded by on the north by South 130th Street, on the west by 24th Avenue South, on the east by 1-5, and on the south by 146th Street, please see exhibit G1 of this report for a pictorial delineation of the approximate boundaries of Southcreek drainage basin. Defining drainage courses for the entirety of Southcreek drainage basin is beyond the scope of this report, however, exhibit G2 delineates the drainage course within close proximity to the subject site. Approximately 1000 feet ± upstream of the site Southgate Creek enters an existing 48" CP just north of the intersection of 42nd Avenue South and South 133rd Street. This 48" CP continues to the south along South 133rd Street for approximately 100 feet ± where it then enters an existing control structure, based on field reconnaissance and interviews with the City of Tukwila personnel, it appears that in periods of high flow this control structure splits flow to the south along South 133rd Street. This overflow continues along South 133rd Street through a series of open channel and culvert segments. The runoff enters an existing tightline system located at the intersection of South 134th Street and South 133rd Street. The runoff then appears, to split into three different directions. This is based upon data provided to us by the City of Tukwila. One downstream segment heads in a northerly direction along South 1 32nd Street where it converges with Southgate Creek just north of44th Avenue South. The second downstream segment continues to the northwest along SR -599. Eventually, incorporating itself into the subject site's downstream. The third segment is conveyed to the east and then north along Intenrrban Avenue South. This segment also incorporates itself into the subject site's downstream just east of Interurban Avenue South. As mentioned earlier during periods of high flow the control structure, located along South 133rd Street, splits water to the south. During periods of normal flow, the water is conveyed from the control structure underneath South 133rd Street and into an existing open channel via a 48" culvert. This open channel is approximately 3' wide, 4' deep, grass/soil lined with 1:1 vertical side slopes. Some erosion/is apparent along the side slopes of the channel. The open channel continues in a southerly direction until it meets South 132nd Street. Southgate Creek then flows to the north along the western side of South 132nd Street unit it is conveyed into an existing 48" CP located approximately 200' south of the intersection of 42nd Avenue South and South 132nd Street. This existing storm pipe continues to the northwest where it outlets into an existing open channel located within the subject site. B. Downstream Drainage Analysis Flow exits the project site through the open channel partially located within the subject site. Once the flow exits the site, it enters a 66 -inch CMP culvert. The culvert conveys flow under SR -599 for approximately 290 feet. At this point, the culvert is expanded into a ±15 -foot CMP culvert. The culvert continues to the northeast for approximately 40 feet, where it then outlets into an existing open channel. Located within the ±15 -foot CMP culvert are a series of four V -notch weirs. Once 6719.002 l KUsm/phl the flow enters the open channel, it continues to the north/northwest for approximately 100 feet. The runoff then outlets into a 66 -inch CMP culvert. The culvert continues for approximately 160 feet to the north where it outlets into the Green River, approximately 560 feet downstream of the site. (See Exhibit B - Drainage Area Map, and Exhibit C - Off -Site Analysis Drainage System Table.) C. ON-SITE SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER FLOW Surface flow on the undeveloped portion of the site generally sheetflows to the existing wetland located north and northwest of the existing building and parking lot. Flow from the developed portion of the site sheetflows to a series of catch basins and is conveyed in an underground pipe system to the wetland northwest of the building. The portion of the site disturbed by new development will be approximately 1 6''acres, not including the ditch relocation and wetland mitigation. Existing elevations in the area to be developed range from approximately 9.5 to 12.5. Much of the area is comprised of existing wetlands and wetland buffers, for which mitigation will be provided on site. Following development, surface flows will continue to discharge into the enhanced wetland area. Surface flow will be treated and have controlled release rates in accordance with KCSWDM requirements. Water quality treatment will include the previously uncontrolled and untreated existing building and parking lot drainage. The development proposes to improve the water quality of on-site drainage entering the wetland. The geotechnical evaluation of the site by Pacific Testing Laboratories, dated March 1979, indicates on-site soils to be made up primarily of wetland -type soils, alternating from soft to very soft silt and peat layers of various thicknesses in the upper 12 feet, with the water table approximately 5 feet below the surface. The wetland -type soils are relatively impervious; therefore, it is our opinion that development of the building and paved parking lot will have no significant impact on groundwater hydrology. Overall surface water hydrology will not be significantly changed due to development. Similar to existing conditions, all storm drainage runoff will be routed to the existing, created, and enhanced wetlands. The flow rate into the wetlands will be controlled to match existing conditions, and surface runoff will be treated prior to discharge into the wetlands. 6719.002 [KUsm/phl EXHIBIT A VICINITY MAP 1111 . Lunn as NEM Tim arsin • 14412R5"121. sum ") SO—Sr CE: THOMAS GUIDE VICINITY MAP erSVP.SIVVIA 4>MAMAitrairifIn,", 04.6. ,V3 , fr r, • • ... „ „. NORTH EXHIBIT B DRAINAGE AREA MAP /112 —I 0 O 0, CflU) 111 LLI SQu w 0 u_ w 3 w •z 1- z 1— LU uj O a). O I— LLJ I 0 LI 0 Z - co 0 EXHIBIT C OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE ZQQ Z'. •00 co W = J F- CO LL w 0 LL Q: =w zl-- F- 0 Z F- O- wI-- Lu h-�: Y--0: .. z: • w H I • 0 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE Subbasin Name: Basin: Green i o,.' 11Y .,t t�S'.� . fes". •` rt, ,. - I Tributary area, likelihood of problem, overflow pathways. potential impacts Flow can run north or south depending on water profile character. No apparent problems No apparent problems No apparent problems No apparent problems Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion '' 1. - :ii Evidence of scouring and erosion in channel Evidence of scouring and erosion in channel Inlet densely vegetated ^1.,..t;. 4,moi YOA rr 0' '2: ',.. rl (al 1) Upstream Upstream On site On site O Cil O b N M ON N S .t' ON c#1 { K;• `'`r. raCY1jTY'". .i-1 :+ ' •4. ., , - 90 Varies -H N ��-HC O N ��-OpH O N ��-HC G� N �-HO V.z N �-FGI t` N '11114%6; r�:�st•t, �. e,,.� ;„�j.yy:.• ii tk Aa ,;;;:. ((Sft . :C .."': .: �i ;•tib; :.3 Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume Basin tributary area = 510 acres Soil headwall some clogging of inlet 2' wide, 2'-3' deep, soil/grass-lined, 1:1 side slopes, outlets at culvert Conveys flow from north side of 42nd Avenue South to on site 1' wide, 1.5' deep, 1:1 V - side slopes, grass/soil lined Conveys flow under SR -599, rock/soil headwalls 66" culvert expands to 15' ± culvert, series of 4 V -notch weirs contained in culvert. Concrete headwalls Grass/soil-lined, 1:1 V side slopes o'fi""`s v: n"rit Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size. diameter, surface area Southgate Creek 24" Culvert Open channel 48" culvert CMP/concrete Open channel 66" CMP culvert 15' t CMP culvert/V-notch weir Open channel yyy� .'' r�lyr�R�'EiY�F . y i; See Map ."1 N M Cf til \D t--00 6719.003 [BE/sml z Z CL W wi0 O 0 co w 1-- U) U LL w 0 LL CO 1 I -w Z= z U� N• _ O F - LU w F- LLZ w UP. = 0 z ` At 'Oti��rv�tions�af Fie��:'Iiispectgri Re uce ReY1eyve; re Z .F� i r _RestdeIIrfF�.;� n Tributary area. likelihood of problem, overflow pathways, potential impacts No apparent problems '' i:F 1',i, .i ,, Constrictions, under capacity, ponding, overtopping, flooding, habitat or organism destruction, scouring, bank sloughing, sedimentation, incision, other erosion (t •.i7't yAtI �'i"�ykJ' i aro ; iAr 4 '"P" .it 4 . t8 .... �/� p �? 0 moi' fix. i i 'I'Jf V'F 'et -H e. — e� V'�F 1.f Drainage basin, vegetation, cover, depth, type of sensitive area, volume soil/concrete headwalls, outlets directly to Green River iv..4...-s% , J,T.� z; Type: sheet flow, swale, stream, channel, pipe, pond; size, diameter, surface area 66" CMP culvert Green River L }. See Map 6719.003 [BE/sm] Z Z W QQ: 000 W= WWo sG LL ry W F- Z f- Z 0 W N 0 1- WLW IL r W Z U= 0 z EXHIBIT C OFF-SITE ANALYSIS DRAINAGE SYSTEM TABLE RECONNAISSANCE REPORT NO. 26 DUWAMISH RIVER BASIN JUNE 1987 Natural Resources and Parks Division and Surface Water Management Division King County, Washington EXHIBIT D BASIN STUDY • FEMA MAP NORTH King County Executive Tim Hill King County Council Audrey Gruber, District 1 Cynthia Sullivan, District Bill Reams, District 3 Lois North, District 4 Ron Sims, District 5 Bruce Laing, District 6 Paul Barden, District 7 Bob Grieve, District 8 Gary Grant, District 9 Department of Public Works Don LaBelle, Director Surface Water Management Division Joseph J. Simmler, Division Manager Jim Kramer, Assistant Division Manager Dave Clark, Manager, River & Water Resource Section Larry Gibbons, Manager, Project Management and Design Section Contributing Staff Doug Chin, Sr. Engineer Randall Parsons, Sr. Engineer Andy Levesque, Sr. Engineer Bruce Barker, Engineer. Arny Stonkus, Engineer Ray Steiger, Engineer Pete Ringen, Engineer Consulting Staff Don Spencer, Associate Geologist, Earth Consultants, Inc. John Bethel, Soil Scientist, Earth Consultants, Inc. P:CR Parks, Planning and Resources Joe Nagel, Director Natural Resources and Parks Division Russ Cahill, Division Manager Bill Jolly, Acting Division Manager Derek Poon, Chief, Resources Planning Section Bill Eckel, Manager, Basin Planning Program Contributing Staff Ray Heller, Project Manager & Team Leader Matthew Clark, Project Manager Robert R. Fuerstenberg, Biologist & Team Leader Matthew J. Bruengo, Geologist Lee Benda, Geologist Derek Booth, Geologist Dyanne Sheldon, Wetlands Biologist Cindy Baker, Earth Scientist Di Johnson, Planning Support Technician Robert Radek, Planning Support Technician Randal Bays, Planning Support Technician Fred Bentler, Planning Support Technician Mark Hudson, Planning Support Technician Sharon Clausen, Planning Support Technician David Truax, Planning Support Technician Brian Vanderburg, Planning Support Technician Carolyn M. Byerly, Technical Writer Susanna Hornig, Technical Writer Virginia Newman, Graphic Artist Marcia McNulty, Typesetter Mildred Miller, Typesetter Jaki Reed, Typesetter Lela Lira, Office Technician Marty Cox, Office Technician TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY 1 re 11.12 II. INTRODUCTION1 V 0 LU Ill_ f - LL 2Z III. FINDINGS IN DUWAMISH RIVER BASIN 2 O W A. Overview 2 u.7 B. Effects of Urbanization4 w a =W t— C. Specific Problems 4 z H 1. Erosion of channel banks and streambeds 4 Z O 2 al 2. Flooding in some locations 5 U ACi ` O N' 3. Further degradation of water quality 5 W W ~tU-- IV. RECOMMENDATIONS 6 Wco Z U= A. Safeguard against continued erosion • 6 O 1- z B. Improve overall effectiveness of surface water management 6 C. Improve habitat conditions, particularly in tributaries '7 V. MAP APPENDICES: APPENDIX A: Estimated Costs APPENDIX B: Capital Improvement Project Ranking APPENDIX C: Detailed Findings and Recommendations 9 A-1 B-1 C-1 L SUMMARY The Duwamish River Basin, in western King County, is intensely urbanized. Commercial and industrial land uses dominate the basin on either side of the Duwamish River and along its valley. Single-family residences are located along the valley walls and on the plateau above thc valley; residential land uses are expected to reach saturation by the year 2000. In the process of urbanization, nearly all of the basin's tributaries have been piped and chan- neled. Outfall pipes within the tributary network are fitted with flap gates to minimize the effects of flooding when the Duwamish River rises during flood stages or as a result of tidal influences. Other alterations to the stream system in the lowland areas include the placement of numerous artificial channels and culverts underneath State Roads (SR) 99 and 599. These carry runoff from three major freeways, as well as from extensive parking lots, one airfield (Boeing), and industrial areas, to the stream system. All wetlands except one have been eli- minated in the basin. Not surprisingly, there are serious environmental problems throughout the basin. The most serious of these, water quality, is being studied by numerous public agencies. The recon- naissance, which focused on drainage and erosion problems and resulting contamination of the stream system, identified several problems. First, bank erosion and mass-wrasting were observed in many locations, the most serious instances occurring along steep valley walls. Second, flooding occurs in some places, most notably in the Allentown area. And third, degradation of the tributaries from sidehill drainage is one of many factors accounting for the fact that fish habitat is nearly nonexistent. The field team investigating the basin recommends that 1) erosion be slowed by implementing planning, engineering, and regulatory measures; 2) the general effectiveness of surface water management be improved with a combination of enhanced maintenance on existing facilities and the construction of new facilities where needed; and 3) habitat conditions be improved where feasible, particularly those related to poor water quality from sidehill drainage. II. INTRODUCTION: History and Goals of thc Program In 1985 the King County Council approved funding for the Planning Division (now called the Natural Resources and Parks Division), in coordination with the Surface Water Management Division, to conduct a reconnaissance of 29 major drainage basins located in King County. The effort began with an initial investigation of three basins -- Evans, Soos, and Hylebos Creeks -- in order to determine existing and potential surface water problems and to recom- mend action to mitigate and prevent these problems. These initial investigations used available data and new field observations to examine geology, hydrology, and habitat con- ditions in each basin. Findings from these three basins led the King County Council to adopt Resolution 6018 in April 1986, calling for reconnaissance to be completed on the remaining 26 basins. The Basin Reconnaissance Program, which was subsequently established, is now an important ele- ment of surface water management. The goals of the program are to provide useful data with regard to 1) critical problems needing immediate solutions, 2) basin characteristics for use in the preparation of detailed basin management plans, and 3) capital costs associated with the early resolution of drainage problems. The reconnaissance reports are intended to provide an evaluation of present drainage con- ditions in the County in order to transmit information to policymakers to aid them in deve- loping more detailed regulatory measures and specific capital improvement plans. They are P:DU 1 Duwamish River Basin (continued) not intended to ascribe in any conclusive manner the causes of drainage or erosion problems; instead, they are to be used as initial surveys from which choices for subsequent detailed engineering and other professional environmental analyses may be made. Due to the limited Q amount of time available for the field work in each basin, the reports must be viewed as = H descriptive environmental narratives rather than as final engineering conclusions. 1' w CL 2 Recommendations contained in each report provide a description of potential mitigative J U measures for each particular basin; these measures might provide maximum environmental U O protection through capital project construction or development approval conditions. The u W Ill appropriate extent of such measures will be decided on a case-by-case basis by County offi- t.. cials responsible for reviewing applications for permit approvals and for choosing among com- 2 tL peting projects for public construction. Nothing in the reports is intended to substitute for a 0 more thorough environmental and engineering analysis possible on a site-specific basis for any proposal. u_ Q III. FINDINGS IN THE DUWAMISH RIVER BASIN H W Z'— The field work in the basin was conducted in February 1987 by Ray Heller, resource planner, I— p Lee Benda, geologist; and Arny Stonkus, engineer. Their findings and recommendations W ujF— follow. A. Overview of the Basin 0 W The part of the Duwamish River Basin under King County jurisdiction is located in = U western King County along the Interstate 5 (1-5) corridor, just south of Seattle and O north of Tukwila (the basin's northern and southern boundaries, respectively). The Z western boundary abuts the Miller and Salmon Creek Basins, while the eastern boundary U cn abuts the Lake Washington Basin. The basin contains the King County Airport at I ---- Boeing Field and portions of SR 99, 509, and 599 as well as 1-5. Historically, the Duwamish River flowed north from the confluence of the Green and Black Rivers. The Black River no longer exists, but the Green River north of its historic confluence is still referred to as the Duwamish and this report identifies the associated basin as the Duwamish River Basin. The Duwamish River flows north through the communities of Allentown and South Park and through the Duwamish industrial area in south Seattle. The river -- known as the Duwamish Waterway near its mouth -- splits around Harbor Island into the East and West Waterways before discharging into Elliott Bay, adjacent to downtown Seattle. The reconnaissance excluded subbasins wholly within the city of Seattle. The Duwamish River Basin is intensely urbanized, with commercial and industrial land uses predominating on either side of the river along the valley bottom. The sideslopes and plateaus above the valley are mainly used for single-family residences, with multi- family residential and commercial land uses also present in various locations. All of the unincorporated portion of this basin is within the Highline Community Planning Area, which lost population between 1970 and 1980. The population level has stabilized and moderate growth is expected in all types of land use by the year 2000. Most future growth in commercial and industrial land uses will be in the river valley bottom currently used for these purposes. Single-family and multi -family housing will reach saturation on the valley sideslopes and on the upland plateau. P:DU 2 Duwamish River Basin (continued) Dominant geologic and geomorphic features. The geology of the Duwamish River Basin consists of sedimentary and volcanic bedrock, glacial deposits of various ages and types, Z and alluvium in the valley bottoms. The major bedrock outcrops appear in the = • southern portion of the basin near Tukwila and consist of sandstones and intrusive ;— Z volcanic rocks. Glacial sediments include undifferentiated pre-Vashon sand and gravel, rt 2 tu Vashon till, recessional outwash sand, and glacio-fluvial sand and gravel. Till is found J U along most of the highlands and generally caps the drumlinoid hills. Recessional out- 0 0 wash sand is interspersed throughout the till and is commonly found along shallow co w stream valleys and other depressional areas. Landslide deposits exist within steep-walledH tributary valleys. Recent alluvium, composed of gravel, sand, and silt, fills the to u_ Duwamish Valley and the bottom of the tributary valleys. w O 2 The morphology of the basin is dominated by the valley of the Duwamish River. The 1 Q valley is cut into sedimentary and volcanic bedrock. While the Duwamish River once to meandered across its floodplain on the valley floor, it now flows through a diked chan- I W nel, as do its tributaries. t'" _ Z i— t—During the last several glaciations, sediments were deposited on the bedrock in the form 0 of glacio-fluvial sand and gravel, recessional outwash sand, and till. These glacial 2 D deposits were shaped into drumlinoid hills, with axes trending northwest -southeast. D r3 Drainage channels in the uplands are not well developed or integrated. Where drainage O D was routed over the valley walls, deep narrow valleys were formed through the glacial F" WW sediments. Landslides formed hummocky and chaotic terrain along the steep walls of = tributary valleys and of the Duwamish Valley. LIO Hydrologic and hydraulic features. Several highly urbanized subbasins, all distinct in tit 0 character from one another, make up the Duwamish River Basin. Some natural H I drainages display undisturbed riparian environments, while severe erosion, scouring, and Z ~ downcutting typify others. The majority of the basin's tributaries are either piped or ditched as they approach the lowland areas and their confluences with the Duwamish River. Outfall pipes within the tributary network are usually fitted with flap gates to minimize the backwater effects of flooding in the river. Alterations to the stream system in the lowland areas include many artificial open channels and major culverts that cross SR 99 and 599. Drainages in the upper subbasins flow through natural swales, steep natural channels, and ravines, as well as through numerous culverts. Many of the streams flow peren- nially from groundwater sources. Reconnaissance revealed that natural storage systems are nearly nonexistent in this basin: There are no lakes and only one small wetland. Habitat characteristics. The fate of stream habitat and fish in this basin was deter- mined during the late 1800s through the 1950s. During this time the Duwamish floodplain was almost totally filled, and the river was dredged and diked. As already described, this process of urbanization completely eliminated the natural features of the river and its corridor. In addition, the discharge of oils and other toxicants from thousands of acres of industrial land and the dumping of domestic garbage (which is common although illegal) have produced serious water quality problems along the waterway. Water pollution has caused documented fish kills in recent years, resulting in fines against the responsible parties. In addition, Metro, King County, the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency P:DU 3 Duwamish River Basin (continued) (EPA) have initiated studies to better define problems and solutions in order to improve water quality along the river. No anadromous fish were found in any of the streams at the time of reconnaissance. Resident fish may exist but were not observed during the reconnaissance study. Streams on the valley slopes and upland plateau are also devoid of fish. The tribu- taries in these upland areas show evidence of damage from the high flows of urban runoff, contamination from garbage dumping, introduction of other toxicants, alterations, filling, and high sediment loads. Most streams have few pools or the large organic debris necessary for fish refuge. Two streams (Trib. 0002, 0003) do have some instream and riparian habitat structures (e.g., protective streamside vegetation, pools, and large organic debris) that might support trout. The possibility of enhancing these fish habitats should be explored and if feasible pursued. B. Effects of Urbanization in the Basin The same process of urbanization that has contaminated the waters of the Duwamish River Basin and destroyed most of the fish and fish habitat has also severely impacted the basin's drainage system. Erosion of channel beds and banks has produced heavy sediment Toads, which have been carried down steep gradients and deposited on the valley floor. Deposition points have too often been within artificial conveyance systems, which have become clogged and constricted during times of heavy flows. This inability of the drainage system to handle higher flows is particularly noticeable in the lower stretches of Tributaries 0001A, 0001B, 0002, 0003, and 0003D. When high flows in the Duwamish river cause floodgates to close at tributary outfalls, flows that originate in the eastern subbasins back up in local conveyance systems in Allentown and cause flooding. Pipe outfalls exist at river miles 7.70 and 7.80. Highway contaminants produce many of the water quality problems in the basin. Most contaminants enter the stream and storm systems unabated by pollution -control devices such as oil/water separators. One drain pipe outfalls onto a steep slope at South 112th Street, just above SR 509. This pipe is discharging noticeable amounts of gasoline and oil from an unknown source, killing insects and plant life on the slope. C. Specific Problems Identified As noted earlier, there are a number of public agencies presently studying the severe water quality problems present in the Duwamish River Basin. The goal of these studies is to recommend mitigation measures in the Duwamish Waterway. The reconnaissance work presented here focused primarily on drainage problems in the tributary subcatch- ments, with secondary emphasis given to water quality and habitat problems. 1. Erosion of channel banks and streambeds was found in numerous locations throughout the basin. However, urbanization is so advanced in this basin that development -related erosion is actually at a minimum. In general, streams and bluffs in the lower Duwamish River Valley are stable and show only moderate increases in erosion. Serious erosion found during reconnaissance was restricted to the steep -walled tributary valleys and areas along valley walls of the Duwamish River. For example: P:DU 4 Duwamish River Basin (continued) a. Channel -bed erosion occurs on Tributary 0003G at river mile .95. The cause is uncontrolled urban runoff; the problem will continue if not addressed. b. Bank erosion and scouring occur on Tributary 0003E at'river mile .00. ,1=- W Debris is building up at the headwall, causing flows to damage the bank. t!= g Increased storm flows from development are apparently the cause. 6 U 00 c. Instream bank erosion is occurring on Tributary 0002 at river mile .55, with W 0 no apparent abatement. Bank erosion also is occurring along the channels W H of Tributaries 0002 and 0003, presumably from development -related increases to in flows.w 0 d. Road embankment erasion is occurring on Tributary 0002E -at the 47th 1Q Avenue and South 109th Street intersection. The resulting sediment is filling two 36 -inch culverts at the lower end. The flows will back up onto private = d property if the culverts are not cleaned. H = 0 e. Hillside erosion is occurring at South 112th Street above SR 509, where a Zi— Z O pipe discharges directly onto a steep slope. There is no energy dissipationIII uj for flows. U 0 • N f. Two landslides were observed on the valley wall beneath residences in the 0 H valley of Tributary 0002 at river mile .70. These may have occurred because i W of the stormwater that is routed directly onto steep slopes, a situation made t-' H u - O worse by vegetation removal along the slope. Another landslide has occurred in bedrock at Tributary 0003, river mile .16, along the main valley of the CU co Duwamish River. 0= ~OH Flooding ours in some locations along the Duwamish River system. For example: Z occurs a. Outfall from Allentown to the Duwamish (Trib. 0001, RM 7.70 and 7.80) will continue to back up when the floodgates are closed at times of high flows. b. Flooding of the storm system at the intersection of Eighth Avenue S and South 100th Street is being caused by sedimentation, which fills and constricts the pipes there. If allowed to continue, flooding could lead to accelerated road failure. 3. Water quality is being further degraded in several locations: a. The illegal but common practice of dumping domestic garbage in streams is very prevalent. Tributaries 0001E and 0001F both had targe amounts of garbage in them. b. There are possible leakages of septic tanks into Tributary 0001E at river mile .12. The stream had a septic odor on the date it was examined. c. Sediment from an upstream fill is producing water quality problems on Tributary 0002A, river mile .15. Sediment in turn is filling pools. Downstream from the Glendale golf course on Tributary 0001E, there are P:DU 5 Duwamish River Basin (continued) excessive amounts of sediment and algae in the water. Algae could be the result of fertilizers and sprays at the golf course. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION Controlling erosion and increasing the overall effectiveness of surface water management are the main goals in the Duwamish River Basin. A. Use planning and regulatory measures as a long-term safeguard against continued ero- sion and other mass -wasting. 1. Enforce the County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and slope regulations along steep slopes of tributaries and the Duwamish River Valley. 2. Prohibit the routing of stormwater onto steep slopes without energy dissipation and other appropriate measures to control runoff in a safe, nonerosive manner. 3. Designate certain portions of the tributary valleys as landslide hazard areas in the Sensitive Areas Map Folio. 4. Establish native growth protection easements in tributary valleys. This will make banks more stable and provide a source of large woody debris for energy dissi- pation in streams. Both are erosion -control measures. B. Improve the overall effectiveness of surface water management in the basin. 1. Increase maintenance of present conveyance facilities to assure they are functioning properly. a. Clean debris and silt from two 36 -inch culverts on Tributary 0002E at the 47th Avenue S and South 109th Street intersection in order to reduce moisture intrusion into the base course of the road. b. Repair the damaged manhole at the intersection of Eighth Avenue S and South 100th Street. Construct an inlet structure with sediment/silt control to alleviate overtopping of the channel and to prevent further destruction of the road. 2. Construct new facilities for conveyance and R/D as needed for flood control and overall drainage efficiency. a. Install a pumping station in Allentown on Tributary 0001 at river miles 7.70-7.80 to reduce flooding when the Duwamish River is running high at the outfall of these two points. Pump flows into the Duwamish River. b. Tightline flows using energy dissipators at South 112th Street above SR 509 to disperse water beyond the steep slopes, which are now being eroded. P:DU 6 Duwamish River Basin (continued) c. As a measure of additional storage, encourage the city of Tukwila to construct an R/D facility on Tributary 0003G, near the intersection of 44th Street S and South 31st Place, to aid in controlling peak_ flows. Conveyance pipes in this vicinity are presently undersized. 3. King County should work with the cities of Seattle and Tukwila where drainage basins are shared. Some tributaries may call for basin plans. 4. Surface water management and discharges into the Green and Duwamish Rivers should be coordinated with the principles and requirements of the Green River Management Agreement. C. Improve habitat conditions, where feasible, particularly those related to the contamination of tributaries by sidehill drainage. 1. Improve enforcement of no -dumping ordinances by King County and the city of Seattle. 2. Establish stream corridor guidelines, including setbacks limiting clearing, and other regulatory measures as appropriate to protect the remaining habitat in the basin. P:DU 7 /. , FRGEl 4 E . .;I... -_: _ . .. -- --, - r.._ -__ i_. ..� �. i(_ ,'i r c.f --�1 6 a ff-1, v •_'�9 i,- i i- i-• .• A ( I � .--f n I fs y r— r- 1 1N 'tL ," - i 17 I I� !! 1— , -1....t.--...:: S� ~4 I •J t -J "-cc( 4 , r. :• A/E —`� iVI�—• -.F. hi —yo - •It' VE s ca o el o - O gD C -v-I v) c� cn co g aliNfii , -0 CT' CD o co p ca,A o, c 33 r+ - o 0 331" MIA* St` N ÷– 0 co 1 II a it mAd rejt 4 fe AVE Z Z 00 W• = W 0 co =d FW Z 1. 0 ZZ F— G U� 0- O II— • W H0 LI O wz —I 0 Z o Col » Q n m O (D .. w = - cr = CA) a �, a 0 = a cn d to sa A 0. Cb 60, ( N A 01 9R 0. !19 a 1 uopduasac »aloid passaippv tuavgoid O D -. c -c3 a • 8 o m 1 g a' • o 3 oi 'D m g it n N , f O d N y y 4 (n CD co 33 3 m o $ ✓ • :SI SOD Q3,LVIA LLS3 APPENDIX B CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT RANKING DUWAMISH RIVER BASIN Q • iH Z �W Prior to the field reconnaissance of the Duwamish River Basin, five projects had been identified and QQ j rated using the CIP selection criteria developed by the Surface Water Management (SWM) and U UO Natural Resources and Parks Divisions. Following the reconnaissance, three projects remain pro- N p posed for this area. Three projects were eliminated based on the consensus of the reconnaissance W = team. One of the projects has already been completed, one had no apparent problems, and the _it— other project could not be located. One project (1306) was added. N IL WO 5 The previous SWM capital improvement project list for the Duwamish River Basin had an estimated cost of 51,280,000, while the revised cost estimate changes to 5462,000 for the three projects. This uu- 64% reduction is due mainly to the elimination of three previously identified projects. N d =t - W The following table summarizes the scores and costs of the proposed CIPs for the Duwamish River Z H Basin. The projects were rated according to previously established SWM Program Citizen Advisory . ' Z O Committee criteria. The projects ranked below are those for which the first rating question, w ELEMENT 1: "GO/NO GO," could be answered affirmatively. These projects can now be con- 2 D sidered for merging into the live" CIP list. Any project scoring over 100 points should be con- U m sidered for incorporation into the six-year CIP list. 0 F,,, WW ~ t= LI O .Z co RANK PROJECT NO. SCORE COST U ~Of - 1 1306 127 5222,000 Z 21304 45 100,000 3 1301* 30 140.000 TOTAL 5462,000 Indicates project was identified by the Surface Water Management Division prior to reconnaissance. P:DU.APB B-1 0) _ 0 s co m 0. Iq - C d c d € c c = o 2 c 2 m e0 O 5. 0 c0 4` J co C c m' E d � t p o N 0 E ° m m 0 c s Recommendations m v •0 o y a) c coo 0 0 -0 O 0 u uu C co E�qc V 2 4) 4) •c N c o 0 4- u u aa) ‘a° 4) 0 F. 0 u mi 4.) 0 13 3.FR4 _" .� 2 � v 4. Q Q .c r 0 W u 'a p C '2 .— ti c h _ p "n. 13 0 •E �s 4, -6c�cc 2 co 4v, 3 a.0 c C .0 t ti ". O C.0 2' al 4 A r. E Oyuc 'yap 30°' w wao o.c Eov!.‘ 0 _ a _ _ O 3 w 's3.. � d o 3 44 CA) 3 E Q) o `-. al= 4) o c c CO o.. an>i cOv '"`=, til > Z �nv�i.�O° .�.��v�"i Za 8 N OE h 0 v ^ h 0 4) — octOc'^ ab o c.b c u '0 0 c ca R. gah .c tn o ,c : a+cj V 00 A O r" C 4) v, fn O O . c bo >$°'z s CU i -i w� al h c:(..t..3 .D '7 0MIcy.0CZ 0 Na)o c 70 03 .o x� 0V>¢)c� o3 U 0 M 0 0 0 oo 0 .0 •0 a. X x x M z z W 00 CO �. WI W0 LL =w ~_ Z WO W VO 0— o1— WW V ~F - Za. 0-± 1- 0 N ri ti et A a z Recommendations 00 c ° y •L7 4-4 13 O �E in .r V+ Q c a A .N O° h w 'T x B .c N .c am °�u-°tea 4. °E'�wu �'� °c �� o �ha�.".e O.) .0 vu '., a " c° cx Q c-. 3A 0 E h b °c... .00 �0°'v�u e' a X03 ��r V a°)1 tn N 8.0 y a r% C' it: °o co Ir co 2I+1 CO 0 tiris .°c 4, 0 `° 'acs.v. n.E4 0 .,°-1 DI 2 0 N 0 L, c u u R ., 0 co X0.•0°) a9oa)� v ..amu `' "c 0 a)u.? u u c h .� Q. IV 1 '�' c W ° b 7 'a [ ? E •w>. Q. '�' c in 8 Is'E u Q • h oD -14 °moi cp p aai y y Q a 0 cp u cc— A c V 6 88 = h=° W .E 0 w 2 a ._ z U� °c .F. o°t 0 r3 w 0 73E E U .0 co 20. U t. o cTs o w z1.73 Problem will continue. Problem will continue. .c. a 13 o '` c v .a 8 to to 0 N ° c c F cci 3 r3 $ e 0 cc Q. -•o a E o (0� ga " 0 ° 2.0 OD W C UP a�'+ .c R cg Wy °.� tti ets 0 .> . c • N .0 Po u as w E w Ili .51 °i >28a.EB,Q� X32¢ -4 :c 00 Problem will continue. CV . N u 00 E �8E 0 E U u 1O ) z' 5 .° 0 e c -6 O gs O 6 o cv ui o ai u �3 E o 0 o gpp N c °i ° °°) fx 0 V) h U c c .0 -" u cc1.4 O in c s as .a a. 2 In N 0 �-+ N N S o a S� a N 00 0� Recommendations R. O o o E E ") C O g 2 ca E ...' '2 ea o a .0 h ..... .c p '^cr. v� `" O cu0‘120 •4) 0 .8 c ;a a� g °' 0. Vi c o 4' Ti aP :a ,', a 2 es.Q :° ca U wc„ 0 'E .21 0 'O vi N > U o so y •C 64 O " u > td h 0 w C 0 lg.•O aNi C cv" {� 'C7 C y •[ 6. aEcAE� a0� z �bo 2 d 0 w a (5 O Conditions will continue. bo a:-- o 0 7 c a N O 5 0 oNu O 41 a+ s o0 14 OCCS c E E " a Landslide terrain. 0 0 a. a O 6P1 8 C•1 r• -•t-/ r•-1 Continued erosion. Q o aE 4a 0 -6„ Na S Recommendations u .02 e0 •d N 0 0 .0 .0 <0 0 0 c w w gp v N C y O V N .0 E a;c ani 0 E E f b '� ., c N R . C Oas 0 u 'S7 C a 0 to 8 • ° p0 O • a oc.a u �'N u t� y cv 3 _ c0 �'oaEi 0E •° Ac a. p" y .0 A v c 2 v c - v GY, c u'o c' 0 eeEs 22 o ▪ d �.0E'-. o E 0 • E r bn a� " til •d V yy �• g W ca 00 W cc N. a+ . c y c0 te+ vj E ... « Fr — c • c U y E .0 C w N N N b • .O al � a .0 aIx 0 � a� a � a ay �o� Nc �alwCO b a> ° E • c u Ea - E _O 2 a. O O Ts • eau cts vS 2 L c .E 3 o u •o • E . O gu t 2 c o ate+ E ' GL .5 Q Continued erosion. 4) 145 o 0 E N N 0i •e0 N OD o C • c c uu ¢ .5. 04) s . 50 0) `° v C aww^.c o C0 O .Q N 18 p p u. t0 8 O i ... p c Fi N 4 .— N N z 0 .0 eu 4 V% .� e0..uveo� cE -'o pp .CEM u Ig M c E. 2 a 'ty 8.. � 2 — E 0.. o 14 �� c O p�i0�� ecv o.. a so e0C ') v) 13 �[ 3 v cM0 C u k •c C _� C lj V •: 6l O O O •N C a o env 00 .9 `° > $" o ° N u E C c i0 a 0 0 0.4 MI < Ec�..,Q� y 2o nt 00 8▪ 53 •c t 3 4". N y E .c e0 n ;; •i� a, •x • N u 0jas cu 4.1 a 0:1q� w Cn > yrs 'Ct N C' Qi �. cn w tr.� CO 'N .- '7 u .�, v1 e0 (� Vl O 0 N �r i O N. cV y 'O X (2 x en N fsl N N N o O Q =3" MOor MO 00 tT 0 .--i - N ("4 Recommendations Construct an R/D facility. 1-4 :c., o ▪ o. N `� V a `; 13 tt: d Z. 'o 4. d 2 a coc 2 C C a� bo a-5.Ey E144 coU N � CJ A E• Vo O Cr) 4-44 bo 0 0 N 01 O p a U Z W re UOQ CO W O 2 W < =▪ W Z �. Zo W uJ U0 S2Q Q I- W W H � V-- O WZ U= O F' Z J4lip --'-'-' t8. i '•-•-•.k.\\:4-, l f �— I�►''�t_«r Irl moi.� . r_:; i_ 1.3.1..4 t 4 •�,'!=c' T1 : ; �•ir.-- .�. ._'c� .1 ` 1'7 ii ... • .Y t j1 I • , I•I Iif .. . I. tl • 4L-11, ! ". ';tyeti 11 \11 1 1 �..i r.7r tI '. 1 .,l_ r . am :FILL J.1 v1 Net ILIMAtitAilinia,,,_'. i MMUS rawmaii040' ., i i vi./ Vi;tG I .��+r'r��SEM ti "' 101111111511NIN Uia.)l a 0 .IIVERLINIMAN l0 ni tM • 111151111111111 STREAMS AND i 00 YEAR FLOODPLAINS All1/4 NORTH C: I•9O KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO Z • 1- W U Q (0 11J W= • V.. W0 2 co H W = ' Z F. Z W 0 O — O I - WW � U W .. Z U= 0 Z :E: IQQO KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO WETLANDS NORTH EXHIBIT E SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO 1 IU 1 619111 u N ei=wroilitirt4,1 ing=amiLitm lbwsMI6srELra111.11 611 umfatintre ;;: li I • g -1',''• l•-• , , COAL MINE HAZARD AREAS E: 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH .•:::- ••-' ; • •., 1 7-1 , • -...;i: . _-..— -4--,--1 1 • .--t- • :::!:," • 1.-"'- -1-71 .7;., 1 1_, ..:,j,' „r.r. t: . % • ::.' ..,.._.,k.... ,.. ----ii-.„-- ::1' '1 r" ;, -1 a 'r',. '1,. 'f• "71. • .j,,..,„; :,4.. .--,-,•:_ .. If?711 !-I-- • . `SI 74 1 --I.: ri I k' .. .: 11. i , • II 1 ,••:' ...•1 • I., -• ' 1 --1-1.at-04-1--..-H-1,..; r,..,/ ; ...:, • 1,. 1..........._ -...t.....L._.„i,-s • i••-.‘“1:. • • '- Il :"!!..:, *;rrl,,,i,;,'.1",•11,..il t_ ), ‘. ,..1.1....1.2 I r—I • - 'J v``,t . ' • -4 ..-t.. 4k.17 itti:-• • -•\:‘‘', '•""fr'-....... L 4 ,Tri '4.., • i. _...., f...t. .L.; i 17 .1...141--1"4,-, ,..• .) ir L • .-•.:.-1-17,4- I 1 • 1irl.11 f'•; • • • LI; I • .":"--7,-“”. —11:-1-1,.iJ , .,,•% ,•, . , ---,-- : :;:-.7:71-,--_,". ; 711 r -t. i• ' - ---f--.' (i-fisq• it,k •J'''') • .s_ ...,_____:_r,/ ..,, • ..1-4-.‘..•_!:.,6...:,. /f .;...-- • s. IiiIrlip1:' 1111,14P _ "slwo woi. - ' il tett '0' , - ,r, t,,,,- amirmtiviN t a, 1 : ,,,,,, MOPt., a. a Layt '•',4,1g4 -i-,,,..-.* Ibt:tritik,liiik ilk %II - uniffirilttita ..•••'" • %•• - 7 I *ORO KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO SEISMIC HAZARD AREAS NORTH z < • I Z • ILI2 10 O 0 U)UJ WI Lu 0 2 g u.. < a LLI Z 0 Z LIJ La O (0 O — O 1- 111 I 0 LI 0 lij z C.) o 1- z i1• !11 11 1K11- 5. h mma r. , .190 III w 1' I ;f 1. • s.0 paii l IUIk llII i 1 .44 I into tEMI at Unlo I is NV 11,91111811211 PM..ON Irldi f ►►"�', AIIjI iltalruivAP ;-4111111trifirMIL t r iattis ratta ,' num r -��7 � 'j' \ff LOMIST 4 i 0 Il f Lo �i •- R.. • 1 1 • . 1 l• F • Nit Yl dr • 11, A:46 firtragim �c �( 1a. AR 'E'. aws=mi61hask12 61' talk om: Ls own,MVO • :4:11:,... • v`°Ian ..o�, \viro I hillitIOND1 It� Irl\r1 'r 0 l • r t. AMIE NIP tilivittnittar litIMINANEM • "'A ti It 26 1� • .1 LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS E: 1000 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO NORTH Z I 1- Z C4w QQ2 UO CO 0• LLIW '- N LL w0 LLa I• d F.. W Z WO La U� N 0 F- ww u' Cu = O~ z -1-.;,--.-1..T:tf111!-v_i1i-11t4+14r.ijiIt•.:!1II••- 1 •-1 1\.:1 ,\Iirr777-r;1-rit""-;7:•• 1 j4"PrIT-iA. .I.': / ifi71r!;c0-i f;i: 1 --TI,4f% .., : .': y.k.:1711:1-:-.0_,,_,L.,,Thr_4i:c• l•p*., 4.11.,1i}.A.1-13 i. .... trii --71.7..:41-1-11.,.z i-.••• •.'11 1 • Lit ui -1- ' .•%1L•I••;%,:. j \•'' 4 7 .1 'l '‘• , •17-1-1 - • = •I• .44. ATI” I .• ••• • .•;=.1s:42.!.• ...• I 1 \ . I \ti j! 11111117VII m. R E MT, 1*.•..•; • The boundaries of the sensitive Arrnks ri i<- I 91/0 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO YR • 1: EROSION HAZARD AREAS NORTH 1- .1- Z CC 2 —J (..) • ° • 111 Mi]: 2u- uJ00 2 g u_ cn =11•1 Z 1-0 Z UJ uj O co O — CI I— LU • 7, g 0 Z 1.11 0 0 EXHIBIT F WETLAND INVENTORY MAP z 6 CL 2 O 0 (0 0 ILJ MI I W IL, w 0 LLg < I— ▪ Ill Z I— 0 Z Ui O co O — I— ILI w I 0 I— ;- U. I- - u) 0 0 Z IZ W2 Q JU 0O N0 CO Ill J F- WO 2 u. a =w F- O Z~ W UO ON 0 I - WW H� LL. O Z wt.) O~ z XX Gs �vn � rcm OF SUBJ �l UPSTREAM DRAINAGE P rtOTE*. Fwu e. Rum Ftrh►ER �oRTIA pR SbuT'H DENPem irrAT UPOM WATER i?RDFILE CN►4RAe-T£le-..r s,0ls>. SITE • mow 1 southg F Creek 98l'tP w Flow Control/ Diversion Structure -SOME FI-DiPio SPL.rT Tt4IS1) wAYOoPaNtr t4rt H FL/ Pt; Pa oia 5 LEGEND ® CULVERTS — DITCH/OPEN CHANNEL ROAD SIDE DITCHES ------ CHANNEL WITH RIPARIAN HABITAT BYPASS (constructed by summer '92) REACH DESIGNATION APPROXIMATE 25 YR STORM FLOW 18" CULYE R T :r. 47TH AVE. S DUWAMISH RIVER S.133RD ST. TERURBAN AVE. S. MAPS PROVIDED TO US BY CITY OF TUKWIL TIA City of Tukwila SOUTHGATE CREEK FISH ENHANCEMENT PROJECT Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc. Figure 6. ALTERNATIVE 3 NEW CHANNELS WITH STORM BYPASS EXHIBIT G UPSTREAM AREA MAPS W 6 M U OI "- 6CO W J l- W O. LLQ a. HWT Z HO ZZ F" . Lu U � O (-1, • 1 - IL Ili U. U co O z File: D04-0415 fce W U• O 0 U; W =. J 1.- U) U) IL, Wo LL. Q: o =W F- _ Z� I- 0 Z F— U� O co O !— W W, 1- LL -Z. 35mm 111 N1 �y. O #2 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.0 FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A. Existing Site Hydrology As mentioned previously, the existing site hydrology is based on a wetland or a Type D soil type under existing conditions. The site will be cleared of all vegetation and backfilled with the new building that is going in. The area of the new construction is approximately 1.75 acres and is located in the southeast corner of the property. The areas along the northern portion of the site will be mitigated to provide wetland mitigation areas and buffers, and the stream rerouted somewhat that passes through the site, ultimately discharging to the same conveyance system it does under existing conditions. B. Developed Site Hydrology Under developed conditions, the vast majority of the project site is considered impervious surface. For detention calculations, that would be 1.68 acres of new impervious surface with 0.07 acre of pervious area, totaling 1.75 acres of new development area. In addition, a portion of the existing parking lot, adjacent to the existing building, will be routed into the wet/detention vault and orifices upsized to allow upstream runoff to pass through the wet/detention vault undetained. Please refer to the calculations within this section of this report for the detention sizing. C. Performance Standards For flow control, as mentioned previously, Level 1 Flow Control using King County Runoff Time Series was the methodology utilized for providing detention on site. There is only 2.3 feet of head available in the vault for detention storage due to site constraints. The parking lot ponding is utilized as well adjacent to the new building and the dock high loading areas totaling less than 6 inches of depth. The water quality standards used for this project are the Resource Stream Protection Menu standards as required by the 1998 KCSWDM and adopted further by the City of Tukwila. This is a two -train treatment system including wet vault and stormwater filter. The performance standard for conveyance systems is the 1998 KCSWDM such that the 25 -year storm event, based on the Rational method, will be conveyed without overtopping any catch basins or manholes on the project site. D. Flow Control System Please refer to the illustrative sketch within this section and the calculations for the flow control system proposed with this development. E. Water Quality System Please to the illustrative sketch and calculations within this section of this report for the water quality systems proposed for this development. A StormceptorTM is proposed for the road improvements to treat at least the equivalent area of the new impervious surface being added. The Stormceptormt Model 450i was selected, which will treat up to an acre contributing. The actual area contributing is 0.13 acre, which is more than the total area of new impervious surface in the roadways. A COS, Inc., storm filter with 12 -inch -tall cartridges was selected to treat the on-site runoff along with the dead storage in the wet/detention vault. 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep) Pre -Developed: FLOW CONTROL CRITERIA Till Grass = 0.04 acre Wetland = 1.75 acres Impervious = 0.44 acre 2.23 acres total Developed: A = 2.12 acres impervious A = 0.11 acre till grass 2.23 acres total Upstream Contributing* A = 0.44 acre impervious A = 0.04 acre landscape 0.48 acre total *Included in pre -developed and developed areas Peak Runoff Rates (cfs) 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] Pre- Developed Developed Proposed Release from Detention 2 -Year 0.127 0.530 0.126 10 -Year 0.361 0.637 0.358 100 -Year 0.491 1.03 0.823 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series : 6719pre.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 j Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG60R.rnf . Till Grass 0.04 acres Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STWL60R.rnf Wetland 1.75 acres Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI60R.rnf Impervious 0.44 acres jtiDg/$14 F'4, 71 1 1-- 6L I .1 -01 -ti Total Area : 2.23 acres Peak Discharge: 0.491 CFS at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:6719pre.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage/Discharge curve:6719pre.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719pre.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:6719pre.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command CREATE a new Time Series Production of Runoff Time Series Project Location : Sea -Tac Computing Series : 6719dev.tsf Regional Scale Factor : 1.00 Data Type : Reduced Creating Hourly Time Series File Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STTG60R.rnf Till Grass 0.11 acres Loading Time Series File:C:\KC_SWDM\KC_DATA\STEI60R.rnf Impervious 2.12 acres Total Area : 2.23 acres Peak Discharge: 1.03 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Storing Time Series File:6719dev.tsf Time Series Computed KCRTS Command Enter the Analysis TOOLS Module Analysis Tools Command Compute PEAKS and Flow Frequencies Loading Stage/Discharge curve:6719dev.tsf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac Frequencies & Peaks saved to File:6719dev.pks Analysis Tools Command RETURN to Previous Menu KCRTS Command Size a Retention/Detention FACILITY Edit Facility Loading Time Series File:6719dev.tsf Time Series Found in Memory:6719dev.tsf Saving Retention/Detention Facility File:6719convey.rdf Starting Documentation File:C:\kc_swdm\kc_data\example\kcrts\6719convey.doc Time Series Found in Memory:6719dev.tsf Edit Complete Retention/Detention Facility Design Edit Facility Time Series Found in Memory:6719dev.tsf Saving Retention/Detention Facility File:6719convey.rdf Starting Documentation File:C:\kc_swdm\kc_data\example\kcrts\6719convey.doc Time Series Found in Memory:6719dev.tsf Edit Complete Retention/Detention Facility Design Edit Facility Time Series Found in Memory:6719dev.tsf Saving Retention/Detention Facility File:6719convey.rdf Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719pre.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.361 0.127 0.387 0.110 0.132 0.121 0.194 0.491 Computed Peaks 3 2/09/01 6 1/05/02 2 2/27/03 8 8/26/04 5 10/28/04 7 1/18/06 4 2/01/07 1 1/09/08 3:00 16:00 8:00 2:00 16:00 16:00 0:00 9:00 Flow Frequency Analysis Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.491 1 100.00 0.387 2 25.00 0.361 3 10.00 0.194 4 5.00 0.132 5 3.00 0.127 6 2.00 0.121 7 1.30 0.110 8 1.10 0.456 50.00 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719dev.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.524 0.458 0.637 0.530 0.630 0.560 0.772 1.03 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 7 2/09/01 8 1/05/02 3 12/08/02 6 8/26/04 4 10/28/04 5 1/18/06 2 10/26/06 1 1/09/08 2:00 16:00 18:00 2:00 16:00 16:00 0:00 6:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Rank Return Prob Period 1 100.00 0.990 2 25.00 0.960 3 10.00 0.900 4 5.00 0.800 5 3.00 0.667 6 2.00 0.500 7 1.30 0.231 8 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 - - Peaks (CFS) 1.03 0.772 0.637 0.630 0.560 0.530 0.524 0.458 0.942 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Flow Rate (CFS) 0.358 0.096 0.184 0.101 0.126 0.337 0.448 0.823 Computed Peaks Peak Flow Rates --- Rank Time of Peak 3 2/09/01 8 1/06/02 5 3/06/03 7 8/24/04 6 1/05/05 4 1/18/06 2 11/24/06 1 1/09/08 16:00 5:00 21:00 0:00 10:00 21:00 5:00 9:00 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 0.823 2.15 1 100.00 0.448 2.07 2 25.00 0.358 2.04 3 10.00 0.337 2.04 4 5.00 0.184 1.77 5 3.00 0.126 1.35 6 2.00 0.101 0.87 7 1.30 0.096 0.79 8 1.10 0.698 2.13 50.00 0.990 0.960 0.900 0.800 0.667 0.500 0.231 0.091 0.980 Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility: Detention Vault Facility Length: 184.00 ft Facility Width: 40.00 ft Facility Area: 7360. sq. ft Effective Storage Depth: 2.00 ft Stage 0 Elevation: 10.50 ft Storage Volume: 14720. cu. ft Riser Head: 2.00 ft Riser Diameter: 12.00 inches Number of orifices: 2 Full Head Pipe Orifice # Height Diameter Discharge Diameter (ft) (in) (CFS) (in) 1 0.00 2.00 0.153 2 1.60 1.90 0.062 4.0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Elevation Storage Discharge Percolation (ft) (ft) (cu. ft) (ac -ft) (cfs) (cfs) 0.00 10.50 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 0.02 10.52 147. 0.003 0.016 0.00 0.04 10.54 294. 0.007 0.022 0.00 0.06 10.56 442. 0.010 0.027 0.00 0.08 10.58 589. 0.014 0.031 0.00 0.10 10.60 736. 0.017 0.035 0.00 0.13 10.63 957. 0.022 0.038 0.00 0.15 10.65 1104. 0.025 0.041 0.00 0.17 10.67 1251. 0.029 0.044 0.00 0.19 10.69 1398. 0.032 0.047 0.00 0.29 10.79 2134. 0.049 0.058 0.00 0.39 10.89 2870. 0.066 0.068 0.00 0.49 10.99 3606. 0.083 0.076 0.00 0.59 11.09 4342. 0.100 0.083 0.00 0.69 11.19 5078. 0.117 0.090 0.00 0.79 11.29 5814. 0.133 0.096 0.00 0.89 11.39 6550. 0.150 0.102 0.00 0.99 11.49 7286. 0.167 0.108 0.00 1.09 11.59 8022. 0.184 0.113 0.00 1.19 11.69 8758. 0.201 0.118 0.00 1.29 11.79 9494. 0.218 0.123 0.00 1.39 11.89 10230. 0.235 0.128 0.00 1.49 11.99 10966. 0.252 0.132 0.00 1.59 12.09 11702. 0.269 0.137 0.00 1.60 12.10 11776. 0.270 0.137 0.00 1.62 12.12 11923. 0.274 0.139 0.00 1.64 12.14 12070. 0.277 0.142 0.00 1.66 12.16 12218. 0.280 0.146 0.00 1.68 12.18 12365. 0.284 0.152 0.00 1.70 12.20 12512. 0.287 0.160 0.00 1.72 12.22 12659. 0.291 0.168 0.00 1.74 12.24 12806. 0.294 0.178 0.00 1.76 12.26 1.86 12.36 1.96 12.46 2.00 12.50 2.10 12.60 2.20 12.70 2.30 12.80 2.40 12.90 2.50 13.00 2.60 13.10 2.70 13.20 2.80 13.30 2.90 13.40 3.00 13.50 3.10 13.60 3.20 13.70 3.30 13.80 3.40 13.90 3.50 14.00 3.60 14.10 3.70 14.20 3.80 14.30 3.90 14.40 4.00 14.50 Hyd Inflow Outflow 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1.03 0.55 0.52 0.56 0.62 0.34 0.53 0.46 Target ******* ******* 0.36 ******* ******* 0.13 ******* ******* Calc 0.82 0.45 0.36 0.34 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.10 12954. 13690. 14426. 14720. 15456. 16192. 16928. 17664. 18400. 19136. 19872. 20608. 21344. 22080. 22816. 23552. 24288. 25024. 25760. 26496. 27232. 27968. 28704. 29440. 0.297 0.183 0.00 0.314 0.198 0.00 0.331 0.210 0.00 0.338 0.215 0.00 0.355 0.534 0.00 0.372 1.110 0.00 0.389 1.850 0.00 0.406 2.650 0.00 0.422 2.940 0.00 0.439 3.200 0.00 0.456 3.450 0.00 0.473 3.670 0.00 0.490 3.880 0.00 0.507 4.090 0.00 0.524 4.280 0.00 0.541 4.460 0.00 0.558 4.640 0.00 0.574 4.810 0.00 0.591 4.970 0.00 0.608 5.130 0.00 0.625 5.280 0.00 0.642 5.430 0.00 0.659 5.580 0.00 0.676 5.720 0.00 Peak Stage Elev 2.15 12.65 2.07 12.57 2.04 12.54 2.04 12.54 1.77 12.27 1.35 11.85 0.87 11.37 0.79 11.29 Route Time Series through Facility Inflow Time Series File:6719dev.tsf Outflow Time Series File:6719rdout Inflow/Outflow Analysis Peak Inflow Discharge: Peak Outflow Discharge: Peak Reservoir Stage: Peak Reservoir Elev: Peak Reservoir Storage: Storage (Ac -Ft) 0.363 0.350 0.345 0.344 0.299 0.229 0.148 0.133 (Cu -Ft) 15825. 15258. 15049. 15000. 13003. 9962. 6427. 5801. 1.03 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 0.823 CFS at 9:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 2.15 Ft 12.65 Ft 15825. Cu -Ft 0.363 Ac -Ft Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:6719rdout.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.358 3 Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (ft) Period 2/09/01 16:00 0.823 2.15 1 100.00 0.990 0.096 0.184 0.101 0.126 0.337 0.448 0.823 Computed 8 5 7 6 4 2 1 Peaks 1/06/02 3/06/03 8/24/04 1/05/05 1/18/06 11/24/06 1/09/08 5:00 0.448 2.07 2 25.00 0.960 21:00 0.358 2.04 3 10.00 0.900 0:00 0.337 2.04 4 5.00 0.800 10:00 0.184 1.77 5 3.00 0.667 21:00 0.126 1.35 6 2.00 0.500 5:00 0.101 0.87 7 1.30 0.231 9:00 0.096 0.79 8 1.10 0.091 0.698 2.13 50.00 0.980 Wetvault Sizing Worksheet Summary of the 1998 Surface Water Design Manual Requirements Project Name: Normed Project Number: 6719 z Step 1) Determine volume factor f. = H Basic size f= 3rt 2 w Large size f= 4.5 6 v 00 coc Step 2) Determine rainfall R for mean annual Storm J x Detemine rainfall R for mean annual storm � � v Rainfall 0.039 (feet) 2 J Step 3) Calculate runoff from mean annual storm N V, = (0.9A1 + 0.25A,g + 0.10Att + 0.01 Aog) X R H w A, = tributary area of impervious surface 92,347 (sf) z F Atg = tributary area of till grass 4,792 (sf) Z F- LU ww Att = tributary area of till forest 0 (sf) 2 D Dp Aog = tributary area of outwash grass 0 (sf) 0 N R = rainfall from mean annual storm0.039 (feet) 0 H LU V, = Volume of runoff from mean annual storm 3,288 (cf) H o Step 4) Calculate wetpool Volume iii N Vb=fV, HI. f = Volume Factor 3 Z Vb = Volume runoff, mean annual atorm V, = Volume of the wetpool 3,288 (cf) (cf) 9,864 Step 5) Determine wetpool dimensions a) Determine geometry of first cell Volume in first cell 2,959 (cf) Depth h 1st cell (minus sed. Storage) 5.5 (feet) Determine horizontal xs area at mid -depth using 538 (sf) Amid =Vol. 1st cell/h Mid -width Mid -length Determine xs area at surface Z = Side slope length (H:1 V) 0 3:1 recommended 2(h/2 x Z) = 0 (feet) Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometrics Top width 17 (feet) 17 (feet) 32 (feet) Top length Area of Top 32 (feet) 544 (feet) b) Determine geometry of second cell z Volume in second cell 6,905 (cf) = H it- z Depth h 2nd cell 5.5 (feet)W Determine xs area at mid -depth using 1,255 (sf) 6 v A mid = Vol. 2nd cell / h U co p Mid -width 17 (feet) w = J 1- M id -length 74 (feet) co u Determine horizontal xs area at surface w O Z = Side slope length (_H:1 V) 0 3:1 recommended g 5 0 (feet) o 2(h/2 x Z) = N d Dimensions of top of pond adjusted for geometrics 1- W Top width 17 (feet) z H Top length 74 (feet) • z O Area of Top 1255 (feet) j Q U 0- Adjustment to cells (If necessary) 0 F' Ww 1- I` Geometry check: Overall pond L:W at mid -depth = 3:1 _ O Pond width (mid -depth) 17 LLi U Cell 1 length (mid -depth) 32 o H, CeII 2 length (mid -depth) 74 z Pond Length (mid -depth) = CeII 1 + CeII 2 106 L mid : W mid = 6.23 Total Wetpond Surface area required = 1,799 Total Wetpond Bottom area required = 1,799 Fol -f -ze es srrl£ 20,e0 fyi Stormceptor TM Sizing Program United States Version 4.0.0 Project Details Project Normed Warehouse Location Tukwila, WA Date 7/19/05 Project # JOB# 6719 Company Barghausen Contact Jake Jacobs Selected Rainfall Station State Washington Name SEATTLE TACOMA INTL AP ID # 7473 Elev. (ft) 400 Latitude N 47 deg 27 min Longitude W 122 deg 18 min Site Parameters Total Area (ac) 0.13 Imperviousness (%) 100 Impervious Area (ac) .13 Particle Size Distribution Diam. (um) Percent (%) Spec. Gravity 20 20 1.30 60 20 1.80 150 20 2.20 400 20 2.65 2000 20 2.65 Stormceptor Sizing Table Stormceptor Model % Runoff Treated % TSS Removal STC 450 100 95 STC 900 100 97 STC 1200 100 97 STC 1800 100 97 STC 2400 100 98 STC 3600 100 98 STC 4800 100 99 STC 6000 100 99 STC 7200 100 99 STC 11000 100 99 STC 13000 100 99 STC 16000 100 100 Comments : With 95% tss removal ad 100% runoff treated, an STC 450i appears optimal for this site. Buiidup/Washoff Loading Z Z • W JU O 0 W • I � LL W O 2 u I• d �W ' Z= F— O Z W U0 O - • I-- 111 W W: H Hu. .. Z W U =. O 1--' z Glacier Page 1 of 1 Jake Jacobs From: Diane Warner [dwarner©cdstech.coml Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 4:46 PM To: Jake Jacobs Subject: Normad Warehouse Hi Jake, Attached please find our mass loading calculations for the Normad Warehouse site using 12" cartridges. Additionally, our sizing sheet for determining number of cartridges using shorter cartridges is attached. These calculations show that 18 cartridges are required. As I read the King County Surface Design Manual (1998 version, as I am awaiting the 2005 version in the mail) - they suggest that sizing downstream of detention requires treatment in a water quality structure of the 'Full 2 -Year release rate from the detention facility'. I wrote down that this rate is 0.126 cfs for this site, from our conversation last Thursday. If I run that through a cartridge sizing sheet (attached Sht A) , 12 - 12" cartridges are required. The mass loading analysis shows that 18 cartridges are required, so this is the more conservative number and the one we will use. My confusion comes in that I heard you say that our competitor was using a water quality flow of 0.28 cfs to design 17 cartridges?? I cannot figure out how the 0.28 cfs number is generated?? The detail emailed to you shows 26 cartridges, but my mass loading calcs show that only 18 are required. I would like to submit the information as is (my name is on all the drawings, so they will know that the design burden is on me) - to get some feedback from the City. Are you okay with that? I have attached both sheets here. I hope you have a nice retreat - it is fantastic weather for time outdoors. Diane Warner, PE CDS Technologies Inc. office: (503) 240-3529 cellular: (503) 780-9505 why not visit our websites?: www.cdstech.com Storm Water/CSO Equipment www.copa.co.uk Wastewater/CSO Equipment This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure, If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly prohibited. if you have received this message in error. please notify the original sender or CDS Technologies, Inc. (888) 535-7559 immediately by telephone or by return E-mail and delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer. Thank you. 7/19/2005 .a O 0) 0 -a > 2 -o c '1.- o .6 U c aa)) m 0) a) . o rno a) o -a U NW as E o U a? 4- Q))+. N E. N CD at eL �a) hi co Lo o rn rna 0-E cav Co o� E a .o (3) Ta -a O c O 0. a 0 < U �a .1 L u_ 0. c 11 Water Quality Flow to be Treated: 0. 0. 0. 0. O O O O L L L L a .a -0 .a w w w w O O O O t�OC�I� T N N N 0) CD U) CO m m 0 E a• a. a- a- m 2 2 2 aa -aa c as as as ac 0)a)mm 0) o) 0) o) v�� i. C i C as as ca co EEE CL rnrnrnrn 0) 1 CO 0 _p o T Nr (v tet'uio as co N O ao c c T a u ra 1'5 LO m 2 a) f.12 V- 4-. L L .. 4-. y.. 4_. 0) CA Co (I) CV rnmrnrn ...... ..C3 ../3 00 t r t t as cv as al O U U U U a co ca C as 'a .c ..c .c t c c c c U NL0ODN T T T N 0 2 Maximum No. Cartridges .t c0 co O) N 41 Precast Structure 0 o c c cu CD O co 72" 0 Manhole 25 WA Trench Catch Basin ..- as > co (D 612 Vault / Box 816 Vault 0)L- Lo Eo 0 O N Z W QQ � JU 00 WI- N LL WO LL < 2d I -W z z O 0 ON 0 1— WW H r T LL z uJ co H H 0 z Mass Loading Design Check CDS Media Filtration System Project Name: Normad Warehouse Project Number: WA -05-074F City / State: Tukwilla, WA User Name: D. Warner, CDS Technologies, Inc. General Site Specifications Total Drainage Area (acres): 2.2 Impervious Drainage Area (acres): 2.1 Total Rainfall / Year (inches): 36.0 Runoff Coefficient - C : 0.126 Design Flow Rates Water Quality Flow (cfs)- into detention: 0.530 Peak Flow (cfs) - into detention: 1.0 Return period of Peak Event (yrs): 100.0 Water Quality Release Rate (cfs) - from detention: 0.126 Peak Flow (cfs) - from detention: 0.823 Detention System Characteristics Dead Volume Depth of Dead Volume (ft): 4.2 Volume of Dead Volume (cubic feet): 25389.0 Live Volume Depth of Live Volume (ft): 2.3 Volume of Live Volume (ft): 14720.0 Volume of Runoff During Water Quality event (cubic feet): 9864.0 111111%10\ CDS TECHNOLOGIES B-1 D. Warner July 19, 2005 Mass Loading Design Check CDS Media Filtration System Runoff / Pretreatment / Treatment Assumptions: Pretreatment (Detention) Removal Efficiency (%) = 235490.77 40 Event Mean Concentration (EMC) of TSS in Runoff (mg/I): Mean Annual Runoff x EMC 60 Pounds of Material to be loaded per 22" tall cartridge (lbs): 40 Pounds of Material to be loaded per 18" tall cartridge (lbs): 31 Pounds of Material to be loaded per 15" tall cartridge (lbs): 26 Pounds of Mater,aI 10 be loaded per 12" :tall'cartridge;(Ibs): " 20 Total Mass Loading: Volume of Mean Annual Rainfall (cubic feet): 235490.77 Total mass of solids generated on site (lbs): = 880.59 Mean Annual Runoff x EMC 50% of Mass that is removed in pretreatment of detention basin (lbs): 440.29 50% of Mass that is carried to the Media Filtration System: Filtration System (lbs): 440.29 Removal Efficiencies: Overall Required Removal Efficiency %: 80 Required Efficiciency by Filters %: (80% - 50% removed in pretreatment = 30% to achieve the last 30% removal, system must remove 60% of the remaining 50% of material) 80 Mass Loading to Cartridges / Number of Cartridges Required: Mass of solids to be captured by Filter Media: 352.24 Pounds of Material for 12" tall cartridges: 20 Number of Cartridges Required: 18.0 Design: Use Mass loading method because that is more conservative. I111IIIIIH'. TECHNOLOGIES B-2 D. Warner July 19, 2005 File: D04-0415 35mm Drawing #3-4 5M CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Z 11- W JU U O U 0 co W J = W O lL Q N = • LU, I- O ZI-. W uj • 0 O (. • I- W • W. u..o. U =. • I-; Z 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN As mentioned previously, the conveyance system was sized to convey the surcharging any manholes or catch basins and was sized based in methodology utilizing the Rational method and a precipitation rate of 3. period. Please refer to the calculations within this section of the report and for the explanation of the conveyance sizing for this project. 25 -year storm without the 1998 KCSWDM 4 inches in a 24-hour the Basin Map as well 67 19.009.doc [JPJ/tep] oZ Wei s o N M ws Z_ E (9y Luo, Df 2 L 3 O Z =S m e, ' op O 2§SZc O O •0 P O N • vi 0. 0. a 1 A 22222 0 0 0 0 0 N N N (V 3 —g8 8 no O O o��000 � � m fir' n nI II R II M o IId 0 a H co M .-. h ^' u Pi Q p C �7.. N pp N CON 0 c)). S N i n O o d dodo d nN N P g N P c' N N fV N N *O fV N N N N Q � N R cco Q c0 O N . N Ni v o •o ,o 0.285 0.366 0101,1 o O O O o o O d 000000 N N N v� 0 O R R O P O 0000.-O 1 n r n M O P N N N PHQ I I R O O O 0ddddd alI v n O 0 N t7 O 2 N M 8 8 O 000000 U N P P P 0t0:P :0:0:01 n o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 EnR^ R R R R R R R vyx� N O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O v W 0 0 0 O O O O O O '� 'R LL i-. L p o n ) t') M O N R P N 85e0> LL .m> )-- n ,o•d •d or ,0C.C.° C `� _n O3 E U p �D c pp N N N N N 1428 II II LL'm 1` J M O O ^ 282%'27 85“a24 1 n p p . n H O O N N W N N O0 0000do .(0°' M 0 0 O m 8 n 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 II CI O 4 g C 3�2.1c.-.0,E8 8 0 N!! m��= Z 6 t G > > > UUUUU> 6 o°Sus ilid U ' w 8' COL--gi ��qg�a Q U �3O S (73282 UUUUUU 1N A �I TI b File: D04-0415 N0: W= 1—; LL W O 24 LLco =W !-- _ Z Z� W .20" U 0 0E - `W • W' Z 35mm Drawing 111 z�. #5 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES ZQQ A- JU U 0. N 0. W =. J H N W, w00 g • J. u.a =• a • LU; Z�. F--0 Z I- LL! O N: w • w. U. 0. z. U N' 0 Z 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] z z: cd 2 QV O 0 CO0 J Q u - W o u. co Id Z H O. ZH 2• p O -▪ (9 - UJ • W. H H IL O I.1.1 Z; N; O ' Z 7.0 OTHER PERMITS 7.0 OTHER PERMITS This project will require a Grading Permit from the City of Tukwila, a Commercial Building Permit from the City of Tukwila, a Water and Sewer Extension Permit from the district for whatever jurisdiction controls this area. w Q 2 Q U 00 N o W• = I— w0 g Q. co d I- _ ZH H O Z I— U o O D- o t- 2 V. 1— - ti O, til Z. U co O~ 6719.009.doc [JPl/tep] Z 8.0 ESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Z W -QQ J U. U OCO 0 W= U) WO g J. LL Q co 3 H W, Z 1- O Z F- LU U� O 0 F- W w. 1- T. - U. 6 Iliz U c. O Z Appended on: 11:47:37 Friday, October 22, 2004 6719tesc Event Summary Event ' Peak Q (cfs) Peak T (hrs)I Hyd Vol (acft)! Area (ac)( Method) Raintype 6 month; 0.1309 8.00 0.0686 1.7500 j SBUH TYPE1A 2 year :I 0.3529 8.00 0.1499 _ 1.7500 I SBUH TYPE1A 10 year 0.6733 8.00 0.2639 1.7500 SBUH TYPE1A 25 year 0.8604 8.00 0.3303 0.4117 ;1 1.7500 ! 1.7500 I SBUH TYPE1A SBUH ITYPE1A 100 year ( 1.0890 I 8.00 Record Id: 6719tesc Design Method SBUH Rainfall type • TYPE1A Hyd Intv 10.00 min Peaking Factor 484.00 Abstraction Coeff 0.20 Pervious Area 1.75 ac DCIA 0.00 ac Pervious CN 89.00 DC CN0.00 Pervious TC I 13.48 min :IDC TCI 0.00 min Pervious CN Calc Description SubArea Sub cn Dirt roads & Parkin Lots 1.75 ac 89.00 Pervious Composited CN AMC 2)89.00 Pervious TC Calc Type Description Length Slope Coeff Misc TT Sheet ? Fallow Fields of Loose Soil Surface.: 0.05 ' 150.00 ft 1.00%i 0.0500' ! 2.00 in 9.39 min ;Channel (interni) Earth -lined (n=0.025) 250.00 ftmin 0.25%j 0.0250 4.09 13.48 i Pervious TC min Licensed to: Barghausen Engineers z re jU 0O U0 J = �u.. w0 LI- Q �.w Z= f- 0 w u • 0 • w 0 i- w W IL O z w z SEDIMENT TRAP SIZING CALCULATIONS Qio during construction = 0.6733 cfs Sediment trap surface area = 2,080 x 0.6733 = 1,400 sq. ft. 6719.009.doc []P]/tep] 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATIONS OF COVENANT Zz• Ce 2UJ 00 CO 0, W2 J �. LL W O' lL Q • a. = F- _W Z �. HO ZF- tIJ • W • p U O N• W W u_ o: wZ U= O I Z 9.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES, AND DECLARATION OF COVENANT 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tep] z ;�- z �w J U 00 N0 W I J H WO LL. Q N d. =W H =. Z 1.- 1— I— O ZLIJH U o. O -;. O 1- W • W. 1-- H'. LI 0 Z W O z 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL z �}- • z W Q J O 0'. • 0 W = J 1- • u. u. WO u_ Q =W F-= z F-. O Z I- W U0 O N 0 W • W 1 -r - u. 0 wz 0 z 10.0 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL The operations and maintenance manual will be prepared and submitted with the final Technical Information Report prepared for this project. 6719.009.doc [JPJ/tepj !; ovt; A A A i Pill COPY TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology • and Environmental Earth Sciences ' • PerrrOf hIn Mr. Larry Shaw • . ' NorMed-Shaw Partnership P.O. Box 3644 • Seattle, Washington 98124-3644 Subject • Reference: Dear Mr. Shaw: Slope Evaluation NorMed-Shaw Slope • • ' 'Tukwila, Washington . Geotechnical Report; NvrMed-Shaw Building, Project No. T-5613, prepared'by Terra Associates; Inc., dated November 17, 2004 R IEW� FOR • CODE COMP pktoriorAorn • F Ld 13 `CUUS • November 7, 2005 Project No. T-5613 CITY OF RECEIVED ®/ NOV 1 0.2005 --��wi City Of TUIla 1 U1! IW3 nflITS 01�' PERMIT CENTER Aa'requested, we have conducted an evaluation of the slope Located in the western 'portion of the NorMed site, Our scope:of work included a visual site reconnaissance, the drilling of 3 test borings to maximum depths of about 20.0 to 21.5 feet below existing surface grads, and review Odle referenced geotechnical report. The purpose of our .study was to evaluate slope stability to determine an appropriate permanent slope inclination to be graded in lieu of the previously planned retaining. wall and 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) cut slopes.. Our study included analysis of slope stability along three:profiles identified as Section A -A, Section B -B, and Section C -C, on Figures 2 through 4, respectively. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Surface III kvioN.NO. Grades in the western portion of the site currently slope gently to steeply down about 20 to 25 feet to the east from the shoulder of MacAdam Road. The lower approximately 10 to 20 feet of the slope has recently been graded to moderate to steep temporary inclinations incidental to the wetland mitigation work east of the slope area. Review of topographic information provided by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., indicates that the temporary slope inclinations currently range between about 50 percent and 150 percent, but are generally about 70 Percent. Native slope grades above the temporary cut are generally 30 percent or flatter. 12525'Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 boil -NIS Mr. Larry Shaw November 7, 2005 Soils exposed in the faces of the temporary cut slopes generally consist of dense silty sand to sandy silt with varying amounts of gravel, and fine-grained sand with silt and gravel. We observed light seepage from some of the sand with silt soils exposed in the lower few feet of the temporary cut slope just north of Boring B-2. This seepage, along with uncontrolled runoff from the upper part of the slope, appears to have caused some minor surficial sloughing of the lower slope face. We did not observe indications of deep-seated instability, significant active erosion, or significant groundwater seepage on the slope. We observed several areas along the shoulder of MacAdam Road where road shoulder subgrades appear to consist of fill. The road fill is generally several feet high and slopes down to the native grade at an inclination of about 1:1. A 12 -inch diameter storm sewer pipe currently discharges stormwater from a catch basin on the western side of MacAdam Road to the top of the slope south of Boring B-1. We observed wet surface conditions below the pipe outlet however, we did not observe indications of an established channel or significant active erosion. The upper portions of the slope are currently vegetated with grasses, brush, and occasional mature deciduous trees. Several of the large trees are located near the top of the temporary cut slope. Subsurface Soils The native soils we observed in the test borings consist predominantly of medium dense to dense silty sand to sandy silt with varying amounts of gravel. These soils are generally consistent with our observations of native soils in test pits excavated on the slope during our previous site explorations. The native soils are overlain by fill at Boring B-1 in the northern portion of the slope area. The fill observed in Boring B-1 generally consisted of medium dense to dense silty sand with gravel. We expect that the fill was placed many years ago, possibly at the time that MacAdam Road was constructed. The Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, by Howard H. Waldron (1962), shows the soils on the slope in the western portion of the site mapped as Kame-terrace deposits, which typically consist of silty sand and pebble -cobble gravel. The soils we observed in our site explorations and observed in existing exposures on the slope are generally consistent with the mapped soil description. The boring locations are shown on Figures 1 through 4. Detailed descriptions of the soil conditions observed in the test borings are presented on the boring logs, Figures 6 through 8. Groundwater We encountered groundwater in all 3 borings at depths of 15 to 18 feet below existing surface grades. The groundwater generally occurs within the fine-grained sand with silt to silty sand observed at lower elevations in the borings. This is generally consistent with our observations of light seepage from isolated areas near the toe of the existing cut slope. Project No. T-5613 Page No. 2 Mr. Larry Shaw November 7, 2005 Stability Analysis We performed our stability analyses using the computer program WINSTABL. The soil parameters used are shown on the attached analysis plots and output text. These parameters are based on field and laboratory data, and our past experience with similar soils. As discussed, analyses of the slope were performed along three section lines identified on the attached Figures 2 through 4 as Section A -A, Section B -B, and Section C -C. Our analyses of these sections considered both static and pseudostatic (seismic) conditions for a permanent slope inclination of 1.5:1. A horizontal acceleration of 0.20g was used in the pseudostatic analysis to simulate slope performance under earthquake loading. The lowest safety factors for each condition are presented in the following table: Section Analyzed Minimum Safety Factors Static Pseudostatic Section A -A 1.63 1.11 Section B -B 1.89 1.20 Section C -C 1.88 1.33 The results of the stability analyses indicate that permanent cut slopes established to an inclination of 1.5:1 are stable with respect to deep-seated failure under static and pseudostatic conditions. The factors of safety determined by our analyses are considered acceptable by local engineering practice for the static and pseudostatic conditions. The results of the stability analysis are attached. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on our study, and review of the topographic information provided to us, it appears that it will be feasible to establish a permanent cut slope in the western portion of the site provided the slope is adequately protected from erosion and surface water is not allowed to flow uncontrolled onto the slope face. In our opinion, the undisturbed native soils underlying the slope can be graded to a permanent inclination of 1.5:1. We recommend the existing fill soils, such as those observed in the upper approximately ten feet of Boring B-1 in the northern portion of the slope, be graded to a permanent inclination of 2:1 and thoroughly compacted using a hoe pack. As an alternative, fill soils exposed in the slope face may be completed to an inclination of 1.5:1 provided the fill is excavated at the slope face, thoroughly compacted using a hoc pack, and the slope face is buttressed with two- to four -inch diameter quarry spalls (broken rock) as shown on attached Figure 9. As discussed, we observed light groundwater seepage in several areas near the toe of the existing cut slope. In one Iocation, seepage in conjunction with uncontrolled runoff from the upper portion of the slope appears to have caused some minor surficial sloughing near the lower slope face. In our opinion, the potential for continued shallow sloughing due to persistent groundwater seepage can be adequately mitigated by constructing a rock revetment over the portion of the slope face where the seepage is occurring. We recommend that the rock revetment consist of a minimum 12 -inch thick layer of 2- to 4 -inch diameter quarry spalls that extends at least 12 inches beyond the extent of visible seepage. Project No. T-5613 Page No. 3 z �z rt 211.1 JU 00 U)o J H COLI. w0 2 u- =d w Z= H F- 0 Z I— w U0 O N OH ww • 0 LI O .. Z w O I z Mr. Larry Shaw November 7, 2005 Once final slope grades are established, the exposed soils should be seeded and covered with an extended -term erosion control blanket. For this purpose, we recommend using North American Green C125 double net coconut blankets (or equivalent.) The erosion control blankets must be installed in conformance with the manufacturer's recommendations, and should extend at least two feet beyond the perimeter of the bare area being covered. Z �w QQ2 JU 00 coo. co uJ J -- U)w w0 g Q co =a �w z= O Z! - W • W O • N o ff ww 11 fl -05- W N O I - A storm sewer currently daylights onto the upper portion of the slope, just south of the location of Boring B-3. Stormwater discharge from this pipe must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled onto the face of the permanent cut slope. We recommend collecting discharge from the pipe and routing in a controlled manner to an approved point of discharge at the toe of the slope. We recommend that a representative of Terra Associates, Inc., observe the slope grading activities to verify soil conditions and appropriate slope inclinations, and to identify seepage areas that require buttressing with a rock revetment. In addition, we should observe installation of erosion protection measures to verify conformance with our recommendations and to provide additional or alternate recommendations, if necessary. We trust this information is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. ,b John C. Sadler, L.E.G., L.H.G. Project Manager Kevin P. Roberts, P.E. Senior Engineer Encl: Figure 1- Exploration Location Plan Figures 2 through 4 - Boring Location Detail Figure 5 - Unified Soil Classification System Figures 6 through 8 - Boring Logs Figure 9 - Rock Buttress Detail WINSTABL Output Data cc: Mr. Ali Sadr, Barghausen Consulting Engineers EE>t'In o8/o4/a7 y •� A 1 Project No. T-5613 Page No. 4 z 1 0 0 z 0 z W re 2 6U UO u)o in NW Wo J u. =W F- _ Z� 1- O Z 1- W Uc3 O - 13 WW H F U. O •• Z W U= O I Z NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. I' LEGEND: • B-1 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC 0 30 80 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Terra Associates! Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences BORING LOCATION DETAIL NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 1 Date NOV 2005 Figure 2 NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. LEGEND: B-2 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING 0 30 60 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET REFERENCE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences BORING LOCATION DETAIL NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 3 00 I 1VD 1 MACADAM RD NOTE: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE: IE 12" CONC. CULV=33. 3 LEGEND: • B-3 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BORING 0 30 60 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC Terra Associates Inc. Consultants In Geotechnical ftngineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences BORING LOCATION DETAIL NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TULWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T.5613 Date NOV 2005 r Figure 4 MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION COARSE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% material larger than No. 200 sieve size GRAVELS More than 50% coarse fraction largeis No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Gravels with fines M GMthan Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. SANDS More than 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve Clean Sands (less than 5% fines) SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SP Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. Sands with fines SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. FINE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% material smaller than No. 200 sieve size SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit is less than 50% ML Inorganic ol rgansilts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). OL Organic silts and organic days of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid limit is greater Than 50% MH Inorganic silts, elastic. CH Inorganic days of high plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS COHESIONLESS Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT I SPOON SAMPLER I 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER = WATER LEVEL (DATE) Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent PI PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Very loose 0-4 Loose 4-10 Medium dense 10-30 Dense 30-50 Very dense >50 COHESIVE Standard Penetration Consistency Resistance in Blows/Foot Very soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 Stiff 8-16 Very stiff 16-32 Hard >32 Inc. Engineering and Earth Silences UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Terra �`.�� Associates, Consultants in Geotechnical Geology Environmental Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 5 Boring No. B-1 Logged by: JMC Date: 10/28/05 Approximate Elev. 38 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Density Depth (ft.) a a E (N) Blows/ ft. Moisture Content (%) FILL: brown silty sand to sandy silt with gravel, moist FILL: tight brown silty sand, fine-grained sand, moist FILL: grayish-brown silty sand with gravel, mottled, fine- to medium-grained sand, moist, asphalt bits. Medium Dense Medium Dense Dense - ~ - - — 10 - --15 - _ ,_ 20 L T 32 19 34 11 32 41 5.6 7.2 8.6 19.9 13.9 18.6 T T Possible FILL: Bluish-gray mottled, clayey sand to silty sand, wet. Grayish-brown, mottled silty SAND, fine-grained sand, wet. (SM) Grayish-brown silty SAND with grave!, medium-grained sand, fine- to medium-grained gravel, wet. (SM) Some areas rattled. ._. Gray (SM SAND, fine- to medium-grained sand, Medium Dense Medium Dense Dense Densewet Z T Boring terminated at 21.5 feet. Groundwater encountered below 18 feet. Terra Associates, inC. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sdences BORING LOG NORMED-SHAW TUKWILA, WASHINGTON , SLOPE ``,,�`�m14 1/4�� Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 6 Boring No. B-2 Logged by: JMC Date: 10/28/05 Approximate Elev. 33 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Density Depth (f.) m a E (N) Blws/ ft. Moisture Content (%) Light brown sandy SILT, fine-grained sand, moist. (ML) Light brown, mottled silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained sand and gravel, moist. (SM) Brown silty SAND to SAND with silt, interbedded SILT with sand, fine-grained sand, wet (SM/SP-SM) Medium Stiff Medium Dense Dense Gray silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained sand, fine- to medium -grained gravel, moist. (SM) (Glacial till -like) Dense to Very Dense II 5 I. 14 I r 26 28 10 45 —15 z 20 50/4" 35 8.3 13.7 12.6 15.6 11.0 7.9 10.1 Boring terminated at 21.5 feet. Groundwater encountered at 15 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Silences BORING LOG NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 7 Boring No. B-3 Logged by: JMC Date: 10/28/05 Approximate Elev. 38 Soil Description Consistency/ Relative Density Depth (ft.) Q, E (N) Blows/ ft. Moisture Content (%) Dark brown silty SAND medium-grained Some areas mottled. Light brown, mottled (ML) Brown gray, mottled sand, wet. (ML) Brown gray, mottled grained sand, fine-grained with gravel, medium-graind sand, gravel, moist. (SM) sandy SILT, fine-grained sand, wet. sandy SILT, fine-grained Loose Very Dem Dense Medium Dense to Dense - - _ - ._ 10 - - _ " 15 - — 90 T I I 1 Z I 3 55/11.5" 35 17 38 5o/3" 17.0 11.4 6.1 20.3 16,1 12.9 UAL-. silty SAND with gravel, medium- gravel, wet. (SM) Brown silty SAND, fine-grained sand, wet. (SM) --tighibrown; molted OTSAND v- tfi gravel; fine"fo medium-grained sand, moist to wet. (SM) Dense ~- Very D` ense = Boring terminated at 20'3" feet. Perched water in sand seams below 15 feet. Terra Associates, Inc.'n. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences BORING LOG NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON ,�`llm, �� Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 8 2" TO 4" DIAMETER QUARRY SPALLS 1 1.5 NOT TO SCALE NOTES: L EXISTING FILL NATIVE SOIL • 1) TEMPORARY CUT FACE IN FILL SOIL SHOULD BE MECHANICALLY COMPACTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ROCK 2) MINIMUM WIDTH OF BUTTRESS BASE CUTH/2 = 2 FEET Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnlcat Engineering Gedogy and Environmental Earth Sciences ROCK BUTTRESS DETAIL NORMED-SHAW SLOPE TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj.No. T-5613 Date NOV 2005 Figure 9 Safety Factors 1.5:1 (A A) Static et ti ti ti ti 00 00 00 nt' cO cO co cc.' co cO cO cc N r a-- r e-' r r r r r c - 00 00 cO CO -M CO 6 M tib oo 0 0 (0 co co ►r? CO M 00 Profile.out ** PCSTABL6 ** Purdue university modified by Peter J. Bosscher university of Wisconsin -Madison --slope stability Analysis -- simplified )anbu, SimplifiedBishop or Spencer's Method of slices • PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (A -A) static BOUNDARY COORRDINATES 7 Top Boundaries 9 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left No. (ft) 1 5.00 2 10.00 3 16.00 4 30.00 5 39.00 6 43.00 7 50.00 8 30.00 9 16.00 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total saturated Type unit Wt. u(cf.p) p) 1 125.0 2 130.0 3 130.0 125.0 130.0 135.0 Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 2.00 10.00 2.00 3 2.00 16.00 6.00 3 6.00 30.00 15.00 2 15.00 39.00 21.00 1 21.00 43.00 22.00 1 22.00 50.00 26.00 1 26.00 67.00 28.00 1 15.00 67.00 15.00 2 6.00 67.00 9.00 3 Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant surface (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 100.0 32.0 125.0 35.0 100.0 35.0 Page 1 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 1 z z U O N D CO UJ 1.11 N u.. W O g 5 u.Q IO I -W z= O Z1.11H 2 j. C.) • 1- U.1 W • W U. O WZ U =_ O ~ z Profile.out 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Z Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 '~ w C4 2 Piezometric Surface No. 1 specified by 2 Coordinate Points 6 c=i 00 N 0 Point X -Water Y -Water CO w No. (ft) (ft) -J H 1 16.00 6.00 w O 2 67.00 9.00 u_ < A critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random = d Technique For Generating circular Surfaces, Has Been specified. i- _ zH 100 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. Z O w • w 10 surfaces initiate From Each of 10 Points Equally Spaced v 0 co Along The Ground surface Between x = 10.00 ft. 0 — and X = 20.00 ft. al -- 111 al F-ww • U Each Surface Terminates Between x = 43.00 ft. F• = and x = 65.00 ft. — Z w N U Unless Further Limitations were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation F- _ At which A Surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. z E-' 3.00 ft. Line segments Define Each Trial Failure surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical of The Trial Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are ordered -Most critical First. * * Safety Factors Are calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Failure Surface specified By 19 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 13.00 2.11 3 15.99 2.39 Page 2 Profile.out 4 18.95 2.84 5 21.88 3.47 6 24.77 4.28 7 27.61 5.25 8 30.39 6.38 9 33.10 7.68 10 35.72 9.13 11 38.26 10.73 12 40.69 12.48 13 43.02 14.37 14 45.24 16.40 15 47.33 18.55 16 49.29 20.82 17 51.11 23.20 18 52.80 25.68 19 53.21 26.38 Circle Center At X = 9.7 ; Y = 53.1 and Radius, 51.1 * * * 1.633 *** Failure surface Specified By 19 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.99 2.29 3 15.95 2.72 4 18.90 3.31 5 21.81 4.04 6 24.68 4.91 7 27.50 5.93 8 30.27 7.08 9 32.98 8.37 10 35.62 9.80 11 38.18 11.35 12 40.67 13.03 13 43.07 14.84 14 45.37 16.76 15 47.58 18.79 16 49.68 20.93 17 51.67 23.17 18 53.55 25.51 19 54.27 26.50 Circle Center At x = 5.7 ; Y = 62.0 and Radius, 60.1 * * * 1.642 ***. Failure surface specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point X -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) Page 3 Profile.out 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.98 1.64 3 15.98 1.53 4 18.97 1.67 5 21.95 2.06 6 24.88 2.70 z 7 27.75 3.57 8 30.53 4.69 9 33.22 6.03 uj 10 35.78 7.59 12 40.47 11.33 11 38.20 9.36 OJF) 00 13 42.56 13.48 u) o 14 44.47 15.79 ow 15 46.18 18.26 1 16 47.67 20.86 u) u. 17 48.95 23.58 1110 18 49.81 25.89 Circle Center At X = 15.8 ; Y = 37.5 and Radius, 35.9 g -. *** a 1.666 *** F. w z= 1- O Failure surface specified By 15 coordinate Points U C3 Point X -Surf Y -Surf - No. (ft) (ft) o F.. 1 10.00 2.00 H tw) 2 12.98 2.38 F- 3 15.92 2.94 L' 0 4 18.83 3.70 5 21.67 4.64 v 0,. 6 24.45 5.77 F- _ 7 27.16 7.07 01- 8 29.77 8.55 Z. 9 32.28 10.19 10 34.68 11.99 11 36.96 13.94 12 39.10 16.04 13 41.11 18.27 14 42.96 20.63 15 44.50 22.86 Circle center At X = 5.7 ; Y = 48.1 and Radius, 46.3 * * * 1.667 *** Failure surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 11.11 2.74 2 14.11 2.68 Page 4 Profile.out 3 17.10 2.87 • 4 20.07 3.31 5 22.99 4.01 6 25.84 4.95 7 28.59 6.13 8 31.24 7.55 933.76 9.18 Z 10 36.12 11.02 11' 11 38.33 13.06 fr w 12 40.35 15.28 13 42.17 17.66 6 v 14 43.78 20.19 v O 15 45.17 22.85 co O. 16 45.39 23.36 w = Circle Center At X = 13.4 ; Y = 37.8 and Radius, 35.1 _II_ *** 1.674 *** 2 gQ Failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points ICI I- Iii Z 1.... Point x -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) w w 1 11.11 2.74 n 0 2 14.11 2.58 0 �, 3 17.11 2.65 0-... 4 20.09 2.95 S 23.04 3.48 H v. 6 25.95 4.24 H 7 28.78 5.22 u- O 8 31.53 6.42Z' 9 34.18 7.83 U CO 10 36.71 9.44 Z. 11 39.11 11.25 p F' 12 41.36 13.23 ? 13 43.45 15.38 14 45.36 17.69 15 47.09 20.14 16 48.63 22.72 17 49.96 25.41 18 50.21 26.02 circle center At X = 14.7 ; Y = 41.2 and Radius, 38.6 * * * 1.675 *** Failure Surface Specified By 17 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 11.11 2.74 2 14.08 3.15 3 17.03 3.72 Page 5 Profile.out 4 19.94 4.43 5 22.82 5.30 6 25.64 6.31 7 28.40 7.47 8 31.11 8.78 9 33.74 10.22 10 36.29 11.80 11 38.76 13.50 12 41.13 15.34 13 43.41 17.29 14 45.58 19.36 15 47.64 21.54 16 49.58 23.83 17 51.37 26.16 circle center At X = 4.7 ; Y is 60.0 and Radius, 57.7 * * * 1.680 *** Failure Surface specified sy 17 Coordinate Points PointNX-surf(ft)Y(f) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.97 1.54 3 15.96 1.38 4 18.96 1.51 5 21.93 1.94 6 24.84 2.66 7 27.67 3.67 8 30.38 4.95 9 32.95 6.49 10 35.36 8.28 11 37.58 10.30 12 39.59 12.52 13 41.37 14.94 14 42.90 17.52 15 44.17 20.23 16 45.17 23.06 17 45.22 23.27 circle Center At x = 16.1 ; Y = 31.7 and Radius, 30.3 * * * 1.682 *** Failure Surface specified sy 18 Coordinate Points Point X - Surf f Y� f�� f No. 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.94 2.62 3 15.84 3.36 4 18.72 4.21 Page 6 Profile.out 5 21.56 5.16 6 24.37 6.23 7 27.13 7.41 8 29.84 8.69 9 32.50 10.08 10 35.11 11.56 11 37.65 13.15 12 40.13 14.84 13 42.55 16.62 14 44.89 18.49 5 47.16 20.45 16 49.36 22.50 17 51.47 24.63 18 53.05 26.36 Circle Center At X = -4.6 ; Y = 78.1 and Radius, 77.4 * * * 1.664 *** Failure surface Specified By 21 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.99 1.80 3 15.99 1.77 4 18.99 1.91 5 21.98 2.21 6 24.94 2.68 7 27.87 3.31 8 30.77 4.10 9 33.61 5.05 10 36.40 6.15 11 39.12 7.41 12 41.77 8.82 13 44.34 10.37 14 46.82 12.06 15 49.20 13.89 16 51.48 15.84 17 53.64 17.92 18 55.69 20.11 19 57.61 22.41 20 59.40 24.82 21 61.04 27.30 Circle Center At X = 15.0 ; Y = 56.0 and Radius, 54.2 * * * 1.738 *** Y A X I S F T 0.00 8.38 16.75 25.13 33.50 41.88 Page 7 X 0.00 + + Profile.out 8.38+*Z• ` -31. 6D. - .57.. 0 O A 16.75 +..▪ 57.... - ..49.... w= -.3127 .....9... N -.30124 W 0 O ..6. 9. X 25.13 +..3.1247.... ...65.49.... Q co -...3.12.7. ... ICI -.... 6...4... . -....03.157 ~ _ - ......6...4... . ? I 33.50 + ....0381257 1-0 8...4.. . W uj - ..• ...0.3.1257 4.. 3812.5.. .. 0...6.87 4.. O • 52 312.5.. 4. (3,- s H5 41.88 + 0 3.8.95.. * W W. - 0 312 169.84.48 - v 2.37 .. 5. _u_16 0 1 637 ... z ▪ .....0.. ....1.63 v 50.25 + 2..7.6* H 0 19.7 0 ..... 0.... ...21. z ........'0 .... ..2 - F 58.63 + T 67.00 + * 0 Page 8 �0 Safety Factors 1.5:1 (A A) Pseudostatic In Ln LO lO CO r e- r- r- r r r e- r • e� r r r e- r c0 co. Z W' tr . 0 J U 00 O CO W= H co co to to N O L0 co 00 d' O Lp co 1.6- N M • CD CO .M c0 6 Mth c0 Ocp to [` co M L1) CO cci co N , Z A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic ** PCSTABL6 ** Purdue University modified by Peter 7. Bosscher University of Wisconsin -Madison --slope stability Analysis -- Simplified ianbu, Simplified Bishop or Spencer s Method of slices PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (A -A) Pseudostatic BOUNDARY COORDINATES 7 Top Boundaries 9 Total Boundaries Boundary No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 x�Lfetft ) 5.00 10.00 16.00 30.00 39.00 43.00 50.00 30.00 16.00 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. No. (pcf) (pcf) 1 125.0 2 130.0 3 130.0 125.0 130.0 135.0 Y(ft)t X-(fg)t Y -Right 2.00 10.00 2.00 2.00 16.00 6.00 6.00 30.00 15.00 15.00 39.00 21.00 21.00 43.00 22.00 22.00 50.00 26.00 26.00 67.00 28.00 15.00 67.00 15.00 6.00 67.00 9.00 Cohesion Friction Intercept Angle (psf) (deg) 100.0 32.0 125.0 35.0 100.0 35.0 Page 1 soil Type Below Bnd 3 2 11 1 2 3 Pore Pressure Piez. Pressure Constant Surface Param. (psf) No. 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 1 Z Ce J0 00 N0 W I. J F - W0 ga u) D. =W Z� ' 1- 0 Z I- W 2p 0 •0 , 0 I - .W W U_0 Z W U =. O~ Z A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of water = 62.40 z ±z r w Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points m UO Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) W FII 2 16.00 9.00 w g 5 u_Q A Horizontal Earthquake Loading coefficient N a of0.200 Has Been Assigned H w A Vertical Earthquake Loading Coefficient H of0.000 Has Been Assigned Z O Cavitation Pressure = 0.0 psf g j D c O • (.2 A Critical Failure Surface SearchingMethod, UsingA Random w w Technique For Generating Circular Srfaces, Has Ben specified. z 100 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. LL. z U co =. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 10 Points Equally Spaced p E-: Along The Ground Surface Between x = 10.00 ft. z and X = 20.00 ft. Each Surface Terminates Between X = 43.00 ft. and X = 65.00 ft. Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. 3.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure surfaces Examined. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are calculated sy The Modified Bishop Method * * Page 2 A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic Failure surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point X -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 13.00 2.11 3 15.99 2.84 5 21.88 3.47 6 24.77 4.28 7 27.61 5.25 8 30.39 6.38 9 33.10 7.68 10 35.72 9.13 11 38.26 10.73 12 40.69 12.48 13 43.02 14.37 14 45.24 16.40 15 47.33 18.55 16 49.29 20.82 17 51.11 23.20 18 52.80 25.68 19 53.21 26.38 Circle Center At X = 9.7 ; Y = 53.1 and Radius, 51.1 * * * 1.109 *** Failure surface Specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point x-surf Yf) f(ft�t 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.99 2.29 3 15.95 2.72 4 18.90 3.31 5 21.81 4.04 6 24.68 4.91 7 27.50 5.93 8 30.27 7.08 9 32.98 8.37 10 35.62 9.80 11 38.18 11.35 12 40.67 13.03 13 43.07 14.84 14 45.37 16.76 15 47.58 18.79 16 49.68 20.93 17 51.67 23.17 18 53.55 25.51 19 54.27 26.50 Circle Center At X = 5.7 ; Y = 62.0 and Radius, 60.1 Page 3 z • z re u12 O 0 u)o J H w O D- LL.4 Cd I -w z= I- 0 ZF- LU ijj U� ON C) w w' S H L' O wz U �. z * * * A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic 1.112 *** Failure surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points zzQ S Point x -Surf Y -surf 1 No. (ft) (ft) w 1 10.00 2.00 6 v 2 12.98 1.64 3 15.98 1.53 0C) 4 18.97 1.67 co w 5 21.95 2.06 Lu H. 6 24.88 3.57 coo 8 30.53 4.69 w 9 33.22 6.03 10 35.78 7.59 g a 11 38.20 9.36 12 40.47 11.33 N 13 42.56 13.48 = w 14 44.47 15.79 Z H 15 46.18 18.26 16 47.67 20.86 z O 17 48.95 23.58 18 49.81 25.89 ZE D. no Circle center At x = 15.8 ; Y = 37.5 and Radius, 35.9 cn, o E- *** 1.139 *** = v. ti 0. ..z Failure Surface Specified By 15 coordinate Points v cn P_ Point x -Surf Y -surf Of- 2! No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.98 2.38 3 15.92 2.94 4 18.83 3.70 5 21.67 4.64 6 24.45 5.77 7 27.16 7.07 8 29.77 8.55 9 32.28 10.19 10 34.68 11.99 11 36.96 13.94 12 39.10 16.04 13 41.11 18.27 14 42.96 20.63 15 44.50 22.86 circle center At X = 5.7 ; Y = 48.1 and Radius, 46.3 * * * 1.145 *** Page 4 A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic Failure Surface specified By 18 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf NO. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.94 2.62 3 15.84 3.36 4 18.72 4.21 5 21.56 5.16 6 24.37 6.23 7 27.13 7.41 8 29.84 8.69 9 32.50 10.08 10 35.11 11.56 11 37.65 13.15 12 40.13 14.84 13 42.55 16.62 14 44.89 18.49 15 47.16 20.45 16 49.36 22.50 17 51.47 24.63 18 53.05 26.36 circle center At x = -4.6 ; Y = 78.1 and Radius, 77.4 * * * 1.146 *** Failure Surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 11.11 2.74 2 14.11 2.58 3 17.11 2.65 4 20.09 2.95 5 23.04 3.48 25.95 4.24 7 28.78 5.22 8 31.53 6.42 9 34.18 7.83 10 36.71 9.44 11 39.11 11.25 12 41.36 13.23 13 43.45 15.38 14 45.36 17.69 15 47.09 20.14 16 48.63 22.72 17 49.96 25.41 18 50.21 26.02 Circle Center At X = 14.7 ; Y = 41.2 and Radius, 38.6 * * * 1.148 *** Page 5 z iI- Z JU 00 wen cow -J h u_ wO �Q co =d �...w Z= I- 0 Z t- 11.1 • w U� O C o F- wW u. 0- . z w • CO O F' z A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic Failure Surface specified By 17 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 11.11 2.74 2 14.08 3.15 3 17.03 3.72 4 19.94 4.43 5 22.82 5.30 6 25.64 6.31 7 28.40 7.47 8 31.11 8.78 9 33.74 10.22 10 36.29 11.80 11 38.76 13.50 12 41.13 15.34 13 43.41 17.29 14 45.58 19.36 15 47.64 21.54 16 49.58 23.83 17 51.37 26.16 Circle center At X = 4.7 ; Y = 60.0 and Radius, 57.7 * * * 1.150 *** Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 11.11 2.74 2 14.11 2.68 3 17.10 2.87 4 20.07 3.31 5 22.99 4.01 7 28.59 6.13 8 31.24 7.55 9 33.76 9.18 10 36.12 11.02 11 38.33 13.06 12 40.35 15.28 13 42.17 17.66 14 43.78 20.19 15 45.17 22.85 16 45.39 23.36 Circle Center At X = 13.4 ; Y = 37.8 and Radius, 35.1 * * * 1 1.153 *** Page 6 A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic Failure surface Specified By 21 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) Z 1 10.00 2.00 3:I": z 12.99 1.80w 33 15.99 1.77 ce 2 4 18.99. 2.21U 6 24.94 2.68 0 o 7 27.87 3.31 w w 8 30.77 4.10 H 10 33.61 5.05. N u'. 11 39.12 7.41 ',JO 12 41.77 8.82 13 44.34 10.37 g Q 14 46.82 12.06 15 49.20 13.89 N C! 16 51.48 15.84 H = 17 53.64 17.92 Z 18 55.69 20.11 H 19 57.61 22.41 z O 20 59.40 24.82 w w 21 61.04 27.30 ? 0 Circle center At x = 15.0 ; Y = 56.0 and Radius, 54.2 p c. oE- W u j *** w*** 1.154 *** H v. u. ~O z Failure surface Specified By 17 coordinate Points v N PIO Point x -Surf Y -Surf Z No. (ft) (ft) 1 10.00 2.00 2 12.97 1.54 3 15.96 1.38 4 18.96 1.51 5 21.93 1.94 6 24.84 2.66 7 27.67 3.67 8 30.38 4.95 9 32.95 6.49 10 35.36 8.28 11 37.58 10.30 12 39.59 12.52 13 41.37 14.94 14 42.90 17.52 15 44.17 20.23 16 45.17 23.06 17 45.22 23.27 circle Center At X = 16.1 ; Y = 31.7 and Radius, 30.3 Page 7 * * * A -A 1.5 to 1 Pseudostatic 1.156 *** Y A X I S F T Z f -H W 0.00 8.38 16.75 25.13 33.50 41.88 re j. X 0.00 + + + + + + vU O. coo: wi _J * mu_ 8.38 + w0 - 31. u.a - 67.. cDd • -.314..* _ A 16.75 +..67.... Z w H - ..45.... -.3127 ' i-.0 5... -.39124 j D, ..6..5. o v X 25.13 +..3.1247.. .. 0 tn. - ...68.45.... (31- -...3.12.7. ... w w -.... 6...4... . * z -....93.187 I- H- - ......6...4... . L- 0 I 33.50 + ....9301287 z -.. .. 0...4.. . w cn - .....9.3.1287 4.. — 3012.5.. 0 9...6.07 4.. * z - 312.5.. 4. S 41.88 + 9 3.0.58.. - ......... . ...12..7. 84* 9 3165.0 .40 - 2.37 .. 8. 9 1 537 ... - . . .......9.. ....1.53 50.25 + 2..7.6* - 9 15.7 - ..... .... 9.... ...21. - .. .... ..2 - 9 F 58.63 + T 67.00 + 9 ..... . ..9... 9 Page 8 • Safety Factors 1.5:1 (B -B) Static O)C00000,-Mt000 co0r- — ter.— —.—V-- �'-NNNNNNNNN Z. LU re 2 O JU to U O. CD U J =. I S` g Q 22 =d IW Z =. Z C. LU W D U O N; O H W W LI 0.. Z W co H ▪ 0. 0 oo . co ti) . oo M c0 .•O O . M co M N t() N . CO M O O 00 Li)(4) 00 to M N 1-- . 4. 0 00 N Profile.out ** PCSTABL6 ** by, Purdue university modified by Peter 3. Bosscher university of Wisconsin -Madison --slope stability Analysis -- Simplified Janbu, Simplified Bishop or Spencer's Method of Slices PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (B -B) Static BOUNDARY COORDINATES 6 Top Boundaries 8 Total Boundaries Boundary No. 1 2 34 56 78 X -Left (ft) 2.00 6.50 16.00 27.50 40.00 55.00 27.50 16.00 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of soil Soil Total saturated Typenit wt. Unit wt. (pcf) u(pcf) Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 2.00 6.50 2.00 3 2.00 16.00 8.50 3 8.50 27.50 16.00 2 16.00 40.00 24.00 1 24.00 55.00 29.00 1 29.00 65.00 29.00 1 16.00 65.00 16.00 2 8.50 65.00 8.50 3 cohesion Intercept (psf) Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Angle Pressure Constant Surface (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 150.0 34.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 120.0 125.0 100.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 130.0 130.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 0 Page 1 . profile.out 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit Weight of water = 62.40 z _1 1- z Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points re 6 -IU Point X -Water Y -Water 0 0 No. (ft) (ft) co 0co w 1 27.50 16.00 J i_ 2 60.00 16.00 co LL wo A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random u. Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. ( d =w F- _ 100 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. ' z H 1-- 0 zF- 10 surfaces Initiate From Each of 10 Points Equally spacedILI w Along The Ground surface Between X = 6.50 ft. • o and X - 25.00 ft. v O 52 D E - Each HEach Surface Terminates Between x = 40.00 ft. w w and X = 65.00 ft.0 LI0. .z Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation U Z At which A surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. H = 0 z 3.00 ft. Line segments Define Each Trial Failure surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most critical Of The Trial • Failure Surfaces Examined. They Are ordered - Most critical Fi rst. * * safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Failure surface Specified By 17 Coordinate Points Point x -surf Y�f��f No. 1 16.78 9.01 2 19.78 8.88 3 22.77 8.94 4 25.76 9.21 Page 2 s• 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 17 28.73 31.65 34.53 37.35 40.09 42.74 45.29 47.74 50.06 52.26 54.31 56.22 57.94 Profile.out 9.67 10.33 11.18 12.22 13.44 14.84 16.41 18.15. 20.05 22.09 24.28 26.59 29.00 Circle Center At X = 20.3 ; Y = 54.2 and Radius, 45.3 *** 1.891 *** Failure surface specified By 16 coordinate Points Point No. 1 2 3 4 56 78 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 X -surf (ft) 16.78 19.69 22.59 25.45 28.28 31.08 33.84 36.56 39.23 41.86 44.44 46.97 49.44 51.85 54.21 56.32 Circle Center At X = * * * Y -surf (ft) 9.01 9.71 10.51 11.41 12.40 13.48 14.66 15.93 17.28 18.73 20.26 21.88 23.58 25.36 27.22 29.00 -3.0 ; Y = 97.1 and Radius, 90.3 2.080 *** Failure Surface Specified By 19 coordinate Points Point N0. 1 2 34 56 x -surf (ft) 6.50 9.43 12.33 15.20 18.04 20.83 Y -Surf (ft) 2.00 2.65 3.41 4.28 5.26 6.35 Page 3 Z F Z • w JU U 000 0. W= H w o g Q. . d. =Wm z • 1-0. Z U.1 Lu 2p U '0 N. .0 H ww LI O. uiZ U =. 0~ Z Profile.out 7 23.59 7.54 8 26.29 8.84 9 28.95 10.24 10 31.54 11.74 11 34.08 13.33 12 36.56 15.03 13 38.97 16.81 14 41.31 18.69 15 43.58 20.65 16 45.77 22.70 17 47.88 24.83 18 49.91 27.04 19 50.22 27.41 Circle Center At x = -9.1 ; Y = 79.1 and Radius, 78.7 * * * 2.096 *** Failure surface Specified By 18 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 14.72 7.63 2 17.68 8.10 3 20.63 8.68 4 23.55 9.36 5 26.45 10.15 6 29.31 11.03 7 32.14 12.02 8 34.94 13.11 9 37.70 14.29 10 40.41 15.57 11 43.08 16.95 12 45.69 18.42 13 48.25 19.98 14 50.76 21.63 15 53.20 23.37 16 55.59 25.19 17 57.90 27.09 18 60.06 29.00 Circle Center At x = 2.8 ; Y - 91.8 and Radius, 85.0 * * * 2.098 *** Failure Surface specified By 17 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 14.72 7.63 2 17.65 8.28 3 20.55 9.04 4 23.42 9.92 Page 4 z • w o: 6 U U 0(0 w= J F- w O LL¢ z Ci z= F-- O z w uj 0C ILJ t� =U H r- - O ..z w = 0 F". z Profi l e. out 5 26,25 10.90 6 29.05 12.00 7 31.79 13.21 8 34.49 14.52 9 37.14 15.93 10 39.72 17.45 11 42.25 19.07 12 44.71 20.79 13 47.10 22.60 14 49.42 24.50 15 51.67 26.49 16 53.83 28.56 17 53.90 28.63 Circle Center At x = -0.5 ; Y = 83.0 and Radius, 76.9 * * * 2.103 *** Failure Surface specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 22.94 13.03 2 25.94 13.14 3 28.92 13.53 4 31.84 14.19 5 34.70 15.11 6 37.45 16.30 7 40.09 17.73 8 42.59 19.40 9 44.92 21.29 10 47.06 23.38 11 49.01 25.67 12 50.24 27.41 Circle center At X = 23.2 ; Y = 45.7 and Radius, 32.6 * * * 2.104 *** Failure surface Specified By 10 Coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 22.94 13.03 2 25.93 12.69 3 28.92 12.91 4 31.82 13.69 5 34.52 14.98 6 36.94 16.75 7 38.99 18.94 8 40.61 21.47 9 41.72 24.26 10 41.79 24.60 Page 5 Profile.out Circle Center At X = 26.2 ; Y = 28.8 and Radius, 16.1 * * * 2.106 *** z z1 i -Z Failure surface Specified By 12 Coordinate Points Q 21L1 J0 0 Point . X -Surf Y -Surf w 0 No. (ft) (ft) w i 1 22.94 13.03 '' F" 2 25.82 12.17 �u- 3 28.80 11.81 4 31.79 11.96 5 34.72 12.62 g5 6 37.50 13.76 u.< m 7 40.04 15.35 N 0 8 42.28 17.34 = w 9 44.15 19.69 Z H 10 45.59 22.32 11 46.57 25.16 Z 0 12 46.75 26.25 w uj �o Circle Center At x = 29.4 Y = 29.5 and Radius, 17.7 v 0 (12, OH *** 2.127 *** Ili w =U 1- u. H; Failure surface Specified By 17 Coordinate Points iiiZ U I. Poi nt X -Surf Y -Surf 0 �- No. (ft) (ft) z 1 12.67 6.22 2 15.64 6.64 3 18.58 7.22 4 21.49 7.95 6 27.18 9.85 7 29.94 11.02 8 32.64 12.32 9 35.27 13.77 10 37.82 15.35 11 40.29 17.06 12 42.67 18.89 13 44.94 20.84 14 47.12 22.91 15 49.18 25.08 16 51.14 27.36 17 51.50 27.83 circle Center At x = 5.9 ; Y = 64.1 and Radius, 58.3 * * * 2.151 *** Page 6 Profile.out Failure Surface Specified By 19 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 16.78 9.01 2 19.74 9.48 3 22.69 10.03 i�. 4 25.62 10.67 5 28.53 11.40 6 31.42 12.21 7 34.28 13.10 8 37.12 14.07 9 39.93 15.13 10 42.71 16.26 11 45.45 17.48 12 48.16 18.77 13 50.83 20.14 14 53.45 21.59 15 56.04 23.11 16 58.58 24.71 i 17 61.07 26.38 I 18 63.51 28.12 I 19 64.68 29.00 circle center At X = 2.0 ; Y = 112.0 and Radius, 104.0 * * * 2.156 *** Y A X IS F T 0.00 8.13 16.25 24.38 32.50 40.63 x 0.00 + + + + + + _* _- * 8.13 + . - .3. - • • -...3. 9 -....3.. 4 A 16.25 + 9 *1 - ..... 3...4. 9 -....... .9.. . 3 142. 6 X 24.38 +.. ... ...9.. . 1 5286. 4 * Page 7 Profile.out - . 130276.. 4 13852.... 32.50 + 4 6 32 1.49 6.. 03 27 .. - . 1 8496.. . 027 S 40.63 + . 1 4.96...7. .* 8 26. .. 7 . ....1.049.3.. . - .. ...... .. .1...825. . ,." ..04 ..83..8. 1 256.38. 48.75 + 0 .596.4 1 4 ..33 F 56.88 + T 65.00 + ,... 0 2 59 ..., .. ,.. ... 1.4 1 2 5. ,,,0..4, 1 �2 ... . ....,0..41 0.... * * 0 .. • Safety Factors 1.5:1 (B -B) Pseudostatic O M to 11") CC O) O O '- d' N M M cr? d; d; �t r r r O OO (0 co ni d' C� N N 0 co co co co . co 'et CD et O 'N a0 O Cr) Co M 00 00 Profile . out ** PCSTABL6 ** by Purdue University modified by Peter J. Bosscher university of Wisconsin -Madison --Slope stability Analysis -- Simplified ianbu, SimplifiedBishop or spencer s Method of Slices PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (B -B) Pseudostatic BOUNDARY COORDINATES 6 Top Boundaries 8 Total Boundaries Boundary X -Left Y -Left X -Right Y -Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 2.00 2.00 6.50 2.00 3 2 6.50 2.00 16.00 8.50 3 3 16.00 8.50 27.50 16.00 2 4 27.50 16.00 40.00 24.00 1 5 40.00 24.00 55.00 29.00 1 6 55.00 29.00 65.00 29.00 1 7 27.50 16.00 65.00 16.00 2 8 16.00 8.50 65.00 8.50 3 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of soil Soil Total saturated Type unit wt. pfp) Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Intercept Angle Pressure constant Surface (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 150.0 34.0 0.00 0.0 0 2 120.0 125.0 100.0 35.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 130.0 130.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 0 Page 1 Profile.out 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED unit Weight of water = 62.40 Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 2 coordinate Points Point X -Water Y -Water NO. (ft) (ft) 1 27.50 16.00 2 60.00 16.00 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading coefficient of0.200 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure = 0.0 psf A Critical Failure surface searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating circular surfaces, Has Been specified. 100 Trial surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 surfaces Initiate From Each of 10 Points Equally spaced Along The Ground surface Between x = 6.50 ft. and X = 25.00 ft. Each surface Terminates Between x = 40.00 ft. and x = 65.00 ft. : Unless Further Limitations were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. 3.00 ft. Line segments Define Each Trial Failure surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most critical of The Trial Failure surfaces Examined. They Are ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Page 2 1' Profile.out Failure Surface specified By 17 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 16.78 9.03. 2 19.78 8.88 3 22.77 8.94 4 25.76 9.21 5 28.73 9.67 6 31.65 10.33 7 34.53 11.18 8 37.35 12.22 9 40.09 13.44 10 42.74 14.84 11 45.29 16.41 12 47.74 18.15 13 50.06 20.05 14 52.26 22.09 15 54.31 24.28 16 56.22 26.59 17 57.94 29.00 circle Center At x = 20.3 ; Y = 54.2 and Radius, 45.3 * * * 1.204 *** Failure Surface specified By 19 coordinate Points Point X -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 16.78 9.01 2 19.74 9.48 3 22.69 10.03 4 25.62 10.67 5 28.53 11.40 6 31.42 12.21 7 34.28 13.10 8 37.12 14.07 9 39.93 15.13 10 42.71 16.26 11 45.45 17.48 12 48.16 18.77 13 50.83 20.14 14 53.45 21.59 15 56.04 23.11 16 58.58 24.71 17 61.07 26.38 18 63.51 28.12 19 64.68 29.00 Circle Center At X = 2.0 ; Y = 112.0 and Radius, 104.0 *** 1.333 *** Page 3 z Z re ug 5 00 J = 1- U) u. w 0 J u_ • a. =W z �. F- 0 w~ • w DO O N. O 1- W w ww u. • z w U =; O 1- z Profile.out Failure Surface Specified By 16 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) zz 1 16.78 9.01 ;� Z 2 19.69 9.71 r4 1 3 22.59 10.51 4 25.45 11.41 V. 5 28.28 12.40 U O 6 31.08 13.48 N W 77 33.84 14.66 8 36.56 15.93 _J H 9 39.23 17.28 N u. 10 41.86 18.73 uj O 11 44.44 20.26 2E 12 46.97 21.88 13 49.44 23.58 u. Q. 14 51.85 25.36 Da 5 54.21 27.22 16 56.32 29.00 z = Circle Center At X = -3.0 ; Y . 97.1 and Radius, 90.3 H z F-. w *** 1.348 *** j 0 U O� Failure surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points ul w I-- u"O Point X -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft)ui 00 2! U -, 1 14.72 7.63 0 H 22 17.68 8.10 z 3 20.63 8.68 4 23.55 9.36 5 26.45 10.15 6 29.31 11.03 7 32.14 12.02 8 34.94 13.11 9 37.70 14.29 10 40.41 15.57 11 43.08 16.95 12 45.69 18.42 13 48.25 19.98 14 50.76 21.63 15 53.20 23.37 16 55.59 25.19 17 57.90 27.09 18 60.06 29.00 Circle Center At X = 2.8 ; Y = 91.8 and Radius, 85.0 * * * 1.350 *** Page 4 Profile.out Failure Surface Specified By 19 coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) z 1 16.78 9.01 2 19.72 9.59 3 22.65 10.24 w 44 25.56 10.96 5 28.46 11.75 6 31.33 12.62 0 00 7 34.18 13.55 co o 8 37.01 14.55 Lu 939.81 15.62 w H 10 42.59 16.75 cn u_ 11 45.34 17.96 w O 12 48.05 19.23 13 50.74 20.56 14 53.39 21.96 g Q 15 56.01 23.42 u_ 16 58.60 24.95 = a 17 61.14 26.54 F. w 18 63.65 28.19z H 19 64.81 29.00 ' F- 0' zI-. Circle Center At X = -5.7 ; Y = 130.7 and Radius, 123.8 uJ ui U U *** 1.362 *** O - o F- ww U Failure Surface Specified By 17 Coordinate Points I O Z Point x -surf Y -surf v w. No. (ft) (ft) F= _ O F - 1 14.72 7.63 z 2 17.65 3 20.55 9.04 4 23.42 9.92 5 26.25 10.90 6 29.05 12.00 7 31.79 13.21 8 34.49 14.52 9 37.14 15.93 10 39.72 17.45 11 42.25 19.07 1244.71 20.79 13 47.10 22.60 14 49.42 24.50 1551.67 26.49 16 53.83 28.56 17 53.90 28.63 circle center At X = -0.5 ; Y = 83.0 and Radius, 76.9 * * * 1.387 *** Page 5 Profile.out Failure surface Specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 20.893 11.67 3 26.89 11.81 4 32.84 1229. .53 6 35.79 13.11 7 38.70 13.83 8 41.57 14.70 9 44.39 15.71 10 47.16 16.86 11 49.87 18.14 12 52.52 19.56 13 55.09 21.11 14 57.58 22.79 15 59.98 24.58 16 62.29 26.49 17 64.50 28.52 18 64.98 29.00 Circle Center At X = 22.7 ; Y = 72.0 and Radius, 60.3 * * * 1.401 *** Failure surface specified By 17 coordinate Points PNo. x(ft�f (ft) 1 20.89 11.69 2 23.74 10.75 3 26.67 10.10 4 29.65 9.76 5 32.65 9.72 6 38..63 58 10.57 8 41.45 11.44 9 44.21 12.61 10 46.84 14.05 11 49.31 15.75 12 51.59 17.70 13 53.66 19.87 14 55.50 22.25 15 57.09 24.79 16 58.40 27.49 17 58.95 29.00 Circle Center At X = 31.5 ; Y = 38.9 and Radius, 29.2 * * * 1.402 *** Page 6 z re w O 0 cow H • LL w O LL I Z▪ = HO Z w • w 0 O - o 1- w• w IL.O .. Z U= O ~ z Profile.out Failure surface Specified By 12 coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) z 1 22.94 13.03 l z. 2 25.9413.14 3 28.92 13.53 re 2 4 31.84 14.19 6 U. 5 34.70 15.11 00 6 37.45 16.30 N o 7 40.09 17.73 cow 8 42.59 19.40 LU H 99 44.92 21.29 N O 10 47.06 23.38 W 11 49.01 25.67 12 50.24 27.41 Circle Center At x = 23.2 ; Y = 45.7 and Radius, 32.6 u. a N C! *** 1.413 *** z i I- 0 Z I - Failure Surface specified By 22 Coordinate Points ? o U Point X -surf Y -Surf C1 I I- MO. (ft) (ft) w w 1 8.56 3.41 H 2 11.54 3.67 _ 0 3 14.52 4.03 z 4 17.48 4.51 w ti) 5 6 20.43 23.35.77 0 H 7 26.25 6.55 8 29.11 7.44 9 31.94 8.43 10 34.74 9.51 11 37.50 10.70 12 40.21 11.98 13 42.87 13.36 14 45.48 14.84 15 48.04 16.40 16 50.55 18.05 17 52.99 19.80 18 55.37 21.62 19 57.68 23.54 20 59.92 25.53 21 62.09 27.60 22 63.46 29.00 Circle Center At x = 2.7 ; Y = 87.7 and Radius, 84.5 * * * 1.441 *** Page 7 Profile.out Y A X I 0.00 8.13 16.25 X 0.00 + + + * 8.13 + 0 • • • -....0.. 4 16.25 + *1 ..... 04. -.. ..0.. .12.7 -....... .... • S F T 24.38 32.50 40.63 - . ...0...123. 9 X 24.38 +.. ... .87. . - ......0..1 23.9. - .....4. 7. .* - . ....0. 1.23.9.. 8 47.. . 1 253.... I 32.50 + 0 8 .4.9... 253.... 8 1.4. 9... 25 3. .. - . .........8.14.9... . ..... 7.2.3.. ... • 40.63 + 0 1 4..9..... .* 8...7..5 39. .. . .. . ..0.1.24....... .. ...... 8. 71.5..36. .. . - . . .... ...0.24 ▪ ....... 8..071.5.369.. 48.75 + ... 8 2 4 . .6.9. ....... .. ...7..1.4.3..9 .... 8. 2 36. .... .. ... .7. 1.4 ........ ....8... .1..3 6. ...... ... .7825.4.* F 56.88 + ....... .... ....8.13 . ...7025.481 ..W... ... .704 25... 70.. 20 T 65.00 + * * ., 7* Page 8 w U O Uco wco Lt.D J = t- w O gQ co d w z= O zI- w • w U� O -. O H w • w u. O WZ O z Safety Factors 1.5:1 (C -C) Static CO O O e- N N CO CO h• GO C Cn (3 0) Q? Cn 01 C? e- r- r- It- T e- • I O N c+o L() (0 M W O J 0 O U O WI 1.- N(0 w O (O g u Q = d. Z HO Z F - w o; o - o I- I U II 1-.02 0 •Z LO UH. O Z O N LO . co O 10 N (0 N O Ocdltd 00 ( ti Profile.out ** PCSTABL6 ** b Purdue University modified by Peter 3. Bosscher university of Wisconsin -Madison --Slope stability Analysis -- Simplified 3anbu, simplifiedBishop or spencer's Method of Slices PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (C -C) Static BOUNDARY COORDINATES 7 Top Boundaries 10 Total Boundaries Boundary No. 1 2 3 45 7 89 10 x -Left (ft) 7.00 9.50 23.00 26.00 38.00 46.00 50.00 38.00 26.00 23.00 Y -Left X -Right Y -Right (ft) (ft) (ft) 2.00 9.50 2.00 2.00 23.00 11.50 11.50 26.00 13.50 13.50 38.00 22.00 22.00 46.00 27.50 27.50 50.00 28.00 28.00 70.00 28.50 22.00 70.00 22.00 13.50 70.00 13.50 11.50 70.00 11.50 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total saturated Type u(pcf)t. U(pcf)t. 1 120.0 120.0 2 120.0 120.0 cohesion Friction Intercept Angle (psf) (deg) 0.0 30.0 150.0 34.0 Page 1 soil Type Below Bnd 4 4 3 21 11 2 34 Pore Pressure Piez. Pressure constant Surface Param. (psf) No. 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0 0 Profile,out 3 130.0 135.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 130.0 130.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 0 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED Unit weight of Water = 62.40 Piezometric surface No. 1 Specified by 2 coordinate Points Point X -Water V -Water No. ft) 1 26.00 13.50 2 70.00 13.50 A critical Failure surface Searching method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular surfaces, Has Been specified. 100 Trial surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 surfaces Initiate From Each of 10 Points Equally spaced Along The Ground surface Between x = 9.50 ft. and X = 26.00 ft. Each Surface Terminates Between x = 46.00 ft. and X = 60.00 ft. Unless Further Limitations were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At which A surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. 3.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most critical Of The Trial Failure surfaces Examined. They Are ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Failure surface Specified By 18 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 9.50 2.00 Page 2 Z. z r4w 2 6 UO W= J w0 2 LQ =a zF._ ZI- Ili 'Li Dc ON C)ff wW �U ti O Wz U =. z Profile.out 2 12.42 2.68 3 15.32 3.48 4 18.17 4.39 5 20.99 5.41 6 23.77 6.55 26.50 7.79 8 29.18 9.15 9 31.80 10.61 10 34.36 12.17 11 36.85 13.83 12 39.28 15.60 13 41.64 17.46 14 43.91 19.41 15 46.11 21.45 16 48.23 23.57 17 50.26 25.78 18 52.18 28.05 Circle Center At X -6.0 ; Y = 75.4 and Radius, 75.1 * * * 1.883 *** Failure Surface Specified By 19 coordinate Points No. X(ftt�f ft) 1 9.50 2.00 2 12.50 2.12 3 15.48 2.41 4 18.45 2.89 5 21.37 3.55 6 24.25 4.38 7 27.08 5.39 8 29.84 6.56 9 32.53 7.90 10 35.12 9.40 11 37.63 11.05 12 40.02 12.86 13 42.31 14.80 14 44.47 16.88 15 46.50 19.09 16 48.40 21.41 17 50.15 23.85 18 51.75 26.39 19 52.67 28.07 Circle Center At x = 9.1 ; Y = 51.5 and Radius, 49.5 * * * 1.899 *** Failure surface specified By 12 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -surf NO. (ft) (ft) Page 3 z 1 I- 'mow' cel JU 000 co CO LU J = U) u_ uO gto Da =d w Z= I-0 Z I - w • w U Q' O N: Q I- r. ttl Z U- H =, Z Profile.out 1 24.17 12.28 2 27.11 12.87 3 30.00 13.68 4 32.82 14.69 5 35.56 15.91 6 38.21 17.32 7 40.75 18.92 8 43.16 20.70 9 45.44 22.65 10 47.57 24.76 11 49.54 27.02 12 50.28 28.01 circle center At X = 17.5 ; Y = 53.0 and Radius, 41.3 * * * 1.904 *** Failure Surface specified By 13 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf NO. (ft) (ft) 1 24.17 12.28 2 27.12 12.87 3 30.01 13.64 4 32.86 14.58 5 35.64 15.69 6 38.35 16.98 7 40.98 18.42 8 43.52 20.02 9 45.96 21.77 10 48.28 23.67 11 50.48 25.71 12 52.56 27.87 13 52.73 28.07 circle Center At X = 15.9 ; Y = 60.9 and Radius, 49.3 * * * 1.906 *** Failure Surface Specified By 18 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 13.17 4.58 2 16.15 4.87 3 19.12 5.34 4 22.05 5.97 5 24.94 6.77 6 27.78 7.74 7 30.56 8.86 8 33.27 10.14 9 35.91 11.58 Page 4 Profile.out 10 38.45 13.17 11 40.91 14.89 12 43.26 16.76 13. 45.49 18.76 14 47.61 20.88 15 49.61 23.12 z 16 51.47 25.47 17 53.20 27.93 18 53.30 28.08 w Circle Center At x = 9.5 ; Y = 56.8 and Radius, 52.3 6 v. 00 N0. *** 1.921 **+� co =.. J 1.- (0 IL. Nom Failure surface specified By 17 Coordinate Points w227 O Point x -surf Y -surf w Q No. (ft) (ft) co d = 1 13.17 4.58 -al = 2 16.15 4.88 ~ 3 19.11 5.37 : Z O. 4 22.04 6.05 Z 5 24.91 6.90 ui 6 27.73 7.94 D0 o 7 30.47 9.14 OD- 8 33.14 10.52 O H 9 35.71 12.06 = w 10 38.18 13.76 11 40.55 15.61 f- 12 42.79 17.60 11'0 13 44.90 19.74 LLj 14 46.87 21.99 c) _. 15 48.70 24.37 16 50.38 26.86 Z ~ 17 5 Circle center At x = 9.8 ; Y = 52.4 and Radius, 47.9 * * * 1.923 *** Failure surface specified By 18 coordinate Points PNo.t x(fft)f Y�fftt)f 1 11.33 3.29 2 14.18 4.24 3 17.00 5.27 4 19.79 6.38 5 22.55 7.55 6 25.27 8.80 7 27.97 10.12 8 30.63 11.51 9 33.25 12.97 Page 5 Profile.out 10 35.83 14.50 11 38.37 16.10 12 40.86 17.76 13 43.31 19.49 14 45.72 21.29 15 48.08 23.14 16 50.38 25.06 17 52.64 704II-: 18 28.0953.78 acui circle center At X = -23.4 ; Y == 111.4 and Radius, 113.6 6 5 00 *** 1.957 *** w = J E_ mu. Failure Surface Specified By 17 Coordinate Points W O ?- g5 Point x (ft) f Y�ft) f N d =w 1 9.50 2.00 F- _ 2 12.47 2.43 z H 3 15.41 3.04 z I- 4 18.30 3.83 u.i uj a 5 21.14 4.80 6 23.91 5.94 v ra 7 26.61 7.26 OD 8 29.22 8.73 0 1- 9 9 31.74 10.37 w w' 10 34.15 12.16 H U 11 36.44 14.09 u. 12 38.61 16.16 13 40.65 18.36 14 42.54 20.69 ...;Z u) 15 44.29 23.13 F- 16 45.89 25.67 z 17 46.95 27.62 circle Center At X = 4.1 ; Y = 50.1 and Radius, 48.4 * * * 1.960 *** Failure surface Specified By 13 Coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 26.00 13.50 2 28.96 14.00 3 31.89 14.65 4 34.78 15.45 5 37.63 16.40 6 40.42 17.49 7 43.15 18.72 8 45.82 20.10 9 48.41 21.61 Page 6 Profile.out 10 50.92 23.25 • 11 53.35 25.02 12 55.68 26.90 13 57.09 28.18 Circle center At x = 17.8 ; Y = 71.2 and Radius, 58.3 * * * 1.971 *** Failure Surface specified Sy 21 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 2 12.50 1.97 3 15.50 2.11 4 18.48 2.42 5 21.44 2.89 6 24.38 3.52 7 27.27 4.31 8 30.11 5.27 9 32.90 6.38 10 35.62 7.64 11 38.27 9.05 12 40.84 10.60 13 43.31 12.29 14 45.69 14.12 15 47.97 16.08 16 50.13 18.16 17 52.17 20.36 18 54.09 22.66 19 55.88 25.07 20 57.53 27.57 21 57.90 28.20 circle Center At x = 11.5 ; Y = 56.2 and Radius, 54.2 * * * 1.977 *** Y A X I S F T 0.00 8.75 17.50 26.25 35.00 43.75 X 0.00 + + + + + + 8.75 + _* - 7 Page 7 Profit e.out - 21 5 - ..7 -.021.5 A 17.50 + ...17.. -..28.5.... -. ..817. .. -..02..5.7.. - 1 . 1F-, -...02. 5 7...3 X 26.25 + 81 * cell -....02..5..73. 6 D ...2. 1. ..9. v O -. ... 0...5,.7..3.. cn o - ........2..1. .9. co w - ..... ..5.87.3H X 35.00 +... ....0.2..1...3.. co 5 1.. . - 0 2 56.743. * W 0 O - ..- .▪ .....0....56 743 .. g Q 2 1 8 Nm. 5 43.75 + ... .... .0.-2.9143.8 = a - .........0....5.67.3. 8 H w - .. ... . .. ..2. 1 *8 z = - �0 29713 ... H .....0....52.1.3* H O 9 4266 w j 52.50 + 0 71 ? o - . .. . ....0..9.5 U - ... .........0.9. 0 co - 9 al-- - = w. - U F 61.25 +o - wz U =. ~O I-- 70.00 -70.00 + * * * * z Safety Factors 1.5:1 (C -C) Pseudostatic d' CO CO 1` I� C1, 01. M M M M M O 0 ti N Tr; N in .co 6 N cn c0 1` o0 c� N O O M • N ORe- Cao O O Profile. out ** PCSTABL6 ** by_ Purdue university modified by Peter 3. Bosscher university of Wisconsin -Madison --slope Stability Analysis -- simplified 3anbu, SimplifiedBishop or Spencers Method of Slices PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 1.5:1 (C -C) Pseudostatic BOUNDARY COORDINATES 7 Top Boundaries 10 Total Boundaries Boundary No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 X�Lfet,t 7.00 9.50 23.00 26.00 38.00 46.00 50.00 38.00 26.00 23.00 Y(ftjft X-�fg)t Y -Right 2.00 9.50 2.00 2.00 23.00 11.50 11.50 26.00 13.50 13.50 38.00 22.00 22.00 46.00 27.50 27.50 50.00 28.00 28.00 70.00 28.50 22.00 70.00 22.00 13.50 70.00 13.50 11.50 70.00 11.50 ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of soil Soil Total saturated Type U(cMt. U(cf)pf)p 1 120.0 120.0 2 120.0 120.0 cohesion Friction Intercept Angle (psf) (deg) Soil Type Below Bnd 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 2 3 4 Pore Pressure Piez. Pressure constant surface Param. (psf) No. 0.0 30.0 0.00 150.0 34.0 0.00 Page 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 Profile .out 3 130.0 135.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0' 1 4 130.0 130.0 250.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 0 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) HAVE BEEN SPECIFIED unit weight of water = 62.40 Piezometric surface No. 1 Specified by 2 Coordinate Points Point X -Water Y -Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 26.00 13.50 2 70.00 13.50 A Horizontal Earthquake Loading coefficient of0.200 Has Been Assigned A Vertical Earthquake Loading coefficient Of0.000 Has Been Assigned Cavitation Pressure = 0.0 psf A Critical Failure surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular surfaces, Has Been Specified. 100 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 10 Surfaces Initiate From Each Of 10 points Equally Spaced Along The Ground surface Between x = 9.50 ft. and X = 26.00 ft. Each surface Terminates Between x = 46.00 ft. and x = 60.00 ft. Unless Further Limitations were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A surface Extends Is Y = 1.00 ft. 3.00 ft. Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure surfaces Examined. They Are ordered - Most Critical First. Page 2 .4 Profile.out * * Safety Factors Are calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Failure surface Specified By 13 Coordinate Points z Point x -surf v -Surf No. (ft) (ft) 4m-6 50 2 28.96 14.00 Oa 33 31.89 14.65 4 34.78 15.45 N o 5 37.63 16.40 w i 6 40.42 17.49 N 7 43.15 18.72 IL 8 45.82 20.10 WO 9 48.41 21.61 2? - 10 ?-10 50.92 23.25 ga' 5 11 53.35 25.02 u_< 12 55.68 26.90 CD 13 57.09 28.18 I W Circle Center At X = 17.8 ; Y = 71.2 and Radius, 58.3 ' z H F- O z I- *** 1.327 *** LI.1 LU . U 0 O - Failure surface specified By 13 coordinate Points o H W W. IU Point X -Surf Y -surf u. 0 No. (ft) (ft) w z. 1 24.17 12.28 U 2 27.11 12.87 0 I 3 30.01 13.64 4 32.86 14.58 Z 5 35.64 15.69 6 38.35 16.98 7 40.98 18.42 8 43.52 20.02 9 45.96 21.77 10 48.28 23.67 11 50.48 25.71 12 52.56 27.87 13 52.73 28.07 Circle Center At x = 15.9 ; Y = 60.9 and Radius, 49.3 *** 1.340 *** Failure Surface Specified By 18 coordinate Points Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) Page 3 Profile.out 1 9.50 2.00 2 12.42 2.68 3 15.32 3.48 4 18.17 4.39 5 20.99 5.41 6 23.77 6.55 7 26.50 7.79 8 29.18 9.15 9 31.80 10.61 10 34.36 12.17 11 36.85 13.83 12 39.28 15.60 13 41.64 17.46 14 43.91 19.41 15 46.11 21.45 16 48.23 23.57 17 50.26 25.78 18 52.18 28.05 circle Center At X = -6.0 ; Y = 75.4 and Radius, 75.1 1.342 *** Failure Surface specified By 19 Coordinate Points Point X -surf Y -Surf NO. (ft) (ft) 1 9.50 2.00 2 12.50 2.12 3 15.48 2.41 4 18.45 2.89 5 21.37 3.55 6 24.25 4.38 7 27.08 5.39 8 29.84 6.56 9 32.53 7.90 10 35.12 9.40 11 37.63 11.05 12 40.02 12.86 13 42.31 14.80 14 44.47 16.88 15 46.50 19.09 16 48.40 21.41 17 50.15 23.85 18 51.75 26.39 19 52.67 28.07 Circle center At X = 9.1 ; Y = 51.5 and Radius, 49.5 *** 1.357 *** Failure surface Specified By 20 coordinate Points Point x -surf Y -Surf Page 4 No. Profile.out (ft) ' (ft) 1 11.33 3.29 2 14.31 3.64 3 17.2 4 20.22 4.71 5 23.13 5.42 6 26.01 6.25 7 28.86 7.19 8 31.67 8.25 9 34.43 9.42 10 37.15 10. 7700 12 39.814 12 13.58 13 44.95 15.18 14 47.42 16.87 15 49.82 18.67 16 52.15 20.56 17 54.40 22.54 18 56.57 24.62 19 58.66 26.77 20 59.97 28.25 Circle Center At x = 4.0 ; Y = 77.5 and Radius, 74.5 * * * 1.359 *** Failure Surface specified By 18 Coordinate Points Point x-surfftY�f��f No. 1 13.17 4.58 2 16.15 4.87 3 19.12 5.34 4 22.05 5.97 5 24.94 6.77 6 27.78 7.74 7 30.56 8.86 8 33.27 10.14 9 35.91 11.58 10 38.45 13.17 11 40.91 14.89 12 43.26 16.76 13 45.49 18.76 14 47.61 20.88 15 49.61 23.12 16 51.47 25.47 17 53.20 27.93 18 53.30 28.08 circle Center At x = 9.5 ; Y = 56.8 and Radius, 52.3 * * * 1.365 *** Failure surface specified By 12 coordinate Points Page 5 • • • • • • 1Z w U 0. wI � LL w 0 u. D.0 w z� I-0 zI-. LU Lu • p. O -: o ff ww U U- la 111 U= o '' z Profile.out Point X -Surf Y -surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 24.17 12.28 2 27.11 12.87 3 30.00 13.68 4 32.82 14.69 5 35.56 15.91 6 38.21 17.32 7 40.75 18.92 8 43.16 20.70 9 45.44 22.65 10 47.57 24.76 11 49.54 27.02 12 50.28 28.01 Circle center At x = 17.5 ; Y = 53.0 and Radius, 41.3 * * * 1.365 *** Failure surface specified By 20 Coordinate Points PNo.t x(ft)f Y(ft�f 1 11.33 3.29 2 14.32 3.58 3 17.29 3.99 4 20.24 4.53 5 23.17 5.19 6 26.06 5.98 7 28.92 6.90 8 31.74 7.93 9 34.51 9.08 10 37.22 10.35 11 39.89 11.74 12 42.48 13.24 13 45.02 14.84 14 47.48 16.56 15 49.87 18.37 16 52.18 20.29 17 54.40 22.30 18 56.53 24.41 19 58.58 26.61 20 59.98 28.25 Circle Center At X = 6.1 ; Y = 73.4 and Radius, 70.3 * * * 1.366 *** Failure surface Specified By 14 Coordinate Points Point x -Surf Y -Surf Page 6 q .. 1.4 Ir • Profile.out No. (ft) (ft) 1 22.33 11.03 2 25.22 11.85 3 28.08 12.76 4 30.91 13.76 5 33.70 14.84 6 36.47 16.02 7 39.19 17.28 8 41.87 18.62 9 44.51 20.05 10 47.10 21.56 11 49.64 23.15 12 52.13 24.83 13 54.57 26.57 14 56.65 28.17 Circle Center At X = -2.2 ; Y = 103.2 and Radius, 95.3 * * * 1.369 *** Failure surface specified By 13 coordinate Points PNO. X(fftt)f Y(ft)f 1 26.00 13.50 2 29.00 13.51 3 31.99 13.78 4 34.94 14.29 5 37.85 15.05 6 40.68 16.05 7 43.41 17.28 8 46.03 18.74 9 48.52 20.41 10 50.87 22.28 11 53.04 24.35 12 55.04 26.59 13 56.22 28.16 Circle Center At X : 27.4 ; Y = 49.2 and Radius, 35.8 * * * 1.370 *** Y A X IS F T 0.00 8.75 17.50 26.25 35.00 43.75 X 0.00 + + + + + + Page 7 1: Profi1e.out _* 8.75 + • * - 5 - 43 6 - .5. -..43.6. A 17.50 + ...3... -..4..6.... .53.. .. -...4..6.... 9 - 53 * -....4. 6 ....2 X 26.25 + 5 3 * -.....4..6 ..... 2. ...45 3. .01. 6 2 - ........ 4..3...01. 6 2. • 35.00 +... .....84..3.0.1.. 56. 3.9. . 84.6.0.17. * . .....854.3 9... - 60 127 .. - 854..39.... S 43.75 + ... .... ......401327.. ..........5...6.1..7. . - ............04..2 ........ ..5...041.27 . .....5.. .64.3.7* �0 1 24.. 52.50 + ........ .5....9...2 - .. .. ...85..19.6 01. 5 1 . . 85. . ....5 61.25 + T 70.00 + * * * Page 8 W`a oLc9Ae •c o Is, --1 1vt ?at cry : t.:.tiS tOr2.-1-1/4- 65'Ti?-u.c ctt Z'.czQ •e -u ,_, t). \1 p- RECEIVED 'NOV .1 9 2004 COMMUNITY GEOTECHNICA'� t!P JRT PERMANENT FILE COPY NorMed-Shaw Building 4310 South 131st Place Tukwila, Washington RUE copy Permit Project No. T-5613 Terra Associates, Inc. REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE Lionorwcril SEP 19 2005 Nett City Of Tu ila BUILDING DIVISION Prepared for: NorMed-Shaw Partnership Seattle, Washington November 17, 2004 RECEIVED MAY 0 4 2005 TUKWILH PUBLIC WORKS ERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 ' Mr. Larry Shaw NorMed-Shaw Partnership P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, Washington 98124-3644 Subject: Geotechnical Report NorMed-Shaw Building 4310 South 131st Place Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Shaw: As requested, we completed a geotechnical report for the subject project. The purpose of our study was to explore the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions and develop geotechnical engineering recommendations for project design and construction. Our field exploration indicates the proposed building area is generally underlain by soft, loose to medium dense compressible alluvial soils. We observed groundwater levels between approximately 3 and 12 feet below the existing ground surface. The upper approximately 10 to 14 feet of native soils in the planned building area will consolidate under stress imposed by .proposed structures and the fills placed for site grading. To mitigate the potential for post - construction settlements due to consolidation, we recommend preloading the building location with a surcharge fill. Following completion of successful preloading, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on a minimum of two feet of structural fill. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. 4.4:it:4r7r:.wsi<tF 12525 Willows Road, Suite 101, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 k �' :M :A. +t,u+a�4v.+d.�+Msh' a:nN=wW 'N�7y.�.tA+��4Y:` 'J i4vY.•• ?At Mr. Larry Shaw November 17, 2004 We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely yours, TERRA ASSOCIATES, INC. e Princi DPL/TJS: cc: . d Kehle Architects Mr. Dan Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Project No. T-5613 Page No. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 Project Description 1 2.0 Scope of Work 1 3.0 Site Conditions 2 3.1 • Surface 2 3.2 Soils 3 3.3 Groundwater 3 3.4 Seismic 4 4.0 Discussion and Recommendations 4 4.1 General 5 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading 5 4.3 Building Preload •7 4.4 Excavations 7 4.5 Foundations 8 4.6 Retaining Walls 9 4.7 Slabs -on -Grade Floors 9 4.8 Stormwater Detention Vault 10 4.9 Subsurface Drainage 11 4.10 Utilities 11 4.11 Pavements 11 5.0 Additional Services 12 6.0 Limitations ' 12 Figures Vicinity Map Figure 1 Exploration Location Plan Figure 2 Typical Wall Drainage Detail Figure 3 Appendices Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing Appendix A Geotechnical Report NorMed-Shaw Building 4310 South 131st Place Tukwila, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a new 37,806 square -foot office/warehouse building with associated parking and utilities. The building will be located northeast of and adjacent a similar existing commercial building. Building plans are currently not available; however, we expect the proposed structure will be a typical light industrial office/warehouse building with concrete slab -on -grade floors, concrete tilt -up panel walls, and floor loads on the order of 200 to 400 pounds per square foot (psf). A site plan by David Kehle Architect, dated May 17, 2004, shows the proposed finished floor elevation of the building at Elev. 15.5. Approximately three to five feet of fill will be required to achieve this finish grade. Parking and driveway areas are located around the perimeter of the building at similar grades, except in the area of loading docks on the eastern side of the building. Planned parking lot elevations in this area are between Elev. 11.0 and Elev. 12.0, which are approximately one to two feet above existing site grades. The plans indicate significant grading will be required on the slope in the western portion of the site as part of on- site wetland enhancement activities. Proposed grades on the plans indicate cuts approaching 14 feet will be required to achieve a final slope inclination of 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) along the length of the slope. A retaining wall is shown supporting a vertical grade break of approximately six to eight feet at the top of the 2:1 slope. Site stormwater will be collected and routed to a detention vault adjacent the northern side of the proposed building. The site plan indicates the bottom elevation of the vault will be at Elev. 6.0, approximately four to six feet below existing surface grades. The northern side of the detention vault will function as a retaining wall for the parking lot fill on the northern side of the building. Stormwater discharged from the vault will be routed through a small sand filter vault off the eastern end of the detention vault. The recommendations contained in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the design features. If actual features vary or changes are made, we should review them in order to modify our recommendations, as required. We should review final design drawings and specifications to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK On October 18, 2004, we excavated 8 test pits to depths ranging from 11 to 16 feet below existing surface grades. Using the information obtained from the subsurface explorations, we developed geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction. November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 Specifically, this report addresses the following: • Soil and groundwater conditions • Seismic z _I-: 4-z • Site preparation and grading ct W • Building preload 6 0 00 yo • Excavations w w I J H- • Foundations co LL W0 • Retaining walls 2 • Slab -on -grade floors co H W • Stormwater detention vault Z = I- li • Subsurface drainage z O UJ W • Utilities D=p U • Pavements 0 52 H WW It should be noted that recommendations outlined in this report regarding drainage are associated with soil0 strength, design earth pressures, erosion, and stability. Design and performance issues with respect to moisture as "-- O z it relates to the structure environment (i.e., humidity, mildew, mold) is beyond Terra Associates purview. A v cn building envelope specialist or contactor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. 1- _ OH z 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The project site is an undeveloped property located between State Route 599 (SR 599) and 42nd Avenue South, and just north of South 131st Place in Tukwila, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. An existing office/warehouse building is located immediately southwest of the subject site. Site topography is relatively flat in the planned building area, and areas north of the building. The western portion of the site slopes up about 20 to 30 feet to the west to 42nd Avenue South at grades of about 15 to 40 percent. Localized slope areas with steeper or flatter grades exist. The slope appeared stable. We did not observe indications of instability, erosion, or significant seepage on the slope face. The eastern margin of the site is adjacent the toe of an approximately 20- to 30 -foot high embankment fill for SR 599. We observed an existing drainage culvert and ditch running along the toe of the slope in the western portion of the site, and across the relatively flat low-lying area north of the planned building area. The ditch discharges to a 66 - inch diameter culvert that extends beneath SR 599 in the northeastern portion of the site. Page No. 2 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 3.2 Soils Soils in the planned building area generally consist of 12 inches of sod and topsoil overlying alluvial silt, clay, silty sand, and sand. The silt and clay are typically soft and wet, with occasional discontinuous layers of fibrous peat. The maximum thickness of the peat layers we observed in the test pits was two feet in Test Pit TP -6. Test Pits TP -1 through TP -6 all terminated in medium dense sand to silty sand observed below depths of approximately 11.5 to 15.0 feet. Based on our experience in the area, and review of boring logs from previous site explorations in the planned building area, we expect these granular soils extend to depths of about 35 beneath the site. We observed approximately 2.5 to 3.0 feet of fill overlying the native soils in Test Pits TP -4 through TP -6, which were located in the southern portion of the planned building area. The fill generally consisted of loose, wet topsoil and organic clayey silt. However, the fill observed in Test Pit TP -5 consisted of firm, brown silty sand with gravel that appeared to be associated with filling for the existing parking lot to the southwest. The soils we observed in Test Pits TP -7 and TP -8, located on the slope in the western portion of the site, consist of approximately six feet of fill overlying native, medium dense to dense, moist to wet silty sand to sandy silt with varying amounts of gravel. The fill is generally loose to medium dense silty sand to sandy silt that contains a moderate amount of residential debris including carpeting, wood, tires, and broken concrete. We understand that several residences formerly occupied the upper to mid portions of the western slope. The Geologic Map of the Des Moines Quadrangle, Washington, by Howard H. Waldron (1962), shows the soils in the planned building area mapped as Quaternary alluvium consisting predominantly of fine-grained sand , silt, and clay. The soils on the slope in the western portion of the site are mapped as Kame-terrace deposits, which typically consist of silty sand and pebble -cobble gravel. The soils we observed in our site explorations are generally consistent with the mapped soil descriptions. The preceding discussion is intended to be a brief review of the soil conditions encountered on the site. Detailed descriptions are presented on the Test Pit Logs in Appendix A. 3.3 Groundwater In general, we observed light to moderate groundwater seepage between depths of about 3 and 12 feet below the ground surface in the test pits excavated in the planned building area. Groundwater seepage in Test Pits TP -7 and TP -8, located on the slope in the westem portion of the site, generally occurred between depths of about 6 and 10 feet. The seepage in these test pits was generally light to moderate, and typically occurred at the base of the uncontrolled fills that have been placed on the slope. Fluctuations in groundwater levels will occur seasonally and annually, with lowest levels and volumes occurring during late summer to early fall (July through September). Considering our test pits were excavated in mid- October, we expect the groundwater levels we observed in the test pits are slightly above their seasonal low levels. Page No. 3 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 3.4 Seismic Based on the soil conditions encountered and the local geology, per Section 1615 of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) for seismic conditions, site class "D" should be used in design of the structure. Z Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in =z. water pressure induced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained 6 v sands that are below the groundwater table. Soils of this nature derive their strength from intergranular friction. c..) 00 The generated water pressure or pore pressure essentially separates the soil grains and eliminates this w w intergranular friction; thus, eliminating the soil strength. Potential project impacts due to liquefaction would N include excessive settlement, foundation bearing failure, and surface rupturing due to lateral spreading. w 0 2 Our subsurface exploration indicates that the soils at the site are alluvial in origin, consisting of varying layers of5 u.a loose and wet silts, silty sands, sandy silts, and clay. Groundwater was generally encountered between depths of d 3 to 12 feet in our recent study. Our review of these conditions indicates that there is a potential for liquefaction H = I— to occur. In our opinion, the potential impact would be reflected at the ground surface in the form of subsidence. 0 Estimated settlement as a result of the liquefaction is approximately one to three inches. w F" • w O • N 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS w w u. 0 4.1 General.Z u The upper approximately 10 to 14 feet of soft, loose, fine-grained alluvial soils in the planned building area are 01— compressible and will consolidate under stress imposed by the proposed structure and the fills placed for site Z' grading. To mitigate the potential for post -construction settlements due to consolidation, we recommend preloading the building area. Preloading will involve placing the structural fill required to achieve the finish floor elevations, then applying an additional three-foot surcharge fill above finished floor elevation, and allowing settlements to occur under this load before building construction. Preloading/surcharge, applied as described, will mitigate the potential for post -construction settlement under the building loads and an expected maximum floor loading of 400 pounds per square foot (psf). If higher floor loading is expected and will be uniformly distributed over the area of the floor slab, additional surcharge will be required to mitigate post -construction settlements. After completing the preload, building construction can begin. The buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on a minimum of two feet of compacted structural fill. With building grades as planned, overexcavation of existing fill and native soils and replacement with structural fill will likely be required below some of the footing areas, including the loading docks on the eastern side of the building. Terra Associates, Inc. should observe footing subgrades to verify that the exposed soils are suitable for support. Page No. 4 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 Organic soils encountered at the site will not be suitable for reuse as structural fill or utility trench backfill. Other inorganic native soils encountered at the site generally contain a significant amount of fines and will be difficult to compact as structural fill when too wet. The ability to use native soil from site excavations as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. Based on the results of laboratory testing, the contractor should be prepared to dry native soils by aeration during the normally dry summer season to facilitate compaction as structural fill. Alternatively, stabilizing the native soil with lime, . cement kiln dust, or cement can be considered. If grading activities will take place during the winter season, the owner/contractor should also be prepared to import clean granular material for use as structural fill and backfill. Detailed recommendations regarding these issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading At the time of our study, surface conditions in the planned building area were wet and soft. A track -mounted excavator was necessary to move around the area of the site. The grading contractor should expect similar conditions, especially if grading is initiated in early spring, and should plan site grading activities accordingly. Existing topsoil fills observed in Test Pits TP -4 and TP -6 in the southeastern portion of the planned building area is not suitable as a fill subgrade or for re -use as structural fill, and should be removed from areas of new construction. The existing mineral soil fill observed in Test Pit TP -5, along the southwestem side of the planned building area, can remain in place. In our opinion, it will not be necessary to strip the organic surface layer where structural fill depths above existing grade are a minimum of three feet in the building area and two feet in paved areas. Surface vegetation in these areas should be mowed closed to the ground, with cutting debris removed from the site. Where structural fill thicknesses fall below these minimums, vegetation and organic topsoil should be stripped from areas that will receive fill. Topsoil will not be suitable for use as structural fill but can be used in landscaped areas. In general, the on-site soils, including the native soils on the western slope, contain a significant amount of fines and will be difficult to compact if the moisture conditions cannot be carefully controlled. Extreme care should be taken to ensure that exposed surfaces of the surficial soils do not become disturbed due to weather and construction traffic. Accordingly, the ability to use native soils from site excavations as structural fill will depend on their moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time site grading activities take place. Based on our observations, we expect that soils will be wet of optimum when excavated, and direct use as structural fill will likely require drying by aeration or treatment with an additive such as cement kiln dust (CKD) cement, or lime. If additives are used, additional Best Management Practices (BMPs) will need to be implemented to mitigate potential impacts to construction stormwater. Page No. 5 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 • If grading activities are planned during the wet winter months, or if they are initiated during the summer and extend into fall and winter, the contractor should be prepared to treat/amend soil as necessary to facilitate compaction, or import wet weather structural fill. We recommend importing wet weather structural fill that meets the grading requirements for gravel borrow outlined in Section 9-03.14(1) of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 2004 Standard Specifications for road, bridge, and municipal construction, modified to allow a maximum aggregate size of 6 inches and a maximum fines content (minus No. 200 sieve) of 5 percent based on the 3/4 -inch aggregate fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, Inc. should examine and test all materials planned to be imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In non-structural areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. Slope Grading As discussed, the existing slope in the western portion of the site will be graded to an inclination of 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical). Because significant cuts will be required to achieve this final inclination, it is planned to use soil excavated from the slope as fill for the new building and parking areas, and the preload surcharge. However, the upper approximately six feet of material observed in our test pits excavated on the western slope contains a moderate amount of residential debris, and will not be suitable for reuse as structural fill. It appears that cuts required to achieve the planned slope grades will result in removal of the vast majority of the fill on the slope. If fill is exposed at final surface grades on the slope face, it should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Structural fills placed on slope must be keyed and benched into competent native soils. Based on our observations, light to moderate groundwater seepage may be encountered from some of the native soils exposed in the excavated slope face. Interceptor drains may be required to facilitate excavation, and to reduce the potential of shallow sloughing and erosion of the slope face due to emergent seepage. The need for drains on the slope should be evaluated by field observations at the time of construction. Water collected by slope drains should be tightlined to the toe of the slope. Upon completion of grading, the slope face should be firmly compacted, trackwalked, and vegetated, or provided with other physical means to guard against erosion. Final grades at the top of the slope must promote surface drainage away from the slope crest. Nater must not be allowed_ to. flow uncontrolled over the slope face. If surface runoff must be directed towards the slope, the runoff should be controlled at the top of the slope, piped in a closed conduit installed on the slope face, and taken to an appropriate point of discharge beyond the toe. Analysis indicates adequate safety factors for stability will be achieved for finished slope grades completed to an inclination of 2:1. Our analysis is based on a finished slope consisting of competent materials such as the medium dense to dense native soils observed below the uncontrolled fill, or structural fill. Page No. 6 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 4.3 Building Preload We recommend preloading the building area to limit building and floor slab settlements to tolerable levels. For this procedure, we recommend placing structural fill in the building area to the design subgrade elevations and then surcharging the building area with surcharge fill totaling three feet in thickness. Building construction is then delayed until settlements under the preload fill have occurred. The preload fill should extend a minimum of five feet beyond the building perimeters and then slope down at an inclination of 1:1. The exception to this is on the northwestern side of the planned building where the proposed stormwater detention vault will be located. To reduce the potential for settlements between the building and the vault, the surcharge fill on this side of the building should extend at least five feet beyond the southeastern perimeter of the vault, approximately 17 feet from the northwestern perimeter of the building. We estimate total settlements under the building fill will be in the range of five to eight inches. These settlements are expected to occur in about four to six weeks following full application of the preload fill. To verify the amount of settlement and the time rate of movement, the preload program should be monitored by installing settlement markers. The settlement markers should be installed on the existing grade prior to placing any building or preload fills. Once installed, elevations of both the fill height and marker should be taken daily until the full height of the preload is in place. Once fully preloaded, readings should continue weekly until the anticipated settlements have occurred. It is critical that the grading contractor recognize the importance of the settlement marker installations. All efforts must be made to protect the markers from damage during fill placement. It is difficult, if not impossible, to evaluate the progress of the preload program if the markers are damaged or destroyed by construction equipment. As a result, it may be necessary to install new markers and extend the surcharging time period in order toensure that settlements have ceased and building construction can begin. We expect that the surcharge fill removed from the building area will be re -used as fill around the building. We recommend that this fill be placed first in parking lot areas to allow additional settlements to occur that will further reduce the potential for settlement beneath parking lot utilities. Following the successful completion of the preload program, with foundations designed as recommended in the following Foundation section (Section 4.5 of this report), maximum total and differential post -construction settlements following full -load application are estimated at one inch, and one-half inch, respectively. • 4.4 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as utility trenches, must be completed in accordance with local, state, or federal requirements. Based on current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, soils observed at the site are classified as Type C soils. Accordingly, for excavations less than 20 feet deep, the side slopes should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 1.5:1. If there is insufficient room to complete the excavations in this manner, or if excavations greater than 20 feet deep are planned, the use of temporary shoring to support the excavations will be required. During our site explorations, we observed caving of the test pit sidewalls in several of the test pits excavated in the planned building area. Page No. 7 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 Groundwater seepage should be expected in excavations made in the planned building area, particularly during the winter season. The volume of water and rate of flow into the excavation will be dependant on the excavation depth below the seepage elevation. Excavations that extend only one to two feet below the seepage level can likely be dewatered using conventional sump pumping procedures, along with a system of collection trenches, if necessary. Deeper excavations may require predraining the excavation site using well points or deeper pumped wells. The contractor must be prepared to dewater the excavations, as required, to maintain excavation stability and relatively dry working conditions. Groundwater levels in our site explorations excavated in the planned building area generally occurred below a depth of about three feet, or about Elev. 9.0 in Test Pit TP -1, located near the western end of the proposed detention vault. Therefore, excavations to the planned bottom of vault elevations of approximately Elev. 6.0 will extend at least three feet below the known water table. This information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Terra Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job site safety. It is understood that job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. 4.5 Foundations Following the successful completion of the preload program, the building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on a minimum of 2.0 feet of structural fill. As discussed, three to five feet of fill will be required to achieve design floor elevations. Portions of the perimeter building foundation, including foundations in the area of the loading docks on the northeastem side of the building, will likely require overexcavation into the native soils to allow for placement of the two feet of structural fill. The structural fill should extend laterally from the edges of the footing at least a distance equal to its thickness beneath the footing. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should be at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below final exterior grades. We recommend designing foundations for a net allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used. With the anticipated loads and bearing stresses, the estimated total settlements are as discussed in Section 4.3 of this report. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth pressures acting on the side of the footings and buried portions of the foundation stem walls can also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). We recommend not including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundations will be backfilled with structural fill as described in Section 4.2 of this report. The values recommended include a safety factor of 1.5. Page No. 8 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 4.6 Retaining Walls The plans show a retaining wall with a maximum height of about six to eight feet supporting the upper portion of the cut. The face of the retaining wall is approximately eight to ten feet from the western margin of the property. The excavation for construction of the retaining wall must be sloped back to the inclination recommended in Section 4.4 of this report. If a temporary construction slope cannot be laid back to the recommended inclination due to site constraints, and a temporary construction easement cannot be obtained, a soldier pile wall should be considered. We can provide design parameters for soldier pile wall construction at this location; however, additional subsurface investigations will be required. The magnitude of earth pressure development on the retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill. Below improved areas, such as pavements or floor slabs, the backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of its maximum dry unit weight, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). In unimproved areas, the relative compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. To guard against hydrostatic pressure development, wall drainage must also be installed. A typical wall drainage detail is shown on Figure 3. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing unrestrained walls for an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pcf. For restrained walls, an additional uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf should be included. To account for normal traffic loading, the walls should be designed for an additional height of two feet. These values assume a horizontal backfill condition and that no other surcharge loading, such as sloping embankments or adjacent buildings, will act on the wall. If such conditions exist, then the imposed loading must be included in the wall design. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 4.5 of this report. 4.7 Slab -on -Grade Floors Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on the subgrade prepared as recommended in Section 4.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four -inch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. The capillary break layer will not prevent moisture intrusion through the slab caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction and aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It should be noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the membrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it will be ineffective in assisting in uniform curing of the slab and can actually serve as a water supply for moisture bleeding through the slab and affecting floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construction occurs during the wet winter months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. Page No. 9 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 Other methods are available for preventing or reducing water vapor transmission through the slab. We recommend consulting with building envelope specialist or contractor for additional assistance regarding this issue. 4,8 Stormwater Detention Vault In general, soil conditions we observed consist of 12 inches of sod and topsoil overlying soft, wet clayey silt to clay with occasional layers of fibrous peat. The soft, fine-grained soils will not be suitable for providing direct support for the vault foundation. Therefore, we recommend overexcavating beneath the bottom of vault and vault foundations to allow placement of a minimum of two feet of granular structural fill or crushed quarry rock. Vault foundations supported by the improved subgrade can be dimensioned for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 psf. The magnitude of earth pressures developing on vault walls will partly depend on the wall backfill. Backfill should be placed in loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). Existing organic soils and fill with organic debris will not be suitable for reuse as structural fill. Native soils or existing fill that are free of organic material and debris can be used for wall backfill provided its moisture content will facilitate proper compaction. The contractor should be prepared to dry or amend the native soils to reduce their moisture content in order to use the excavated soil for backfill. To guard against hydrostatic pressure development, drainage must be installed behind the wall. A typical wall drainage detail is shown on attached Figure 3. If it is not possible to discharge collected water at the footing elevation, we recommend setting the invert elevation of the wall drainpipe equivalent to the outfall invert and connecting the drain to the outfall pipe for discharge. With proper wall backfill and drainage, we recommend designing the vault walls for an earth pressure imposed by an equivalent fluid weighing 50 pcf. For any portion of the wall that falls below the invert elevation of the wall drain, an earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 85 pcf should be used. These values assume a horizontal backfill condition. To simulate traffic surcharge impacts, walls should be designed for an additional imaginary height of two feet. As discussed, the northwestern side of the vault will function as a retaining wall where exposed above the existing ground surface, approximately Elev. 10 top Elev. 12. The top of the wall on the northwestern side of the vault is shown at Elev. 15.0. The portion of the vault wall between the adjacent ground surface and the maximum water elevation in the vault (Elev. 11.5) is a hydraulic structure that retains stored water; therefore, the loads imposed on the wall by the stored water would govern the wall design. Because the proposed vault will extend below the known water table, the structure will be subject to uplift pressures if drainage is not provided. The weight of the structure and the weight of the backfill soil above its foundation will provide resistance to uplift. For backfill consisting of on-site soils, a soil unit weight of 110 pcf can be used, provided the backfill is placed and compacted as structural fill. If vault backfill consists of imported material conforming to the gradation recommended in Section 4.2 of this report, a unit weight of 125 pcf should be used. Page No. 10 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 4.9 Subsurface Drainage Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the site at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building areas. We recommend providing a gradient of at least three percent for a minimum distance of ten feet from the building perimeters. If this gradient cannot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the structures and discharged to the storm sewer or an approved point of controlled discharge. Subsurface We recommend installing perimeter foundation drains. Roof and foundation drains should be tightlined separately to the storm drains. Subsurface drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to an approved point of controlled discharge. All drains should be provided with cleanouts at easily accessible locations. 4.10 Utilities Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA), • or Section 7-08.3(3) of the WSDOT 2004 Standard Specifications. As a minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill, as described in Section 4.2 of this report. As noted, it is likely that most native soils excavated in the planned building area will be wet of optimum when excavated and will not be suitable for reuse as backfill without drying or treatment with an additive. If utility construction takes place during the wet winter months, it may be necessary to import suitable wet weather fill for utility trench backfilling. Buoyancy, or an unbalanced hydrostatic head, will impact the trench bottom stability. Where an unbalanced hydrostatic head exists in the trench excavation, the trench bottom can heave and, subsequently, become unstable causing installed utility pipes to settle when overburdened stresses from utility trench backfill are replaced. Two methods for stabilizing the trench bottoms can be considered. The first involves using well point dewatering systems to lower the groundwater table adjacent to utility excavation and prevent development of an unbalanced hydrostatic head. Single -stage, well point dewatering systems are typically effective for utility excavations occurring to depths of 15 to 20 feet. The second method that can be used to mitigate heave or unstable soil conditions at the trench bottom involves overexcavation of the affected soils and replacement with free -draining crushed rock. As a general rule, the depth of overexcavation below the pipe invert and replacement with free - draining crushed rock would be equivalent to one foot for every two feet of unbalanced hydrostatic head. 4.11 Pavements Pavements should be constructed on a subgrade consisting of at least two feet of structural fill prepared as described in Section 4.2 of this report. Regardless of the degree of relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. Proofrolling the subgrade with heavy construction equipment should be completed to verify this condition. Page No. 11 November 17, 2004 Project No. T-5613 The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subjected. We expect moderate to heavy traffic loading. With a stable subgrade prepared as recommended, we recommend the following pavement sections: z • Three inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over six inches of crushed rock base (CRB) 1 z � w • Three inches of AC over four inches of asphalt -treated base (ATB) aa 2 JU The paving materials used should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) N 0 specifications for Class B asphalt concrete and CRB surfacing. H Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly -drained pavement section will be w 0 subject to premature failure as a result of surface water infiltrating into the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. To improve performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two u_ � percent. Some longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. _ 0 Ill Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks when they occur. z I— 0 ZI-- LL' uj 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES v 0 OEl 0 ;- Terra Associates, Inc. should review the final design drawings and specifications in order to verify that earthwork w w and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in project design. We should r▪ z also provide geotechnical services during construction to observe compliance with our design concepts, LL' 0 Z specifications, and recommendations. This will allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from v co those anticipated prior to the start of construction. ~O H z 6.0 LI1bIITATIONS We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc., and is intended for specific application to the NorMed-Shaw Building project. This report is for the exclusive use of the NorMed-Shaw Partnership, and their authorized representatives. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from the test pits excavated, and the previous borings advanced on the site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to re-evaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with construction. Page No. 12 • \S a ~ 117TH ST • DWAM!SH PARK m Sr 2 fy -7<- S `S u' WALLACE s S 119Th in c ST JUNIPER 4TH ST 126T; ST VI s 126TH 1) 130TH PL ro S v 131ST 133RD • N S 136TH S 137TH „"""R VER--, FOSTER \\\••., GOLF LINKS 0 N IST TH PL i ST rn ST --139TH 141ST S 142ND oo S Q? 14210 Ft c 4000 '^ 10FS -.4 N 4600 -JS c" , 145TH NOT TO SCALE REFERENCE: THOMAS GUIDE, CD-ROM, KING, PIERCE AND SNOHOMISH COUNTIES, 2003 EDITION Terra Associates, Inc. • Y Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences VICINITY MAP NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2004 Figure 1 File: D04-0415 35mm Drawing #6 z 6�. _i O 0O U) 0 U) ILI J1=- w O L a' co �w z1 o. zI w U O N O I - w • W' �' O Ili Z co; O z 12" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS WASHED GRAVEL SLOPE TO DRAIN •rami :r'•. e. 4,7 • • 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE NOTE: 12" OVER PIPE L 3" BELOW PIPE NOT TO SCALE EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) MIRADRAIN G100N PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE PANELS OR SIMILAR PRODUCT CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE 12 -INCH WIDE GRAVEL DRAIN BEHIND WALL. DRAINAGE PANELS SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES INTO 12 -INCH THICK DRAINAGE GRAVEL LAYER OVER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. Terra • -:•• •• Associates, Inc. •* • •r— Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2004 Figure 3 l • 4 .1 4} APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING NorMed-Shaw Building Tukwila, Washington On October 18, 2004, we performed our field explorations using a track -mounted excavator. We explored subsurface soil conditions at the site by excavating 8 test pits to a maximum depth of 16 feet below existing surface grades. The test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. The test pit locations were approximately determined by measurements from existing site features. The test pit logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-5. An engineering geologist from our office conducted the field exploration, classified the soil conditions encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative soil samples, and observed pertinent site features. All soil samples were .visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) described on Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the test pit logs. Project No. T-5613 , MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION COARSE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% material larger than No. 200 sieve size GRAVELS Clean Gravels GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. More than (less than 5% fines) GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. 50% of coarse fraction is larger than No. Gravels GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 4 sieve with fines GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. SANDS Clean Sands SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. More than (less than 5% fines) SP Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no . fines. 50% of coarse fraction is smaller than Sands SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. No. 4 sieve with fines SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. FINE GRAINED SOILS More than 50% material smaller than No. 200 sieve size • SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. Liquid limit is Tess than 50% CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, (lean clay). OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, elastic. Liquid limit is than 50% CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. greater OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS cn cn w Standard Penetration Density Resistance in Blows/Foot2 OUDIAMETER SPLIT 1 SPOON SAMPLETSIDER 0 ii) w = 0 Very loose 0-4 Loose 4-10 Medium dense 10-30 Dense 30-50 Very dense '50 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER 1 WATER LEVEL (DATE) Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Standard Penetration Consistency Resistance in Blows/Foot Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf DD DRY DENSITY, cubic foot w > w m o Very soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 Medium stiff 4-8 Velry Ststiff 8-1ff 32 6 Hard >32 pounds per LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent PI PLASTIC INDEX N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM IllimTerra NORMED-SHAW BUILDING �.•�� Associates, Inc TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2004 Figure A-1 Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -1 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 12 Moisture Content (%) (12 inches TOPSOILJSOD) Dark gray sandy clayey SILT, some roots, soft, wet. (ML) Grayish -brown clayey SILT to CLAY interbedded with peat layers, small log at 5 feet, soft, wet. (PT/CL) Black silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (SM) 39.7 59.7 177.7 206.3 57.5 62.2 27.1 27.4 Test pit terminated at 13.5 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage at 3 to 10 feet. Some caving below 9 feet. Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0- 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -2 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 10 Moisture Content (%) (12 inches TOPSOILJSOD) 35.7 40.4 120.4 78.9 49.8 25.8 25.2 Y Grayish -brown sandy clayey SILT, medium stiff to stiff, some roots and iron stains. (ML) Pp- 3.5 to 4.0 at 3 feet. Interbedded grayish -brown to brown clayey SILT and PEAT, soft, wet. (CL/PT) Pp- 0 to 1 at 4 to 6 feet. Grayish -brown CLAY with peat stringers, soft, wet. Pp -1 to 2 at 7 to 10 feet. - Black silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (SM) Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at 3 to 12 feet. Some caving at 11 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 1Date NOV 20041 Figure A-2 Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP -3 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 10 Moisture Content (%) (12 inches TOPSOIUSOD) Dark grayish -brown sandy SILT, trace roots, medium stiff to stiff, wet. (ML) Pp- 2 to 3 at 3 to 4 feet. Brown PEAT, soft, wet. (PT) Grayish -brown CLAY with some peat soft, wet. (COPT) Gray sandy SILT, trace peat, medium stiff, wet. (ML) Pp- 0.5 to 1.5 at 10.0 feet. Black silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (SM) 50.2 87.3 41.2 41.4 29.5 29.0 Test pit terminated at 14 feet. Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at 3.5 and 12 feet. Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP -4 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 12 Moisture Content (% - - FILL: old organic topsoil, some debris, loose, wet. 50.5 50.8 Gra ish-brown sandy clay SILT, iron stained, medium stiff to stiff, wet. - (ML)Pp-2.5to3to4feet.ye 49.8 - - Gray sandy SILT, trace peat stringers, medium stiff, wet. (ML) Pp- 1 to 2 at 6 feet. Pp- 0.5 at 8.5 feet. 41.3 _ 37.0 • - Gray sandy clayey SILT to silty CLAY, soft, wet. (CL) - Pp - Oto 0.5 at 11 feet. - Black silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (SM) 27.2 - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. - Moderate groundwater seepage at 4 feet. - Some caving below 5 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 1 Date NOV 20041 Figure A-3 u Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP -5 Soil Description Approximate EIev.12 Moisture Content (%) - _ _ FILL: import, brown silty sand with gravel, fine grained, medium dense, moist. 112.1 47.7 138 2 131.2 74.5 29.0 Dark gray sandy silty CLAY, iron stained, stiff, wet, trace rootlets. Pp- 1 to 2.5 at 4 feet. -1 - Dark brown to gray sandy clayey SILT with peat, soft, wet. (MDPT) Pp -1 to 1.5 at 7 feet. Brown PEAT with gray clay lenses, soft, wet. (PT/CL) — ' Gray sandy clayey SILT to silty CLAY, soft, wet, trace peat. (ML/CL) Pp- 0.5 to 1.5 at 11 feet. • Black sand, to silty SAND, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (SM) - - - Test pit terminated at 15 feet. Light groundwater seepage observed at 3.5 feet. Some caving below 12 feet. Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 20 Test Pit No. TP -6 Soil Description Approximate EIev. 12 Moisture Content (%) FILL: topsoil fill mixed with dark brown sandy organic clayey silt, loose, wet. Brown clayey SILT, iron stained, stiff, wet. (ML) Pp- 2.5 to 4 at 4 feet. Brown PEAT with thin clay lenses, soft, wet. (PT/CL) Gray CLAY with trace peat, soft, wet. (CL) Pp- 0 to 1 at 8 feet. Gray sandy SILT, medium stiff, trace peat, wet. (ML) Pp 0.5 to 1.5 at 10 feet. Interbedded black silty SAND to gray clayey SILT, soft, wet. 51.5 150.0 62.6 46.3 33.7 Test pit terminated at 16 feet. Moderate to heavy groundwater seepage at 4 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2004 Figure A-4 Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -7 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 24 Moisture Content (%) FILL: dark gray silty SAND with gravel, quarry rock, concrete, and car tires, loose, wet. FILL: tan -brown sandy SILT with gravel, with quarry rock and concrete, loose to medium dense, wet. FILL: grayish -black sandy clayey silt, clay tile, soft, wet. Bluish -gray sandy SILT to silty SAND with some gravel, iron stained, fine grained, medium dense, wet. (MUSM) Greenish -blue sandy clayey SILT, medium stiff, wet. (ML) Gray silty SAND with gravel, fine grained, dense, moist. (SM) 18.1 76.9 19.4 11.4 19.3 13.3 Test pit terminated at 12 feet. Light groundwater seepage observed at 6 to 10 feet. Logged by: DPL Date: 10/18/04 Depth (ft.) 0 5 10 15 Test Pit No. TP -8 Soil Description Approximate Elev. 22 Moisture Content (%) FILL: dark brown to gray silty SAND to sandy SILT with gravel and debris. Pieces of concrete, wood, carpet, car parts, tires, and cobbles to small boulders, wet, loose. Tan -brown to grayish -brown silty SAND with some gravel, some iron staining, fine grained, medium dense, moist. (SM) Grayish -brown sitly SAND with gravel, fine grained, dense, moist to wet. (SM) 17.9 21.4 13.3 12.6 8.9 Test pit terminated at 11 feet. Light groundwater seepage observed at 6 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage at 9.5 feet. Terra Associates, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences TEST PIT LOGS NORMED-SHAW BUILDING TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Proj. No. T-5613 Date NOV 2004 Figure A-5 PERMANENT FILE COPY OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL • It 7n r COPY, Proposed Normed Warehouse _•.. ,, r NEC — Macadam Road and South 131st Place Tukwila, Washington REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE Snoonumo SEP 19 2005 t'4# City Of Tukwila BUILDING DIVISION OFT!!:,..,• S1=ij PERMIT YIFl-E LTR# Prepared for: Normed Development P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, WA 98124-3644 September 9, 2005 Our Job No. 6719 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com 9OL444($ 1.0 INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION Z Z 2 6U 00 U W= J N u. w 0: g u. = a. Z �. o z 11.1 j2 o. o- CIma. wuw U 6 .. z, W U= OH Z (3°4) 1.0 INTRODUCTION/GENERAL INFORMATION The following pages of this report delineate the maintenance requirements for the surface water collection, conveyance, detention, and treatment facilities proposed for the development known as Normed Warehouse, in particular for the wet vault, which is the large vault located on the western portion of the project site. The maintenance considerations for that vault include: 1. Accumulated sediment and stagnant conditions may cause noxious gases to form and accumulate in the vault. Vault maintenance procedures must meet OSHA confined space entry requirements, which include dearly marking entrances to confined space areas. This may be accomplished by hanging a removable sign in the access risers, just under the access lid. 2. Facilities should be inspected annually. Floating debris and accumulated petroleum products should be removed as needed, but at least annually. The floating oil should be removed from wet vaults used as oil/water separators when oil accumulation exceeds one inch. 3. Sediment should be removed when the 1 -foot (average) sediment zone is full, thus 6 inches. Sediment should be tested for toxicants in compliance with current disposal requirements if land uses in the catchment include commercial or industrial zones, or if visual or olfactory indications of pollution are noticed. 4. Water drained or pumped from the vault prior to removing accumulated sediments may be discharged to storm drains if it is not excessively turbid (i.e., if water appears translucent when held to light) and if all floatable debris and visible petroleum sheens are removed. Excessively turbid water (i.e., water appears opaque when held to light) should be discharged only after the settleable solids have been removed. 5. Maintenance Requirements for the Stormwater Filter. Maintenance needs vary from site to site based upon the type of land use activity, implementation of source controls, and weather conditions. Stormwater filters (otherwise known as media filters) shall be inspected quarterly or at a frequency recommended by the supplier. Inspection and maintenance shall include the following: a. The operation and maintenance instructions from the manufacturer shall be kept along with an inspection and maintenance log. The maintenance log shall be available for review by city inspectors. b. Routine maintenance shall include inspecting for debris, vegetation and sediment accumulation, flushing the under drain, and removing or replacing media. c. Sediment shall be removed when the accumulation causes the infiltration capacity to drop below the design flow rate of 15 gallons per minute (gpm) per filter cartridge. d. The filter media should be replaced at least once a year or when infiltration capacity is unrecoverable. Sediment removal and/or media replacement may require a vactor truck, but more typically is removed in the dry with a square -point shovel. e. Media shall be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations, including the Seattle -King County Department of Public Health solid waste regulations (Title 10) and State dangerous waste regulations (WAC 173-303). 6719.015.doc [JPJ/dmj c. In Appendix A of this report are all of the maintenance requirements for all of the stormwater collection, conveyance, and treatment facilities as delineated in the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Appendix B is the Operations and Maintenance Manual for the stormwater filter. Please refer to these documents for how to maintain the high level of performance required to detain, convey, collect, and treat runoff from this project site. z. QQ: 2 JU 0 O NO co al J1 WO u_ =W 1— _ • 1— O Z 1- 6719.015.doc [JPJ/dm] Z APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AS DELINEATED IN THE 1998 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 4 - CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Cleanout Gate Orifice Plate Overflow Pipe Manhole Catch Basin Trash and Debris (Includes Sediment) Structural Damage Damaged or Missing Damaged or Missing Obstructions Obstructions • Distance between debris build-up and bottom of orifice plate is less than 1-1/2 feet. Structure is not securely attached to manhole wall and outlet pipe structure should support at least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure. Structure is not in upright position (allow up to 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight and show signs of rust. Any holes—other than designed holes—in the structure. Cleanout gate is not watertight or is missing. Gate cannot be moved up and down by one maintenance person. Chain leading to gate is missing or damaged. Gate is rusted over 50% of its surface area. Control device is not working properly due to missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation blocking the plate. Any trash or debris blocking (or having the potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. See "Closed Detention Systems" Standards No. 3 See "Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 All trash and debris removed. Structure securely attached to wall and outlet pipe. Structure in correct position. Connections to outlet pipe are water tight; structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Structure has no holes other than designed holes. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate moves up and down easily and is watertight. Chain is in place and works as designed. Gate is repaired or replaced to meet design standards.. Plate is in place and works as designed. Plate is free of all obstructions and works as designed. Pipe is free of all obstructions and works as designed. See "Closed Detention Systems' Standards No. 3 See 'Catch Basins" Standards No. 5 9/1/98 A-4 1998 Surface Water Design Manual APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed General Trash & Debris (Includes Sediment) Trash or debris of more than 1/2 cubic foot which is located immediately in front of the catch basin opening or is blocking capacity of the basin by more than 10% Trash or debris (in the basin) that exceeds 1/3 the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Trash or debris in any inlet or outlet pipe blocking more than 1/3 of its height. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate odors that could cause complaints or dangerous gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in volume Structure Damage to Comer of frame extends more than 3/4 inch past Frame and/or Top Slab curb face into the street (If applicable). Cracks in Basin Walls/ Bottom Sediment/ Misalignment Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or cracks wider than 1/4 inch (intent is to make sure all material is running into basin). Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., separation of more than 3/4 inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 3 feet, any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks, or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than 1/2 inch and longer than 1 foot at the joint of any inlet/ outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering catch basin through cracks. Basin has settled more than 1 inch or has rotated more than 2 inches out of alignment. No Trash or debris located immediately in front of catch basin opening. No trash or debris in the catch basin. Inlet and outlet pipes free of trash or debris. No dead animals or vegetation present within the catch basin. No condition present which would attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Frame is even with curb. Top slab is free of holes and - cracks. Frame is sitting flush on top slab. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. No cracks more than. 1/4 inch wide at the joint of inlet/outlet pipe. Basin replaced or repaired to design standards. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A-5 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 5 - CATCH BASINS (CONTINUED) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is performed Fire Hazard Vegetation Pollution Catch Basin Cover Cover Not in Place' Locking Mechanism Not Working Cover Difficult to Remove Ladder Metal Grates (If Applicable) Ladder Rungs Unsafe Presence of chemicals such as natural gas, oil and gasoline. Vegetation growing across and blocking more than 10% of the basin opening. Vegetation growing in inlet/outlet pipe joints that is more than six inches tall and Tess than six inches apart. Nonflammable chemicals of more than 1/2 cubic foot per three feet of basin length. Cover is missing or only partially in place. Any open catch basin requires maintenance. Mechanism cannot be opened by on maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts into frame have less than 1/2 inch of thread. One maintenance person cannot remove lid after applying 80 lbs. of lift; intent is keep cover from sealing off access to maintenance. Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs, misalignment, rust, cracks, or sharp edges. Grate with opening wider than 7/8 inch. Trash and Debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% of grate surface. Damaged or Missing. Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. NO. 6 DEBRIS BARRIERS (E.G., TRASH RACKS) No flammable chemicals present. No vegetation blocking opening to basin. No vegetation or root growth present. No pollution present other than surface film. Catch basin cover is closed Mechanism opens with proper tools. Cover can be removed by one maintenance person. Ladder meets design standards and allows maintenance person safe access. Grate opening meets design standards. Grate free of trash and debris. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Maintenance Components Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When, Maintenance is Performed. General Metal Trash and Debris Trash or debris that is plugging more than 20% of the openings in the barrier. Damaged/ Missing Bars are bent out of shape more than 3 inches. Bars. Bars are missing or entire barrier missing. Bars are loose and rust is causing 50% deterioration to any part of barrier. Barrier clear to receive capacity flow. Bars in place with no bends more than 3/4 inch. Bars in place according to design. Repair or replace barrier to design standards. 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual A-6 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 10 - CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS (PIPES & DITCHES) Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Pipes Open Ditches Catch Basins Debris Barriers (e.g., Trash Rack) Sediment & Debris Vegetation Damaged Trash & Debris Sediment Vegetation Erosion Damage to Slopes Rock Lining Out of Place or Missing (If Applicable). Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through pipes. Protective coating is damaged; rust is causing more than 50% deterioration to any part of pipe. Any dent that decreases the cross section area of pipe by more than 20%. Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic foot per 1,000 square feet of ditch and slopes. Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20 % of the design depth. Vegetation that reduces free movement of water through ditches. See "Ponds' Standard No. 1 Maintenance person can see native soil beneath the rock lining. See "Catch Basins: Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers' Standard No.6 NO. 11- GROUNDS (LANDSCAPING) Pipe cleaned of all sediment and debris. All vegetation removed so water flows freely through pipes. Pipe repaired or replaced. Pipe repaired or replaced. Trash and debris cleared from ditches. Ditch cleaned/ flushed of all sediment and debris so that it matches design. Water flows freely through ditches. See "Ponds" Standard No. 1 Replace rocks to design standards. See "Catch Basins` Standard No. 5 See "Debris Barriers" Standard No. 6 Maintenance Component Defect Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed General Weeds (Nonpoisonous) Safety Hazard Trash or Litter Trees and Shrubs Damaged Weeds growing in more than 20% of the landscaped area (trees and shrubs only). Any presence of poison ivy or other poisonous vegetation. Paper, cans, bottles, totaling more than 1 cubic foot within a landscaped area (trees and shrubs only) of 1,000 square feet. Limbs or parts of trees or shrubs that are split or broken which affect more than 25% of the total foliage of the tree or shrub. Trees or shrubs that have been blown down or knocked over. Trees or shrubs which are not adequately supported or are leaning over, causing exposure of the roots. Weeds present in Tess than 5% of the landscaped area. No poisonous vegetation present in landscaped area. Area clear of litter. Trees and shrubs with less than 5% of total foliage with split or broken limbs. Tree or shrub in place free of injury. Tree or shrub in place and adequately supported; remove any dead or diseased trees. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A-9 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 13 - WATER QUALITY FACILITIES (CONTINUED) D.) Wetvaults Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Wetvautt Trash/ Debris Accumulation Sediment Accumulation in Vault Damaged Pipes Access Cover Damaged/ Not Working Vault Structure Damaged Baffles Access Ladder Damage Trash and debris accumulated in vault, pipe or inlet/ outlet, (includes floatabies and non- floatables). Sediment accumulation in vault bottom that exceeds the depth of the sediment zone plus 6 - inches. Inlet/ outlet piping damaged or broken and in need of repair. Cover cannot be opened or removed, especially by one person. Vault: Cracks wider than 1/2 -inch and any evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks, or maintenance/ inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Bathes corroding, cracking, warping and/ or showing signs of failure as determined by maintenance/ inspection staff. Ladder is corroded or deteriorated, not functioning properly, missing rungs, has cracks and/ or misaligned. Trash and debris removed from vault. Removal of sediment from vault. Pipe repaired and/ or replaced. Pipe repaired or replaced to proper working specifications. No cracks wider than 1/4 -inch at the joint of the inlet/ outlet pipe. Vault is determined to be structurally sound. Repair or replace bathes to specifications. Ladder replaced or repaired to specifications, and is safe to use as determined by inspection personnel. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A-13 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 13 - WATER QUALITY FACILITIES (CONTINUED) F.) Leaf Compost Filters Maintenance Defect Component Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Above Ground Open Swale Below Ground Vault Sediment accumulation on Geo - Textile/ media Trash and debris accumulations Sediment/ debris in drain/ yard drains/ clean -outs. Vegetation Leaf Compost Media Short -Circuiting Erosion Damage to Slopes Damaged Geo -Textile Fabric. Rock Pad Missing or out of place Damaged Pipes V -Notch Weir Assemblies Sediment Accumulation on Geo - Textile/ Media. Sediment Accumulation in Vault Trash/ Debris Accuumulation Sediment in Drain Pipes/ Yard Drains/ Clean -Outs Sediment depth exceeds 0.25 -inches. Trash and debris accumulated on compost filter bed. When the yard drain CB's and clean -outs become full of sediment and/ or debris. Vegetation impending flow through section, or encroaching into compost media. Drawdown of water through the leaf compost, takes longer than 12 -hours, and/ or flow through the overflow pipes occurs frequently. When Channeled flow occurs over the leaf media; and where flow perks through the media at the baffles. Eroded damage over 2 -inches deep where cause of damage is prevalent or potential for continued erosion is prevalent. When fabric is tom, deteriorated, raveled, etc. Soil beneath the pad is visible. Any part of the pipe system that is crushed, damage due to corrosion, and/ or settlement. Flow is not being uniformly spread over filter media. Sediment depth exceeds 0.25 -inches. Sediment depth exceeds 6 -inches in first chamber. Trash and debris accumulated on compost filter bed. When drain pipes, clean -outs, yard drains become full with sediment and/ or debris. No sediment deposits on fabric layer which would impede permeability of the fabric. Trash and debris removed from compost filter bed. Remove the accumulated material from the facility. Vegetation is mowed or eradicated such that flow is no longer impeded. Replace media with new to design specifications, in addition to replacing fabric. Flow is uniform over the entire width of the media section, and concentrated percolation does not occur at the baffle walls. Media needs to be graded and re -set at the baffles to form a seal. Weir plate may need to be adjusted in addition. Slopes should be stabilized by using proper erosion control measures. Fabric replaced as necessary. Replace or rebuild the rock pad to design standards. Pipe repaired or replaced. Clean, repair or replace the weir systems. No sediment deposits on fabric layer which would impede permeability of the fabric and compost media. No sediment deposits in vault bottom of first chamber. Trash and debris removed from the compost filter bed. Remove the accumulated material from the facilities. 9/1/98 1998 Surface Water Design Manual A-16 APPENDIX A MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATELY MAINTAINED DRAINAGE FACILITIES NO. 13 - WATER QUALITY FACILITIES (CONTINUED) F. Leaf Compost Filter (Continued) Maintenance Component Defect Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Below Ground Leaf Compost Media Short Circuiting Plugged/ Damaged Elbows Damaged Geo -Textile Fabric Rock Pad Missing or Out of Place Damaged Pipes Access Cover Damaged/ Not Working V -Notch Weir Assemblies Vault Structure Includes Cracks in Wall, Bottom, Damage to Frame and/ or Top Slab Baffles Access Ladder Damaged Drawdown of water through the leaf compost, takes longer than 12 -hours, and/ or overflow occurs frequently. When seepage occurs along the vault wall and comers occur. Flow tends to backup unusually high in the first chamber of the vault. Fabric is tom, deteriorated, raveled, etc. Soil beneath the pad is visible. Any part of the pipes that are crushed, damaged due to corrosion and/ or settlement. Cover cannot be opened, one person Cannot open the cover, corrosion/ deformation of cover. Flow does not spread uniformly over filter media by weir section. Cracks wider than 1/2 -inch and any evidence of soil particles entering the structure through the cracks, or maintenance/ inspection personnel determines that the vault isnot structurally sound. Baffles corroding, cracking warping, and/ or showing signs of failure as determined by maintenance/ inspection person. Ladder is corroded or deteriorated, not functioning properly, missing rungs, cracks, and misaligned. Cracks wider than 1/2 -inch at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence of soil particles entering the vault through the walls. Replace media with new compost to specifications, in addition to replacing fabric. Percolation of water occurs along the walls and comers and not through the media section. Media needs to be re -set along the vault wall and comers to form a semi -seal. Clean out the elbow fittings and/ or replace if damaged. Fabric replaced as necessary. Replace or rebuild the rock pad to design standards. Pipe repaired and/ or replaced. Cover repaired to proper working specifications or replaced. Clean, repair and/ or replace the weir plate section, or adjust height. Vault replaced or repaired to design specifications. Repair or replace baffles to specification. Ladder replaced or repaired and meets specifications, and is safe to use as determined by inspection personnel. No cracks more than 1/4 -inch wide at the joint of the inlet/ outlet pipe. 1998 Surface Water Design Manual 9/1/98 A-17 APPENDIX B OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE STORMWATER FILTERS Operation and Maintenance CDS Technologies, Inc. is positioned to provide maintenance services, as may be requested/required by the owner. Maintenance involving observation for z proper operation is a non -hazardous activity and can normally be performed by a single person. re When the media needs to be replaced, or the vault forebay needs to be cleaned, - o confined space entry is required, and needs to be carried out in conformance cnLLI with all safety provisions required for the entry being followed. CDS has many of its staff trained in confined space entry. N w w0 The maintenance requirements and frequency of direct filtration systems is highly 2 site specific depending on the characteristics of the runoff including: sedimenta. particle size distribution, pollutants associated with those particulates particularly N d oil and grease and amount of organics, trash and litter. The Media Filtration w System with the dedicated volume for the capture and retention of larger sized z solids will extend the period before replacement of cartridges is required thus z o reducing maintenance costs. In addition, with its large forebay and cartridges LIJ mounted on a support above the forebay, allows the cartridges to be maintained D numerous times prior to the need to clean out the forebay. p 0 (- Replacement of the cartridge media is required when the cartridge chamber is v filled with water to the extent that the cartridges are submerged and water is w flowing over the head control weir at the valve box. Additionally, when floatables w z begin to collect on the screen surface inside of the cartridge vent pipe, the v system has bypassed. This bypass could be a result of cartridges being clogged. o This is a visual observation that can be made during an event or during dry days. z When possible during storm events, visual observations will allow for inspection inside of the cartridge center tube. Comparison of the water surface in the center to tube to the water surface outside of the cartridge will allow for measurement of the headloss through the cartridge. As the cartridges begin to clog, the headloss will increase (ie. As the difference between the water surface outside the cartridge and the water surface inside the center tube increases, the headloss is increasing) indicating that maintenance should be performed soon. The spent cartridges need to be properly transported to a facility where the media can be removed, the cartridge structure cleaned, and rejuvenated, then charged with new media. These cartridges can be stored and made available for the next maintenance effort. Removal of solids from the bottom of the vault is not required when the cartridges are replaced. However, the solids in the vault should be removed when they reach a depth of about 1 -foot, and it is time to recharge the media in the cartridges. A vacuum truck provides the easiest means of removing these settled solids from the vault floor. The process requires setting up traffic control if necessary, setting up and performing a confined space entry, repositioning the CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-1 anti -flotation channel racks by hanging them on the walls, disconnecting the slip connection flexible drain tubes from the bottom of the cartridge or unthreading the cartridges from the support racks, which eliminates the need to disconnect the flexible drain tubes, as they will stay attached to the underside of the cartridge support rack, removing the cartridges from the vault, rotating the hinged cartridge support racks against the walls to expose all of the forebay area to an unimpeded work area. CDS MFS Cartridges CDS MFS Cartridges filled with XSORB Perlite Media Connection Flexible Drain Tubes Hinged Cartridge Support Racks CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-2 After the solids are vacuumed out, the cartridge support rack is rotated into position, new cartridges are reloaded, the flexible drain tubes reconnected, and the anti - flotation channels are set back into position. Since the materials extracted from the vault may be hazardous, it is appropriate to analyze a grab sample to confirm if special handling for disposal is required. Typical Cleaning and Inspection Schedule: Perform an inspection prior to rainy season. Observe floatable accumulation; inspect inlet and outlet pipes for obstructions. Sept — Oct Annually y, x'l�..�.. �r 'C.t 4:. 1n',L"' %`,;T•41,146,1 V i t ' g' 't ti •` }\ 1.'"I'V t�.. ?}¢.. R,++p�l!3�Rfi� ' Y' • ti�i,�' ,sTl.'N;*. `�fi,.. IM. la.SO, ., ,.:., ' 1k �.J � • T! ... �1�� gf��i�:%4. to \xi.:F...;.?Y�:�-r. ,tiff V��\�. .`i51 k:,',l".��'fd N�, $'F'"_'�AVIV;:* t} 4' i�iV.7�."'1.,�d��ir Inspection: (1) Note if floatables have been caught on the screen inside the vent pipe located on top of the cartridge, the MFS has by-passed. Measure depth of sediment in the sediment area below the cartridges. (2) If possible during a storm event, observe the function of the MFS. Check inside the vent pipe to observe the water surface inside the center tube compared to the water depth outside of the cartridge. The greater the headloss across the cartridge, the more sediments have been captured and a maintenance cycle will occur soon. Measure depth of sediment in the sediment area below the cartridges. Dec Annually ) >?' t7 :,9 ♦n, f' 'i '� 1 \:: k' _ M•'.• ,}l.. t;<.?' .it h• 5i ': Sr3 3 k ' '�. Y �.^.�{. yR t i[y i' ^.$ytjjj�R,�'� ,'�}j'�}'r, , '{jz� " 1` `jT\w ; ` '1 ?a '.. , 4a,I;�'k SP ` va: 3� �.i�'. P !fit ..� " .•.��Y�.s241Q.`?.'R•. , � ,?�� 3RM1H4is � �i'�Y=:i�i�i..r��'r'�'�'S�%f.� �' ��..c�t�� :S r:C4� i�3V� Y' �J. 4• 2Cn.k -Ci'%. t 'tv sf t W, t. 5n 1. 1t. .�.4ai �j{ �}4;d:•; PS „q W'!LS{��i�Y:C.'.1T� i�= .,i Yearly Maintenance. Perform dry season maintenance to recharge/ replace media/ cartridges, and remove floatable trash and debris. Prepare MFS for the upcoming rainy season by re • lacin9 cartridges with new/fresh media. May — Aug Annually Ott �t .¢ n.C,.F 4 rcr "'.V U Mr F ' ijS Y #•, ey3 }t� fi�1• yYt ll�:�,��ea,\ '�'�!✓1�4{��'n wd3 Alff"� A ,. Y �{yr ' .a �M r f �.rL 3'.P , �i �, kxi�R _' i „�� , 1 .4.. :ZP��7 �'i.-. ? 4+! . JJ +" n. � d�h�. �\ !9?�.i) � � ' :Ti i. �,: \,+.� ^43,' i� t�'< S��r ..��Y�' �, �T;PR^�$�!�$�' � �51a ; 5"F • i0. a R<'•{�; 7� Bi -Annual maintenance. Replace Filter Cartridges, and clean sediment storage area below cartridges. May - Aug 2 - 3 Years Suggested Tools for Successful Maintenance • Safety Cones • Wader Boots • Vault Pentalock Tool/ Manhole casting lifter • Large Shovel • Hand Shovel • Confined Entry Equipment CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-3 • Flashlight • Garbage Bags/Cans — or Dump truck • Duct Tape • Pool net for removable of floatables Suggested Equipment for Successful Maintenance • New media or replacement cartridges • Small crane with 800 Ib. Lifting capacity • Vacuum truck with water hose (for use during 2 to 3 year cycle when cleaning sediment area below cartridges) • Cable system for lifting cartridges (weight will vary between 200 and 300 -lbs) • Flat bed truck to transport cartridges Recommended Maintenance Procedure Checklist If desired, CDS Technologies, Inc., will contract for maintenance of the filter unit. This yearly contract covers all inspections and maintenance cycles. CDS Technologies will supply the owner and the jurisdiction of authority with written confirmation that maintenance has occurred, when contracts are in effect. For an hourly rate, a CDS staff person can arrive on site and answer any questions during the procedure. Alternatively, the owner can opt to purchase new canisters or media from CDS Technologies and arrange to have them installed. Maintenance of the MFS is not proprietary. The following list outlines step- by- step instructions for maintenance: o Safety Cones should placed around the Access Hatches of the Direct Filter Vault. o The access hatches should be opened upon arriving on site o Confined entry equipment must be used to test the air quality of the CDS Filter and for all persons who enter the filter o The ladder inside of the filter vault should be pulled up and secured. The installed ladder is the safest way to enter the structure. o The floor of the vault (the sediment storage bay) or the support rack are the best places to stand. The sediment storage bay may have 18 -in of standing water. Wader boots are recommended. CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-4 o Using the pool net, scoop floatables, trash and debris from the surface and dispose of in the trash bag. Removing these items first, will allow better access to the cartridges. z z Media Filter Systems with slip connections and hold down Racks cc w o The top float rack bars are the first items to be removed, if they are installed. 6 Each rack is attached to hinges on the inside walls of the filter. The pin v p connection should be pulled releasing the rack from the hinge. Note: if the top co o co float rack bars are not present on the top of the cartridges, then the cartridges are the threaded connection type. u. w 0 o Each of the support racks are designed to attach to the concrete anchors § 5 installed in the filter side walls, approximately 2 -ft above the top of the canisters. u The racks should be placed against the wall horizontally on these concrete = 3 anchors. F- _ zF- o A release tool used to detach the cartridge from the flexible tube, is installed inz o each filter near the support rack anchor bolts. This tool is the next piece of equipment to find. o o • - o This release tool allows the discharge tubing to be released from the base of the w ~ canister. 0 • b ..z Media Filter Systems with threaded cartridge connections o Some units are designed with threaded cartridges, eliminating the need for hold b down racks. If the cartridges are designed with threads on the bottom, removal z occurs by turning the cartridge. Threaded cartridges eliminate the need to disconnect the flexible tubing. This tubing will remain attached to the underside of the support rack. o Turn the cartridge using the handles on top of the cartridge. o The suggested place to begin is with the canisters closest to the center of the vault o Each of the canisters should be lifted using the handles on top of the canisters o If a vaccum truck is on site, the tops of the cartridges may be removed and the media can be vacuumed from the cartridges before they are lifted out of the vault o Each canister can be removed by hand or via a small crane. CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-5 o If the sediment area is filled with sediment to a depth of over 13-in, the vactor truck begins to vacuum this area. A water tank is recommended to wash the vault floor, helping to keep the solids in suspension for easier removal.Flushing of the vault floor may be necessary every 2 to 3 years. =•z ❑ If new media is to be installed in the cartridges on site, the used media should be emptied into garbage bags/ cans or into a dump truck. Please contact CDS 6 Technologies, Inc at (888) 535-7559 for information on recycling the used U o cartridges. co W J o Once the cartridges have been filled with new media or the new cartridges are on u~- site, they can be lowered into the vault and attached to the 2-in discharge tubing w o or threaded back on to the support rack. �a o After each discharge tube has a new cartridge securely attached, or all cartridges = a are secured on to the threaded connection, the maintenance is complete. 1- Z� ❑ Be sure to shut and lock the access doors, and sweep the site if necessary. w o • w U1:3 O - O I- 111 w u- O. . Z W U N 1- O CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-6 Z CDS TECHNOLOGIES INSPECTION I OBSERVATION LOG CDS INSTALLATION: MODEL DESIGNATION DATE SITE LOCATION WAS VAULT FLOOR VACUUMED DURING LAST MAINTENANCE: YES NO INSPECTIONS: DATE/INSPECTOR DEPTH OF SEDIMENTS OF VAULT FLOOR* IS THE WATER MARK ABOVE THE LINE MARKED MAINTENANCE 1S OIL & GREASE VISIBLE ON THE WATER SURFACE IS THERE STANDING WATER ABOVE THE BOTTOM OF THE CARTRIDGES WHAT IS THE DEGREE OF FLOATABLE MATERIAL IN SYSTEM • If this depth is greater than 12 -in, vacuum service should be performed. OTHER OBSERVATIONS: CERTIFICATION: TITLE: DATE: CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-7 Appendix A Project Description Sheet CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-8 Z re 6u: 0 O. CO 0. 111 �LL wO ga is zi.. ZI•- 2uj 0�• 111 H U_ LL. 0- W • Z U =. 0 Z Project Description Annual Maintenance Estimate Project Name: Project Location: CDS Model No. Normad Warehouse Tukwila CDS 816 MFS Water Quality flow rate: 0.28 cfs Number of cartridges: 26 (System has been sized) for mass loading Estimated costs for Annual Maintenance: $2,600 Ladder Float Float Arm Slide Gate Outlet Box Outlet Pipe Manhole Cover Collector Box Support Rack Collector Manifold CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-9 Appendix B Site Plan Plan and Profile Drawings (Project Specific) CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-10 z W re 2 6U 00 NLLI J H W0 LL =, Nom. _. Z �. I-- 0. Z !— W 0 0 H W W. H U L' 0. WZ C°' O Z Appendix C Maintenance Service Contract Proposal (Provided upon Request) CDS Technologies, Inc. September 2005 4-11 Z W re LI JU O 0 W =, W • O. g J LL. Q ▪ W _ z� z LIJ • W O ▪ (.12 w - _' O 1- z PERMANENT FILE COPY 'Hi SHANNON iWILSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS January 5, 2006 Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. City of Tukwila Department of Public Works Development Section 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188-2544 ALASKA COLORADO FLORIDA MISSOURI OREGON WASHINGTON JAN 1 1 2006 � JBLIC WORK: RE: GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW, NORMED-SHAW BUILDING, 4310 SOUTH 131ST PLACE, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Dear Ms. Mosqueda: This letter presents the results of our peer review of geotechnical engineering reports for the proposed NorMed-Shaw Office Building project in Tukwila, Washington. The project site consists of an undeveloped portion of a commercial property located northeast of an existing office/warehouse building at 4310 South 131st Place, Tukwila, Washington. The proposed building site is currently covered with a mound of fill material that was recently placed to pre -load the subgrade soils for the building pad. An enhanced wetland has been partially constructed along the western portion of the site. The purpose of our work is to provide an opinion as to the adequacy of the geotechnical engineering reports submitted with the proposed development permit application. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The geotechnical studies for this project consist of two reports prepared by Terra Associates, Inc. (Terra), and an older geotechnical report prepared in April 1980 by Pacific Testing Laboratories (PTL). The Terra reports include a geotechnical report dated November 17, 2004, and a slope evaluation letter dated November 7, 2005. The geotechnical report by Terra presents the results of eight test pit explorations and includes recommendations for site development, foundation design, preloading, seismic design, subsurface drainage, and other typical geotechnical issues. Terra recommended preloading the site with 3 feet of surcharge fill and leaving it in place for 4 to 6 weeks. The November 2005 letter by Terra presents 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 206.632.8020 FAX 206.695.6777 TDD: 1.800.833.6388 www.shannonwilson.com 21-1-20436-001 k,0 Is- Puina4) �la-ctC � Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. City of Tukwila Department of Public Works January 5, 2006 Page 2 SHANNON WILSON, INC. information from three soil borings that were drilled on the slope located between Macadam Road and the recently expanded wetlands on the NorMed Property. It addresses slope stability for the proposed cut slopes in this area. The PTL report, which was included with the September 2001 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, presents the results of nine soil borings ranging from 20 to 40 feet deep. It includes geotechnical recommendations for foundation design, structural fill, and pavement design. PTL recommended preloading the site with 10 feet of surcharge fill and leaving it in place for 6 to 9 months. We note that laboratory consolidation tests were not discussed in the PTL report. Because of the age of the PTL report, we understand that the recommendations of Terra are being relied upon for the current project and Terra is the geotechnical engineer -of -record. We also reviewed a set of drawings dated October 2005 showing proposed site grading around the wetlands. These included sheet SD -1 by David Kehle architect, and sheets 1 and 2 by Barghausen Consulting Engineers. These drawings indicate proposed cut slopes ranging from 2 Horizontal to 1 Vertical (2H:1 V) to 1.4H:1 V. CONCLUSIONS Based on our review of the 2004 Terra Associates report and observations of the site, we generally concur with the opinions and recommendations provided for the proposed building foundation. We note that Terra Associates predicted the site will settle 5 to 8 inches during the 4- to 6 -week preload period. The 1980 Pacific Testing Laboratories report suggested that the preload period would be 6 to 9 months. Neither report presented laboratory consolidation test data that would provide a more accurate estimate of settlement rates; however, geotechnical observations and analysis are required to confirm that the preload method achieves a sufficiently improved subgrade soil prior to building construction (the observational method). Therefore, we recommend that Terra prepare reports that document the preload settlement data and analysis. These reports should be provided to the City of Tukwila to become part of the permanent construction record. 21-1-20436-001-L1 /wp/LKD 21-1-20436-001 Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. City of Tukwila Department of Public Works January 5, 2006 Page 3 SHANNON iWILSON, INC. Terra Associates, in their November 2004 letter, recommended that permanent slopes along the western edge of the enhanced wetland be graded to an inclination of 1.5H:1 V. They performed slope stability analyses that indicate the factors of safety against slope failure are adequate under static and seismic conditions. In our opinion, these findings and recommendations are acceptable and the proposed slopes are not likely to result in adverse affects, e.g., settlement, on Macadam Road. During our recent visit to the project site we observed that the temporary slopes along the west side of the enhanced wetland are, in places, currently cut much steeper than 1.5H:1 V. Some of the cuts are near -vertical and there is no erosion control matting or mulch on the slope. We also observed active erosion occurring on the exposed soil cuts, most notably where water from a storm sewer pipe discharges directly onto the ground surface above the temporary cut slope. Thus, it is important that slope modifications and stabilization occur as soon as possible to prevent continued erosion and sedimentation of the wetlands. The 1.5H:1 V slopes, protected with erosion control blanket or rock revetment, as recommended by Terra Associates, should be implemented. If space limitations between the wetlands and protected trees prevent the use of 1.5H:1 V slopes, then additional geotechnical recommendations should be provided by the project geotechnical engineer. Such additional measures could include use of rockeries to provide erosion -resistant facing on stable slopes steeper than 1.5H:1 V. Finally, the site grading drawings prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers show slopes steeper than the 1.5H:1V recommended by Terra. Terra should review and comment on the stability of these slopes, if they are to be used. It is our opinion that the geotechnical reports prepared for this project by Terra meet the generally accepted standards of practice in this area and meets the standards of Tukwila Municipal Code 18.45.080E. Additional information should be provided to the City of Tukwila by the applicant's geotechnical engineer, as discussed above. 21-1-20436-001-L1/wp/LKA 21-1-20436-001 1 Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. City of Tukwila Department of Public Works January 5, 2006 Page 4 SHANNON FIWILSON, INC. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions, I am available at (206) 695-6875. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. !EXPIRES 4/21/ 0 Martin W. Page, P.E. Associate MWP :TMG/mwp 21-1-20436-001-L1 /wp/LKD 21-1-20436-001 =Hi SHANNON iWILSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS December 19, 2005 City of Tukwila Public Works Department/Engineering Division 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. RECEIVED DEC 2 1 2005 fUKYUiLN PUBLIC WORKS RE: GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW FOR PROPOSED NORMED OFFICE/ WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, MACADAM ROAD AND SOUTH 131ST PLACE, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON ALASKA COLORADO FLORIDA MISSOURI OREGON WASHINGTON This letter confirms your authorization for Shannon & Wilson, Inc. to perform a peer review of a geotechnical engineering report for proposed development on the above -referenced property in Tukwila, Washington. The purpose of our work will be to offer an opinion on the appropriateness and adequacy of the geotechnical engineering report that has been prepared for the proposed development by others. We will also provide our opinion regarding stability of Macadam Road as it relates to the proposed development. Our fee and the terms under which our services are offered will be on a lump sum basis in accordance with the enclosed Standard General Terms and Conditions. Our fee will be $3,000, which includes review of the geotechnical reports that have been prepared for this project, a visit to the site, and preparation of a written summary of our findings. The geotechnical findings will be limited to and based on our visual site observations, the information contained in the geotechnical reports, review of our project files, and experience with similar projects in the area. Invoices for payment will be submitted to you as our client. Please sign in the space provided and return a copy of this letter, which will then serve as an agreement between us. Shannon & Wilson, Inc., has prepared the enclosed "Important Information About Your Geotechnical Proposal" to assist you and others in understanding the use and limitations of our proposals. 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 206.632.8020 FAX 206.695.6777 TDD: 1.800.833.6388 www.shannonwilson.com 21-3-51023-001 City of Tukwila Attn: Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. December 19, 2005 Page 2 SHANNON &WILSON, INC. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service and look forward to working with you. I am available at (206) 695-6875 if you have any questions. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Martin W. Page, P.E., L.E.G. Associate MWP:TMG/mwp Enclosures: Standard General Terms and Conditions, SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Important Information About Your Geotechnical Proposal I accept the above conditions and authorize the above work to proceed. By Signature (print) Date Organization 21-3-51023-001-LI/wp/LKD 21-1-51023-001 IMP SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Attachment to and part of our Proposal: 21-3-51023-001 Date: December 19, 2005 City of Tukwila, Public Works Dept./Engineering To: Division Macadam Road and South 131st Place, Tukwila, Re: Washington STANDARD GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS (ALL PURPOSE) ARTICLE 1 — SERVICES OF SHANNON & WILSON Shannon & Wilson's scope of work (Work) shall be limited to those services expressly set forth in its Proposal and is subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. Shannon & Wilson shall procure and maintain all business and professional licenses and registrations necessary to provide its services. Upon Client's request (and for additional compensation, if not already included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal), Shannon & Wilson shall assist Client in attempting to obtain, or on behalf of Client and in Client's name attempt to obtain, those permits and approvals required for the project for which Shannon & Wilson's services are being rendered. Client acknowledges, depending on field conditions encountered and subsurface conditions discovered, the number and location of borings, the number and type of field and laboratory tests, and other similar items, as deemed necessary by Shannon & Wilson in the exercise of due care, may need to be increased or decreased; if such modifications are approved by Client, Shannon & Wilson's compensation and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. If conditions actually encountered at the project site differ materially from those represented by Client and/or shown or indicated in the contract documents, or are of an unusual nature which materially differ from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent for the locality and character of the services provided for in Shannon & Wilson's scope of work, Shannon & Wilson's compensation and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. Without increasing the scope of work, price, or schedule contained in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson may employ such subcontractors as Shannon & Wilson deems necessary to assist in furnishing its services. If Shannon & Wilson's scope of work is increased or decreased by Client, Shannon & Wilson's compensation and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 2 — FEES AND EXPENSES FOR RENDERING SERVICES LUMP SUM AMOUNT Shannon & Wilson's total fee for performing all of the services described in the Scope of Work shall be the lump sum amount of $3,000. Shannon & Wilson shall be entitled to monthly progress payments in proportion to the percentage of the completed Work bears to all of the services described the Scope of Work. Fees For Additional Services Fees for Shannon & Wilson's services attributable to any additional services provided by Shannon & Wilson which are not specifically included in our Scope of Work will be based on the actual time expended on the project, including travel, by our personnel and will be computed by multiplying the actual number of hours worked times the employees direct salary rate times 3.3. The hourly rates for the services of our staff will be doubled for time spent actually providing expert testimony. ADDITIONAL REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Expenses other than salary costs that are directly attributable to any additional services provided by Shannon & Wilson which are not specifically included in our scope of work will be invoiced at our cost plus 15 percent. Examples include, but are not limited to, expenses for out-of-town travel and living, information processing equipment, instrumentation and field equipment rental, special fees and permits, premiums for additional or special insurance where required, long distance telephone charges, local mileage and parking, use of rental vehicles, taxi, reproduction, local and out-of-town delivery service, express mail, photographs, film, laboratory equipment fees, shipping charges and supplies. A unit price of $7.00 per hour will be charged for computer time to prepare spreadsheets, $25.00 per hour for AutoCAD and modeling software use, and $35.00 per hour for GIS computer work. ARTICLE 3 — TIMES FOR RENDERING SERVICES Shannon & Wilson shall perform its services in accordance with the schedule set forth in its Proposal. If Shannon & Wilson's Proposal sets forth specific periods of time for rendering services, or specific dates by which services are to be completed, and such periods of time or dates are extended or delayed through no fault of Shannon & Wilson, Shannon & Wilson's compensation and schedule shall be equitably adjusted. If Shannon & Wilson's schedule is increased or decreased by Client, Shannon & Wilson's compensation shall be equitably adjusted. ARTICLE 4 — PAYMENTS TO SHANNON & WILSON Invoices shall be prepared in accordance with Shannon & Wilson's standard invoicing practices and shall be submitted to Client by Shannon & Wilson monthly. The amount billed in each invoice shall be calculated as set forth in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal. Unless Shannon & Wilson's Proposal contains a fixed lump -sum price, Shannon & Wilson's actual fees may exceed the estimate contained in its Proposal. Shannon & Wilson shall not exceed the estimate contained in its Proposal by more than ten percent (10%) without the prior written consent of Client; provided however, unless the Client authorizes additional funds in excess of the estimate contained in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson shall have no obligation to continue work on the project. SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 1 of 6 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Invoices are due and payable within 30 days of receipt. If Client fails to pay Shannon & Wilson's invoice within 30 days after receipt, the amounts due Shannon & Wilson shall accrue interest at the rate of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month (or the maximum rate of interest permitted by law, if less) after the 30`h day. In addition, Shannon & Wilson may, after giving seven (7) days written notice to Client, suspend services under this Agreement until Shannon & Wilson has been paid in full. If Client disputes Shannon & Wilson's invoice, only the disputed portion(s) may be withheld from payment, and the undisputed portion(s) shall be paid. Records of Shannon & Wilson's direct and indirect costs and expenses pertinent to its compensation under this Agreement shall be kept in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices and applicable federal, state, or local laws and regulations. Upon request, such records shall be made available to Client for inspection on Shannon & Wilson's premises and copies provided to Client at cost. ARTICLE 5 — CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES Client shall grant or obtain free access to the project site for all equipment and personnel necessary for Shannon & Wilson to perform its services. ARTICLE 6 — STANDARD OF CARE / ABSENCE OF WARRANTIES / NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR SITE SAFETY OR CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE Standard of Care The standard of care for all professional services performed or furnished by Shannon & Wilson under this Agreement shall be the skill and care ordinarily exercised by other members of Shannon & Wilson's profession, providing the same or similar services, under the same or similar circumstances, at the same time and locality as the services were provided by Shannon & Wilson. The construction, alteration, or repair of any object or structure by Shannon & Wilson shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner in accordance with general industry standards, and conform to this Agreement. Shannon & Wilson warrants for one (1) year from substantial completion of the Work, all goods delivered hereunder shall be new and free from defects in material or workmanship, and shall conform to the specifications, drawings, or sample(s) specified or furnished, if any, and shall be merchantable and fit for their intended purpose(s). Shannon & Wilson warrants that Shannon & Wilson has good and marketable title to all goods delivered hereunder, and that all goods delivered hereunder shall be free and clear of all claims of superior title, liens, and encumbrances of any kind. Subsurface explorations and testing identify actual subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken, at the time they are taken. Actual conditions at other locations of the project site, including those inferred to exist between the sample points, may differ significantly from conditions that exist at the sampling locations. The passage of time or intervening causes may cause the actual conditions at the sampling locations to change as well. Interpretations and recommendations made by Shannon & Wilson shall be based solely upon information available to Shannon & Wilson at the time the interpretations and recommendations are made. Shannon & Wilson shall be responsible for the technical accuracy of its services, data, interpretations, and recommendations resulting therefrom, and Client shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Shannon & Wilson shall correct any substandard work without additional compensation, except to the extent that such inaccuracies are directly attributable to deficiencies in Client -furnished information. No Warranties Shannon & Wilson makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied, under this Agreement or otherwise, about Shannon & Wilson's professional services. Client -Furnished Documents Shannon & Wilson may use requirements, programs, instructions, reports, data, and information furnished by Client to Shannon & Wilson in performing its services under this Agreement. Shannon & Wilson may rely on the accuracy and completeness of requirements, programs, instructions, reports, data, and other information furnished by Client to Shannon & Wilson. Client shall, only to the fullest extent permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors, and indemnify and hold Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from Shannon & Wilson's reliance on Client -furnished information, except to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. Site Damage Shannon & Wilson shall take reasonable precautions to minimize damage to the project site, but it is understood by Client that, in the normal course of Shannon & Wilson's services, some project site damage may occur, and the correction of such damage is not part of this Agreement unless so stated in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal. Client shall, only to the fullest extent permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors, and indemnify and hold Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from any project site damage caused by Shannon & Wilson, except to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. Buried Structures If there are any buried structures and/or utilities on the project site where subsurface explorations are to take place, Client shall provide Shannon & Wilson with a plan showing their existing locations. Shannon & Wilson shall contact a utility locator service to request that they identify any public utilities. Shannon & Wilson shall use reasonable care and diligence to avoid contact with buried structures and/or utilities as shown. Shannon & Wilson shall not be liable for any loss or damage to buried structures and/or utilities resulting from inaccuracy of the plans, or lack of plans, or errors by the locator service relating to the location of buried structures and/or utilities. Client shall, only to the fullest extent permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors, and indemnify, and hold Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from damage to buried structures and/or utilities caused by Shannon & Wilson's sampling, except to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. Aquifer Cross -Contamination Despite the use of due care, unavoidable contamination of soil or groundwater may occur during subsurface exploration when drilling or sampling tools are advanced through a contaminated area, linking it to an aquifer, underground stream, or other hydrous body not previously contaminated and capable of spreading contaminants off the project site. Because Shannon & Wilson is powerless to totally eliminate this risk despite use of due care, and because sampling is an essential element of Shannon & Wilson's services, Client shall, only to the fullest extent permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors, and indemnify and hold Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from cross -contamination caused by Shannon & Wilson's sampling, except to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 2 of 6 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Opinions of Probable Construction Costs If opinions of probable construction costs are included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson's opinions of probable construction costs shall be made on the basis of its experience and qualifications and represent its judgment as a professional generally familiar with the industry. Opinions of probable construction costs are based, in part, on approximate quantity evaluations that are not accurate enough to permit contractors to prepare bids. Further, since Shannon & Wilson has no control over: the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others; the contractor's actual or proposed construction methods or methods of determining prices; competitive bidding; or market conditions, Shannon & Wilson cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual construction cost will not vary from opinions of the components of probable construction cost prepared by Shannon & Wilson. If Client or any contractor wishes greater assurance as to probable construction cost, Client or contractor shall employ an independent cost estimator. Review of Contractor's Shop Drawings and Submittals If review of a contractor's shop drawings and submittals are included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson shall review and take appropriate action on the contractor's submittals, such as shop drawings, product data, samples, and other data, which the contractor is required to submit, but solely for the limited purpose of checking for general overall conformance with Shannon & Wilson's design concept. This review shall not include a review of the accuracy or completeness of details, such as quantities; dimensions; weights or gauges; fabrication processes; construction means, methods, sequences or procedures; coordination of the work with other trades; or construction safety precautions, all of which are the sole responsibility of the contractor. Shannon & Wilson's review shall be conducted with reasonable promptness while allowing sufficient time, in Shannon & Wilson's judgment, to permit adequate review. Review of a specific item shall not be construed to mean that Shannon & Wilson has reviewed the entire assembly of which the item is a component. Shannon & Wilson shall not be responsible for any deviations by the contractor in the shop drawings and submittals from the construction documents, which are not brought to the attention of Shannon & Wilson by the contractor in writing. Construction Observation If construction observation is included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson shall visit the project site at intervals Shannon & Wilson deems appropriate, or as otherwise agreed to in writing by Client and Shannon & Wilson, in order to observe and keep Client generally informed of the progress and quality of the work. Such visits and observations are not intended to be an exhaustive check or a detailed inspection of any contractor's work, but rather are to allow Shannon & Wilson, as a professional, to become generally familiar with the work in progress in order to determine, in general, whether the work is progressing in a manner indicating that the work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with Shannon & Wilson's general overall design concept. Shannon & Wilson's authority shall be limited to observing, making technical comments regarding general overall compliance with Shannon & Wilson's design concept, and rejecting any work which it becomes aware of that does not comply with Shannon & Wilson's general overall design concept. Shannon & Wilson's acceptance of any non -conforming work containing latent defects or failure to reject any non -conforming work not inspected by Shannon & Wilson shall not impose any liability on Shannon & Wilson or relieve any contractor from complying with their contract documents. All construction contractors shall be solely responsible for construction site safety, the quality of their work, and adherence to their contract documents. Shannon & Wilson shall have no authority to direct any contractor's actions or stop any contractor's work. If Shannon & Wilson is not retained to provide construction observation of the implementation of its design recommendations, Client shall, only to the fullest extent permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson, and indemnify and hold Shannon & Wilson harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from the implementation of Shannon & Wilson's design recommendations, except to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. No Responsibility for Site Safety Except for its own subcontractors and employees, Shannon & Wilson shall not: supervise, direct, have control over, or authority to stop any contractor's work; have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by any contractor; be responsible for safety precautions and programs incident to any contractor's work; or be responsible for any failure of any contractor to comply with laws and regulations applicable to the contractor, all of which are the sole responsibility of the construction contractors. This requirement shall apply continuously, regardless of time or place, and shall in no way be altered because a representative of Shannon & Wilson is present at the project site performing his/her duties. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, Shannon & Wilson shall never be deemed to have assumed responsibility for the project's site safety by either contract or conduct. No act or direction by Shannon & Wilson shall be deemed the exercise of supervision or control of any contractor's employees or the direction of any contractor's performance. Any direction provided by Shannon & Wilson shall be deemed solely to ensure the contractor's general overall compliance with Shannon & Wilson's design concept. No Responsibility for Contractor's Performance Except for its own subcontractors and employees, Shannon & Wilson shall not be responsible for safety precautions, the quality of any contractor's work, or any contractor's failure to furnish or perform their work in accordance with their contract documents. Except Shannon & Wilson's own employees and its subcontractors, Shannon & Wilson shall not: be responsible for the acts or omissions of any contractor, subcontractor or supplier, or other persons at the project site, or otherwise furnishing or performing any work; or for any decision based on interpretations or clarifications of Shannon & Wilson's design concept given without the consultation and concurrence of Shannon & Wilson. Approval of Contractor's Applications for Payment If approval of a contractor's applications for payment are included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal, Shannon & Wilson shall review the amounts due the contractor and issue a recommendation about payment to Client. Shannon & Wilson's review and approval shall be limited to an evaluation of the general progress of the work and the information contained in the contractor's application for payment and a representation by Shannon & Wilson that to the best of the Shannon & Wilson's knowledge, the contractor has performed work for which payment has been requested, subject to further testing and inspection upon substantial completion. The issuance of a recommendation for payment shall not be construed as a representation that: Shannon & Wilson has made an exhaustive check or a detailed or continuous inspection check of the quality or quantity of the contractor's work; approved the contractors means, methods, sequences, procedures, or safety precautions; or that contractor's subcontractors, laborers, and suppliers have been paid. ARTICLE 7 — CONFIDENTIALITY AND USE OF DOCUMENTS Confidentiality Shannon & Wilson agrees to keep confidential and to not disclose to any person or entity (other than Shannon & Wilson's employees and subcontractors), without the prior consent of Client, all information furnished to Shannon & Wilson by Client or learned by Shannon & Wilson as a result of its work on the project; provided however, that these provisions shall not apply to information that: is in the public domain through no fault of Shannon & Wilson; was previously known to Shannon & Wilson; or was independently acquired by Shannon & Wilson from third -parties who were under no obligation to Client to keep said information confidential. This paragraph shall not be construed to in any way restrict Shannon & Wilson from making any disclosures required by SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 3 of 6 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. law. Client agrees that Shannon & Wilson may use and publish Client's name and a general description of Shannon & Wilson's services with respect to the project in describing Shannon & Wilson's experience and qualifications to others. Copyrights and Patents — Shannon & Wilson shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Client from any and all actions, damages, demands, expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs), losses, and liabilities arising out of' any claims that any goods or services furnished by Subcontractor infringe any patent, trademark, trade name, or copyright. Use of Documents All documents prepared by Shannon & Wilson are instruments of service with respect to the project, and Shannon & Wilson shall retain a copyrighted ownership and property interest therein (including the right of reuse) whether or not the project is completed. Shannon & Wilson grants to Client a non-exclusive, irrevocable, unlimited, royalty -free license to use any documents prepared by Shannon & Wilson for Client. Client may make and retain copies of such documents for their information and use. Such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for , Z reuse by Client, or others, after the passage of time, on extensions of the project, or on any other project. Any such reuse without written verification or W rt 2 adaptation by Shannon & Wilson, as appropriate for the specific purpose intended, shall be at Client's sole risk, and Client shall, only to the fullest extent Q permitted by law, waive any claims against Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors, and indemnify and hold Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors J U harmless from any claims, liability, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees and costs) arising from such reuse, except to the extent of Shannon & U 0 Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract. Any verification or adaptation of the documents for to U extensions of the project or for any other project by Shannon & Wilson shall entitle Shannon & Wilson to additional compensation to be agreed upon by W Client and Shannon & Wilson. J Copies of documents that maybe relied upon byClient are limited to theprinted copies(also known as hard copies) that are signed or sealed byShannon & u - P P P P) Bn W O Wilson. Text, data, or graphics files in electronic media format are fumished solely for the convenience of Client. Any conclusion or information obtained or W derived from such electronic files shall be at the user's sole risk. If there is a discrepancy between the electronic files and the hard copies, the hard copies govern. LL Q Because data stored in electronic media can deteriorate or be modified inadvertently or otherwise without authorization of the data's creator, the party U receiving an electronic file agrees that it shall perform acceptance tests or procedures within 60 days after its receipt, after which, unless notice of any errors = Ci are given in writing to the delivering party, the receiving party shall be deemed to have accepted the data thus transferred. Any errors reported within the 60- l 2 day acceptance period shall be corrected by the party delivering the electronic files at their sole expense. Shannon & Wilson shall not be responsible for Z 1— maintaining documents stored in electronic media format after acceptance by Client. Z 0 When transferring documents in electronic media format, neither Client nor Shannon & Wilson makes any representations as to long-term compatibility, Ui usability, or readability of documents resulting from the use of software application packages, operating systems, or computer hardware differing from those U t] used for the document's creation. ON ARTICLE 8 - INSURANCE 0 1.— Shannon & Wilson shall purchase and maintain during the term of this contract, the following insurance coverage at its sole expense: U Commercial General Liability - $1,000,000 each occurrence/$2,000,000 annual aggregate Bodily Injury/Property Damage Combined Single Limit including u - Blanket Contractual Liability, Broad Form Products and Completed Operations, Explosion/Collapse/Underground (XCU) Exposures, and Washington Stop Z Gap coverage. U - Auto Liability - $1,000,000 Bodily Injury/Property Damage Combined Single Limit including Owned, Hired, and Non -Owned Liability coverage. ~O Umbrella Liability - $10,000,000 Bodily Injury/Property Damage combined Single Limit in excess of Commercial General Liability, Auto Liability, and Z Employers' Liability. Workers' Compensation - Statutory in monopolistic states and $500,000 per accident/$500,000 per disease/$500,000 disease policy aggregate Employers' Liability in non -monopolistic including if applicable, U.S. Longshore & Harbor Workers coverage. Professional Liability - $5,000,000 per claims/$5,000,000 annual aggregate for professional errors and omissions including Pollution Liability coverage. If requested in writing by Client, Shannon & Wilson shall name Client as an additional insured on its Commercial General Liability policy. If requested in writing by Client, Shannon & Wilson shall deliver to Client certificates of insurance evidencing such coverage. Such certificates shall be furnished before commencement of Shannon & Wilson's services. Client shall cause Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors to be listed as additional insureds on any Commercial General Liability insurance carried by Client that is applicable to the project. Client shall require the project owner to require the general contractor on the project to purchase and maintain Commercial General Liability, Automobile Liability, Workers Compensation, and Employers Liability insurance, with limits no less than set forth above, and to cause Shannon & Wilson and its subcontractors to be listed as additional insureds on that Commercial General Liability insurance. Client shall require the project owner include the substance of this paragraph in the prime construction contract. All insurance policies shall contain a waiver of subrogation. ARTICLE 9 - HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Disclosure of the Existence of Hazardous Environmental Conditions Client has disclosed to Shannon & Wilson all data known to Client concerning known or suspected hazardous environmental conditions, including but not limited to, the existence of all asbestos, PCBs, petroleum, hazardous waste, or radioactive material, if any, located at or near the project site, including its type, quantity, and location, or has represented to Shannon & Wilson that, to the best of Client's knowledge, no hazardous environmental conditions exist at or near the project site. If any hazardous environmental condition is encountered or believed to exist, Shannon & Wilson shall notify Client and, to the extent required by applicable laws and regulations, the project site owner, and appropriate governmental officials. SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 4 of 6 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Disposal of Non -Hazardous Samples and Hazardous or Toxic Substances All substances on, in, or under the project site, or obtained from the project site as samples or as byproducts (e.g., drill cuttings and fluids) of the sampling process are the project site owner's property. Shannon & Wilson shall preserve such samples for forty-five (45) calendar days after Shannon & Wilson's issuance to Client of the final instrument of service that relates to the data obtained from them. Shannon & Wilson shall dispose of all non -hazardous samples and sampling process byproducts in accordance with applicable law; provided however, any samples or sampling process byproducts that are, or are believed to be, affected by regulated contaminants shall be packaged by Shannon & Wilson in accordance with applicable law, and turned over to Client or left on the project site. Shannon & Wilson shall not transport store, treat, dispose of, or arrange for the transportation, storage, treatment, or disposal of, any substances known, believed, or suspected to be affected by regulated contaminants, nor shall Shannon & Wilson subcontract for such activities. Shannon & Wilson shall, at Client's request (and for additional compensation, if not already included in Shannon & Wilson's Proposal), help Client or the project site owner identify appropriate alternatives for transportation, storage, treatment, or disposal of such substances, but Shannon & Wilson shall not make any independent determination about the selection of a transportation, storage, treatment, or disposal facility. Client or the project site owner shall sign all manifests for the transportation, storage, treatment, or disposal of substances affected by regulated contaminants; provided however, notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement to the contrary if Client directs Shannon & Wilson, Shannon & Wilson's employees, or Shannon & Wilson's agents to sign such manifests and/or to hire for Client or the project site owner a contractor to transport store, treat, or dispose of the contaminated substances, Shannon & Wilson shall do so only as Client's disclosed agent. Contaminated Equipment and Consumables Client shall reimburse Shannon & Wilson for the cost of decontaminating field or laboratory equipment that is contaminated by regulated materials encountered at the project site and for the cost of disposal and replacement of contaminated consumables. In some instances, the cost of decontamination may exceed the fair market value of the equipment, were it not contaminated, together with the cost of properly transporting and disposing of the equipment. In such instances, Shannon & Wilson will notify Client and give Client the option of paying for decontamination or purchasing the equipment at its fair market value immediately prior to contamination. If Client elects to purchase equipment, Client and Shannon & Wilson will enter into a specific agreement for that purpose. Any equipment that cannot be decontaminated shall be considered a consumable. Client's Liability for Hazardous or Toxic Materials Except to the extent caused by Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's negligent or wrongful acts, errors, omissions, or breach of contract, and only to the maximum extent permitted by law, Client shall: indemnify and hold harmless Shannon & Wilson, its subcontractors and their partners, officers, directors, employees, and agents; from and against any and all actions (whether sounding in tort, contract (express or implied), warranty (express or implied), statutory liability, strict liability, or otherwise), claims (including, but not limited to, claims for bodily injury, death, property damage (including bodily injury, death, or property damage to Shannon & Wilson's own employees), or arising under CERCLA, MTCA, or similar federal, state, or local environmental laws), costs, damages (including without limitation, economic, non -economic, general, special, incidental, consequential), demands, expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense), fines, judgments, liens, liabilities, and penalties of any kind whatsoever; arising from the arrangement for and/or ownership, operation, generation, labeling, transportation, storage, disposal, treatment, release, or threatened release of any hazardous or toxic materials, as defined by CERCLA, MTCA, or similar federal, state, or local environmental laws, on and/or from the project site. ARTICLE 10 - ALLOCATION OF RISK Indemnification of Client To the maximum extent permitted by law, Shannon & Wilson shall: indemnify and hold harmless Client, its appointed and elected officials, partners, officers, directors, employees, and agents; from and against any and all actions (whether sounding in tort, contract (express or implied), warranty (express or implied), statutory liability, strict liability, or otherwise), claims (including, but not limited to, claims for bodily injury, death, property damage, (including bodily injury, death, or property damage to Shannon & Wilson's own employees) or arising under CERCLA, MTCA, or similar federal, state, or local environmental laws), costs, damages (including without limitation, economic, non -economic, general, special, incidental, consequential), demands, expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense), fines, judgments, liens, liabilities, and penalties of any kind whatsoever; arising from the negligent or wrongful acts, errors, or omissions, or breach of contract or warranty express or implied, by Shannon & Wilson or any of its subcontractors; but only to the extent of Shannon & Wilson's and its subcontractor's relative degree of fault. In furtherance of these obligations, and only with respect to Client, its appointed and elected officials, partners, officers, directors, employees and agents, Shannon & Wilson waives any immunity it may have or limitation on the amount or type of damages imposed under any industrial insurance, worker's compensation, disability, employee benefit, or similar laws. Shannon & Wilson acknowledges that this waiver of immunity was mutually negotiated. Limitation of Shannon & Wilson's Liability A. Total Liability Limited to Insurance Proceeds Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, and only to the maximum extent permitted by law, the total liability, in the aggregate, of Shannon & Wilson, its subcontractors, and their partners, officers, directors, employees, agents and, or any of them, to Client and/or anyone claiming by, through, or under Client, for any and all actions (whether sounding in tort, contract (express or implied), warranty (express or implied), statutory liability, strict liability, or otherwise), claims (including, but not limited to, claims for bodily injury, death, property damage, (including bodily injury, death, or property damage to Shannon & Wilson's own employees) or arising under CERCLA, MTCA, or similar federal, state, or local environmental laws), costs, damages (including without limitation, economic, non -economic, general, special, incidental, consequential), demands, expenses (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense), fines, judgments, liens, liabilities, and penalties of any kind whatsoever, arising out of, resulting from, or in any way related to the project or this Agreement, shall be limited to the insurance proceeds payable on behalf of or to Shannon & Wilson by any insurance policies applicable thereto. If you are unwilling or unable to limit our liability in this manner, we will negotiate this limitation and its associated impact on our approach, scope of work, schedule, and price, with you. You must notify us in writing before we commence our work of your intention to negotiate this limitation and its associated impact on our approach, scope of work, schedule, and price. Absent your prior written notification to the contrary, we will proceed on the basis that our total liability is limited as set forth above. B. Professional Liability Limited to $50,000 or 10% of Fee With respect to professional errors or omissions only, notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, and only to the maximum extent permitted by law, the total liability, in the aggregate, of Shannon & Wilson, its subcontractors, and their partners, officers, directors, employees, agents, or any of them, to Client and/or anyone claiming by, through, or under Client, for any and all actions (whether sounding in tort, contract (express or implied), warranty (express or implied), statutory liability, strict liability, or otherwise), claims (including, but not limited to, claims for bodily injury, death, property damage (including bodily injury, death, or property damage to Shannon & Wilson's own employees) or arising under CERCLA, MTCA, or similar federal, state, or local environmental laws), costs, damages (including without limitation, economic, non -economic, general, special, incidental, consequential), demands, expenses SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 5 of 6 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. . (including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of defense), fines, judgments, liens, liabilities, and penalties of any kind whatsoever, arising out of, resulting from, or in any way related to the professional errors or omissions of Shannon & Wilson, its subcontractors, or their partners, officers, directors, employees, agents or, or any of them, shall not exceed the aggregate total amount of $50,000.00, or ten percent (10%) of the total compensation actually paid to Shannon & Wilson under this Agreement, whichever is greater. If you are unwilling or unable to limit our professional liability to these sums, we will negotiate the amount of this limitation and its associated impact on our approach, scope of work, schedule, and price, with you. You must notify us in writing before we commence our work of your intention to negotiate the amount of this limitation and its associated impact on our approach, scope of work, schedule, and price. Absent your prior written notification to the contrary, we will proceed on the basis that our total professional liability is limited to $50,000.00 or ten percent (10%) of the total compensation actually paid to Shannon & Wilson under this Agreement, whichever is greater. ARTICLE 11 — MISCELLANEOUS Termination This Agreement may be terminated without further obligation or liability by either party, with or without cause (for convenience), upon 30 days prior written notice to the other. Shannon & Wilson shall be entitled to compensation for all services performed prior to the termination of this Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated by the non -breaching party upon any breach of this Agreement that remains uncured after 10 days notice to the breaching party by the non -breaching party. Upon payment of all amounts due Shannon & Wilson, Client shall be entitled to copies of Shannon & Wilson's files and records pertaining to services performed prior to the termination of this Agreement. Successors, Assigns, and Beneficiaries This Agreement shall be binding upon each party's assigns, successors, executors, administrators, and legal representatives. Neither Client nor Shannon & Wilson may assign or transfer any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other. No assignment shall release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create, impose, or give rise to any duty owed by Client or Shannon & Wilson to any third -party. All duties and responsibilities undertaken under this Agreement shall be for the sole and exclusive benefit of Client and Shannon & Wilson. There are no intended third -party beneficiaries. Notwithstanding the foregoing, should a court find a third -party to be a beneficiary of this Agreement, it is the intent of the parties that the judicially created third -party beneficiary be bound by and subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Jurisdiction, Venue, and Choice of Law Any applicable Statute of Limitation shall be deemed to commence running on the date which the claimant knew, or should have known, of the facts giving rise to their claims, but in no event later than the date of substantial completion of Shannon & Wilson's services under this Agreement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, as a condition precedent to commencing a judicial proceeding, a party shall give written notice of their claims, including all amounts claimed, and the factual basis for their claims, to the other party within one (1) year of when the claimant knew, or should have known, of the facts giving rise to their claims, but in no event later than one (1) year from the date of substantial completion of Shannon & Wilson's services under this Agreement. As a condition precedent to commencing a judicial proceeding, a party shall first submit their claims to non-binding mediation through and in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws (except choice and conflict of law provisions) of the state in which the Project is located. Any judicial action shall be brought in the state in which the Project is located. Attorneys' Fees Should any dispute or claims arise out of this Agreement, whether sounding in tort, contract (express or implied), warranty (express or implied), statutory liability, strict liability, or otherwise, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, including upon appeal and in the enforcement of any judgment. Should neither party prevail on all of their claims or receive all of the relief they sought, then the substantially prevailing party shall be awarded their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, including upon appeal and in the enforcement of any judgment. Waiver A waiver of any of the terms and conditions or breaches of this Agreement shall not operate as a subsequent waiver. Headings The headings used in this agreement are for general ease of reference only. They have no meaning and are not part of this Agreement. Integration This Agreement, together with all attachments hereto, are incorporated by reference into each other, and supercede all prior written and oral discussions, representations, negotiations, and agreements on the subject matter of this Agreement and represent the parties' complete, entire, and final understanding of the subject matter of this Agreement. Survival Notwithstanding completion or termination of this Agreement for any reason, all representations, warranties, limitations of liability, and indemnification obligations contained in this Agreement shall survive such completion or termination and remain in full force and effect until fulfilled. Severability If any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement are found to be void or unenforceable for any reason, the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, and the court shall attempt to judicially reform the void or unenforceable provisions to the maximum extent possible, consistent with the original intent expressed in the provisions, to render it valid and enforceable. If the court is unable to reform the provisions to render it valid and enforceable, the court shall strike only that portion which is invalid or unenforceable, and this Agreement shall then be construed without reference to the void or unenforceable provisions. SEA -LS -2005 (1/2005) Page 6 of 6 =iii SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Attachment to and part of Proposal 21-3-51023-001 Date: December 19, 2005 To: City of Tukwila, Public Works Dept./Engineering Division Attn: Ms. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL/ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSAL More construction problems are caused by site subsurface conditions than any other factor. The following suggestions and observations are offered to help you manage your risks. HAVE REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS. If you have never before dealt with geotechnical or environmental issues, you should recognize that site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions at those points where samples are taken, at the time they are taken. The data derived are extrapolated by the consultant, who then applies judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions; their reaction to construction activity; appropriate design of foundations, slopes, impoundments, recovery wells; and other construction and/or remediation elements. Even under optimal circumstances, actual conditions may differ from those inferred to exist, because no consultant, no matter how qualified, and no subsurface program, no matter how comprehensive, can reveal what is hidden by earth, rock, and time. DEVELOP THE SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION PLAN WITH CARE. The nature of subsurface explorations—the types, quantities, and locations of procedures used—in large measure determines the effectiveness of the geotechnical/environmental report and the design based upon it. The more comprehensive a subsurface exploration and testing program, the more information it provides to the consultant, helping to reduce the risk of unanticipated conditions and the attendant risk of costly delays and disputes. Even the cost of subsurface construction may be lowered. Developing a proper subsurface exploration plan is a basic element of geotechnical/environmental design, which should be accomplished jointly by the consultant and the client (or designated professional representatives). This helps the parties involved recognize mutual concerns and makes the client aware of the technical options available. Clients who develop a subsurface exploration plan without the involvement and concurrence of a consultant may be required to assume responsibility and liability for the plan's adequacy. READ GENERAL CONDITIONS CAREFULLY. Most consultants include standard general contract conditions in their proposals. One of the general conditions most commonly employed is to limit the consulting firm's liability. Known as a "risk allocation" or "limitation of liability," this approach helps prevent problems at the beginning and establishes a fair and reasonable framework for handling them, should they arise. Various other elements of general conditions delineate your consultant's responsibilities. These are used to help eliminate confusion and misunderstandings, thereby helping all parties recognize who is responsible for different tasks. In all cases, read your consultant's general conditions carefully and ask any questions you may have. HAVE YOUR CONSULTANT WORK WITH OTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS. Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretations of a consultant's report. To help avoid misinterpretations, retain your consultant to work with other project design professionals who are affected by the geotechn- ical/environmental report. This allows a consultant to explain report implications to design professionals affected by them, and to review their plans and specifications so that issues can be dealt with adequately. Although some other design professionals may be familiar with geotechnical/environmental concerns, none knows as much about them as a competent consultant. Page 1 of 2 1/2005 OBTAIN CONSTRUCTION MONITORING SERVICES. Most experienced clients also retain their consultant to serve during the construction phase of their projects. Involvement during the construction phase is particularly important because this permits the consultant to be on hand quickly to evaluate unanticipated conditions, to conduct additional tests if required, and when necessary, to recommend alternative solutions to problems. The consultant can also monitor the geotechnical/environmental work performed by contractors. It is essential to recognize that the construction recommendations included in a report are preliminary, because they must be based on the assumption that conditions revealed through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Because actual subsurface conditions can be discerned only during earthwork and/or drilling, design consultants need to observe those conditions in order to provide their recommendations. Only the consultant who prepares the report is fully familiar with the background information needed to determine whether or not the report's recommendations are valid. The consultant submitting the report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of preliminary recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction. REALIZE THAT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. If you have requested only a geotechnical engineering proposal, it will not include services needed to evaluate the likelihood of contamination by hazardous materials or other pollutants. Given the liabilities involved, it is prudent practice to always have a site reviewed from an environmental viewpoint. A consultant cannot be responsible for failing to detect contaminants when the services needed to perform that fiinction are not being provided. ONE OF THE OBLIGATIONS OF YOUR CONSULTANT IS TO PROTECT THE SAFETY, PROPERTY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. A geotechnical/environmental investigation will sometimes disclose the existence of conditions that may endanger the safety, health, property, or welfare of the public. Your consultant may be obligated under rules of professional conduct, or statutory or common law, to notify you and others of these conditions. RELY ON YOUR CONSULTANT FOR ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE. Your consulting fine is familiar withseveral techniques and approaches that can be used to help reduce risk exposure for all parties to a construction project, from design through construction. Ask your consultant, not only about geotechnical and environmental issues, but others as well, to learn about approaches that may be of genuine benefit. The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the ASFE/Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Geosciences, Silver Spring, Maryland Page 2 of 2 1/2005 4 I 1rim 1`t CO • 0 5 D � mz O Zr- D D • 0 D Z v) 0 = T M o D O--4� ▪ m 00 c ci) OO D 0 0, D Z m D 1 1 CD m CD 0D 0 Z 0 N 0 z Z m z O V rn 1.n a w N r 01-1 r=r0mXiZr 73ZrDr<21--Ivr 7C -I z1-1 I-1 rn In z In n n73 n Lno a v m l --I m r 1--{I -HI 4-1 -<mnnIr-4 z N lmi,-<-G z "' -Iz~D S In �O"' Dr -1n --1.t > DTD 700 r-ioor>vs z m z 30 :r r vs -I v $n DZ rDC 03 Z Oo 1AO-I mm - > Z rr oom<co -I 1- rn 4-4 73 • =vmoonO0vin r --I uv1�;<a-I S C C O O F-1 C 1 D In Z 73avID >DSZS C1• -4-I 73 cnmI�I 0D --1 < m m z s v D r <r�7 m S 0 N., m 1--1 D 70 0 ~-<O O?m�'--17S• en a O Ivisr rn-▪ 4nn 2 Orn 0 O r m u -I 3 Z3• = >I -4T m 3 E n 3 o m0nr-1mrn>o C r a a avlz• vlm v--I-Imm� 3 9, • m VI m r- •rn2 D 1-4 D o -4 In -1V1 Z ('1 m T • - m - �g• 3NOZ >IdOM NOIIVIS d3SSV 13 c • 8 m -n0 3 3NO3 A133VS 3WV ll 'NOM 031V7321 d3H1O ONV 0 rri-71O 0 rrt0 2 i17 1 10-02-2007 City of Tukvs'iia Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director DAVID KEHLE, ARCHITECT 1916 BONAIR DR SW SEATTLE WA 98116 RE: Permit No. D04-415 4320 S 131 PL TUKW Dear Permit Holder: In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a fmal inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division. Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days. Based on the above, you are hereby advised to: Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206-431-2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection. This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if the project should be considered abandoned. If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. Extension requests must be in writing and provide satisfactory reasons why circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken. In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 11/14/2007 , your permit will become null and void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Jtiir fer Marshall, Permit Technician xc: Permit File No. D04-415 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Page 1 of 1 Brenda Holt - Nor Med From: Donald Tomaso To: Brenda Holt Date: 03/05/2007 3:54 PM Subject: Nor Med Here is the new address for the new building that Nor Med has. Tax parcel # 7349200135, new address of 4320 - S. 131st. PI. with the following suite numbers, starting at the far North end of the building with suite 100, 120, 140, and 160 being the far South suite. Thanks Don -11/014/kaLkieko P-bi\ Po bud 3im 6eat2bLb 98�uf file://C:\Documents and Settings\Brenda\Local Settings\Temp\XPGrpWise\45EC3D23tu... 03/05/2007 February 9, 2007 cry of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director David Kehle 1916 Bonair Dr SW Seattle WA 98116 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #1 to Revision #3 Development Permit Application Number D07-036 Normed — 4310 S 131 P1 Dear Mr. Kehle, z JU U0 U 0 111 U w w 0 2 gQ -d �w z= 1— O This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can w be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same time and w reflected onour drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Fire0 Department. At this time the Y g ON Building, Planning, and Public Works Departments have no comments. p F-. ww Fire Department: Alan Metzler, at 206 575-4407, if you have questions regarding the u.1- 76 ..Z w O~ z attached memo. Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or other documentation. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted throuMh the mail or by a messen>°er service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433-7165. Sincerely, .�l Jen it arshall 4/12 Pe i Te ician encl File No. D04-415 P:Uennifer\Correction Letters\2004\D04-415 Corr Ltr #1 Rev 3.DOC jem 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS z Project Name: Normed 4310S131 PI 6D U O'. CO 0. Permit File No.: D04 -415w w J � Date: February 7, 2007 w o' Reviewer: Al Metzler u. Fire Protection Project Coordinator a: (206)575-4407 z H O: Z�-. 1. Provide a ceiling plan showing smoke vent layout. 2 D 2. Provide a FPE stamped analysis verifying fusible Zink temp. selection is appropriate. n 0 3. Submit an engineered proposal for manual vent operations activation for sprinkler riser !o room. (3 1: ww H U U. ~O I'll Z: U =. O1 z Le. S david kehle January 31, 2007 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Mr. Bob Benedicto Re: NorMed "Deferred Submittal" Smoke Vents Dear Bob, After our phone conversation and your e-mail relative to smoke vents, I am enclosing two copies of shop drawings for your review and approval. They are UL listed, have automatic operation via fusible link set at 370° (sprinkler is at 286°) and is capable of manual release. I trust these will meet with your approval. Sincer David Ke e DK/mt Enclosure: Two copies smoke vents Cc: Jonathan Bingham 0441/tukwilalet1-31-07 1916 Bonair Drive S.W. Seattle, WA 98116 (206) 433-8997 fax (206) 246-8369 email: dkehle@dkehlearch.com P.; S davoci kehle architect. RECEIVED Dirt OF TUKWILA OCT 0 6 2006 PERMIT CENTER z October 6, 2006 w • 2 -1U O 0 NCO aj0 N u_ WO w. co ?a w. Z o zt- U0 O -. City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Re: Mr. Ken Nelsen NorMed II — D04-415 4310 So. 131st Place Dear Ken, 0 I - w ui As a follow up to our phone conversation today regarding the above mentioned project, the �- z w o 1. General Contractor: Donovan Brothers o P.O. Box 818 following is the updated information: Auburn, Washington 98071 Attn: Mr. Ray Atwood Contract License #DONOVBI09405 2. Special Inspections: a. Concrete, rebar, high strength bolts, expansion bolts, epoxy adhesive fasteners and welding: Otto Rosenau and Assoc. 6747 Martin Luther King Way So. Seattle, Washington 206-725-4600 b. Soil bearing, compaction, site soil preparation, and foundation excavations: Terra Associates, Inc. 12525 Willows Road Suite 101 Kirkland, Washington 98034 425-821-7777 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: dkehle@dkehlearch,com • Mr. Ken Nelsen City of Tukwila Re: NorMed — D04-415 October 6, 2006 Page 2 Should you need anything else, please call. DK/mt cc: Mr. Larry Shaw Mr. Ray Atwood a:\0441 0-6410 z 11— au ret U:. • U O° U U 'U) W : ui = ; • 1W O, 52 a m_ Z ' I—O Z I—' U N` • W W: —O •..z w U co'. • H Z August 17, 2006 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director David Kehle David Kehle, Architect 12720 Gateway Dr, Ste 116 Seattle, WA 98168 RE: Request for Extension Development Permit NOW:Mg NorMed — 4310 S 131 PI Dear Mr. Kehle: This letter is in response to your written request for an extension to Permit No. D04-415. The Building Official has reviewed your letter and considered your request to extend the above referenced permit. The City of Tukwila Building Division will be extending the expiration date of your permit for an additional 180 days from the receipt of your request (through January 31, 2007). If you should have any questions, please contact our office at (206) 431-3670. Sincerel tAlt ifer it T arshall chnician File: Permit No. D06-032 Permit No. M06-018 P:Vennifer\Extension Letters\Pennits\D04-415 Permit Extension.doc Page 1 of 1 jem 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Le S d kehled� arc August 2, 2006 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Building Official Re: NorMed II 4310 So. 131st Place (D04-415) RECEIVED AUG 0 4 Z006 DEVELOPMENTCOy Dear Building Official, I am in receipt of a letter from the permit technician regarding the above project and that the permit needs to be extended. NorMed has been constructing the wetland and bank grading and stabilization the past months. The delays encountered have put the building construction behind schedule. We are currently re -bidding the project and NorMed would like to start the building shell this month. I am therefore requesting a 180 day extension to this permit to allow construction to start and finish. Work has started (the wetland was a part of the permit) with inspections, etc. occurring along that area of construction. It's just that the building construction has not started and a final inspection could not be called for. If you have any questions, please call. Si David Kehle DK/mt cc: Mr. Larry Shaw 04411citylet8-2-06 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 6xr iv Vi I�t Iif4- (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: dkehleadkehlearch.com 07-28-2006 Ci,y of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director DAVID KEHLE, ARCHITECT 12720 GATEWAY DR, SUITE 116 TUKWILA WA 98168 RE: Permit No. D04-415 4310 S 131 PL TUKW Dear Permit Holder: In reviewing our current records the above noted permit has not received a final inspection by the City of Tukwila Building Division. Per the International Building Code and/or the International Mechanical Code, every permit issued by the Building Division under the provisions of this code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work authorized by such permit is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such permit, or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days. Based on the above, you are hereby advised to: Call the City of Tukwila Inspection Request Line at 206-431-2451 to schedule for the next or final inspection. This inspection is intended to determine if substantial work has been accomplished since issuance of the permit or last inspection; or if. the project should be considered abandoned. If such determination is made, the Building Code does allow the Building Official to approve one or more extensions of time for additional periods not exceeding 90 days each. Extension requests must be in writing and provide satisfactory reasons why circumstances beyond the applicants control have prevented action from being taken. In the event you do not call for the above inspection and receive an extension prior to 09/02/2006, your permit will become null and void and any further work on the project will require a new permit and associated fees. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, wAbc-44A Je t r M rshall, ermit ician xc: Permit File No. D04-415 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 =Hi SHANNON &WILSON, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SEATTLE • RICHLAND • FAIRBANKS • ANCHORAGE • ST. LOUIS • BOSTON • DENVER TRANSMITTAL 400 N. 34TH STREET, SUITE 100 P.O. Box 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 206.632.8020 FAX 206.695.6777 TO Jill Mosqueda, PE Date February 10, 2006 Company City of Tukwila Public Works Department Phone Address 6300 Southcenter BLVD, STE 100 Fax Tukwila WA 98188 Job No. 21-1-20436 SUBJECT Signed Contract THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED: ITEM DATE No. DESCRIPTION DOCS NORMED DEVELOPMENT - Per your request - For your approval - For your information - For your files - For your review - For your action- Return with comments - Other Hi Jill Enclosed are the geotechnical documents we reviewed for the NORMED development peer review.. Feel free to call me at (206) 695-6875 if you have any questions.. RECEIVED FEB 1 3 2006 Martin W. Page, P.E., L.E.G. TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS Associate 21-1-20436-001 z Z QQ• � JU U O co W la w2) _a �w z= o z I- WuJ U 0- C1 W W HF O w z O z FROM : DAUID KEHLE,ARCHITECT FAX NO. : 206 246 8369 Feb. 15 2006 10:31AM P1 Jill Mosqueda, 10:14 AM 2/15/2006 -0800, NorMed D4-415 Revisions To: Jill Moaqueda <jmosqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.us From: David Kehle <dkehleedkehlearch.com> Subject: NorMed 04415 Revisions e c: Attached: Hi Jill, PERMANENT FILE cc 1 just received a breakdown of the costs of Revision 81 for the above project and 1 am wondering if you remembered that Lary Shaw cut you a check for $2,000 for the peer review already. The breakdown states that the he owes for the Public Works Peer Review which states $3,000. Would you please check on this for me? Thank you for your help. David Kehle David Kahle, Architect 12720 Gateway Drive Suite 116 Seattle, Washington 98168 206-433-8997 - phone 206-246-8369 - fax Post -It• Fax Note 7671 Date 2_6 Av.. j To J I ( 1 Mos 4dA, From ") 1 61 I Co. DkA CoJDept. Pubt i c. o ieKS Phone K Phone # Feu # Fax # CL. 'e 4 Q o o f� 0 J�- Printed for David Kahle <dkehleCgdkehiearch.com> 1 i Jill Mosqueda - Re: Permit Fees for D04-415 &-D05-016 Page 1 From: Brenda Holt To: Lawrence M. Shaw Date: 2/15/06 3:38PM Subject: Re: Permit Fees for D04-415 & D05-016 The balance owing for D04-415 is as follows: PERMANENT FILE COPY $2,485.67 - Public Works Additional Plan Review $1,000.00 - Public Works Peer Review (balance from Permit No. D05-016) $2,510.67 - Public Works Additional Permit/Inspection Fee $5,996.34 - TOTAL There is a zero balance for D05-016. Any further questions, please let me know. Thank you - Brenda Holt Permit Coordinator City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter BI, #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 (v) 206-431-3672 - (0206-431-3665 http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us »> "Lawrence M. Shaw" <Ishaw@normed.com> 02/15/2006 3:20:56 PM »> Brenda Holt: Could you please itemize the costs for the above permit revision. I understand from Jill Mosqueda that a $2000 deposit needed to be applied to the originally quoted fee. Thank you. Lawrence M. Shaw NorMed-Shaw Partnership CC: David Kehle; Jennifer Marshall; Jill Mosqueda City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: February 10, 2006 CONTACT: David Kehle, David Kehle Architects RE: D04-415, NorMed Warehouse and Wetland Creation ADDRESS: 4310 S. 131st Place, Tukwila The revised permit D04-415 is approved by the Planning Division with the additional conditions noted below. If you have any questions, please contact Carol Lumb 206-431-3661. Conditions to be Added to Revised D04-415 1. Adolfson must visit the site prior to planting to evaluate the depth and condition of the soil amendment. Any remedial action Adolfson determines is needed must be reported to the City either by e-mail or letter. 2. A drip irrigation system must be used to water the plants during dry periods until plants are completely established. 3. Please identify the owner's representative who is responsible for verifying conformance to the plant schedule and characteristics. 4. Written verification must be received from the wetland biologist that the wetland mitigation plantings have occurred per the approved mitigation plan. 5. All groundwater seepage areas shall be field located and adequately mitigated by construction of a rock revetment per the recommendations and specifications of the geotechnical report. 6. Prior to the final planning inspection, provide documentation that the new stream channel that formed at the base of the slope during the January storm event will not compromise the slope stability or cause additional sedimentation of the stream, or propose measures to control these problems, if necessary. CI, q:\Gener0l\200-4 ('vlemos\D04- 4I5-7.doc Page I or 1 2;,11I'AI?:; .I'•NI 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 MICRO COM SYSTEMS LTD. ATTENTION n The next image may be a duplicate of the previous image. E. Please disregard previous image. n Please disregard previous 2 images. n Please disregard previous 3 images. n Other: 164-1141 La L -745111W101-74 0 'T° -ft -6 irk -6 w6 i6 irk irk irk irk ir6 irk irk irk City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: February 10, 2006 CONTACT: David Kehle, David Kehle Architects RE: D04-415, NorMed Warehouse and Wetland Creation ADDRESS: 4310 S. 131st Place, Tukwila The revised permit D04-415 is approved by the Planning Division with the additional conditions noted below. If you have any questions, please contact Carol Lumb 206-431-3661. Conditions to be Added to Revised D04-415 1. Adolfson must visit the site prior to planting to evaluate the depth and condition of the soil amendment. Any remedial action Adolfson determines is needed must be reported to the City either by e-mail or letter. 2. A drip irrigation system must be used to water the plants during dry periods until plants are completely established. 3. Please identify the owner's representative who is responsible for verifying conformance to the plant schedule and characteristics. 4. Written verification must be received from the wetland biologist that the wetland mitigation plantings have occurred per the approved mitigation plan. 5. All groundwater seepage areas shall be field located and adequately mitigated by construction of a rock revetment per the recommendations and specifications of the geotechnical report. 6. Prior to the final planning inspection, provide documentation that the new stream channel that formed at the base of the slope during the January storm event will not compromise the slope stability or cause additional sedimentation of the stream, or propose measures to control these problems, if necessary. C1. q:\General\2004 M•lemos\D04-415-7.doe Page 1 of 1 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 ne kehled Art tw: February 1, 2006 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Ms. Carol Lumb Re: NorMed II (D05-016 & D04-415) Dear Carol, I have asked each team member to respond to your latest comment letter dated January 18, 2006, received January 24th regarding the above referenced project. The following is a recap of your letter: 1. Rock Revetment: C5/11 has added the location of the rock revetment with adequate verbiage for the contractor to construct. (Revision flag #9. 2. Top soil will not be placed (more erosion) but will be hydroseeded with an erosion control mix (see Adolfson letter). 3. Trees are protected and we will not install signage (see Adolfson letter). 4. Landscaping along Macadam Road will be installed per plan (see Adolfson letter). 5. The silt fence along parking lot will be re -installed (provided access). 6. See Adolfson letter. 7. See Adolfson letter. I believe all issues have been discussed. Four complete sets have been included with the only new sheet being C5/11 (clouded revision 9). I trust this will answer your concems adequately. Since we will be deleting the retaining wall permit, I have included only four sets for the main permit. Please rescind the wall permit (D05-016). If you have any questions, please feel free to call. David Kehle Enclosure: Four sets (civil & landscape & Adolfson) Letter from Adolfson dated Jan. 30, 2006 PS The right of way use permit is ready to pick up. 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: dkehle@dkehlearch.com MEMORANDUM DATE: January 30, 2006 TO: Carol Lumb, City of Tukwila FROM: Mark Epstein, Landscape Architect CC: Dave Kehle; Larry Shaw; file ADOLFSON• Environ' nentai Soiutions RE: Response to Comments NorMed: D05-016 and 004-415 Adolfson Associates, inc. (Adolfson) is pleased to provide this memorandum to the City at the request of Mr. Larry Shaw of NorMed Partnership (Owner). This memo is in response to the Planning Division Comments of Correction Letter #2 for Revision #1, in a letter to David Kehle, Architect dated January 24, 2006 (Planning Division Comments dated January 18, 2006). Our responses are numbered in accordance with the Planning Division Comments. 1. Barghausen Engineers will provide the civil drawing showing the location and details of the rock revetment. 2. Topsoil will not be placed over the rock revetment and it will not be seeded. The rock is approximately 12" deep and up to the ground surface. The seed will be an erosion control mix sprayed onto the slope from above in a hydroseed slurry combined with fertilizer, mulch, a tacking agent and soil binders. The seed mixture will be 40% Red Fescue (Festuca rubra); 40% Perennial Rye (Lolium perenne); 10% Colonial Bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis); and 10% White Dutch Clover (pre -inoculated Trifolium repens). 3. Trees located within the two wildlife corridors will be retained and protected with temporary fencing until construction activities have been completed. The Owner will omit the wildlife crossing signs from the construction contract. 4. The landscaping shown along Macadam Road in our original planting plan will be installed per that plan, with slight adjustments to plant locations to account for the exclusion of the retaining wall. 5. The owner will eliminate the gap in the silt fencing at the existing parking lot. 6. Plant installation on the steep slope is the responsibility of the contractor. The erosion control blanket will be installed prior to planting shrubs and trees, which will minimize slope disturbance and allow better footing for contractor personnel. We anticipate the contractor will employ safety ropes from the top of the slope, with workers rappelling down the steeper slopes, cutting into the erosion blanket and installing each plant with a shovel or planting dibble. The Owner has agreed to include drip irrigation from soaker hoses set on the ground surface. 7. Adolfson will visit the site prior to planting to evaluate the depth and condition of the soil amendment. We understand that recent rains may have removed some of the topsoil and soil amendments added to the mitigation area, thereby changing the depth and/or condition of the site. Please feel free to contact me if you require any further clarification. Please note that our comments have been based upon our experience on site and conversations with the property owner. Adolfson did not conduct a site visit in support of this memo. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 Tel 206 789 9658 www.adoltou.com Fax 206 789 9684 January 24, 2006 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director David Kehle David Kehle, Architect 12720 Gateway Dr, Ste 116 Seattle, WA 98168 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #2 for Revision #1 Development Permit Application Number D04-415 Normed — 4310 S 131 PI Dear Mr. Kehle: This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can be approved. All correction requests from each department mustbe addressed at the same time and reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Planning and Public Works Departments. At this time the Building and Fire Departments have no comments. Planning Department: Carol Lumb, at 206 431-3661, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or other documentation. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal: I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted throurih the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433-7165. Sincerely, encl arshallOmit( hnician xc: File No. D04-415 P:Vennifer\Correction Lcttersk2004\D04-415 Correction Ltr 42 Rev I.DOC jem 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: January 18, 2006 CONTACT: David Kehle, David Kehle Architrects RE: D04-415, D05-016 ADDRESS: 4310 S. 130 Place Please review the following comments listed below and submit your revisions accordingly. If you have any questions on the requested revision, Carol Lumb is the planner assigned to the file and can be reached at 206-431-3661. 1. The November 10, 2005 report prepared by Terra Associates recommends constructing a rock revetment over the portion of the slope face where seepage is occurring in the vicinity of boring B-1. The civil drawing C5 submitted on December 21, 2005 does not show this revetment. Please revise the drawing to show the location of the revetment and provide a detail of the revetment for the contractor. 2. Adolfson's memo indicates that the rock revetment will be hydroseeded after placement of the erosion control blanket over the top. Does this mean that some topsoil will be placed on top of the rock underneath the erosion control blanket? Please clarify. What seed mix will be used for the hydroseeding? 3. The- requirement for wildlife crossing signage is rescinded. The trees that are located in the two wildlife corridors must remain and continue to be protected with the temporary fencing. 4. Since a revised site landscaping plan was not submitted, it is assumed that the landscaping along Macadam Rd. South will be installed even though the retaining wall is being eliminated. If this is not the case, then a revised landscaping plan must be submitted and approved. 5. There is still a breach in the silt fencing facing the existing NorMed parking lot. The opening must be closed to prevent sediment from entering the wetland and stream. If a temporary closure is necessary for maintenance purposes, it should be limited in size to allow only passage of personnel and not heavy equipment. 6. Given the very steep slopes that will remain after grading is completed, the City has concerns about how the slopes can safely be planted and maintained. Please explain. Since planting has not yet taken place, plant survival will be compromised if irrigation is not installed. Drip irrigation will be necessary to ensure plant survival until plants are established. Overhead watering will simply run-off down the slopes and is, therefore, not acceptable. 7. Given the sediment transfer that has occurred during the recent heavy rains and that the plants have not been installed per the approved wetland mitigation plan, prior to planting the wetland area, the wetland biologist needs to re-evaluate the site to see if additional soil amendment is necessary. NorMed P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, WA 98124 (206) 242-8228 January 23, 2006 NorMed-Shaw Partnership Ms. Carol Lumb City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: NorMed-Shaw Partnership Permit # D04-415 Dear Ms. Lumb: R�C,�o�� 'SAN 2520115 O EIOP eArf r z rt '~ w U0 co WI r H N � w 0 gco Q d. z▪ = 0 z� Ul • w • o In response to your letter of January 12, 2006, regarding erosion control on the above noted 0 _ocin wW • 0 1) Installed plastic sheeting where the city's culvert drains on to our hillside property. u~ - To minimize erosion at the base of the hill we have extended the sheeting horizontally w z out into the wetland. • N 0 2) Closed temporary openings in the silt control fencing. Z permit, we have taken the following actions: 3) Covered the entire hillside with an erosion control bonding agent. As the weather improves we will continue with the final grading of the slope and the installation of additional project plan erosion control features. Sincerely, 7i/kAvkid Lawrence M. Shaw Partner NorMed-Shaw Partnership ImmRdiat9 Care MA(IICFI SUDDIIRS City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director January 12, 2006 Mr. Larry Shaw NorMed 4310 S 131st Place Tukwila, WA RE: NorMed, Permit Number D04-415 Dear Mr. Shaw: PERMANENT FILE COPY I visited the NorMed site with our environmental specialist, Sandra Whiting on January 11, 2006 and we observed significant active erosion of the slope in numerous locations and sediment transport into the newly created wetland and Southgate Creek. In addition, stormwater from a culvert that crosses under 42nd Avenue South is discharging directly to the ground, causing significant erosion of the slope. There also appear to be groundwater seeps in the same area that are causing erosion. As you may be aware, your contractor was instructed by Public Works during an inspection on December 12, 2005 to implement the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control plan (TESC). This has not been done, and you are in violation of Tukwila Municipal Code 1430.050 (Stormwater Management, Compliance) and 1430.070 (Stormwater Management Standards). You must take immediate steps to temporarily stabilize the slopes, per the recommendations in the Shannon and Wilson letter of January 5, 2006 and the Terra Associates letter of November 7, 2005. In addition, you must take steps to dissipate the energy from the storm water discharging to the slope from the culvert and seeps on the southwest part of the site. In resolving these issues, work in the stream must be avoided because salmon may be migrating now. You must also designate an Erosion Control Supervisor in accordance with the TESC. You must implement these control measures no later than January 13, 2006. A report of the actions taken must be provided to the City by Tuesday, January 17, 2006. You must also provide the City with the name and contact information of the Erosion Control Supervisor. Your failure to carry out these erosion control measures will result in an enforcement action. The existing slopes and the erosion and sedimentation that have occurred at the site raise doubts about.the satisfactory implementation of the remainder of the wetland mitigation plan. We will address our concerns about this in our response to the comments received from David Kehle dated December 19, 2005 on the proposed revisions to D05-016 and D04-415. CL q:/NorMed/3004 SEPA RU Revisions/Shaw.doe Page 1 o1'2 01/12/2006 11:51 AM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Mr. Larry Shaw NorMed January 12, 2006 Once the water in the stream recedes, the site will need to be inspected to determine if additional best management practices will be needed to protect the stream and wetland from future erosion and sedimentation. If you have any questions, please call me at 206-431-3661. Sincerely, Carol Lumb, Senior Planner cc: Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist, DCD Nora Gierloff, Planning Manager Jim Morrow, Director, Public Works Jill Mosqueda, Engineer, Public Works Department Greg Villanueva, Project Inspector, Public Works Department Larry Fisher, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife David Kehle, David Kehle Architects CL Page 2 of 2 01/12/2006 11:51 AM q:/NorMed/200-1 SEPA RU Revisions/Shaw.doc 14,1 kehle architect December 19, 2005 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Ms. Jennifer Marshall Re: NorMed II D05-016 & 004-415 4310 So. 131st Place Dear Jennifer, z z w U UO U❑ co LU J= LL REw O CITY OF TUKWIIA gD pit; 2 CEIVED 2005 LL PERMIT CENTER iw Z= F. O Z F- LU 0 O- The following comments are in response to City comments from two agencies. These w w LL 0 A. Plannina Dept. Comments —12/5/05 Carol Lumb 1. Since the removal of the wall now allows more planting and the slope of 1-1/2 to 1 will N still be stable, the landscape really is not impacted other than quantityor spacing. See also Adolfson response. Z 2. The "seepage" revetment is a very small area (5' x 20') and is relatively insignificant in the scope of the project. See Adolfson response and plan revision showing locations. 3. The revised submittal does reflect the revised planting plan relative to no wall and no changes were done because the slope change from 2 to 1 to 1-1/2 to 1. See also Adolfson response. responses are as follows: 4. The original TESC had shown an erosion control fence at the edges of existing to new wetland which is still in place. Now that we have completed the stream and wetland relocation and the hillside is not complete, we will add an erosion control fence at the base of the hill (see revised civil sheet/Barghausen). 5. Slopes are now going to be accessed from Macadam Road with long reach equipment Thus we will be out of the "emerging" wetland and don't have to go across the stream. There are no wetland plantings in place yet and nothing but hydroseed on the hill, so no impacts will be done. 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek©dkehlearch.com Ms. Jennifer Marshall City of Tukwila Re: NorMed — D04-415, 005-016 December 19, 2005 Page 2 6. The Addison plans were changed to reflect the removal of the wall and really, no changes were necessary. In addition you noted a "breach" in two locations of the silt fence. I was at the site today and saw two "access" areas from the upland to the wetland to enable maintenance — are those what you're looking at? We could put in a removable section of silt fence if you are concerned. Also, since there is no wall anymore, do we get rid of the "habitat crossings" since the entire hill is now accessible? B. Public Works 11/23/05 Jill Mosqueda 1. The $2,000 check for the "peer review" was delivered to Public Works on 12/7/05. Thank you for your reviews. COM David Kehle DK/mt Enclosure: Civil Sheet C5 of 11 cc: Mr. Larry Shaw w/enclosure Mr. Ali Sadr w/enclosure Mr. Mark Epstein w/enclosure a:10441 bitylet12-19-05 MEMORANDUM DATE: December 20, 2005 TO: Carol Lumb, City of Tukwila FROM: Mark Epstein, Landscape Architect CC: Teresa Vanderburg; file A D 0 L P C 0 N En,viror nen-tai Sof!ubtion-s RE: Response to Comments NorMed: 005-016 and 004-415 This memo is in response to the Planning Division Comments of Correction Letter #1 for Revision #1, in a letter to David Kehle, Architect dated December 8, 2005. Our responses are numbered in accordance with the Planning Division Comments. 1. There will be no impacts to the new wetland as a result from re -grading the slope in order to eliminate the need for the retaining wall. We understand from Barghausen Engineers that the new slope was started at the existing toe of slope, resulting in no change to the wetland area or perimeters. 2. Our understanding is that the rock revetment (as detailed in the Slope Evaluation study by Terra Associates dated November 7, 2005) to control seepage on the slope will be installed in one location encompassing an area approximately 20'x30' near the top of the slope. This area cannot be planted with trees or shrubs, however the rock will be covered with erosion control blanket and hydroseeded. We will field -adjust the plants proposed for this area to other locations so the number of plants installed will remain the same. 3. We propose no change to the buffer planting plan except the adjustment noted in #2 above. We concur with the use of an erosion control blanket along the entire slope face. Plants may be installed after blanket installation by cutting an "X" through the blanket for each plant and installing per our slope planting detail shown on our plans. Each plant should be protected from spray during the hydroseeding operation. 4. A temporary erosion control and sedimentation plan for slope re -grading is being prepared by Barghausen Engineers. 5. Our understanding is that slope re -grading will be performed from the top of the slope and no work will occur in the wetland. We anticipate no impact to the wetland plants or plantings on the slope as a result of the regarding. All grading work should be completed and the erosion control blanket in place before planting begins. 6. As stated in responses #2 and #3, we propose no change to the approved landscaping plan except for a change in location for plants displaced by the rock revetment. We propose to make those changes in the field based on the site conditions after grading. Please contact me if you require any further clarification. ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 Tel 206 789 9658 tit ww.adnllsnn.cnm Fax 206 789 9684 City of Tukwila Public Works Department Development Section 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite 100 z Tukwila, WA 98188-2544 Z (206) 433-0179/Phone (206) 431-3665/Faxre PERMANENT FILE COPY No colaJ= F-- ° w < • d w F- z� I- 0 Z~ w U � O N o ff ww UO z w 1— z LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. Date: December 14, 2005 400 North 34th Street, Suite 100 Attention: Martin Page, P.E. (P.O. Box 300303) Seattle, WA 98103 RE: Normed Retaining Walls D05-016 206.632.8020 Attached is the following: [X] Plans [ ] Letter [X] Reports [ ] Easements [] Other Quantity Description 1 Plan set Revision 1 1 Draft EIS — Geotechnical study by Assoc. Earth Sciences, Inc. 09.10.2001 1 Geotechnical Report by Terra Associates, Inc. 11.17.2004 1 Geotechnical Report by Terra Associates, Inc. 11.07.2005 These are transmitted as checked below: [X] Detailed Review [ ] Approved as noted [ ] As requested [ ] Returned for correction [ ] Submit mylars [ Remarks/Comments: Applicant proposes eliminating retaining wall on slope/embankment that supports Macadam Rd S (42°' Av. S.). Please provide a price quote and a contract for Geotechnical peer review. Please return all materials once the contract is closed. If you have questions / comments, please contact me at 206.431.2449. cc: File # D05-016 D05-415 Signed: L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. Public Works Development Engineer Fed. I.D. #91-0745357 400 N. 34th St., #100 ='1' PERMANENT FILE COPY SHANNON 6WLSO NI, INC. Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants P.O. Box 300303 Seattle, Washington 98103 06933 CITY OF TUKWILA Attention: MS. L. JILL MOSQUEDA, P.E. P W D / DEVELOPMENT SECTION 6300 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, SUITE 100 TUKWILA, WA 98188-2544 DEC 3 0 2005 TUrcvvILtd PUBLIC WORKS Fax #(206) 633-6777 Telephone: (206) 632-8020 Invoice No : 73376 JOB REFERENCE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES NORMED RETAINING WALLS MACADAM ROAD SOUTH, TUKWILA, WA THIS PERIOD FROM: 12/11/2005 TO: 12/24/2005 INVOICE DATE 12/28/2005 CONTRACT OR PURCHASE ORDER FILE # D05-016 AUTHORIZED FEE $ 3,000.00 JOB NUMBER 21-1-20436 (01) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TOTAL TO DATE PREVIOUS BILLINGS DUE THIS PERIOD • Phase Code / Name 001 - PEER REVIEW Lump Sum 100% Complete Invoice Totals 3,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 OK TO PAY APPROVAL 0.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 Please pay from thls invoice. Net 30 days. Late charge of 1.5% per month on past due accounts CITY of TUKWILA PURCHASE ORDER DEPT.tif 3 2 6 6 2 CODE__ THIS NUMBER MUST APPEAR ON ALL PACKAGES, INVOICES, AND CORRESPONDENCE. 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD • TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 • (206) 433-1800 SHIP TO VENDOR NAME & ADDRESS '-,-)Kivw\cm,,,_\ 1;;;(' 2)CAIC 1- G -3(3 66S' 10 3 DEPT. VENDOR CODE 2/f DATE (FOR FINANCE USE ONLY) t Y' El VERBAL QUOTE ri WRITTEN QUOTE STREET ADDRESS TUKWILA, WA s'QUANTITY .. ? 4 ` `, . %DESCRIPTION FUND • � DEPT BASUB . ELEMENT OBJ . SUB OBJ AMOUNT (...r / t (t'\ i ( ,C_. /.. Ksf V i(E: 1.-j 'v(.) f 3, S.Sr) 6,.'6 L) : i r (1 L f .) t_`` (,, ;j f lith. (1C-it1A. I r> (7) U 16 \ Lie i } iY 3. C i, h 1,„►(,y I 1?(. • • .1 )i) .1” Ci Vt:e,,vk\ I— / / Zni Vats e. .Aj ,ter /1 2,,6, OTHER SOURCES DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL EXECUTIVE APPROVAL QUOTE QUOTE VENDOR COPY l December 8, 2005 Ciz of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director David Kehle David Kehle, Architect 12720 Gateway Dr, Ste 116 Seattle, WA 98168 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #1 for Revision #1 Development Permit Application Number D04-415 Normed — 4310 S 131 PI Dear Mr. Kehle: This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same lime and reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Planning and Public Works Departments.•Atthis time the Building and Fire Departments have no comments. Planning Department: Carol Lumb, at 206 431-3661, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Public Works Department: Jill Mosqueda, at 206 431-2449, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or. other documentation. The.City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433-7165. Sincerely, wjAvce, Jehni er arshall rmit Technician encl xc: File No. D04-415 P:Veimifer\Correction Letters\Do4.415 Correction Ltr NI Rev I.DOC jem 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: December 5, 2005 CONTACT: Dave Kehle, David Kehle Architects RE: NorMed: D05-016 and D04-415 ADDRESS: 4310 S. 131st Place Please review the following comments listed below and submit your revisions accordingly. If you have any questions on the requested revision, Carol Lumb is the planner assigned to the file and can be reached at 206-431-3661 or you may contact Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist at 206-431-3663. 1. The plans do not make it clear what, if any, impacts to the new wetland will result from re -grading the slope in order to eliminate the need for the retaining wall. The applicant's wetland consultant should review the plans and provide input. 2. The plans do not indicate if or where the rock revetments will be put in place along the seeps as recommended in the geotechnical report, nor are design details provided for these revetments. If the revetments are not proposed, applicant must explain how the seepage issue will be controlled to maintain slope stability. Installation of extensive revetments is not necessarily appropriate for the wetland buffer and, therefore, if control of seepage is needed, the applicant should develop alternative techniques more in keeping with enhancement of the buffer function. This should be coordinated with the applicant's wetland consultant. 3. Any changes to the approved buffer planting plan resulting from re -grading the slope should be reflected in a revised planting plan and submitted for approval. The applicant's wetland consultant should review the use of the proposed erosion control blanket with respect to the planting plan. 4. A temporary erosion control and sedimentation plan will need to be implemented to prevent sediment from entering the wetland and the stream during re -grading. 5. Will the slopes be accessed through the wetlands and across the relocated stream to carry out the re -grading? If so, how will impacts to these sensitive areas be mitigated? What are the impacts to the wetland plantings that go up the slope? 6. The plans provided do not indicate whether any revisions are proposed to the approved landscaping plan. In addition, at site visit today it was observed that the silt fencing has been breached in two locations. This must be repaired as soon as possible or you will be cited for a code violation. CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards Permit #: D04-415 D05-016 Retaining Wall Project Name: Normed 4310S131PI Revision: #2 Review #: 1 Date: 11.23.2005 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. The City Of Tukwila Public Works Department (PW) has the following comments regarding your application for the above permit. Please contact me at 206.431.2449, if you have any questions. 1 The revisions trigger a peer review by a geotechnical engineer. Public Works negotiates the contract with an independent geotechnical engineering firm and the applicant pays for the review. Please provide $2000 for initial costs for the review. If the review costs less, the remainder will be returned to the applicant. PW notified applicant of this requirement by phone 11.17.2005. Le. kehled November 10, 2005 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Building, Planning & Public Works Re: NorMed II - D05-016 4310 So. 131st Place Dear Staff, PERMANENT FILE Can' VED CITY OF TUKWILA NOV 1 0 2005 PERMIT CENTER RECFPVED NOV 15 2005 i ut\vvIL k t UBLIC WORKS The new stream has been relocated and approved by Fisheries and the wetland area has been overexcavated and top soil mix installed ready for planting. In cutting back the hillside for the wetland creation, the hill stability is better than previously anticipated. The soils engineer has done additional testing and has concluded that the slope will be stable at a 1-1/2 to 1 slope (previously a 2 to 1 slope). This change in the grading will eliminate the need for the retaining wall. I have attached the Soils Engineer Report and revised architectural site plans SD -1, civil drawings 1/2 and 2/2 and Adolfson drawings 1-5 which reflect the wall deletion and grade changes. We are requesting this owner revision to the retailing wall permit (actually probably void that permit) and revise the building permit accordingly. Please advise if you need anything else from us. S David ehle DK/mt cc: Mr. Larry Shaw w/enclosure Ms. Alison Moss Enclosure: Engineering Soils Report Site, Civil and Adolfson Drawings a:\04411citylet11-3-05retaining 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek©dkehlearch,com City of Tukwila . Steven M. Mullet, Mayor October 25, 2005 Department of Public Works James E Morrow, P.E., Director Normed-Shaw Partnership P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, WA 98124 To Whom It May Concern: Enclosed is check #319319 for $2,400.00. This check is to refund overpayment of the Cascade Water Alliance Fee on Permit D04-415. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206)433-7184. Sincerely, a/U,e--(—C (/(}.5 Laurie Werle Administrative Technician enclosure 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-433-0179 • Fax: 206-431-3665 CITY OF TUKWILA, WA 98188-2544 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK NO ANUOICE'lklUMBER . " c - - ... "1.?..~. -.!.DATE •; • ..• ' : P.O. NUMBER;;%"•1•,;;;;•:;„:, ; ••.•' , ; • ..;.; •-: •/,'•,;;;;;;;, ;z06";GESCRIPTION;:;,)2,;;;,4n,:.i'A,.•• .;,';•-414;;;11,14-1f:i.,;.'.•7'n",1:',..5:',1',,,,7f,',',".°Y :'...0r, :41(>1C.,::.,4%4MOUNTieWiaAariull 1024313 10/19/2005 CASCADE WATER ALLIANCE REFUND ••• 2,400.00 •. PAY PLEASE DETACH BEFORE DEPOSITING THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORED BACKGROUND -NOT A WHITE BACKGROUND CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 Southcenter Boulevard TUkwila WA 98188-2544 PAYABLE THROUGH U,S. BANK 151 Andover Park East • Tukwila. WA 55155 • 19-10 1250 moo F:10AVOREGV.Ple.2 1.1.tik4KUMBERAN9a7; 008801 110/24/2005 • Two Thousand Four Hundred Dollars and No Cents • , • TO THE NORMED-SHAW PARTNERSHIP ORDER PO BOX 3644 OF • SEATTLE, WA 98124 *******2,400.00 THE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS AM ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK -HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW. z w 6 D —J 11- 00 UJ LUI (J)LL Ilio < w z o z LU u j 0 0 (22 0 I— uJ I 0 Z IC5 0 z N Jill Mosqueda - Earthwork Contractor Page 1 From: "Lawrence M. Shaw" <Ishaw@normed.com> To: Jill Mosqueda <jmosqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 9/16/05 10:55AM Subject: Earthwork Contractor PERMANENT FILE COPY Jill: Per our conversation this morning here is the information on the Earthwork rt 2 Contractor: 00 Contractor Business Name & Address: N w: Interwest Construction & Development, Inc. LL 1425 - 22nd Street NW, Suite E w 0 Auburn, WA 98001-3334 og Contact: u. N d: Chad Littleton H w. Project Manager z 253-939-9787 Z OI_ Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks very much for your help, Jill. v o. 0 V - Larry Shaw • f- NorMed-Shaw Partnership = W u_ r- ")" Z CC: "Dave Kehle" <dkehle@dkehlearch.com> W US P. Z :Jill Mosqueda Re Fwd: NorMed Retaining Wall Page 1 From: Bob Benedicto To: Jill Mosqueda Date: 9/16/05 11:55AM Subject: Re: Fwd: NorMed Retaining Wall PERMANENT FILE COPY FYI regarding the memo to Reid/Middleton....Phil Brazil will be advised to look at the retaining wall only for permit application D05-016 (this has not been sent for structural review as of this date), and to confirm that the r design considered the surcharge due to traffic on Macadam Road. Regarding the vault: A separate permit will be required for this construction. Unfortunately, the plans that were submitted for the Normed building gave no indication that a storm water vault was to be installed within a few feet of Northwest wall of the building. This may cause changes to the foundation requirements in this area. I will so advise Phil Brazil and await word on this matter before approving the permit for the building. »> Jill Mosqueda 09/16/05 10:31AM »> Here is what i got from D kehle regarding constrcution sequencing. L. Jill Mosqueda P.E. • PERMANENT FILE COPY aec<,\ c;'°131 -34a -po i}- 4, S NORMED CHECKLIST 09.15.2005 Richard T Do we own existin • pipe South • ate creek -- Al Do we have two 1" meters on record and how de we decommission? 2 ( �4! Before Issue D05-016OW- aanciaed ROW -Financial Guarantee F $42,375.00 — c,.% c 4 ail -Cc -fi L ' A 1(W1a g , �= ROW - Business license ROW - Automobile insuranc ROW - Liabilit insurance Before Final ROW 2 -year Financial Guarante Turnover $2,825.00 Surface water improvements in S Southgate Creek . •e Easement Easement for access and maintenance for FYI Size 1-1/2" New or existing New Im . rovements RPPA Wilkens 975 and freeze protection Meters Domestic Domestic Domestic 2" 1" Existing_ Existin • RPPA Wilkens 975 and freeze protection Remove Domestic 1" Existin• Remove Irri•ation Irritation 1" 1-1/2" New Existing Deduct- •rotected by RPPA at domestic AMR and Radio me Money En•ineer Estimates Perf Guarantee 2- r maintain -- S 131st St $28 250.00 $42 375.00 $2 825.00 Onsite $562,845.00 NA Street vacation $35,600.00 Ordinance 2094 : Applied to Macadam Improvements Frontage Improvements in Macadam Rd S $90,888.00 Normed paid $55, 288 + $35600 = $90888 toward 2006 Overlay project : 104/02.595.300.63.85 aec<,\ c;'°131 -34a -po i}- 4, S 8410121033 General Easement to the City of Tukwila by NorMed Industrial Park - Phase I South 131st Street and 44th Place South NorMed, Inc., a Washington Corporation, Grantor, hereby grantspMNIIr CEN1U.i to the City of Tukwila, Grantee, a nonexclusive perpetual r..: easement:;fdr access' throughout the,bereinafter described r.,; property to install,, maintain, operate, monitor, repair and replace •water- meters .and public..utilities built by the . �, r� Grantee. This easement is conditional upon Grantee's , ('• agreement to.restore at its.expense•:those areas excavated for r, installation of.utilitie•stiand to conduct Grantee's.activities ':-.;in a way -that will.:not unreasonably—interfere with Grantor's 0f use of the property. Parcel IIAII Lot 8, Block 2, Riverton Replat of Lots 1 to 5, Fostoria Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 13 of Plats, page 40, in King County, Washington; TOGETHER with that portion of vacated 43rd Place South adjoining. Parcel IIBn Lot 8, Block 3, Riverton Replat of Lots 1 to 5, Fostoria Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 13 of Plats, page 40, in King County, Washington; • TOGETHER with that portion of vacated 43rd .Place South adjoining. Parcel "C" Lots 9 to 13, inclusive, Block 3, Riverton Replat of Lots 1 to 5, Fostoria Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 13 of Plats, page 40, in King County, Washington; TOGETHER with that portion of vacated 43rd Place South adjoining; TOGETHER with that portion of 44th Place South adjoining vacated by City of Tukwila, Ordinance No. 1168, June 16, 1980. In witness whereof, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed this 12th day of October, 1984. E;:CISE TIT 1,:O . • STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) ) ss. County of King NorMed, Inc. -BY THL OIVISIONU d27'1'1. �t�M1 RE .OkDS & ELECTION: KING COUNTY 4/10/12 *1033 B • RECD F 3.00 CASHSL .0 GURU! !' !HIS DA'. tier 11 427 '8t Title: 4" On this 12th day of October, 1984, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Lawrence M. Shaw to me known to be the President of NorMed, Inc., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and • voluntary act and deed of said corporation,. for the•uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said instrument. Witness my hand and official se•a1 -�1oreC•a,,p"f'fixed the day and year first above written. �.�;�. i+ CORRECTION , :A ****3.00 55 Ad03 311d 1N3NVWb13d Ile,.,4b and for the State $� q9 ,.:}residing at SeattleL•TR# I- Maintenance Agreement 1 ' iii . 1 j'.'.• „I- 1' .• , ' • • 'Norkied=Shaw Partnership., hereby agrees to ,construct' and • ,'linai'ntain •impro'vements in: the vacated portion of 44th '1? Place South generally located between South 131st Place and Primary State Highway No. 1 as delineated in a :Developer's Agreement with Litho Development velopment and .Research ".(herein LDR) dated May 8, 1980. This agreement is a part . of and'condition'to the:vacation of,said street as passed 'by the City of Tukwila under Ordinadce• No.' •1168 dated June 16, 1980, which was•duly approved and recorded.. In. the- event this street -(legal description below) or the utilities'therein need maintenance and the current owner of the'LDR property refuses •to pay their full one-half '''share of the'cost of maintenance per,'the Devel'oper's :Agreement, NorMed-Shaw Partnership'will,performi•the maintenance for the current LDR property' owner, if• such cost becomes a lien against that property and '�if,.any, • development. or sale of.the property will be•precluded • 'unless said lien -is satisfied and the -cost -of 'said"' maintenance is.reimbursed to NorMed-Shaw Partnership. Legal description of subject street: ` 1 • A forty . (40) foot wide street identified aa "44th Place South, lying between' Blocks•3 and''4"in ' the plat'of Riverton,,replat of Lots 1 to'5, Fostorie''Garden Tracts, as per'plat recorded in Volume 13 of:plats on page 40, records of King. County, except:'any portions thereof taken by primary State Highway No.. 1. .Legal description'of property adjacent to 44th Place South between South' 131st• Place .and Primary State Highway No. 1. .Owners: PERMIT •CE1Nl1 E i az C T 1. 'Litho'Development Research. •:' 1..'. z=v, Lots 6' through 10 inclusive in,Block 4 of Fostoria,"=? :Garden. Tracts• Subdivision Blocks 1-5 as per plat:;?_:: 'reco.rded in• Volume. 13 of':plats'on' page 40•'records; of" King County. .. 1'j• -' .'r -r, cn u• Gal 2. • '•NorMed-Shaw Partnership . ' „ ' Block 3 of. Fostoria Garden Tracts SubdivisionBlocks 1-5 as per plat recorded in Volume 13 of plats on page 40 records of King County. • In witness whereof said partnership has caused thisv. instrument to be executed this 6t.S day of February, 1985.. • NorMed- haw Partnership By: Vaal/ Q General Partner • STATE OF`WASHINGTON. ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) 85/02/14.• #0696 -RECD F:. '8.00 CASHSL. *$:*:*8.00 55 On this day personally appeared before me:Lawrence M. Shaw to me known to be a General Partner of NorMed-Shaw Partnership, the company that executed the foregoinginstrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes' therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. . . GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS • Notary Public in, and 4fq. •0'he Statg of Washington, residin•g;';aS {fie ‘••••rur.M.1Y.i:..0 ... 8 • AdOO 911d IN3NWWEi3d I� • 19DORRECTION LTR# �Z MICRO COM SYSTEMS LTD. ATTENTION n The next image may be a duplicate of the previous image. E. Please disregard previous image. n Please disregard previous 2 images. Please disregard previous 3 images. n Other: • I , YWL-7,2. 2_5 ) cA0 \Nis.* // /1 wLej--e4.4) k A. a._ --c-e_o_ok; 00 y-, K.1 no) 1 1=q:5A o e X t S'•r• v -v\ Cfr". V."..a+ • Z re 211i 6 —J C.) O 0 co 0 w WI -J 1.- O u_ uj 0 u) Da w z o z 111 uj 0 (0 CI I— W uj I 0 rz (0 0 P- Maintenance Agreement 1 i I.. , 1 •• •'NorMed=Shaw Partnership., hereby agrees to,construct'and ;.''liaintain •impro'vements in: the vacated portion of 44th 0 Place South generally located between South 131st Place and Primary State Highway No. 1 as delineated in a Developer's Agreement with Litho Development and.Research '•(herein LDR) dated May 8, 1980. 'This agreement is a part of and'condition'to the vacation of,said street as passed •by the City of Tukwila under. Ordina:ice' No.' •1168 dated June 16, 1980, which was'duly approved.and recorded. In. the event this street'(legal description below) or the utilities'therein need maintenance and the, current owner of'the•'LDR property refuses to pay their full one-half .'share of the cost of maintenance per,"the Devel'oper's ,,, :Agreement, NorMed-Shaw Partnership 'will ,perform• the maintenance for the current LDR property' owner. if. such cost becomes a lien against that property and }i,f ,.any. ,'•development.or sale of,the property will be'precluded 'unlesssaid lien'is satisfied and the'cost•of said ' maintenance is.reimbursed to Neta•orMed-Shaw Partn rship. • ..,.. , Legal description of subject street: •"A forty(40)foot wide .street 'identified as''44th ::•Place South', lying between' Blocks • 3 the plat'of Riverton; replet of Lots 1 to'5, Fostoria -Garden Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 13 of:plats on page 40, records of King County, except:'any portions thereof taken by 'primaryrState Highway No. 1. , ! • PERMIT CENTER •Legal'description'of property'adjacent'to 44th Place South between S'outh' 131st• Place •and Primary State Highway No. 1. li }. :j.! n� ''1. 'Litho'Development Research—. •: i "•" .; 7.i" Lots 6' through 10 inclusive in 'Block 4 of Fostoria,;h,2? ' ,Garden—Tracts—Subdivision Blocks 1-5 as per plat';"? reco;rded in Volume 13 of plats '.on' page 40.'recordsµof" ling -County.' • . ., • -, iq.-..r 2. ' AorMed-Shaw Partnership , • LA .1 Block 3 of'Fostoria Garden Tracts Subdivision' Blocks 1-5 as per plat recorded in Volume 13 of plats on page 40 records of King County. . . • In witness whereof said partnership has caused this\' instrument'to be;executed this Mday of February, 1985.•• • .Owners: 1, NorMed-,thaw Partnership By: STATE OF'WASHINGTON. ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) r General Partner 85/02/14. #0696 • RECD F:. '8.00 CRSHSL. ****8.00 55 On this day personally appeared before me.Lawrence M. Shaw to me known to be a General Partner of NorMed-Shaw Partnership, the company that executed the foregoing.instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be free and voluntary act and deed of said company, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS, ! • Notary Public ins, and '+fqi •r'he Stat of Washington,' residin'k'yt�= • '''''''''''11\\+�\{. '' •�I ...i.! ' .... •.' ....1. ' .. P AdOO 21E11N3NVWbl2d , 19, . RRECTION LTR# .- -1.4,,<?. may. �NG ENGt•- PROJECT NAME: JOB NO.: DATE OF ESTIMATE: PREPARED BY: LOCATION/DESCRIPTION: PERMANENT FILE COPY PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE 1.1'll.;ti Normed Warehouse Project 6719 September 9, 2005 Jake Jacobs Off -Site Road Improvements to South 131st Place DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL PUBLIC STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM Mobilization 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000 12 -Inch CMP/ADS/PVC Pipe 30 LF $20.00 $600 Type 1 Catch Basins 1 EA $800.00 $800 Connect to Existing System 1 EA $3,000.00 $3,000 Stormceptor 1 EA $8,000.00 $8,000 Subtotal: $14,400.00 PUBLIC ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Sawcut 400 LF $2.00 $800 2 -Foot Concrete Curb and Gutter (vertical) 300 LF $7.50 $2,250 Base Course Crushed Rock ($1.00 per inch thickness) 220 SY $6.00 $1,320 AC Paving ($3.00 per inch thickness) 220 SY $9.00 $1,980 Street Signs 2 EA $250.00 $500 Traffic Control 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 Relocate Power Pole 1 EA $2,000.00 $2,000 Subtotal: $13,850.00 TOTAL: 1 $28,250.00 [JPJ/tep] 1 of 1 DoLi 6719.014.x)s FilL10 david kehle September 13, 2005 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Ms. Brenda Holt Re: NorMed II 4310 So. 13181 Place 004-415 Dear Brenda, Attached are four sets of revised drawings of civil (Barghausen) and wetlands (Adolfson) in response to comment letters from Carol Lumb (Planning) and Jill Moqueda (Public Works). These relate to the overall Building/Public Works permit. It appears there is overlap within the comments between the retaining wall permit (005-016) and this permit. Therefore I have included the same civil set and wetland set for both. Specific to the building permit are as follows: 1. Letter of response from Barghausen to Carol dated August 31, 2005. 2. Letter from Barghausen to Jill dated September 12, 2005. 3. Previous response letter from Kehle to Carol on mitigation timing August 31, 2005 in response to additional items 1 & 2. 4. Redlines from Jill. 5. Under wetland mitigation plan from Carol, Items 1, 3, 4 & 5 have been revised on the drawings and all drawings should match. 6. General easement to City of Tukwila — 8410121033 (2 copies) for access and utilities in vacated 44th Place. 7. Maintenance agreement regarding vacated 44th Place — 8502140696 (2 copies). 8. Delivery construction cost estimate for off-site improvements — Barghausen Sept. 9.2005. 9. Two revised technical information report Rev. July 18, 2005. 10. Two operations and maintenance manual — Barghausen dated Sept. 9, 2005. 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek@dkehlearch.com Ms. Brenda Holt City of Tukwila Re: NorMed — D04-415 September 13, 2005 Page 2 Thank you for your efforts in putting this all together. If you have any questions, please call. David Kehle DK/mt cc: Mr. Larry Shaw Mr. Ali Sadr a:10441' Itylet9-13-05 w JU 0O w =: w o. u. a co t- = w z �. 0. z 1— UJ uj O 0, O 1-: W • W' H: O co til z H =� 0 z Carol Lumb, Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES August 31, 2005 RE: Response to Plan Review Comments of August 26, 2005 Normed Project 4310 South 131st Place, Tukwila, Washington Tukwila File Nos. D04-415 and D05-016 Our Job No. 6719 Dear Carol: OF TJ'.: '.r;. . SC .:3 1 S i:llli'6 PERMIT CENTER The following is a response to planning review comments for landscape and civil plans related to the permit review of the Normed project. The revised plans are included in a package of resubmittals to be made by Mr. David Kehle, David Kehle Architect. The following summarizes the changes in the drawings and follow the City's comments on an item -by -item basis. Wetland Mitigation Plan: 1. The wetland biologist will address the condition of second tree to the northernmost habitat area corridor. 2. The civil drawings, including Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan, have been revised to clarify reference to the mitigation plans for identification of the wildlife corridors and tree protection measures. 3. This is a revision by the wetland biologist. 4. This is a revision by the wetland biologist. 5. This is a revision by the wetland biologist. This completes the items under Wetland Mitigation Plan. Landscaping Plan: CORRECTION 1. The landscape planting plan has been revised to remove ivy from the proposed planting. Kinnikinnick, which is already specified as a groundcover, has been extended to include the areas around the entry of the new Normed building. 2. The plant list/legend included two species that can be referred to as trees or large shrubs based on their use. Rhus typhina and vine maple are typically sold based on height and numbers of growing stems. It would be extremely difficult to obtain these species in the minimum caliper of 2 inches. Sumac (R. typhina) was replaced by an evergreen tree, Leyland Cypress, and planting layout along SR -599 was adjusted for inclusion of that tree. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com • Carol Lumb, Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development -2- August 31, 2005 Per our telephone conversation, vine maple can be specified based on height around the new building foundation. Shrub sizes are confirmed to be a minimum of 18 inches height at planting. 3. The shrub species planted along Macadam have been revised to be native plant species. Tall Oregon grape replaces the heavenly bamboo previously specified. California (Oregon) myrtle replaced the previously specified Photinia. The plant list on Sheet L1 identifies the specific quantities and sizes of these plants used along Macadam Road. 4. The TESC Plan (Sheet C5) has been revised. 5. The TESC Plan (Sheet C5) has been revised to include all tree protection, including a reference to the mitigation plan for tree protection measures. 6. Civil Sheets C5 and C9 have been revised to identify all trees in the wildlife corridors to be saved. This concludes the list of items under the Landscaping Plan. Additional reference notes have been included on the drawings to identify the wildlife corridor openings as noted under Item No. 3 of the final paragraph of the review comments. We trust this resubmittal addresses the City's review comments satisfactorily. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact David Kehle at (206) 433-8997 or myself at (425) 251-6222. Sincerely, H. Bruce McCrory Landscape Architect HBM/dm/tep 6719c.012.doc cc: David Kehle, David Kehle Architect Daniel K. Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Ali Sadr, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. File • ✓ iga, david kehle �1..`:_•111..1 l; � c!,,,OF-11/:••.';,,:. ;`, SFP 1 id PERMIT CENTER w ce J U O CO W= J .. N �. w O Attn: Ms. Carol Lumb AUG 3 1 2005 g q J LL Q co P = d. I- LU Z� I- O Z Dear Carol, w w U As a follow-up to our phone conversation today regarding your August 26, 2005 comment letter, O N: I am requesting a change in the timing for the mitigation contract. 0 ww NorMed will enter into a maintenance contract after the project is installed so that it is very clear ~ �—.. as to what will be required. They have not even finished bidding the entire contract yet and so LI z we will not have a contractor on board. In all likelihood it will be the installing contractor who will be retained to do the maintenance. o Z August 31, 2005 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: NorMed II 4310 So. 131st Place D04-415, D05-016 Therefore, I would propose that subsequent to the installation of the mitigation area and prior to the.end of the first year or prior to occupancy permits, that the contract be forwarded to you for • your files. Please let me know your thoughts. S David Kehle DK/mt cc: Mr. Larry Shaw Mr. Dan Baimelli Mr. Ali Sadr Mr. Teresa Vanderburg a:\0441\citylet8-31-05 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 AUG 3 1 2005 CORRECTION (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek©dkehlearch.com September 1, 2005 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director David Kehle David Kehle Architects 12720 Gateway Drive, Suite 116 Seattle, WA 98168 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #2 Development Permit Application Number D04-415 Normed — 4310 South 1313` Place Dear Mr. Kehle: This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can be approved. All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same time and reflected on your drawings. I have enclosed comments from the Planning and Public Works Departments. At this time, the Building and Fire Departments have no comments. Planning Department: Carol Lumb, at 206-431-3661, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Public Works Department: Jill Mosqueda, at 206-431-2449, if you have questions regarding the attache memo. Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or other documentation. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433-7165. Sincerely, Brenda Holt Permit Coordinator encl xc: File No. D04-415 P:\planning\brenda1D04-415 — correction Itr H2.doc bit 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS - CORRECTED DATE: August 26, 2005 CONTACT: Dave Kehle, David Kehle Architects RE: D04-415 and D05-016 ADDRESS: 4310 S. 131st Street Please review the following comments listed below and submit your revisions accordingly. If you have any questions, Carol Lumb is the planner assigned to the file; she can be reached at 206-431-3661. Wetland Mitigation Plan: 1. There is a discrepancy between the TESC plan and Sheet 1/5 that identifies trees to be retained in the habitat crossing area. Sheet 1/5 shows just one tree to be retained in the northern most habitat area whereas the TESC (Sheet plan shows two. 2. Sheet 1/5: The notation identifying existing trees to be saved needs to be extended to the northern -most wildlife corridor and a note added that links to the tree protection measures on Sheet 4/5 of the Wetland Mitigation Plan. 3. Sheet 1/5: Add to the "Existing Trees to be Saved" notation: "Trees to be protected per detail on Sheet 4/5 of the Wetland Mitigation Plan." 4. Sheet 4/5, Tree Protection graphic: correct Note 1 to replace "dripline of trees" with "direction of the project biologist." 5. Please correct Sheet 4/5 — Roots as noted to replace a reference to "containerized" plants — the reference should be container grown plants. As an information item: Sheet 1/5 now contains a note stating that the top 12 inches of soil will be removed in existing wetland areas, however, it is still not clear on the drawing which areas are meant. It does not need to be changed to satisfy Tukwila's permit process, but it may cause confusion to a potential bidder/contractor. This could possibly be clarified during a pre-bid or pre -construction site meeting. Landscaping Plan: 1. Sheet L I proposes that ivy (Hedera helix `Hahns') be planted in the overhead planter and as ground cover. No new ivy may be planted anywhere on the site for the following reasons: ivy is listed on the State and King County noxious weed lists; ivy is very invasive and has become a serious problem in urban forests; and the site contains wetland CL q:\General\D04-415-4 I'age 1 61'2 08/26/2005 2:11 PM 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Planning Division Comments D04-415, NorMed August 26, 2005 and upland habitat that needs to be protected. Alternative evergreen vines that can be substituted include: a. Jasminum x stephanense (Pink Jasmine) b. Holbellia fargesii or other species c. Billardiera longiflora (Climbing Blueberry) 2. Sheet Ll: Plant List/Legend: Several red -lined corrections were not picked up from the last review. Deciduous trees must have a minimum caliper of 2 inches (Acer Circinatum and Rhus Typhina only specify a height); shrubs must be a minimum of 18 inches in height at planting. 3. Sheet L2. Native shrubs must be planted along Macadam instead of Nandina and Photinia, in keeping with the adjacent wetland buffer mitigation, which is being planted with native plants. Assuming an evergreen shrub is desired for this area, one suggestion would be to plant Tall Oregon Grape (Mahonia aquifolium). Another alternative is California Myrtle (Myrica californica). This shrub would need to be pruned periodically to keep it from spreading horizontally. 4. Sheet C5 — TESC Plan. The TESC Plan ignores the fact that clearing will also be taking place on the existing wetland (removal of the top 12 inches of soil and Reed Canary Grass roots). The TESC needs to be extended to identify the rest of the wetland mitigation area. 5. Sheet C5 — TESC Plan: The notation to protect existing trees needs to be extended to the second wildlife corridor and a note added that links to the tree protection measures on Sheet 4 of the Wetland Mitigation Plan. 6. Sheets C5 and C9: These sheets have omitted identifying the second tree in the northern most wildlife corridor that is to be saved. Please add this tree to the drawings. As an informational item, when the permit is approved, the following conditions will be applied: 1. The owner must provide a copy of the signed contract for maintenance of the mitigation area after the first year. 2. The Scope of Work for the maintenance contract shall include those maintenance tasks listed on Sheet 5 as well as the following: a) maintain/correct erosion control measures as necessary; b) remove non-native plants from within the dripline of installed plants, even if invasive species cover is 20%; and c) maintenance/replacement of wetland signage as necessary. 3. The chain link fencing on top of the retaining walls along Macadam Road shall not block the wildlife corridor crossing openings. cc: Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist Cl, Page 2 of 2 08/26/2005 2:1 l I'M q:\General\D04-415-4 CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards z eGw 2 QQU O 0 N o 111 X Permit #: D04-415 Project Name: Normed 4310 S 131st PI Review #: 2 Date: 08.30.05 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. • LL w 0 2 gCOQ =a 1w z= The City Of Tukwila Public Works Department (PW) has the following comments regarding your w o application for the above permit. Please contact me at 206.431.2449, if you have any questions. ? o 0 O - O H w W .9-- wo ..z —• I o 1. Return the enclosed redlined plans with your response to this correction letter and to the comments on the plans. FOR PERMIT APPROVAL 2. This project no longer includes the frontage improvements along Macadam Rd. S. The City will install the improvements as part of the 2006 Overlay Program. The Preliminary Development Cost Estimate Public Roadway Improvements should include all work in the rights-of-way except the frontage improvements in Macadam Road S. Work in the right-of-way includes gas line and frontage improvements in S 131St PI 3. Resubmittal of these plans with changes indicated on the redlines must reflect the changes to D05-016 (retaining walls). 4. Provide approval from CDS for the design of the filtration vault. 5. The work in 44th PI. S includes installation of storm drainage and new pavement on the neighbor's property. Please provide a recorded easement for the storm drainage and the access. Provide the maintenance agreement for the storm drainage and the access. 6. Explain why there is a 15' water easement shown on sheet C4. 7. The 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual is referred to throughout the Technical information Report. The TIR must refer to and must use the 1998 KCSWDM. Review of the surface water design will be completed once the TIR is corrected. z BEFORE PERMIT IS ISSUED 8. The Permittee or the contractor shall provide insurance, business license, and performance financial guarantee for 150% of the improvements in S 131st PI. Please refer to Customer Assistance Bulletin A4. FOR FINAL APPROVAL 9. Provide a copy of the maintenance plan for the two surface water vaults for review before it is recorded with King County. FYI 10. The plans show approximately 440 SF of cut in Macadam Rd. S. The pavement has 0-1 years of life left, so the mitigation fee will be $0.00 for the cut. 11. The plans show six existing meters. The City can only account for four and can find only four onsite. Please amend the plans according to the following. Type Size Comment Improvements Needed 1 Domestic 2" RPPA and freeze protection 2 Deduct 1-1/2" irrigation. Comes from the 2" domestic AMR and radio 3 Domestic 1" Locked in off position. Owner may want to remove. Register, radio, RPPA 4 Domestic 1" Locked in off position. Owner may want to remove. Register, radio, RPPA e 7 kehle� July 27, 2005 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Ms. Brenda Holt Re: NorMed II 4310 So. 131st Place D04-415 Dear Brenda, CORRECTION RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 2 8 2005 PERMIT CENTER Several comment letters and phone conversations have been occurring while finalizing the project with the City, DOE, Fisheries, etc. I am attempting to compile an overall response letter to the various comment letters as follows: A. Feb. 15, 2005 — Planning — Carol Lumb 1. Conditions of BAR: Condition 1: SD -1 has been revised to reflect the landscape stripe (no sidewalk extension beyond 45 degree entry) adjacent to the access easement (southerly side of the site). The landscape plans address this as well as the entry planter box on Sheet A-1. Condition 2: Additional parking for new building. Per SD -1's parking calculation based on uses of the new building, we have the required parking shown (Carol and I discussed this on the phone). In addition, parking stall striping is 17' on pavement with 2' overhang at sidewalk which totals 19' the code required depth. 2. All site drawings have now changed the street name to Macadam. The landscape plans now show landscape screening of fence along Macadam. 3. The landscape plan provides blow-ups of landscape areas for distribution and type. a. Landscape Architect has confirmed all plant counts. b. Planters islands are 6' x 17' = 102 SF per SD -1 and landscape plan. c. Landscape plan has added a note regarding herbicide use by wetlands and ground water that drains to the Duwamish. 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 ti•s (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek@dkehlearch.com Permit Center City of Tukwila Re: NorMed — D04-415 July 27, 2005 Page 2 Also a note was added regarding the Landscape Affidavit being completed prior to final inspection. 4. Sheets C-5 and C-7 have been revised to reflect 12" removal of soil in wetland as well as TESC plan to incorporate the removal protection. z z rew = QQ -JU. U0 N0 co ILI J 5. Sheet C-5 has the added note to protect trees that remain during construction. co w 0 6. The paint color scheme will still match the existing NorMed building on site. 2 7. Sign permits will be under separate permits.u. 8. SD -1 has been revised to show two bicycle parking spots (bike rack) adjacent to the 45 i z� degree entry. 0 Z Reasonable Use Application 2 U0 ON 9. Lot consolidation application will be submitted in conjunction with permit issuance and street vacations were file on February 14, 2005. 10. We will respond to any comments on the wetland mitigation plan when issued. Enclosed are new SD -1, landscape, C5, C7 and TESC reflecting the above comments. B. December 13, 2004 — Building — Ken Nelson 1. SD -1 has been revised to add a plan sheet index. 2. Sheet A-1, door schedule has been modified to reflect u -values and window schedule is added for u -values. 3 & 4 Notes have been added to Sheet A-1 regarding future tenant improvements complying with WSEC as well as commissioning requirements for future HVAC systems. C. January 11, 2005 — Building — Kent Nelson Retaining wall permit has been submitted January 14, 2005. D. January 12, 2005 — Public Works — L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. See Barghausen Consulting Engineer response letter. 0 I— wW U u' z w 0— z Permit Center City of Tukwila Re: NorMed - D04-415 July 27, 2005 Page 3 E. January 12, 2005 - Public Works - Ryan Larson, P.E. See Barghausen Consulting Engineers response letter. David Kehle DK/mt Enclosure: Four Sets Revised a:\04411citylet7-27-05b INFORMATION MEMO To: City Clerk PERMANENT FILE COPY From: Jill MOsqueda Date: August 25, 2005 Subject: 3.40.31 Street Vacations — 43rd Avenue South and Squire Street ISSUE On February 16, 2005, the Normed-Shaw Partnership submitted a complete Petition for Vacation of Streets application for a portion of 43rd Avenue South, running southwesterly from SR 599 to Squire Street and Squire Street from 431.d Avenue South to South 131st Place. BACKGROUND The Normed-Shaw Partnership proposes construction of a new 40,000 square foot warehouse/office building and installation of wetland mitigation at this site, creating a need to vacate these rights-of-way. On May 16, 2005, the City Council passed Ordinance 2094 approving the vacation with the condition that the City be provided compensation of $35,600.00. ANALYSIS On August 22, 2005, the Finance Department accepted a check for $35,600.00 from Mr. Larry Shaw of Normed-Shaw Partnership. This completes the condition for vacation. RECOMMENDATION Record Ordinance 2094 with King County records and notify the Assessor's Office in order to change the maps. CC: File 3.40.31 jill/projects/vacations/3.40..31-43`d av s and squire z • z rtw QQom. WV U OQ CO • UJ J CO LL w u. cn d. =w zF.. o w~ n o. O En-. O 1-- w • uj LL. F6 - - w ..z U= O~ z r.. r ,rte '•s t��r- C-. Y. .^.�_.-.�L.+. ._ . r.".� :: :� ._:.. ..- �� 3+.^-,^'.. c.:-':.� -�=T' -'•sem •• �..:L ^.•�s`.=T l.:1t•'‹. NORMED SHAW PARTNERSHIP P0BOX 3644 SEATTLE, WA 98124-3644 11 ORDTO ERR OFE ��iFu C( CA go•('a:��.,4 o� Cr u Y FOR ertg uer.,S tr ••^(? •eu u�t FAtios 19-10/1250 wp D•1,• • • 1 $ 55,2F2:00; may{�� -.. ..., .,. _ .. - _�� ..' :•mer •�': .. •`.�jC`r"TTv r .J :i- '� :.�'. �`."�.^G'�"' �•"r .,,, • •�•., •'`• = •1.:'!f.:�iri!"; :1• • ;•"' _ `-1, ; s" . �'' ',i�, �'G•:`• '_��iv�'S.: .vvMac f)CI C • PAY TO TI -M•': ::: 7� ORDER OF • .c . y . ' O 1 „l t l • 3:.�,:: sarf •.,no�'�:r-s�=-.. . 0 COL' •VIE.:, • X. w cc N Z. 0 w w 0 0 O 0 uJ > • _ W _O ,,_ N w ` O •- : 4 - y wl c w V7 22" Zoo bo -4- 7.xe, Frr rat -de littiage6,2,,,,,e &177 o CD600 Ono. gl/ zoo Sreee,-- d — 2rg" 1011/42_, 30o, da, 96 w Jill Mosqueda-,Normed Development Pagel From: Jill Mosqueda To: Dbalmelli@barghausen.com Date: 6/15/05 11:31 AM Subject: Normed Development Following our meeting on June 6th, I presented your proposed frontage improvements to Jim Morrow, Public Works Director. The following is Jim's decision on the proposal: 1. S 131st PI - Proposed improvements consisting of a paved shoulder, curb and storm drainage pipe running from 42nd Av S to Hot Mix Pavers is approved. The storm drainage that will be collected must be handled so that there is no flooding or pooling occurring downstream. At a minimum, the storm drainage would have to be treated before it is directed to the wetlands/stream. Additionally, I advise you to work up a drainage design for S 131st PI and get WDFW approval before you go too far with the rest of your design work. 2. 42 nd Av s - Install curb, gutter, storm drainage and 5' concrete sidewalk for the full length of the 42nd Av S frontage. The City will not require paving (overlay) or pavement mitigation fees to do this work. Upon request, I will provide a copy of the planned paving from the 2005 Overlay Program. Paving along Normed property as shown in the overly program has been deferred. The two paved travel lanes in 42nd Av S will be 10' wide. The frontage improvements would begin at the edge of the travel lane. L. Jill Mosqueda P.E. CC: Whiting Carol Lumb; Cyndy Knighton; Jim Morrow; Robin Tischmak; Ryan Larson; Sandra NorMed Frontal Improvements Macadam Road Unit Total Quantity Unit Cost Cost Crushed Surfacing Top Course 125 Tons $22 $2,750 Curb and Gutter 750 LF $22 $16,500 Sidewalk 425 SY $35 $14,875 Storm Drain Pipe - 12 inch 800 LF $55 $44,000 Catch Basin - Type 1 3 Each $1,500 $4,500 Miscellaneous @ 10% 1 $8,263 $8,263 Total $90,888 TRANSMISSION RESULT REPORT (MAY 13 '05 09:59AM) TUKWILA DCD/PW THE FOLLOWING FILE(S) ERASED FILE FILE TYPE OPTION 006 MEMORY TX (AUTO) TEL NO. PAGE RESULT 9*2069230814 04/04 OK ERRORS 1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL 2) BUSY 3) NO ANSWER 4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION CITY OF TUKWILA - PUBLIC WOIUCS DEPT. FAX TRANSMITTAL FAX NUMBER (206) 461-3665 DATE: Ms- AtI5cs-+n ri_ _ t 3. (3 OS TITLE: COMPANY: 3/11s4-601-11 cess DEPARTMENT: FROM: JIM 11at-t-at... TITLE: , j t o DIVISION: .. ....: +i •: w•.^1�Sp•.•�st..v:.:.�„a\fir .ru.a.•-•.,..7t.!;!..::>a: \\ivA.va-ae..�.........o ....... a ..•i-••�ag;•.9g:. .. a ern\ \ .J:.vf!.:...c}a ....�.a!--:>s` V)i V{!.V ........•v^^..rS:":` Y.\\.. .. 11:11\'TVT9ttor,�w Gam... . a...-:.....>, win .... ,a... tt+•a .-: . .... ,.,...: .•.ac •.,.. ... a,r:a•:,w. �\.. .:�:�. _.. n... .......... ..�iw .............� FAX NO. CALLED: (VDU)) 2 •c.>e�l4 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES T ANSMITI1:D, INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: SENT BY (INITIALS) : Li F .�.....: i^:s•:' .. .>:S ^: ::t.`)h::.\•r!.w, MfY..Ns`lcor.:f:\1?:1`Ar..m\'Mwn!..f!..w.x:;SJ:A`;J�:.v.(.Y.w�Y.-.c...�.�.....-M;•:::1':. �..v..):..\'!!DIwSY.W. atilw'A\ >r �. .: s1”iiT`.1V{w.+%JwNF>:{M•+!'G:i...i<C':.:OY..M5.C.M!.%clKnwi•N•K NIoN !•S!&,!h.••sx•N• •Nt.• S CT: TIN N tom ' 4i1J "' • tl CkA i N 1 T o Ws-r+r» T f'%4... 41 CITY OF TUKWILA — PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. FAX TRANSMITTAL FAX NUMBER: (206) 431-3665 TO: ils. Alissesin floss DATE: flaA3 (3, oS TITLE: FROM: j I ti 1 Pf-t-c.N.A. COMPANY: 1 31-11-04- bo --n El il_c.ss TITLE: . 4 yitAsi DEPARTMENT: DIVISION: DIVISION: FAX NO. CALLED: Ce-cicP) 923 . 0 B14 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES TRANSMTITED. INCLUDING TFIIS COVER SFIEET: II ---,........,..............,...m.,„.... ........ SENT BY (INITIALS): J Fll ... :,,,..--:-......., ,,,,..„.......,,,.....k. ,„...,:.:„:.:,:.z..,:.:.....:......s.:...:,,,,.o...:;:,:.....,:s,,...,.,,,... SUBJECT: -SkcueaxsAskii.svn'-eo-_s-E-L1_)04-4I5 4 COMMENTS/MESSAGE: tiS • 1105S (A5 rpt-csrol.a.uS1 Lak-.111.5 cri -ft-cAacylL. --"y-tOiet31- 01. ik h 12.Ja_CS.L.L.L.SA_ -Q 04.34-s cppot-Lx. ik c5. fc, _FA :/),, kosg-I:si -Ft-c3m >LL. •• •• • • ••• • • 4444,-..›)«mc;;;::r.:444::::: IF THIS COMMUNICATION IS NOT CLEARLY RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL: TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. - 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila WA 98188 - (206) 433-0179 Suite 100 09/18/92 z z re u-12 0 O 0 co 0 u) LI] W I W o 2 g :=3 < • 2, uj Z 0 Z I- LL! uj • 0 O c-2 o E - Lu I 0 wz P o (LPL: Street Vacation 43rd Ave S and Squire St 3.40.31 NOT TO SCALE Photo Date: June 2002 Z HW _1 O 0o U)0 (f)W J = I— U) U W o Q ce< =a I- IA z= Ho zH w UD 0— 0 t— Ww 2 H -o " Z W 0 z 0 mu,. 4Z 14) z z re wn _i O 0 u) 0 W • I u j 0 • <t La z o z LLI • CI 0 O — CI F- LU U. . z cu 0 0 1— a&19 z Iw JU UO CO CI J H L.L. WO �a cn= 2d F- W Z= 1- O Z F- W U0 O- OI— W w WW 2 F- tL O Z W U= O Z rn :dmir Iowa • rya., I 3 I 5j zZ • 1-1 0 co 0 w W I -J w 0 Ce :3 LL < • C1 W Z 1- 0 Z W w O u) O - CI I- W w 2 0 LI: 0 o 13 S'/ NorMed PERMANENT FILE COPY P.O. Box 3644 Seattle, WA 98124 (206) 242-8228 NorMed-Shaw Partnership August 22, 2005 Ms. L. Jill Mosqueda, PE Development Engineer City of Tukwila - Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard # 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: Building Permits # D05016 8004415) Dear Jill: Per your phone call earlier today, I've prepared two checks, No. 0906 in the amount of $55,288.00 and No. 0905 in the amount of $35,600.00, payable to the City of Tukwila for compete and full satisfaction of both of the following: 1) All required frontage improvements on Macadam Road South (42nd Avenue S.) including, but not limited to, storm drainage, pavement, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, 2) Street Vacation pursuant to Tukwila City Ordinance Number 2094. Sincerely, Lawrence M. Shaw Partner NorMed-Shaw Partnership Immediate Care Medical Supplies To: Jim Morrow From: Jill Mosqueda Date: August 22, Subject: ISSUE INFORiMATION MEMO D04-415 NorMed —Shaw Development 4310 South 131'` Place PERMANEN1 FILE COPY Allocation of $90,288.00 received from the NorMed Shaw Partnership. BACKGROUND This project triggered a street vacation of 43`d Avenue South and Squire Road and installation of frontage improvements along Macadam Road South (42nd Avenue South) from South 131' Street to South 128th Street. Council approved Ordinance 2094 with a condition that the City is compensated $35,600.00. Public Works estimated the improvements along Macadam Road South at $90,888.00. ANALYSIS Following a request from NorMed Shaw for some reduction in the frontage improvements required along Macadam Road South, the Director agreed to curb, gutter, 5' sidewalk, drainage and '/2 street overlay on the NorMed side of Macadam Road South. The Director further agreed to install the improvements as part of the 2006 Overlay Capital Improvement Project, provided NorMed Shaw contributes the $90,888.00 toward the 2006 Overlay Program. TMC 11.60.050.D stipulates that Y2 of street vacation compensation shall be dedicated to open space or to transportation CIPs. NorMed Shaw requested that all of the vacation compensation go toward the $90,888.00 contribution to the 2006 Overlay Program, leaving a balance due of $55,288.00. The City agreed to this request. On August 22, 2005, Mr. Larry Shaw presented two checks to the City, one for $35,600.00 and one for $55,288.00. Following a recommendation from the Finance Department, the $35,600.00 check was credited to account 000.343.200 and the $55,288.00 check was credited to account 104/02.595.300.63.85 (CIP 96-RWO1). RECOMMENDATION Allocate the $35,600.00 from 000.343.200 to the 2006 Overlay Program, for a total of $90,288.00 to the 2006 Overlay Program. CC: Kevin Fuhrer . Laurie Anderson Robin Tischmak Gail Labanara Carol Lumb womb File attachment JilI/Prajccu NorMa'D61-115 compensation allocation menu NORMED SHAW PARTNERSHIP P 0 BOX 3644 SEATTLE, WA 98124-3644 DER OF C. I O� ! Lt k 8'�2z f DS 19-10/1250 3..''00 . DATE 1 $,55,28'8. ad .IN.11 r.i us bank. 1.813-U9 &WIG F Cr sa f.•oTauf-,-.+n er a Le F22Flist1`tt[iQ•y f-•^tc+ au cart �. =+• PAY TO THE.::: ORDER OF r. tAj t C4 ...t•? -' :: ter. :-Joh •.. Y_''17.:•:'u'Y.-.i: it• "ice • ti_=:.:..-.�e^.. r`'�-, �:=.r„^': COLL•1.45 �: bank. • 3- .. - I o a:. -311 7.� 11.1m=2.1t1.U1U CE_ H . <;d U wz C a - CC: u. u u L u n c u .r �t • +•! !ate• . ♦• s s 141*,:•` f is Z.. (• • O?..-a=gx oY&tDa timPit Oaaa 11103 x2cr r.- uj •} • 11.2p 4 Ocriu 'J C 0 Q'1 .o 0 u. 0 • 0 cc a 0 m • .w w N w E U 0 w ccN 1z 0 ccw w 0 0 u.0 0 Q 4 0 m w cc CC > w N w 4 w c • i 2 0 • 0 • z • z cc W QQ JU U O CD MI N O CW O g Q tog S V w z H OO` Z uj O — O H WW H � L'O LLI� U= O F - z -Do -4 - ( CA -g---21 Zoo /o 774 0, Fre- rxe Lj01-1-1 de/1-s 3s- ea_oo ac20 • gi--/ Sree e d .---> (/ 2. .306 a Fs-) as/ • Reke, 6369 08/23 0716 TOTAL 90888.00 ZCND:3 z • LIJ2 6 = (.) O 0 (0 0 CI)LU LLJI _1 1_ • u_ uj 0 g "Zi < y a I- Ili Z I-0 ZI- W• UJ • 0 O E• l2 0 I- W uj 0 , z W(1) r: o Olttc. 44N 21 1 W." - City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. Le AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, VACATING CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY, DEDICATED FOR STREET PURPOSES, GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF 43RD AVENUE SOUTH, RUNNING SOUTHWESTERLY FROM SR 599 TO SQUIRE STREET AND SQUIRE STREET RUNNING SOUTH FROM 43RD AVENUE SOUTH TO SOUTH 131ST PLACE; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP OF THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, TMC 11.60 identifies street vacation procedures including public notification, a public hearing, review and comment, and submittal of relevant information to City Council, all of which have been done, and WHEREAS, 43rd Avenue South and Squire Street are unopened and part of Southgate Creek runs through the right-of-way; and WHEREAS, 43rd Avenue South and Squire Street have been nght-of-way for more than 25 years; and WHEREAS, petitioner provided a real property appraisal from a member of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers in the amount of $35,600.00, and WHEREAS, no utihties exist in the rights-of-way being vacated; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila City Council conducted a public hearing on May 9, 2005 for the purpose of considering the vacation of certain property located in the City of Tukwila, as described in the ordinance title; and WHEREAS, following conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council found the property should be vacated, subject to certain conditions; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Vacation. A The following property located in the City of Tukwila is hereby vacated: Approximately 18,705 square feet of 43rd Avenue South, running southwesterly from SR 599 to Squire Street and Squire Street running south from 43rd Avenue South to South 131st Place. STV -43rd & Squire JM:bv 5-12-05 1 B This vacation is conditioned upon satisfaction, by April 30, 2007, of provision of compensation for $35,600.00. Section 2. Duties of Public Works. The Public Works Department is hereby directed to record a certified copy of this ordinance with King County, upon determination by the Public Works Director that the conditions referenced above have been satisfied. Section 3. Amendment of Official Street Map. Upon the recording of a certified copy of the ordinance, the City Public Works Director shall amend the City's official street map to be consistent with this ordinance. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City. This vacation shall not become effective until the conditions contained herein have been fully satisfied, until all fees owed the City have been paid, and until five (5) working clays after the date that this ordinance and all relevant documents have been recorded with King County Records. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 2 I OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this /6 " day of��' , 2005 ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. By Office of the City Attorney �. 1V \ 4V\ Steven M. Mullet, Mayor FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK. 5; j z— -5— PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. S—/(, • D -- PUBLISHED: 5- ID -OS' EFFECTIVE DATE ORDINANCE NO at 0 STV -43^" & Squire 5-12-05 2 Street Vacation 3 40 31 43`d Av S and Squire St. Property Berore Vacation 71 , q}I c : Ir_i_07 4ttJj 2 I 5; 7 L •, 7::Q • \ 1.A! I k n 1 '714 Se 4,,.,0 —•, 1 n!1 r� ...RF- TO BE \! A O A T C D . :17 -.`I,- -- 4? v iii 11 ,�,/ , ii,/fk- tt clap • •./` /;i:', \s 1TT' •,I ' f"ti• 1 ? -..-g!!:,. , 1 t.•0, ,,,:r..:4,,r.I.,,$)...., .".:CC.:2• ....../.,,,,..„,.....----3z.,..1...0.,...n, %.t.:, v t, * A. •�,. °' i( V 1 ,a:n nu., , I web a`" 1 / • ,73 Inn TIccls\msuic cnzn�---- ,,,��; VI )alac•co)c Projects/Vacations/ 3 40 31 -;0003- • - 01r •-- 1.V Lr -J Street Vacation St. 3 40 31 43'd S and Sq.tire Property After Vacation thl...1:e0,3‘1):1:;:..0.' 'A' • •6-'-'f:' ..:4:„:"j•Y,15,4:: .4, i, 0710 7..,. .., ‘v• -•••yr.,-, • Z. 6,1:3: k• ilit...:‘,'''''t . t• ,.., ..? .4•••'" .4(::,71'.7 • -..;"--?'- i" --... -...,.. .....A •I• 4.: —.),, ..,. .q..• r:.--, , ' 7 •-6,92,0* - 'e-\•.k2C/0 171'.•:Zif.e•:."-. ... [.... .4eiltusa# . ' ti.:"7- ,..c44-1rA,1.211V-43 . Cceln• .;-,/,„,,,e, 1 .un 5 1•42.t.'41-4 ••••••1 _:. .14,013 , 1.4fl t•Is . eopdS c'f'. ...."til . .,q....r:-..... -;.:,3 1':.:?,.z cass/ . -,4';.-.).1* ......r Vire# .., :. °. ......--, :J..,7...:,:eee......004,. -ii. tok• 4 ..._ 'rlti,,t,5•5i:i-P" ( 34920 .7, 734060 0343 "17 k•-\ BEP 0 bE i1/4C E 081.2..,,, ,.......,, 1.1 /3:110.0‘00 .1 • o4„• ists.tsa.I:.s.:.o?2„s21,t..s1: 3 ' ‘ : \lo rx •,, 1 '.. -7- / \ ‘,..1.:2, .) ..: / r,,,,,..17:47 :;:v. 7, ,,,-"5, ▪ 1 I 1 cf,S'...\.,l'i,c,„;•,'• '' 1 i \ .. prote,c.upacattansi 3 4031 1 Iv Is.coolc, 1 i 1 I 734 • 0225 72.4sit.:. • .1a497.:\ 02551, \ 00A. 0231 • ,7i.7:1.• 734g20 0235 ••• •oop. /4 73,020 0245 A?„s, 40004. , /N. 1\10r4A.Zto G1.1/4,t,ta 7.,,,.tt,s-t• • c)•,: - 1 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE No. 2094 City of Tukwila, Washington On May 16, 2005, the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington, adopted Ordinance No. 2094, the main points of which are summarized by its title as follows: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington, vacating certain property located within the City, dedicated for street purposes, generally described as a portion of 43`d Avenue South, running southwesterly from SR 599 to Squire Street and Squire Street running South from 43rd Avenue South to South 131St Place; amending the official street map of the City; providing for severability; and establishing an effective date. The full text of this ordinance will be mailed upon request. Approved by the City Council at their Regular Meeting of May 16, 2005. Published Seattle Times: May 20, 2005 E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE Sections: 11.60.010 11.60.020 11.60.030 11.60.040 11.60.050 11.60.060 11.60.070 11.60.080 11.60.090 11.60.100 11.60.110 11.60.120 Chapter 11.60 STREET AND ALLEY VACATION PROCEDURE Purpose Streets Abutting Water Filing Fees and Charges Valuation and Compensation Property Trade in Lieu of Payment Waiving Compensation - Other Governmental Agencies Title to Vacated Street Procedure Limitations on Vacation Approval of Vacation Effective Date of Vacation 11.60.010 Purpose This chapter establishes street vacation policies and procedures regarding petition for vacation by owner(s) of an interest in any real estate abutting a street right-of- way pursuant to RCW 35.79. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.020 Streets Abutting Water Streets abutting water shall not be vacated unless in compliance with RCW 35.79.030. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.030 Filing A. The petition for street vacation shall be submit- ted to the Department. The complete application shall include a completed petition form, a vicinity map, a tax assessor's map showing all properties abutting the vacation, total of assessed land value proposed for vacation, an appraisal per TMC 11.60.050, mailing labels for all property owners within 500 feet of the vacation boundaries, and a non-refundable application fee pursuant to TMC 11.60.040. B. A completed petition form shall be one that is signed by owners of more than two-thirds of the properties abutting the street proposed for vacation. . C. If the assessed value of the land proposed for vacation is greater than $10,000, the complete applica- tion shall include a fair market appraisal. D. The petition and application expire two years from date of application, if the vacation conditions have not been met and compensation paid. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.040 Fees and Charges The Department shall be responsible for review of the petition, inspection and acceptance of all required construction, and vacation plan review. The fee for these services shall. be set forth in a fee schedule to be adopted by motion or resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.050 Valuation and Compensation A. The value of the right-of-way proposed for vacation shall be determined utilizing either of two methods: First, based on the assessed value of land abutting the street or, second, on an appraisal which was conducted no more than 3 months prior to the date of the application for vacation. Under the first method, the value shall be calculated by multiplying the total square footage of right-of-way by the assessed value per square foot of the abutting land, as set by the County Department of Records and Elections and the County Assessor's office. Under the second method of calculation, a real property appraisal from a member of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers will be conducted. B. If the calculated value is less than $10,000.00, the calculated value shall be used as the right-of-way value. If the calculated value is 510,000 or more. then the right-of-way value. shall be set under the second method above. C. Compensation shall be one-half of the valua- tion, except any part of the right-of-way that has. been parr of a dedicated right-of-way for 25 years or more shall be compensated at the full valuation. One-half of the revenue received by the City as compensation must be dedicated to the acquisition, improvement, development and related maintenance of public open space or transportation capital projects within the City. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.060 Property Trade in Lieu of Payment The petitioners may grant or dedicate to the City, for street or other purposes, real property which has a fair market value, set by an appraisal less than three months old, at least equal to the compensation value set in TMC 11.60.050. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11.60.070 Waiving Compensation - Other Governmental Agencies For a vacation petitioned by another governmental agency, the City Council may waive compensation required by this code and may waive the filing fee, if the Council determines the waiver is in the public interest. In this case, the petitioner shall record a covenant at King County Records that provides the City compensation by the current fair market value, for future sale or lease by the governmental agency of the vacated property. (Ord. 1995 §1(part), 2002) 11-38 Printed January 14, 2003 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 14, 2005 TO: Carol Lumb, Senior Planner FROM: Donna Frostholm, Senior Scientist RE: NorMed Mitigation Plan ADOLFSONMa Enwo nine aa'( So Ctcti o ns CORREQTION LTR# Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) has prepared this memo in response to the City of Tukwila letter dated July 7, 2005 for the NorMed Mitigation Plan. Adolfson has reviewed the comments and has discussed each of the eight comments with Sandra Whiting. The attached mitigation sheets have been revised based on comments from the City of Tukwila and this memo summarizes those changes. Revisions to the mitigation sheets are as follows: 1. The Grading Plan (Sheet 1) has been revised to clearly show which trees on the site are being retained and which trees will be removed. 2. Some of the native shrubs on the site could be salvaged and replanted. Rather than show the shrubs to be salvaged on the plans, Adolfson will flag the shrubs to be retained. A note has been added to the Grading Plan that instructs the Contractor to dig up, store, and replant the flagged shrubs. 3. A note has been added to the Grading Plan that clarifies where the top 12 inches of reed canarygrass and soil are to be removed. 4. The definition of what constitutes topsoil on Sheet 5 (Wetland Mitigation Report) has been clarified. 5. The Notes title on Sheet 3 has been revised to clarify that both wetland and stream notes appear on this sheet. 6. In addition to the details shown on Sheet 3, stream restoration will be conducted as stipulated in the HPA. A copy of the HPA is attached to this memo. 7. On Sheet 4 (Wetland Mitigation Notes and Details), the word "containerized" has been changed to "container -grown". Also, the Tree Protection detail shown on Sheet 4 has been revised to state that the location of the fencing will be determined by the project biologist. 8. Wildlife crossing signs have been added to Sheet 3. This sheet shows the detail and location of the signs. RECEIVED crTY OF TUKWILA JUL 2 8 2105 PERMIT CENTER iso 4415 ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 Tel 206 789 9658 www.adolfson.com Fax 206 789 9684 y, 'NG ENGAN�� Z iH w rt 2 UO N0 J H` RE: Submittal of Revised Plans and Documents N u_ Normed II RECEIVED • 0 4310 South 131st Place CITY OF TUKWIIA g Permit No. D04-415 CORRECTION Our JobNo.6719 JUL 2 • a PERMIT CENTER LTR#A-- w We have revised the Civil Engineering Design Plans and Technical Information Report for the project z o. referenced above in accordance with the comment letters received from your office. The following ? o outline provides each of the comments in italics exactly as written, along with a narrative response U describing how each comment was addressed: ,0 u CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES July 25, 2005 City of Tukwila Public Works Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Ryan Larson, P.E., City of Tukwila Public Works Department, Dated January 12, 2005 1. The TIR must use the 1998 King County Surface Water Design manual. Response: The TER has been revised in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). 2. The capital improvement projects cited are out of date. Please refer to the City's 2004 Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan for current CIP projects in this basin. Response: The road improvement plan has been designed and is attached to this submittal. L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E., City of Tukwila Public Works Department, Dated January 12, 2005 General 1. Return the enclosed redlined plans with your response to this correction letter and response to the comments on the plans. Response: The redlined plans are enclosed with this submittal. 2. Please visit the PW development and Permits web page that can be found at: http://webserverIpubwks/popermit.htm This site contains information to help meet Public Work's requirements. Please review the Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards (Stds) and to the CAB (customer assistance bulletins). Response: We have obtained and added the latest construction standards to the plans. 1 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-622 (425)"51-878AX BRANCH OFFICES ♦ OLYMPIA, WA • TEMECULA, CA • WALNUT CREEK, CA www.barghausen.com City of Tukwila -2- July 25, 2005 3. PW issues a Type C permit as part of the building permit. For the Type C permit, PW collects a base application and plan review fee when the application is submitted. The fee pays for two reviews. Public Works charges for additional reviews. See Bulletin Al. Response: We concur with this comment. 4. You may apply for two Type C permits, one for the right of way work and one for the onsite work. Alternatively, you may include all work under one permit. Response: We have designed the off-site road improvement plan, which is attached to this plan submittal. 5. Provide two construction cost estimates prepared by the engineer of record, one estimate for the right-of-way work and one estimate for the onsite work. The estimates must include all water, sewer, grading, storm drainage, and frontage improvement work that will be reviewed, approved and installed under this permit. Response: Attached are two construction cost estimates for the on- and off-site improvement plans. 6. Public Works has not received a petition to vacate Squire Street and 43rd AV. S. It can take almost 6 months to complete the vacation process. Response: The petition for vacation of 43rd Avenue South has been submitted and processed. 7. Resubmittal of the site plans must occur AFTER the retaining walls are designed. Response: The retaining walls have been designed and submitted to the City. Site Plan 8. The civil plans should accurately show property lines as they currently exist and should have all streets labeled with correct street names. Response: The boundary of the project has been revised to show the updated property lines and all streets are labeled with the correct street names. 9. The civil plans must show the frontage improvements along S 131' Pl, and 42'' Av. S (Macadam). The '/a street improvements include curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk, street lights, and paving. Any exception request to this requirement must be made in writing to the PW Director. I do not have the authority to grant an exception. Response: The off-site road improvement plan has been prepared and is attached to this submittal for review. iF-z ix II' U 0 U 000 ILI. W _ NLL w 0 J. u_? -± d �- 0 z I -- w w U 0 O N O I -- ww O. Wz 0E - z City of Tukwila -3- July 25, 2005 10. The civil plans must show the retaining walls, once they are designed. Your response to this correction letter must include the actual proposed walls and all changes associated with those walls. Response: The civil plans show the retaining walls and the retaining wall designs have been submitted to the City. 11. The water meters for the existing building must be upgraded and appropriate cross connection must be installed. Refer to Chapter 7 of the Stds., the Customer Assistance Bulletins available on the City's website and to the redlined plans. Response: The note in this regard has been added to the plans. 12. The new water meters and fire line must have backflow prevention devices as explained in the Stds, Chapter 7. Please refer to the Stds. and to the Customer Assistance Bulletins available on the City's website. Response: The note in this regard has been added to the plans. Attached are three (3) copies of the revised plans and documents for your review. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. Respectfully, Ali Sadr, P.E. Senior Project Manager AS/tep/bd 6719c.011.doc enc: As Noted cc: Dave Kehle, David Kehle Architect (w/enc) Larry Shaw, Normed (w/enc) Alison Moss, Dearborn and Moss (w/enc) 06/13/2005 13:26 206926 .4 DEARBORN AND Mi ?` JUN -13-'05 MON 13:35 ID:WA DEPT OF FISHERIES TEL NO:206-391-6593 PAGE 02 1!554 P01 iii.i''' Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL North' Puget Sound Department ofFISH and RCW 77.55.100 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW 18018 Mill Creek Boulevard WMill Creak, WA 98012-1296 W1LpLIFE ILIF. (425) 775-1311 Issue Date: June 10, 2005 . Control Number: 00000F4793.1 . Expiration Date: September 30, 2007 .,�MIMM FPA/Publie Notice #: 200500013 PERMITTEE NorMed-Shaw Partnership . ' 2183 Sunset Avenue Southwest Seattle WA, 98116 AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR Dearborn' & Moss PLLC ATTENTION: Alison Moss 2183 Sunset AVenue SW Seattle WA, 98118 ' Project Name: Project Description: NorMed Warehouse and Offices Install Wetland Fill and Mitigation; Remove Culvert, Realign Creek, and Install Habitat Location is lower Southgate Creek, Tributary to the Duwamish/Green River, 4310 S. 131st Place, Tukwila PROVISIONS 1. Work on wetland grading and fill, culvert removal, stream relocation, and habitat installation shall only occur between June 15 and September 30 of calendar years 2005-2007. 2. Work Involving the stream and wetland shall be overseen by a qualified stream and wetland scientist. 3. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The Area Habitat Biologist listed below shalt•receive written notification (FAX (425-649-7098) or e-mail (fisheldf©dfw.wa.gov) from the person to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) is issued (permittee) or the agent/contractor no leas than three working days prior to start of work, and again within seven days of completion of work to arrange for a compliance inspection. The notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work or completion date of work, and the control number for this HPA. 4. Work shall be accomplished per plane and specifications approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife entitled, "NORMED DEVELOPMENT", dated April 27, 2005, except as modified by this HPA. A•copy•of these plans shall be available on site during construction. FLOW BYPASS 5. A temporary bypass to divert flow around the work area shall be in place prior to initiation of other work in the wetted perimeter. 6. A sandbag revetment or similar device shall be installed at the bypass inlet to divert the entire flow through•the bypass. 7.. A sandbag revetment or simile? device shall be installed M the downstream end of the bypass to prevent backwater from entering the work area. Page 1 of 6 06/13/2005 13:26 206923b.,14 DEARBORN AND ML -,8 PAGE 03 JUN -13-' 05 MON 13:36 I D: WA DEPT OF FISHER IES ,TEL N0: 206-391.-6583...,_ _ _ _ ##554 f?02• - alWashington Department of FISH and WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL North Puget Sound 16018 MOI Creek Boulevard MM Greets; WA 98012-1296 (425) 775-1311 Issue Date: June 10, 2005 Control Number: 00000F4793-1 z Explratlon Date: September 30, 2007 FPA/Public Notice #: 20050001.3 < Z 8. The bypass shall be of sufficient size to pass all flows and debris for the•duration of the project. rt2 _r O 9. Prior to releasing the water flow to•the project area, all Instream work shall be completed. . v p 10. Upon completion of the project, alt material used in the temporary bypass shall be removed H from the•site and the site returned to preproject or improved conditions. N u_ w0 11. The permittee shall capture and safely move food fish, game fish, and other fish life from the job 2 site. The permittee shall have fish capture and transportation equipment ready and on the job site. u- Q Captured fish shall be immediately and safely transferred to tree -flawing water downstream of the co project site. The permittee may request the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife assist In = W capturing and safely moving fish life from the job site to free-flowing water, and assistance may be • Z '— granted if personnel are available. - G z 12. Any device used for diverting water from a fish -bearing stream shall be equipped with a fish uj guard to prevent passage of fish into the diversion device pursuant to ROW 77.55.040 and . o 77.16.220. The pump intake shall be screened with 1/8 -inch mesh to prevent fish from entering the p co system. The screened intake shall consist of a facility with enough surface• area to ensure that the ' 0 !— velocity velocity through the screen is less than 0.4 feet per second. Screen maintenance shalt be = w adequate to prevent injury or entrapment to juvenile fish and the screen shall remain in place whenever water is withdrawn from the stream through the pump Intake. u- z co CHANNEL REALIGNMENT U I- 13. The permanent new channel shaft, at a minimum, be similar.in length, width, depth, floodplain z configuration, and gradient, as the old channel. The new channel shall incorporate fish habitat components, strearribed materials, meander configuration, and native or other approved vegetation equivalent to or greater than that which previously existed in the old. channel. •14. During construction, the new channel shall be isolated from the flowing stream by plugs at the upetreem and downstream ends of the new channel. These plugs shall be substantial enough to • prevent flood flows from entering the new channel during construction. 15. Before water is diverted into the permanent new channel, approved fish habitat components, streambed materials and bank protection to prevent erosion shall be in place. Fish habitat components and bank protection material shall be installed to withstand the 100 -year peak flows. 16. The fish habitat log structures shall be of fir, cedar, or other approved coniferous speckle installed a minimum 1/4 to 1/3 of the channel width into the channel. An on-site meeting shalt occur with the Area Habitat Biologist the permittee or agent, and the contractor prior t� installation of the log structures. Page 2 of 6 ,`/13/2005 13:26 206923b�14 DEARBORN AND ML -3d .,TUN -13-'05 MON 13:36 ID: WA DEPT OF FISHERIES TEL NO: 206-391-6583 PAGE 04 #554 P03 0Washington HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL North Puget Sound Department of 16018 Mill Cris*Boulevard MN end Mill Creek, WA 98012-1296 WILDLIFE (425) 775.1311 issue Date: June 10, 2005 Control Number: 00000F4793-1 . Expiration Date: September 30, 2007 FPA/Public Notice #: 2005000/3 17. A minimum of 12 inches deep of clean, rounded, uniformly -graded gravel with a size composition of: , 15 percent of 4.0 to 3.0 inches; ' 35 percent of 3.0 to 1.5 inches; 40 percent of 1.5 to 0.25 inches, with fines less than 0.25 inches 10.0 percent total volume, shall .be placed throughout the channel. 18. Spoils from the new channel shall be placed in an approved upland site. This material shell be used to fill the old channel once the diversion has been completed, 19. The angle of the structure used to divert the stream into the new channel shall allow a smooth transition of stream flow. 20. Stream diversion shall be conducted only after inspection and approval of the new channel by the Area Habitat Biologist listed below or his/her representative. . z z ccw 0 O 0 rn 0 J f - w0 =I- LL LL co P Cl I -w z1 zI- w 21. Diversion of flow into the new channel shall be accomplished by the following! U 1. First remove the downstream plug. • o e- 2. Face the stream side of the plug with a sandbag revetment or similar approved mechanism. w • w 3. Partially remove the upstream plug to allow 1/3 to 112 of the flow down the new channel for at - 0 least overnight. The old channel shall•not be allowed to dewater, u_ 4. Remove the rest of the upstream plug once the new channel has flow throughout its entire z length. v 5. Close the upstream end of the old channel and securely armor the entrance to the old channel H to prevent re-entry of any flow: Armor material shall consist of clean, angular rock and shall be installed to withstand the 100 -year peak flow. z 22. Filling of the old channel shall begin from the upstream closure and the fill material shall be compacted. Water discharging from the fill shall not adversely impact fish life. 23. Equipment used for this project shall be free of extemal petroleum-based products while working around the stream. Accumulation of soils or debris shall be removed from the drive mechanisms (wheels, tires, tracks, etc.) and undercarriage of equipment prior to'its working below the ordinary high water line. Equipment shall be checked daily for leaks and any necessary repairs shall be completed prior to commencing work activities along the streatn. 24. Alteration or disturbance of the stream and wetland shall be limited to that necessary to construct the project. Prior to December 31 of the year of project grading, the approved mitigation plan (Provision 4) shall be installed. Vegetative cuttings shall. be planted at a maximum interval of three feet (on center), Plantings shall be maintained as necessary for three years to ensure 80 percent or greater survival. 25. if at any time, as 'a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (Including equipment leaks or spills), Immediate notification shall be • Page 3of6 ,ma/13/2005 13:26 2069236,i4 DEARBORN AND ML-, ?UN -13-'05 MON 13:3? ID:WA DEPT OF FISHERIES TEL N0:206-391-6583 IWashington Department of FISH and . WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PAGE 05 4554 PO4 North Puget Sound 16018 MITI Creek Boulward . MRII Creek, WA 98012-1296 (425)774-1311 Issue Date: June 10, 2005 Control Number, 00000F4793-1 z Expiration Date: Se tember 30, 2007 FPA/Public Notice #: 200500013 Z �w made to the Washington Department of Ecology at 1.800-258-5990, and to the Area Habitat D Biologist fisted below. _i o 26. Erosion control methods shall be used to prevent silt -laden water from entering the stream, el el These mayinclude, but are not limited to, straw bales,filter fabric, temporarysediment ponds, W po , check dams of pea gravel -filled burlap bags or other material, and/or immediate mulching of u) u - exposed areas. . W O 27. Prior•to starting work, the selected erosion control methods (Provision 26) shall be installed. u. Q Accumulated sediments shall be removed during the project and prior, to removing the erosion co d control•after completion of work.. _ i_w Zm 28. Wastewater from project activities and water removed from within the work area shall be routed H I— O to an area landward of the ordinary high water line to allow removal of finesediment and other w e - contaminants prior to being discharged to the stream or wetlands associated with the stream_ j o 29. All waste material such as construction debris, slit, excess dirt or overburden, resulting from this o co project shall be deposited above the limits of flood water in an approved upland disposal site. IL Lu 30. If high flow conditions that may cause siltation are encountered during.this project, work shall ~• H L stop until the flow subsides. Z wco 31. Extreme care shall betaken to ensure that no petroleum products, hydraulic fluid, fresh cement, H z sediments, sediment -laden water, chemicals, or any other toxic or deleterious materials are allowed 01— z to enter or leach into the stream or wetlands associated with the stream. PROJECT LOCATIONS • Location #1 NorMed Work Start:06-15-2005 Work End:09-30-2007 WRIA 09.0001 . 1/4 SEC. NE 1/4 WATERBODY Duwamish/Green River Section Township: 15 23 N TRIBUTARY TO COUNTY • Elliott Bay King Range: Latitude: Longitude 04 E N 47,48733 W122.27915 DRIVING DIRECTIONS: Interurban Ave S, west on 5 133rd St, north on 44th Ave S, left on S 131st St. NOTES APPLY TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to the provisions of the Washington State Fisheries and Wildlife Code, specifically. RCW 77.55 (formerly RCW 75.20). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federal) that may be necessary for this project. Page 4 of 6 /13/2005 13:26 206923u�,14 DEARBORN AND MLS ,---JUN -13 -' 05 MON 13:38 1 p : WA DEPT OF FISHERIES TEL N0:206-391-6503 PAGE 06 kt554 P05 • • Washington WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL North Puget Sound Depa�tDepartment of 16018 MW Creek Boulevard FISH and MIK Creak, WA 98012-129e (425) 775-1311 Issue Date: June 10', 2005 ' • Control Number: 00000F4793-1 Expiration Date: September, 30, 2007 FPA/Public Notice #: 200500013 Z H Z CC al 2 �U O 0 rn0 to u.i Ili COW w 0 u.a co P =a I --w Z ZO ILI • W All Hydraulic Project Approvals Issued pursuant to RCW 77,55A00 or 77.55.200 are subject to U 0 additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines 00 H that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to m 0 appeal such decisions. All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.110 may be u- ~O rnoditied by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after consultation with • z .the person(s) to wtiorn this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such w u) modlficetiona shalt be.subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW i--:1 77.55,170. 0 z This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is Issued and operator(s) Performing the work. This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass. It is the responsibility of the permit holder to secure any landowner permissions or use authorizations as needed for the project. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval Is issued and operator(s) performing the work may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic•Project Approval. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. APPEALS INFORMATION IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL THE ISSUANCE OR DENIAL OF, OR CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN A HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL, THERE ARE INFORMAL.AND FORMAL APPEAL PROCESSES AVAILABLE. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220-110-340) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.100, 77.55,110, 77.55.140, 77,55,190, 77.55.200, and 77.55.290: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: (A)The denial or Issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a •Hydraulic Project Approval; or (B)An order imposing civil penalties. A request for an INFORMAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife HPA Appeals Coordinator, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30 -days of the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. If agreed to by the aggrieved party, and the aggrieved party is the Hydraulic Project Approver applicant, resolution of the concerns will be facilitated through discussions with .the Area Habitat Biologist and • his/her supervisor, If resolution is not reached, or the aggrieved party is not the Hydraulic Project Approval applicant, the Habitat Environmental Services Division Manager or his/her designee shall Page 5 of 6 6'13/2005 13: 26 206923k,.,_4 DEARBORN AND ML ; JUN -13-' 05 MON, 13:31„ „I D_b1A ,DEPT (3F F I SHER I ES TEL NO: 206--391-6583 ,.-if.' • Washington Department of FISH and WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL issue Date: June 10, 2005 Ex•irntion Date: September 30, 2007 12554 �bAGE 07 r 'North Puget Sound 1 Go18•Mift Creek Boulevard Mill Crook, WA 98012A298 (425) 775.1311 Control*Number 00000F4793-1 . FPA/Public Notice #: 200500013 conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or his/her designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of this Informal appeal, a formal appeal may be filed. B. FORMAL APPEALS (WAC.220.110-350) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO. RCW 77,55.100 OR 77.55.140:. A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions mey.request a formal review of: (A) The denial or Issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or•provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval; (B) An artier imposing civil penalties; or (C) Any other 'agency action' for which an adjudicative proceeding is required Under the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. ' A request for e'FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife HPA Appeals Coordinator, shall be plainly labeled as 'REQUEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL,' and shall be RECEIVED DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department at 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia,' Washington 98501-1091, within 30 -days of the Department action that Is being challenged. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely Inform=al appeal. If there hes been an informal appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 30 -days of the date of the Department's written decision in respanse•to the informal appeal. C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT 'ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.65.110, 77.55.200, 77.55.230, or 77.55.290: A person who Is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be In • WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Board per WAC.259-04 at Environmental Hearings Office, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459-0327. D. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 43.21L RCW: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by.the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval may request a formal appeal. The FORMAL APPEAL shall be In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21 L RCW and Chapter 199-08 WAC. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Environmental and Land Use Hearings Board at Environmental Hearings Office, Environmental end Land Use Hearings Board, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, P.O. Box 40903, Lacey, Washington 88504; telephone 360/459.6327. E. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS RESULTS IN FORFEITURE OF ALL APPEAL RIGHTS. IF THERE IS NO TIMELY REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT ACTION SHALL BE FINAL AND UNAPPEALABLE. ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Sergeant Chandler (34) P2 Larry Fisher • 425-649-7042 Habitat Biologist CC: iormol for Director VVDFW Page 6 of 6 Jill Mosqueda - RE: Normed Development From: "Dan Balmelli" <dbalmelli@barghausen.com> To: "Jill Mosqueda" <josqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 6/15/05 12:15PM Subject: RE: Normed Development Jill and Jim, Thanks for your assistance on clarifying the required improvements and also attempting to assist Normed in keeping them to a minimum based on the site constraints. I will pass the information onto Larry for his review. Dan Page 1 Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda [mailto:jmosqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.usj Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 11:32 AM To: dbalmelli Cc: Cyndy Knighton; Carol Lumb; Jim Morrow; Ryan Larson; Robin Tischmak; Sandra Whiting Subject: Normed Development Following our meeting on June 6th, I presented your proposed frontage improvements to Jim Morrow, Public Works Director. The following is Jim's decision on the proposal: 1. S 131st PI - Proposed improvements consisting of a paved shoulder, curb and storm drainage pipe running from 42nd Av S to Hot Mix Pavers is approved. The storm drainage that will be collected must be handled so that there is no flooding or pooling occurring downstream. At a minimum, the storm drainage would have to be treated before it is directed to the wetlands/stream. Additionally, I advise you to work up a drainage design for S 131st PI and get WDFW approval before you go too far with the rest of your design work. 2. 42 nd Av s - Install curb, gutter, storm drainage and 5' concrete sidewalk for the full length of the 42nd Av S frontage. The City will not require paving (overlay) or pavement mitigation fees to do this work. Upon request, I will provide a copy of the planned paving from the 2005 Overlay Program. Paving along Normed property as shown in the overly program has been deferred. The two paved travel lanes in 42nd Av S will be 10' wide. The frontage improvements would begin at the edge of the travel lane. L. Jill Mosqueda P.E. CC: "Lawrence M. Shaw" <Ishaw@normed.com>, "Sandra Whiting" <swhiting@ci.tukwiia.wa.us>, "Robin Tischmak" <rtischmak@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "Ryan Larson" <rlarson@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "Jim Morrow" <jmorrow@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "Carol Lumb" <clumb@ci.tukwila.wa.us>, "Cyndy Knighton" <cknighton@ci.tukwila.wa.us> May 27, 2005 Mr. Larry Shaw Nor Med Shaw Partnership. PO Box 3644 Seattle, Washington 98124-3644 .; ADOLFSON Erwironmenta.( So(utions PCMANENT FILE COPY JUN C "i Z.UO5 PUBLIC WORKS RE: Nor Med Shaw Partnership, Building Permit - Frontage Improvements Dear Larry, At your request, Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) has reviewed the letter from the City of Tukwila Public Works Department in regards to a request for relief from half street improvements to 42nd Avenue South (Macadam) for the Nor Med-Shaw. Building Permit D04- 415. I have reviewed the letter from Mr. Jim Morrow, Director of Public Works and have provided this response based upon our role in the project as the environmental consultant and designer of the wetland mitigation area. Frontage improvements requested by the City of Tukwila include curb, gutter, drainage facilities, sidewalk, and paving along the eastern side of 42nd Avenue South. As I understand it, the required frontage improvements would result in expansion of the road cross-section to provide a 12 to 14 foot wide lane, a new curb and gutter, and new sidewalk of a width of approximately 5 to 6 feet on the east side of the road. To construct these improvements, we understand from Barghausen Engineers that two to three sections of new rockery would need to be built, in addition to the retaining wall already proposed for the slope as part of the wetland mitigation. The results of construction of these frontage improvements would likely include encroachment into the mitigation slope from a fill slope for the sidewalk and rockery wall. This construction may also cause impacts to both proposed wildlife movement corridors and existing trees designated to remain. As part of the mitigation design, two "wildlife corridors" were identified on the existing slope along 42nd Avenue South and protected from grade change in the mitigation plan. The construction of additional wetland mitigation area, as required by the Washington State Department of Ecology for the project, necessitated the grading of the slope east of 42nd Avenue South. The two wildlife corridors were designed to retain existing grades so that movement of wildlife to and from the mitigation area was not adversely affected by steepening the grade of the slope. Coyote and raccoon are thought to use the existing wetland and buffer and the segment of Southgate Creek located on site. The wildlife corridor areas proposed also served to retain existing coniferous trees. Our concern is that construction of the additional rockery as part of frontage improvements may artificially "block" the movement of wildlife through the corridors and further isolate the habitats on the Nor Med site. This could limit the use of the mitigation area by local wildlife species. In addition, I have two other concerns regarding the effects of frontage improvements (namely sidewalks) along 42nd Avenue South on the wetland mitigation area. These are related to roadside litter and human access. Sidewalks will encourage pedestrians and walkers may ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 7 206 789 9658 5taK 206 789 9684 www.ado mere Shaw /Nor Med-Shaw Partnership May 27, 2005 Page 2 of 2 contribute to degradation of the slope by depositing litter. Currently, litter and debris is found on the slope east of 42nd Avenue South. The debris consists of bottles, cans, discarded building materials, and tires, among other man-made items. The mitigation proposal requires removal of this debris from the slope to clean up the site and improve wildlife habitat. Encouraging pedestrian use at the top of this slope area could result in a continuing problem with disposal of trash. We anticipate that litter removal could end up being a continual maintenance issue and potentially jeopardize the viability of new plantings required for the upland slope as part of the mitigation. We also have concerns that the new sidewalk would encourage physical access to the mitigation area by the public, which could also disrupt wildlife use of the site. As an alternative to the frontage improvements outlined by the City in Mr. Morrow's letter, I understand that Barghausen Engineers has developed, with your assistance, another proposal for frontage improvements along 42nd Avenue S. This alternative would include curb and gutters, and drainage facilities within the existing paved road shoulder, but would not include new sidewalk. Dan Balmelli of Barghausen Engineers described this alternative over the telephone. If only curb and gutter and drainage facilities were installed, then the additional impacts from fill and rockery walls for sidewalks to the mitigation area would not occur. Existing trees and other vegetation in the two wildlife habitat corridors would be unaffected. Existing grades in the proposed wildlife habitat corridors would be maintained and allow for movement of animal species. Further, without sidewalks along the top of the slope, we anticipate that litter and dumping of garbage would occur less frequently and public access to the site would not be encouraged. This would require less maintenance and contribute to the overall viability of the upland and wetland mitigation area. Thank you for requesting our review of the frontage improvement issue. If you have any questions, I would be happy to discussthese with you personally at 206-789-9658. Thank you, ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES, INC. V..42,14.41 -:?-1. Teresa H. Vanderburg Director of Natural Sciences City of Tukwila PERMANENT FILE COPY Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Public Works James F Morrow, P.E., Director Ms. Alison Moss Dearborn & Moss P.L.L.0 2183 Sunset Ave. SW Seattle, Washington 98116 RE: NorMed-Shaw Building Permit D04-415 Dear Ms. Moss: Thank you for your letter of April 6, 2005 wherein you outline the reasons for requesting an exception to the City's requirement of frontage improvements (curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk, street lights, and paving) along 42nd Avenue South. At your request, I have reviewed the City's position. My review included your letter, the plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers (dated 10/13/04), and the project's geotechnical report prepared by Terra Associates (dated 11/17/04). There were three reasons presented for your waiver request. The following discussion will address each of those in the same order that they were presented. 1. The NorMed Proposal Does Not Create the Need For or Contribute to the Need for Half Street Improvements. Response: The principal reason for your waiver request is the alleged lack of nexus between the proposed NorMed building and the City's desired half -street improvements and the accompanying lack of proportionality between the impacts and the desired public improvements. To substantiate this statement you state the City has not provided an analysis that demonstrates the need for the improvements. To bolster your position, you have pointed out that the NorMed Project will not access onto 42" Avenue, the location for the proposed half -street improvements. The City is well familiar with Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battleground, 146 Wn.2d 685, 494, 49 P.3d 860 (2002), Isla Verde v. City of Camas, 146 Wn.2d 740, 49 P.3d 867 (2002), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, 391 (1994) and the duties they place upon the City. As such, the City feels there is substantial evidence to establish a nexus and satisfy the proportionality requirements. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-433-0179 • Fax: 206.431-3665 The NorMed proposal includes the filling of a Type 2 wetland and the creation of a new wetland area. This new wetland area will be located along the western side of the property and at the base of 42nd Avenue South. To create the new wetland and provide fill material for the building site, existing steep slopes on the western edge of the property will be excavated and an extensive retaining wall system z installed. Barghausen Drawings Cl, C4, C5, C7, and C8 clearly show the z excavation limits, the retaining wall system and its associated details. Section 4.2, specifically Page 6, of the geotechnical report prepared by Terra v p Associates, Inc. addresses the work that will be performed along the western portion of the site. It states, "Water must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled CO over the slope face. If surface water runoff must be directed towards the slope, w the runoff should be controlled at the top of the slope, piped in a closed conduit w O installed on the slope face, and taken to an appropriate point of discharge beyond the toe." Section 4.6, Page 9, also addresses the retaining wall system and establishes criteria for the construction of the walls. = c� �w z= The City considers that NorMed's own project documents provide the substantial 1- 0 evidence and nexus to require frontage improvements along 42nd Avenue. The z 1-- surface water runoff from 42"d Avenue South flows eastward toward the NorMed 2 o property and would flow uncontrolled over the slope face if not channeled by the U installation of a proper drainage system - curb, gutters, etc. The installation of a o - sidewalk on the backside of the curb is required because once the curb and gutter = v is installed, the roadway width and travel lanes will be clearly defined and LLO pedestrians will need a safe area upon which to walk. Also, the sidewalk will assist in directing surface water runoff away from NorMed's steep slopes and the v cn retaining walls, because they will be sloped towards the gutter. 0 2. Adjacent Frontage Improvements are Unlikely in the Foreseeable Future. Response: The City feels that the possibility of future frontage improvements on adjacent properties along 42nd Avenue South have no bearing upon the issue at hand. The impact created by the relocation of the wetlands and the excavation of the steep slopes on the western portion of the property is directly mitigated by the frontage improvements. 3. Frontage Improvements Would Conflict with Wetland Mitigation. Response: The elevation difference between the roadway and the wetland area is significant. Frontage improvements will not adversely affect the quality of the habitat and species using the wetlands. In summary, the City has determined that frontage improvements, curb, gutter, drainage, and sidewalks along 42nd Avenue South are required to mitigate the impacts created by the proposed relocation of the wetlands and the excavation of the steep slopes, including the need to maintain slope stability as noted in NorMed's geotechnical report. The requirement for street lighting is waived. The City is planning to perform some roadway work this summer along 42nd Avenue South adjacent to the NorMed property. The scope of the work will be an edge of pavement to edge of pavement overlay and the installation of a water main. Once this work has been completed, the City will not allow any work in the right-of-way without fully restoring the pavement. Therefore, the City would be willing to include in our maintenance contract the installation of the frontage improvements - curb, gutter, sidewalk, and drainage. NorMed would reimburse the City for the cost of the design and construction of these improvements. NorMed would not be billed for the cost of the paving. If this offer interests NorMed, please let me know as soon as possible so that the City can plan the scheduled maintenance work. Should you have any questions regarding this decision, please do not hesitate to call me at your convenience (206) 433-0179. Sincerely, �curna� c�' James F. Morrow, P.E. Director, Public Works u ARBORN & MOSS P.L.L.C. Attorneys at Law April 6, 2005 VIA FAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Jim Morrow, Director Public Works Department City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Re: NorMed—Shaw Building Permit D04-415 Dear Mr. Morrow: PERMANENT FILE COPY RECEIVED APR 0 7 2005 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORiv., By this letter I would like to follow up on our telephone conversation of March 23, 2005 in which we discussed the request in the Department's January 12, 2005 review comments that NorMed Shaw construct half street improvements to 42"" Avenue South (Macadam). The review comments indicate that the improvements should include curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk, street lights, and paving. NorMed has asked that you waive this requirement. You asked that I outline the reasons for our request and agreed that doing so would not affect NorMed's ability to formally request an exception, should we find that necessary. Background In April, 2002 the City of Tukwila approved a reasonable use exception for the construction of an approximately 40,000 square foot (SF) office/warehouse building and the filling of approximately 32,204 SF of a Type 2 wetland. The wetland mitigation plan conceptually approved by the City proposed creating approximately 13,726 SF of wetland and enhancement of 43,440 SF of wetland on-site. In addition, the proposal incorporated a number of features that would provide "out -of -kind" mitigation for wetland impacts. The proposal also requires an individual Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and an individual water quality certification from the Department of Ecology (Ecology). After extensive review, Ecology determined that an additional approximately 18,478 SF of wetland creation was necessary to achieve no net 2183 Sunset Ave. SW Seattle, Washington 98116 Phone: (206) 923-0816 Fax: (206) 923-0814 ("2".1111) Jim Morrow April 6, 2005 Page 2 loss of wetland square footage. NorMed investigated off-site mitigation for more than a year, but none of its overtures came to fruition. Consequently, in April, 2004, NorMed z asked its civil engineers, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, to evaluate the possibility 1 ~ of providing additional wetland creation area on-site. Barghausen has developed a plan ui which would result in no net loss of wetland square footage by creating greater wetland 6 = areas on the western portion of the site by excavating into the hillslope below 42"d v o Avenue South (Macadam). Ecology conceptually approved this plan. co w J= As we discussed, the revised wetland mitigation plan will require construction of a co � retaining wall along most of the top of the slope adjacent to 42nd Avenue South and w grading and replanting of much of the slope from 42nd Avenue South to Southgate J Creek. u.. u)a = Bases for Waiver Request H Wm z1- 1. The NorMed Proposal Does Not Create the Need For or Contribute to the Need w alO For Half Street Improvements. ? o The principal reason that we ask the City to waive the request for half -street o improvements to 42"d Avenue S. is that there is no nexus between the proposed NorMed cu w building and the City's desired half -street improvements or proportionality between the 1- H impacts of the proposal and the desired public improvements. Consequently, the I O request does not comport with RCW 82.02.020 or constitutional principles. Further, the id n City has not provided any analysis demonstrating that NorMed's proposal creates the o need for -- or even contributes to the need for -- the improvements. Thus, the request is Z not supported by substantial evidence. NorMed operates a manufacturing and wholesale distribution business that produces and sells immediate care medical supplies. It chose its current location based on its excellent access to I-5 and to SR 599. NorMed's access to I-5 and SR 599 is via S. 131st Place to 44th Avenue S. and S. 133rd Avenue. It acquired additional adjacent properties for expansion at this location for the same reason. Currently, it has no access to 42nd Avenue S. The wetland mitigation described above will preclude future access to 42"d Avenue S. Its new building is unlikely to generate any trips on 42nd Avenue S., as S. 130 Place provides much more direct access to its property. The City's request is very similar to that invalidated in The Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battleground, 146 Wn. 2d 685, 49 P. 3d 860 (2002) . In Benchmark, the City of Battleground required an applicant for a subdivision to make half -street • Jim Morrow April 6, 2005 Page 3 improvements to a street adjoining the development based on an ordinance very similar to TMC 11.12.030.B. The applicant sued under the Land Use Petition Act (LUPA), arguing that the condition was not supported by substantial evidence and was unconstitutional. In that case, as in this case, the proposal had no direct access to the street in question. Traffic studies performed both by the applicant and by the City both indicated that the proposal would not generate a substantial number of trips on the street or create safety or operational concerns. 146 Wn. 2d at 690. Consequently, the Supreme Court found that the condition requiring half street improvement was not supported by substantial evidence. As a result, it did not rule on the constitutional argument. This case is even more clear cut than Benchmark: NorMed's proposal is not expected generate any traffic on 42nd Avenue S. Isla Verde v. City of Camas, 146 Wn.2d 740, 49 P.3d 867 (2002) considered challenges to a 30% open space requirement. The challenges were brought under RCW 82.02.020 and the constitution. As in Benchmark, the Supreme Court found no need to rule on the constitutional challenge, based on its conclusion that the condition violated RCW 82.02.020. RCW 82.02.020 generally provides, with some exceptions, that the state preempts the field of imposing certain taxes. There are three exceptions: (1) impact fees authorized by RCW 82.02.050-.090;1 (2) dedications of land or easements within the proposed development which the local government can demonstrate are reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development; or (3) voluntary agreements that allow a payment in lieu of dedication or to mitigate a direct impact that is a consequence of the proposed development. The second and third exceptions are found in RCW 82.02.020 and by their plain language require that the local government demonstrate that the condition is reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development. Thus, in Isla Verde, the Supreme Court held that the City had to demonstrate that set aside regulation was based upon an assessment that the requirement was reasonably necessary in that location: We have repeatedly held, as the statutes require, that development conditions must be tied to a specific identified impact of the development on a community. 1 While your request does not fall within the first exception for impact fees, we note that the Court of Appeals has recently held that the first exception, impact fees, also requires that the condition be proportional to the impacts of the proposal, and not be based on a Citywide or cumulative impact assessment. City of Olympia v. Drebick, 119 Wn. App. 774, 83 P. 3d 443 (2004). z re0w U O 0 w= F - w 0 gQ �0 =d �w Z= I- O Z~ • w O co O- O r- LLJ ..z w 0 o� z Jim Morrow April 6, 2005 Page 4 146 Wn. 2d at 761. As Camas had not done so, the 30% set aside was invalild. Here, the City has not demonstrated that the improvements to 42"d Avenue S. are tied to a specific identified impact of the NorMed building on the community. Thus, the request violates RCW 82.02.020. You suggested that the grading work on the slope adjacent to 42nd Ave. and the construction of retaining walls adjacent to the right-of-way may provide the necessary relationship between the frontage improvement and the impact of the proposal. However, street improvements are wholly unrelated to the wetland mitigation. The fact that NorMed will be performing wetland mitigation work adjacent to the right-of-way does not provide a basis for requiring transportation improvements for which NorMed's proposal does not create a demand and from which it does not benefit. z w ret J U 00 coo CO - _ w O 2 ga sa I -w 2. Adjacent Frontage Improvements are Unlikely in the Foreseeable Future. z F=•- 1— O z (-- Frontage improvements on adjacent properties on the east side of 42nd Avenue S. have g �. not been undertaken. The nearest improvements to north are on the north •side of SR v 599. To the south, there are no similar frontage improvements along the entire length of 0 42nd Avenue S./Macadam Rd. nearly to Southcenter (over two miles). It is unlikely that w W half street improvements on adjacent properties would be undertaken in the foreseeable future. u_ cu 3. Frontage Improvements Would Conflict With Wetland Mitigation. 17- 0 z In my experience, lighting and pedestrian traffic, particularly pedestrian traffic which may involve pets, are not desirable within or adjacent to wetland mitigation projects as they adversely affect the quality of the habitat and the species using that habitat. For these reasons, we ask that you waive the requirement for frontage improvements on 42nd Avenue S. Thank you in advance for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, Alison Moss cc: Larry Shaw Reid iddleton February 28, 2005 File No. 262004.005/00902 Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permit Plan Review — Final Submittal NorMed Shaw Building (D04-415) Dear Mr. Burnell: MAI? 01 2005, rJEyELO pl y T Engineers Planners Surveyors Z. w CL 26 00 wo w= w 0 1coQ =d I— al We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) as amended and adopted by the state of w O Washington and the City of Tukwila. The permit applicant has responded successfullyuj D o to our comments. 0 O • I— w • w 0 ..z Portions of the structural design have been deferred by the structural engineer for • '— submittal to the City of Tukwila after issuance of the initial building permit, per IBC z Section 106.3.4.2. The following deferred submittals are identified: A new structural set of drawings was submitted in response to our initial plan review and inserted into the original drawing set. The other sets of drawings should be reconciled in preparation for permit issuance. 1. Design drawings for open -steel -web wood I -joists. Special inspection by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record should be provided for at least the aspects of construction noted below, as recommended in the geotechnical report by Terra Associates, dated November 17, 2004. See IBC Sections 1704.7 and 1802. 1. Site excavation and grading. 2. Preloading of building area. 3. Placement of structural fill and soil compaction. 4. Verification of soil -bearing capacity. 5. Installation of the foundation subsurface drainage system. 6. Placement and compaction of foundation and retaining wall backfill. Structural special inspection by qualified special inspectors should be provided per IBC Sections 1704 and 1707. The following is a summary of the structural special inspections: Washington Oregon Alaska Reid Middleton, Inc. 728134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 Ph: 425 741-3800 Fax: 425 741-3900 Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila February 28, 2005 File No. 262004.005/00902 Page 2 1. Concrete construction: Continuous, see also Section 1704.4. 2. Reinforcement at concrete construction: Periodic, see also Section 1704.4. 3. Structural welding of concrete reinforcement: Continuous, see also Section 1704.4 and Item 5.b.2 of Table 1704.3. 4. Erection of precast (tilt -up) reinforced concrete walls: Periodic, see also Section 1704.4. 5. Installation of concrete expansion and adhesive anchors: Continuous, see also Section 1704.13. 6. Fabrication and erection of structural steel: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. 7. Structural welding of structural steel for single -pass fillet welds < 5/16 -inch and floor/roof deck welds: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. 8. High-strength bolting of structural steel other than slip -critical: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. 9. High-strength bolting of structural steel, slip -critical: Continuous, see also IBC Section 1704.3, Section M5.4 of the AISC Specification (AISC-LRFD or AISC 335), and RCSC Section 9.3. 10. Erection of open -web steel joists and girders: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. 11. Wood -framed lateral -force -resisting system at the roof: Periodic, see also Section 1707.3. Enclosed are one complete set of the revised structural drawings (bound with the originally submitted architectural drawings) and an additional set of the revised structural sheets. Also enclosed are the structural calculations, geotechnical report, and correspondence from the structural engineer for your records. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, please contact us. Sincerely, Reid Middleton, Inc. tiK r Phip Brazil, P.E., S.E. Senior Engineer Enclosures cc: David Kehle, Architect Richard Hudson, Hudson and Associates vlf\26\planrevw\tukwila\04\t009r2.doc\kky Reid iddleton 1114 n • v david kehle architec February 17, 2005 Reid Middleton, Inc. 728 134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, Washington 98204 Attn: Mr. Philip Brazil Re: NorMed Shaw Building -- 004-415 Tukwila Dear Philip, eiN) Enclosed please find two sets of revised structural drawings, one copy of structural calculations and a response letter from Richard Hudson & Associates as requested in your December 7, 2004 review letter. If you have any questions please feel free to call. Sincerely, a David Kehle DK/mt Cc: Mr. Bob Benedicto a:10441 Veidmiddletonlet2-17-05 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 9OL/O(Q)? f. FEB 2 2 2005 1)04.- 41s (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek@dkehlearch.com February 16, 2005 Ciiy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Mr. David Kehle 12720 Gateway Drive, Suite 116 Seattle, Washington 98168 RE: CORRECTION LETTER #1 Development Permit Application Number D04-415 Normed — 4310 South 131't Place Dear David: z z rew JO 00 N0 CO W J1- 1— U) LL w0 2 u_? a =w z� 0 This letter is to inform you of corrections that must be addressed before your development permit(s) can be approved. W w All correction requests from each department must be addressed at the same tine and reflected on your drawings. I ? o have enclosed comments from the Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. At this time, the Fire Department . 0 w has no comments. o wW Building Department: Ken Nelsen, at (206) 431-3677, if you have questions regarding the . 1 -- attached attached memo. o Planning Department: Carol Lumb, at (206) 431-3641, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Public Works Department: Jill Mosqueda, at (206) 431-2449, if you have questions regarding the attached memo. Please address the attached comments in an itemized format with applicable revised plans, specifications, and/or other documentation. The City requires that four (4) complete sets of revised plans, specifications and/or other documentation be resubmitted with the appropriate revision block. In order to better expedite your resubmittal, a `Revision Submittal Sheet' must accompany every resubmittal. I have enclosed one for your convenience. Corrections/revisions must be made in person and will not be accepted through the mail or by a messenger service. If you have any questions, please contact me at (206) 433-7165. Sincerely, Stefania Spencer Permit Technician encl xc: File No. D04-415 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 z Tukwila Building Division Ken Nelsen, Sr. Plan Examiner Building Division Review Memo Date: Dec. 13, 2004 Project Name: Normed permit application Application #: D04-415 Plan Review: Ken Nelsen, Senior Plans Examiner An initial Building Division architectural plan review has been conducted on the subject permit application. Please address the following comments in an itemized format with revised plans, specifications and/or other applicable documentation. 1. On the plan title sheet SD -1, provide a general "Plan Index". 2. Provide compete door, window, and skylight schedules on the plans. The schedule must reference safety glazing and minimum energy code values. The energy code values should also be reflected on an updated State Energy Code compliance form. 3. The building shell is designed to comply as a prescriptive, Semi -Heated structure under W.S.E.0 Section 1310.2. However, as separate tenant improvement permit applications are made for occupancy, the general requirements for conditioned spaces and semi -heated may change. At a minimum, provide general notes on the plan regarding the W.S.E.C. compliance for the future development of tenant spaces, etc. 4. Related to comment number 3 above, the commissioning of H.V.A.C. equipment has become an integral part of the W.S.E.C. requirements. Regardless that separate mechanical permits are required for H.V.A..C. systems, the requested W.S.E.C. general notes must include references to the System Commissioning requirements of W.S.E.C. Section 1415.4, specifically as required for the Certificate of Occupancy. No further comments at this time. • Page 1 Tukwila Building Division Ken Nelsen, Sr. Plan Examiner Supplemental Building Division Review Memo Date: Project Name: Application #: Plan Review: Jan. 11, 2005 Normed permit application D04-415 Ken Nelsen, Senior Plans Examiner An overview of the subject application building site improvements, in conjunction with the Planning and Public Works Departments has resulted in the following concern. Please address the following comment as applicable. The retaining walls sections shown on plan sheet C-8, would indicate that the required wall construction is far more complex then is generally presented. Because City policy requires separate permit building application for retaining walls and detention vaults, it is recommended that the retaining wall construction be submitted for permit application as soon as possible. Feel free to contact myself if there are any questions at 206-431-3670. No further comments at this time. CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards z W Permit #: 004-415 2 Project Name: Normed o 4230 S 164th St co Review #: 1 w u Date: 01.12.05 cn o Reviewer: Ryan Larson, P.E. 2 �. ga The City Of Tukwila Public Works Department (PW) has the following comments = c regarding the surface water Technical Information Report provided with this 1-• _. permit application. o z w w U0 1. The TIR must use the 1998 King County Surface Water Design manual. oo 2. The capital improvement projects cited are out of date. Please refer to the = w City's 2004 Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan for current CIP 1- projects in this basin. 1 z. w U= P Projects/D04-415 Normed SW comm 1 from Larson 1 z City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING DIVISION COMMENTS DATE: February 15, 2005 CONTACT: Dave Kehle, Architect RE: D04-415, NorMed Warehouse ADDRESS: 4310 S. 131St Street Please review the following comments listed below and submit your revisions accordingly. If you have any questions on the requested revision, Carol Lumb is the planner assigned to the file and can be reached at 206-431-3661. Background: This building permit is being reviewed against the approved Reasonable Use (L98-0076), and Design Review applications (L98-0077) for the proposed NorMed warehouse. Public hearings were held on these applications February 28, 2002 and April 4, 2002, and they were reviewed, discussed and approved by the Tukwila Planning Commission and Board of Architectural Review April 4, 2002. A conceptual wetland mitigation plan was submitted at the time the Reasonable Use application was approved with a final wetland mitigation plan and monitoring program to be submitted with the building permit submittal. Design Review: 1. Two conditions were approved by the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) when it approved the design of the project: Condition 1: The landscape plan must be revised to reflect at least 12.5 feet of landscaping on the front of the building and to add ornamental landscaping at the front entrance; Sheet A-1 indicates there are planters at the front entrance to the building, however, the landscaping plan does not provide a detail of the plantings. This detail must be provided. The landscaping plan does not provide the required 12Y2 feet of landscaping at the front of the site. The landscaping between the sidewalk and the street does not appear to include shrubs, only 2 street trees and ground cover. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Mr. David Kehle, Architect D04-415: Norrned Warehouse February 15, 2005 Condition 2: The site plan must be revised to reflect the corrections identified in Attachment B. The second condition related to the need for additional parking on the site. It appears this condition has been met by providing 110 parking stalls for the entire site. I had calculated the parking requirements differently, as noted in the attached staff report and come up with 47 required parking stalls for the new building. This would have you one parking stall short on the site. Let's discuss the discrepancies in the calculation of required parking. You may be able to address the short fall through the development of a commute trip reduction program, which is one of the conditions of the Reasonable Use application approval. Also, please check the size of the regular parking stalls — on the west side of the building it appears that some of the stalls are not 19 feet deep z 4-z w • 2 JU O 0 N • LLI LU � LL w 0 g u. Q =• d 2. Please revise the landscaping plan to provide landscaping along Macadam to provide z screening for the proposed fencing. A major change in the project is the proposal to z O excavate into the hillside to create additional wetland area to meet DOE wetland • w replacement requirements. Retaining walls will be needed to retain the slope at the base of the slopes. At the top of the slope, fencing is proposed for placement on top of the o w retaining walls. The site plan approved by the BAR April 4, 2002, did not include to retaining walls in the hillsides where additional wetlands are being created nor fencing = v along Macadam Road, and as a result did not require landscaping along the street frontage. u. O 3. Please provide an enlargement of the landscaping plan — it is hard to determine the v distribution and type of the plantings in some cases due to the scale of the plan. t— a. I am enclosing a copy of the Plant List with notations where the actual count of Z. plantings differs from what is listed. Due to the scale of the plan, I was not able to confirm the number of Abelia and mixed varieties of Rhododendron shrubs that are being planted. Please have the landscape architect confirm my counts of plants. b. The required size of the interior landscape islands is 100 square feet; my calculations show that the islands are 75 square feet in size. c. Planting Notes: Herbicide use is not encouraged at any time due to the proximity of the landscape plantings to the wetlands and groundwater that drains to the Duwamish River. Also, please add a note that the Landscaping Affidavit is to be completed and provided to the City prior to requesting the final landscaping inspection. 4. Sheets C-5 and C-7 must be revised to reflect the grading that will occur to remove the top 12 -inches of soil in the existing wetlands to remove the Reed Canarygrass. The TESC plan should also be revised to reflect the need for erosion control during this grading 5. On Sheet C-5, please add a note that the trees in the northern -most habitat corridor must be protected during construction. q:\mydocs\general\2004-Memos\.doc Mr. David Kehle, Architect D04-415: Normed Warehouse February 15, 2005 6. I would like to confirm there are no planned changes to the color scheme provided at the design review hearing. 7. A separate sign permit is required for any signage for the new building, or revisions to the free standing sign at the entrance to the Normed site. 8. I did not find that bicycle parking was provided on the site plan. The parking standards require one bicycle space for each 50 parking stalls with a minimum of 2 spaces provided. Reasonable Use Application z z cc 2 '~ w Jo O 0 N 0. -1_ w o g• � 9. A copy of the conditions approved with the Reasonable Use application are enclosed. Conditions 1 and 2 apply. I don't believe that we have received either the lot consolidation I a w application as yet or the street vacation request for 43rdAvenue South. These must be z submitted as soon as possible. o zI` 10. The wetland mitigation plan will be reviewed and approved through the review of the 2� revised SEPA and Reasonable Use applications. Comments will be provided on the o co mitigation plan under separate cover. o w uj • U 0 w U= O I- 3 q:\my docs\general\2004-Memos\.doc z CITY OF TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards Permit #: D04-415 re 2 Project Name: Normed 4230 S 164th St N o Review #: 1 • _ Date: 01.12.05 cn u_ w 0 Reviewer: L. Jill Mosqueda, P.E. 2 La The City Of Tukwila Public Works Department (PW) has the following comments = d regarding your application for the above permit. Please contact me at I- i 206.431.2449, if you have any questions. z �o z� GENERAL uj 1. Return the enclosed redlined plans with your response to this correction letter .o and response to the comments on the plans. 2. Please visit the PW development and Permits web page that can be found at: 0 u.o http://webserver/pubwks/pwpermit.htm z This site contains information to help meet Public Work's requirements. Please o review the Development Guidelines and Design and Construction Standards z F- (Stds) and to the CAB (customer assistance bulletins). 3. PW issues a Type C permit as part of the building permit. For the Type C permit, PW collects a base application and plan review fee when the application is submitted. The fee pays for two reviews. Public Works charges for additional reviews. See Bulletin Al. 4. You may apply for two Type C permits, one for the right of way work and one for the onsite work. Alternatively, you may include all work under one permit. 5. Provide two construction cost estimates prepared by the engineer of record, one estimate for the right-of-way work and one estimate for the onsite work. The estimates must include all water, sewer, grading, storm drainage, and frontage improvement work that will be reviewed, approved and installed under this permit. 6. Public Works has not received a petition to vacate Squire Street and 43rd AV. S. It can take almost 6 months to complete the vacation process. 7. Resubmittal of the site plans must occur AFTER the retaining walls are designed. Projects/D04-415 Normed Comm #1 1 SITE PLAN 8. The civil plans should accurately show property lines as they currently exist and should have all streets labeled with correct street names. 9. The civil plans must show the frontage improvements along S 131St PI. and 42nd Av. S (Macadam). The'/2 street improvements include curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk, street lights, and paving. Any exception request to this requirement must be made in writing to the PW Director. I do not have the authority to grant an exception. 10. The civil plans must show the retaining walls, once they are designed. Your response to this correction letter must include the actual proposed walls and all changes associated with those walls. 11. The water meters for the existing building must be upgraded and appropriate cross connection must be installed. Refer to Chapter 7 of the Stds., the Customer Assistance Bulletins available on the City's website and to the redlined plans. 12. The new water meters and fire line must have backflow prevention devices as explained in the Stds, Chapter 7. Please refer to the Stds. and to the Customer Assistance Bulletins available on the City's website. Projects/D04-415 Normed Comm #1 2 Reid iddleton December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Building Permit Plan Review — First Submittal NorMed Shaw Building (D04-415) Dear Mr. Benedicto: • ''1 avec4 E.E O EIVED DR: n 8 20010 (�}iVeielJri1 ► l DEVELOPMENT We reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the structural provisions of the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) as amended and adopted by the state of Washington and the city of Tukwila. The permit applicant should address the comments below. Note that the "WSxx" code references are to Washington State Amendments of the applicable code. General 1. Responses to the review comments below should be made in an itemized letter form. We recommend the permit applicant have the geotechnical engineer and the structural engineer respond and resubmit two sets of the revised structural drawings and one copy of the supplemental structural calculations. All information should be submitted directly to Reid Middleton, Inc. Geotechnical 1. Special inspection by the Geotechnical Engineer of Record should be provided for at least the aspects of construction noted below, as recommended in the geotechnical report by Terra Associates, dated November 17, 2004. See IBC Sections 1704.7 and 1802. a. Site excavation and grading. b. Preloading of building area. c. Placement of structural fill and soil compaction. d. Verification of soil -bearing capacity. e. Installation of the foundation subsurface drainage system. f. Placement and compaction of foundation and retaining wall backfill. Engineers Planners Surveyors Washington Oregon Alaska Reid Middleton, Inc. 128134th Street SW Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 Ph: 425141-3800 Fax: 425 741-3900 n Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Page 2 2. The geotechnical should submit a supplemental letter recommending a lateral earth pressure on the foundation and retaining walls due to earthquake motions. See IBC Section 1802.2.7(1). Architectural 1. Portions of the structural design are deferred by the structural engineer for submittal to the city of Tukwila after issuance of the initial building permit, per IBC Section 106.3.4.2. The following deferred submittal is identified: a. Design drawings for open -web steel joists and girders. Structural General 1. Structural special inspection by qualified special inspectors should be provided, per IBC Sections 1704 and 1707. The following is a summary of the structural special inspections: a. Concrete construction: Continuous, see also Section 1704.4. b. Reinforcement at concrete construction: Periodic, see also Section 1704.4. c. Structural welding of concrete reinforcement: Continuous, see also Section 1704.4 and Item 5.b.2 of Table 1704.3. d. Erection of precast (tilt -up) reinforced concrete walls: Periodic, see also Section 1704.4. e. Installation of concrete expansion and adhesive anchors: Continuous, see also Section 1704.13. f. Fabrication and erection of structural steel: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. g. Structural welding of structural steel for single -pass fillet welds < 5/16 -inch and floor/roof deck welds: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. h. High-strength bolting of structural steel other than slip -critical: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. i. High-strength bolting of structural steel, slip -critical: Continuous, see also IBC Section 1704.3, Section M5.4 of the AISC Specification (AISC-LRFD or AISC 335), and RCSC Section 9.3. j. Erection of open -web steel joists and girders: Periodic, see also Section 1704.3. k. Wood -framed lateral -force -resisting system at the roof: Periodic, see also Section 1707.3. Reid iddleton n Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Page 3 2. The wind design data at the section of the structural notes on design criteria, Sheet S-1.0, should be revised by increased the basic wind speed from 80 to 85 mph. See IBC Figure 1609. 3. The earthquake design data at the section of the structural notes on design criteria, Sheet S-1.0, specifies a response modification factor (R) of 5.5, which is also assumed in the calculations (i.e., page 111). For a bearing wall system with specially reinforced concrete shear walls, however, this factor is 5.0. This also affects the design base shear, which is proportional to R. The note and the design base shear should be revised. The structural design of the building should be revised for the higher design base shear. See IBC Section 1617.6 and Table 9.5.2.2 of ASCE 7-02. 4. The section of the structural notes on expansion bolts, Sheet S-1.0, should be revised by specifying a replacement for ICC -ES ER -2156. The referenced evaluation report is cancelled. See www.icc-es.org for further information. 5. A note should be added to the section of the structural notes on wood, Sheet S1.0, stating that fasteners installed in preservative -treated wood shall be hot -dipped zinc -coated galvanized, per IBC Section 2304.9.5. Foundation 6. No comments. Vertical 7. The design for gravity support of the south end of the girder truss at Grid E/5, Sheet S-2.1, is not clear. It appears that Detail E/S2.2 is intended. It should be referenced on Sheet S-2.1. 8. The design for gravity support of the south end of the girder truss at Grid C/8, Sheet S-2.1, is not clear. Detail E/S2.2 is specified but it appears that a detail similar to E/S2.2 is intended, which depicts support adjacent to an exterior precast concrete wall rather than an interior wall. Please comment. Lateral 9. A note should be added to the Diaphragm Nailing Schedule, Sheet S-2.1, for Diaphragm Type C specifying that the framing at adjoining panel edges shall be 3 inches nominal or wider and the nails shall be staggered. See Footnote (c) of IBC Table 2306.3.1. Reid iddleton Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Page 4 10. Note 7 at the Roof Framing Plan on Sheet S-2.1 should be revised to specify the seismic load in combination with 90 percent of the dead load only. See Equation 16-18 of IBC Section 1605.3.2. 11. Note 11 at the Roof Framing Plan on Sheet S-2.1 specifies a system overstrength factor (Do) of 2.0. For a bearing wall system with specially reinforced concrete shear walls, however, this factor is 2.5. The note and the referenced table on Sheet S-2.1 should be revised. See IBC Section 1617.6 and Table 9.5.2.2 of ASCE 7-02. Note that a value of 2.0 is assumed on page 130 of the calculations. 12. The nominal width of the purlins for connection of the MST37 straps in Detail A/S2.2 should be specified for review. A nominal width of at least 3 inches is required for effective use of the MST37 straps, which is due to the spacing of the nails at the strap. See Simpson Strong -Tie literature for further information. 13. The size and spacing of the anchor bolts at the sill plate on top of the concrete wall, Detail B/S2.2, should be specified for review. It appears that Detail C/S2.2 is intended for this purpose at the east and west walls but it is not referenced for that purpose at the Roof Framing Plan, Sheet S-2.1. 14. The connection of steel plates connecting the reinforcing bars to the bearing plate of the steel beam at Detail C/S2.3 is not clear. It appears that a double 3/16 -inch by 4 -inch fillet weld is intended but the weld symbol appears to be incorrectly located. Please comment. 15. The purpose for Detail D/S2.3 is not clear. It appears to be a design for the connection of a W12x58 drag strut over a steel column and should be referenced at Grid C/5 on the Roof Framing Plan, Sheet S-2.1. Please comment. 16. The analysis for the precast concrete walls should be revised. For example, the load combinations assumed on page 5 of the calculations are based on the 1997 UBC. The 2003 IBC, however, applies to this project. The load combinations in IBC Section 1605.2 are required to be used. For example, the load combination in Equation 16-4 is 1.2D + 0.5L + 0.5S + 1.6W, but a maximum value of 1.28W is included in the load combinations on page 5. Also, the load combinations in Equations 16-5 and 16-6, which include E, are required to also include the effects due to seismic forces in Equations 16-50 and 16-51 of IBC Section 1617.1 for use of the Simplified Analysis. Typically, this has the effect of increasing D in Equation 16-5 and decreasing D in Equation 16-6, each by 0.2 Si)S D. Reid iddleton Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Page 5 17. The analysis for the steel braced frames beginning on page 113 of the calculations should be revised. For example, a stress increase of 33.3 percent is assumed on page 117. Such a stress increase is not permitted by the IBC except where permitted by a material section of the IBC or referenced standard, which is not the case for steel design. See IBC Section 1605.3.2. Note that the 1989 AISC ASD Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, including Supplement No. 1, 2001 is the referenced standard of the 2003 IBC for allowable stress design of structural steel. References to stress increases for load combinations that include wind or earthquake forces in the 1989 Specification are deleted by Supplement No.1. Refer to www.aisc.org for further information. Note also that UBC Equation 12-9 is referenced on page 118 of the calculations but UBC Section 1612.3.1, which contains Equations 12-7 through 12-11, does not permit stress increases. 18. The support of the steel braced frames detailed on Sheet S-2.4 is not clear. There does not appear to be a design in the drawings for the support of the frames by the structure. Knife plates are specified at the Details on Sheet S-2.4 but we are unable to find details for the connection of the knife plates to the structure. Please comment. 19. The design of the concrete pilasters supporting the concrete spandrel panels along Grids A and 1 is not clear. A design for 12 -inch x 16 -inch pilasters with 8 No. 5 bars is determined in the calculations, beginning on page 54 of the calculations. Section L/S 1.7, however, is for the design of a 11 1/4 -inch x 12 -inch pilaster with four longitudinal bars. In addition, the concrete panel elevations on Sheets S-1.4 through S-1.6 typically do not reference a detail at the locations of the pilasters. Please comment. 20. The analysis of the steel braced frames beginning on pages 113 and 174 of the calculations should be revised. A response modification coefficient (R) of 5.5 is assumed, but the factor is required to be 5.0, per IBC Section 1617.6 and Table 9.5.2.2 of ASCE 7-05. A system overstrength factor (S)o) of 2.0 is assumed, which is the value for ordinary steel concentrically braced frames. A value of 2.5, however, is required due to the limitations on combinations of framing systems. See IBC Section 1617.6 and Section 9.5.2.2.2 of ASCE 7-02. The SI° factor is required to be not less than the larger of the two factors for the braced frames and the concrete shear walls. 21. A detail should be added to the drawings for the design of the moment -resisting connection between the horizontal and sloping sections of the bent HSS 14x4 beam at Grid A/I-A/1.7, which is specified on Sheet S-2.1. The wall thickness, which is assumed to be 3/8 inch on page 149 of the calculations, should also be Reid iddleton Mr. Bob Benedicto, Building Official City of Tukwila December 7, 2004 File No. 262004.005/00901 Page 6 specified. Note that the section properties are substantially greater than currently specified by AISC. The analysis should be reviewed to verify structural adequacy. See page 1-58 of the AISC LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, third edition, for further information. 22. The analysis for the roof diaphragms and drag struts, beginning on page 198 of the calculations, should be revised due to the assumptions of the same R and no factors and one-third stress increases as discussed above. Responses to the review comments above should be made in an itemized letter form. We recommend the permit applicant have the structural engineer respond and resubmit two sets of the revised structural drawings and one copy of the supplemental structural calculations directly to our office. Corrections and comments made during the review process do not relieve the permit applicant or the designers from compliance with code requirements, conditions of approval, and permit requirements; nor are the designers relieved of responsibility for a complete design in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington. This review is for general compliance with the International Building Code as it relates to the project. If you have any questions or need any additional clarification, please contact us. Sincerely, Reid Middleton, Inc. Philip : razil, P.E., S.E. Senior Engineer cc: David Kehle, Architect Richard Hudson, Hudson and Associates tij\26\planrevw\tukwila\04\t009r1.doc\prb Reid iddleton Ciiy of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 2, 2004 Dave Swanson, P.E. Reid Middleton 728 - 134th Street SW, Suite 200 Everett, WA 98204 RE: Structural Review Normed - D04-415 4310 South 1315` Place, Tukwila Dear Mr. Swanson: Please review the enclosed plans and documents for structural compliance with the 2003 International Building Code. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206)431-3672. Sincerely, Brenda Holt, Permit Coordinator encl xc: Permit File No. D04-415 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 Cizy of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director December 1, 2004 David Kehle David Kehle Architects 12720 Gateway Drive, Suite 116 Seattle, WA 98168 RE: Letter of Complete Application Permit Application Number D04-415 (Normed) 4310 South 1315' Place Dear Mr, Kehle: This letter is to inform you that your permit application received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center on November 19, 2004, was reviewed at the November 23, 2004, plan review meeting and has been determined to be complete. Your permit has begun the plan review process and you will be notified of any required corrections or when your plans are approved. If you have any questions, please contact me at the City of Tukwila Permit Center at (206)431-3672. Sincerely, Brenda Holt Permit Coordinator File: D04-415 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 PROJECT NAME: LOCATION: CLIENT: PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT COST ESTIMATE Proposed Normed Project SEC — 42nd Avenue South and SR -599 Normed DATE OF ESTIMATE: November 17, 2004 PROJECT NO.: 6719 NO. OF LOTS: Not applicable ACREAGE: 6 acres SECTION .1- HARDCOSTS A. Site Grading/Clearing/Earthwork (Non -Taxable) $64,200 B. Sanitary Sewer System (Taxable) $17,423 C. Water Supply System (Taxable) $33,184 D. Storm Drainage System $448,038 SUBTOTAL SECTION 2 $562,846 PLUS CONTINGENCY (10%) $56,285 TOTAL SECTION 2 $619,130 RECEIVED nay OF TI WWII A NOV 1 9 2004 PERMIT CENTER 1,04415 9/10/03 Summary 6719.010.xts SECTION 1- HARD COSTS A. SITE GRADING/CLEARING/EARTHWORK QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL Mobilization 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 Clearing 3.6 AC $4,000.00 $14,400 Rough Excavation/Embankment 4,000 CY $4.00 $16,000 Temporary Construction Entrance 1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000 Mirafi Silt Fence 1,400 LF $5.00 $7,000 Hydroseeding/Erosion Protection 1.5 AC $1,200.00 $1,800 Temporary Interceptor Ditches with Checkdams 500 LF $2.00 $1,000 Allowance for Other Erosion Control (not specified) 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL SECTION A $64,200 B. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 8 -Inch PVC Pipe 237 LF $22.00 $5,214 6 -Inch PVC Pipe - Side Sewers (typical 40 -foot average length per lot) 50 LF _ $18.00 $900 48 -Inch Manholes/Type 1 2 EA $1,800.00 $3,600 Cleanouts 1 EA $300.00 $300 Street Restoration 200 SY $30.00 $6,000 SUBTOTAL SECTION B $16,014 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $1,409 TOTAL SECTION B $17,423 C. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 8 -Inch Ductile Iron Pipe 400 LF $22.00 $8,800 8 -Inch Gate Valves with Box 2 EA $800.00 $1,600 10 -Inch Fittings and Blocking 6 EA $400.00 $2,400 Connect to Existing Water Main Stub 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 Fire Hydrant Assembly (including tee, valve, and 6 -inch ductile iron pipe) 2 EA $2,200.00 $4,400 Single Service with Box (no meter) 1 EA $400.00 $400 Irrigation Service with Box (no meter) 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 8 -Inch Double Check Assembly including PIV and FDC (minimum $10,000) 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000 Road Restoration 30 SY $30.00 $900 SUBTOTAL SECTION C $30,500 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $2,684 TOTAL SECTION C $33,184 11/17/2004 Page 1 of'2 67I9.0Iaxis IAS/tcpj 11/17/2004 Page 2 of 2 6719.010.xIs [AS/tepj I D. STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 12 -Inch CMP/ADS/PVC Pipe 378 LF $20.00 $7,560 8 -Inch CMP/ADS/PVC Pipe 670 LF $16.00 $10,720 Cleanouts 7 EA $150.00 $1,050 Type 1 Catch Basins 5 EA $800.00 $4,000 Type 2/48 -Inch Catch Basins (maximum 8 feet deep) 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000 Vault Type Detention Tank (concrete) 1 EA $150,000.00 $150,000 Vault Type Oil/Water Separator 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000 Restricting Device in Manhole 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 Riprap (quarry spalls) 20 CY $30.00 $600 Open Ditch 160 LF $2.00 $320 Base Course Crushed Rock ($1.00 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $2.00 $7,400 Top Course Crushed Rock ($1.25 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $2.50 $9,250 AC Paving ($2.50 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $5.00 $18,500 Extruded Concrete Curb 800 LF $10.00 $8,000 4 -Inch Concrete Sidewalk with 2 -Inch CSTC Sub -Base 3,200 SF $3.00 $9,600 Sawcutting 400 LF $2.00 $800 Landscaping 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000 Irrigation 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 Retaining Walls (concrete) (measured on the face) 4,000 SF $30.00 $120,000 SUBTOTAL SECTION D $411,800 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $36,238 TOTAL SECTION D $448,038 11/17/2004 Page 2 of 2 6719.010.xIs [AS/tepj LJill Mosqueda RE .004-415,Normed From: "Dan Balmelli" <dbalmelli@barghausen.com> To: <Dkehle@seanet.com>, "Jill Mosqueda" <jmosqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 12/2/04 12:35PM Subject: RE: D04-415 Normed Thanks Jill. We will review and call you with any questions. Ali Sadr is the project engineer from my office working on this project. Dan Original Message From: Jill Mosqueda [mailto:jmosqueda@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:20 AM To: Dkehle@seanet.com Cc: dbalmelli Subject: D04-415 Normed I am the Public Works focal for this project. You can reach me at 206.431.2449 or by e-mail. The attached documents are customer assistance bulletins regarding Street Vacation and the Type C right-of-way permit application requirements. You will receive official plan review comments in January. The civil plans show 42nd place as vacated, and it is not as yet vacated. This process takes a couple of months. I recommend starting that as soon as possible. Also, when right-of-way is vacated, = goes to each abutting property, so the Hot Mix Pavers property will get = of 42nd Pl. I recommend you read the Bulletin and the referenced RCW, if you are not familiar with the process. The work in the right of way will include required frontage improvements along S 131st PI. (see TMC 11) and utility work. Please refer to Bulletin A4 for submittals required for the right-of-way work. L. Jill Mosqueda P.E. CC: "Ali Sadr" <asadr@barghausen.com> ��. 0 3 - Dy '0tyB-✓\ r'v\ A 'JQ12 P.Seei .. -4*--"R2,.)teiJ Comm/JAI(' �LeAL, b6 7o moi; —5a Oca--Respe_,,V,J� -I �lA ()4 ti/NA • Tim � I 1I14 (�1/44 ��,� �Nls.�,Lins` P+ao1-6 P -✓diol. 6,41; cck.na--n W Vv-v\-�J 1Z � i v►7 - Z JU 00 CO LU J= H Nu_ lq.COQ a 1. W Z= 1.- 1- F- 0 Z 1- W W U� 0 1- w w H� WZ z PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT COST ESTIMATE PERMANENT FILE COPY i Z, PROJECT NAME: Proposed Normed Project LOCATION: CLIENT: SEC — 42nd Avenue South and SR -599 Normed DATE OF ESTIMATE: November 17, 2004• PROJECT NO.: 6719 NO. OF LOTS: Not applicable ACREAGE: 6 acres SECTION 1- HARD COSTS A. Site Grading/Clearing/Earthwork (Non -Taxable) - '`'ta-V-TtAi 5 -70akal-w� $64,200 B. Sanitary Sewer System (Taxable) $17,423 C. Water Supply System (Taxable) $33,184 D. Storm Drainage System , c $448,038 SUBTOTAL SECTION 2 $562,846 PLUS CONTINGENCY (10%) , TOTAL SECTION 2 $619,130 RECEIVED Nov 3 0 2004 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS RECEIVED r:ITY ()F TI IKWII A NOV 1 9 2004. PERMIT CENTER 9/10/03 Summary 6719.0I0.xls • ... SECTION 1= HARD COSTS A. SITE GRADING/CLEARING/EARTHWORK QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL Mobilization 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 Clearing 3.6 AC $4,000.00 $14,400 Rough Excavation/Embankment 4,000 CY $4.00 $16,000 Temporary Construction Entrance 1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000 Mirafi Silt Fence 1,400 LF $5.00 $7,000 Hydroseeding/Erosion Protection 1.5 AC $1,200.00 $1,800 Temporary Interceptor Ditches with Checkdams .500 LF $2.00 $1,000 Allowance for Other Erosion Control (not specified) 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL SECTION A $64,200 B. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 8 -Inch PVC Pipe 237 LF $22.00 $5,214 6 -Inch PVC Pipe - Side Sewers (typical 40 -foot average length per lot) 50 LF $18.00 $900 48 -Inch Manholes/Type 1 2 EA $1,800.00 $3,600 Cleanouts 1 EA $300.00 $300 Street Restoration 200 SY $30.00 $6,000 SUBTOTAL SECTION B $16,014 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $1,409 TOTAL SECTION B $17,423 C. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 8 -Inch Ductile Iron Pipe 400 LF $22.00 $8,800 8 -Inch Gate Valves with Box 2 EA $800.00 $1,600 10 -Inch Fittings and Blocking 6 EA $400.00 $2,400 Connect to Existing Water Main Stub 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 Fire Hydrant Assembly (including tee, valve, and 6 -inch ductile iron pipe) 2 EA $2,200.00 $4,400 Single Service with Box (no meter) 1 EA $400.00 $400 Irrigation Service with Box (no meter) 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 8 -Inch Double Check Assembly including PIV and FDC (minimum $10,000) 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000 Road Restoration 30 SY $30.00 ' $900 SUBTOTAL SECTION C S30,500 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $2,684 TOTAL SECTION C $33,184 11/17/2004 Page 1 of 2 67I9.010.xls [AS/tepl 11/17/2004 Page 2 of 2 6719.010.xls [AS/tepl D. STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL 12 -Inch CMP/ADS/PVC Pipe 378 LF $20.00 $7,560 8 -Inch CMP/ADS/PVC Pipe 670 LF $16.00 $10,720 Cleanouts 7 EA $150.00 $1,050 Type 1 Catch Basins 5 EA $800.00 $4,000 Type 2/48 -Inch Catch Basins (maximum 8 feet deep) 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000 Vault Type Detention Tank (concrete) 1 EA $150,000.00 $150,000 Vault Type Oil/Water Separator 1 EA $10,000.00 $10,000 Restricting Device in Manhole 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000 Riprap (quarry spalls) 20 CY $30.00 $600 Open Ditch 160 LF $2.00 $320 Base Course Crushed Rock ($1.00 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $2.00 $7.400 Top Course Crushed Rock ($1.25 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $2.50 $9,250 AC Paving ($2.50 per inch thickness) 3,700 SY $5.00 $18,500 Extruded Concrete Curb 800 LF $10.00 $8,000 4 -Inch Concrete Sidewalk with 2 -Inch CSTC Sub -Base 3,200 SF $3.00 $9,600 Sawcutting 400 LF $2.00 $800 Landscaping 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000 Irrigation 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 Retaining Walls (concrete) (measured on the face) 4,000 SF $30.00 $120,000 SUBTOTAL SECTION D $411,800 PLUS TAX AT 8.8% $36,238 TOTAL SECTION D $448,038 11/17/2004 Page 2 of 2 6719.010.xls [AS/tepl 710 .74 dav kehle architec November 18, 2004 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attn: Technical Review Committee Re: NorMed II Dear Staff, We have finally received approval for the mitigation plan from the Corps, which has been holding up our submittal for building permit. Under separate cover, I have submitted the required revised plans to Carol so that she can amend the SEPA and Reasonable Use decision administratively. Attached are four complete sets of permit documents including site plans, civil plans including utilities, landscape plan for non -wetland mitigation and the wetland mitigation plans. The building will be for a shell only with future office improvements for NorMed. Please review and issue a letter of complete application ASAP. There are evidently new ordinances going into affect in December that would greatly impact this project. The delays for submission have been outside our control. If you have any questions, concerns or additional information requests, please forward via fax (206-246-8369) for our immediate return responses. Thank you for your assistance with this project. David Kehle DK/mt Cc: Mr. Larry Shaw Ms. Alison Moss a:\04411cityletl 1-18-04 12720 GATEWAY DRIVE, SUITE 116 SEATTLE, WA 98168 RECEIVED r:ITY OF TI II<WII A NOV 1 9 2004 PERMIT CENTER Doo -els (206) 433-8997 FAX (206) 246-8369 email: davek@dkehlearch.com • • : V S:SEMBLY TEST 'REPORT , . dersott, , ac ow Assembly Testing 14921, 298th Ave NE Lynn, WA 9,8019 206)6,604763 • ,• . +. • ••• Cti : Commerci • : • PHONE (t/4 • .• I .1 . ; • 3! EMBLY .PLACEME • 5 2)124 filo) kAssEMBY B "J. • ,rre,(••:?',F4147'4 1FV4'117PF.,"OTHR ,Art? , • 41+4 BA, tatit,,,,,01,i,o 4,.y N• 22 PROPER LNSTALLATION? YES r: „....,,,,, ;••• R' ,tOa•.ak:.,".1vi.I',''i.,0R. . . ... .......,-,,..„... g..., •A•.;,..vt4 • • ‘• 31.44.3t , ' r y5'. , , '4':'11 '.•4• SII0t''t.';' ',-!l .. . • tr,, .., .• , ...: . ...,,ii.:Acii....- :NAi.,ri,.; • • -1;,.., • 1..,,..t;i. . -} .,„. - . : . :. •••••:,.....,:%Y..,,. 1 1 IRPB i. -..‘•••.:A. • • • PVBA/SVBA ',...."..--,";•••.: '1.-”, : ::, • . 3 ...,.i!,,,,,R,a,.?..................i.,...,....,4...:,---.) r-, „ ,,,,,-., •; --,„:- •i . 1 .g ' '' . ,, ,11 4•4,,f,.. I ..... -,., .' .. •... , ; , 4 4 , .,, ,', , .. - , :,,. i*. . ... .; 4', ''''''':',( , S''.; . , , SID %.!:•INL ''', i ''‘'':,,*• :.‘; '',,,, • x I3D AT ..',".LOP,•','' • : ......:',.. r , . ,. -,. ':,:i )... '''' ' ,, ' N. i 1 . ,: .-.; A •;4r 'f',1 ;, ;.-, ',..Y ).• ..,. .AA,! , s: V- .. ''t .' ,* .. . „ -;, - Q3RG 4, ''. -, ,-. . ,' ,,+il„4,+f.,.. 1,,.,.'•,.7'..- „. 1 .•.s+:'.,': ., ":•'. 1 616,1OTOPE}• i1k, tkKE i r 1 ‘• „ .."i,.:, 1 , ,1 : i 4 .<• , .,.„y-',' ..° ,I'Z'I':'.L''V3 -Vd ,.t.. ,,',.:.' ' ' "1`: 1 ; 1. i 1 , , .'.,' ,.-.',!1 ,-o.:''i.4;:",:-:.. -::• , 1441',"V141' 4'': •,'- ..3. , 1111 ..• N•1 ?s';K'41b„,z'"i4.. t4', 6',::•',„.•ig,, :.'•Pi.•7,. ;. tVt'Ma.t : 4' k,'k'F+.i;'`),Py44fflu?'1 i6ltr1q1i.0Fe0.l21r.4A1)i'4l31E.4iDx:i %tlr,@,aVye,\,.iI /• •,.'' ' .,' 1.„,'3,44.,','' 'ri.%',''.,'.i '..'. ,4i1_• .:... ,.'. +.. ',1, ''' _ .:,,.*'-. .ii v:•. ,' -.'.••:i•., f,'...- ,.".:. '..':-i,1'3.-,4.i..'. ',.i, :,9iki,i.1; kq:-pi','•.4 v‘fd t.:'A,..!‘' 1N4 f.,,•,....T4/ '4.11 , .J'I , • tN.it,,kCaoi.t4lk,,,'''''6''o':N'.'.",' ' .'1''' -ek.6.. ,' ...'7'1 ! '',''"•',e"„'•'' , , ,.,• „.,Ag.... ,r.„..i2.,,;+„7..‘,4,:.'.,• .„',f',,1 .''' , • -C,ENY t,i'A::1f:,i4:i;0.';,?:a•'`t!'.A , „,4" .•1. ''.Iv'.r••‘..., .:'.-'.' .,•:,.•i:4:.1; ',,....?" 43PlA01r1ARTCLEAN 5,,'• 9 .;12,:;, ;,-: ..- ;. :,, -•4. t• ,•., 7t.80.,,7,A.r.0 ,,.-,11..z,;.,..,.::,. J;I',f+:•.k.REPLACE PART .4,.'.,Lt.i).., ,1,,:i,,' •:.. .,''1 ' .. ,:.:'"' ::';''•:-!'.•.:,:`'•1,••'•.•' .,',,'. . .:.,'-'., 1::.•' :•40''i:'; .,' [ . , .,A'"' ,.'.' .'.,. .. .-'...,•':, .."'..','- '. .i•:';''. -,',' ;iCHECK'V• • )'AE. ..•i ..:...‘ fEEDAT ...,.,;,, • .. "•i,„i .1 '' —'•. .•.E• ,,. ... rE ,..• ..,. (.',,..:,..,,, ,,,....,, ...•••,..,•.:.:::::-.'••.,?•-•,....,••:,,,:::' ,• •, ,•. ... ”. ,:, , . . :. •••••-•,;'•.`.,' '',:'!,:4'•.'.;.-: •.4-.,,:... '•:. ',•.' ... •• .;i:.: ','-. •.•.1..).ii,''.+?.f .:;: :. :'• ' :,!i;!, ,m. . .!„..,, •.t,•;,•.A.,,-•• • , go • '..:•::•••..:•••.•;', „ '' -I ','..'6'.''•''• ', '. '•.''.'•- '‘.1 •••.:••,. •;„ ..:...•,,:-•• ;.,.. '., ',,?•,.-'„..' •:•.. ':. •.,, 7,• •• •••• 2..,,...: .;,.;.I.:.,i .• •'V;•-,1: !L.',', -,,;E, ,•..'A•,''. ,'':.•!,•N..•,. .!'.•••••,E, .•'',.. ".7.'.• '•.., • ,..- '”. ': ''•,' .-t•.'%,:',-!i''-,.'.'••••,,.”..,?.• •,„,, .•.•,•:,,••.,:',,:,-,',. af.' ,i,,•. •• .,., .,•:.-..:,'.,.:.,i• ;,. ....., ' ,.,'; '.••,.....,..":,:,. :,.:i..:2: .:.:•. ''•''',,, ‘ :'..•',' `;,• ,.,.: :',•„....,., ,..:'',.., z[•-,•., ,,,-.-,, 1Rr--•,-.4,•}ii'i,,-,,-.,.7.,.,''.)..k,,:,,'1':,•4,El,a,s,,;6,,l,t-•2,,.1e•,, •.• . s1r ,,t,,,— - 1,`'„, .„0....:",•••,,• .„••a• .••:'„',,:,'...', ,‘•,.s•',,...:": '•?:•• • ..'1 , : .,,,•.,„, .. ,-...•. ,'::.2 :- I';'?.!.•",••'.•;•.':••,,.;,.."•,•:;!.„.:'„;•,•' .•...i,:'.. ••,.,,,,,i'5.„,.;,, . ..,,,.,,,,„,.•, L ;; TESTiA1ER1' 1!1 / i) • k ,1. SSEDV„ 1 '..,tf nii'-'. _ '!. El ' ••••:..!,.,..:' •-...+ ::'''',',..'•;',.•-;:".;.:, ''' EkKED 2, 1 :••..••;.,•• : : .' - ' PsID ...• .,,,..,,.,• ,,• : .';',/:-.., ,:,..:i4: 4-"....,, ' ' ” -......,..,,,,.....„:•,,••,,,•,=..;• ..., • ,,•:•,',„ •••, • ,•:. ..,,,.0p,••..EE,.. ,.D.::•.+1.,,,i;H:,.,...:.,\:,,,,. 04 sit.. ,...,. .,. ,,..,,....:,-...":. : INI.;, , . ET, ,, , , ••• . . psg ,... ,-4.. LEAKED MI ..., .... .,. „... ..„. : :.. .,,, ,,..,,•• : .•.:.;..,:,,.,, :: . ..., ,.:,..,,...,,.:. • . : #1 CHECKPSID „ ... . , .., :. , CHK VALVE ••:.i.',V...,"+'.'..i., t•••;:.•,•'::::+:”. ' • ', . "•:`,",..-4.?.::.", - . . .„ • . . . .. .•., SPECTION Required minimumairgap separation Provided? Yes 0, No 0 Detector Meter Reading •STER&SI STEJ • ;22 REPAIREDBY2 12 • CERT., NO. DATE. • . • .. TEST BY:. • „ •• ' •Fi';69 ‘2.4-118 LIIIE:P.RESSURE YLPSI B44541 CERT NO D 133 Scott Anderson 22 STERS P 206- ) 660-8763 • . CONFINED SPACE? , • DATE '"'CALIHRATION DATE GAUGE # 07041560 MODEL Mid -West 830 SERVICE RESTORED? certify that ;his report isitccitra4; and 1 have used WAC 246-290-490 approved test methods and test equipment. 1, Dick Hanson's BACkS ,Q,W A, M�I,Y TEST f 'r :1CCOUNT / iv cr41 1111--. ww 0 -w _..r... 1 "AMR Or P1&EMX51,' , t^>f2_,/,xj h/dee % LC ..._ 1 _. Comrercidt er tertttentlMl 0 SERVICE ADDRirSSy ep . /;r .�..�s.- ciTy ,11___11,. CONITAM PERSON W a• ro;a Lrt Slrt2)g?s?i52.n ,.: l .1 �...., moms, 1,42 .•,Qa9 U... #AX (425113,10§88 LOCATION of ASS! M lL_sl �:t+� 11. - U f ;, ,��' ,c? tihni, t_e ie 4 s- . 11.......MwMra .W• 1111.,. ..M DOWNSTREAM PROC11SM ,r, ircji ittjcil Sx:FL n!. _. »CVA D RPDA 0 PVBA 0 O'T'HER Pi W LNSTAW.AT1d5N 17/EXISTING 0 1tEMACJ M1 NT 0 OLD ASSEMBLY SEAM NUMBER MAIM or A$SEM1 I0Y,, ,_,.DAO,I S' SERIAL NO. �� . �� %, : / / d L� ...SLZail VITIAL TEST PASSED � FA�,U.D © NEW P1 .('�"D Atzmwmat gkrid,CE Vsejso,Q Ate/ BDA RPII6 OPl;W'li1) Air' ..,......._PS1D CHECK , _ __MID MR GAP � I� �� 1111.. . _1111-1111... 'm& MCILYAmu i tO,2 .' AIR tNL.ET OPENED AT„ _ psm LEAK D F i tOSttr •EIGHT C 107 rt .--42-...7,4:00-- PST]: c:1.GA:l n Tra"L', r in tI r�❑ - 1111..piouspiousb LI 1111.. •--- D ' .. �... 0 � _ CLO ED TIGHT 0 __....:'--...�....._.�.�'4LA 0_....11•1. LEAKED 0 moss J 'norm air"41 yf'7 Q. STA 1{ DlIDv'lr�ioT� ()lir; CI HELD ,A J YAW; !i }�IJlri ...w..� —. _ �] , . _.,jai ef:N St$P Ci PART 0 ci sPP AA Y !taI'tAr;A I Mtlr' o C] ^ .r.._. CLEANED CIREPAIRSb REPAIRED f, GI 0__ p 11 1:1•..�_. 0 c� —,... .. rwr....--- 0 0 .»_ TESTMITER:..-•..:......_.�._: ;I'AI17$ PASSED 0 0 PFAXED.1..,.: , r... r CLOSED TrGNNT 0 ��SID »....»..»,..._..� —0110 . _ OPpno AT „ ... SIT) in ctiCK_._r a. , ?SID - _.......,_.. ,...�, AIR MUT ,...; ~..r,.w, $SID CM VALVE_.,. • PSID 1111_. .........,...... _W...._� - — AM CAP ISP.EChOlti: ltvquired sl,lnimurn air gltp =mint* prov(ded? YOB 0 NO 0 Detector Meter Reading ��7�,� �� r�� / S REM.AR s: r f LL _1111 z ♦i i"•. Ir) ,e r 1111..-.—_r.W rr.. .P. - .._.S •e l,ra•I..W...._ »_.—_•.• TESTERS S1QNA'I'U1tt;: ,.l 4 ywSwGq•rr "" _1111.....»,.. • ....._.......».••••• xc P SST..r>�u; _ CERT. NO. j32.642DATE .., "._./_Y-, 0:2 TESTERS NAME PRINTED' D' R'ck.,• 11ans24 'mums S i'i.io t; 0211M-5363 -5363 REPAIRED BY! FINAL 'non 131eL... _�...._._.............._......, .1I.......... ...,, ___..._...yJ•.0 .WM\.••••• CERT. NO. _. DATXt'.,..».._..».,... CALIBRATION DATE o 06 11Q (1AUCE 4 0.051, ,8l) MODEL gulyegpt 804 SERV/CE RESTORED 7'E•SD RiWc }Ramon P.b113bx 002 Lyi llt�t�nd. bVc: .0()46.01}02 (425)77t1•:i3A 1'0025y/76442a 111 1 'f ..w '�.;L NAME or PREMISE .6r4jE-„f LC,C,„, Comor'ciai Critesitlentinl CJ MIME �1DAi2I�41 1%� 4 _....5...� ' r ... CITY 27 ci 1l, ..._._...—_._-.__.__ZnI'. &-21 CONTACT PERSON .Wyk,''c S At4'as.grt?tpsji_o, .a� o e1 ._ ......_. PHONIC .FAX 1.0CAT1O`I OE �SS51✓MJ3 )'fit ......_l �� f �tJi � �� / r...., to r.. ..''. ' �.: _ . ._,. _._�.. ».., - .. Ay..._.�..... DOWNSTR1! A.M 1ROCt��'Sfi ,,,_ir _4FIra1Dki� .x§ tmi tOX, 5 PCV.A Ct�mowRPBA 0 PVBA 0 OTHER __._...._....1.._... NEW INSTALLATION (('' i JWrL.N ❑ ttrinACEMEN7' CI OU) Ags.Emf L,Y SERIAL NUMBER,,,Y MAKE or ASEIETOLY..•.�'":: 'Z2.1_..INIODFI, C�<l 0 a SERIAL NO.*� �% � ._! 2ZE ,.., t''�r l . Ugw1/ luta, LV ITXAL c:HE 'K VALVE Nc�sl, TEST PASSED FAILED 0 NEW PARTS AMI) REPAIRS Lw�tca�) LOSCtt 'TIGEI'l PSID ca:sAn x P,nc; i;:�n rr 0 • •Q a pCVA_I U HA LEAKED ❑ a.08.r31) IGGIT 13 . ._w :•t ... PSID Er nurt.Acs r r O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 'Nora+... ktiqi OPJ: I-iti A r... PSID C:iIE_C.TC .Al R CTAP OKI.' .,� .._ _..._ . ..AN A�;N "Frtia. 0 TEST AFTER REPAIRS PASSED 0 FAILED 0 CLOdEt) TIGFI'r • 0 �...�_�__..�_..._.PSL,n C'J OSisl) TIGHT 0 • ..1....... • ._.... __...ww SIA r /.m.&I"tiV.J 1 AIR MET OPEIGA AT._ D NOT OM Cl MSC( 'V.ALVa;. HELD AT LEAKED _ _.• . G� CLBANED REPAIRED ..OPEN) D/ _. AT 7t 1 (ITEM__ _. . woo. PS X'i) AIR ..w.._.�_ W .PS1D CHK VA:LVJ3...... _FEW .AIR GAP 1NS1'EC'•it'O) is Mi2gllir d inInirnutn nfr s;lp nopnratlon provldadl Yes 0 No C7 Detector Meter Rending nding r<.LiT.I.`,rill i •�.wTAi++...•.: _. i+�.a .n... .. S� � � � .....d.. a .fi � .uA...-�-�..-..--_ .... .. n r r........, .• .,n._ .,,_ _...• •••••• _ _ ..._..._ . _......._.•.._........ .._... ..I.1tNX� P'1tESStri Sl . TESTERS SIGN.Ls?:vltEt TESTERS NAM PRINTED; ,ick. - _�.... CERT. NO. B2642 ni,T `"-,/ TESTk!RS P ONA OAf..425.172&5363 RT.II'AIXZr!:D BY: ,....w,.rDATE IriNAXA TE$T Ext.__.. ._» ., __._r w... CIi,R►1'.11U. ..l _. .. N.1.. .1..__ . ... _• .. row n CALu3IZA'rIoN nATx 03 QG 209/ GAUGE ti 01051 Ba NxODEL SW.14:A4'o9t 840 SI:T WC ] 7t wsxORJ1 D YESI.:7 No2----"" Rick FCaft,lm PiQ, Lao;c (i02 Y.:A tt/muc! 9411,16.0602 (+125)77843(i'3 Ill1(475)77 -820F ,00 y- (-// 5 AME Citi.' of 711,�"a'l�Cl 6i )r.4s .t[aintenance Dep ! rit:en( ��i r'7'?'•I I�.��rr1^.' ?=.�: R -r ��r: Form %CCM NT = SERA ICE ADDRESS INTI yRto 5. I�tsrPL METER t1! \C -1„11A S T r E ‘..;sEAllity LOCATIUti ZIP CODE . >>; E Prz4,P ecc.rt c,c S S t.i\ of CROSS-''U""ECTfU' CONTROL FOR 1 t.ZL'r1 Sii )Swf- I,4s. it101 �T1C SIZE t/'L %1AKEa MODEL %Tvv TYPE Z-2 !KA' SN LINE PRESSE RE i' TIME OF TEST'' PSI NEV.? EVE)USTING' ❑ REPLACEMENT' J 1:sTTIAL TEST RESULTS PSI DROP ACROSS =1 CHECK V ALVE RELIEF A LVE OPENED =I CHECK V LVE CLOSED I ll:H'r' =I (HECK V ALVE LEAKED" RPB a =_ CHECK A;LVE CLOSED TIGHT' =' :'HECK k U.% E LE AXED' ‘PPRU'. ED AIR G PRO' IDE:D' RP13.i ? »SED TEST' Yes 11 CHECK V&LVE CLOSED TIGHT! DCI. al CHECK V&LAE LEAKED.' _= CHECK V.ALVE CLOSED TIGHT:' ;2 CHECK VALVE LEAKED: DCV PISSED TEST' -1R FLET OPENED AT UR INLET FAILED TO OPE`' PVI3A CHECK VALVE HELD tIGUT AT CHECK VALVE LEAKED' PA BA P \1SED TEST" APPROA ED ASSEMBLY' RE M,aRKS rEsT COMP ANY TESTS .-AFTER REPAIR OR CLEAMNG PSID PSI DROP ACROSS yt CHECK V\LY E %,0 PSID PSID RELIEF % AL« OPENED PSID ❑ at CHECK VAL A E CLOSED TIGHT? =i CHECK VALVE LEAKED' ❑ =2 CHECK VALVE CLOSED r1i:HT' 1—+-_= CHECK V -AL A E L.E.KED.' APPROA ED AIR GAP PRO IDEI)' RP13A PASSED TEST.' Y es PSID =I CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT"' ❑ =t CHECK V AL.VE LEAKED' PSID =: CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT'.' L__I 42 CHECK V ULVE LEAKED Yes ❑ No ❑ DCV.a PASSED TEST'.' Yes 0 Na ?SID AIR INLET OPENED %T PSID UR FLET F.ULED TO OPEN? PSID CHECK V ALVE HELD TIGHT AT PSID CHECK V ALVE LEAKED' ❑ PVSA PASSED TEST' I es ❑ r PSID PSID Nes 0 N') 0 PROPER INST A.LLA rtu' TEST KIT 11AKE11,C.iL MODEL g%4i–P TESTER'S `AM S1:GNIA7"1RE REPAIRED BY RETESTED in SN INSPECTED BY CCS" PHONE • 1 c: t0 -t1 CALIBRATION DATE `t – 2Y -•J . 11 _1 W. -1C 246 -':)O -4)'i Iaar'Is?d . rj:.tfe:.w.i, res: r' E (PRINTED t• CERTIFICATION 4 DATE TESTED REPAIR DATE CERT 4 is '�3ls D ATE TESTED 6%g%--7 Z i= Z reW 00 CO CI W= 1 }_. WO 2 gQ co W Z= Z0 ujgyco =p U ❑I— WW U. Z W U= 17- O~ z '••••• \I 1 LOCATION 1•10?-t•AE_-):> C:-1,tv of rtil,:',vi/L1 T.2 c: vdott.EAs t?'..10 L I t i7 1TE k-'`.341 mil '1/DE _ . • 3sG.' 1-'2•0N)c.„-t.EA-'31 '.171 -rt ":;• *-N 1.; '1N,‘E1: r111%1 fl\fI ij. FOR ; ( r .i; /I.: Z. ° MAKE tiNE ME.1.11. RE AT TIME OF MODEL 556 (3 \ 'cc) Psi NENA.• TN PE R? iga4c \1.% g TEST FtFSUI.TS TESTS AFTE.:12 or:t i.-;1 nor 11 GlIECK ALvE .1, PSID PSI DRI.:11' CRIP4: /1E1 **K E ?W./ RELIEF %LVE ffl'EN El) 41 CHECK VALVE t:1.0sED 7-11;u 311 -HECK V ‘1.‘ E LE.tKED! HECK k UNE C1.0--tED TIGH Pitt) i<ELLEI: OPENF.1) CHECK tI.v'E CLoSEL) sL CHEI:I.; V U.'. E LEAKED cHECI: AL% (L1)SEL) 3: 1-1F.CK E LElKED ' ' 42 CHECK '• 110-:1) APPROVED MR GAP PRO t MED! RiUt PASSED TEST ' RPBA PA_NSED rE..sr! , , kppEtm, El) IIt I pRuv IDED 41 CHECK v U.VE CLOSED TIGHTPSID 41 CHECK V kl.t•E CLOSED TIGHT! D Do I CHECK v ALt.E LE ‘K,ED,, 3: CHECK V‘1.3. E. LEAKED! 42 CHECK V U.'.E CLOSED TIGHT! ?SID 42 cur.cl: VALVE CLOSED TIGHT' _ PSID 42 CHECK U.VE I.E KED! 7 42 CHECK V U.3. F. LAKED DCV P A.SSED TEST' Ves No DC'. A PA.SSEL) TEST! No • _ . rEr UR INLET OPENE.D AT P:;1) UR INLET OPENED r UR INLET FULED TO OP'EN CHECK' v F HELD TIC.HT AT t. 1lEs•K 3. AL" F. LE %E.E1)' LI 11R INLET I' Al LED ro OPEN? PSID CHECK \ F. HELL) MITT AT 0 CHECK 3. E LEAKF.D! _-___+•--- B P AS-'NED VEST'4 E .1 • , '.El) t-Ei • 1\ ED tSSEMB1.1 ' PROPER INST TION • , INSPECTED Bt CCS' UttiS ?SID 3 N oiE.PRENTED! 1\.3 44t4211L-73:\-- AAA,. Cz,ter. ‘10DF.L %1'1-0 SN k:RED I3'l RE r rt-,-) PHONE ••••••••• LII1R.\ II(.). CERNFIC.1rION rE TESTED CERT REP \IR 1) DATE TESTED tore 2b/ lake r 18:18 14258813030 ' Mra t-14-2 J07 1(! :9'S PM RICK HANSON WESTERN STATES FIRE \\ 1 4 Ufa 425 778 5363 Rick Hanson's BACkKFLQW A$SEM,�1,Y T �, PO,�t PAGE 02/03 P.03 J7� ACCOUNT #,,A1 I . 01 NAME OF PREMISE Commarvinl t!( esIdentlal CI SERVICE ADDRESS�'7t✓P !ffAr ��, .... _.._ cnvY.� c: tni'rAc1 PERSONWAato /1.1,4:5.'l► Ir r tg tisn . jri 59121._ PHONE 442 .-Q I Q C f 425, Ms€ LOCATION OFAM$EM13LY �� 'C ;;;;;1_ 'f D OAVNSTREAM PROCESS _.„ il;e fi. Sii.!4ia, S.X,S1Wa3 �.. PCVA C.1 RPBA 0 P%'IIIA CI OTHER NEW INSTALLATION 13/EXIS'I'ING t] RIMACEMENT d OLD ASSEMBLY SERIAL NUMBEA.��.._. ___.....»._._ MAKE or ASSEMbiLyidl,$;.. __MODEL4,14eVera SERIAL No. L;=' „Y / 7 /f / /,J c• sizii' �F..... . Dt1TIAL 1%ST PASSED I FAILED NEW PARTS AND REPAIRS TEST AFTER REPAIRS PASSED 0 FAILED 0 psYAI,a peva/a6 OPENED AT __ PSID V1 CHECK ,,. _..... PS) MR CiAP OK;' ... ....._. OEM v.V,�wYF..;.6.0 , YALvi Ma Am INLET OPENED AT., _ PSID DID NOT OPLN ti CHEM VALVE, HELD AT,___ rs)ri LBA .t ""----- CLEANED CI REPAIRED .we INLI$ r ......., PS17) CM VALVE _._• PSID —...._. LEA ED 1I J OStiD TIGHT T,: .._w- tig- ..._ PSTl) LEAKED ■ CLO$rEl7 TIC3t3T Cr . :2 . sm CLEAN A.ere.".PA11ij,RAN 'a 0 I ..._.•. 0 b o _..• CLOSED TIGHT 0 __...;.,......__...._.._ PRD . t$uCii PART 0 0 CI AN RuILAY;F; FUt•P W 0 ^......-rb 0 10 E;❑ _...._..... OPINED AT , __PM) i1 CHECK._._.... DSII) ❑ oo C'LOSED't'IONT 0 ,......_......._...,._..-_ psi A,tR GAIL' INSP.ECt'ION: R.quired minimum nit gnp separntilln provided? Yes 0 tardaRxst Ari 7w•• % r. .+. .r...--.�... ea. . wrw......-.._. h ••••••••••• ••• / • I IT.8TERS SIGNATURE: TESTERS NAME PRIMTE I') t,�i,C.1C-.Hafl A., REPAIRED BY: _.�.....- No Cl Defector Meter Reading _.. ......._ ......_. _«....... _ �...... ................. ..... _.............:I+INIu PRESSURE � 1'SJ CE1 &'t'. 111:). . 32,14 ZDATE .,_, "..: 47:2_ TEs•rERs P HONEt�.��'Z 778-53 6 DATE MALT Cg'I' R'�'1_...._�.,.._ _........w...•_ ..., ...«...... 8.0•••••••••••....+4RTS NO.�..w._.._....,... 1.•••••••••.4.a. CALIBRATION DATE 0106/2.407, GAUGE # 0).(f6ie 1vMODED Mi, ur;jt 84S -S S1')IWXCE RESTORED 1 ES❑ NO(:,I'� (425)77ti.S'�b;{ ihx(' 2S)17ti.1t2 ti,: Rlbk Ramon Ly onwhod. 'VII 9$$(I46. 0602 0 (/'tb/ lel, l 13: 20 14258813030 MAY -i4-2007 121.03h PM RICK HANSOM r WESTERN STATES FIRE PAGE 03/03 425 rrid na6a P.01 Rick Hanson's 7 ACKFLO]11(_ ASS M,,,,BLY TEST RE PAM ACCOUNT NAM1F, OF PREMISE Ai/Glz,,rx.4e .6/efijei Commercial (!! Rceidentint 0 SERVICE AADRRS$ _ Q -..ar, .. _4? 4CITY . L . e 1.z.4 ,.,.. CONTACT POISON - %b.1f,`S' $.L; i4'.AYfre gxt)lcati_on., OIt'l, �O cl�._.....r. PHONE. (441$11,2.0_ FAX (42S ? b8 LOCATION O}' ASSEMBLY t 4:.. erne DOWNSTREAM FROCI Sfi �irA111a1ialdt.a§vatet '' JCVA I!' RPBA CJ PVBA f OTHER NEW INSTALLATION'XISTINC.�r {� REPLACEMENT' ❑ OM ASSEMBLY SERIAL NUMBER,^,_,__,�_ MANE OP A98EM)ILY.:4:',11224:...`.c....NODEL , 000 ti.Z .SERIAL NO, _� _ ^ ' .�. _,.SIIZE .,.....;:/ INITXAL TEST PASSED FAILED 0 NEW PARTS ANI) REPAIRS TLSr A?TItR REPAIRS PASSED 0 FAILED 0 • J YA Sf� 14AxEr) �l losttp TiGEI't cirr- i, PSID "to r a ' ,nt; ;"� r 0 0 00 0 •© ❑ . W... - j VAJ_IEM. aRA .S cic vIav& Nat., OPNNhDAr_ ,,,,PSID 1.n.AK.13i) ❑ CLOs•r1 'rro}IT 11) CHECK ...".••. 1 r..Z.,_JSID 0 0 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ AIR 1N'I,trl' OPENED A'1 ........ ,,,PSID D1) NOT OM 0 CIBC VALVE AIR CTAP OK." ..., _-..._ , HELD A1' LEAKED �.� 0 .RAN RIIPLA6�H AkT ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 0 CLB.ANEr, REPAIR= 0 '..wr.r'r.ww.w....rw.r.n. . ..r.r�.+.�.1�r..._ _ _.'_i...w.,+ ..w—..r.....••......w.rn.-.-.........._ .••v.....•+.71•11.7 &Oft TIGI1'r0 _..........___ _...., ,.,,. P SIi i) CLOSED TIONT 0 .7_ 0........r.►. _...... OPENI 1) AT -..... _MD 01 AIR INLY3'l' PSI) CHK VALU2 ,•.PS D .41B GAP INSPRCMON: ;tuquited min(mutn nlrg:ip Mctwratlon provided? Yes 0 No 0 Detector Meter Reeding ,,. �__....� ._.•.�•_„� 7W••..• M . l ... ...................,...._;».7._._.:.,.... —_.. ...- ..J.. ........ 7 ..-_........,..._._•r. r..., -.4.r.,..., . OrTESTERS SIGNA'tti t11:t _ , ' r TESTERS NAME PRINTED; Aja. HI= Q11 , .�^_ .aNE PRESSURE _I 5! I'sr ...� _.._. CERT. no, Rii642 DATA .. " 6: J . TES7't!tt8 PHOM( 0015_1720363 R.EPAIREDB t ..,._.._._ ... _,........-...,.....w..�......---__...,...._.. ........�7._DATE FINAL TEST BYt.-......___....,..,.»..,•.__ .•.,-__ .. __. •• - - c ERT. N0. _. • ...PAPA"? CALIBRATION MAT 03 Lam= (HUGE if masa, MODEL42 c - 'est 84 „ sxRV7ICI ItESTORICD YEsO Rick (tot m iiox 602 Lynt v''ctud Wit9h11.16.(002 025)77ti..:13( Ilix(475)775-8200 ti AM E SERA IcE ADDRESS %310 5. I-CtL= Pt.. METER4 CITA f��rZME� City of rpt--wi1a P0.11ic Works .tictinfenance Department B:Icn77o.,.• .-{sect:.:,':' res: Report Form ACcoi NT x COpY TJt Lit STATE t..JA- ASSEMBLY LOCATION ZIP CODE S i SE C)'24.ti) C.`clK'`t - I v K trn) C CROSS -CONNECTION CONTROL FOR. SIZE Z•° NI.IKE CGo QZe+n SES. (Sath MODEL %.6 0 TYPE &/S SN s— LINE PREiit.RE AT TIME OF TEST.' SO PSI NES 9 tXISTICG' 11 REPL.I,CESIENT' Li LNIT1.•YL TEST RE RP BA SULTS TESTS AFTER REP.&IR OR CLEAN NG PSI DROP ACROSS 3 CHECK VALVE RELIEF VALVE OPENED xl CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT: x! CHECK VALVE LEAKED' x: CHECK VALVE CLOSED rIGHT:' CHECK vALVE LE.AKED' APPROA El) UR CAP PROVIDED' RPB.A P \S3ED TEST.' •9 PSID 3.3 Yes PSI DROP ACROSS 31 CHECK V•LLVE PSID PSID RELIEF V ALVE OPENED j ".'"."/31 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT' 0 11 CHECK VALVE LEAKED? ❑� x: CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT: x: CHECK V U.VE LE:t.KED' C✓ APPROVED AIR GAP PROVIDED! u ri RPBA PASSED TEST? Yes PSID xi CHECK V ALVE CLOSED 'TIGHT' DO' .a 31 CHECK VALVE LEAKED! 42 CHECK VALE CLOSED TIGHT 72 CHECK VALVE LEAKED' DCV.1 PASSED TEST? Yes PSID x! CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? ❑ s: CHECK VALVE LEAKED.' PSID 32 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? ❑ 4: CHECK VALVE LEAKED? 0 No DCV A PASSED TEST? PSID PSID n ❑ �J �—I AIR INLET OPENED AT AIR INLET FAILED TO OPEN'.' PVB:\ CHECK V><LVE HELD TIGHT AT CHECK VALVE LEAKED! P% BA P >.SSED TEST? Yes PSID 0 PS1D ❑ ❑ ❑ .-UR INLET OPENED .AT AIR INLET FAILED TO OPE`? • CHECK VALVE HELD TIGHT .AT CHECK VALVE LEAKED! PAHA PASSED TEST! ?PROVED ASSEMBLY" (^,-- PROPER INSTALLATION! RE, I •UU'3 INSPECTED Bti CCS'' rEST CO%I?1/4't AJBk.ian) n �cZ sCdt L TEST KIT NI AKE rlAtS ccIc MODEL PHONE 2.53 SN 199 r C:U.IBRATION DATE i-V(_Q-j : :d"'yr• :.^..::1 used W./C:46.290-SX C . p7rOa'd. 7d.::.1,1.:.:0I..; ::r:d l:" J7:::C: Qr''..... re reS! n TESTERS NAME SPRINTED) I\\%k 4 _ CERTIFICATION 1 g"??CT / SISNA''. E N (4.4.4.2r DATE TESTED (12/ 0 Z REP AIRED BY RETESTED BY CERT7 REP UR DATE DATE TESTED z rew - O 0 W o J }— U) N lL W 0 • Q co I—W Z �.. 1— 0 uj W• ~ O • - CI I— WW � U LL 0 WZ U= oz NAME SERA ICE CITY 1Jnitvs Cita' o r'11k ; IQ Ptlbl!� GVorki .11a nrenance Deparw!ent R'r,vr: Form .ACCOL NT ADDRESS 9Sko S. ll‘Sr PL 11I\C_A,11,+t ASSEMBLY LOCATION %IETER . T ATE COpy ZIP CODE ' • SA1E P«' S`'l %Oc- G3 d1 ow S. SCs� . CROSS -CONNECTION CONTROL FOR `2CY kkE-'i )SovfTD (144 /c14.‘t;11C SIZE 1/2- MAKE ��CZ) MODEL U10 TYPE g7k SN S �a1 LINE PRESSLRE :AT TIME OF TEST'. PSI: NEW? 'EXISTING? ❑ REPLACEMENT' ❑ 1NIT1.&L TEST RESULTS TESTS AFTER REPAIR OR CLEANING PS1 DROP ACROSS a! CHECK VALVE RELIEF VALVE OPENED s1 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? _! CHECK VALVE LEAKED? EZI'8.A 02 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? s: CHECK VALVE LEAKED' :A?PROV ED AIR GAP PRO' !DED' RPBA PASSED TEST.' Yes -ere- NO 0' NO PSID P51 DROP .ACROSS vI CHECK VALVE 7•o PSID PSID RELIEF v ALAE OPENED ❑ al CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? C'r4I CHECK VALVE LEAKED? ❑ Y: CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT' r- 42 CHECK VALVE LEAKED! APPROVED AIR GAP PROVIDED! RPBA PASSED TEST! ;•Y ?SID JI CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT' DCVA 41 CHECK V ALVE LEAKED' a: CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT'. a= CHECK VALVE LEAKED' DCVA PASSED TEST'' Yes PSID 41 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? 0 x! CHECK VALVE LEAKED? PSID 42 CHECK VALVE CLOSED TIGHT? 42 CHECK VALVE LEAKED? No 0 DCVA PASSED TEST'' Yu No AIR INLET OPENED AT AIR INLET FAILED TO OPEN? PVBA CHECK VALVE HELD TIGHT AT CHECK VALVE LEAKED' PVBA PASSED TEST? Yes PSID AIR INLET OPENED AT 0 UR INLET FAILED TO OPEN7 PSID CHECK VALVE HELD TIGHT AT ❑ CHECK VALVE LEAKED? 0 ❑ PVBA PASSED TEST"' Yes ❑ N,) PSID 0 PSID ❑ 0 PSID PSID 0 APPROVED ASSEMBLY' PROPER INSTALL.ArloN' REMARKS INSPECTED BY CCS'' TEST COMP ANY" kl 6+.,CZA. J'(EZ ti Gh. TEST KIT MAKE r"i(t)L-.(L'S7, MODEL e4�-P PHONE 1S3-tCg-lbl-1 SN 1'11 (A1 CALIBRATION DATE 1 - ZY-01 -::r:.�' :A : I used W.. -IC 24:5-290-490 approved T.s:.ti d 1 n : ,+ D Te s: � I :.%sv.is r.�i:�;lzr r.:.wr Pressure T_s; E.7:::pm.en' TESTER'S N A.VIE iPRINTED X1,15 4k2,11‘1T/Oda 1.44A4— SIGNAT(;RE CERTIFICATION a DATE TESTED REPAIRED BY r � tali RETESTED BY N / j tiu!/ CERT4 REPAIR DATE h -WS- DATE TESTED 1z rea W UO o co (11 WI F - W 0 Q LL rn � a I--Ili Z= F - Z0 111 wN O I— W W. • 0 • O .• Z W U= O f - Z • oMVnrLiu/ Iry rINGV ii 1 IV111 Avv1=111161I I Imi00 0 .♦tea ire .IL. Anderson's Backflow Assembly Testing 14921298 Ave NE Duvall, WA 98019 (206)660-8763 ACCOUNT It NAME OF PREMISE N t] �Iv1 eCr� ]u.S i ,✓2.55 qAa-�- Commercial ®' Residential ID SERVICE ADDRESS ««/Q /8/64 P 1 CITY Tu,k su / ! 4 - SERVICE ZIP CONTACT PERSON alp)/ 6m•I ON PHONE 646 ) ,g7? l "y FAX ( ) LOCATION OF ASSEMBLY 6e.k, red /1.46.1-e iL DOWNSTREAM PROCESS a¢. L g44i ,Cx) DCVA Er RPBA 0 PVBA D OTHER _,,% �1 DOH Approved Assembly? YES LrjO 0 NEW INSTALL dd EXISTING 0 REPLACEMENT 0 OLD SER. # PROPER INSTALLATION? YES L10 NO 0 MAKE OF ASSEMBLY ce-b c () MODEL o SERIAL NO. /1/ 7 3 / / SIZE 1 °�z INITIAL TEST DCVA / RPBA »CVA / RPBA RPBA PSID PVBA/SVBA PSID CHECK VALVE NO.1 CHICK VALVE N0.2 OPENED AT AIR INLET OPENED AT _ PSID LEAKEDEV PSID #1 CHECK PSID LEAKED • � « q DID NOT OPEN • AIRGAP OK? PASSED —■ FAMEDDJ' NEW PARTS AND REPAIRS CLEAN REPLACE PART CALL_ CLEAN REPLACE ❑ PART G V Z CLEAN REPLACE PART CHECK VALVE HELD AT PSID EV • ■ ■ LEAKED ■ 1, ■ • • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■lais■ CLEANED REPAIRED • • ■ ■ ■ TEST AFTER REPAIRS PASSED FAILED ■ PSID PSID OPENED AT PSID AIR INLET PSID PSID LEAKED • a..4r) LEAKED • ] . 7 #1 CHECK PSID CHK VALVE AIR GAP INSPECTION: Required minimum air gap separation provided? Yes 0 No 0 Detector Meter Reading LINE PRESSURE / VePSI CONFINED SPACE? REMARKS:qq- &6 9ay6 TESTERS SIGNATURE: ,_.14011 CERT. NO. B4454 DATE ) 0? TESTERS NAME PRINTED: Scott Anderson TESTERS PHONE # ( 206 1660-8763 REPAIRED BY: FINAL TEST BY: CERT. NO. DATE _ CALIBRATION DATE i6'GAUGE # 07041560 MODEL Midwest 830 SERVICE RESTORED? ES 0 O ❑ 1 cerdjy that this report is accurate, and I have used WAC 246-290-490 approved lest methods and test equipment. DATE TO: Gregg V. Donovan Brothers COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION 1801 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 P.O. Box 818 Auburn WA 98071-0818 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET FIRM: Citv of Tukwila DATE: 7-30-07 FAX #: 206-431-3665 RECEIVED JUL 3 0 2007 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS FROM THE DESK OF: Tye Groshong NUMBER OF PAGES: (Including this cover sheet) 8 DONOVAN BROTHERS FAX #: (253) 939-7994 TRANSMISSION PROBLEMS? CALL (253) 939-7777 Gregg, Here are the documents you requested. Five backflow certifications, Two meter bills of sale. Thank you Tye. Hard copy: Will be mailed Will not be mailed , ArroJ fav I T E INCORPORATED 4819 WEST MARGINAL WAY S.W. SEATTLE, WA 98106 L D T 0 fir`• t �_ � , _ 1 t+,; s P T 0 DATE (206) 935-8000 /20 Customer's Order No. DATE REQUIRED: DATE SHIPPED: WILL CALL ❑ ORD: B.O. SHIPPED DESCRIPTION PRICE % AMOUNT 1 , ;1 II ,., <._:,ti c` \.(\., 4 Q 9 1,./ ,a �; r (- , �..� 21•22 LIC': RECEIVED IN GOOD CONDITIOf ' ?l;�i(2- e::::);-4.,....„4,,____ TOTAL ALL claims and returned goods`MUST be accompanied by this bill I-1 14990 PRINT SERVICES NORTHWEST (206) 763.9230 ORDERED BILLED DATE INV. NO. PARTIAL COMP WHITE - OFFICE COPY, CANARY - CUSTOMER'S COPY, PINK - FILE COPY, GOLDENROD - NUMERICAL COPY 10/0'' V DONOVAN BROS INC JONATHAN 'I !IINGH01 5082187(' FCG T 1 rE INC SEATTLE, WA .. �.....,..� / ........... • „I...CA'U.l'r.L�.:Aw:r6 PURCHASER SIGN,ftif Gj?i(4t•.tl.�(.,_).. ��.-G...-.�///..�.--.-._.. AUTHORIZATION ( SERVER REFERENCE NO, .J i i „3 S 1 [7 RETAIN FOR YOUR RECO1 SALES SLIP 4000 eft-ficacm 4819 WEST MARGINAL WAY S.W. D T 0 FOCI -SITE INCORPORATED SEATTLE, WA 98106 S P T 0 DATE • �20 ..� (206) 935-8000 s ice(•-•+` �r Customer's Order No. DATE REQUIRED: DATE SHIPPED: WILL CALL ❑ ORD: B.O. SHIPPED DESCRIPTION PRICE % AMOUNT 1 1 1 1 `--7.1R iii. 't=t rt.? i- ei' r . w," i c:c9 C LfC ) , IPF/21- q, 1 I', i tr.,`.. 71 RECEIVED IN GOOD CONDITION . f k /� (\l �--c,�,�,f'.;:.:t) ::.--..�� G ::..------•-� TOTAL - ALL:claims/and returned goods MUST be accompanied by this bill H 14910 ORDERED PRINT SERVICES NORTHWEST (206) 763-9230 WHITE - OFFICE COPY, CANARY - CUSTOMER'S COPY, PINK - FILE COPY, 10/04 it DONOV API BROS INC JONATHAN M BINGHAM i 85987187' FCG T' TE UC SEATTLE., wA I � SER lGN HERE /1/4- X /4 Cardholile'• acknowledges receipt of gads and/or services In the amount of the Total shown hereon and agrees to perform the obligations set forth �._........-r..-u�w...w...n�nea�itl►)bw.l�4J •._ , BILLED DATE INV. NO. PARTIAL COMP GOLDENROD - NUMERICAL COPY AUTHORIZATION (st nvl n REFERENCE NO. 5945531 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1-i NCI() w cc cc 0 a 0 ) LL a.. 0 0 fx W 2 0 SALES SLIP • :.TOTAL • BULLETIN A2 TYPE C PERMIT FEE ESTIMATE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEES DUE WITH APPLICATION PW may adjust estimated fees PROJECT NAMEetO PERMIT # 4'b' o. I?7 T r If you do not provide contractor bids or an engineer's estimate with your permit application, Public Works will review the cost estimates for reasonableness and may adjust estimates. 1. APPLICATION BASE FEE 2. Enter total construction cost for each improvement category: General Erosion prevention Water Sewer Storm water Road/Parking/Access A. Total Improvements 3. Calculate improvement -based fees: B. 2.5% of first $100,000 of A. C. 2.0% of amount over $100,000, but Tess than $200,000 of*A. jZW I. trP a Wag be ./ D. 1.5% of amount over $200,000 of A. _ 4. TOTAL PLAN REVIEW FEE (B+C+D) 5. GRADING Plan Review and Permit Fees $ 250 (1) RECEIVED ".ITY nF T11101/11 A NOV 1 9 2004 Enter total excavation volume .40 cubic yards Enter total fill volume *.to cubic yards Use the following table to estimate the grading application fee. Use the greater of the excavation and fill volumes. QUANTITY IN CUBIC YARDS RATE wr Up to 50 CY Free 51 -100 $23.50 101 -1,000 $37.00 1,001 -10,000 $49.25 • 10,001 -100,000 $49.25 for 1 10,000, PLUS $24.50 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof. 100,001 - 200,000 $269.75 for 1 b 1 100,000, PLUS $13.25 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof. 200,001 or more $402.25 for 1 S' 200,000, PLUS $7.25 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof. TOTAL PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEE DUE WITH PERMIT APPLI,CATION (1+4+5) $ j -241i2-`3 PERMIT CENTER (4) The Plan Review and Approval fees cover TWO reviews: 1) the first review associated with the submission of the application/plan and 2) a follow-up review associated with a correction letter. Each additional review, which is attributable to the Applicant's action or inaction shall be charged 25% of the Total Plan Review Fee. Approved 09.25.02 Revised 03.18.03 Revised 05.13.03 Revised 06.07.04 r;b0 4 -IS BULLETIN A2 TYPE C PERMIT FEE ESTIMATE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEES DUE WITH APPLICATION PW may adjust estimated fees 6. Permit Issuance/Inspection Fee (B+C+D) $ 4j 4a? _ (6) 7. Pavement Mitigation Fee $ (7) • The pavement mitigation fee compensates the City for the reduced life span due to removal of roadway surfaces. The fee is based on the total square feet of impacted pavement per lane and on the condition of the existing pavement. Use the following table and Bulletin 1B to estimate the p Approx. Remaining Years Pavement Overlay and Repair Rate (per SF of lane width) 20-15 (100%) $10.00 15-10 (75%) $7.50 10-7 (50%) $5.00 7-5 (33%) $3.30 5-2 (25%) $2.50 2-1 (10%) $1.00 0-1 $0.00 8. GRADING Permit Review Fee $ #fr•(8) Grading Permit Fees are calculated using the following table. Use the greater of the excavation and fill volumes from Item 5. (5QUANTITY IN CUBIC YARDS RATE 50 or Tess $23.50 +y 51 -100 $37.00 101 -1,000 $37.00 for 1s' 100 CY plus $17.50 for each additional 100 or fraction thereof. 1,001 -10,000 $194.50 for 1s` 1000 CY plus $14.50 for each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof. 10,001 -100,000 $325.00 for the 15` 10,000 CY plus $66.00 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof 100,001 or more $919.00 for 1s` 100,000 CY plus $36.50 for each additional 10,000 or fraction thereof. Approved 09.25.02 Revisd 03.18. 3 Revisdi 3. Revis 7,,9 ". e 2 BULLETIN A2 TYPE C PERMIT FEE ESTIMATE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL FEES DUE WITH APPLICATION PW may adjust estimated fees 9. TOTAL OTHER PERMITS A. Water Meter - Deduct ($25) B. Flood Control Zone ($50) C. Water Meter - Permanent* D. Water Meter - Water only* E. Water Meter - Temporary* H bO * Refer to the Water Meter Fees in Bulletin Al Total A through E 10. ADDITIONAL FEES A. Allentown Water (Ordinance 1777) $ B. Allentown Sewer (Ordinance 1777) $ C. Ryan Hill Water (Ordinance 1777) $ D. Special Connection (TMC Title 14) $ E. Duwamish $ F. Storm Drainage Mitigation $ G. Other Fees $ Total A through G $ �� (10) DUE WHEN PERMIT IS ISSUED (6+7+8+9+10) $ ' B11C1, �7 ESTIMATED TOTAL PERMIT ISSUANCE AND INSPECTION FEE This fee includes two inspection visits per required inspection. Additional inspections (visits) attributable to the Permittee's action or inaction shall be charged $47.00 per inspection. Approved 09.25.02 Revised 03.18.03 Revised 05.13.03 Revised 06.07.04 3 City of -Tukwila Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-433-0179 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: ci.tukwila.wa.us Steven M. Mullet, Mayor James F. Morrow, P.E., Director WATER METER INFORMATION z ;� z Parcel No.: 7349200135 Permit Number: D04-415 re I Address: 4320 S 131 PL TUKW Issue Date: 09/20/2005 U Suite No: Permit Expires On: 11/17/2007 U - 0 U Wi• = - H u) LL W 0 u_¢ UD =d �W Z1 PW activites include Frontage improvements on S 131 PI, private water main extension, detention W O vault and drainage, grading, water meters and backflow prevention upgrades on existing building and g W Iinstallation on new building, fire line and cross connection to new building, extension of existing U 0 access to SR599 . Sound Transit lite rail work will be in WashDOT ROW and should not affect this p N site. Pavement mitigation fee is $0.00. 0 F" UJ W I TURNOVER FOR THE PIPE CARRYING SOUTHGATE CREEK TO THE END OF THE PIPE AND THE SURFACE WATER F' U IMPROVEMENTS IN S 131ST PLACE. Improvements to 42nd Av S (Macadam Rd 5) by City in 2006 Overlay LL Z Program. u.iU = REVISION 1: DELETE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADE SLOPES TO 1.5H:1V. 0 ~ DESCRIPTION OF WORK: CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 40,000 SF TILT -UP CONCRETE WAREHOUSE/OFFICE SHEL; GRADE AND FILL AND INSTALL UTILITIES TO BUILDING; install retaining walls, RELOCATE THE EXISTING STREAM INCLUDING NE WETLAND MITIGATION FOR WETLAND BEING FILLED; AND LANDSCAPE SITE WORK IN MACADAM RD S (42nd AV 5) APPROVED UNDER PW05-127. TUKWILA WATER AND SEWER TO PROPERTY LINE. The peer review by Shannon and Wilson indicates that the 1.5H:1V slopes should be stable without a retaining wall. ANY SLOPES STEEPER THAN 1.5H:1V REQUIRE ANALYSIS BY TERRA ASSOCIATES AND APPROVAL BY PUBLIC WORKS. METER #1 METER #2 METER #3 Water Meter Size: 1.5 1 0 Quantity: 1 1 0 Water Meter Type: PERM DED Work Order Number: 5106a04 Connection Charge: Y $225.00 $0.00 $0.00 Installation: Y $2,125.00 $0.00 $0.00 Additional Install Deposit: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Plan Check Fee: Y $10.00 $0.00 $0.00 Inspection Fee: Y $15.00 $0.00 $0.00 Turn On Fee: Y $25.00 $0.00 $0.00 Subtotal: $2,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 doc: PWWATER 004-415 Printed: 06-19-2007 City ofr`rukwila Department of Public Works 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-433-0179 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: ci.tukwila.wa.us Cascade Water Alliance (RCFC): Y TOTAL WATER FEES: $12,840.00 $10,440.00 • Steven M Mullet, Mayor James F. Morrow, P.E., Director $0.00 $0.00 doc: PWWATER D04-415 Printed: 06-19-2007 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 02-28-07 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # X Response to Correction Letter # 1 X Revision # 3 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division Public Works n Fire Prevention Structural Planning Division Permit Coordinator DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Comments: Incomplete DUE DATE: 03-01-07 Not Applicable Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROUT NG: Please Route Structural Review Required ri No further Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: Approved Approved with Conditions Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE: 03-29-07 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping 0 PW ❑ Staff Initials: Documents/routing slip.doc 2.2802 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 01-31-07 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Correction Letter # Response to Incomplete Letter # X Revision # 3 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Build�ng vision ;(1T Public Works n w<I c1 FirePrevention Structural Planning Division Permit Coordinator n n DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete [ Incomplete n Comments: DUE DATE: 02-01-07 Not Applicable n Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS RO TING: Please Route Structural Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: DUE DATE: 03-01-07 Approved ❑ Approved with Conditions n Not Approved (attach comments) n Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: 02-4V1 Oir Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire Ping 0 PW ❑ Staff Initials: Docunienlsrouting slip.doc 2.28-0z PERMIT WORD 69RY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 11-01-06 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # X Revision # 1 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division Public Works k4 Fire Prevention Structural Planning Division Permit Coordinator DETERMINATI N OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Comments: Incomplete DUE DATE: 11-02-06 Not Applicable n Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route Structural Review Required No further Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: APPROVALS CORRECTIONS: Approved Approved with Conditions Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE: 11-30-06 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping D PW ❑ Staff Initials: Documentshouting slip.doc 2.28-02 m PERMIT COORD COPY -. PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 02-02-06 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # X Response to Correction Letter # 2 X Revision # 1 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division Public Works n Fire Prevention Structural C,V( Apo 2-10 0 Planning Division Permit Coordinator j DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Comments: Incomplete DUE DATE: 02-07-06 Not Applicable Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire 0 Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route REVIEWER'S INITIALS: Structural Review Required No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: Approved n Approved with Conditions Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DUE DATE: 03-07-06 Not Approved (attach comments) DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW 0 Staff Initials: Documents/routing slip,doc 2-28-02 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 12-21-05 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # X Response to Correction Letter # 1 X Revision # 1 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: n Public Works d Structural ❑ Permit Coordinator 961, A? 1-14-00 Building Division Fire Prevention PJPLng cl 1 �d /-I� PYarniivislon DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Comments: Incomplete ri DUE DATE: 12-22-05 Not Applicable Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route REVIEWER'S INITIALS: Structural Review Required No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved (attach comments) 7( Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: DUE DATE: 01-19-06 Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: d I.21-1 • CO Departments issued corrections: Bldg 0 Fire 0 Ping ' PW ❑ Staff Initials:�Y Documentshoulins slip.doc 2.28-02 _1ERMIT COORD COPY .� PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 11-10-05 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # X Revision # 1 After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Bug Didision Public Woks 411/1 d & I1 -2--o( Fire Prevention Structural n n Plannin Asion Permit Coordinator -6 DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) DUE DATE: 11-15-05 Complete Comments: Incomplete n Not Applicable Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg 0 Fire 0 Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROUT G: Please Route Structural Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: DUE DATE: 12-13-05 Approved Approved with Conditions n Not Approved (attach comments) Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: 12.1 D'8 `j Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire 0 Ping[ PW 1 Staff Initials: iA- Docunients/routing slip.doc 2.28-02 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 PROJECT NAME: NORMED DATE: 09-13-05 SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal X Response to Correction Letter # 2 Response to Incomplete Letter # Revision # After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: Building Division n Fire Prevention n Planr(�G g in Division PubliclWorks /�/ Q� Structural U Permit Coordinator cam . . DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Yr Incomplete n Comments: DUE DATE: 09-15-05 Not Applicable Permit. Center 'Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg D Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: TUES/THURS ROUTING: Please Route Structural Review Required REVIEWER'S INITIALS: n No further Review Required DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: Approved n Approved with Conditions { Not Approved (attach comments) n DUE DATE: 10-13-05 Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire 0 Ping 0 PW 0 Staff Initials: Documents/routing shp.doc 2.28-02 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 PROJECT NAME: NORMED DATE: 7-28-05 SITE ADDRESS: 4310 S 131 PL Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # X Response to Correction Letter # I. Revision # After Permit Issued DEPARTMENTS: 1301/1 g Division Public WorksJP( Fire Prevention Structural n Planning Division Permit Coordinator DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) DUE DATE: 8-2-05 Complete Incomplete n Not Applicable Comments: Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping ❑ PW ❑ Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS RO TING: Please Route Structural Review Required ❑ No further Review Required ❑ REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: DUE DATE: 8-30-05 Approved n Approved with Conditions n Not Approved (attach comments) Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: 11-1-0 Departments issued corrections: Bldg ❑ Fire ❑ Ping IA PW A Staff Initials: Documents/routing sllp,doc 2-28-02 PERMIT COORD COPY PLAN REVIEW/ROUTING SLIP ACTIVITY NUMBER: D04-415 DATE: 11-19-04 PROJECT NAME: NORMED SITE ADDRESS: 4230 S 164 ST X Original Plan Submittal Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # Revision # After Permit Issued DEPARTM NTS:ovi Z �rf3 11 Buil i g Division Public Works Gt3yl1 1/344 , NI iAt Fire Prevention Stru toalz se dvte& Planning Division Permit Coordinator 111 DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS: (Tues., Thurs.) Complete Incomplete DUE DATE: 11-23-04 Not Applicable n Comments: Permit Center Use Only INCOMPLETE LETTER MAILED: Departments determined incomplete: Bldg 0 Fire 0 Ping 0 PW 0 Staff Initials: LETTER OF COMPLETENESS MAILED: TUES/THURS ROyTING: Please Route M Structural Review Required El No further Review Required n REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: APPROVALS OR CORRECTIONS: DUE DATE: 12-21-04 Approved n Approved with Conditions n Not Approved (attach comments) Notation: REVIEWER'S INITIALS: DATE: Permit Center Use Only CORRECTION LETTER MAILED: 0.2-141 OS Departments issued corrections: Bldg N' Fire 0 Ping g PW' Staff Initials: ZeS Documents/routing slip.doc 2-28-02 PROJECT NAME: IDV -11A6-2 PERMITNO:. 12)L- Site YSite Address: IVA l� 6, 4 'I �L - --- Origins}�-ssue Date: • t� REVISION LOG Revision • Date No. Received Date Received ( I Staff InitialsIssued i Date ''Staff Initials ' OA - a() •., ' 4 • to ► It , v t'_Jv i V_1` 0140 i!n GIt�ly tn1 11_, Summary of Revision: ii e A. ' hi _A ,.1 , l,, A ' ► nA 1 ., ' , ►a f 1 l LaJ Received By: ' kr 1Gu -Tra d of,s0 (please print) Revision No. Date Received ( I Staff Initials I Staff Initials Date Issued Staff Initials Summary of Revision: Summary of Revision: S,N p,4 \J tilk I ' - Received By: M 0A41,4, (please print) Revision No. ' • j Date I Received Staff Initials I Date Issued I Staff Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: (please print) Revision No. Date Received Staff Initials Date Issued Staff Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: (please print) Revision No. Date Received Staff Initials Date Issued 1 j Starr Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: please print PROJECT NAME: 1\1.OI-N1e PERM1 ANO:. Site Address: y7,10 4 I- • Original Issue Date: REVISION LOG 7-0 Revision i Date I Staff i Date "Staff No. ` Received Initials I Issued � Initials IIhsjoS rIrk Summary of Revision: 1r fj iil I l.SI oi= 'fu 'IZ 1 awn ; -� mist d,; !a -p V -G r'I- IkAI tom,- WALL, Received By: err✓sa E. Shall) (please print) RevisionDate No. I Received I I Staff Initials Staff Initials Date Issued Staff Initials Received By: Summary of Revision: • Received By: (please print) Revision No. • 1 Date Received Staff Initials Date Issued Staff Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: (please print) Revision No. Date Received Staff Initials Date Issued Staff Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: Revision No. Date Received Staff Initials Date Issued (please print) Start Initials Summary of Revision: Received By: (please print) City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tulnvila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director REVISION SUBMITTAL Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date:IZl, 4C51. ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # ® Response to Correction Letter # 1 ® Revision # 3 after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Plan Check/Permit Number: coi4--IIS Project Name: Normed Project Address: 4310 S 131 P1 nn tt Contact Person: glip 1126±111,6Phone Number: it Too'""1�c�J"L� l� Summary of Revision: zlz 11* Relit Ci — r'bUtk at&ki et l to isitictie0 192E lift Et3)19e9 1-644 'hie OSV,a MAU,* itliM GIN Vt 65.E 1,(0, 1ttle2 70 C ii i • '" G WASP Ohl Mktif .. O warat4 \lher Cdwa iu/ OKA Plitt [1.1ber t- MAC*, "V -N 1W-1 Orb Sheet Number(s): $* ' • 621- ' lb/'" C "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: [] Entered in Permits Plus on 2'2-0-07 f ECEIVED curt T Uti(W11 A bkak- FEB 2 8 20071 PERMIT CENTER \applications\forms-applications on line\revision submittal Created. 8-13-2004 City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us N Steve Lancaster, Director Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, eta Date: 't 4 ( Plan Check/Permit Number: RA " O Response to Incomplete Letter # O Response to Correction Letter # ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name: liR1W Project Address: 1 t Q 1 27 1 1 Contact Person: 0) Ke\--ua., RECEIVED CIN OF TI W'' JAN 31 2007 Summary (/?otf Revision: Phone Number: CH fgok�Vl� eUleto cc,Q CcwrCi aA Sheet Number(s): "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: ( Entered in Permits Plus on O ( 114— \applications\forms-applications on Iinelrevision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: 11 €,116 Plan Check/Permit Number: 74 4-1' z ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # 0 Response to Correction Letter # AIRevision # 1 after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name: 1411L1VCI Project Address: ZO ' • 1.519` tz ' Contact Person: ckIQ FETl X Phone Number: A9 Summary of Revision: IECEWVED CITY OF TUKW1L4 NOV 0 1 2006 PERMIT CENTER '( to l fNE icovte Gj'ifkqt.r Wool t-c''tWQRVt 150.61 avie. IiOE OPEN' geg-i- '13 1 e� C 4 tAnies Roel) 4) 60 ao,vo us_ie b Quo 2/ Ftb,t Dl; tebk411.4 1 ilt t - 6ei n D (t1anees Roe) Rind •ekva-hoitw� el4an1e% -gym t n�. dh arb Sheet Numter r((s):" l • ��' %Z• I "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: Entered in Permits Plus on 1` [ 01 6 (\p \applications\forms-applications on line\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director REVISION SUBMITTAL Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: 101 lCc Plan Check/Permit Number: D04-415 ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # ® Response to Correction Letter # 2 for Revision #1 O Revision # after Permit is Issued O Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name: NORMED .• RECEIVED parry Off yukwu FEL) 0 2 200(i PERMIT CENTER Project Address: 4310 S 131 PL Contact Person: David Kehle Phone Number: fa •4 't f Summary of Revision: ai6tex0 1160124 M9i4i Viattv tca Gibik. 1 /it .11.1003104,006trtsist• Sheet Number(s): (tLi.LL COIL 1 1 PES iZi/ "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by:1 (AnVvid Entered in Permits Plus on ()Y.-los1V3e J \applications\forms-applications on Iinc\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.atukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: 1Z` br Plan Check/Permit Number: D05-016/ D0+-4-15 O Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # 1 for Revision# SOF trkVALA O Revision # after Permit is Issued DEC 2 1 2005 PERMIT CENTER O Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name: Normed Project Address: 4310 S 131 P1 Contact Person: David Kehle Phone Number: "a -41f Summary of Revision: �. Otf b Ngo Xi12 `—T Sheet Number(s): e0V67 11,, "Cloud" or highlight all area of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: 1,4 Entered in Permits Plus on 19-,2-1 • Uc_.� \applications\forms-applications on (ine\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 SouthcenterBoulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98133 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director REVISION SUBMITTAL Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: 11 11711 0 Response to Incomplete Letter # ❑ Response to Correction Letter # Revision # after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name:l'41() Plan Check/Permit Number: Project Address: Contact Person: -419 Ricrivito Nov 1 0 2805 PERMIT CENTER to Kaite, Phone Number: -435'?cgf Summary of Revision: 11 ki "1 UL C i 11(2 .eG t G (4,T4([s pextrt) 7„ attirmoi 4 7t it l.if lct ‘Dh1,1, er‘i H i t s e *e! uI toe. • "'Ce 6M Qi4H1"-t -140ef FWVitt 1 M -b40,1 'het 'G 1 114_61AinAti (6114to1,. ,. . Sheet Number(s): i (Xlitg. 1 1� * 7-' Goll, 16r1 2 c i likt4.?vt4 "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: / kAAA . Entered in Permits Plus on 11, MDS-- \applicanons\torms-applications on line\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: l -14_05 Plan ChecWPermit Number: D Response to Incomplete Letter # E. Response to Correction Letter # 2- ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner NOY Project Name: z z � W QQ2 JU U0 CCO alO J = H • w w 0 • ? co =W z f -- HO z ILI • w UCI O — t7F— LU w L -6O Project Address: /1-31Q - /3; 5T Pia 1 VN 4e -.,Q -LJ Contact Person: ,{,t l d Phone Number: (301, - ��-�CI 7 p H Summary of Revision: LQ.nd.3c, bawin_5_,4) /eP-- Olt<i-peicAl-e_i CITY Or TUKWILA SEP 1 4 2005 PERMIT CENTER Sheet Number(s): - Lb— "Cloud" b "Cloud" or highlight all areas of revision including date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: Entered in Permits Plus on "(-114- City 14 \applications\forms-applications on line\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director REVISION SUBMITTAL Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: CA` ,os Plan ChecWPermit Number: D04-415 ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # ® Response to Correction Letter # 2 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued SEP 1 3 2005 ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner PERMIT CENTER Project Name: NORMED Project Address: 4310 South 131st Place Contact Person: David Kehle Phone Number: 4a0 - 433. tom, Summary of Revision: io;pakse Wets caf,, 1 4� Sheet Number(s): r'O. 1 )'' el • C lla.haw, , bh141 r "Cloud" or highlight all (Wats of revision i$cluding date of revision Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: (Van �JCX Entered in Permits Plus on 001. ` 1'3' 05 \applications\fonns-applications on line\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: City of Tukwila Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206-431-3670 Fax: 206-431-3665 Web site: http://www.ci.tulnvila.wa.us Steve Lancaster, Director arcentai CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 28 MI5 Mum CENTER REVISION SUBMITTAL Revision submittals must be submitted in person at the Permit Center. Revisions will not be accepted through the mail, fax, etc. Date: Plan Check/Permit Number: D04-415 ❑ Response to Incomplete Letter # Response to Correction Letter # 1 ❑ Revision # after Permit is Issued ❑ Revision requested by a City Building Inspector or Plans Examiner Project Name: NORMED Project Address: 4310 SOUTH 131ST PLACE Contact Person: David Kehle Phone Number:4?'�11T Summary of Revision: ol `s Ae Lioeo We) Sheet Number(s): RJ(•(,G l�� j � �j' .j 414211--1) 2' "Cloud" or highlight all areas o revision Inc tdin datofrevision + �t ✓✓j Received at the City of Tukwila Permit Center by: Entered in Permits Plus on 0 747orA 5 \applications\forms-applications on Iine\revision submittal Created: 8-13-2004 Revised: Look Up a Contractor, Electri .i. n or Plumber License Detail Page 1 of 3 Washington State Department of Labor and Industries General/Specialty Contractor A business registered as a construction contractor with L&I to perform construction work within the scope of its specialty. A General or Specialty construction Contractor must maintain a surety bond or assignment of account and carry general liability insurance. License Information License DONOVBI09405 Licensee Name DONOVAN BROTHERS INC Licensee Type CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR UBI 601114768 Ind. Ins. Account Id 55472800 Business Type CORPORATION Address 1 PO BOX 818 Address 2 City AUBURN County KING State WA Zip 980710818 Phone 2539397777 Status ACTIVE Specialty 1 GENERAL Specialty 2 UNUSED Effective Date 9/25/1991 Expiration Date 3/5/2007 Suspend Date Separation Date Parent Company Previous License PCCIN** 121QW Next License Associated License Business Owner Information Name Role Effective Date Expiration Date DONOVAN, DARRELL 01/01/1980 DONOVAN, E LAURA 01/01/1980 DONOVAN, DEBBIE 01/01/1980 DONOVAN, KEVIN 01/01/1980 Bond Information Bond Bond Company Name Bond Account Number Effective Date Expiration Date Cancel Date Impaired Date Bond Amount Received Date https://fortress.wa.gov/lni/bbip/printer.aspx?License=DONOVBI094O5 10/23/2006 Look Up a Contractor, Electrician or Plumber License Detail Page 1 of 3 Washington State Department of Labor and Industries General/Specialty Contractor A business registered as a construction contractor with L&I to perform construction work within the scope of its specialty. A General or Specialty construction Contractor must maintain a surety bond or assignment of account and carry general liability insurance. License Information License INTERDN088KH Licensee Name INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT N W INC Licensee Type CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR UBI 601374187 Ind. Ins. Account Id 82223100 Business Type CORPORATION Address 1 1425 22ND ST NW STE E Address 2 City AUBURN County KING State WA Zip 98001 Phone 2539399787 Status ACTIVE Specialty 1 GENERAL Specialty 2 UNUSED Effective Date 5/8/1992 Expiration Date 1/4/2006 Suspend Date Separation Date Parent Company Previous License THOMAOC196LW Next License TACOMCS980QK Associated License Business Owner Information Name Role Effective Date Expiration Date KESSELL, JOE PRESIDENT 05/08/1992 Bond Amount KESSELL, SHARON SECRETARY 05/08/1992 CAIFSU0381793 SELANDER, WILLIAM VICE PRESIDENT 12/12/2001 Bond Information Bond Bond Company Name Bond Account Number Effective Date Expiration Date Cancel Date Impaired Date Bond Amount Received Date #10 INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INS CO CAIFSU0381793 05/08/2004 Until Cancelled $12,000.00 05/04/2004 https://fortress.wa.gov/lni/bbip/printer.aspx?License=INTERDN088KH 09/20/2005 FROM : DAUID KEHLE,ARCHITECT Sep 15 tib 1U:bb8 1-1-493goNay.-31N I FAX NO. : 206 246 8369 Sep. 20 2005 01:40PM P1 H i'9 a aPP 0 ..M tT1 . Iv • Cri r r. U: 1